The Duran Podcast - End of the Globalists w/ Jay Dyer (Live)

Episode Date: April 30, 2024

End of the Globalists w/ Jay Dyer (Live)

Okay, we are live with Alexander Mercuris. How are you doing, Alexander? I'm doing very well and very happy to be here with Jay, especially, as I said, in this week of all weeks, when the Orthodox people celebrate Easter. It's obviously at a different time from the Western Easter, but, you know, as three Orthodox people, this is an important week for us.

And we are very happy to get someone who has been the most requested guest, or at least potential guest to have on the Daryat. We finally got him. Mr. Jay Dyer. Jay, it is great to have you on the Duran finally. How are you doing today? I'm doing great. And yeah, like I said, I'm honored to be with you guys. I've been watching for a long time.

So, yeah, it's kind of surreal. But, yeah, I'm happy to be here. It's great to have you here. And Jay, I have in the description box your Twitter as well as your YouTube. Where else can people follow your work? I have a website, jasonelsus.com, and you can get all my stuff there too. All the backlogs of the archives of interviews and lectures that I've done for the last 10 years or so. So everything's at the website, the shop, get my books there and all that.

And pretty much anywhere else if you just type in Jay Dyer, Instagram, or whatever, you'll find me. Great. those links as a pin comment down below when the stream is over. Let's say a quick hello to everyone that is watching us on Rock Finn, on Odyssey. Hello to everyone on Rumble, our awesome community on locals. How is everyone doing in the locals chat? And a big hello to YouTube as well. Zareel, what is up? Peter, how you doing, Peter, my friend? And Zaryl, Peter, I think it's us three. We will be moderating for now this live stream.

Let me see. Is there anybody else? I think it's us three. All right. No worries. No worries. Ariel, Peter, and myself moderating. A lot of questions came in before the stream.

We will get to all those questions. We'll try to get to those questions for Jay towards the end of the stream. Alexander, Jay, let's talk about globalism. Alexander. Let's indeed talk about globalism because of course globalism has been one of these things, one of these topics of people have been talking about an awful lot in the last 20 years, 30 years or so. Basically it really began to be talked about after the end of the Cold War. A lot of people initially discussing it very much as a kind of economic relationship, the fact that, you know, people, countries would be able to trade with each other in an uninterrupted way.

That was how, as I remember, it was initially presented that we would have the global economy come together, become integrated in that fashion. And, of course, that all sounded very innocuous. And in fact, it was so innocuous, it was basically banal because the global economy has been integrated together since at least mid-19th century as any economic historian would know. So why was that different? Well, I think it gradually and clearly became obvious that what we were talking about was something very different. It wasn't just a trading system and an economic system. It was also a philosophical and political and ideological system that was beginning to develop. And it was one that was one that was as being very, very strongly advocated by a small group of very influential and very powerful people.

And saying that, you know, one has to be clear, you know, they do come together, they do meet. We're not, however, talking about, you know, a kind of James Bond spectre type organization, if only because what they do and what they say, they do and say in clear view. they make no attempt these people that we're talking about to conceal in any way what they're about. Well, one person who has been keeping a close eye on all of this and has been talking about it for a very long time and has been, I think it's fair to say, critical of it and critical of it, not just because it leads in all sorts of very bad directions, which I think it does, but also because it is fundamentally unsustainable. And the whole conception behind it is one of control, which is unsustainable.

One of the person who's been talking about it is Jay Dye. And Alex said that nobody, no guest, have we been asked to invite more than Jay. And I'm sure this is partly why, because he can take us through and discuss this with us in a way that I think no one else can. So, Jay, what is globalism? Let's start with that. I don't mean, you know, it's the international global economic system, which has existed since the mid-19th century. I mean the ideology. The plan, I think plan is not too far-fetched a word. The plan that we have seen develop over the last 30 years. And who is behind it? Do colossal questions, but we've only got a limited amount of time with you.

So let's go straight in and let's start with globalism itself. What is it? Yeah, I like that you mentioned that there was this sort of selling point some decades ago after the Cold War that under the guise of economics, we might achieve this new peaceful order. And I want to go to a place that probably not many people would expect. And if you go back to the Enlightenment, there's a little known. treatise that Emmanuel Kant wrote that I think is very influential. And he wrote in that treatise

that when we had full on laissez-faire free trade, et cetera, when that was fully realized, we would have what he basically calls a New World Order and a kind of global piece based around homo-economicus, that man seen only as an economic unit viewed in that way and if understood in that way, if that's the case, which I think they just all sort of assumed at that time, David Ricardo and Adam Smith and all these characters, that really that would be the way that we would achieve this future order. They had a lot of opposition from what I believe was kind of their dialectical opposition as Western ideology progresses towards the rise of things like socialism after the Jacobins and the communists to come about. And I think that the idea was

that this dialectical conflict would produce this again, this eventual, peaceful order. So I think they had a lot of true believers on both sides of the conflict, whether they were dialectical materialists, historical materialists, or whether they were libertarian anarcho-capitalist or monopoly capitalist. All of those things coalesce. One of the key texts that, you know, kind of two texts, actually, that form my approach to this question was the writings of Dr. Carroll Quigley, both his tragedy and hope and his book, Anglo-American Establishment. I think they give kind of an inside view. I apologize. I apologize. I've always apologize for the coughing. I'm, the allergies are terrible here. But in both of those books,

he really just lays out what you're talking about, this inside view from the perspective of entities like the Council on Foreign Relations, the trilateral commission, their view, Builderberg group could be another one of these big steering committees. The view of the think tanks and the NGOs and the power players in the Western Anglo sphere, the Atlantis's power block, what they felt like would be the hope for the world. And I like that you pointed out, it's much more than just an economic system, even though I think the original idea was that the philosophy of liberal economics, that that would be the means, the mechanism.

It ends up being much more than that. It ends up being an ideological commitment and ultimately even a kind of a technology, I think, to subvert and transform anything that opposes it. And then I'll end with this point. And again, Dr. Quigley's books are not conspiracy texts. They're apologetics for this approach. He argues that the tragedy of the last century was the two world wars. The hope is the democratic capitalist liberal order that would be then preferred and promoted and sort of almost mandated, I guess you could say, on the entire world.

And so is that really a solution? is it really, you know, the final stage of Fukuyama type stuff? I don't think so. I think it's unsustainable. And he says basically that the two enemies that would have to be combated by the Atlantis' establishment would be Austro-Hungarian Empire and Russia. These two would have to be taken out. It's a sort of continuation of the great game.

And that's what it is. That's we're living out, I think, that world, that reality right now, as we see. see this conflict through both the Middle Eastern conflicts and the conflict in the Ukraine. They both kind of reflect the older British imperial strategy and structure going back to McKendor and people like that. So that's what we're living through. It is that that's the hope, according to the Atlantis' establishment. But ultimately, I think that's pretty deceptive.

The hope is very much tied to Malthusian ideology. They cloak that in a lot of humanitarian, ingenious. It has this humanitarian cloak that's really pushing a lot of subversive ideas in all these other countries. Indeed. And I like the word you use, mandatory. We mandated. This change would be mandated. And of course, you mentioned that, you know, this is all about democratic, liberalism, all of this.

But ultimately, there's not going to be very much choice for people if this is ever imposing. wisdom in this way. So, of course, democracy, at least as I understood it, understand it, you know, we are Greeks. I'm born in Athens where we like to think democracy was invented. That's a questionable view, by the way. But anyway, we like to think that. Democracy, in fact, inherently involves choice. And this system, ultimately, despite the fact that he's always promoted as being intended to spread democracy, to me, it looks very much like it's there to abolish choice. It's the system you have to have. You're not really permitted to argue for alternatives.

And you're also told always that seeking the best economic outcome, which is a questionable concept in itself, What is the best economic outcome, the most efficient one? That is the objective that one should always follow. So the quest for narrow economic efficiency should be the objective. And, well, a system that ultimately abolishes choice is the goal. Now, have I got this wrong? And what I've just said about it. No, I think it lines up perfectly with the idea of homo-economicus man is essentially an interchangeable

economic unit. The locus of human action and purpose is the marketplace. This is a very, you know, enlightenment-based idea. I think we're still sort of manifesting, I guess, the process of the enlightenment in the West and where it's where the bad places it might actually take us. as we work out kind of the logical consistences or actually inconsistencies in a lot of the philosophies of the Enlightenment. That's my take on it. I think you're absolutely right that, you know, the idea of, you know,

Athenian democracy is very different from what today's, you know, think tank based technocracy is using democracy as a cloak for. For example, best example of this is Jacques-Atele's book, Brief History of the Future. There's a whole chapter towards the end of the book where he says that the spearhead of today's democracy, that today's revolution, the people's revolution, he says, is transhumanism. And so there's this sort of ironic anti-human empathus, he's basically saying to become post-human, that's really the tip of the spear of democracy, which is, again, it's very odd. But it's not odd if you take to heart the point that you're making here,

which is that you can be the desire to transcend the boundaries of being human and the limitations that we have actually ends up coming out the other side and becoming something that becomes anti-human. So we get anti-natalism, we get the Malthusian ideas. We get this anti-human epithetist, again, is the essence of this philosophy because man is seen as a reductionist economic unit. he doesn't have any transcendent value or anything to give him, you know, so-called rights. If you think of an enlightenment philosophy of rights, well, if man is just a kind of a meat sack, there's not really a basis, philosophically speaking, to have rights other than the rights accorded via some sort of technocratic super state. And again, I think that's the real danger is that the

ultimate goal, if you look at even a book as unsuspecting, like Miles Copeland's book Game of Nations, whereas a CIA consultant, he's essentially revitalizing and changing at least two governments. He talks about both Syria and Egypt in that book as a consultant to modernize those governments. And he says that, look, if you want to understand what all we're up to, it's not about this or that weapons transfer, this black off. He says, you need to understand the big picture. And he says, you need to go read people like, James Burnham and the managerial society. He says you need to go read Bertrand Russell.

You need to read the Council on Foreign Relations documents. There's a whole appendix at the back of that book where he says that's, if you really want to understand what the CIA is up to, it's that kind of stuff. It's not, you know, this or that black off. I think that perfectly encapsulates the attitude and the perspective of what you're talking about with. Democracy has nothing to do with human rights, equality for women or any of that stuff. It's a cloak.

I mean, what you said about transcending one's own humanity, it brings me back actually to a conversation I had with a very senior cleric, Orthodox priest. In fact, he was the archbishop of the Greek church in London, who I used to know quite well some years ago. And he said that if you aspire to go beyond your human limits, then of course you usually, you should. cease to be human, and that is an absolutely terrible thing. That is the worst conceivable thing that you can do to yourself. Now, he wasn't, by the way, talking about some of the topics we're talking about now, but of course it is very closely related what he was talking about. But he was actually talking about Hollywood and films, and the fact that there were so many characters in Hollywood films nowadays

who are, you know, well, they're called superheroes. They have extraordinary powers. And he felt that this was extremely disturbing and was something that was taking us on a completely wrong course and was a very, very bad thing as an example to people.

It was an interesting conversation. But what you just said now brought back to me that very conversation because of course an orthodox priest would tell you that choice is in fact an absolute central part of being human having the gift to choose is something that human beings absolutely have of course how you exercise it is important and that's but but you nonetheless do have that choice if you're denied that choice in terms of entirely. And if you are reduced to a economic construct and one that's at the same time, you're denying your humanity. Well, I think he would have been very concerned about that.

And I think it ties in, frankly, very well to the point that he was making about films. Yeah, I think it was Bernays that said the ultimate weapon for property. again, the greatest weapon the world's ever seen was Hollywood. So, you know, I think I cited that. And I wrote two books on Hollywood. And I think, I think that makes sense. We're getting our new meaning, our mythology from, from movies, maybe in the 20th century. Maybe it's going to change now that people are no longer really interested in movies and that arc form as much.

Maybe video games or the future. I don't know. But, yeah, I think that that's where we, that's the myth maker of the 20th century that gave us meaning. And I don't think it's accidental that what became kind of the big blockbuster phenomenon for the last 10, 20 years was the Marvel slash, you know, comic book universe world because that's all premised on a very naturalistic evolutionary ethos where man will through his own devices and technet achieve a kind of transcendence like we're talking about. And it is ultimately, I think you're absolutely right, a denial of what it means to be here. human. I also think there's an unintentional perhaps subversion of the incarnation itself. I mean, in Orthodox theology, we have the idea that the second person of the godhead became man and thus affirmed the goodness of human nature and of humanity and of that human nature's

eternal existence via, you know, the resurrection, the Eschaton, and so forth. And so it's, any attack on human nature ultimately ends up being also an attack on the incarnation as well because man is a little christophany to use the orthodox terminology meaning he's a little image of christ he's a little image of the divine and that's that's his purpose that's his telos that's what he's intended to kind of work towards becoming in orthodox theology and i think that you get with this transhumanist ideology a kind of replacement gospel i think it's a kind of a replace it's kind of a cult too if you look at some of the Silicon Valley elites that go to burning man and participate in kind of the rituals that go on there it's they actually kind of see it as a

quasi cult religious movement and they you know they'll kind of reinterpret christianity's message and ethos as well it really you know Christianity was just kind of talking about eternal life through the secret gnostic tech that we have or whatever I think that's very Gnostic um you actually see this when you read some of the people from the transhumanist line of thought when you read Kurzweil or if you read Noeval Harare or even Klaus, you know, they really do speak in quasi-religious tones. In fact, when I was reading Klaus's 2018 Orthonos Revolution book, I didn't expect him to be speaking of the new world that we're going into needs. He says something to the effect of a new covenant, a new ethic, a new covenantal religious ethic, which, well, I thought this was a book about technology and

economics why are we having this you know religious speak here well then we find out that we're you know a lot of the wf partners with uh you know in elements of the vatican you know pope francis is on board with a lot of the wf so it makes sense to i think push this sort of what i view as a religious delusion along with the tech uh and the economic policies that they want because it's a whole worldview they want they want to instill an entire worldview not just as you said an economic system and not even really an ideology. I think the technocrats that have studied this for for so many decades, they understand that man is fundamentally religious being. He's not fundamentally motivated by abstract reasoning and concepts. You know, Birch and Russell in one of his books says something like,

if you want to sell people on your ideology, don't do it with logic and facts. Do it with big brass bands and music and song. And, you know, that's what you see a more effective. means of indoctrination, Hollywood, pop music, rather than ideology. Who are these people who are behind this thing? Let's get back to this because why do they want it? Is it all about power? I mean, do they have a perspective about this that is completely cynical? Is it that they feel that this is a mechanism for control? Or do they actually generally believe that, you know, this is something that is the future. future for humanity and that, you know, their kind of missionaries leading us to this world.

I have to say, as somebody who's had to do legal, a lot of legal work in my past, in my own past, I always tend to be fairly cynical about motivations that people who tend to talk in this way. the people who are promoting these things always seem to be the people who expect at the end of the day that they will be the beneficiaries and that they will exercise control. But who are they? What kind of people are we talking about? Are they scientists? Are they technocrats?

Are they people who have connections with the financial world? Are they doctors, diplomats, lawyers? Or are they a class and to themselves? I would say all the above, all the above, both for motivations and ideas and all the above in terms of people recruited into the superclass, the managerial class. I think Roth Kopp had a book about, you know, the managerial class, the 6,000 people or so that run the world. You know, I think the best examples are people like a Kisendura Bresensky. And when we go and we read their books, we see that they, you know, they're not necessarily. necessarily in every case religious. I think a lot of those people are, you know, a religious,

irreligious, atheistic, pragmatic. For example, I don't, I didn't see any evidence that David Rockefeller had any particular religious commitments. But I don't think that that necessarily excludes other members who are true believers. They might have a true belief in the possibility of technology being a kind of Promethean flame, you know, to take us to some sort of transcendent level. But it's hard to know, like you said, whether they really believe it. I mean, you know, I think Klaus and Noi-Vel-Harrari, for example, are intelligent people. So you would think they would be able to recognize kind of fundamental contradictions.

But when they both will say things like, well, you don't possess free will or consciousness. That's an illusion. By the way, we will upload your consciousness to the cloud. To me, that's a contradiction. I mean, you would think you would notice that at a kind of a basic logical level. But I think in a lot of cases, that cynical pitchman thing is coming for. I think there's a lot of car, you know, phony cars, a lemon car salesman, bad car salesman at work in this domain. But I think you do have some true believers.

I think some of the Silicon Valley people really believe mainly because they've done a lot of hallucinogens and that kind of contributes to the quasi-nostic ideology that they have, whether they know it or not, that leads them to. believe that they will. I mean, it's very popular, well-known that, you know, Silicon Valley kind of comes out of the 60s counterculture. You've got people in that sphere very open about their DMT, LSD use. So I think there's a very easy overlap there with being a true believer in the power of tech to raise us to some immortality or whatever. And I think there's an element, a contingent of those people who really believe in something dark and satanic. I think we've seen people like Michael Aquino who had some degree of influence and he seemed to take his Satanism seriously. I don't mean, he could have been putting up a front.

I mean, certainly these people are very adept at deception. If they're high level, you know, intelligence operatives or something like that, then obviously they're very, they're very skilled in the art of lying. So it's very possible that they were putting on in front. But I really do think there's also a kind of motivating force, whatever your particular, bent is if you're on board with the same basic ideas, they're not really concerned with the particularities of your proclivities. So I think, you know, when you read Klaus, when you read Kaczynski, when you read Kistinger, when you read DeV Rockefeller, when you read these Western

power block elites, they tend to have kind of the same basic. I said something years ago, the video where it was like the Ten Commandments of the Global Elite. And it was like, you know, these are the 10 basic things that you have to believe without question to kind of be in that club not that believing that makes you a part of that club i think you know you got to be recruited out of harvard yale you know put into CEO positions and whatnot so so as i think you know we're it's not like you said the beginning it's not a mystery who we're talking about the cfr's been around for a long time you know billerberg's been around for a long time all that stuff's fairly it's semi-public i guess is what we could say no um they created trilateral

Commission for Bresenski to run. That was a Kissinger idea. So we've seen the passing of that old guard of those guys, but it looks like they really wanted to kind of hand it over to like tech elites and Silicon Valley people. That's who was more and more showing up at Bilderberg in the last eight or ten years. But I don't know how, I don't think that it's going as well as they thought it would. We'll come to that in a moment. But briefly, I'd be very interested to know what your 10 commandments are that these people have. But let's just, that is a question. But it's also another question,

which is this looks like a very, very management technocratic, elitist vision of the future. I think that we need to say it's people who believe that they can control everything. The other thing I wanted to say is it may be logical in its own terms, but it doesn't seem to me very rational. which is, you know, maybe I'm, you know, making a distinction between the two. I actually do think that logic and reason are not by any means the same things.

But to me, it looks, in fact, frankly, completely irrational as well as bleak and ugly and lacking any kind of humanity about it at all. and deeply unappealing to the vast majority of humankind once they've properly understood it. But let's start with the Ten Commandments. And maybe you can just comment on those other points. Yeah, I made that video maybe six years ago. So I don't know if I remember every single one of the ten that I listed. But I think at that time I'd read about 30 or 40 of the Western Power Block elite texts.

And so I just kind of noticed like, well, they all kind of seem to say the same thing about, you know, We've got to have, they always say, well, you have to believe that we're in a giant crisis. There's a huge crisis. And the only solution to this crisis is a global governance. We can't have nation states or firewalls of limited power blocks. It's got to be international in terms of its structure. You've got to have an international economic order, which would then preclude any types of, and I'm not trying to be a libertarian, but.

I have plenty of critiques of libertarian philosophy, but that you can't really have a system of free exchange. So they do want to, I think, ultimately eliminate that. They talk about a single currency. You can find this back in Lord Birkenhead, H.C. Wells, Virgin Russell, all of those old school, you know, sort of British upper structure elite, who had a huge role, I think, in planning a lot of what we're going into in their writings. you have to essentially have a commitment to scientism to a sort of a Darwinian philosophy of some type. They seem to be committed to technocratic governance on the whole. I couldn't find any member of that superclass that's written that doesn't believe in a technocratic governance.

I don't remember what all the other, there was three or four more. I think that's the basic idea. I think we get it. Yeah, yeah. I mean, you know, a couple of books. that really lay this out, I think that are very telling is, you know, if you read something like Impact to Science on Society by Russell, which, you know, is almost a century old now, and then if you, you know, fast forward up until the, you know, Cold War period with something like Tragedy and Hope,

the most important chapter in Tragedy and Hope, I've argued for a long time, is the very middle chapter where he talks about technocratic managerial governance of the future. He says that what the Western PowerBlock's plan is, is ultimately basically have everybody in smart cities and giant supercomputers running the city. And so, you know, he's very explicit there, but he thinks that's where we're going. We can come up a few, maybe a decade ahead of that. Brasanski rides between two ages, the technocratic, technotronic era. And then we come up into, you know, Fritov Koppas writing about radical eco type of stuff. All society has to be reorganized around the principles of Gaia of the feminine patriarchy. All of that has to be undermined,

has to be inverted in his book, I think it's a turning point. That's another example. So there's many, many of these. There's a changing image as a man, Stanford research. It also sort of makes the same point about reorganizing everything on the basis of these new principles, reintroduction of paganism. This is where we get the New Age movement as a big part of this, fostered, foisted and fostered by the elite, by the way, it's not a, it's not a, you know, a grassroots type of movement. It's very much amenable to the Pentagon's long-term plans, I think. And so, you know, then we come up to people like Klaus and he's essentially saying the same thing that H.G. Wells was saying 100 years before. So I think that's the, the basic plan here.

I think people get caught up in, well, is it fully a Marxist plan? You know, the American rights, mistakenly thinks that it's, quote, Marxist. You get other people who think, no, it's the monopoly capitalist. I really think it's a fusion of a lot of these different systems into whatever will work in the long run. Well, we were talking about logic. I mean, this seems to me to have the logic of the Anne colony, essentially. And the other thing to say about it,

and it's the immediate instant thing. I mean, it abolishes history, obviously. that goes without saying. And it creates stagnation. I mean, it is the end of development, human development. Now, human beings are not like this. I mean, we are different from each other. We're not ants.

We're different from each other. We are, you know, function in completely different ways. Function isn't even the right way. We live in completely different ways. And we have. I mean, in spite of everything, we do have the power of choice, which is inherent to us as human beings. It's not something they can be taken from us. Right.

So you said that this isn't working. Well, it clearly isn't because, of course, it can't. But the attempt to impose it is doing immense damage. Absolutely. I think the reason it does this damage is because it's fundamental. against our nature. You made this point about it's fundamental to humans to have choice. The patristic teaching is that free will is a component of human nature. And so you couldn't have human nature without removing free will. And so the idea that you could get rid of it really

has, it demonstrates the presupposition of a different metaphysics, which of course the power structure does have a different metaphysics. They see humans as essentially a reductionist, materialistic phenomenon, it's a product of the cosmos that can then be sort of steered in terms of evolution. And so, and this is actually pretty explicit as well. Jonas Salk has a book, Survival, The Wisest, where he talks in this way that he says that the scientific priest class has to really step in and sort of steer humanity in evolution. And that's going to require things like, you know, really radical Malthusian ideologies. So the, the implementation of this, other examples could be things like Tavistock. Tavistock heavily pushes and was behind all of the,

I'm going to use my famous code words here, the T-R-A-N-Z, things that we've seen in the last 10 years, 20 years, they were very bold and open about spearheading that from a, from a sociological perspective on purpose. And I think that it makes perfect sense when you think about, well, why would they push that so hard? Well, that's a very, it's very adjacent to the transhumanist agenda because the idea that we can, you know, transcend all the limitations, including biological limitations and so forth, that very easily transitions into, oh, yes, well, then I can also now become a cyborg. I can become something beyond the human. There's a really great book that inadvertently, I think, admits all this as well.

from a journalist's perspective, if you read Annie Jacobson's book on the history of DARPA, I read that whole thing, lectured through it, and it blew me away because the very last chapter was where I think she was interviewing or having discussions with some of the transhumanist-minded technocrats at DARPA. And they were very explicit about their philosophy. So you might think they would be very nerdy and into tech stuff, but they were very explicit that their operating system was a very dogmatic radical materialism. And so it's almost like at war against the idea that man possesses free will or that

man possesses consciousness or mind or a soul because for them that would necessitate that there might be something else transcendent. So I think the war against the soul and consciousness ends up almost, they almost kind of admitted at times that it's a war on the idea of God and the transcendent. So yeah, I think you have to, it kind of goes together, right? Like if you're going to undermine human nature, it kind of goes along with the idea that we have to stamp out. I think Merchant Russell at some point uses this terminology of stamping out free will or something like that. Indeed. We can't have humans in a system like this. So we have to find ways to persuade people not to be humans. Essentially, that is the nature of

this, which ultimately is impossible. Now, it is running into problems. Let's actually talk a bit about those problems. We have Russia, which is, of course, the country, which actually there were quite a lot of people with not entirely dissimilar ideas, especially if you go back to some of the writings that were widespread in Russia in the 1920s, when there was quite a lot of debate at that time. But there were, you know, a lot of ideas that were not entirely different from the ones that we are seeing now. And by the way, people who often in the West today are hailed as great artistic figures, which I'm prepared to say they were. But they were in many ways. The constructivists, for example, were right at the vanguard of this kind of thing.

Anyway, Russia eventually doesn't like it. it moves on. It's reverting to orthodoxy. It's now a major stumbling bloc, or so it seems to me, in front of this thing. Putin himself, who's its president, very connected, I think, to Russian feeling. He's opposed it. He's straightforwardly come out and said, we don't like this. Other countries are doing the same. I mean, China, not obviously an Orthodox Christian country, but with a tradition and philosophy of its own rooted in Confucianism, they're also coming up, opposing it. In India, too, they're not very keen on this,

and it's not difficult to understand why. And we are seeing conflicts flare up in all parts of the world. We have a major conflict, of course, in Ukraine. It's interesting that you brought up the issue of paganism, because people may not be aware of the fact, but there is an awful lot of your practice at this particular point in time in Ukraine. And from exactly the kind of people that you would, who, you know, you'd expect and who would be closest to the thinking behind all of this. But one sense is that these things aren't going very well.

And again, I'm glad you used the word scientism. because in reality, if you're talking about science, actual science, the kind of thing that people used to think of as science, this isn't like that at all. And in fact, we're seeing regression and scientific stagnation beginning to take hold as well. And in fact, it's clear to me that science is in fact the place where it's happening more

is in places other than the West, partly I think as a result of all of this. So what would you say about this? I mean, are we indeed seeing this whole thing run into problems? Because I should say, I don't think

this has much traction outside the West at all. And the rest of the world, looking at this, not just Russia, China, India, but pretty much everywhere. They're rejecting it. Yeah, I think you're, you hit the nail on the head there as well as kind of what you said at the beginning that it's very difficult to push an ideology, even with all of this sort of packaging and veneer of the promise of, you know, being becoming a marvel superhero and transcending limitations. I think when you realize that what's actually being pushed is, you know, destructive to children and having a family, that's where the rubber meets the road.

And that's where people are saying, oh, wait a minute. Okay, this is, this is crazy. This is way too far. We have enough sense to not allow this into our countries because it's essentially a weapon that undermines and really only could be pushed by, I think, a sort of psychopathic, oligarchical type of elite. You know, not even a, not even a, we think of a corrupt, you know, elite power structure or something like that or somebody greedy or something. This is almost beyond that to like a just a just a sort of a, you know, it's like O'Brien in 1984 with this, this insatiable hatred for humanity is what seems to be motivating the ideology of Western technocracy because it, it must push the darkest elements to further the goals. And people are now seeing that. So I think that the biggest mistake was when it just sort of from the corporate.

sort of CEO top-down level went wholesale into, you know, Skittles slash T-R-A-N-Z agenda. I think that everybody saw that, and it was like, well, wait a minute. First of all, this shows that we're not really in some sort of free market if every Fortune 100, Fortune 500 company has the same agenda that's pushed that has nothing really to do with economics directly. It seems to have a lot to do with an ideology. And so, yeah, that woke a lot of. of people up.

That shows that it's inherently anti-human, ultimately anti-natalist. And, you know, you mentioned the Ukraine, sort of the push for these resurgent pagan ideologies. Those also are very, I'm in this for a long time. They're very amenable to what the Western power structure wants to push because it opens you up, I think, to a return to the worship of nature, to the worship. of the natural cycle, which the people who go into paganism or neo-paganism, they may not intend this, but it makes you very amenable to accepting death as a good thing and a natural thing and something that perhaps should be part of the oligarchical structures plan. So now we're

moving into the acceptance of something like euthanasia, et cetera, and we're starting to see that, you know, in places like Canada. So you see, we again to see that it's sort of like a I guess is the best way to put it. And I don't think it's accidental that, you know, tiny mustache man, his followers, you know, they had that same ideology of a kind of a death cult ideology in the background. And, you know, when you get into the history of the Ukraine, particularly World War II, you get into gladio, you get into the Galen networks, Galenorg, that has a connection

to the Ukraine at that time. That's why there's that network there, I think, at least for my reason, research. And yeah, I see paganism and neo-paganism ideology foisted there as part of that Western as well as Protestantism, charismaticism, Eastern Catholicism. Those are also techniques and tools and strategies of the Western power structure. Fordham University, famous Jesuit CIA University, very closely connected to a lot of these entities in the Ukraine. That's not accidental. That's all by design. How is it that we in the West have proved so vulnerable to all of this? Is it because of the crisis of faith that we have seen develop since the mid-20th century? Because there has been a crisis of faith across the West. Of that, it's indisputable.

It's gone very far in Europe. It's reached the United States. Is that why? Because we've lost faith, our own faith. Is that the vacuum that's been opened that these ideas have been able to fill? Is it also, again, we come back to what you're talking about, you know, neo-paganism, is it, you know, the temptations of hedonism, which do exist as well, and are connected to it, it seems to me.

Is this why it's happened? Because there doesn't seem to be the resistance to this in the West that you might have expected. As I said, to the rest of the world, I could say this with some certainty because I get lots of people from the rest of the world contacting me, and I read a lot of what they say and what the articles that they write about. They're starting to see us in the West as very weird. This isn't something which I think people in the West fully understand, especially policy makers, by the way. So why are we letting this happen to us? I mean, one can come up with all kinds of power-related reasons and economic-related reasons, but, you know, people have pushed back

before when all sorts of things have been done to them. Why are we not doing that much more than we actually are? Yeah, I think the problem of the West is a long-term spiritual problem. And that's probably a different diagnosis than most people would give. And probably the easiest, most accessible book on this. And I don't agree with everything that this author writes, but I think he really hit on something that few people notice is Dr. Philip Sherard has a really excellent little 100-page book called Church Papacy Schism. And he goes back to the time of the schism between the East and the West.

And he really says essentially that this produces kind of two different Europe's. the Europe of the first millennium that produces Byzantium is a very different idea and ethos than the Europe that we get after the schism in the West with what for all intents of purposes we call the Franco-Latin Papal Church. And so I'm not trying to foist everything on the papacy. Obviously life is more complex than that. But the religious sentiment of the West goes in a very different direction than the ethos of the Orthodox Church. and what you get there eventually manifests as a kind of a choice between well you're either going to be a Protestant or you're going to be a papist, a Roman Catholic. And this, if you go to the key disputes in Byzantium where St. Gregor Palomaz is arguing

with a lot of the Western-minded thinkers and theologians, the Barliamites, the Akandinos, Prokeros. He says, if you adopt this ideology, what will happen is, this theological aberration will result in mass atheism. So very few people go to St. Gregory of Palomas to locate, I think, this prophetic prediction. You know, we're talking Byzantium in a 14th century, of warning that the West, if it adopted this theological mistake, that it would lead to mass atheism, but that's exactly what happened. And so not too long after that. I mean, there's other really great books as well that detailed the spiritual ideological. There's a great book that came out recently by Cambridge text by Sinistia Glue,

where he talks about the ideological subversion within Byzantium itself actually influenced a lot of the Enlightenment thinkers, Spinoza, Kant, and then some of the radical Jacob and Socialists were influenced by Pleithon. And so he locates this atheistic move that is very similar to the critiques of St. Gregory Polymouthus as well in this kind of tending towards atheism, which then manifests in a lot of these dialectical movements from the Enlightenment onward that we talked about earlier. So I think it's at root a spiritual problem that leads to theological mistakes, theological errors. That then leads to other ideological errors. So, yeah, I think that's the real thing. And it sounds a little odd because we don't usually think of theology as having that kind of an effect. But I actually think at root we're all religious beings.

We do kind of operate that way, even if we don't, in our conscious mind, think of it that way. I absolutely agree. I mean, I think that this actually has a huge role to play. And I think if we don't, one of the great problems with the study of history and the West is that he doesn't give enough weight to this sort of thing. Anyway, we've spoken a lot, and I know there's questions. So I'm going to transfer to Alex here, and I want to first of all say thank you. We've covered a huge amount of ground.

I would hope very much that we're able to do more programs of the future and explore some of these points that you've made in a lot more detail, because we can definitely do that, it seems to me in ways that I think a lot of people would find very interesting. But this is where I'm going to finish now. And I want to say thank you. And I'm going to hand over to Alex. And he'll probably have some questions to put it to you. Thank you very much, Jay.

Absolutely. Thank you, Alexander. Yes, we do have a lot of questions. And that was a fantastic discussion over to a lot of ground for sure. And let's see what everyone is asking. Jay. Let's start with Ricardo Afanzo. Cruel fate. Why do you mock me? You finally

have Jay Dyer on and I won't be able to watch it. But can you guys ask Jay to talk about gladio and Intel agencies? He's a great researcher. I'll have to watch later from Ricardo. Well, yeah, in brief. I've done a few talks that spend a few hours on Gladio. I've done a few of Lord Voldemort's fourth hour on Gladio. So you could probably find those for more information. But this is really just a Cold War operation that the members of the OSS and CIA cooked up to supposedly stave off a Soviet invasion of Europe. So if Stalin decided that supposedly that he would

move into Europe, there would be these cells that were set up all throughout Europe. And as more information has come out about this over the years. It was first discovered in the 90s. There were some writers who were already sort of on the on the cusp of even the 80s, people like David Yalup. But as this came out, you had people begin to actually write full-on examinations of it. Daniel Ganser wrote basically what's a PhD thesis on it. And it turns out this was a much more widespread operation of sort of training saboteurs, assassins, and so forth to be. be ready for these sorts of operations. And it looks like they might have even been doing a lot more than that in terms of actually doing black ops. I think we find things like the Bologna bombing

and so forth having connections to Gladio. And if you read the Paul Williams text, this really gets into depth with the Vatican Bank, the Vatican Bank being used as a sort of a funnel for black operations, drug money, weapons, trades, and so forth. So I would recommend either Ganser's book or Paul Williams book. They're both focus on different things. Williams book focuses on the Vatican element as well as organized crime, the mafia, the P2 Lodge in Italy, Lichie O'Gelley, Michelle Sindona, Kissinger. Williams's thesis is basically Kissinger was running all of that in Italy. And then you have the Ganser thesis focuses more on the different cells and what they were doing in all the different countries like Turkey. So, so yeah, this was a pretty vast,

a wild crazy operation that was cooked up, I think, by Hellowell and Donovan and Angleton. From F.Bits, hopefully Jay will tell the audience about the CFR's plans as described by Carol Quigley. Yes, we did hit that earlier on in terms of, and if you're interested in a longer treatise, I did a whole eight-hour, eight-section lecture through Tragedy and Hope, and then I did a two-installement lecture through Anglo-American establishment. I do have his book on civilizations, but I haven't read that yet. John Roberts says,

my perspective as a citizen of a nation is the globalists look like a club of the super rich who hire Ivy League graduates as their minions, as they obsessively seek to increase their wealth and power. I would concur. Yeah, I think if you look at, for example, you know, the OSS and CIA often

sometimes recruiting out of, for many years, at least, Harvard and Yale and Princeton, British intelligence basically, you know, recruiting out of Oxford and Eaton and Cambridge. So, yeah, that's what we mean by the sort of recruitment process. It's not limited to intelligence operatives. Obviously, it includes CEOs, bankers. And as you pointed out, doctors, scientists, mad scientists. So, yeah, I think all of these elements are recruited into that superstructure for sure. G1

G.I.1416. Question to all of you, to Jay and Alexander. Did you read, and if yes, what did you think of Burnhomes the Machiavelliads? That I've not read. I haven't read it. Exactly.

Okay. Zareel says, Jay, they are very religious. They understand it. More than one wants to admit, but their religion is Antichrist. Religion is a human creation, not faith um yeah i think a segment of the power structure the power elite definitely do have religious commitments that they take seriously but i think many of them don't so i think but they all kind of align with

a similar you know game plan so you don't have to be religious i don't think to be a member of that power structure wade asks outside the most basic natural law how does rational man have belief in any mythology theology, i.e. the miracle problem. Well, a lot of the debates that I do with atheists, we end up kind of in the domain of philosophy. And so, you know, having an assumption or a commitment ahead of time to what's not possible, that's based on a metaphysics. And so what I would do in that discussion or debate is ask you for an account or justification for your metaphysics that underlie the assumption that something miraculous or supernatural isn't possible. And if you could tell me then what the grounding for that metaphysics is, then which I don't think an atheist or materialist

can. I've not found one yet. But if you fail at that task, then I would say that the conclusion that there are no miracles would be unjustified. So that's the transcendental argument for God. That's the move we make in terms of that apologetic. And J.J.H.W. says Operation Gladio, there's a full 1992 documentary from the BBC. And I'll put that link in the chat. Sophisticated caveman says, what is the proper way to integrate this gnostic, technocratic worldview

with the rest of the world? I doubt it's possible to get rid of it entirely. Well, I mean, I guess from a Christian perspective, there will always be competing systems and ideologies and heresies and heterodoxies. And so, yeah, they may not always ultimately be eliminated before the end or the Eschaton, whenever that is. But I'm not sure why we wouldn't necessarily need to, quote, integrate it or what that means. It sounds kind of a Jungian thing.

I don't think we need to integrate, you know, things that are anti-human or that undermine civilization. And as Bella Chab says, I once read in an old Freemasonry manual, that the light is death, that is what the Nosset teaches us. The manual mentioned Mozart being a member of the French lodge. So this is a very old thing. Yeah, I mean, if you look at Magic Flute, right? I mean, that's essentially a kind of a Masonic pageant. So, yeah, that's definitely, I think, the case.

But I think there's a lot of different ideas within masonry as to what the light is and what this or that thing is. If you look at immorals and dogma, it's really just a kind of a comparative religion text where he sort of smashes all of the religions together and says that's what Freemasonry. Free Masonry is the true supra religion or philosophy. He says at times it's not a religion,

even though it kind of is. So I don't think necessarily that there's one ultimate Masonic secret. I see Freemasonry is more of a tool of the British Empire's era of control, It was kind of their spy network. There's mainline histories that have been written about freemasonry operating as the kind of the spy network of the British Empire. I don't think it's as important and influential today as it used to be. But I do think ultimately it's kind of an esoteric.

If you read Morals and Dogman, he kind of goes into positing that it's really neoplatonism or a form of neoplatonism. It's very similar to what Pleaton. talked about when I mentioned Pleothon earlier. Jay Alexander, any opinion on UK elite groups like Chatham House? Oh, absolutely. I mean, the CFR is essentially Pratt House is based on Chatham House in the UK. And so it's supposed to be the sort of the U.S. mirror of that.

That's the means by which the British establishment really sort of put their foot back in the door, so to speak, of American influence, power, and control. I mean, they were already kind of there with Colonel Edwin Mandel House and Woodrow Wilson, but I think the erection of the OSS via a lot of these British intelligence operatives like William Stevenson and Noel Coward and even Ian Fleming, you know, that's being done out of a lot of these, you know, of New York offices in Rockefeller Plaza as well as Pratt House, which is the mirror of Chatham House. I have absolutely nothing to add to that. I mean, this is very much the British establishment and how it works.

If you see it close up, which of course I have. And exactly as Jay says, a lot of it has migrated across the Atlantic or the pond, as we call it often in London. And it's amazing how it's taken root there, actually, given how profoundly different American culture is from British in so many ways. That's another whole topic about the anglicisation of a part of the American elite that took place over the course of the 20th century, which is very strange. and not what I think one would have expected at the beginning of the 20th century. But it's exactly that. A lot of these things that the Americans developed,

a lot of these ideas that the Americans developed, originate from British discussions and thinking and structures that were developed from about 1890 onwards. And anyway, they've taken root in the US. Matthew says nothing will fire up human resistance more than the erosion of free will. So while it is scary that these globalist elites exist, there is significant hope that this will all come crashing down. Yeah, it doesn't really have anything to offer other than, you know, ultimately, you know, get in your coom pod and live in the Matrix.

I mean, that's sort of the end result of this. And I don't think ultimately that will be, I mean, like Alexander says, we may experience a lot of damage and destruction on the way to that, you know, in-game being pushed, but I don't think it'll be successful. You have time for a couple of more questions, Jay? Sure. Okay, great. Slowboy Whiteboard says thanks for having Jay on.

Sparky says euthanasia's pushed in the U.S. as hospice care. Doctors now talk patients into dying in a hospice where they stay for a few days and quietly give in overdose of morphine rather than treatment. It's the primary reason the life expectancies at least a couple of years lower nowadays. That makes sense. I wouldn't be surprised. I heard somebody talking the other day.

I didn't verify this, but they said something like upwards of 10K people have already been sort of goaded into this in Canada and that they really started with elderly, homeless people. So again, I haven't verified that, but it wouldn't surprise me. It would seem to line up with this ideology. Sophisticated caveman says, what is your view on the Rosicrucians? They had a lot of influence on the Enlightenment. Dame Francis Yates' book, Rosicrucian Enlightenment. It's kind of a classic. It's a famous text on that. I've done some talks on that years ago. So I think that Rosicrucianism is, you know, it's important ideologically in tracing the development of the Enlightenment, but I don't find it convincing.

And I think it's kind of a silly ideology ultimately. All right. And finally, from Sparky, a borderless world run by central authority. Jay, what could go wrong? I see this is one of the chief weaknesses in the libertarian position for, you know, for so many years, the libertarians have pushed. open borders in their crusade against, you know, stateism. And now we're at this juncture where I've, I see a lot of libertarians kind of thinking, oh, wait a minute, actually, if we have completely open borders.

So this might actually be a problem for the, you know, the system, the welfare system, all this stuff. So, yeah, I don't think that it really is possible to have a totally open borders world. It doesn't make any sense. Jay Dyer It's been a pleasure having you on the Duran I have all of I will put all of Jay's information

as a pin comment down below where you can follow his work Thank you very much Jay for an amazing live stream Well hey I thank you guys can I plug one thing real quick Absolutely We will be at a live event in Las Vegas June 22nd

And our live events are a combination of kind of real geopolitical discussion. I'm going to be doing a two-hour talk on blackmail espionage, the Anglo-American establishment, how they operate, Jeff Stein McEffrey-style stuff. And then we'll be talking about films, Hollywood, and we'll have some comedy there as well. You can get those tickets on my Twitter,

which links my event bright. So June 22nd in Las Vegas. June 22nd, Las Vegas. I will have Jay's Twitter link. It's in the description box right now, and I will also add it as a pin comment. very much, Jay. Absolutely.

Thank you guys. It was an honor. Thank you. Thank you very much, Jay. Thanks. Have a good one. Take care. Honor is ours.

Thank you. Wow. Wow. Alexander. That was great listening to you and Jay. Thank you. Well, it was a wonderful program. I thought it was so fascinating.

I think, you know, he, the discussion went very well, actually. Yeah. Just to make one quick observation. after I spoke to him about what the Archbishop, Archbishop Ligorous, by the way, said to me about people who aspire to be more than human, becoming less so, and talking about film and Hollywood. He actually made exactly the point that J. Dyer made that this is, that this goes completely contrary to the whole nature,

of the mission of Christ of Jesus, which was precisely to become human. It's exactly the same point. Yeah, well, I mean, you know, Jay's... I just wanted, I just wanted to say that on the road. I didn't want to interrupt. You know, it would be... It would be at exactly that point that Jay has just...

Yeah. Yeah, it would be a little bit off topic for us as the Duran, but because Jay has written books on Hollywood and I don't know, people that have been watching the channel know your, your interest and expertise in cinema. That would be a great, a great stream. Maybe one day. One day.

When and if the news cycle comes down a bit, maybe we could put together a live show that's focused on that. If Jay would join us, that would be a fun, interesting live street. It would be. It would indeed. All right. Let's answer the remaining questions, Alexander.

Absolutely. Call it a night. Let's see, Philip, welcome to the Duran community. Ruby Appel says thank you both for your great videos and keeping us in touch with reality. Thank you. Nikos, KN125, says Duran, I suffer from depression. So maybe that's why I now believe that no matter the outcome in Ukraine, the world will end in nuclear hellfire. There's more, Alexander.

NATO will never leave Russia, despite what you or they say. The elites don't care if they cause nuclear war. They'll be in their bunkers while we suffer. People ignore the communism, degrading our culture and the support of the neo-NisiIs. I guess my question, Duran, is what's the point of doing what you do? Right. Well, I come back to the point I make many times, which is the despair is a bad counselor. If we all give way to despair, then, well, the other side wins and all the bad things that you talk about will undoubtedly happen.

If we push back, obviously we by ourselves are only a minuscule part of it, but if we push back and if other people push back, then there's a chance and if it had a probability that if we'll be stopped. So there's no point in giving way to despair. Now, as a theological matter, and since we've been talking a lot about theology, I should say that within orthodoxy, despair is often seen as a state of sin because it despairs of God's creation, which is, of course, the world in which we live, and we should not despair in what God has made. I agree. Please don't be sad about everything that's going on in the world. We'll make it through. Nikos also says off topic. I know Alex watches the critical drinker. Alex, have you considered doing a video with NerdRodic on FNT?

Vivek appeared there. I think you can. I don't know what F&T is, Alexander, but once again on film, Nerdrotic and Critical Drinker are awesome YouTube film critics. So we would love to have them on the show. I mean, and talk about cinema. That would be great.

Yeah, but let's see how the news cycle goes, and maybe one day we could have a show like that. It would be our honor to have nerderotic and critical drinker on the show. Sneedle gifted us Duran memberships. Welcome, Sneddle to Duran. Sneedle also says, given that the West's diplomatic, financial, and military moves, all appear to be pushing bricks together and causing the West to lose,

is it possible that this is the intent of those who bold sway. Interesting question. You know, we have this question often in various forms. If they are actually intentionally creating a situation where the West loses and the bricks consolidate and all of that, then they're not only irrational, but they're illogical as well. And they've lost all touch with reality because, of course, what they're doing is undermining the very power structure, which makes them powerful. So I come back to the point. Maybe, I mean, I'm assuming that you're not suggesting that these people deliberately actually do want the bricks and the other side to win. But, you know, that they feel that if they sow the chaos, they will be able to ride the whirlwind. They won't. They'll be

swept away. That is the way it always works. That is the historical truth. That is historical truth. And of course, history doesn't always repeat itself, but it often rhymes. I am Valentina says, will Palestinians ever be free? Yes, I think they will. I think at one somehow or other, some way or rather, something will happen and they will be free. There will be a system that they will have again that freedom to which all people,

of all nations and all religions are entitled. O.G. Wall says, good day. Andreas, welcome to the drag communities. Ashand, thank you for a super sticker. Tatiana, thank you so much for that amazing. Superchat. Thank you, Tatiana for that. Sparky says, a borderless world run by central authority.

We'll go wrong. We answered that. Garland Nixon. Hello, Garland, says free Assange. Absolutely. Absolutely. Indeed. We'll see what happens and how it works out. We're all waiting to see what the High Court does in London. Gell Mibson says, Alex Hexagon, shout out. A young British lad who makes awesome videos about all these topics, EU, globalism, W-E-F, etc. Give him a visit.

Alex. Alex Hesigone. Thank you for that. Tishab says, love to the Duran family. Sparky says, great to see the great Garland Nixon in the audience. Awesome. Agreed. Sir Mug's game says, what has five eyes yet is legally blind, the Anglo-American intelligence, UK, USA. Brilliant. Thank you. I love it. Sparky says globalism goes against human nature. Hague says the U.S. unsanctioned the largest Russian banks for energy-related trades until the election. all while claiming to sanction China because it trades with Russia and deindustrializing EU with North Street. I think we're going to do a program about that, Alex and I.

It's a less bizarre thing. It shows, first of all, it shows how important the election is and how difficult the election is becoming and the fact that the people in the White House are becoming increasingly scared and increasingly nervous that things are not going their way. But you're absolutely right. You threaten the Chinese banks with sanctions. You relax the sanctions on the Russian banks. We've had a statement from a House of Commons select committee that sanctions are a total fail.

So we must increase and tighten up even further the sanctions. I mean, the whole thing is so completely lacking in any kind of logic anymore that, you know, it's, well, words fail me to describe what an absolute mess it's become. Valerie says, I'll read that to you after the Shaw, Alexander, because it's about our channel. I don't want to say it on this show. Sorry, Valerie. Sir, Mug's game says, we have from River to the Sea, the bridges of the Napier River, and all the while Mr. Putin is being a river to his people.

Okay. Agu says globalists opposed nationalism in Russia and China. Why then did they fight the lab leak theory? It was an opportunity for them to blame China and ask for reparations. Well, again, I mean, don't look for logic as these people. That's all I can say. Yeah. Cheribo says, are N.A. culture wars, a prelude to an Anglo-Sulfur.

Saxon meat grinder or are we safe from the playbook used abroad because we embrace globalism and open borders? Well, I think that eventually globalism is going to come back to haunt us in the West very badly indeed. As I said, what it's doing is it's uniting the rest of the world ultimately against us because we're seen as weird and disruptive and aggressive and belligerent and arrogant all at the same time. And people are having enough. And we are becoming isolated as people want to have as little to do with us as they can.

Valerie says, Love the Duran, the ideal company. I would keep compassionate, knowledgeable, reasonable. Christian, hopefully our paths cross one someday. Absolutely. I hope so too, Valerie. Thank you for that. Martin MDL says,

is economic collapse in accident? Dollar, not global reserve. bring in CBDCs, engineered by Biden, economic advisors, Lyle Braynard, Jared Bernstein, leaving wealthy elites and people in poverty. Right. Well, this is actually an important point because, of course, always what happens in economics is down to human action. It's always important to remember that what goes on in the human economy is entirely a creation

of human beings. In a sense it is artificial. But it doesn't necessarily follow that it is planned by one group of individuals. So I don't think that they are planning an economic collapse. In fact, if you look at the way in which

the people in control in the United States are behaving, they're trying to prevent one. trying to avert one. They're trying to push it back. But of course, they're doing it in a way that risks making it more likely. Because at the same time that they want to avert an economic collapse, they also want to retain control. And the mechanisms that they use in order to retain control ultimately undermine the foundations of the economy. So that's why you have corporatism. That's why you have all of these control mechanisms that Jay was talking about within the economy.

Instead of it functioning more smoothly and more efficiently as they pretend, imbalances and problems, build up, which is what we're actually seeing. Dave Shaw, welcome to the drowned community. Sir Muggs game says, here is wisdom. Put me not into the hands of any human protection. Oh, our lady most holy, line from Greek Orthodox by ecclesis to the Theotokos. Very simple. Thank you for that. Sir Mug's game. Let's see here. Sophistic, we did that one. Anise, we answered that as well. Communism Incorporated, Alex's. Could you both please look into China's new revised company law? It may fundamentally restructure China's business governance. I'd love your thoughts on its implications in a separate episode. I'd be very interested to see it, actually. When I was in China in 2017, I spent a lot of time with a banker there,

a non-Chinese banker. You know, an awful lot to tell me about Chinese company law, and I'd be very interested to see how it's changing. Nikos T says Regarding the end of times Could the Antichrist come from Russia On some issues She allied with globalism, digital money

The West is damned anyways The devil's goal would be To lead us orthodox astray I think that it is Not within our Ability to predict Where such a person Or being would come from

I think that is something that we do not have the capacity to know. Jeff Bigford, thank you for that super sticker. Sparky says many patients who could be cured or at least treated and given many more good years end up dying in hospice in the US. The push seemed to happen in the last decade. Well, I'm not familiar with the situation in the US, but if we're talking about euthanasia,

the campaign for it in Britain is also very strong. and you find all the usual suspects who you would expect to advocate for it actually doing so. And it is true that life expectancy is starting to fall in Britain, though I don't know whether that correlates with the spread of this thing. EU Tech Health says by 2050 Europe and North America will be down to 300 million and 200 million respectively. If China and India make up that is 2.8 billion against 500 million, he has right about it being a death cold psychotic. Western societies are dying at a rapid rate China and Russia never had to go to war. We'll see. I mean, let's just be clear. I mean, but Russia and China have demographic issues

of their own. I think in Russia, unlike us in the West, they are working. towards developing family-oriented policies. What they're doing in China, I have no idea. Tabernak says, when due process fails us, we really live in terror. Absolutely. Completely agree. Zareel says this was fantastic. Thank you both so much.

Thank you, Zaryl. Jerry says, what's a good objective biography on Putin? There isn't one. Short answer. I mean, there really isn't. I mean, I've heard of ones that are better and others that are worse, but a really good biography of Poohy

doesn't exist, at least not in my opinion. Toby Clear says, serious deep truth seekers encouraged to find and try the Masters in the Path by C.W. Ledbetter 1925 PDF or any by Alice A. Bailey or Benjamin in Krim.

Thank you for that. Toby. Darren Levy says, could you guys do a vid on the political crisis around Spain's Prime Minister's wife? Is it lawfare or is there grounds to go after her? Well, I think it's definitely a program we need to do.

And to answer the question, I need to look into it in more detail, but definitely something we need to discuss. Tabernak says, all free societies have started with one premise, human nature is cruel, unjust, a force to be controlled. Chaos justifies all needs to restore order. I think the other thing that all societies brings us back to the importance of due process that all systems of law recognize is that human nature is capable, always of error. And the nature of justice. And the nature of justice,

due process is that it recognises that fact. That's why it exists. It doesn't, at least legal systems, have always been mistrustful of any idea of humans being able to make infallible decisions by themselves. And the fact that due process is gradually being torn up and demolished in the West, which it is, by the way, is a reflection again of the fact that some people think that they know the answers and can simply impose them and that they don't want to have due process get in the way. Colorado Watch says nobody gets off this train until the locomotive stops. That's a quote from Douglas McGregor. Colorado Watch.

Thank you for that. Zareel says one man made a change. We can follow him. Nick Coriel says, thoughts on the pro-Palestinian protests in the USA. They're a huge issue. I'm going to be speaking with somebody who's in contact with what's been going on in these protests. I think it's important to get a little bit more because there is so much information, and for all I know, misinformation about it that I'd like to get a bit closer to it.

They're making huge impact, by the way. to my knowledge within British universities. But as I said, I'd like to get a little bit closer to this. And since Columbia University is at the center of all of this, according to the news reports, but you're very interested to know what Professor Sacks has to say about all of this. Matthew says the discussion hosted on this channel are atonic. Discussions hosted on this channel are at a tonic.

Sam Whiskey says, if the West is Carthage, will that make Russia the Roman Republic? I think that we shouldn't press these analogies too far. The Romans, by the way, spoke about the Carthaginian curse because, of course, what happened was that Rome defeated Carthage and then went back on agreements that it had made with Carthage and destroys it. and some Romans of an old-fashioned type

felt that that was the beginning of the Republic's decline and was what eventually led to its fall and its replacement by the empire. So I think, you know, the Russians, Russia today probably would not want to go there, having already, you know, escaped its own sort of imperial mission. I think it would probably not want to go. back to it. Jerry Kogan says, future guest suggestion, Dr. Vladimir

Brofki. Okay. Thank you for that. Jerry. Sparky says protests in the U.S. are becoming heavily infiltrated by the feds with many agent provocateurs and crisis actors appearing on both sides to sow chaos and violence. You're absolutely right, which is again one reason why I'd like to get closer to get some more information about what is actually going on because there's a huge amount of manipulated information

about all of this. There is someone I know who is, I'm hoping to get in touch with who should be able to tell me a lot more. And as I said, I come back to this. This is Professor Sacks, this university. I'll be very interested to know what he has to say. EU Tech Health says, Jay, do you think the depopulation is a China strategy?

So the W.E.F, WHO Gates, DuPonts, at all are actually working for China's interests. Are they the only ones who will win in the Western depop destruction? The Chinese government, in my opinion, at this particular moment in time, very earnestly wishes that they had not done what they did in terms of their one-child policy, or at the very least, hadn't kept you going for as long as they did. So I think that they greatly regret it now and are trying to find means to reverse it.

Now, whether or not they're giving advice to all the DWF people to repeat that in the West, I don't think so. I think all of these people actually do what they do because they see it as being in their own interests. Yeah, and EU Tech Health says U.S. and EU moved to a grain-based diet, fast food, also corn and bread. Post-World War II, people would eat mainly meat and vegetables. Jabs, GMO, unnecessary pesticides. It's funny if individuals would just stop eating bonded sugars, grains, seed oils, etc. they would live to be a hundred.

It's a huge subject, which I have. Mediterranean diet. I just say Mediterranean diet. Mediterranean diet absolutely. It's far and the best. I completely agree. Communism Incorporated says atheism is merely the lack of belief in one less God. I respect Christians, but I cannot accept the proposition of original sin that lie at its core.

I instead place faith in daring, compassion, and love. I'm not sure that original sin is at this call, but that's a theological discussion. We will have another day. Kenneth, thank you for that super chat. Elsa says, I'm confused. Last year we were told that the West can't find Russia's money. They wanted to cease. Have they found the assets now?

Yeah, I think there was a lot of misdirection there. Clearly, they haven't found it all. But clearly, a large part of it, a large chunk of it, a large chunk of it, was there in Euroclear. And they always knew it was there. So, I mean, you know, there was an awful lot of misdirection. I'm not quite sure why it was done, but that's the truth about it. Well, I was reading an article actually yesterday on this topic, Alexander, and they were saying that the EU was pressing the banks very hard to disclose a lot of the information

and the way money was moving. And at first the banks were resistant, but eventually they disclosed everything. Right. Yeah, they crumbled. So that's why we got a little bit more clarification as to where the money was. That's what I read just the other day. Sir Muggeen says, Alexander, did you ever have the honor of meeting the late Greek Orthodox bishop of Oxford, Galistos, where? He has amazing lectures on YouTube. No, I didn't. I never have, partly because I'm obviously focused in London. And I'm obviously focused in London. Archbishop Gregorius was a personal friend, and before that, a friend of my fathers. So that's how I got to know him. And I got to know him very well. Eric, thank you for that super sticker. Kenneth says, any chance to have Anna's Halaji, the Michael Jordan of oil and gas and energy,

explains nuance about war and energy sectors, including sanctions and so on. Well, that's an interesting topic. And yes, I mean, if this person is an expert in this, there might be a very interesting person to actually speak with. Actually, if I just can go back to the previous question, I mean, there is a very, very large English Orthodox community in Oxford, which might be a surprise to some people. But, you know, there is a significant population of Orthodox converts in Oxford,

including some connected to the university. And within the Church of England, there's been a significant interest in orthodoxy for some time now. EU Tech Health says, OK, last one, I have the personal belief that Putin attacked the Ukraine just to belittle the West. He is a genius strategist, but analyzing what he does not do, it really looks like he was just proving the West to be weak,

common statement in Russia? I don't think so. I think that if you actually follow what Putin said and what he was doing, I think it was a decision he absolutely didn't want to take. I think he was massively stressed and unhappy when he took it. I think he felt he had to take it because it was the only way in which he could safeguard Russian security and protect Russians in Ukraine. It was, as I said, I think he felt he was being led into a,

a trap. He wasn't sure how the Russian people would react. He wasn't sure how the Russian economy would react. And he said that himself. And I think he's been astonished that things have turned out from his point of view as well as they have. Yeah. Escorto says another great, another guest suggestion for Gaza, Mahmoud Ahdagh, from the at Mahmoudoadhi channel. Right. Thank you for that. Tabernak says what goals does he intend to accomplish in Europe, etc? Sorry, who intend to accomplish? Xi Jinping. Oh, see. Oh, right. I think, look, he's coming to Hungary, Serbia and France.

So he's coming to support Orban and the Serbs at a time when they're under an awful lot of pressure. very interesting that he's done that and something that's going to annoy the EU leadership and the US and the Germans intensely, by the way, just saying. And he's also going to speak to

Macron because he had a reasonably productive discussion with Macron last year. And I think I think he's wrong on this by the way that I think he hopes that Macron isn't quite yet a lost course. So I think that's why he's

He's a lost cost. He is a flip-plop. He's lost cost. A flip-flop and lost cost. Eric, thank for that super sticker. Sam Whiskey says, how will sanctions affect the international space station? Well, I think it's almost to an end.

I mean, the Chinese and the Russians are moving in their own direction, so is the U.S. At the moment, it just about holds together. But I mean, I think that that whole period of it is gradually going away. Sir Mokescape says, a river to my people, one of the famous lines from the film Lawrence of Arabia. Yeah. Sophisticated caveman says,

Jay identified the Orthodox Catholic schism as a fundamental cause of the current problems. How do you reconcile the fact that the Enlightenment originated from the Western Catholic lineage? Well, this is a huge subject, and I don't have Jay, Jay's erudition to be able to discuss this. I think, I get to say this, and this is a controversial thing I think, suspect I'm going to say, but I think that Catholicism encouraged a degree of intellectualism. In other words, attempts to second-guess God, as the Orthodox pointed out, which opened the way for Enlightenment thinking.

Because trying to second-guess God, trying to guess what he's trying to do, trying to understand what he is trying to do is by definition beyond human ability. And that is what inexorably led to the Enlightenment. And probably was what Gregory of Palomers was warning about. Sir Muggev says, looks like the Russians have incorporated the famous quote, you can move everything, just not all at the same time. Absolutely.

They're approaching this war, if I can just say, in a very rational way. Just saying. David, David says, apartheid Elon Musk is the biggest welfare recipient of the U.S. government. Look it up. Okay. Okay. Martin Meadow says, thank you for what you both do for us. Thank you, Martin.

MbP says, do you think Larry Johnson's presentation that the UN will prompt an investigation in the Nord Stream pipeline? I think the points that he made, which were brilliant, by the way, and superbly set out, are precisely the reason why we're not going to get an investigation of the events on the Nord Stream pipeline, because as he absolutely rightly said, all the evidence points in one direction. And that person who it points to has a veto on the security case. answer. David David says apartheid,

Musk, South Africa likes to coup Native American presidents have a morale as Bolivia. To steal their lithium, we coup whoever we want. Okay. David, David says, nature is God. Benedict de Spinoza. Basil Beshkov says, does Makron

have a Napoleon complex called Russia? Yes. in a word. He's obsessed by Russia, by the way. It's widely forgotten that Putin was one of the first people he invited to France. And the whole

visit by Putin to France at the time, which is, I believe, in 2015, is just astonishing. It really is incredible to see how Naccaron was treating Putin and lecturing him.

trying to get Putin to understand the genius and brilliance of Napoleon mackerel. Reza, thank you for that awesome super sticker. And finally, one second, Alexander, Man Oman Zero. Thank you for that super chat. And George D. says, can you get Osie Kozak on the show? Last week marked 500 days of asylum in the Russian embassy, as the Australian government wants to lock him up for journalism. I didn't know.

I knew nothing about the story. Okay. Well. Thank you for that, George. We'll try, yeah. Elza says Macron is a synonym for hopeless case. That's true. Alexander, final thoughts.

Let me do a final check and make sure we got all the questions. Any final thoughts as we wrap up this? I think we need to have Jay on again. that's my final thought about this it's um i mean we just touched the surface there's so much more to say and discuss with him about these things and i mean it it's these kind of discussions and conversations are necessary again once upon a time when you know great events happened people did look below the surface and did talk about the kind of things we talked about this program. The fact that we don't do that anymore is perhaps one of the reasons why we are in the

mess we're in. So it's good that we should have programs like this. And I hope we have another one with Jason. Yeah. Colorado, Colorado Watch says, I should have studied more foreign policy at university, Russian studies. CIA recruited at my university. By the way, same true. Same true at my university as well. There were heavy, MI6 was heavily involved. Curtain people who did Russian studies of that.

They kept very clear of me, by the way, which weren't surprising. MbP asks, we actually got this question. Will Larry Jod's presentation at the UN prompt an investigation about North Stream? I've got that question. Who could have done it?

Anyway, all right, Alexander. That's the stream. Thank you once again to Jay Dyer. I will have Jay's information as a pin comment. And I also have his links in the description box right now. Alexander, that was a great live stream. Thank you to everyone that was watching us on Rockfin, Odyssey, Rumble, YouTube, and the durand.orgals.com.

And thank you to our moderators. Valies. Thank you, Valies. Peter. I think I saw Tisch also in the stream. Thank you Tish and Zaryl. Thank you, Zaryl. And I think that's everyone that was moderating this live stream. All right. Take care, everybody.