Shaun Newman Podcast - #945 - Courtenay Turner

Episode Date: November 4, 2025

Courtenay Turner is an American podcaster, author, aerial acrobatic performer, and anti-technocracy activist known as a “Congenital Rubella Warrior” who overcame partial blindness, hearing loss, and childhood open-heart surgery to champion cognitive liberty and resistance to global control systems. Launched during the 2020 lockdowns, the Courtenay Turner Podcast features deep-dive conversations on occult geopolitics, Hegelian dialectics, biodigital convergence, and AI surveillance. Tickets to Cornerstone Forum 26’: https://www.showpass.com/cornerstone26/Tickets to the Mashspiel:https://www.showpass.com/mashspiel/Silver Gold Bull Links:Website: https://silvergoldbull.ca/Email: [e-mail] Grahame: [phone]Bow Valley Credit UnionBitcoin: www.bowvalleycu.com/en/personal/investing-wealth/bitcoin-gatewayEmail: [e-mail] Use the code “SNP” on all ordersProphet River Links:Website: store.prophetriver.com/Email: [e-mail] your voice heard: Text Shaun 587-217-8500

This is Viva Fry. I'm Dr. Peter McCulloch. This is Tom Lomago. This is Chuck Pradnik. This is Alex Krenner. Hey, this is Brad Wall. This is J.P. Sears. Hi, this is Frank Paredi.

This is Tammy Peterson. This is Danielle Smith. This is James Lindsay. Hey, this is Brett Kessel, and you're listening to the Sean Newman podcast. Welcome to the podcast, folks. Happy Tuesday. How's everybody doing today? How about we start with a little precious metals action, shall we?

Well, if you want to protect a portion of your savings with silver or gold, It's the perfect time, and silver gold bowl has a wide variety of best value silver for every budget. Simply text or email Graham for details, whether you're a season investor or new to precious metals. He'll work with you to answer all your questions and recommend the best products to meet your investing goals. It's all down on the show notes. You can text him about any details around this feature or any other questions you may have around buying, selling, store, and you're using your retirement accounts to invest in precious metals. Silvergoldbull.com.

Anytime you're on the site making purchases, make sure to reference you. the Sean Newman podcast. Profit River, well, when it comes to firearms, look no further than these gentlemen. Profit River services all of Canada, and whether you're online in the store or over the phone, make sure you reference the coupon code SMP. It gets put in for monthly draws.

You can also go down in the show notes and find Joel. He's the primary contact for every one of you lovely listeners. He's at SMP at Profitriver.com. You can just head to Profitriver.com. They are the major retailer of firearms. and accessories, and they serve all of Canada. Rec tech, for over 20 years, they've been committed to excellence in the power sports industry. They're open Monday through Saturday, and they've got a full selection of different things,

including Alberta-built aluminum trailers. They got boats. Yeah, we're talking Lund fishing boats, pontoon boats, and then with winter season, you know, I hope it's off here by a month or two. But it's coming faster and faster, I would think. They got snowmobiles, quads, side by sides, all the things. And if you haven't stopped into their location on the west side of Lloyd Minster, you really should. Their showroom is top-notch, or you can just visit them at rechtechpower products.com.

When you're busy running a growing business trying to stay on top of the ever-changed world of information technology, well, it can be overwhelming to say the least. And let PlanetCom take care of that, leaving you to do your thing while they do theirs for over 22 years. PlanetCom has been here to boost your productivity by proactively managing every aspect of your IT infrastructure, both in the house and in the cloud, and that ensures you're not too tangled up in technology to get anything done. They build websites. You can go check out the Sean Newman Podcast.com, and they also do cybersecurity. So if you're worried about things getting taken away from you, Planetcom knows the ins and outs of that as well. So head to Planetcom.com.com.com. We got some events coming up here in November. November 22nd. Quick Dick MacDick is a lot. in Lashburn.

It's a comedy event with supper and all the proceeds going to the Lashburn Elementary School for a new playground. You got the Mashbill coming January 17th in Kalmar, just west of Ladoek. Less than 12 teams available for that down on the show notes. You can click on that

link. And then the Cornerstone Forum returns March 28th. Early Bird tickets are on sale until December 31st. So New Year's Eve, get your tickets before then. After that, the tickets do go up We've announced Chad Prather and Catherine Katooski are the new to us that are going to be in the forum. You also got returning Tom Luongo, Alex Kraner, Matt Erritt, Vince Lanchi is going to be new.

Tom Bodrovich, Tews is going to be reprising a role in there. So some familiar faces and some new voices coming. Once again, that's March 28th. The Cornerstone Forum returns this year at a new venue, the Westing Calgary Airport. What's cool about it is obviously the venue and the hotel are one and the same. So once you're there, you don't have to leave. It has got a 24-7 shuttle to the airport. So if you're flying in, nice ease there.

You just hop on the shuttle over to the hotel. And yeah, it's going to be top-notch, I think, this year. And we're just ironing out the details. Looking forward to sharing more as they come. Substack, it's free to subscribe to. Obviously you get the Sunday week in review that gives you everything that's happened on the podcast. and yeah you should hop on there free to subscribe to you can also become a paid member and support the SMP if you're listening or watching on Spotify Apple YouTube Rumble X Facebook make sure to subscribe make sure to leave a review

make sure to share with a friend folks now let's get on to that tale of the tape today's guests an American podcast or author speaker an aerial acrobatic performer I'm talking about Courtney Turner so buckle up here we go Welcome to the Sean Numa podcast. Today, I'm joined by Courtney Turner. Courtney, thanks for hopping on the show. Thanks so much for having me. Now, I've done, I don't know, not a deep dive on Courtney, but I've listened to you chat on several things. And I'm like, well, let's just start with Courtney telling the audience a bit about themselves, about yourself, sorry. And then we can get into some of the things you've been covering and tracking and probably blow some minds or melt some minds or whatever the term people want to use.

is regardless. Tell the audience a bit about yourself. All right. Well, I'm not sure how much or where you want me to start, but I can start with maybe how I got into the podcasting sphere, which will give a little background of my personal story as well. So it was in 2020. I was living out in Santa Monica, California, and we were experiencing very traconian measures. I'm sure you can possibly relate. The Canadian version in the United States. Yes. California was close to Canada. Where in Canada are you?

I'm right on the border of Alberta, Saskatchewan. So I got to see both provinces how they handled COVID. I'm sorry, where? Alberta and Saskatchewan. Okay, so you could see a little of, you got a little taste of how they handle it differently. Yeah. I was in Santa Monica and it was pretty bad. And everything was shut down.

I was at the time working at two different gyms. and I was fired from both of them. I cannot prove it, but I can say with a 99.9 repeating infinitely certitude that it was over politics. And I have a couple of examples that indicate to me that it was definitely politically motivated, but nonetheless, I was fired from both jobs. And I was also an aerial acrobatic performer and I was doing motivational speaking around my personal birth story. And I would talk about movement as a metaphor for life. And I was really, you know, alluding to like the philosophical aspects of movement. You know, I don't need to wax poetic about all the physiological benefits, the cognitive benefits. I mean, there are countless

studies and we could take years to discuss that. But if you actually talk about it in terms of philosophy, you know, Aristotle is often paraphrased as saying like you are what you repeatedly do. And that's not actually his direct quote. That was a, you know, his that was paraphrased i forgot who reinterpreted that but anyway so you know there's a lot of philosophical kind of benefits and i talk about it as a metaphor for life using your physical training as a tool to teach people to overcome adversity in other areas of life and i felt that my personal story was a testament to that and then i would do the aerial performances to prove it and so i was i found myself obviously all of those speaking engagements the aerial performances were shut

because you know you couldn't be around other super spreaders and that that would be an issue so I found myself with a lot of time on my hands and and really isolated and I everybody had their face covered and so I was born hearing impaired bilateral hearing impaired and I actually didn't get hearing aids so I was almost six years old because I learned how to speak by reading lips so they didn't know for sure that I was hearing impaired because I was speaking but you know I had some speech issues but I learned by reading people's lips. I didn't realize how much I still depend on all of those nonverbal cues

for clarity of speech until all the coping mechanism I had spent my whole life developing would then strip from me because people were wearing face diapers. And so I was really, really depressed, and I found myself, like, thinking at first that this would be a great opportunity to write. I had a couple of projects. You know, I had often been told I should write my life story, So the Cliff Notes version is that, you know, the story goes, and I have some questions about this, but, well, for the sake of, you know, relaying it, the story goes that my mom was sick during first trimester pregnancy and that I was born. They diagnosed me with what they call congenital rebella. There's no indication that she actually had your measles, which is why I question it, but she was actually not even sick. She had a rash on her upper chest is what she describes to me. However, that's what they diagnosed. And I was born.

blind one eye. I had a cataract that had to be removed when I was three months old. I had hypotonic limbs so the muscles in my limbs didn't develop, fine graphic motor impairment, stunted growth, has all sorts of dental issues, the hearing impairment that I mentioned. I had heart surgery and I was one years old. And they basically told my parents that the best they could hope is to find a lovely institution for me to spend my life. They thought I was going to be completely blind, completely deaf, autistic, mentally, severely impaired. Fortunately, they were wrong on many of those things. I know. I would say. So I'm very grateful for their error. They also claimed that the doctor was dyslexic and misread the tighter. He read it as being

112, meaning the baby is not afflicted, me. And if they had read it as 12, which is what they, in hindsight, believe it was, my mom would have had an abortion. So again, if it was a error, a misreading, then I'm very grateful for that to be here. But so all this to say, I thought that maybe this would be a great opportunity to write. People had suggested I should write my life story. Actually, Steve Bannon tried to take my life story a few decades ago to lifetime and said he would pitch it for $250,000. But I said, no, because I said, well, what do you have? You don't own the rights to your life.

So, yeah, and he wasn't willing to have me talk. to them or be any part of it. So it was just kind of like a flat-out buy-out the rights to your life story deal. And I was in the entertainment industry at the time. I was an actress and a producer, so I knew enough to know that once you give those up, like you can't do anything with them. So I was like, I think I don't know what you have if you don't own the rights to your life story. So that seems a little, yeah, precarious to me. I'm not going to do that. But I found myself thinking that I would, you know, do some writing. And at the end of 11 hours on the first day that we were locked down. I remember it was March 18th because I was actually

supposed to do a poll competition on the 20th. And I remember because I had worked so hard. It was like it was very much a gymnastics routine. It was like, you know, instead of uneven bars, it was you know, vertical bars and I had worked so hard on it. Of course, it was shut down. I never got the opportunity. But I remember it really well. And so I was staring at a beautiful white screen at the end of 11 hours and realized that I was probably a little bit too anxious and pressed to get any writing done and that maybe I would have to table this because I know how the creative process goes and you can't really force that kind of thing. So I decided to order some books and I thought that maybe I would do some reading, which I hadn't had time to do and that

this would be a great opportunity. I ordered 11 books and I started doing a lot of reading. And then I found myself sharing these things on social media, sharing some medical journals. and I learned pretty quickly that the way the social media works is that if you post an orange, like a picture of an orange, people will argue with you incessantly until you know it's really an apple. It doesn't matter that you are very clear that you've posted a picture of an orange. You don't know what you're talking about and they know, the church of the internet is very clear on this. So I found myself arguing with people about things that I just didn't think were like controversial at all. And I was kind of surprised.

So that got very frustrating. And so I started joining a bunch of online Zoom groups, really just because I couldn't talk to people because everybody's faces was covered. And I couldn't understand them. And so I found, again, I was just really depressed. And so I joined all these groups. And people started telling me that, you know, they saw my posts on social media and that I had a lot to say. And then I should start a podcast. And somebody was hearing about my story and they said that this is like how long.

little I knew about podcasting, but they told me that I needed to be on Rogan. And I said, what's a Rogan? Why do I need to be on it? And I know who Joe Rogan is, for the record now. So I started listening to Rogan. And that led me to like the intellectual dark web. And I started and it became, I guess, you know, the way people used to feel about watching television. They're your friends in your living room. They're the background noise. They kept me company during a very isolated and difficult time. And then it dawned on me. I thought that the idea of starting a podcast was horrific and a really terrible idea. It sounded like a lot of effort for very little return and it sounded really terrifying, to be really

honest. So I was like, yeah, that doesn't sound great. But then one day dawn on me that I could have naked face discussions and that might save my life. And so I invited people to have conversations with me. If I could do them in person, that was the treat. I mean, I was really looking for that. I'm like, this is an excuse. You can, we can find a place. You can even come into my home. And I mean, I started with literally an air mac. I didn't have any equipment or anything. But I was like, okay, the rule is you cannot have face covering. So, and, you know, of course, a lot of times it was impossible for it to be in person. We did it through the digital interface. But I still thought, you know, that this might literally save my life. So I made a commitment for six months.

And I told my guests that I might not actually air this, that it was really a project for me, you know, very selfishly that the isolation was killing me. And I just wanted to be able to have meaningful discourse with people and that, you know, I was giving this a little trial run. And the guests really loved it. And I found it did wonders for my morale. Imagine that, you know, some social socialization. Interaction.

A little human interaction. Actually seeing faces. Whoa. This was a novel. It was, you know, you know, tremendously morale boosting. So I, yeah, so after six months, I ended up deciding I was going to start airing them. And, you know, it wasn't like six months consistently. It was just like here and there, whoever was willing to jump on.

And some of them I aired, some of them I didn't. But yeah, so I started my first, I aired my first one, I think right in December of 2020. But it was just a test drunk because I knew you had to do a test to get approved by some of the platforms. And I was worried that if the material were too political, that it might not be approved. That was in the Supreme censorship era. And I'm on my six YouTube channel now. So, you know, we see how that went anyway. But yeah, so I aired my very first one in, I think it was January of 2021.

And it was actually with Alex Newman. And so he was giving, his wife was giving birth that day, I think, to their fifth kid. And we know them now. wonderful. We've spent time with them, but it was really funny, like, my husband was telling his son, like, you're as old as my wife's podcast. And he's kind of like, that's nice. I mean, he didn't say that, but he's kind of like, uh-huh, like, let's play with trucks, you know. But yeah, so he was running late at the time. And I told him, like, you know, we can reschedule. This is not like a, I mean, at the time, it was not even really like a, it hadn't been aired in anything. So he's,

no, no, no. And I was, oh, I guess by the fifth one, you know, this is a, you know, the, you know, the drill, so I'll let you drive the scene. But yeah. So that was how I started. And I think I started my podcast very politically oriented. I had because I was living in Santa Monica, you know, the Socialist Republic of California. And I was under the impression that if we could just get the right people in office, we could fix this whole mess. That really felt like the Republicans were behaving as controlled opposition for the left. But after a few weeks, I mean, it was really very brief into my journey. I said, oh, no, no, no, they were designed to be controlled opposition for the left. And I really started to have a major paradigm shift about how things operated. And that sent me on quite the journey.

I'm still on. I'm like, okay, I almost want to just jump right off on that sentence. But before we get further down that road, sure. You were talking about being an aerial acrobatic performer. Mm-hmm. What the heck is that? So you might be familiar with Cirque de Soleil. Yes.

Yeah, so you see people in like the silks. Some people call them the curtains is what else people would say to me all the time. Like you dance in the curtain. Yeah, like those silk and they have like a sling one. Yes, yeah. Yeah. So that's what I did. I've performed in those.

Interesting. Okay. I found it because I tried out for American Ninja Warrior, and I have very small hands. So obviously it requires a lot of grip strength, but if you have small hands, you have less surface area. So your grip strength is going to be compromised as a result. Like you have longer, like you have bigger hands, longer fingers. Like you don't have to have as much strength because you have the surface area to grip. And so I knew that I had to compensate because my hands were so small.

So I was trying to find like fun ways that weren't just like hanging from bar, which, you know, I did a lot of or they have these little grip things that I would do while I was driving or something. But that's kind of boring. So I was looking for something that might be a fun way to increase my grip strength. And I had seen it when I lived in New York. And I thought it looked like a lot of fun. And I was a gymnast growing up. So I was like, I think I could do that. And so yeah, and I fell in love with it.

It seems wild to me. You know, when you go back to your childhood and having partially deaf, eye issues, heart surgery, all the different things. Heck, if the doctor read it right, you'd be aborted. And you go, I don't know. I guess I just think there's a ton of skill, strength, all the things to do what you did in acrobatics. Isn't there? Like that's, I'm not picking that out. I'm not going, I want to do that.

I'm like, not a chance. Am I going to roll down a curtain? Nothing like that. Like that is a ton of strength. I guess it's, I don't know. I don't know if it's even surprising. It's just from where you started as a kid to where you got to, I'm like, that's pretty impressive. Well, thank you.

I think so when I was very little, I wore a patch over my sighted eye every other day in my childhood. And I didn't have hearing aids yet. So I was essentially blind and death every other day. I was like Kellyn Keller, every other day in my childhood. And my mom had this idea because they were very concerned about my balance, right? Because vestibular is very tied to your hearing.

Pro preception is very, you know, you get motion parallax through binary binocular vision, right? And I didn't have that. So deaf perception was something I had to adjudicate for intellectually as opposed to subconsciously with binocular vision. And I can do that. I mean, I'm not conscious of doing, you know,

equations in my head all day. But I am aware that I measure like my straight vision against the periphery and that's how I'm adjudicating death procession, but I cannot get motion parallax. It's physically impossible for me, which is why things like the liches and Ninja Warrior were actually really difficult. It was very hard. Even a box jump, I have to really size it up and I'm never quite sure because I don't have motion parallax. Like I came to 16th of an inch of actually going blind playing lacrosse because I misjudged where the ball was and it came and smote. smack me right in the faith. I broke my nose and I was actually, I got permission to wear goggles. Now they wear full helmets, but back then they didn't. And the goggles slipped and

scratched a 16th of an inch away from my cornea. So, all this to say, I don't get motion parallax. And so they were very concerned about this in terms of just like very basic development. It's procreception is actually really important for basic things like not walking into walls and, you know, walking in a straight line. And then, of course, for sports, it's, you know, it becomes exponentially more important. But yeah, so for basic functionality, just to have kind of a spatial awareness, you know, of my place in the world, my mom was very concerned. And she came up with this idea of building a balance beam.

And so my grandfather actually built a beam. And I was, you know, maybe two, you know, years old, really, really young. And my reward would be I'd have to walk on it every day, whether I had the patch on my eye or not. and my reward at the end of the week, if I completed it for a full week, would be that they would make the beam narrower. And so when I was four years old, I went to a day camp over the summer. And, you know, I was very nervous. It was, you know, I'm going to be by myself for the day.

I mean, obviously not. You know, there's counselors and all that sort of thing, but away from my family. And, you know, I didn't know how it will go. The new environment of, you know, kids I didn't know. So they gave us a little tour and I saw the gymnasium and I saw the balance theme and like immediately felt at home. Like, oh, this is familiar. You know, this is like my place. And so I fell in love with gymnastics from a really young age.

And this is part of why I was doing those speeches on movement of metaphor for life and using physical training to help you overcome adversity in other areas of life. Because the thing about physical training is that it doesn't matter how much talent you have. talk to an Olympic athlete, they will tell you, like, all that talent, obviously they have true gifts that most of us don't possess. I speak for myself, but, you know, I'm never going to be an Olympic athlete, you know, but they have obviously a raw talent, but they will never go to the Olympics sitting on the couch all day. They have to work at it. And every athlete knows this. You have to put in the work. And there is something about, and you will always have failures. So there's something about putting yourself in that kind of a situation where you're up against it just you know I always say

that you know ignorance is bliss until you know reality smacks you in the face and reality always smacks you in the face eventually right so and that's the thing about something so like so tangible like physical training is you're up against reality you know you can't cheat your way through it you can't fake your way through it you just have to go through it and you have to do the work And so I think it's a really good teacher. It teaches you that's something that you can take with you into other areas of your life, whether, you know, being career paths, emotional relationship, you know, social interactions, you know, intellectual journeys. I mean, it's just something that you, it transfers so well. And it's such a great teacher because it's there, that's the only way to get through it. So I really attribute a lot of my overcoming. You know, certainly in the physical development. I think it really helped me to compensate for a lack of vestibular, lack of motion parallax, and, you know, the proprioception that, you know, I still challenge, I still have challenges with. But I think it really helped me in that regard,

obviously physically. And it also helps with increasing neuroplasticity, you know, cognitive benefits, all of that. But I think there was also a sense of, you know, I can, I can fail and keep going. You know, it teaches you that this isn't the end. You know, you're going to have the hardship, but the reward is overcoming it and that there's different ways and that my path isn't going to look like somebody else's. You know, I was dealing with challenges that most people weren't. Like most of the other kids doing gymnastics didn't have to deal with my challenges. You know, they may have had other things. Everybody's got the strengths and weaknesses, but, you know, my challenges were very unique in a way, especially for a child. And so I'll give you an example.

I remember when I was seven years old and I was watching, I was in gymnastics and I was watching the big kids, you know, they were doing backwalkovers on the beam and that looked amazing to me. I want to do that. And the coach specifically came over to me and told me not to do it, not to try that I was never going to be able to. He said, just because of your vision, you're hearing, you're always going to fall off to one side. You're never going to be able to, you know, go in a straight line and it's just too dangerous. It's not safe. So I, behind her bag, would practice every day on the floor on like they would have a line, you know, that maps around the mat. And so on that line, sometimes they have little lines that separate.

So I would practice on these lines. And every day that I was in practice just to get until I felt super confident that I was landing right on that line. And then I went on to the low beam. And then I started to put little mats on that. They had medium beams, you know. So little mats. So it's just a little bit elevated. did. And then I started to practice, like, whenever I could sneak away, you know, nobody's looking at the beam.

And one day I called her over and I was like, I have something I have to show you. And so I did. I showed her me doing back walkover on the beam. And she pulls me into her office. I thought I was going to be in such big trouble. And she says, so I have something for you. And she pulled up like a t-shirt and said, you can have this t-shirt. And, you know, I thought it was going to be scolded. I didn't know what's going on. And then she said, or you can have this. And she pulled out a jacket. And it was a team jacket. And I said, well, if I take that, does it mean I'm on the team? And she said, yes.

So that was how I made it onto the team was sneaking behind her back during back walkovers. Well, it's just, I don't know. It seems really cool to me, like what the human spirit, like you have all the things against you. Like, I feel like you had all the things against you that you're not going to be able to do. not a lot alone gymnastics, a ton of physical activities because of all the, I don't know, the problems. I don't know the proper word. Physical challenges, yeah. Thank you.

According. And instead, you like overcome it. It's like, you can't, you will never be able to do this. I'm like, if I tell my children not to do something? What's the first thing they do? They go and try and do it. Yeah. And so a coach goes, don't do this because it's way too dangerous.

What do you do? You find a way to work your way up to it. Yeah. So that you can confidently do that. I think that's like, yeah, this is, you know,

to the folks listening, like back when I first started the podcast, it was on athletes. And a lot of them played in the NHL. And I was trying to pull out of them that they just don't get there on skill. Like there's so much more to making it to the ultimate level. And in hockey, that's the NHL.

And in different, uh, uh, sports. It's, it's different, um, leagues and,

and everything, but like there's so much hard work. There's so much like attention to detail that is. Yes. Kids need to understand. And what you're breaking down for me in gymnastics, you did. Like I'm like, it's pretty wild. Yeah. I'm so grateful for it.

I think it was like life changing for me. I really think it impacts every aspect of my life. Well, I was going to say so like growing up that way, I assume you had to, I don't know, would it be spotting patterns? Would that be the easiest way of like navigating? This is really funny. I had a tutor when I was two years old. I remember her so well.

Her name was Miss Corey. She was 104 years old. And she was wonderful. As a two year old, you had a 104 year old tutor. I did. And her name is Mrs. Corey. And I, so it was really, I didn't know this until it was actually maybe a few years ago. I asked my mom like if the reason I had a tutor was because of all of my disabilities,

you know, my challenges and whatnot and should actually know, Mrs. Corey apparently only worked with gifted children. I never knew this my whole life. Like, you know, I'm several decades older and like never knew that. I thought it was because I was quote unquote disabled. That's why I had a tutor too. Who has a tutor too? But the reason it came up was because I was drive.

My mom was driving and I was pointing something out and I told her, well, we're going to find this. And she said, how do you know? And I had told her like all the patterns, like all the signs along the way. And she was like, I don't know how you even noticed that. And I told her the story about, so Mrs. Corey and I would read together. And I was reading the box card children. And I would always tell her like, you know, because I'm an impatient two-year-old. So this is how the story is going to end.

And she would look at me like kind of flabbergasted. She's like, did you read the end of the book? And I'm like, no. And she's like, how do you know, being the good teacher that she was? You know, she'd let me unfold this far. her. And I was like, oh, it's really easy because, you know, this happened, this happened. And then, so obviously this is what's going to happen. And she explained to me this is called foreshadowing that the, you know, author is like laying out, like dropping the hints to help unfold the story. And she said,

but I have never in my century of working, like, you know, living and, you know, almost I guess a century of working with children. She said, I've never seen anyone with that kind of pattern recognition. And I've never forgotten it because, like, people always thought I was so strange because I point out patterns, you know. And I'm getting trouble in school for it because they're like, you're not paying attention, you know. You're just like integrating things that don't make sense. You're connecting dots that are like, you know, like I'd be in physics class and I was like talking about democratists who, you know, who was the first to discover atoms. And they're like, you're not paying attention. Why are you talking about ancient Greek philosophers?

We're in physics. And I'm like, no, no, but now I understand it because that's how my brain works. because I'm an integrative thinker. So I can't isolate. Like it's only in context that I understand something. I mean, I can get like a cursory, a superficial understanding of something, but for me to really understand something

where I feel like, you know, I have a grasp on it, it needs to be contextual. I have to really see the full picture. So you enter into politics, sorry, into podcasting. Yeah. And you have this unique story of like overcoming physical, barriers that people don't think you're going to be able to do. So then you enter podcasting and you

start staring at politics. I think that's what I heard, right? You're looking at the Republicans, Democrats, we just need to get the right people elected and we get out of this. But you also have this ability to spot patterns and start recognizing things. Walk me through how this plays out, because I assume you pick up on a lot of things faster than most. That's what I'm getting. Well, I think I look at cues that a lot of people don't look at. So I think in some way, I mean, maybe the pattern recognition might be an innate kind of a skill, talent, gift, or, you know, that might have been something I would have had anyway. But I think it's very much enhanced because I don't have all the sensory cues that most people have. So most people take for granted that they can get all the visual cues.

They have the visual acuity. And, you know, that just comes to them. You know, people hear things. They get all that information, which is part of how we adjudicate, you know, life. Like, it's part of how we navigate is through that sensorial experience. But because I don't have that to the extent that other people do, I don't take it for granted. But I think that I have some non-verbal, non-visual kind of, I don't want to make it sound woo-woo. It's not like ESP kind of a thing. But I think I'm looking at things a little bit more holistically.

And I'm more aware that I need to look at things that way because I don't have all of those cues. And you've been doing it since you're a kid, right? Yeah, it's not a conscious. It's just when a politician gets up and starts talking, you're not just listening. You're watching the entire production. Yes. Yes. So I will tell people, I'm like, I don't trust that person.

And they'll be like, what? Like, they're so charming. you know, and I'm like, I could be wrong, you know, so far my instincts have not steered me wrong, but, you know, I'm always open to that. Like, I don't have evidence. So I'm just like, and it's actually a large, largely how I do my research. I will get like a hunch. And it sounds so, again, I really don't mean it to be like, you know, this woo woo mystical thing. It's not. But I'm, I'm getting cues that other people aren't looking at because they're listening. They're taking them at face value. So they're listening to what they say. You know, they're watching them like

very superficially, you know, how they put themselves together or the settings and whatnot. And I'm just looking at things that other people probably aren't looking at because I can't hear and see everything. I miss things. You know, even with my hearing aids, I only get 80% of clarity of speech. So I still, that's why I didn't realize until, you know, 2020 hit. I'm like, oh my gosh, I didn't realize how much I still depend on, like, reading their lips and their facial expressions and all of that. I'm putting the pieces together because I don't hear everything. I'm not getting every word clearly. So yeah, I will point out something like, I don't trust that person. And they'll be like, why? Like, you know, they haven't proven it. And I'm like,

just watch them. We'll, we'll start to see. You know, and I usually it is right. And it's, I can't pinpoint it, but it is a bigger picture thing that I'm looking at. But it is how I go about my research. I'll get kind of a instinct about something. I'm like, I'm going to start looking here. And, you know, I'm not, I don't always find it. And I'm not going to present things that I don't have some real tangible evidence to hook onto, you know, but it is sometimes I'm like, oh, there might be something here. Maybe I need to scratch beneath the surface and say what I find. Well, you start looking. What did you find? Oh, yes. So when I was with the politician, so it was mostly just that I was talking to, I was talking to a lot of people who were right there

in California, you know, so, you know, obviously it's very controlled. You're dealing with the people who were, I wouldn't even necessarily call them like conservatives, you know, they're just people who weren't on the crazy end of the left, you know, who were trying to make a difference. And you could see very quickly, like, how the system worked, that they just didn't have a whole lot of, now, I don't agree with this locally. Locally, I think people actually have a lot of power. I don't think they, most people don't want to take the time, energy, and effort to exercise their power that they have locally. And I think this is true everywhere, actually, but in America, especially, because of where our system was designed. We actually have a lot of power locally.

But it requires, you can't point the finger to somebody else. You have to step up, take action. And I understand. Everybody busy with their lives. You know, they, people have bills to pay, mouths to feed. You know, it's a, I get it. But it's also a responsibility. It means, like, you can't just sit there and complain if you're going to start taking action. But I was seeing, like you know more of the state level I knew people who are working more in the federal you know like in Congress or who are running and I was just seeing that there is they're not speaking up so I have a friend he he calls he says it's the the dogs that don't bark he calls the GOP the dogs that don't bark and so

essentially they become the the controlled opposition right they're not speaking when they should because they should be putting a stop, right? They should be calling out. When I hear all the time, like people are always very condescending to me, like, they're there, a little girl, you still believe this piece of paper is going to do something for you. I'm like, no, I don't believe that at all. I believe the principles and the metaphysics upon which this piece of paper represents, which they stand, will defend us. That is the defender of liberty. That is the bulwark to preserve the free will of humanity, but it's incumbent upon us. It was an experiment in self-governance. Self-governance means

that we have to step up and we have to self-govern. It means that, and that requires holding our elected officials accountable. That does not mean like, oh, we, you know, authorize somebody else to take complete authority over us and we're abdicating our responsibility. That's not what it means at all. It means we have to call them out. They're supposed to represent us. They're supposed to work for us. And when they don't, we need to be calling it out. But what I was seeing, is that the quote unquote Republican were intentionally not standing up, not holding them accountable because they have to, you know, because they had other interest, really, is what it was. And the way it's structured right now is that they are incentivized to be the controlled opposition.

Like they'll get whatever advancements, you know, whether it's a monetary career, you know, I think it varies depending on who it is, right, and what may motivate them and what's available, you know, in that circumstance. But I was just seeing it rampantly. It was a, you know, I don't really love the term uniparty, but it was just very much that they were, they're incentivized to be the controlled opposition and often to controlled opposition either doesn't stand up when they should, right? They're not calling out. They're not holding their, the other side accountable, or they're abetting it in some way, which is usually through omission, you know, narrative steering. There are lots of distraction. There are many ways that that can go. But I saw it very quickly.

And I was also in the, you know, I kind of started this whole journey with the medical freedom movement, right? Because I was so frustrated with, I'm posting all of these medical journals telling you that the masks do more harm than good. I mean, we had like infinite resources proving that the masks do not help. And so I was just presenting this information. We knew how harmful they were for the children. We know they're deleterious literally to one's health. I mean, you normally when you excrete bodily waste, you don't put it back in, right? And that's what they were asking us to do. That's literally what you're doing.

You expel bodily waste through exhalation. And so now you've got something blocking it. And now you're breathing it back in. And I mean, when you think about it, one, it's disgusting. But two, I mean, it just defies all logic. Why would you do this? And we've known even from the medical industry with like surgeons and people who do wear, that the particles that can go through, I mean, this really mostly they wear it so that they don't, you know,

contaminate somebody else, like when they're operating, right? Like if they sneeze, if they, that's mostly what they wear it for. Wasn't to protect them from supposedly as a virus, right? And that was the other thing. None of it made sense to me. It was like, okay, if you believe the narrative of, you know, like mainstream burology, viruses don't live on surfaces. And yet they kept telling us that we needed, you know,

all this like hand sanitizer and we had to clean off the surfaces. That might be true for bacteria. Bacteria can live on surfaces for a bit. But if it's really, even if you believe, and I know there's controversy around the nature of virology, but like, let's just say you accept the mainstream science narrative on barology. That didn't make any sense. Why were we all, like, running out to buy Lysol to wipe off surfaces when viruses don't live on surfaces? So I just very quickly saw my realization was that, and I mean, this is, you know, could be contested. I don't know whether it was co-opted or whether it was intent. My belief is actually that it was designed.

The medical freedom movement was actually an intentional op to shift the Overtin window. And the way to think about this is if you look historically, and I'm pretty sure this is probably true even in Canada, but I know this is my experience and I've lived in many parts of the U.S. And I've traveled all over the U.S. But historically, the people who were more involved in the medical freedom movement, historically, prior to a few years ago, you know, these are what you might call like the crunchy moms, right? And I don't mean that to be a majority. But these are people who would only buy organic foods and, you know, never dream of buying toxic chemicals to clean their house and would never inject experimental pharmaceuticals into them or their children. right these kind of people historically voted left democrat or didn't vote at all they were anti-establishment

altogether and all of a sudden this medical freedom movement comes in and labels them they put a label on them they are now republican conservative libertarian whatever they slapped a right wing quote unquote banner on these people and most of them were actually quite confused by it you ask them they're like I've never, in my life, I've never voted or I've never voted Republican, like, ever. Like, but they're, okay, that's what we do now. Now we're Republicans. And so it really shifted the Overton window. And I mean, you saw this again pretty recently with Elon Musk with the cars, right?

Most people on the right side of the political, now I hesitate when I use, because I really think these labels are mostly like, you know, they're, they're just marketing for targeted audiences effectively. I'm not saying that they don't have philosophical origins. I do think that there's merit to that. However, effectively, what they've become is, you know, labels for marketing to target audiences and very effectively. So, but people who identify as being on the right side of the political spectrum, you know, typically would never have dreamed of buying an electric vehicle. They, you know, that's a UN club of Rome lie. Why would we do that? But when they were the protests against Elon, Elon now suddenly, even though Elon has voted Democrat and been affiliated with Democrats most of his life and is a like arch technocrat, he has suddenly, you know, he's in the Trump administration working with them on Doge.

So now he's got this banner of I'm a Republican. I'm dark MAGA. And so now, of course, all these Republicans or whatever label, but people on the right rush out to buy Teslas. I'm like, okay. So they just shift the Overton window. And so this is what I mean. It's really like it becomes controlled opposition. It becomes a part of a bigger Hegelian dialectic. You know, and George Washington warned us against this.

He said that the two-party system would lead to foreign and domestic, lead to foreign entanglements and domestic invasion and loopholes. I'm paraphrasing. That's essentially, he didn't use the term Hegelian dialectics, that's essentially what he was saying. So when you get to Charlie Kirk being shot and you've watched everything since then, what do you see? So I don't claim to know what happened. Like I don't know who shot him.

I don't know if he's dead alive. And I don't mean to- You're just watching the aftermath and the patterns and how they watch shift the Overton window. Yes. Well, what I'm seeing is it's very much an offer. And I have a lot of theories on what's going on there. Charlie Kirk was actually very tied in with NAR. I know that's not a popular sentiment comment, but it's very true.

NAR. Explain to me. The new apostolic reformation. So they believe in the Seven Mountain mandates. They actually believe he's an apostle. They believe Charlie. He's an apostle. He was also on the board of the council for new policy,

count the council for new policy, I think new policy, which is tied to like the Heritage Foundation, the, you know, the co-consortiums, like the Atlas Group and Montpeler and society. It's very much tied in with that kind of network. But yeah, he was, so he was also connected to NAR. So NAR, they believe in Seven Mountain Mandate, and they believe that it's kind of the religious version of the Long March through the institutions, you know, familiar with like the Frankfurt School notion of, right, this is the Gramsci. He never actually used the term Long March, but that's essentially, and that was more of a Maoist term, but the Frankfurt School essentially outlined it.

And it's this idea that you would have, though Graham She believed in a concept called cultural hegemony. So he believed that if, you know, you couldn't approach revolution through like economic conflict. He said that wasn't enough to motivate people. It was as long as, and he was referencing capitalism at the time, as long as there's the culture of capitalism, you're never going to have this kind of like Marxist revolution. Lennon actually called a meeting, I think it was back in 1923, might have been a little bit earlier,

between Georgi Lukash, Antonio Gramsci, and Willie Munzenberg. And he was very concerned because the revolution, after the Bolshevik revolution, did not spread throughout the West the way that Karl Marx, had predicted that it would. And he was all confused and perplexed. Why, why isn't this happening? What do we need to do? And it was Gramsci who said that, you know, it's because it has to be a cultural infiltration. You have to take over the culture. And, you know, then they went to, they had the Institute, Marks Engels Institute, Moscow. And from there, they built the

the Institute for Social Research in Frankfurt, Germany, which became known as the Frankfurt School. But, of course, then with the rise of Nazi Germany, they moved, they made, they went through England, they made their way to the United States, Columbia University, by 1933, 1934, and they started the Institute of Social Research at Columbia University, and then they progressed from there, Michigan, and then Adorno and Harkheimer moved out to L.A., and he infiltrated through culture there, But all that to say, you know, they believed in this kind of concept of marching through the institution. So this is kind of a religious variation of that where they're talking about there's the seven mountains of society. So it's like legal, media, religious, political, law, no, I already said legal, academic.

I don't remember the other two. I'm blanking. But so these seven mountains, and they believe that if you take over these seven mountains, that you will then help to bring in essentially the Antichrist. So it's kind of an immunization of the Eschaton type of concept. So to help bring about the reign, they're sort of dominionists. They believe like they're going to be the apostles who will now reign here on Earth. And they're trying to bring that, you know, end times.

So we can have, you know, the Christian kingdom here on Earth, which is not a biblical concept. That doesn't, you know, like heaven does not have. happen on earth. It's not supposed to be, you're not supposed to force any kind of conversion or prosely, you know, you can inspire and teach, but it's not like, you don't force institutions. You certainly don't try and to hurry up the Antichrist. That's not a biblical kind of a framework. But that is what they believe. And so he is very tied in with that network. And they do believe he is an apostle. So I think that's, and you see them now opening up, like tens of thousands more. But there are some other things going on as well. You know, one of their primary

donators was also John Mappen, who's a Scientologist, very tied in. Also, Scientology historically has been tied to intelligence, and that's proven. So I can't say he is. I'm not going to, you know, make allegations. But historically, we have seen those, you know, connections. And all he's also tied in with some of the, you know, British kind of infrastructure. But that was one of the largest donors. Then we also have some very interesting things going on with his mom with, sorry, his father, who it worked for Trump, I think Trump introduced them.

I might be wrong on that, but I actually think Trump did introduce them. But his father was, I think, was it Robert Kirk, who was an architect, worked on the Trump Tower. So this whole like garage story, you know, it's like Bezos. That's always to build the, you know, the American dream. It's a great story. But I, so far, I have not seen this garage story ever be true. Like, where, you know, they're just like some kid in their garage. And they become like, you know, this huge operation organically.

But he, his, her mom is also very interesting. Her mom and her dad. Her dad worked for Raytheon. Now I'm not saying everybody who, works for Atheon. It's an operative, you know, but he was very involved in government contracts. And her mom works for this E3 tech company. And they're doing some really interesting things with human terrain systems and cultural linguistics. And I've done some investigating into this because there's some ties to the Game B community on this. And that was a rabbit hole I was, you know,

diving into. And this human trade systems, I will. be it's going to take me a bit i've just finished a book um so uh that's kind of taken up and then i had i had a bunch of projects so it's been on the back burner uh but i will put it together um the the stuff on the human terrain systems is kind of like a in operation phoenix style uh culture they're they're looking through cultural linguistic so it's human domain right so they're studying uh the cultures and how uh the human systems organize uh so this is a it's like Stanley McChrystal's teams of teams is based on this premise but they're doing it for community mapping which that Erica Kirk's uh mom's uh I forgot like a I can't pronounce her name so

I'm not going to try um but uh yeah so she's she she's more very she started this company and that's actually part of why they moved to Arizona because they were living in Ohio and she's Erica has talked about this. However, her mom had these contracts for Homeland Security, for the Department of Defense. And so that's kind of interesting to me. You know, I'm not making any allegations at this point, but those connections are very interesting. And she steps into this role where, you know, NARA wants to use this infrastructure to create this. And you're kind of seeing it.

And you're seeing also the division that it's creating. Anybody who ask questions is either a cold-hearted leftist or a woke right. And I'm like, I'm definitely on either of those categories. But I have a lot of questions that, I mean, I think fair to be asking questions. But then we also have all these narratives popping up, like, you know, Candace Owens, who's, you know, I never thought she was sane. But now she's, I think other people see that she's not so sane. But it's interesting. Candace Owens claims that the only people, two people who can shut her up are her husband, which, okay, fine.

Her husband connected to, you know, Michael Farmer, Lord Farmer. definitely tied into the royal family. And then the other person is Erica Kirk. That's interesting. Now, my theory, and this is really just blatant, like I don't have any evidence for this. So I will caveat that. This is pure speculation. I don't want anybody coming at me. Pure speculation. But Erica Kirk was a Jesuit trained. That's provable, right? You know, her education is Jesuit connected. and I you know, Candice just converted. I kind of felt like it was a nod to say that she might be above her ranking. Because it's very strange.

Why is that the only other person who could shut her up? And again, it's pure speculation. I have no idea. But something there is interesting because I don't know who's shutting up Candace. I mean, she's just, she says whatever she wants to say. But this narrative that Israel killed Charlie is just like so over the top. it's uh and it creates such division which is very effective for destabilizing and creating chaos which i think they very much want to do right now and i think they've had a lot of success with

it but it's it's kind of just insane like israel doesn't have better things to do like it's just i i i i there's just no evidence for it and it's it's just so ludicrous to me um but you know she's really running with this even though there's no evidence I know her friend had those texts released, you know, saying that Charlie was getting pressure, which is very possible. I don't dispute that. But I don't think that means that they killed him. It's just kind of like that they have other things to worry about right now.

And I don't see what the motive would be. I don't know what they gain out of that. Do I think it was some sort of an operation? Absolutely. Absolutely. But do I think that the long-range plan was always to get Erica in? I do think so. You know, off the hob, you were talking about being a young girl working with a 104-year-old

lady and being able, I think it was the box car kids. Yeah, the box car children, yeah. Yeah, children, thank you. And being able to see the foreshadowing of where we're going and hopping to the end, this is what's going to happen. When you look at today, I mean, it's a large stretch to be like, you can just see it and go, oh, this is where we're going. But you've done a ton of research and you're looking in, you're writing books, you're

you're interviewing people, all the things. When you get to, oh crap, I think this is where it's going. They're trying to shift the Overton window. They're trying to sew division. They've been very successful at this for a long time. Where do you think we're going then? I think they're trying to put us into a techno-feudal society. That's where I see it going.

I think they're putting us into digital gulags, essentially to create like a trans-futal, trans-human, techno-futal world. That's why the whole, like, you know, cultural linguistics and community mapping using human terrain systems, that's why that was concerning to me. I can see how it would be effective without the technology, but especially for, like, NAR, if they want to create these seven mountain mandates. and, you know, infiltrate. I can see how it's effective in that regard.

I can see how even, you know, if we were to look at it benign, kind of, you know, from the most euphemistic kind of vantage point, I could see it just being effective for recruitment. But I do see that they, you know, the powers that shouldn't be, if you will, I do think they want to put us into a transhuman leading to a post-human world that's in a techno-feudal. system techno feudal walk me what what is that so that would be like uh where we're kind of in all of these uh little like network states uh but being controlled uh kind of techno fiefdoms

so the technology will be controlling us through uh very like essentially cybernetic feedback loops and algocracy um but it really is where you're leading towards i think they're leading towards. Nick Land called it technoplastic beings. And so it's really that synthetic biology, like a merger of cyborg. It might be a more popular kind of a term where they want us to merge. I, you know, some of them, there's obviously lots of factions in the transhumanist world. Some of them are actual posthumous. I don't know how they think that's going to work out, like without any humans to program. I guess they think the, you know, at some point the AI will become recursive. and some of them believe the AI will become sentient.

I don't believe that that's possible. I think they want to convince us that. I think the ramifications of convincing us that are actually just as grave as if they actually achieved it. I don't think they can achieve it, though. That's my personal view. But I think that they think that that's why they won't need humans at all. Of course, except for them. You know, they're going to live to be 150,000, whatever it is they believe these days, once the singularity hits.

But then some of them are more just transhuman, right? They believe in kind of like a hybrid. You know, they're techno-optimists. They think that this is going to be human augmentation, you know, to put it very euphemistically. It's this idea of enhancing human capacity, and they think that's the best possibility for humanity. You know, I used the term immunization of the eschaton previously. I kind of think of this transhuman and technocratic agenda as a technical. technological immunization of the Eschaton. I think it's a Gnostic inversion where they believe they

become the gods and that they're going to terraform the earth to to bring about heaven on earth. But I personally think it'll be a dystopian hellscape, but they have to make it a simulacra, right? So there's a lot of narrative steering to try to convince us that we're already in a simulation. I don't believe we are. Again, my belief, I don't see enough evidence to indicate that we are. However, I think they'd like to get us there and they can do that through putting us in a simulacra. You know, so for those who aren't familiar with the term, it's like if you have a strawberry, you know, that's the real thing. That's made by God, nature, you know, the real fruit. You bite into it.

It's got the seeds and, you know, the juice and all that. You want to make strawberry juice. So you squeeze it. It's still got strawberry in it, though. You know, it's still from a real strawberry. Now you want to make strawberry candy. and it's mostly chemicals. It might not even have any strawberry at all, but it's got like a strawberry essence, strawberry-ish flavor, and that's a simulacra. So I think that's kind of what they want to do with Earth, right? They're trying to take over all the resources, so now we won't have any real foods. They're already moved. They want, you know, just lab-grown meat, eat sea bugs. They might not even be real bugs. They're making all this lab-grown kind of, I mean, already so much of our food is fake, it's synthetic. You know, they want to put us into these like 15-minute. kind of smart cities where everything is connected to the internet of things, the internet of

everything, the internet of nanobiothings, they want to make us kind of, you know, merge with organic and inorganic material. So I think it's like a terraforming and creating a simulacra. Yeah, so I think that's but of course the way they could, that gives them ultimate control. You know, when you start to look at how currency is moving towards a digital currency, they have, patents. They already have technology on mining human energy for crypto. Right there's that patent, the Microsoft 666 patent, like 0606, and a lot of people are off that up in COVID. But I actually have done a show on it. And most people just read that abstract. It's actually a very extensive patent. Now, I know they've actually used some of this technology. They say it's not very efficient

where they can, you know, mine humans for crypto. They say it's not very efficient. It's not very effective, but they're doing a lot of research on it and they could possibly move us towards a black mirror episode. But yeah, yeah. Mind humans for crypto. All that comes to mind is the matrix and sitting hooked up to something suck in your, you're like, is that what you mean? Well, I mean kind of like a black mirror episode where they're on those bikes and they're powering the grid, right? that technology actually exists. They say it'll be much more efficient with 6G technology. 6G technology does have the ability to work through humans.

So that's like part of their, that middle layer, the peer-to-peer layer. But they don't have to. I mean, they can do it now. But they say, I mean, you can look up on University of Amherst when they talk about using humans as an antenna for 6G. they've actually released their study. I'm sure they're not the only one, but that study was made very public a few years ago, so I'm not repeating speculative kind of information.

This is very well documented. I'm sure there are other studies, but that one was published a few years ago very publicly. So that's easy to find. But they say the technology is not very advanced and it's not very efficient right now, but they're certainly working on it. So I think if they could attach us

through some sort of a digital currency, they could put us into a tokenized economy, not just economy, tokenized everything. They would have complete control. That would be like not just a financial kind of control. They would literally have remote control interface to humans. Now, I don't necessarily think this is inevitable, but I think that this is where they'd like to go.

I mean, if they could. Well, so if you take your, if you take what you said earlier about labels or marketing for targeted audience, to kind of like shift them back and forth, right? And you use your Elon Musk example of a Tesla. And most people on the right wouldn't have got an electric vehicle because they don't believe, you know,

they just weren't for it. But then all the things happen and it shifts it. And now you get all these people on the right buying Teslas and supporting that. And they're like, rah, raw, Elon Musk. Yeah. What you're pointing to is that when they need to move the population to the next step, they find ways to shift it's almost like a false flag event but in a different or maybe it is i don't know it's it false flag to me i've always um thought of as a way to justify getting into wars

and what you're talking about is different little false flags to shift label from side to side to move the entire population to where they want to go yeah i mean i think false flags doesn't have to just be war. I think it's a, it can be. No, that's, that's me oversimplifying it. I'm oversimplifying what a false flag is to go to war. Right. I think it's also like mass scale, trauma based mind control. Um, so if you think about like, uh, the big nine event, uh, you know, in 2001, uh, now part of it did incentivize and, uh, create acquiescence to get us into war in the Middle East, right? That's part of it. But largely what it did was, uh, build the, uh, uh, build the, the security state.

Exactly. And the justification. You can't walk through an airport and not see it. What came from after 9-11. Exactly. And I think that's a lot of what they're doing right now. Yeah. We all, not we all point, but one of the things that was easy to point to was justification for war.

Yes, exactly. But what was happening and probably a ton of people, once again, I didn't start this podcast of 2019. and I certainly didn't start talking about things like this because you're like, at times you're so far off my head. I'm like, what the hell is she talking about? I'm like, no, no, it's totally fine. I'm just like, you go back to 2001.

What did everybody see online or sorry on television, I guess? Like you could watch them bombing things for Pete's sake, right? Like they really showcased we're at war, we're going to get the bad guys or whatever. And certainly there was a report. and some news coverage, I'm sure of it, of how they were beefing up security and airports and other places. Yeah.

But that was kind of the secondary thing of what was happening from one big event. When you come to the big events now, you're talking about the labels switching so that they can move people more into, I don't know, just like EVs or whatever the thing they're trying to shift people around. Well, I think it's a, I do think it's about the security state. I think that's really the goal right now. You know, they have the agenda 2030, right? And that's coming up pretty close, right? We're almost in 2026. So we're a little over four years away, which sounds like it's far in the distance. But it's not. It's not. It's going to be here in a blink of an eye. So they have a lot they have to get in line.

I think the digital currency infrastructure is a huge part of it. They need to transition people into, you know, right now they can track and surveil even here in the United States. They do it, even with the cash, right? They can still do it. Certainly with the credit card. It's not that hard. We saw that. The Canadian truckers experienced it firsthand, you know.

So a lot of people who are on like these, you know, Stripe and all these various platforms have experienced it, unfortunately, in some regard. there's also, you know, the, what happened with the, I think it was Bank of America who reported people with the J6. So I mean, it's happened. We have evidence that it's not just speculation, but we also know the infrastructure. They are able to track you. However, we still have a lot of freedom. You know, you can still, you know, during the Great Depression, people hid cash under their mattress. And like, you can still do that. And cash is still legal. tender that you you still have some control. I have people argue with me, you know, they're like, no, we're already in complete surveillance. You don't understand. You think you have more freedom than you do. I'm like, I'm not denying that people think they have more freedom than they actually do, that they're being surveilled. We still have a lot. And I think we should not take that for granted. And we need to hold onto it. We need to push back so we can, you know, reclaim more of our our liberty and our inalienable rights, right, so that they've trampled on. However, if they put us

into digital, they've complete control. That's complete surveillance. That's programmable. It's not going to be a universal basic income. It's going to be a conditionally based income. It's a complete. That's social credit. So I think that's what they really want to move us into. And I, my book with Patrick Wood is going on sale. It's either Saturday or Monday. So forgive me. I'm not, 100% sure Saturday Monday will be on Amazon. It's called the final betrayal. And there is a chapter in there about the whole regulatory infrastructure that Trump is. And you know, this isn't to pin it all on Trump because I, again, I don't think, first of all, he's a president. He's not a dictator. So I don't think he, the executive branch is not supposed to have that much power. Unfortunately,

that's what they're trying to do is create an unbound executive, which is not how the United States was structured. And that is not how it should be. I am not in favor of making it a monarchy or or CEO-run dictatorship. That is not what the founding fathers envisioned. And, you know, it was not a perfect system, but I think it was, so far, I do believe it was the best system. And not because there aren't, you know, incredible people all over the world doing amazing things and beautiful places.

I've been fortunate enough to travel quite a bit. And I've experienced that firsthand. But it's because of the metaphysics upon which it was founded. And there's no other paper in the world that codifies that. in writing and upon which the laws were built. So it is that that I think we need to defend. But I do think so I think this plan was in motion long before Trump, but I do think that Trump has been, you know, an expediter, you know, whether wittingly or otherwise, I think, you know, Silicon Valley has a lot of control over him. And so they built that one of the chapters is about

the regulatory infrastructure for putting this digital currency in place. Now, he did put a ban against the central bank digital currencies and you know that's great i am not in favor of central bank digital currencies we know where that leads we know who's behind that uh however they put what i would call congress back digital currency which i actually think in some ways or worse it's like the worst to both because central banks are still tied to it and still have their hands all over it um however it's almost more like arbitrary more trackable um you don't have any kind of like there's no countermeasure. So it's really kind of at the whim of Congress, these stable coins. So it's, very concerning to me. But I think they need to get that regulatory infrastructure. And they're

trying to do it all over the world. Most of the world already has did some sort of a digital currency. And I think that's really one of the biggest, you know, things they're trying to do. FinTech is a huge part of this, right, to have like all the financial tech. And actually, Islam is the leader of fintech, even in the Western world, which is also very concerning because it means that they have to submit to Sharia law. And, you know, it's not that I think the central bankers are favorable to Islam or Sharia law. I don't think they care. It's not, you know, good or bad to them. I don't think it's about the religion. But the infrastructure, because it is autocratic, it's a very hierarchical, top-down, rigid kind of a system, is beneficial.

to a technocracy. And so I think that's a, you know, very favorable to the kind of control they want to implement. But they are the leaders in FinTech all over the world, including Western country. So they're, yeah, so they're kind of a lot is being subordinate to Sharia in that regard. When you say FinTech is mostly, and I don't know if I'm getting this right, mostly Islam? Do you mean like the Islamic country? Yeah, like they're the leaders. in fintech.

Islamic countries are? Mm-hmm. Yeah. Like Arab Emirates and Dubai and yeah, they're the leaders of fintech. The financial technology. Yeah. They're the leaders. And so a lot of the central banks are already like working because they want to be part

of fintech because they want the digital control, right? It's a way of being able to track everything. to tokenize everything. And I really think tokenization is the end goal. They want to, so I think it was last year, sorry, was it last year? I don't remember where I was fighting against a natural asset companies. They were trying to, this was here in the United States. They were, other countries already have them. But it was the intrinsic exchange group, which is mostly funded by the Rockefellers. It was a, and it was only created for this purpose. They partnered with the New York stock with the SEC and the New York Stock Exchange. And they were trying to put a bill

up on the New York Stock Exchange that would allow for a new category of companies called the natural asset companies. And this was a plan they thought they would make upwards of like 500 quadrillion dollars, like insane amount of money, commodifying all the natural resources. So like the air we breathe. I used to me joke about this one. I was a kid. Like they're going to, they commodified water now like Nestle did that. You know, now they're going to commodify the air we breathe. And And here we are. They're trying. So it was like they wanted to like photosynthesis. I mean, really like all natural resources, but they want to commodify it. So when you look back at Technocracy Inc. back in the 1930s, right, it was a economic policy that was in response to the

Great Depression. They were trying to build a new infrastructure that they thought would create quote unquote abundance. And they thought they would do this through what they call energy credits. And this is very similar to what we're seeing today with carbon credits. So this is always been kind of the plan. And that was back in the 1930s. Elon Musk's grandfather, Josh Haddleman, was actually the head of Technocracy, Inc. Back in 1936 to 1941, right before they shut it down. And he was actually kicked out of Canada.

He started a new party called the Social Credit Party. It was literally called the Social Credit Party. But that's his grandfather. And people argue his grandfather passed when he was young, but he was very familiar with grandfather's ideas. He has publicly openly talked about advocating for a technade. He said he wants to build it on Mars, but I think he's trying to build it here in the United States. And so it's this concept that you would have these energy credits. And that's essentially what the natural asset companies were doing. They wanted to do carbon credits, carbon sequestering, carbon offshoots,

and it was through the commodification of all of these natural resources. And one of the sneakiest things that they were doing was that if you had this natural asset company and you had a conservation easement on your land, you could have inherited the land, like from your great-grandparents. And if they had entered into some sort of a conservation easement, on that could be some sort of a natural asset company that has ownership. And now through what they call ecosystem management services, they now have controlling rights to your land. So they could tell you that because, you know, it's bad for the environment, you can't farm on your land, you can't drill on your land, you can't, you can't breathe on your land because, you know, that's too much carbon dioxide. They could tell you all of that,

but then they could go ahead and drill, breathe, you know, farm, whatever it is on your land because they have what they call ecosystem management rights. So essentially they have controlling rights. Do you think you own the land, but they have controlling rights to it? So I was trying to, you know, fight back on that. I actually didn't think I would have any success. I didn't think we would have any success. I tried to just sound sound the alarm for people to submit comments because I knew that if they submitted comments and there were enough people submitting comments, if they went through with it, there would be legal recourse because it's actually illegal what they were trying to do. And then we would have legal recourse and there would be a bigger class action lawsuit.

But I went on InfoWars and it was like the next day they actually did pull out. And it was one of the shortest comments period, like historically. I don't know that I was, you know, I think there were a lot of us trying to sound the alarm. But yeah, it was like the next day. And I was, thank goodness, because that was, you know, really a major step towards this half-earth agenda. You know, they call it the 30 by 30 agenda. But Biden renamed it America the Beautiful because that sounds much better than, you know, trying to steal 30% of the earth's land and water and make it in,

uninhabitable for humans. But it's really only a stepping stone to the half-earth agenda, which was E.O. Wilson, wrote a book on it in 2016, the half earth, and that's this agenda where like half of the earth's water and air and land would not be inhabitable by humans. If you look at the, there is an agenda 2030 map and they actually have these like various degradation, you know, like colored zones, and there are no crossing zones like where humans cannot cross and they can't use that land. So, I mean, this is a very real agenda. But this is all tied to, this is why I think the tokenization is so important because it's all tied to capturing complete asset control, all the natural resources, all the assets and having complete, and that includes us.

I mean, the technocrats always said, like humans were basically cattle, we be resources as well. This is part of what the whole education system is about. You know, people think the school choice is about giving people choice. you have a God-given right to educate your child as you see fit. You do not need the government's permission to do that or to not do that. You want to put them in state school? Go for it. I don't think that the state has any responsibility in education.

You know, in the United States, it's for the state's purview. We do have federalism. They can decide to do that. And that's for the individual state's constitution to, you know, that's up to their discretion. But there is no role. I mean, the Constitution says nothing about state education. And so this idea that the, you know, but if you want to put your children in school, that's your prerogative. However, this is not about giving you choices.

This is all about putting every child on the blockchain ledger. Charlotte is a bee blew the whistle on this back in the 80s. She worked under Reagan and she blew, she was working at the Department of Education. And she blew the whistle on the best project, which is the better education through technology project. and she blew the whistle that this is what they were doing. All this tech ed is about data mining the children and create these cybernetic feedback loops that data mine them and then program them. They claim they're targeting them with very specific education tools that are just for them,

but it's really about collecting their data and then programming them so that they can be trained to be part of this technocratic workforce, right, which is where they're moving towards with the fourth industrial revolution, although a lot of the social called quote unquote experts claim were already in the fifth industrial revolution. The fourth industrial revolution, as Klaus Schwab says, you know, it doesn't change what you're doing. It changes what you are. And they mean it.

I don't know why people don't take them if they're like, when they say things, people are like, oh, that's not what they mean. I'm like, no, no, that's what they mean. That's exactly what they mean. They're talking about making us transhumanists. I mean, Albert Borrello stood up on that world economic forum, platform, talking about how, you know, you can take a drug and it'll notify you when you need your next dose. I mean, this is the internet of nanobiobio things. That's what he's talking about.

This is nanotechnology. And I mean, I actually think the drug was ambilify, which is not that uncommon a drug. So, I mean, they say these things. And I think people just like gloss over, like it's not real. I'm like, they mean what they say. When you all know, Harare says, you know, this is the year that surveillance goes under the skin. He means what he's saying. He's not, he's not an idiot. I think that's the other mistake is like people, if they don't agree with them or they think it's a little too kooky, they undermine them. They're like, oh, you know, they're just like some idiot, like babbling. I'm like, these people are not stupid. You know, you may not agree with them, but these are not stupid people. You know, I don't like much of what Brasinski or Kistinger

had to say, but I don't deny their intellect. Yeah. I, um, some of it, I would think that most people don't think are possible yet, right? Like, there's no way that they're going to put a chip under the skin, let's say. Or that they're going to, you know, like the combining human beings with computers, put a brain chip in and, and all those things. And yet, it's happening. And it's, you know, so then it comes back to, I go back to your thought of labels or marketing for targeted audiences. and it goes, so how are they going to get majority of people to adopt something that I don't think any of us would think is a brilliant idea?

So I think there's many ways. Now, the Phoenix conspiracy, I kind of outlined this big overarching kind of dialectic fusion of how a lot – I mean, obviously, I didn't, you know, catch everything. But I think it gets kind of the main archetypes and the main kind of driver. So I think what we're seeing, a lot of people are starting to recognize the Dark Enlightenment, which has been, I mean, Curtis Yardt's been blogging since 2007. Nick Land was doing the CCRU, which is the Cybernetic Culture Research Unit in Morewick University. It was the philosophy department along with Sadie Planned, the cyberpunk feminist.

I mean, that was back in the early 90s, right? He coined the term Dark Enlightenment. So this has been going on for a very long time, but it's coming to the forefront where a lot more people are aware of it, because of the influence on the Trump administration. And so I do think that is a very, you know, important and relevant influence, this philosophical movement of the dark enlightenment. And that, I think, is part of how they are infiltrating through the, quote, unquote, right. They're using the archetype of kind of like the patriarchal, disciplinarian, autocratic, authoritarian,

kind of father figure. And they're using that, you know, to create order. Right? You typically have, the left is typically like the divine mother nurturing, you know, kind of more emotionally driven. And you typically see this. Like that's like they, if you think about an ideology like communism versus fascism. But what happens is that it always comes back to, they kind of do the pendulum swing. You know, they're dialectical twins. It's not the telos is the same, right? Their end result, their end purpose is the same. is a totalitarian control. But their, you know, mechanisms are slightly different. There are nuanced differences. But you typically see, you know, they start to drive towards the pendulum goes back and forth. They go towards the fascism. But fascism is usually ends up being rejected because it is so authoritarian and autocratic, right? And it's like a top-down, overt kind of control. And the dark enlightenment, I mean, says it right in the same. It's dark. I kind of look at it

like Satanism versus Luciferianism, you know, it's like, there are people who run towards Satanism, but most people are like, oh, I don't want that, that's dark, you know, I don't want that in my face. But the Luciferian, it's like, I mean, Lucifer's most beautiful angel, like the master deceiver, beautiful, charming, the talents, you know, both me like a great musician or something, like the harp, right? So, I mean, they kind of gravitate like that because they're deceit. And so I kind of see it's similar in that way that you end up going back into the arms of the divine nurturing mother. So I think right now people are very aware of the dark enlightenment. A lot is being pushed through because we need the control, right? Fascism is much more controlling. We need order. And I think

there was so much chaos that we saw over the past four years in this country. And so I think they're now like, okay, we needed some structure. We need some order. I don't know how much Trump is aware, isn't aware. I don't, I think at the very least, he's probably not aware of all the ramifications. You know, he's, I, I don't think he has kind of a super strong understanding of where all this technology, the infrastructure that's being built may go. He may, I'm not inside his head. I can't, you know, that I can't predict or not, you know, I don't know. But what I can say is he's very clearly in the back pocket of Silicon Valley. And they are putting in all this, the security state systems, all of this is always for our safety, for our protection, for our

convenient. I mean, Palantir with ICE, you know, it's so that we can secure the border. Now, I'm all for securing the border, but I think we'd be very naive to think that all that technology is being put in place and is it not going to be used for anything else. I mean, what happens when, you know, the left is in power? And do they think that they're not going to suddenly decide we have domestic terrorists, you know, domestic extremist or whatever they want to call them, you know, the people who don't align with whatever they're saying. So this is, this is why it's so important, you know, when they want to create like this unbound executive, you look at Project 2025, a lot of conservatives jumps on board. They were so excited about this plan because they

were championing a lot of things they would like to see. But what they don't necessarily take into consideration is, okay, well, what happens when all that power is now in the hands of someone you don't like and someone whose ideas you don't like? And so, you know, you may have thought that what they were doing is great. And that's why you jumped on board. But now you've given all this power without the checks and balances, right? We're supposed to have the three branches of government so they can check and balance each other. So I, yeah, so I think that what they're moving through this dark enlightenment and they're getting a lot of infrastructure put in place. And a lot of people are championing it because they think, oh, we ban the CBDCs, but great. We got the stable coins. That's going to be convenient. people think it's like a freedom coin. It's a, you know, they don't necessarily understand what the implications of having that regulatory infrastructure is and where the tokenization is going. I mean, Larry Finku was, I think he was always calling the Schoth or at least for a long time.

And now all of a sudden he's officially on the, he is the co-chair of the World Economic Forum. They just gave him the official title. I think he's been calling Schoss for quite a long time. But he's saying how he's so excited to tokenize everything. thing. He can't wait. They bought 50,000 homes recently. And yeah, they're, they're setting up infrastructure. They, uh, they're working with various companies for tokenizing, uh, real estate. And he's openly said he wants to tokenize everything. So I think this infrastructure is being put in place and, uh, the dark enlightenment is being cheered. I mean, Doge was a lot of,

dark enlightenment philosophy. Uh, Curtis Yarvon is, uh, yeah. Dark enlightenment. Yes. Walk me through this. Okay. So as I was saying, Nick Land actually coined it, but it was based on Curtis Yard. So Nick Land is an accelerationist. An accelerationist kind of split into the left and right. I'll spare you that. He's on the right of the accelerationist, but his philosophy is essentially that we should use capitalism to push technology to its end degree

because it's doomed for an apocalyptic event anyway, but we should use technology to speed it up. This is the accelerationist aspect. So this is why when, you know, RFK starts talking about how part of MAHA is MABA, make America biotech accelerate. I was like, oh my gosh, he actually said accelerate in the term. Like, I mean, talk about like signaling to the initiates. I mean, it's like right there in your faith. But anyway, so the, he's an accelerationist. And, you know, as I mentioned, he was part of this, you know, cybernetic research. culture research unit in Martinwick University and he he that's his philosophy and then Curtis Jarvin he talks about and his writing is very dark I mean it's very occult literally I

one of his like a URL actually was like demon occult UK like it's you know very lovecraftian he's very inspired by Ebola who's a traditionalist and a satiracist who's actually a huge influence on Steve Bannon as well he's tied in Bannon has been kind of a you know, a figure that's helped seed some of this dark enlightenment philosophy. But so that was Nickland. And then Curtis Jarvin in 2007, started blogging unqualified reservations. And now he has his gray mirror. And they both have this concept. Nick Land calls it Gov Corp. And Curtis calls it a So government corporation, sovereign corps. And it's just this idea. They're very similar. It's essentially this idea.

of really like a network state, but it's a network state slightly different. This is a Belagia Shornamossin's concept, but it's, it's very similar. But it's the idea, the difference is that they're talking about the whole country. It's not like a little fipdoms. So they have this philosophy that the country should be run by a CEO style monarch. So we need to get rid of all of this. He calls the, the cathedral he talks about is like the information institutions like academia and the media he says they're all co-opted and they're all far left so again the hegelian dialectic right there the enemy the big bad enemy is the left that they're all about power meanwhile the dark enlightenment is all about creating a power infrastructure like it's all top down it's all hierarchical it's all leadeth Curtis jarvin actually

is a quote in his a patchwork a better vision and it's not a better vision in my opinion but he says that an alternative humane alternative to genocide would be to virtualize humans. So like to put them in virtual reality. Like again, it's just so incredibly dark to me. It's what and the full quote is like one of the darkest things I've ever read. But yeah, he said that's an alternate humane alternative to genocide. So he talks about how we need to, he was all excited back, you know, the end of Trump's first term thinking that Trump was going to come back and he's going to run the country. like as if you were CEO and be a dictator. And so he claims that we need to get rid of democracy.

We need, we're not a democracy. We're a constitutional republic. But he has a very anti-democracy, which, so does Peter Thiel. Peter Thiel actually funded his orbit project, which is a network state, you know, like the Lashir-Shanovans concept of network state. And through Tlaan, that company, Peter Thiel funded largely his urban ventures. But, yeah, so he believes. that we should be run like a corporation.

So, I'm scratching my head here because I'm like trying to keep up with a bullet train. Sorry. When Peter Thiel, all these different people, if I were to simplify this down, and I don't know if I'm right on this,

so please feel free to correct me here. Sure. They're looking at the Republic and going, this no longer works. Right. And now they're offering up different alternatives to try and shape the United States and maybe the world of the way it should be, a different way of governance.

And their thought process, if I'm getting this right, is to run it like a company, CEO at the top. Yeah. And integrate tech to help navigate the messy parts of a democracy. Right? That's what Mark Zuckerberg said in 2000. Move fast and break things. essentially acceleration of them.

If I were to take a quote from somebody to sum it up, it's a really good way to sum it up. Yeah, move fast and break things. And that's kind of, yeah, they want to use technology to push capitalism to its apocalyptic state. So that's kind of their theory. They think it's kind of doomed anyway. And so we should do that, use the technology. Now, Nick Land is more of a post-humanist. He really kind of, you know, he has all these comments.

like hyperstition, where we're going to, you know, manifest reality. Like I said, he's very inspired by a lot of these kind of esoteric kind of themes and concepts. But if I go back to the Dark Enlightenment, you have this group of people. Yes. Who are very tech savvy. They can see some of the brilliance that comes with technology. And they look at the messiness of democracy, a republic. And they go, this is doomed to fail, whether it's in,

200 more years or 20 more years. It's doomed to fail. So let's accelerate it. So we hit failure quick. Yeah. And then we step in with a efficient system. Correct. Department of efficiency.

Yeah. But the part that people didn't catch is that Department of Efficiency, I'm all for getting rid of bloated expenses and, you know, wasteful use of bureaucracy, all for that. But the second part of it was part of Curtis Yarvon's philosophy is rage, retire all government employee. The next part of that is replace it with a guy. So I was telling you before we started, I read your The Phoenix Conspiracy and I watched that video. I'm like, man, this guy sucks at public speaking. Like it was painful. It was painful.

He's not the most socially adept, no. And that guy is funded by Peter Thiel. Yes. His Erbit project was funded by Peter Thiel. And Peter Thiel actually introduced him at his home to Herman Hawk, which is part of who helped shape his ideas, his anti-egalitarian, anti-democracy ideas. But Peter Thiel is very aligned, right? Peter Thiel says that in his Cato 2009 review, he says that he no longer thinks that democracy and freedom are compatible. So they're very aligned. I mean, Curtis Yarvin calls Peter Thiel very enlightened. and Teal calls Yarvin the household philosopher. So they've got quite a little romance going there.

But yeah, Jarvin has been very influential on a lot of the Trump administration. You know, people like Vance are very, you know, taken with this dark enlightenment philosophy. Obviously, Elon Musk. So I think that's on one hand, that's helping to build this whole infrastructure, right, with the Palantir connections and this project Stargate. But then I think we've got some stuff going on in the middle and on the left where like the middle would be the kind of network states is kind of a libertarian kind of concept. Now, I personally have philosophical issues with libertarianism. I very much appreciate the spirit of a lot of libertarians.

You know, they tend to think they're fighting for freedom. They don't seem to realize that a lot of their philosophical roots have no metaphysical anchor. and so therefore it's all constructivist, nominalist, and self-apaphyosis. I don't think they see it that way, but that is the roots of it. I have an article I wrote on how Kant's philosophy quietly inspired the libertarian movement and actually created libertarianism. And it's true. It comes out of Kant, who is, you know, Kant believed that everything is the mental construct, right?

He had some, you know, concession for the fact that reality exists and that we can, you know, adjudicate some empirical reality, but yes. Sorry, I'm in my own brain right now. Yeah. And I'm going, okay, so when I learned about Wef and that group of people, they have a very dark vision of society. And my brain goes, they're sitting in a room, they're all these billionaires, they got all this money and time to sit and discuss idiotic things, and they start implementing them on society. Right.

And we've been watching that play out. Then you got the Dark Enlightenment, which I think is, they can both be Dark Enlightenment, but they're just two very different versions of how to control the populace, correct? Wait, you think who can be Dark Enlightenment? What two? Well, I feel like they're both Dark Enlightenment. I didn't understand you said both, but who are the both? The Weff and then the Peter Thiel's group. So those two separate?

They are. They are. And they're, yes, they are. Their telos is the same day, right? Their purpose,

their angle. Yes, is, yes. That's what I'm pointing to. But they are different. Yes. Yes.

The modality. So then my question goes, Courtney. Yes. Where is the other enlightenment going? These are all terrible ideas. We should not do this. And painting a picture of maybe a better future.

Yes. So I will just address the weft. Sure. So in that article, right, the weft is all centered around like Gaia, right? Gaia religion, this idea, this Malthusian lie that we have limited resources and, you know, we need to call the useless leaders and we need to, you know, ration out all of these diminishing resources. So that's the carbon credits and the 17 Sustainable Development Goals, all of that. That's the Wef narrative and that's a it's Gaia religion.

They worship the creation. Not a creator. They worship creation. But that's when I outlined a lot of the game B is centered around that. So, you know, yes, we have the left who literally just works with the UN, the World Economic Forum, parodying all of their narrative. The game B is kind of this underground movement. And I actually did just interview Jordan Hall. And he informed me both in, you know, writing and in the conversation that Game B is like a thing of the past.

And, you know, he doesn't even know why anybody's talking about it. And it's like, and I'm like, okay, he said it would be like talking about movements in the 70s. And it's like, why are we discussing this? So that may be true. However, I think there's a lot of caveats to that. One is changing images man was done in the 70s. We now have the first principles and first values of evolving perennialism, 42 propositions on cosmorotic humanism, which is just an extension of that. And I do have an

article coming out on that. It's just a direct extension of that. And that's like the Club of Rome blueprint, basically. I mean, they don't say that, but it basically is. And that's very, that's most of the, there are many members of the Game B community who actually wrote that. So, I mean, that's right here, right now, real time, very recent. But we also have, the name may have dispersed, and maybe they're rebranding or something, or maybe some of the community has splintered a bit, you know, but splinters happen all the time. You know, it's kind of like saying Ariosophy and, you know, theosophy are so different because Rudolph Steiner had a fight with Madame Blavoski. I mean, they're both, their telos is the same, right? They both are very steeped in the occult

with some nuanced differences, but ultimately they have the shared kind of worldview. And so we now, see the same they call them dialogos happening through the internet the same milieu with these same people through what they call the liminal web the metamodernism or the meta crisis or the emergent space they have all these different kinds of names but it's essentially the same people having a discussion centered around the same kind of idea but the reason I bring it up is because it's kind of like this under current that is kind of adjacent to libertarianism it's I mean a lot of them share

leftist kind of causes, right? The Gaia, the, there's actually B-Corps. It's like, you know, there's over 6,000 of them, like Patagonia is one of them. Ben and Jerry's is a B corporation, and it's all about 17 sustainable development goals. They have a B, like score adapter. But so there, but that, through that, like, milieu and through network states, and they have different I did an whole article outlining all these different types of smart cities like 15 minute cities C40 cities you know these the Sibian project which is Jordan Hall's project you know all of these different concepts and then they're slightly different but they're different variations of a network state and a network state is according to Belagie

Chernobyl who didn't necessarily you know create it but he coined the term in his book And this is very endorsed by Peter Thiel and largely predicated on Peter Thiel's concept of sea steading, which Peter Thereto put $1.7 million into, very reminiscent of like Elaine Masswell's Taramar concept. But it's slightly different, but it's this idea of city-states on international waters. And Belagher actually says in his network state book that, you know, he still thinks there's hope for reviving the sea-steading project. But first, we have to get the network states off the ground. And so just in nutshell, the network state is this idea that there will be a dissolution of geographical nation states in favor of these cyber ideological network states. And I think this is the way they can get people to opt in to their own tyranny and into the techno feudal systems, the techno phyptoms.

Because you think that just because it's below a Dunbar number does not mean that it's any more or any less tyrannical. I mean, do you think you don't need like some sort of an ID, digital ID to enter, some sort of probably a shared digital currency, some sort of shared, you know, communal laws that get recursively updated through these click wrap agreements? And what happens when you violate them and get locked out potentially? So this is to me where they're going to get people to opt in. And it's going to be under the guise of, oh, we're all doing good and we all have the shared bond, right? have the vegan network state, the carnivore network stage, the, I care about the planet network state. It's, you know, whatever it may be, you know, I only wear Hello Kitty network state. I don't know. But like, you know, you're going to think you're opting in, but they keep saying that it's a voluntary and that you can enter and leave. But good luck negotiating with a smart contract that's recursive. I mean, it's hard enough to negotiate with humans in this legal system. You think that a smart contract is just going to be like easy peasy? I just, you know, I guess you find all these different groups of people trying to find ways to steer the population, whichever way they think the world should go.

and I don't know I'll maybe ask it again because I'm like I I wonder if there's a different group of people that are just like you should just leave us all alone and we don't want to go down these roads maybe that's what we're doing right here I I'm so I'm not like I know the exit and build is like really popular I'm all for people building parallel systems that's great I think people should use whatever ingenuity and I'm. that's a I mean small business is what this country was predicated on and I'm all in favor of that but the the reality is is that it's not all that feasible and I don't think it's an escape it is largely based on like a you know Hirschman's concept of he wrote the book on exit bill voice right so either you either it's yeah exit or build and voice and you know so you either have like free exit or you can voice and I think that there needs to be both people can absolutely build their parallel systems all for that you know continuity creativity is uh has been the uh you know the flourishing of humanity since the dawn right so I'm all for people doing that however I do think that there

is some need for some sort of an infrastructure people when they're atomized just don't get things done right there's just there's no cohesion there needs to be some sort of infrastructure structure. So that's why I say local is really the way to go. But locally, we saw this here with like the school boards, right? Back in 2020, a lot of these moms finally realized what their kids were learning in school. They were horrified. And they started becoming mama bears and going over to their school boards. And we saw they made a difference. They had no idea they could make a difference, but they did. We saw policies be changed. We saw school curriculum being changed. You know, things happened. I think that's what people need to do.

And people think like, oh, we just exit. But I mean, so what are you going to do? Just isolate from society and just like that doesn't really, we still need, we're social beings. I think we still need some sort of, you know, we need some sort of systems and communities. And I actually think that we can do things together. We can do things within the system. And it's also like, why wouldn't you push back against the system?

What are you going to do? Just let them win. Like let them just take. over it's it doesn't really make sense to me Courtney if people were wanting to find your your writing your podcast etc etc where would you point them to so Courtney turner.com is a great place to find all of my podcast the ways you can reach out to me and support my work so that's spelled like Cortinei C-O-U-R-T-E-N-A-R-N-A-R-com it is pronounced Courtney but if you want to find me it's Cortenae online

And also you can become a paid member of my substack is a great way to support me. I put out all of my podcast early access for my paid subscribers. So you get it early and you get it ad free. And I don't put every article behind paywall, which I probably should, but I don't. And so, but the ones that I do, you'll get those. And I am going to start doing some, like, you know, shows that are just for my paid subscribers, like where they'll get a link, mostly just. for community building and so I can interact with you guys and build some sort of like a more

personalized kind of relationship and hear what you think so yeah Courtney thanks for hopping on and giving me information by fire hose sorry you're welcome thank you for having me