The David Knight Show - INTERVIEW World Governance & the UN Summit of the Future

Episode Date: September 11, 2024

Ryan Cristian, TheLastAmericanVagabond.comHow the Trump-Harris debate is a perfect example of the false dichotomy of the tightly controlled political processCreating UN 2.0 and World Governance with UN Summit of the Future, Pact of the Future coming up in just 11 daysWhat does Prospera, Thiel's technocratic utopia in Honderas, tell us about the technocracy and its goals?Find out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.comIf you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-showOr you can send a donation throughMail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @[e-mail] App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Money should have intrinsic value AND transactional privacy: Go to DavidKnight.gold for great deals on physical gold/silverFor 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal, go to TrendsJournal.com and enter the code KNIGHTBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-david-knight-show--2653468/support.

When you're not weighed down by high interest rates, life lightens up. MBNA TrueLine MasterCards have low interest rates on balance transfers and purchases to give your finances a lift. Find the credit card that's right for you. Visit mbna.ca slash TrueLineCards. Give your finances a lift. All right, welcome back. And joining us now is Ryan Christian from The Last American Vagabond. I wanted to get his, he's not part of the left-right Hegelian two-step here.

So I want to get his take on the politics because, you know, it's just going to be, he said, she said, for most of the media, we're going to take a different approach to this. And I also wanted to get him on because they're going to be having live coverage of the UN summit, the pact for the future that's going to be happening there. That's a very concerning thing that we need to have all eyes on because they keep playing this game over and over again. But joining us now is Ryan Christian of the Last American Vagabond. Thank you for joining us, Ryan. My pleasure, David. Good to see you again. Good to see you. What was your take on

the pageant last night? Something up right there. The pageant or theater. What's interesting is, to be completely transparent, I didn't watch the entire thing. I have a hard time doing that these days in general. I know. I didn't watch the whole thing either. I had to get away from it.

I had a friend send me a text message and say, this is crazy. My dad's listening to it on one side of the house. My wife is listening to it on the other side. I got nowhere way they engage with them, it's, it's the point is that if I take the time to really go through it, I'm going to have to take notes because I'm going to want to address it. And it's like, I ended up with like 45 pages of notes of like, you know, probably take me four hours to cover all the lies that were put out. But what I tend to do is look at the, you know, the, the different kind of highlights and what the reports, the parts people are highlighting from what they thought was important. And then I, if it's important enough, I do tend to go back through it. But overall my, of it because i was looking at it more this morning it is different than i think people expected but i'm very very right out of the gate i want your audience to know that this year more than ever or this cycle i feel that there's more coordinated

effort than i've seen in the past and i could just be my own personal kind of feeling about it but i'm saying that because i tend to feel like we should be skeptical or questioning more than usual whether these things are like being highly coordinated i just want to put that out there my personal opinion they always look at the way they got her in i mean no she hasn't gotten a single point a single vote as a point that a lot of people are trying to make out there she's just installed installed, you know, as a candidate. She got less than 1% when she ran as a candidate four years ago. The thing about that though, I find interesting is I think a lot of this is about sort of doing the thing that's actually the reality,

like kind of make it like the point is that we already know the primaries are kind of an illusion, like the DNC made that clear, but let's not pretend it's only one side. They don't really have to do what we want anyway. So the fact that that didn't happen is sort of like, well, we like,

it doesn't, I mean, it should happen if it was actually being done properly, but it wasn't. So it's kind of like a, you know, that's where it's at now. I feel like you're trying to shove these things in your face,

but to the point about the actual back and forth, it ended up to show where ultimately it seemed that Kamal Harris, the weeks leading up to it was almost, I don't know whether intentionally, but she was like, she did very airhead comments. Like she comments like she was letting know what's going on all the time. But then she came out in this debate and seemed to put forward a very, you know, most of her responses seem to be pretty good to highlight the claims of Trump that were accurate and so on. But the same for the point was that everyone's making the moderators seem to only apply apply that fact checking aspect to one side of the discussion, which is true. But they're all lying all the time, in my opinion.

So it's sort of like a coordinated thing right there. But it did end up in a way to seem to highlight that Trump wasn't as strong in a lot of the things that they were pretending. You know, I just was clear. My opinion is they're both pretty much the same thing. And they're both just as dishonest. The way this went out or ended up sort of it i don't know it makes me wonder whether or not this might go a different way my opinion is i think trump is sort of the selection with all this but either way everyone seems to be on the same page that it didn't really change anything

people who are voting already made their mind up the moment these people announced their candidacy and that's the real problem with our current political dynamic. It's really, it's all boiled down to that person's a little bit worse than what I might be forced into. And that's so childish at the end of the day. And so that's kind of where I think it ended up. It was theater. It was entertainment. And that's what I talked about yesterday in the run-up to this.

I played a clip from Thomas Massey, who's just had enough of this stuff. He goes, here we're going to do another theater i've been involved in this don't expect me to be an actor in this play again yet again you always come up with the last minute continuing resolutions so you can justify throwing everything into one giant basket called the omnibus bill and that's really kind of in a sense what happens with our political with our presidential race, right? I got an omnibus candidate over here, and I've got another omnibus candidate over there. And both of them, it's like if you went to the grocery store to buy groceries and say, sorry, you can't do any shopping yourself.

You can't make your own choices. You can pick. We've prepared two baskets for you. This is what's in basket A. This is what's in basket B. Which one of those two baskets do you want? And, oh, by the way, you're going to have to eat everything that you take home you know and it's like well wait a minute but that's what elections are it isn't like an a la carte uh i want this or

this or this and and the government increasingly it's now become orthodoxy of both parties that the government should do everything uh you know when when trump they they hectored him over uh medicare for all or whatever and what he was going to do about uh obamacare and he says well i you know i i have a plan i've got a concept of a plan and all the rest but he never questioned the issue of whether or not the government should be involved in our health care see and that used to it was only uh when hillary clinton when the clintons uh got in uh that was uh what uh 30 31 32 years ago that was when uh they first started saying well we want to have the government run health care in the united states and that was a big issue but now both parties have bought into that presumption that the government run health care the question is can trump run health healthcare better than Lala can run healthcare?

Right, right. And see, that's the same point, isn't it? It's the exact same point. It's all being distilled down to this binary dynamic where it's the reality. Nobody, the vast majority does not have their needs met, if honestly ever, with that dynamic. You know, but the point to see is not just that it's always just two choices that aren't the reality. What we want is that they use the illusion of the back and forth to bring you into that.

The point you made about the health care is so important because, I mean, there's a valid conversation to be had about why there are people. And I could take it a further step back and acknowledge it's because of other government lacking in policies, but that are in need in situations where they can't get what they might need and so on and but my i would i always lean on the side of less government liberty in the same way even though that would bring about problems the point is i can understand why there might be an argument about around medicare for all kind of thing but that was my first point it's like i'm like well hold on we just saw what they would do through covet 19 like how can we even ignore how those things can you know it's obvious what they would do but to your point is that it comes to a position now where instead of acknowledging that maybe we shouldn't even have them involved they drive you in a position where you're like well hers stance on government

controlling everything is a little bit worse than his stance on government controlling everything and that amounts to the same thing the basket thing is a great analogy i'm gonna have to use that and the point is not just you have to eat all you're not going to get half of what you want and half of it might not be the brand you like but too bad those are your choices you know it's crazy or you get home and you find that the boxes are empty there's yeah there's not actually any cornflakes in this thing you know it's just an empty box wait a minute uh that's supposed to be border patrol uh there's nothing in there you know i voted for a border patrol or whatever you voted for yeah you go back and you and you look and you look at it, like you point out that,

you know, how did, how did we like a government running our healthcare four years ago? I hated that. But of course, Trump thought it was a great deal. He thought he saved lives. And he goes back to this old nonsense about the 1917 flu epidemic again to

defend what he did. And, and you know, he didn't make any mistakes. All the mistakes that were made in his administration were because of the germ game that they played on us. it's just insane what they're doing but they do this over and over again and everybody you know keeps falling into this same thing i i so many of these um you know a long time ago when i was much younger i would hang on these things and i would think about what

what they're doing and and how it's trying to be you know how it's going to be perceived by the other side it was going to be to this guy's advantage i'm just so far beyond that i'm like thomas massey's like i've seen this before and i know that this is just fake uh and it's just to keep people distracted from doing the real things that are going to make a difference in their life can i come around that point alone like i was it's so funny. I was just thinking about this yesterday. It's difficult to engage.

Like for what we're doing, David, we have to be open-minded enough to engage with the people that are, you know, maybe they just literally for the first time in their life decided to look into politics today, you know? And like, we have to be open-minded enough to be like, okay, that we've gone through so much more in the scene these days. And also that we could just be wrong. know the problem the reason i'm saying all this is that i'm with i'm at the point with you where you're saying right there where i'm having a really hard time engaging honestly with people that are taking some of these things seriously

and so i have to temper myself i'm like i can't be rude i can't but it's really difficult because some of this stuff is so cartoonish and so obviously against our interests that it's hard for me to engage with this as if I might want to get, you know, it could be the option. It's just difficult, you know, but it's, we gotta be open-minded enough to consider there might be other options. But like what Thomas Massey is saying is that it's, it's not necessarily that, that like, I think what we're saying is that it's like a, an obvious manipulation where both sides are dishonest. I mean, he's kind of saying that, but he's also really just saying that they just give up with the end.

Like they want the same act, but at the end of the day, they kind of know that they're not going to get it. So it's more theater in that way. But even if you take his point, exploit just that being the only problem, it shows you that they are still lying to everyone that they're talking to and convincing them that they're going to get this.

And the reality being, it's only going to come around to the if ever at a point when it's not necessary or after the fact when they think they need it for the election. And all of that ultimately, which we can touch on, I think, is a Trojan horse for the digital ID, which overlaps with the pack for the future. But the point is, however you look at it, we're all being played. And people like Massey, whether he's playing a role that I'm just being skeptical here as the the one that kind of the revelation of the method comes out and shows you so you gain the support and you know that happens

to whether whatever it is it's the truth and we are being played you know yeah there was an interesting article today on brownstone at jeffrey tucker he says whatever happened to libertarianism he said this should have been in 2020 and on it should have been their moment to shine yeah and i was just so it's like yes yes he nailed it exactly right because you know when you look at what happened to the libertarian movement uh small l and big l the libertarian party uh there was only one candidate that i could find that was actually taking on the lockdown that was uh donald rainwater in indiana who was running for governor he's he's running again this time and he's he's got some really good economic issues that i had him on we talked about but um he was the only one who was pushing back against it and

all of a sudden he's up like 15 16 points or something like that in the polls you know of course what we always see happen is that as you start to get close to the election date, everybody reverts back to their tribe, you know, and so they'll say they're going to vote for an independent or a third party candidate. But then they go back, they fall back into, well, I'm going to vote for Republican or vote for Democrat. That type of thing always happens. But while he was doing that, I was so disappointed to see the National Libertarian Party was completely AWOL. And what Jeffrey Tucker talked about, and I didn't realize that, because I have not really followed them since then. It's like, okay, we're done. I used to be very active in the Libertarian Party, and it's like, that's it,

after what happened in 2020. But this time around, Jeffrey Tucker says the guy that's running for president in the Libertarian Party, he was out there telling people they needed to wear a mask. He was a cheerleader for Pax Livid and all the rest of this stuff and shaming people if they didn't follow this. And really, the presidential candidate was about as bad in 2020 as he is. But here's a guy that, you know, now for a couple of election cycles, this has happened. He says, so what's happened to the intellectual movement? We've really lost that idea of the Constitution of Individual Liberty. That's just really been flushed to the side for the most part, I think.

When you're not weighed down by high interest rates, life lightens up. MBNA TrueLine MasterCards have low interest rates on balance transfers and purchases to give your finances a lift. Find the credit card that's right for you. Visit mbna.ca slash truelinecards. Give your finances a lift. It's the same as always. It shouldn't be that we... It's always the way this has gone as far as I can tell. It doesn't mean it can't change in the future. So I always want to make sure we're thinking about this hopefully. I do believe we can't change it, which is why they're trying to suppress what we're talking about. But it's like the Green Party or anything else. You know, it very rapidly gets co-opted by the same corporate entities and the same power structures that want to keep us falling into the left right paradigm.

And, you know, and to your point about people falling in line at the end, it's we're seeing it more aggressively now than I think I've ever seen, shows you just how vulnerable it is right now but that it's it got very quickly dialed in you know like usually we hear it every year most important election of our lifetime very quickly we saw it happen both kamala and trump are like gushing about how this everything will end if we don't vote one way or the other this time and the problem is that it's just it's people want to do what they believe in they want to you know i want to vote libertarian i want to vote green party whatever it is but then they get convinced by the adult conversation you know the way that they're projecting it today that well all the people telling you to vote your third party your what you believe in they don't understand how politics works an adult will recognize the lesser of evils i mean it's just

it's always the same conversation that boil it it makes you ignore your own principles at the end of the day. And it's always that way. Like maybe there was one election out of 10 cycles of elections where it seemed that way. And I can get the logic of it. But if it's literally every time and literally every time is the same narrative. And this is why I think they're so desperately trying to pull new moves to change the situation, because I think people are seeing this more than ever. I really do. And so I think,

I think that, that it's also people want to do something, right? They see this and that, you know, being passive and just letting this happen is not an answer. So it's like, what can I do?

And the national media and the establishment, the government is very quick to come out and say, here, you can do this. And they give them a fidget spinner, right? And so they go sit in the corner And they give them a fidget spinner, right? And so they go sit in the corner and they play with a fidget spinner, think that they're doing something.

And when there's really things that they need to do, they need to investigate what's happening at a state and local level. And we had a situation here. We had an excellent senator who had taken on the banking system, and he had taken on a lot of, and actually also put in a thing about stopping out-of-state money but even though he's republican senator he couldn't get it passed by the other republicans and so guess what out-of-state money and the banks came for him and uh took him out and so you got to get involved you got to get involved at the primary uh time

because if you don't do that then then they're going to put in their people and you're not really going to have a choice when it comes to the final election and they're now starting the big guys are now starting to pay attention to the state and to the local elections they don't want you paying attention to that they want you still doing the fidget spinner of the presidential election and everything rides on their presidential election i don't even think that that congress uh is is going to do anything to help us so i'm looking at it and saying well we need to figure out how we're going to to nullify what's going on and do it at the state level and do it at the local level because that's worked for medical marijuana it's worked for other things we've

seen nullification work and in the case of that they stopped jeff sessions that was his passion to stop it and yet because he didn't have any constitutional authority to do that they had states all over the place doing first medical marijuana then recreational marijuana i don't i don't i'm not a marijuana advocate i'm a constitutional advocate and when people say if you start nullifying federal governments overreaching their unconstitutional acts then that's going to lead to civil war that's not true and you can always point to that and especially point to that for the left because they're the ones who typically support uh marijuana reform and that type of thing and you can point it and say that was done

peacefully wasn't it and so we can follow that model for a variety of things and i really think that's really about the only thing that we've got left in terms of politics and i don't make politics my entire life but i think when you look at politics that's the key thing at this point in time is state and local elections yeah i agree well to be clear on my stance on that in general like like katherine austin fish has said in a recent interview in her mind the presidential election represents about one percent of what you can do to actually affect change. And I completely agree with that, if anything, quite frankly. My personal opinion is I don't think your vote, speaking specifically about the presidential election, but quite frankly, I generally think this broadly, your vote does not translate to the outcome.

And there's a whole conversation to have in there about the nuance about that. But for two things. One, 100 percent agree. If you're going to make an effect anywhere with a vote, regardless of the circumstances, local is where it's at. I completely agree with that. And I wouldn't say that they're only now doing that. I'd say that's always kind of been the case. So they're very aware of how they can use the smallest elections, you know, trickle up in that same way. But I would argue that basically putting putting it this way that if you think

your vote makes a difference obviously i support that but i only only ask regardless my opinion but i only ask that you do what you actually believe in which i was saying before don't fall into what they convince you is what adults do lesser of evils just stick with what you believe in and vote for who you actually believe that's trump or kamala then i support that choice even though i disagree with it saying but i think that more people are showing that like all the comments i see online are all well they're both terrible but i'm you know i'm honest enough to acknowledge that i have to do this or she'll win or whatever and so i'm like will you stick jill stein or whoever else who you actually think might make that difference and

stick with that i just think that's super important that we're at a point where we can't we got to stop compromising our principles because people in the adult conversation, they keep framing it that way. Tell you otherwise, you know, that's it's important today. Oh yeah. Yeah. Well, you know, when you look at it, as you point out, I think, you know, we've got the whole thing exactly upside down because as Musk has said, you know, he said, look at what Soros is doing. He's he's putting money behind local district attorneys because what he wants is chaos.

And that's what he's getting with these district attorneys. And so he's not focused that much on Washington. And so Musk is saying, you know, the smart money is going to be focused on things. The closer you are to yourself, the more effect that you're going to have. And, of course, that is true even getting out of the political sphere and focusing on your family, focusing on your life, making preparation about your life. We don't want to ignore the politics,

but we want to keep an eye on it. So we know what we need to kind of defend against. And then, you know, make some effort to try to, to nudge things in a particular way, to the extent that we have the capacity to, but recognize realistically that you're not going to have a whole lot of say about that but you do have a

lot of say as to whether or not you're going to prepare whether you're going to train whether you're going to make alliances and local area that type of thing that you do have uh some uh ability to do something about i think that's really important but it's it's kind of amazing to me how they get caught up and these petty side issues so they don't have to talk about the fundamental thing and of course they talk about gun control trump can't really say much about it because he did uh set a precedent for doing gun control by executive order it's really right really crazy kind of tight when you're not weighed down by high interest rates life lightens up mbna true line master cards have high interest rates, life lightens up. MBNA TrueLine MasterCards have low

interest rates on balance transfers and purchases to give your finances a lift. Find the credit card that's right for you. Visit mbna.ca slash TrueLineCards. Give your finances a lift. It's the interesting thing when you look at them, more than I've ever seen, and maybe by design, I don't know know their narratives are shockingly aligned right now like it's really strange like there's the typical wedge issues where we know they disagree but at the end of the day like i think jill stein's one put out this compilation of their different rallies that were basically around the same time where they were you know it pro israel go against iran war for forward biometric surveillance wall like all these different points and it's like

it's and they're all kind of cheering how my guy's doing this they're not and they're both like yay yo pro america you know it's really an alarming thing where they're framing themselves as like the counterbalance and even even in the debate she Israel won't be here tomorrow if she wins and she's like that's not true I've supported my whole life and I'll support their war it's like if they're debating about who supports Israel more I don't know why the people i mean i i think most people see it quite frankly i think the only people driving this machine forward are the ones like we talked about that are team sport politics they've chosen already it doesn't really matter what they have to say yeah oh i agree yeah even on the things that she's flip-flopped on right

nobody holds her feet to the fire fracking all the rest of stuff oh yeah because she what she does is she does a focus uh group which is the same thing that all these politicians do the republicans for years knew that everybody wants to push back against they don't like obamacare uh they don't like the open border so i'll talk about obamacare and open borders and i won't do anything about it and of course that's she can play that game as well you know i can do i can support fracking as a candidate and then you know go the other direction when i become president so they'll just tell you whatever they know that you want to hear they have focus groups uh and they just have positions and they can change their positions just as easily as shifting in a chair let's talk a little bit about what's coming up in terms of the un pact for the future because you're going to have reporters on site covering that as that's

going through in about 11 days right yeah yeah it's it's basically now and so Derek will be on site and he'll be doing stuff for TLAB live on our show as well but I believe he'll also be putting stuff on Conscious Resistance so make sure you check both out the the interesting thing about this that I find so alarming is that it's getting little attention. And I find that this, so what we're talking about is the summit of the future. And then within it, they're talking about the pact for the future. And that's the real alarming part for me, because it seems to have all of the same possible mechanisms that, like during the COVID-19 discussion, we all were, and it hasn't gone away. So we're clear about that. But the pandemic accord and all these different overlapping points were very clearly identified as a problem right everybody

was highlighting this there was a lot of shows about it even still right now we should be paying attention to the way that goes forward but derek and i had a great interview about this where walking through the actual points it seems like it has all of the same kind of mechanisms at least potentially but with far less oversight or far less you know like that truly matters anyway but far less like acknowledge very lofty all these general concepts that could be used in the same way and i'm i i opened i wondered out loud whether the pandemic accord which which has happened a lot through history was sort of like the the clumsy on its face we're going to control your life thing so we all push back on it and then we accept the lesser of it you know how they do that, right? That's what I think this

might be. I've said that about the World Economic Forum. You know, it was always interesting because, you know, we would go to the Bilderberg Group, and we would talk about that, and nobody was talking about the Bilderberg Group, but the World Economic Forum, they wanted all kinds of press coverage. They invited it, and they put this cartoon nazi out there i mean you know it's just like a bomb villain yeah it's such a straight out of central casting and it's like pay attention to this watch this and everybody's like you know but where the real work is getting done is that bilderberg at the club of rome oh you know they got one after the other where they're meeting and they want nobody to talk about these So they basically set up a lightning rod of criticism, which is the World Economic Forum.

And I agree with you. And we also see that regardless of what their rationale is, whether it's we're all going to die because of global cooling, or then we're all going to die because of global warming, or we're all going to die because of a pandemic, whatever it is, it's always the same solution. We going to have depopulation we're going to have central control we're going to have tracking of everybody and so they come up with these different mcguffins i call them to get people afraid but it's always the same solution whether it's a pandemic or it's climate change or freezing or heat or whatever it's always the same solution and so that's really what this is about this is about you know creating, creating the structures to govern us.

And I think the thing that is very concerning about it, and this was brought up by Expose News out of the UK, they said, well, where is the discussion about this in the political sphere in the UK? Where are our representatives on this? Do we have a say in this? And, you know, why is this coming? Well, the same thing happened with the Paris Climate Accord. And they always run this stuff through.

They jam it through without getting people involved. And I think that's the really concerning thing, that we really need to pay attention to it. Absolutely. Well, a very common tactic today, if not the only thing they seem to do anymore, is use the justification. It's a climate change model, right? We're all going to die it's it's our fault we have to do this we can't really wait for democracy because we're all going to die it's like the same even though we all know that democracy the mob rule like the point is that they ultimately use the act the idea that we've destroyed this and typically pointing at the other party that's usually how that goes right the whole scarecrow thing and so they get us in the idea that we have to rush through this and so

on and then not not dive into the reality and the facts and so on and i think that the two main things around what this all is obviously tied to is just general world governance i think that's what all of these main points are about about driving us to a point to where it like and obviously technocratic technocracy overlap where we're not talking about necessarily the old classic politician like i i mean that may even be what claude schwab was supposed to kind of like taint us against but more so like the engineers and the scientists you know and so on like let them decide because we don't know enough that's the idea behind that and really it ends up just being elitist oligarchs in the world that decide

these things for everybody and so that's what this is about is setting up this framework to make it look like no we're not going to have some world government we're going to have a mechanism in place that should there be an event which is really what this is around a world event that suddenly justifies that we need coordinated action that may well be what the covid 19 illusion amongst a lot of other technological experimentation and science you know mra platform stuff may have been one of the main points setting us up to go, look, that's how we failed because we didn't have this in place kind of an idea.

And so now this is about setting up this framework and then triggering what they're, they talk about in this discussion, a planetary emergency, or at least acknowledging, claiming, pretending one, whatever to drive these things into place and then never relinquishing that

power. This is the Patriot act that never went away. It's the same stuff we've always seen. And then the other part of it, and there's more than just these two main parts, but me tonight, in my mind, these are the central parts.

And then the digital framework, because that right in this main discussion, they keep highlighting the global digital compact. So this is exactly what I'm worried about. Now to go back to the point we said before, the save act, Thomas Massey's point, all these different it's right now. And that's to his point where he says they don't

even really want it i think it's really just about it's i think they all want it it's a trojan horse for digital id using the real id compliant identification combined with biden's mobile driver's license push once that comes into play that removes the other options for paper stuff because it'll be digital making it digital for all of your identification concepts and then you go back to the actual save back and the only thing you have are real compliant ids and that's digital identification so that's driving us there so when we get to a place where they're having a digital compact for the world all that means the same point but on a global scale and as we've all highlighted yourself catherine i mean it's this i don't see how we come back from that, that once we get past that step, the censorship will become insurmountable.

I mean, I don't want to say it's not possible, but let's just say it is, if we recognize right now that we're under some massive control, the insurmountable kind of effort that the average person starting a new show has no chance today with the level of censorship, right? 40 times worse once they have a situation where it's not even accountable if it is even right now the digital control that boxing you out from websites or domains like just how about just not even being able to access the internet if your social credit score is too low we've all talked about this stuff oh yeah that's what i think this is absolutely about yeah yeah as a matter of fact you know microsoft's been working on the con the

coalition for content providence and Authentication, CCPA, I call it the Chinese Communist Party of America, where they can mark you. They can use, and the partnership is with Intel and other processors as well as Adobe. So they've got the hardware and the software that's going to mark you, and then they've got their mainstream media that's going to decide whether you are somebody that should be allowed to talk or whatever. And you won't be able to even upload stuff. That's going to be the interesting thing. And I'm kind of in that situation right now with Spotify.

Spotify has taken the lead in podcasts to ban me. They banned me within a couple of months of me starting my independent show. I'm banning there as well, the way a while ago yeah and so they've and they've talked about giving their you know or leasing or selling whatever their technology uh to other podcasts so they can do the same thing it's just a matter of time before that happens and so uh they'll stop it on the upload side of things and but it is a completely comprehensive thing to shut down anybody that disagrees with him it's just astounding to me to see how everyone is is pushing censorship and you notice there wasn't a single question about

that and the exactly right the uh so-called press of abc doesn't care at all about censorship and neither the candidates brought it up either so you know it was just fine for it to happen during trump he was it was only a problem when he was kicked off, just like the police state and the SWAT teams attacking people's homes and throwing flash grenades into the baby's cribs and stuff. That's only a problem if it might have happened in Mar-a-Lago, if it had the potential to happen, even though it didn't happen in Mar-a-Lago. But now it's a problem because they could have potentially done something

like they're doing to everybody all the time in our homes uh it's that kind of you know voyeurism that is really kind of occupying the the average American where they don't care about what happens to them or their neighbor they only care about what happens to their um the guy that they've identified as a person who's going to save them that's the only thing they care about yeah well it's kind of the othering right it's like the dehumanization it's the same thing we're seeing in our country right now with left and right it's been that way for a long time but it's it's the idea that it only matters if it challenges our worldview or our beliefs or what we want to happen it's just hypocrisy plain and simple you

know and it's if you think for one second that the censorship digital ID stuff is only coming from one side, it's not. It's both sides and different flavors. It always is. Coke and Pepsi, it's the same thing every single time. And so right now, they're both clearly pushing digital biometric wall, digital identification from different angles. It's very, very clear. And so they may not even know that themselves. I'm not convinced that these individuals necessarily are in the know about these larger

plans. Frankly, I find it more believable that these were useful idiots, all of them, Congress, you know what I mean? But I mean, I'm sure at some level there's inside to it, but that's the thing I really hoping Americans can come to terms with right now is that this is very clearly something that is bigger, even than our election system, our political dynamic, there's something that is global. And if we can see it like that in other contexts the covet 19 illusion you know globalism in general

we have to ask or even the israel conversation i mean americans more than i've ever seen in my life are like openly discussing israel's aggressive control over congress yeah and that's important it's not about jews or israelis in particular it's about zionism but that's important and that's important it's not about Jews or Israelis in particular it's about Zionism but that's important and that right there is a huge part of globalism because of a lot of the right narratives they seem to try to decouple Israel from the obvious globalist and you know direction that they have as well the important things to see that it's one and the same and that it's all about keeping you compartmentalized in all of this and and by doing so we're sleepwalking into the very control structure that will allow this to continue. Yeah, and it's just okay whoever wants to buy influence. It can be a foreign individual.

It can be a foreign government. But it's all right. She gets a half a billion dollars in one month and $350 million the next. No, that's fine. That's good news. That's good news. The media likes that because she's going to spend that money with them. And so they don't have a problem with it.

And Trump is the same thing. Israel used to own Congress, and rightfully so they're not they don't have a problem with it and you know trump is the same thing yeah the israel used to own congress and rightfully so he said right is that right you know but when you look at it as you're pointing out they have they they have their ways that they can channel both the left and the right to their common purpose their common purpose of having digital id and total surveillance for the right uh they're buying into it because they're concerned they want e- into it because they're concerned they want E-Verify because they don't want their jobs being taken by foreign people coming in. So let me have set up a system where I've got to get permission from Washington to work. Let's take a look at, you know, what is going on the border. Well, let's put all kinds of

technology that we can down there at the border to keep people from getting into the country or getting out at the same time right right and then let's also look at you know what is going on what we don't want the kids looking at pornography so let's have an id right for people to be able to use the internet uh you know it's just you you can find an issue as and i think what do you think is the common thing here i look at it as people every problem that comes up they believe that the government should be the solution to it and more importantly that the federal government should be the one to solve it and that's what makes everybody so vulnerable to well okay we got a problem with the border we got a

problem with people taking my jobs or we got a problem with the kids watching pornography what's the government going to do about it and that's what these debates are really feeding what are you going to do about this problem in my life you know i've got a next door neighbor that i don't like what are you going to do about it you know well exactly well that's the thing is that that's what that we were just discussing is it kind of you know that's the point about how the majority in any election cycle are people that don't partake and then the people that do usually 40 of them are independent you know it shows you that it's all about trying to drive you in to pretending that the left and right are the only things that matter in this conversation and then making forcing you to have to pick between the lesser of evils and that

there's no other option there right there are people in this conversation that are talking about less government or burning it down entirely but they're never going to be allowed to be on that stage and so this a lot of the americans that engage in this are of the mind that it's not either not there or that it's not prominent enough to be able to be considered because, well, they're not showing it to me. Right. But that's obviously a false assumption, because clearly there are a lot more people that want this change. You know, the idea that only government can make a difference in your life. I don't believe that most Americans even remotely believe that. But sadly enough, we get forced into it again.

Back to the point. That's why I think all this is happening. They're cranking up the heat and the violence because that's what drives people back into their comfort zone. Because right now there are people asking questions they don't like. And so when people's lives are made more uncomfortable, so you become emotional, become vulnerable, and then you fall back into line. I genuinely think that,

but whether we should want government in our lives, I mean, I don't, I don't think, I think that it's a kind of quintessentially American to have less government in our lives. And now here's Trump and Kamala, and they're both representing basic, you know,

I mean, the funny thing is about the whole communism verse that they're both authoritarian capitalists all the way through. And it's very clear that they have differences, but they are not the the as different as they try to make them out to be like you said more government more control in your life period yeah that's right yeah yeah the old paradigms of you know used to be well uh the government you know the republicans are going to give you freedom in economic sphere and the and the democrats and liberals are going to give you uh freedom and your civil liberties and that kind of stuff that's all gone away uh they're all uh and this idea that well there's government and then there's business and they represent different interests no they've

merged and so there's this merger of the parties there's this merger of government and business and all the rest of stuff so these these paradigms that have been out there that even people are in the third party aspect and again jeffrey tucker touches on this when he talks about it says well you know we have the the combination of these two things i've been saying it for the longest time you know the the liberals will say well business can do nothing right government can do nothing wrong the conservatives or libertarians would go the other direction the problem that they don't see is that they've merged you got a fashion system here where you've got corporations and government have merged for their common interest,

and neither of these paradigms are capable of addressing that because that's not even a part of their fundamental. They don't want to. It's not a part of their fundamental assumptions. And so they can't deal with this problem because their assumptions don't fit reality. Right. Well, it's the same old classic it's a classic saying, right? You can't solve a, first step in solving any problem is simply acknowledging you have one. And they all seem to be pointing in any direction other than the obvious problem.

And whether they see the problem or not, it's not being addressed because nobody wants to talk about it. And I think it's more so about the fact that, you know, these are NASCARs, right? You just can't see all the patches and advertisements all over them. Like they're being funded and lobbied. And I mean, you mean you know it's very very obvious and we all joke about it but yet weirdly when it comes to these important moments those were told anyway the the larger conversation and this is usually people that have their entire wealth or identity invested in the system try to convince everybody that might be somewhat aware of it that it's not what you think you got to vote

otherwise nothing matters we go through this for that's really the point of it, that it's not what you think. You've got to vote. Otherwise, nothing matters. We go through this. That's really the point of the four-year cycle. It's like right when people start going, maybe there is something. Oh, wow, we get pulled right back into it. It's like every single time. That's right. Yeah. That's why I look at this and I just want to try to get people focused on other things

rather than these things that are just kind of a sisyphus task you keep pushing this rock up the same rock up the hill over and over again and nothing ever changes with yeah it is crazy well what else is on your mind what they're at um last american vagabond well you know i recently covered a really terrifying story that I think my impression of where this goes, the thing that really worries me is that I see through it sort of like the outlines of maybe like a new form of governance. Like we've all talked about technocracy. It's not a new concept. It goes back to the early 70s. Right. The idea clearly, whether with good intentions or not, it was it represents today, in my opinion, the opposite of what it pretends to be, right? This is just a very clear technocratic elitist mindset about overlapping with eugenics and all sorts of terrifying things, in my opinion. And the point is that I see technocracy sort of showing itself in ways that I think circumvent government is the best way maybe to put it. And so in Honduras,

Peter Thiel backs a company that essentially has tried to start or has started what they are pretending is some libertarian utopia and not even remotely what it is, in my opinion at all, based on every possible metric to, to sum it up rather quickly. There's a lot in this story, but in 2009 in Honduras,

the U S government backed a coup, which is pretty common knowledge these days. We do that all the time, don't we? Oh, yeah. It's Tuesday, right? It's probably happening again right now. We're overthrowing this week, yeah. Yeah.

But so essentially, it caused the chaos that we might expect, which is usually the objective to a degree, so they can take advantage of all sorts of things now what's important to recognize is a series of leaders went after that which caused you know it's right even even to this day it's one of the most dangerous places on the planet as i understand it the point is at once that happened it created the chaos that they allowed to happen because these despots are doing what they want taking what they want and they use that chaos to justify the need for sustainable know, special development zones is what we've heard them called before. It comes from sustainable development zones, which is a UN 2030 point. Right.

Now in this country, they call them ZEDs or ZEDs, Z-E-D-E, which is just another name for the same exact thing. So it's important to recognize these comes from a UN 2030 objective. This is Peter Thiel's back company. They use backing vans.

That's Trump's cabinet. It's important to see how these things are all connected. But the point is that they backed this pretend libertarian utopia city in a location. Well, first they, sorry, I jumped in. They created these ZED zones under the guise that they were going to help people because of the chaos. They tried, they started to set this up. They got pushed back from the constitutional court because nobody wanted it.

So what'd they do? The legal thing. They kicked people off the judge positions and they put people in place that would vote the way they wanted them to, you know, otherwise completely illegitimate, right? And they got this passed. So then once they got it passed, they then started to set up these fake libertarian cities. Now, it hasn't really accomplished anything. People are worried. It's already starting to absorb other parts of the area. It's a very weird dynamic. jumping forward to right now the p the a a presidential cabinet ran entirely on the idea that we're going to get rid of these zds the people in

honduras are wildly outspoken about how they don't want this and essentially it's important to understand that this zone this area they built one of them's called prospera i think it's roton the island they have their own laws they have their own tax system they have their own police force like there's no sovereignty there honduras Honduras, that area is no longer theirs. It's wild. So this new government got put in place, right? And then they removed the law because they immediately voted for it.

Nobody wanted it. So now it's technically illegal, even though they're already starting to build another one, which shows you don't care about the laws. Now, what the important part is, they're now suing Honduras for $11 billion. the gdp of honduras is 35 36 billion dollars new york times thinks they're going to win this so here's my point in all this right now they're going forward anyway the current government is telling us they just on september 5th they openly

said they're doing it again they're getting their marshalling their forces the u.s government's going to back another coup which i think they know which is why they're not caring about this but here's what's important. What happens? Like, right now, how does that make sense? Like, what happens? Who has control over this area if they're the ones in control? So what does the government mean in that context? What happens if they win, which it seems they might?

Do they take all the assets of Honduras because of a bankruptcy? And what does that mean for the people? The government doesn't go away, but arguably this liberal, this technocratic steel-back backed entity owns everything. So they're technically in control of everything, even though the government's there. So my long point, essentially pointing out, there's lots of these things happening in the world. Is this an example of technocracy? These elitist oligarchs sort of taking control of land and land grabs without even going through some illusion of a democratic process. It's kind of terrifying. And I think an important part is to see how this ties back to Teal and, you know, Palantir, Israel, all these different overlaps. But just that concept alone worries me about where this goes and how they're sort of like reimagining the way that we should

live under technocrats as opposed to elected governments, even though that's not even what's happening anymore. It's interesting. Yeah. You know, when you look at Palantir, that's, that's his connection to Palantir is one of the things that really concerns me about Peter Thiel as well. Uh, he's not what he appears to be. Uh, Musk is not what he appears to be. And, um, you know, I guess he wants to have like another Rhodesia or something where he's the, we call it Thiel-esia or something. Peter Thiel villager. I don't know what he would call it, but you know, that's the whole thing. And, and,

and Musk, Musk Starlink, by the way, I'm sorry, I forgot that Musk Starlink is being allowed to be used for these, for these areas. But as I can tell, not for all of Honduras.

So I think that's interesting. And I think that relates to the military purpose that might be coming. Go ahead. Sorry. I just wanted to include that. That's interesting. Yeah. So,

so what is your take on it? I mean, are they just trying to set up an example here? Is this going to be like the home base for them to flee to if they have to? Because in the past, I talked to Hugo de Garis. He wrote about artificial intelligence. He worked in the field. And he was a true believer in it.

He thought they were going to create a godlike intelligence and so forth. And he said, but before that, he said, when people realize what they're doing, in other words, the technocrats, he said, what I think will happen is people will come for them. And to defend themselves, he said, they'll most likely set up some kind of high frontier type of thing. Gerard K. O'Neill talked about in the 1970s. You had Jeff Bezos referenced it a lot. And you saw it in Elysium, you know, where they got these toroid-shaped things. And so he said, I think that they'll set these things up and flee to that. And then, you know, conduct a war against us with superior technology.

He called them Cosmos and the people that would be left on Earth. He called them Terrans. And he said, you know, I think that they'll flee to their space bases and then uh you know as a refuge maybe they're going to just go to Honduras you know I'd say it's funny as I take as much as your I there's there's jokes we made about these people but I tell you there's something about that that I take very seriously and that's a terrifying thing like even the space aspect I've been saying this for so long and I don't know why it doesn't get I mean it's probably why it doesn't get much attention but how we don't know what the hell is going on up there in space like there's been a long period where they have the ability to do all sorts of

things i mean even like how do we know that they haven't even made contracts with other governments to be like look let's just black this out people don't need to know like colonies space wars i mean i'm not saying i'm thinking that's happening i'm just saying the fact that we don't know is pretty crazy to me it's a wild west up there for governments and technocrats. So you make a great point in regard to Honduras and all the, by the way, I love your point there. It's a terrifying reality, but we have to realize that the point he's making is these people are wildly powerful, influential, in some cases overlap with government. And they could literally be creating a situation where they're driving into reality their worldview which is technocracy that's kind of terrifying yeah but yeah the

honduras point it's it could be right so my take on what it ultimately comes down to it could be sort of a test bed you know like a litmus test to see how people respond like the main point to make is that the people of honduras that's what again one of the new administration was running on the removal of those but the idea that they violated their sovereignty. I mean, they're even trying to argue that they violated the original contract, even the contract with the illegal governments, both, by the way, the presidents that existed during those illegal contracts are both indicted by the current government. And even the U even the U S government acknowledges that both as criminals. So it just shows you how ridiculous this all is. But the point is that I think it's really about

testing to see how we respond to what people will do and see how far they can take it. But, I mean, it could be more than that. You know, this could be the beginning of something. I just think it's important to highlight that if it's that easy, you know, I mean, it shouldn't be easy, but military power, a quick coup overlapping with a corporation swinging in, making a contract with the government the illegal government put in place and then just saying well too late you can't take this back even though the laws have changed even though it turns out you didn't even meet the contract to begin with and now my point is that like i said before they just posted something on twitter where they're saying they're building another city on the island that prospera's on now but that law has been removed for a long time now so my point is

i'm convinced the people behind this that's the theal company why would they do that if the law doesn't back it i think that they're they there's something in their mind that tells them they're going to be able to get away with that that's why my feeling is that's why she's saying that about the upcoming coup that they think there's going to be a power swing and that they won't have to worry about it that's completely my opinion but so that's all about where this goes and the shifting of power and whether government is a thing in the past you know it's just a thought but it does worry me yeah it is interesting when you go back and look at it i've talked many times about how peter thiel's uh grandfather uh you know was fully on board with technocracy back in the 1930s as hg wells was doing things to come

in shape of things to come that they did the movie they had the book and and he actually tried to enact that and canada had to flee to uh south africa so there's a certain you know uh this this um it kind of resembles this in a lot of different ways the idea that um you know they're going to kind of hedge their bets to to make sure even though they're making so much money out of government. And that's the key thing. You know, Elon Musk became the king of crony capitalism. He made so much money and became so wealthy, and he's going to make even more doing the fact that he's able to get the satellites up and Boeing.

You know, NASA said, well, we want to have another company that's doing it. Boeing can't get their act together. He's able to do that. So he's on track to become the world's first trillionaire by maybe 2027. So it's just a vertical takeoff in terms of the power that these people have. But Thiel and the powers and the companies that he's put in there, Palantir, that's unbelievably powerful. And so they put themselves into key technologies that the government is relying on. And a big part of that is going to be artificial intelligence, because in my opinion, that's

the killer app of AI. It isn't that they're going to have autonomous robots that are going to come around and try to kill us individually. They want to use the artificial intelligence as a way to propagandize and to surveil us. I think that's the killer app. I think that's what they've been working on for a long time. And so they're insinuating, inserting themselves into all of these key choke points, essentially through technology. Yeah, 100 percent.

And one of the important overlaps that we shouldn't miss with all of it, with Musk and Starlink, is the idea that what this is overlapping with the conversation we just had by the way with the pack of the future and the the digital i mean this might very well be the beginnings of what this is meant to kind of the need that they're building that needs the the the role to fill and like for example the 15-minute city the smart city dynamic i mean it may not be exactly the same overlap but it's the same general idea that we're simply in an area that is run by technocrats or run by people that are arguing they know better about your life, you know? And so it's a different flavor of the same

kind of thing. And so what really should be worrying for the people that think they're on the side of the party that is against this, right? It's largely people tied right back to the administration that's running on trump's side who are building this thing you know and that overlaps and there's also there's so many overlaps to these people with the actual who overlap in the world economic forum as if people are just kind of being willfully blind about it you know but your point is right i think it's all about building into a position where artificial intelligence digital identification these things are not just necessary but paramount to the way that the city functions.

All of course, always framed under the guise that it's better for you and it'll make your life more convenient. You know, and maybe that's in some minds, maybe that's what they're actually doing, but it's like that, for that to turn into a technocratic nightmare. You know, and that's what we're all worried about is

I want the positive if that's something that's genuine. I mean, technically, I actually don't. I don't want any of this stuff. But I mean, like, I'm open to the idea that things might be positive. But we need to realize that if you open that door, it's like a dual-use concept. It is going to be used against you eventually. And I don't think we should take that step. Yeah.

Oh, I agree. That's what's happened, really, to technology. But, you know, when we look at the technocracy versus Marxism versus, you know uh populism or whatever you take these different approaches and the dangerous things about all of them you know we're talking about fascism or populism or marxism or technocracy the thing that makes them dangerous is the element of authoritarianism and totalitarianism and they all have that in there as a strong aspect of what they're doing and so uh they can all lapse into that commonality you know we're so used to thinking that marxism is completely opposite from fascism and it's not you know when you you look at the

nolan chart you see that they're down there at the bottom because they're both authoritarian or totalitarian. And the same thing can happen with technocracy. It's just how they market it to us. One of them might come in and say, well, we want to have a brotherhood of man. That'd be Marxism. So you've got to give all power to me. The other people say, well, we've got a different MacGuffin.

We want to focus around our culture and our nationality. So give all power to me. They've all got just like the other things. It's like, well, we need to depopulate the earth, whatever it is. They've all come back to the same thing. They have different ways to sell it to you. And the reason I mention this is because when you look at the dangerous tendencies that I see in the electorate is the idea that, as I said before, we got a problem. It needs to be solved by the government.

And we need a savior. Well, let's get a billionaire who says he's on our side. And I see that with Elon Musk. I see that so much with the people, the MAGA people who are focused on Trump. Look at this guy. He's rich. He's powerful. He knows he's successful, obviously, because he's got a lot of money.

And so if he's on our side, and I think he's on our side because, look, he's given us free speech on Twitter. I'm not seeing any free speech on Twitter, but they imagine that. And you've got all these people who are cheering Musk and think that he's on their side and he's going to be the guy who's going to save us after Trump. And that's such a dangerous thing. And they're playing these people, I think. Here's the thought. Oh, 100%. I completely agree with everything you just said.

One thing that's jumped into my head, based on what we were just discussing right so if we're thinking this out let's just say for sake of conversation the long play is to get americans comfortable with the idea of technocratic leadership right and and one thing matt errett and i've talked about over the years is he's under the mindset this is a a very long like this goes back to power structures bloodlines to go back a long way in the mindset being that at one point in time there was a shift from kind of a monarch mindset into something where at least we pretend we have the power to elect who we want and the argument is that that was something that was a veil pulled over eyes where they convinced us we were choosing but we really weren't and now we're at a point where that veil is being removed because they've decided,

well, we're going to step back out of the shadows for whatever reason, you know? And so it's possible to consider the fact that this whole thing is about manufacturing Elon Musk into some kind of position. He's already accepted a position, but whether it actually happens, that's still up in the air, but he said it, he's accepted. That's the department of government energy, which just happens to be doge, which find ridiculous you know the coin is always are they serious are they i don't know but he said it publicly trump stood up in an interview and said i hope he's accepted it and i think it's good so my point is what happens if elon musk takes a pretty prominent role right and then runs for president next time right i mean there

you go just boom just like that and all of a sudden you've got a literal technocrat oligarch elitist military contractor who's the good guy saving free speech i mean that's a pretty terrifying step right there i mean if that happened my opinion would be that would be that's likely coordinated yeah oh i agree i agree it is a crazy time that we're living in and things are accelerating uh very very rapidly and um you know i think it is the again we go through i believe the cycles of history like they talked about strauss and how talked about the fourth turning i think we're at the tail end of that and i think this next administration whoever it is is really going to usher us in through this whole thing because it's going to take us right up to the end of it they want to have their new society in 2030 that means they got to tear everything down

and start rebuilding something else to get it there and in place by 2030 and so that means whoever this next president that they select that they're going to use to do this thing so it's a people need to be aware of the overall landscape understand how uh the you know how the dangers are shaping up and see what these threats are so that you can prepare yourself that's why i keep telling people you know focus on your own life uh and don't live vicariously through these people who really uh don't care at all about you i mean we can just see that with january the 6th they they just use people and cast them aside for their own benefit. It's just absolutely amazing.

Well, it's always great talking to you, Ryan. And tell us a little bit more about the last American vagabond. And is it, is it spelled out last American vagabond.com? Is that the website? Yeah.

The last American vagabond.com. Okay. And we also have our, our sub stack at TLA vagabond. I okay yeah and we also have our sub stack at tla vagabond i think it's at substack.com i think that's what it is um you know but just it's all on the website if you go to the last american vagabond.com you'll find links to everything as i say in this about every interview don't don't let the platforms be the conduit between you and our information right go directly to david knight.com go directly to the website

check out our content you know as opposed to the platforms because i think there's control happening through those as well but uh yeah the platform i think is is right now by the way i we're under some pretty heavy attack as always i think but the website i had a really amazing interview with katherine austin fits that was focused aggressively about all this stuff around the two-party illusion the election around digital is always great she's oh absolutely outstanding and she had a really crazy conversation about like important and crazy around neurological weapons i'm sure you've talked about i've talked about the neuroscience like but like claim saying that she has experienced it been there seen it and her argument is that's part of

what's happening in this election anyway people need to check that out at the last American Vagabond. Sorry. An excellent interview with Catherine Austin Fitz. Thank you so much, Ryan Christian. Thank you all for joining us today. Have a good day. Let me tell you the David Knight show you can listen to with your ears. You can even watch it by using your ears. You can even watch it

by using your eyes. In fact, if you can hear me, that means you're listening to The David Knight Show right now. Yeah. Good job. And

you want to know something else? you can find all the links to everywhere to watch or listen to the show at the david night show.com that's a website