The Last American Vagabond - Hrvoje Morić Interview - Is A Multipolar World Order The Solution Or Just The Next Trap?

Episode Date: May 8, 2026

Joining me today is Hrvoje Morić, here to discuss the global power transition that appears to be taking place. We discuss his recent article, “Multipolarity As World Government 3.0 & Its Pied Pipers,” and the possibility that the multipolar world order that is being presented as the solution to the current reality is nothing more than a coordinated transition—a controlled demolition if you will—away from a dying globalist unipolar order, and into the new globalist multipolar order. We also discuss how this may have happened more than once in the past, what we can learn from this, and what we may be able to do about to today.Source Links:(21) Geopolitics & Empire (@Geopolitics_Emp) / XGeopolitics & EmpireGeopolitics & Empire | SubstackNew TabMultipolarity As World Government 3.0 & Its Pied PipersA United States of Europe? on JSTORThe Network State Coup And The Engineered Transition To “Tech Zionism”(26) David Icke on X: “The China Scam Deception - you are being scammed on a monumental level by calls getting louder all the time for a ‘multi-polar world’. This is code for moving the global power centre eastwards to China and eventually into a world government overseeing ‘hemisphere superstates’ - https://t.co/DBAevPWvLq” / X(26) David Icke on X: “This is exactly what I have been saying the plan has been for decades - to move global power eastwards out of the US and the West to China and connected countries - including Iran. Trump was installed precisely so his narcissistic arrested development could be used to create the” / X(26) Greg Reese on X: “The New World Order https://t.co/HieeIGWIeG” / XNew TabEfrat Fenigson: Escaping the Algorithm in the New Financial World Order(25) Geopolitics & Empire on X: “”Smart Lockdowns” in Pakistan. “Traders highlighted that heightened security measures, including checkpoints and movement restrictions across Rawalpindi and Islamabad over the past two weeks, have significantly disrupted daily business. Many warned that continued curbs are” / XChristian Westbrook: Finding Peace Amidst the Omnicrisis & Planetary Grid BuildoutHantavirus cluster linked to cruise ship travel, Multi-countryHealth warning issued for half a million people as lung-penetrating toxins fill the air: ‘Stay indoors’ | Daily Mail Online(26) greg on X: “It’s time https://t.co/hM9qYKBKhM” / XNew TabJames Corbett Interview - Trump’s Great Reset Or Great Blunder?(26) The Last American Vagabond on X: “As anyone paying attention say coming before Trump even opened his mouth to lie about a deal again.” / XNew Tab(26) Linda Mamoun on X: “Imagine seeing this op ed in any Western newspaper. https://t.co/Grq6J8v5wA” / XTrump & The Zionist/Globalist Technocrats Are Building Your New Society Whether You Like It Or NotThe Technocratic Dark State - Second Edition – THE PAPERCUTIain Davis Interview - The Technocratic Dark State & The Network State AgendaCo-opting Freedom: The Bitcoin Sleight Of Hand & The New AI Control StructurePronomos Capital & The Rapid Transition To A Techno-Feudal StateGaza’s “Board Of Peace” Seeks To Reimagine The International OrderAs Mexico’s Biometric ID Draws Closer, Implementation Remains UncertainMexico’s Central Bank, BIS, and BlackRock Discuss Phasing Out Cash and Future of Digital MoneyBitcoin Donations Are Appreciated:www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/bitcoin-donation(3FSozj9gQ1UniHvEiRmkPnXzHSVMc68U9f)Thanks for reading The Last American Vagabond Substack! This post is public so feel free to share it. Get full access to The Last American Vagabond Substack at tlavagabond.substack.com/subscribe

Welcome to the Last American Vagabond. Joining me today is Javorje Mourish from the founder, editor of geopolitics and empire, here to discuss something that we've been talking about quite a lot and how it overlaps with some interesting historical data points that I think are going to be very relevant to those of you that have been discussing both the larger Iran kind of geopolitical conversation, as well as the kind of network state agenda and maybe the larger transition of society today. How are you today, my friend? Thank you for joining me.

I'm doing well. I've finally made it on TLAV. I've hit the big leagues. As well as a founding member of the IMA, right? So that's important as well. And I'm happy to have Yonbrother. I'm surprised we haven't done this, you know, in the past already because I find your work very important and insightful and, you know, nonpartisan.

Hey, it's like to find, it's great to see that actually happening in the world today. It's amazing how little that seems to be represented in the real conversation or I guess presented as the real conversation. Anyway, I think your work is important. And I'd like to get into this topic about. the sort of transition, but the BRIC's new world order kind of overlap to it. Now, what a lot of people have talked about in this is, you know, there's a view around this that says that this is the change, right?

That this is the new thing coming our way that is the answer to the old authoritarian world control structure. And so what's interesting is that people are leaning into what I see as sort of like a, at least a less centralized government idea. So when that first got discussed, my thought is like, okay, I'm skeptical, right? because anything that they're presenting, they're always very skeptical, but doesn't that kind of seem like what would be the right direction? And the reason I'm saying this to start is that it sort of feels like all that we're dealing with today is sort of like that, where they know we want something

as a society or even just certain parts of the society. And so they present you with something that feels like that's what it might be leading toward, but really it's a trap, you know, and the Fed, CBDC. So let's start with the idea of the, you know, your opinion on the BRIC's New World Order sort of transition and why you feel that that is not the right direction. Yeah, you know, I think what is most important here is people separate their emotions, right, and just study the cold, hard facts. And I'm not looking at what I want to happen or don't want. I'm just examining the facts.

And, you know, many of us in this space are students of globalism, right? And going back a century, all of the Cecil Road stuff, the Rhodes Roundtable, the Royal Institute, CFR, all that stuff, we're all familiar with. So, and so do you really think at this juncture they're going to be stepping back, given all of the money and power they have been able to monopolize and centralize? Like, for me, it doesn't make any sense. They've got this momentum going. They're in the process of centralizing and the train is speeding forward. So in my article, I mentioned, League of Nations was sort of world government, 1.0, UN was 2.0. I mean, that's clear.

Everyone knows that. And this is what I call is 3.0. Multipolarity is the third iteration. And practically every week, I am finding mainstream academic pieces, confirming my thesis. And what they repeat over and over is they say, they talk about the current Brentwood's system, which is also getting an upgrade. but they say that within the current global governance structure, this is their own language, within the world government structure that we have today, the UN-type Bretton Woods system,

they say that Bricks and the Global South and the multipolar world, that they're not looking for a separate system. They say themselves, they're looking for a better position within this same globalist technocratic one-world. order. They say it themselves. So it's like people can come at me all day. People call me black pilled. And my response is like, what do pills have to do with anything? You know, what does it's like I was thinking in my head the other day. It's like two people having an intellectual discussion on international relations, you know, which is what we're talking about,

multiliparity, whatever, different theories of international relations. And someone comes in and says, oh, you're black pill. And like, what does that have to do with anything? They're saying in their own words that Bricks' multipolarity is simply jostling for a better seat at the table. And then in my article, you know, even I was surprised to find the other day, David Ike came out and did a monologue on the China scam deception. And he actually tweeted out my article. And I look at the history. Yeah, there's my article there, geopoliticsampera.com. substack.com and he explains that we're moving into this system of regional governments,

which is the foundation for world government, and you can consider multipolarity, is just a synonym for EU-like regions. And again, World Economic Forum just published an article. And you have to learn how to read the Global East. Recent piece from World Economic Forum is called Seven Reasons Why the Old Order Broke and how the middle powers might define the new one. My reading is they're basically saying, you know, global governance, world government is not going anywhere. It's simply going to be built back better as a patchworked system. They say we're still going with the UN and Bretton

Woods. They say the disappearance of a single hegemon does not make shared stewardship, globalism, less necessary. It makes it more so. So basically, power is being diffused. And EU is the model. And then in my article, I explained with primary sources that virtually every world leader has called for copying the EU. Like, like, you cannot even make this up. So the Mexican president has said, he literally said, let's copy the EU and create a North American Union. Bukele, primary source. He says, let's copy the EU and make a Central American Union. Rafael Correa, he literally says, let's copy the EU and make a South American Union. And then, then I found multiple sources explaining how Putin's Eurasian Union is literally modeled on the European Union and so on and so forth.

And I think what we're witnessing now with the Iran War is the attempt to create the Middle Eastern Union. And there was even a CFR, Constable Foreign Relations article from 2014, which I cited, which that title actually said, EU-style Middle Eastern Union. So that's the tech, that's the tech date where we're watching come to be right now in the Middle East. So wherever you want to go from here. Really quickly, I just found it really interesting in your article that you even cite George Washington, citing the idea of some kind of a, you know. I had an academic source for that. It was an academic article.

And apparently, I mean, this is shocking that in 18th century, Washington is talking about a United States of Europe. I mean, you can click on that link. It takes you to like a J-Store article where, they quote, that's where the quote is from. And that goes back to a bit what I, you know, you'd probably have to use, what is it, Anna's archive or, or the sci-fi hub to break the paywall. Right.

To read it, although I think it's maybe in the free version. But I think the project of America, that's another segment of my article. I use Dr. Martin Erdman as a source, Patrick Wood, he's friends of Patrick Wood. and I message with Erdmann often. He's a Christian, German theologian, and he's really making the case that democracy never really existed. It was a tool of oligarchy, and it's, in fact, it's like an occult, esoteric thing, actually. And that voting is like participating in this cult ritual.

And then that's where he starts talking up. And I was shocked looking at his work, because that also sort of conforms to my biblical worldview. when you look at Bible prophecy and the four empires of Daniel and Babylon and Rome. And Rome is the last empire until Christ comes back. And Erdman found actual, again, academic quotes where when Babylon fell, Rome, you know, was the next sort of big empire. A lot of the Romans were ethnically Babylonians. And then when Rome fell, the Venetians came out.

You know, you're a lot of us familiar with the Venetian nobility, black nobility, all that sort of stuff. The Venetians actually called themselves the new Romans. So there's that continuation. And then they, you know, eventually Holy Roman Empire comes along. And then there's the elite factions fighting each other. Then the Venetians have to move up north. And that's where you get, you know, the central banking. And then the Dutch and the French and the Spanish empires,

and they move ultimately to Britain. And then Britain, as Erdman calls the new global Rome. And then from that, you get the American Empire, which is like the latest iteration of Rome. And then in my article, again, who created the EU, 50 plus percent CIA, State Department financing, you know, the globalist, Bilteburg as well. And then they created the EU and then Wolfgang Streak and German academic, Austrian, he literally says the EU is an empire.

And it's an empire. We should call it an empire. The EU is an empire. It's not some, again, they sell it as some democratic thing. It's a freaking empire. They're trying to take Iceland now and Canada. And, and, you know, it's right from the land encroachment, just in and of itself, it's the opposite of democracy, which is what people, even those that have supported it, who are honest, have come around to see that if you can elect somebody that has no real power over the actual union, then you don't have sovereignty whatsoever. You know, and it's the whole thing is a transition of power it looks like to, you know, again, it's the same kind of idea, selling you on the idea of more sovereignty, more, you know, anything when it's really the opposite.

And it's just more centralization of power. And so actually what you wrote in there was basically that they realized this kind of Venetian oligarchy that or whatever we're really highlighting is the larger thing back then that there was sort of a the global agenda was unlikely to happen from what you said, what from a tiny city state. And so they saw England and Scotland as the perfect sort of incubator for the world government. And I found that so fascinating because what we've always talked about again is this idea that sort of there was a transition away from democracy or from kind of the feudal state.

being and this is what I want people to think about today that this was in my mind a transition away an organized at demolition because people for whatever reason we could talk about like consciousness evolution or just being aware that people are suddenly at that time starting to push back and you know not agree with the like divine bloodline mindset and so whatever you see it as it transitioned into what we claim is some kind of democratic democratic society but as you're highlighting it seems as if that might might not have actually ever been the reality and so now it feels as if we're being driven back into the techno feudal state and the divine bloodline dynamic is still the ones kind of guiding that. So let's talk about that one point before we go

further into the larger geopolitical point of the whole like Roman carryover. I've heard something about this, but I've never really gotten into this in depth. And the idea this is sort of some like ancient bloodline dynamic. Is that the gist of it? Explain that for me. Yeah, I didn't go into it in depth. then I will, you know, delegate that to people like Erdman and others. She's a prolific author. But again, you know, many people have spoken on this that, you know, I think this, I like Mark Posio's term of a cultocracy, right? So it's just that simple that this group has been around for a while.

And, you know, one thing that's data point that's insightful for me is a few years back, Bloomberg, again, I try to use good sources, not that Bloomberg is the greatest source, but they published an article about some Prince of Liechtenstein or something. And in that Bloomberg piece, they said that the land that they own, the wealth that they owned, they've owned it since 1,200. So it's like people know if you have money, the people with money and capital are able to easily deploy it, earn interest, buy assets, and just grow it and grow it and grow. Actually, I had on recently Robert Sibis of Oval Media, German filmmaker, and he made a great point.

He said that one of our biggest problems is we have these private individuals, you know, the central banking system that own the ability to print money. And I never heard anyone put it the way that he did that mathematically, like it's a mathematical fact within one generation, three generations, whatever, at some point in time, they will become owners of the world. Like you like that's that two plus two equals four. Like there's if they can just print money and just buy up all the assets, you know, we had the case recently just a just a visualization. I'm here in Mexico in January, Shine bomb was visited by Borge Brand of Wef and Larry Fink of BlackRock.

A few weeks back, Larry Fink visited Shinebom again. Georgieva of IMF also just visited her. These are these people represent that international class. Those are the real owners of Mexico. and then you can say the equivalent for the BRICS countries as well. There was the latest example, Ramaphosa. Errinde, I'm jumping all over the place, but he created a great global technocracy index, and he showed that Russia, the R in BRICS, the I in BRICS, India,

they're in the top 10 in terms of their advancement into technocracy. And the S in BRICS, South Africa, Ramaphosa was just in Spain at some global progressive leaders conference where Alex Soros was and Ramaphosa actually said the three things in his speech he's like we need world government, global governance he said climate change and agenda 2030.

How is this? No, it's not any opposition but I guess going back to your thing about Rome yeah, I think these occult families and dynesies have been around and just accumulating more and more wealth and we've finally hit the stage where technology, I've asked many of my guests,

and we all agree that technology is what now gives them the power to literally take over the planet. And that's why we're seeing technocracy, scientific dictatorship, and the digitalization of everything. Yeah. And I would frame it as sort of the plan, as you've highlighted,

it's always sort of been back there as now technologically possible, right? So this is kind of building. And there's been, elements of trying to drive little, you know, more control in this direction. But I agree with you. Now it's just, it's clearly the trigger has been pulled. I think COVID-19, whatever that was, was part of that. You know, there was an effort right there to push that. I think parts of this were made. Now this is kind of a continuation of it. Now before we touch on what you call the global

network state point in this, I want to go back to the original point that I made and ask your thoughts on this. Because, you know, so in a world where it seems, because the way you're framing this is sort of that all different parts of this, Russia, China, you know, basically that you have the bricks multipolar world order and you've got the, you know, unipolar world order from the U.S. Western kind of dynamic. And both of them are looking for a global control structure. And I would argue that's the whole point of my side of like why government to general is bad. But so in that framing, there's no positive like all of them want that control. One of just wants to make it more split up or however you would frame that.

So in that world, then where do the individuals go? Like obviously my mind is away from government entirely. But even that mindset seeks a direction away from that. So wouldn't the logical step be for somebody who wants less government, less centralized control, to be between the two, the brick side would be the leaning. But then that becomes the false paradigm of like the false binary kind of idea. I guess what I'm getting at is if that is a lie, which I agree with you, that's what I think. How do we get to a point where that would be something we would want?

Like so you and I sit down and say, and let's just say we have control of everything and we want to go in a direction of less government, in my opinion, to the point of no government. How do you effectively take that step when all of these governments are presenting these plans, which are really a consolidation of the world control? If you get what I'm saying, like if that looks like a positive direction from what we would do, how do we get there as individuals and how do we traverse this lie of the bricks part of it? That's a weird, abstract question. I hope you get what I'm asking.

The thing with bricks, again, the multipolaristas, as I call them, the Piper's. And, you know, I was in my article, I said it's a spectrum of people. There's people who are well-meaning and really believe this stuff. There's people who are kind of grifting and then people who kind of are intelligence assets. But the fundamental idea, ideology here of this BRICS multipolarity is globalist. It's supranational because they themselves are saying we need to create all of these regional supranational organizations, the SCO, ASEAN, which is the Southeast Asian Union, which is financed and advised by the EU, you know? And there was an article like 10, 15 years ago that said they wanted to actually reach parity with EU, like with an EU-like

currency and everything, you know, they're way behind schedule. So the thing is, the fundamental ideology of the BRICS movement is actually globalists because they're pushing for supranational regions. And I guess to answer your question, I mean, what can we do is just try any which way we can. I always go back to Teddy Roosevelt, do what you can with what you got where you're at, to hold on. Not that nation states are the best things since sliced bread, but to hold on to as much sovereignty as we can, whatever that means for your local, you know, not to let it get metastasize bigger, but I guess let's hold on to the nation. stayed for as long as possible.

Well, to me better define that. I don't think I framed that as well as I could have. But I guess what I'm trying to get at is, you know, the argument for an, for a conversation of people that would want less government would be, but be generally in the direction of less centralized control, right? That's a first step. That's obvious. So first of all, that's what I'm highlighting is that I feel that's what the bricks element

is. Seeing that we want that direction and just in a general way, giving that as sort of this trap, you know, to people to think that's what they got, what they wanted, been really it's just the re-enshrining of the global order from a very different framing. So how do, you know, let's just even say, let's just say a nation state genuinely wants to go in that direction. How do you, there's no, it doesn't seem like there's a way to get past what they're presenting. And I maybe there's not even an answer to this, but I think what I'm highlighting here is that

there should be a way that we can discuss the idea of less centralized control that doesn't then get capitalized on as that's just the other side of the coin of globalism. You know, see, I mean, it's almost as if this whole thing has created a circumstance where we now don't have a conversation to have about centralized government or decentralized government unless it's just all or nothing. That we just go from this to absolutely nothing, which I would vote for, but there would be a lot of chaos. You know, so anyway, I mean, you have any thoughts on that. It's just, I guess I'm really just kind of stating the concern about how that seems to mask what would otherwise be something we might want to begin to do, which is if a, you know,

I could transition to less government all the way to no government, you know, and this is a way to trap them into asking for that, but they get world government, you know. So go ahead. I don't have an answer for that because I think the format that we're being presented is strictly this. Again, like I said earlier, it's a supernational format and it's all digitized. So all governments across the planet are bringing in this rapid digitalization of everything. Phone registry, biometric digital IDs. And there are a few, I listen to a wide array of people, Simon Dixon,

example, he explains that the West has been spent. The Bretton Woods IMF World Bank system has squeezed like a lemon and extracted from the West as much as it can. So their ROI is very small. But the global South now is a big market. Everyone talks about the fertility in Africa and India's coming up. And he posits that, yes, in the near term, economically things will be. better in BRICS countries and the multipolar world because now they're going to get all I mean like China economically China and other countries are doing great but they still have that veneer of that total totalitarian infrastructure so they're going to grow and for a short while the people will benefit but eventually they're going to get the extraction levels will

increase increase and in the long run they're going we're all going to collectively end up in this algorithm. Right. That's the problem in the long run. That's what the multipolarisos don't understand. In the long run, east and west, I effectively say, you can basically decorate your gulag.

Do you want like the Mexican version with the sombreros? Do you want the Chinese, do you want the Russian version with the vodka? Because they're bringing this in everywhere. And there's this China maxing thing, Afghani, you know, Kit did a great article. I mean, you got these Americans, this American teacher in China recently,

he's married to Chinese. I'm not saying you can't have a nice life in China. But he's China Maxing, which is this like artificial, inorganic promotion of technocracy. I mean, Carl Jha is promoting 15-minute cities. Right. And these foreigners who live in these countries are treated like royalty. And my point is talk to any average Russian like I do or Kazakh, where I used to live, they will tell you just the same feeling you and I, Ryan, have for our American government,

or me for my Mexican government because I'm a citizen of Mexico, is the same disgust that the Russians and the Kazakhs feel for their own government. But we've got these like foreigners who are being treated treated like royalty. Like it's a complete distortion of reality. And then this guy, he's going around like, wow, I can buy a bottle of water in China with my palm payment. And then, whoa, I can just, with my biometrics, open the door to my mind. my apartment and I'm like, have you guys been the platformed by any state ever? Like, what's going to happen when the Chinese government is done using you as a China Maxer? You can't

open your door anymore, you know? Seriously. Well, I mean, on top of that, it seems like it's tone deaf, in my opinion, and maybe I'm in a bubble. I mean, I think we all are to a degree, but from my opinion, it seems that the world is largely pushing back on, like, from a society, like what you just highlighted, not from the government or the mainstream media apparatus that pretends to say what the people in these countries think, which is largely from what I can see, a resistance to the technocratic change, to digital ID, to, you know, I mean, from a very fundamental level, it's objectively obvious. It's about surveillance. It's about cataloging our lives. And I don't think most people want that. You know, so it's an interesting thing to see that being

pushed as if it's like, hey, this is pretty cool. It's like, China is one of the earliest ones to be called out for the social credit system. James Corbett and others have been doing work on that for years, you know? But so this comes back to the same point, actually going into this larger discussion of where it seems to go might make what I was kind of trying to clumsily explain earlier make more sense, which is ultimately the idea of what you see, as you described as the global network state or global network agenda, basically what you see this kind of leading to, which would be, again, to highlight the earlier part you pointed out in your article, and we said earlier that this is sort of a transition and it's happened more than once, right?

So now we're at this new stage of another one of them. And so it would be a transition from something we currently have, like the fake battle, I guess, between, even if you want to argue, there's adversarial agendas between the bricks and the Western agenda that it ultimately wants to control your life, that ultimately ends up in something that is sort of multipolar, but it kind of melds together, and then you've got what you said as a global network state. So what do you think that is, like, as you described it, what does that mean? What does that look like? And then I'd like to get into what I see, what I've been covering, and how that might relate. Yeah, just again, to go back to Corbett, he, I cited some of his

material and he makes the case a lot of this infrastructure of the multi-polar world piggybacks on the western infrastructure so again it's it's it's it's all out there in the open that or you know and i cite mentioned anthony sutton i mean the thing is anthony sutton shows the soviet union you know you can argue that the bolshevik revolution was a western banker-led revolution and that the Soviet Union wouldn't have had its industrial capability if it hadn't been for the technology transfers of the West. Same thing for China. In the 70s, it was just like an agricultural country. And then, Jampeng Xiaoping had to go to Japan and to America.

You know, Kisinger went there, and I think intentionally to start seeding and building technocracy in China because they didn't have a constitution like we did. So they could get away with scientific dictatorship better and first. and then that's where they sort of wargame prototyped the scientific dictatorship of technocracy. And then while they were doing that in the east and the west, it was death by a thousand consents or cuts, right? And on our end, where they're slowly eviscerating our constitution, so then they can slowly bring in Borg-like the technocracy, elgocry to the west. And so I guess your question was the city states, right? the um well before you get so right there with your discussion point of china though so in that in that

conversation what the way you just described that it's it paints it as sort of an adversarial thing though right so but or rather both really so like how do you see that from let's just say the way the global situation is playing out like so do you see do you see them as adversarial in some ways in other words working together like these cool these states u.s china for example yeah in my article i bring up straight counsel and so i again it's all it's all written down paper. And I cite Clarence Strait, who was a Rhodes Scholar, American Rhodes Scholar. In 1939, he published the Atlantic Union map, which he posits to unify Europe and North America, which would be like the basis for world union. So first you get the sort of Europe and

North America together into Atlantic Union. And then from from there, you take the rest of the world, kind of like a second version of what Rhodes was himself talking about. And there was a recent article of a French minister saying, can we add Canada to the EU? And it's like, yeah, you just scroll down. There's literally a political article from a month ago. Yeah, there it is. Canada could join EU. That's literally 1939 Clarence Strait. But then they had a recent article from the Strait Council itself, which they're talking about something called the supranational federal republic. That's their word for world government, supernational federal republic. And they said the problem is with countries like China. And it's funny, they actually talk about, so we're economically

very integrated, right, with China. But then to have full integration into a world federation, you have to have political integration. And that's why the CCP in Beijing, they've still got their firewall up, right? They've got their cybernetic firewall up, the internet, right? And they still have firm control of their politics. So when you say it's like, yes, in some, some, it's like a devil's dance where they have cooperated, you know, China has been penetrated by the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers, you know, you name it in some ways, but they have not given up full control. And then the, and then the straight council said in that article, in order to sort of

jigger open that door of political integration, we can long, tariffs turn tariffs on and off on and off on China as sort of a threat to try to get them to open up politically and then that's literally what Trump is right is doing so I think there is a real struggle but it's not ideological again I think China and and you've seen Putin like in the 50s the Soviet Union asked to join NATO and then I think Putin during the 2000s alluded you know to doing trying to do something like that again so So basically the Kremlin is Atlantisist in mind, but the West doesn't want to treat them as a joint partner. The West basically wants, it's like both things at the same time.

Beijing and Moscow are globalists, but the mafia in the West wants to take them out and take control. Yeah, right. And these guys in the East are like, no, no, we're globalists. You know, we want to join you, but we want to be like equals at the table. We want to be controlling our things. Yeah. How much of that do you think is illusory, right? Do you think that there is more of a framed adversarial setting and it's more coordination?

Or do you think it's more the other direction? It's hard to tell because I use the example of the Mexican cartels. You know, they have the same competing cartels. They have the same ideology of rape and pillage. And then, you know, I'm reading this book by Nicholas Hager, which I think is important. And I cited him. He's a British, former British intelligence. And he's talking about this.

I just discovered him. He's 86 years old. And he's saying he's talking about Rockefellers and Rothschilds who are both on Bilderberg, right, steering. And he says that like they own a lot of the energy in Russia. I think gas problem, he says, is like a Rockefeller or something. And he makes the point that although they both work together at times, sometimes they compete with each other at Rockefeller and Rothschilds.

So I think that that's a similar frame we can use for east and west. But, you know, I do think there are some real battles, you know, using Iran as an example. You know, Ian Davis brought up an article recently where Cuba and Iran were meeting and they were talking about e-government. Again, you know, technocracy. So I think it's a mix where you have some elements, for example, the Iranian government that is very technocratic. I mean, they had a meeting last year in Tehran about smart cities. and SDGs in the agenda 2030. Well, this is your point, right?

This is what I've been saying for a while. It's exactly what you were just highlighting right there, which is like COVID-19. I think this stood out to a lot of people is that, well, they're all adversarial and they hate each other, but then they basically went lockstep with the agenda to enforce what happened. And so that could have just been that they thought that was the safest thing to do.

But these are groups that are very skeptical of each other, at least on the surface. And so what it stood out to me was exactly as you were describing it, is that ultimately they will work together insofar that they can take control of the tools they can use to gain more control over their people to influence their agenda. And even might pretend to be on the same page, but then really quietly do what they want behind the scene. Or at that point, there is still a level of like, well, I'm going to do it my way. I don't want to give up my sovereignty to your agenda, but I'll take those tools and use them for my own abet. You know, and I think that's more the, like, just like you described. And I think

we've really got to think about that for where this goes. Because effectively, as you're highlighting about Bricks, what it means is neither of those things are the solution to the problem. I just want the problem to be their problem, you know, over us. They were the control of it as it as it pertains to us. So going back to the network state point, you know, as you were describing it, so what does that look like to you? Like, so how to the end point, however that goes forward, and you're talking about a global network state kind of idea, is that, is that being, are you referencing the network state agenda discussion or is that something else in your mind when you said that? Yeah, I don't, I didn't think I go, I went into great detail on that. I may have

mentioned it in passing. I think Ian does a great work on that. But I just see them, what they're doing is constantly building back better. So building up, collapsing, and then building better and then collapsing. Kind of like, you know, League of Nations collapses. So they advance. It's like two steps forward, one step back, two steps forward. So the League of Nations, UN. And then effectively, you know, again, the EU is the model. Some people say it's possible. You know, there was a white paper, a globalist white paper I read years ago, which I cannot find anymore. And it was saying that the EU will collapse between 2030 and 2035. And I'm wondering, that could actually be their plan.

And see, the trick here, the thing is people are going to be like, yes. And I'm thinking, well, no, because they're going to come back with something even worse. Because, you know, I'm not trying to sound blackbilled intentionally. but you know I go back to Dr. Mercola right Merkola wrote something years ago where he said he was kind of a black people in the sense that look they've got control

of all the levers of power the financing structure the agriculture the politics the military the security it's not just going to disappear overnight so if the EU collapses they have they might be rebuilt

as smaller supernational units, and I've posited in North America, they might use, because again, how was the EU built? They had a continent-wide war, which was the pretext for creating the EU. And so, and I was thinking, you know, 1930s technocracy, they had the idea to make the first EU-like government in North America, the technique. But they didn't have the opportunity, right? The different variables that just didn't come together. And maybe because of what happened in Europe, that gave them a clean slate to make the first tech. in Europe, the EU, which is then being brought everywhere else.

And so maybe in North America, for example, I've posited they might launch, you know, they've been trying to artificially exacerbate a civil war 2.0. And it looks like now there's where we currently have a Mexican standoff between DC and Mexico City. They want to extradite in a low anarcho governor and shine bomb doesn't want to do it because if they do that, then that will reveal that the Morena government. Again, it's all a unit party. All Mexican political parties are the same.

They're all narco parties. And it will reveal what everyone knows and basically created. You know, Shimbun will get her head chopped off by narcos. And so again, but maybe that's a pretext for a second of Mexican-American war, which I've been predicting. So maybe they will start that conflict in North America to then justify a North American Union. But to your city-state point, and Ian and others have made the point that really at this stage, it doesn't matter the size of the physical territory,

because whether it's a North American technate or smaller chunks, they're going to be reintegrated into the cyber digital infrastructure, which is going to be controlled by the UN and EU and the WF and all this, the public-private partnership with digital currencies and digital IDs. So really the physical space doesn't matter as much,

and then they're experimenting with the private stuff, like the Honduras Prosperas in the US, they're creating these private cities all over the place. I can't even remember them all. Liberland, I think, is one of those prototypes. And they're setting, they're all, they're popping up every month. I'm seeing more of them, like on the ocean,

in different locations, taking land. And, you know, I mean, even like El Salvador, for example, you mentioned Bukali in the end of there. He's a weird element of the sense. That's a sci-op, in my opinion. That's some kind of, and you know, Bitcoin, my latest crazy thesis is that something, I think Bitcoin was a DARPA project because if you see this all started with the operating

system verification stuff that's been coming out lately, which I'm just flabbergasted by, but DARPA creates internet, DARPA creates computers. Like I only learned this recently. So if you just extrapolate, it makes perfect sense. Look at the pattern. They gave the first financing to develop personal computers. Jeff Bezos' grandpa was DARPA. So Amazon was probably DARPA project, Facebook, Life Log. DARPA project. Internet, yeah, whole thing. And now they're saying, it was it, Kathy Wood or whatever her name was, says the internet

doesn't have a financial layer. So she says on the one hand, there's no financial layer to the internet, to the DARPA internet, but we have Bitcoin, which is like the financial layer, which could be used as the backbone for tokenization. And then Jason Lurie, this guy who wrote Software, who's like, is behind the scenes, a big brain on Bitcoin. He's talking about how Bitcoin could be used sort of to transmit value. sounds like it can be used for tokenization.

I just read Ethereum yesterday was talking about scaling Ethereum up because someone criticized me and said, oh, Bitcoin doesn't have the scale of that capacity. Well, I think it's officially held that. But go, sorry. Right. They can, like just yesterday they used Ethereum says, oh, we're going to do some things to scale up the ability of the Ethereum network. So couldn't they do that with Bitcoin as well?

So again, it feels like that's going back to the Neo-Tech. feudal city-state network state model. So effectively all polities will exist on the tokenized system and the physical space won't matter as much because all legal power will reside in the ether. And Patrick Wood just posted, again, the great piece on his technocracy news citing Martin Erdman. He calls it reflexive law where effectively. It's a bit of a deep die, but he talks about reflexive law where there's no democracy there. They're just creating the processes to do this stuff and they're just doing it. And we are being obliged.

They're saying it's kind of like with the COVID stuff you mentioned earlier. Look, you want to get on the plane? You need your vaccine certificate. You don't have it too bad. You can't get on a plane. It's that simple. Right. And this is the concern about that direction and why I think, you know, any of these, you know, you mentioned prosper.

I think it's it's a, it's a slight of hand. You know, it's knowing we want something. something that is away from the government idea we're discussing and selling it to us as that when really I think it's the opposite. You know, we talked about beforehand, you know, the idea of an illegal coup, which is why it created. I just, you know, I think very much so it's about, you know, from any perspective, anarchism, libertarianism, that, you know, the means matter, right? The end point is not the only point that matters, but how we get there. And so I think all of this stuff is like that. I think it's sort of a play, you know. And so back to what you were saying in the article,

and this is what I was kind of saying before. And as you wrote here, you know, if the British inspired League of Nations was world government 1.0, then the American-inspired United Nations was world government 2.0. Well, then we're on our way to 3.0. And you said it looks to be a global network state with its foundations and regions. And so I thought that was interesting. Because, like, as you know, I've been discussing the idea of the network state agenda and what that means. But so how did, what do you see that as? Not necessarily the network state point from what we were discussing. But you described as a global network state. So I'm curious about how you see world government 3.0 looking in a functional way. Like, you know, as it,

Yeah, effectively, God forbid. Yeah, and I include the other maps of the Club of Rome, right? 1970s where they divide the world into 10 regions. So it's the Technate project. It's the Technate, the Clarence Strait, the Club of Rome, which I learned recently from a guest I had on Billy Crone, who I didn't know this. You know, Johnny Vedmore has done the work on Klaus Schwab,

having created, was it the World Economic Forum was born through Kissinger, Harvard, CIA collaboration with Schrobb and the European, what became the Wef, but that Klaus Schwab helped Club of Rome make the first step. So he helped publicize Club of Rome. Yeah, and that's another map from Maurice Skomberg in 1942. And basically, I would say that is basically, what this multipolar world would look like, where you have 10 regional unions. Each union is a technate, meaning it's a scientific dictatorship.

It's totally digitized. And then you've got 10 regional unions, which are then plugged into the United... There's an endless amount of the global governance network, NGOs, IGOs, so it's plugged into all the Bretton Woods institutions and the Eastern equivalents. right the the swift the chips the you name it and uh un and the world economic forum and you know there's something else else i mentioned in my article i mean you had she jing ping proposed global

governance initiative come on and the chinese are doubling down on u.n and jacob nortigar and jacob norg talks about they will either attempt to upgrade the u.n or do away with it completely and create an entirely new world government which is why i feel like again there's that competition where Trump, obviously not Trump, it's whoever's behind the scenes. They create the Board of Peace. Right. And then Xi Jinping is like global governance initiative. So it's kind of like who's going to win the competition or will they both be sort of merged in?

And then they keep talking. I've interviewed the folks from democracy without borders like five or six years ago. Andreas Bommel who wrote a book on world government. I've got it in the box somewhere in Croatia. And he and if you follow democracy without borders, they're talking about we need to create a UN, our elementary assembly so that the people can have a vote at the world government. I'm like, we don't even have a vote in our local government.

Right. Are you kidding me? Like, what a joke. But I think these people actually believe this. And so that's part of the UN 2.0 structure. And then what's his name? Nordengarde talks about how they want to create this UN emergency platform to just shove down our throats, world government.

Today I woke up to the WHO, the Hanta virus. I'm like, come on. The X-Files, it's all over the socials. X-Files did a segment on the hanta virus being used to take over the planet. And one of the W.HO. At Baratchiks, he literally pleads. He says, please, guys, like we have this virus. We need a global structure.

Can we, you know, can you guys, he's basically saying, give us world government now because of some virus. You know, they're so desperate to get this thing off the ground. And that's what Nordengarde says. They will use emergencies to finally get us to world. Right. This emergency platform. And I'm forgetting my final point.

But yeah, Board of Peace, I think, is part of that. And the Chinese are short of, you know, GGI is their attempt as well. Well, and the Board of Peace is important. Well, so back to what you were saying, though, you know, I think it's what you were saying. I think that there's an element of both of them wanting to be the one that ultimately is, in control of the other. But at the end of the day, it becomes, well, we're willing to work together insofar as we can control everybody else, you know, or the people underneath that. So that's kind of what I see as Trump's new board of peace idea that, I mean, even the UN called it a new,

a tangential or adjacent security council, one of those words. It's, you know, it is globalism. It's literally what we're all talking about, you know. And so the reason I find that interesting what you were discussing there is this larger idea that one of these different elements being pushed, as you highlighted, the 15-minute city, the smart city. the Freedom City, right? That is the same conversation, which I still think is important to point out, right? It's that you have these different framings. But as we're highlighting, it could just be, well, whoever you may think is the guiding force behind that, Peter Thiel's version of that agenda. And maybe that's not what everybody wants to do. Maybe he's, maybe that's the minority in the

conversation, but it's still in there, you know, and this guy's very influential and he's very, very wealthy. And so that's one part of it. But that's why I want people to be very on guard to what these different things are. People are trying to take advantage of what this is. My mind, though, is that this is what you're highlighting is like the central play. There's just people around it trying to take advantage of the situation for their own immediate benefit. So let's bring this into kind of the current reality. And I, oh, actually, I was going to ask you, let's, let me, let's do this briefly.

And then I want to end with kind of where we are in regard to, like the, Iran, you know, as that may be a relevant factor. But I forgot I grabbed this. I wanted the, I didn't get to listen to all of this, but you had an interview with Efron Fangensen. And I found her very relevant and interesting since October 7th forward. because she stood up as somebody who was, you know, former IDF and, you know, I forget, was it, signal intelligence, I forget, but had insight and very critical of what actually

happened that day. And Ferguson argues that, uh, Fangensen, excuse me, argues that the current era mirrors historic monetary resets where legacy financial systems are being replaced by programmable CBDCs, biometric identification and new world financial architecture, which we all agree with. And talking about in this point, smart lockdowns, you recently had an interview with Christian Westbrook about, you know, environmental walkdowns and all this. So I wanted to lead to what you were just saying, right? The idea that all of a sudden, you know, a Honda virus kind of thing, but I don't know if you saw this. I saw this just today. This came out today. Health warning issued for half a million people in lung penetrating toxins fill the air, stay indoors. And I just thought all this coming out

at the same time. Just on that last point, I think something important that I've been paying attention to here in Mexico. And again, that's why it's important to check your local news. and mentally, I've been able to, as the years passed, you've watched them construct the prison. So just going, rewinding real quick, I was in Kazakhstan until COVID happened. You know, I came in 2010, I came to Gwola, out of Mexico. And we came back in 2020,

and I saw them building out massive public transport. I'm like, what is going on? I've been here for a decade, and I've never seen anything like this. Where's the money coming from? Like just, you know, subways and trains and buses and they're cutting car lanes. And I'm like, then I'm researching and I came upon the term resilient city. Like, well, what is a resilient city?

Well, how does a resilient city? And I'm like, resilient cities are Rockefeller financed projects. And I found the actual white papers. It's like, that's where the money is coming from. And then they've got white papers with Visa and the big corporate saying we want a cashless system with AI. on internet and surveillance. And I'm like, and then, then, you know, somewhere in the 2020s, they make a mandatory geolocation for using your banking apps.

Then they brought in vehicle emissions tests. We didn't have that in Mexico just until a few years ago. So now you have to take your car every year. And there's people whose car doesn't pass a test. So their car is illegal now. You just lost your car. But it's okay because, look, you have the public transport with that. we just coincidentally just literally built for you.

I mean, what a shock surprise. And then to that article, you know, Mexico City, you can only drive your car every other day if it's a gas power car. And I just started to notice in the Mexican papers. Maybe one or two years ago, they didn't used to have it. But now every week, they publish an article in the Mexican papers about the quality of the air. They didn't have that before. But you can kind of see this propaganda being put into place.

And so now it's like, oh, the air quality is good today, and Olajada. And the next week, like, oh, it's bad. And then they say what this article says. This is the U.S. version of the propaganda. Here in Mexico, they'll say, oh, it's very dirty today. You should stay indoors. You know, the kids should stay home.

And last week, the civil protection of Mexico published an official notice saying, it's going to be hot in the coming days. You should. And I look outside. I'm like, it's a perfectly normal day. what are you guys talking about? Like complete lies, globalist lies. This shows you how the Mexican government is being just, it's like a mouthpiece for the global agenda.

They say don't fill up your car gas tank. Don't use your car if you don't have to. Use less electricity. Don't use your air conditioner, which I've got on right now. And then again, that is literally the green agenda. It's all lies. They're just, you know, it's, it's. And it's one arm of the multifaceted, you know, the idea that this is what I think is important

as well, just on that side note is, and I think, I think you might have touched on this in the recent article we're discussing, but the idea that these are all, you know, just, it's just getting the foot in the door. You know, the idea of the climate change. There are people clearly within these things that buy or drink the Kool-Aid or believe it, but from a government and like a global world government perspective, I think these are just agendas to get people to move in certain places like using woke ideology to to justify get the foot in the door with the national down for democracy or USAID. I don't believe that at the core point, these people even care about what they claim these humanitarian issues are. And so that's kind of the ideas, I think, whether it's this or the one you just

mentioned, which was, well, just any of them, that it's about, you know, that they don't really believe it. And so it's about using people's concern for other things or for other people to justify them accepting something they wouldn't otherwise accept. And I think that's just everywhere in this conversation. So let's go ahead and finish with the point of Iran and how this plays into the larger conversation we're having because I think this is a huge part of this. Clearly it's playing a factor in what we're discussing today. But I guess what I want to kind of discuss. It's all opinion at this point because who knows really what's in the minds of these people. But what how this may play into it and whether it's intentional, you know, is there an agenda here from Trump to create some kind of a, you know, massive energy transition to support the U.S., you know, basically turn their their weakness in a sense and the.

their debt and everything else into somehow a power, a mechanism of control, you know, or is this them floundering in their agenda? James and I discussed this. I just simply said, Trump's great reset or great blunder because clearly it is affecting this stuff. And I think a lot of people are trying to capitalize on what is happening here. So how do you read all this and as it pertains to the conversation we were having today? Well, I guess it's still not entirely clear.

There are people who talk about the Greater Israel Project, which is one. thread and the noahide law project, which I've covered on an episode, then there is what I feel like the bigger play is it's the Middle Eastern Technate. And maybe Israel will be like the manager of the Middle Eastern Technate, like the Germans are the managers of the European Technate. And like Washington would be the manager of the North American Technate and the Kremlin would be the manager Moscow of the Eurasian Union. And so I think it's effectively for the Middle Eastern Union this war in Iran.

But also I was one of the first and even Christian Westbrook, Ice Age Farmer. He commented on my episode with my colleagues, cognitive dissidents with Monica Perez and parallel Mike. In March, right from the get-go, we said that this is a great reset 2.0. It's COVID-2.0. Because they bomb some of the oil fields, energy fields, whatever, disrupt the energy flows. What do we get? literally COVID 2.0. QR code rationing

in Asia. The IMF head, Georgia literally said, let's bring back COVID protocols. Australian mainstream papers are saying, let's bring back COVID protocols. School from home, work from home, don't drive your car. The IAEA, that's another thing.

Rafael Grossi, the head of the IAEA, he's posturing to replace Mafia, Mafia Don, Tony Gutierrez, the UN sex gen, and, you know, IAEA, published that absolute zero you know that's the actual UK planning document absolute zero to end all flights and cars and and and meet and so I feel like the globalist started this war on Iran and there's always a large checklist right part of it is related to

the Israeli project part of it is part of the um the great reset agenda to bring to bring in rationing all that another aspect is what like Patrick Wood talks about IMAC, the India Middle East corridor. I mean, is it any coincidence that the UAE just leaves OPEC? And then the next day, they effectively say, we're going to be the world's first algocracy. And I gave an interview to Spiroz Kouros in April of 2020, where I said COVID was all about bringing in global oligocracy.

And here we have the Emirates declaring we're going to be the first government run by AI algorithm. Right. I was going to say, for those who don't know, that's ruled by algorithm. You know, and that's important where we're going. Yeah, yeah. And so I think this is part of that process. And then the IMEC corridor, and Gaza has to do with this because they're going to build back 15-minute city.

They're wiping Lebanon. They're going to do the same. Venezuela, you know, I sent you. It was wild to see Alex Jones with CIA asset Patrick Byrne half a year ago or whenever that was saying, yeah, let's regime change Venezuela and install blockchain digital biometric IDs. Right. And I'm like, that's that formula. any countries that are still on the legacy operating system,

you go and wipe out Venezuela, you know, Ukraine, Libya, Syria, whatever, and then you're going to just bring them back up to speed. And so I think, what else can we say for Iran? And so the IMEC quarter, I think Wood goes into greater length saying how that's going to be the tokenization stuff now. And then that's why the petro dollar is still not clear. I've been saying for years, they're positioning for Bretton Woods 3.0, the Bretton Woods 2.0,

which is the petro dollar has been spent. And are they going to go to like Mark Goodwin says, the Bitcoin dollar, which will be the third iteration? And I think they're also trying to birth the petro you want as a global player, the digitized petro you want. So you might initially have both systems, Petro dollar and Petro Yuan. And then from there, they may just keep it like a co-co-eastern. and Pepsi left-right paradigm. But effectively, I think the big takeaway for Iran is it's the for the Technate, and they're using it to continue the COVID policies of digitalization.

And I mean, why did Shine bomb here? As soon as that broke out, you saw in Asia, people were waiting in lines to get fuel, and they had to use digital QR codes. So the government knew how much you bought, so you couldn't buy. again until the next time you were allotted, Shinebaum just announced a few weeks ago, by the end of the year, they're going to remove cash as payment for gasoline in Mexico.

And that was another thing I forgot to mention in my explanation of Mexico building this infrastructure. A few years back, the banks in one bank app update, they had a section for carbon social credit. So I go into my bank account and it says they're calculating your energy use, electricity, water, gasoline, and it was just informative at the time. And I paid gas and cash.

And it actually asked you, well, if you pay for your gas and cash, can you upload your receipt so we can calculate your carbon footprint based on the gasoline you use? I'm like, hell, no, I'm not doing that. But now they're removing that ability. So they will de facto now know your gasoline usage. And then at some point they can say, oh, you filled up your tank this month. You can't anymore. Or if you want to, it's going to cost double because, you know, you pay your hundred bucks gas tank and the carbon fee is in another hundred bucks.

And I'm going to be like, yeah, I'm going to have to walk more. Well, yeah, I mean, that's the, I would agree. That's the, that would argue the logical conclusion. It's very clear how that's just, that's kind of organized manipulation, you know, to just draw people in. And really, like with COVID, it's always done in a way. that is, you know, even if it starts in a way that seems like it's your choice, it's, it's in a way where it's at least coercive and it ultimately ends up in something like I was showing Derek's articles on that very point you were discussing in Mexico.

Yeah, and how it's, you know, even when they, even at the point last I checked, they were still sort of lying about the reality that it's optional when it clearly is not, you know, there is a very obvious agenda around all of this. And so I think the point I want to make sure we discuss as well is, is the point we, around the Hanta virus and the argument there, about the energy lockdown point or just lockdowns in general before, you know, I guess we just kind of finish on where this all went.

But it's clear that this, I mean, I haven't seen that necessarily the way we expected or the way you might have, like the way COVID was. I've seen the point. I get where it goes and the energy point was clearly kind of pointed to, but I haven't seen that really pick up, right?

I haven't seen like, you know, nationwide energy lockdowns or even the United States. So do you think that's where that will go, some kind of a, you know, element or or do you think this will take a new face on it? Because I'm very skeptical about whether it just becomes the same sort of thing.

Like I think they would, I see them as clumsy today, but I feel like they know that we are on guard for that, you know? Well, on the one hand, it's still wild what they're doing with the pandemic stuff. Like again, it's just, it's, the thing is, they're lying to our faces and it's like, what are you going to do about it? Because you just had, again, a few months. The henta virus stuff now. and then they're not letting air go.

They're keeping that on the fire. Monkeypox in Singapore. In the past few months, it was media, total propaganda, fear-mongering of measles and tuberculosis here in Mexico, setting up vaccine checkpoints. They're raiding schools to find children who are not fully immunized for measles here in Mexico. That's what they were doing.

And then the craziest thing was the meningitis. Like I just discovered this, maybe you saw it. They exercised Pegasus, the biggest ever historic simulation of pandemic in UK last September, October, November, 2025 with a fictional meningitis outbreak. And then like five months later, like a month ago or two,

the UK Health Secretary comes out and seriously says, we have a meningitis outbreak. We're going to do targeted vaccination campaigns. Like such lies and this antivirus thing. And so when it comes to the energy lockdowns, I think it's just the first inning. because they've said that it's going to take time, you know, because the tankers are slow, the last batch came in, and months later is when you're going to feel the energy crunch. And we're seeing it with the meat now, like Amsterdam just said, you can't promote the meat prices are street.

Argentina, the latest was 70% jumping beef, so people are eating donkey meat, which is sold out now. And then the flights are being canceled. So Spirit Airlines went under, which again, it's part of this plan where where they're taking us, their plan is neotechnofeudalism, Elysium, the movie with feudalism where there's no middle class. I mean, we probably in fact lived better in feudalism than what we're going to or we're going. And I think that's their play. And through this new energy lockdown, I mean, the articles are coming out. That one that you showed about Pakistan smart lockdowns in the article that's, says it's destroying the small and medium-sized businesses.

It's exactly what happened with COVID. So this energy lockdown is destroying what's, it's hitting another chunk of the middle class. Right, right. Which is the big opposition because then you're just going to have the rich, which are with the elites and the poor. And if you got money, you can't do anything. And so I think we could see going forward more of these restrictions.

And they also brought in the car rationing, Like it was in Korea, South Korea, they say you could drive your car every other day, which I'm betting now that where I live in Guelahara, the second biggest city in Mexico, at some point they're going to bring in the same thing. They're going to say you can drive your car every other day. Well, so that's a good example right there of that. But so have you seen others? Because like I was saying, I haven't seen it as much as I might have expected, but maybe I'm missing it. Are there bigger examples of any kind of lockdown, but specifically energy lockdowns that have taken place since this has started? No, like I said, it seems to be Asia's being hit,

smart lockdowns, Pakistan. And we're just, it's the propaganda phase. Like I just said, the civil protection here in Mexico said, don't drive your car, you know, don't use electricity. The airlines are going out of business. And many airlines like was it, Lufthansa and others are cutting tens of thousands of flights. Delta won't serve any more snacks, short flights. Again, it's like a slow process.

Yeah. And you feel all connected to the same point. Yeah. And then so I think we're just going to have to see. But I think as the summer comes, it's just going to hit harder. You'll be seeing more cancel. And then the price, I think just the price of everything is going to shoot up. So it's not going to be like put on your masks like it's such obvious propaganda.

Right. It's just going to feel more like the frog in the boiling pot where the water is just getting warmer and then it boils on your toast. Yeah. Well, of course, for people that are not. know the analogy is simply that if you turn it up all the way immediately, the frog will jump right out. But if you turn it up very slowly, the frog will literally sit in there and boil to death. You know, and that's what the argument is that's what we're being that's being done to us. Even though it's interesting that it seems more rapid, like COVID was the same point.

I said, why does this feel like they're doing this so fast? You know, it's like because maybe there's a time frame they're aiming for, but it is still over the long term and even within this more rapid part of it, that it's about sort of like you said, death by a thousand cuts. You know, it's a slow process of getting you in the place they need you to be. But like I said, though, I do feel for whatever reason there seems to be a little bit more pressure. And I do think they feel like they have a time frame. And I think that's part of the reason why this is not successful right now, why more people

that I've ever seen are truly standing up and going, but, you know, just questioning things that I'm so glad to see they are that I haven't been used to most people calling out, you know. And so I think that's really important to see that this is, you know, I mean, what is your opinion on that? Do you feel that let's just take, I mean, any of these conversations, specifically the larger one, but Iran, you know, on a secondary point, do you think that America, let's just say average people around the world are more skeptical of what's happening or more leaning towards taking the government narrative today?

I hope. We can use the, was the latest, the third assassination attempt on Trump. I think that was, you can call it staged or allowed to happen. Like my view is, again, the guy probably had real gun, a real gun. with real bullets and was let in to attempt to do something. But immediately I saw on the socials from left to right to beyond, nobody's buying it anymore. And Wired Magazine was forced to,

they produced some garbage propaganda that said, so many conspiracy theories everywhere. On the socials from left to right, nobody's believing it, you know? And then the thing with Iran, going back to Iran, They've got Iran they can blame as the scapego for this in inflation. But even that propaganda is so cartoonish. Like when I saw Hegsef come out, was it two days ago.

I have it on my X feed where Hegseth says, Iran is trying to subjugate the world. And I'm thinking, like seriously, what planet are we on? Literally the American Empire has been subjugating, you know, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Libya, Syria, Venezuela. I mean, you go on down the line.

Iran hasn't touched anyone since forever. I mean, in fact, it was the U.S. who armed Iraq to go attack Iran. I think here's the thing is that I think that is aimed like Israeli propaganda or, or example, the white helmets and their vests being written in English. You know, it's like it's clear that this is aimed at a Western audience. And I think today specifically Americans from that point. And so my argument is that they are, I think they are very aware that they are losing in at least the propaganda war, I think the larger one as well.

And so with that hagseth in doing that, might as well be a shame ritual as far as I'm concerned, but it's literally just desperately trying to get Americans a few more people to believe that that's the reality. I think the world has long since become aware of what the U.S. government, but the larger West agenda is doing to policy. But to your point, though, I don't think it's about like, oh, I have a moral issue with what you're doing. It's just about control. And now it's literally using what they've done, it's just to the West, I guess, in a general sense, but to transition away from that into just more

control, which is what we're talking about today. And another example of kind of what you're saying earlier that they are not completely winning. I mean, we should all just keep doing what we're doing. But that's why they want to bring in the operating system verification on every single device. And then they're taking away our compute from us. I had on Brian McLean where we talked about they want to remove our computers from us actually. And then the other point was they're bringing in the Ministry of Truth. So the disinformation governance board 2.0 to potentially, well, the platform or make it economically impossible for people like us to do what we're doing.

Or, you know, they have higher tiers of fines actually coming to your home and finding you or jailing you under these new Ministry of Truths. And some of the most frightening stuff is the EU. like the German journalist Hussein Dogru or Jacques Bard or the Swiss African lady Natalie Yam who've been completely unpersoned in the EU and there's literally no recourse there's no legal recourse and that's that reflexive law system that Patrick Wood talks about where you're like Kafka where you're just stuck somewhere in the machine and there's literally no one you can go to and you cannot buy food buy use any Amazon you can make any purchases can't even travel

exit or enter EU. Anyways, I forget where we were. It's not even a secret. That's what's so confounding about this, is that many of us are just trying to go look at what they're literally doing, not what they're going to do tomorrow. That's part of it too. But look at what they just said. Look at their technological republic. Look at what they're literally saying they're doing.

And people, ah, conspiracy theory. And it's just confounding. It's very, but I think more people like we said are starting to see it. And that means we're successful to a degree in getting. that message out, you know? That's what you just said is the most confounding thing for me where people at this point still don't get it. I had just a few weeks ago caught up with an old friend in the States. His mom just passed last year. Multiple, she consumed multiple parts of the magic elixir of the 2020s and and then on my wife's extended family multiple people our age either died from heart

attacks another one just got a heart attack another one of her extended family like 40 something like what are you you know it's and and so for the people that don't get it at this point like in my group it's Mexican neighbors and acquaintances and yours for Americans it's kind of like you people not get it. They're literally trying to still to democide us. Right. And I don't, I don't think what's crazy is that this is not even, you know, like we're trying, we're objective people and we do our best to make sure. But, you know, and that's why even then I'll be, I will do my best to frame it in a way that doesn't seem hyperbolic. But what's insane is that what you just said is backed up by so much evidence. It's, it's painful that we have to act like that's not real. And you could, look, you can argue that

there are a number of people who see it a different way, who weren't a way, but, you know, like different people within the government, let's say, who actually thought they were doing the right thing, even though I find it really hard to believe. The point is at some level you can prove that choices were made, that made this, you know, and many of them, like think of the likelihood, mathematically speaking, that you could make all these choices and each one of them be like the maximum lethality that you could possibly make through all this. Anyway, you know, our audiences are well aware of this, but so that bigger point you're making is that it's really very obvious that there are elements that are, at the very least, have no concern about the livelihood or,

you know, our interests, our lives, our families. But all of what they're doing is based, they argue on doing that for those reasons, you know, and it's just, it's a scapegoat, as always that they're using us. But, you know, I think that the bigger part you're highlighting at the end there is this kind of like technocratic structure that they're building and how it's being built around us. And I'm glad that people are starting to call this out. And I'm glad that people are seeing it. But to end in general, you know, do you think with where it already is, with where

it's, you know, the implementation happening all around us, that it's even possible for us to, to, I guess, stop that, you know, and if not, then, you know, what is your advice for people as this goes forward? Just, you know, regardless, people often ask that question, can we stop it? Maybe we shouldn't ask that question and just, just continue resisting it and let the dice fall where it may. And, you know, I was thinking back. to what you were saying earlier, what do we do with the, like, the multipolar brick stuff?

And, you know, again, the whole from the group here is it Derek Rose and, I'm forgetting his name now. I interviewed him. John, he started the great reset with him. Oh, my goodness. Bush, yeah, John Bush. Bush, yeah, yeah. Exit and build. I effectively like the most you can do. And I've seen examples of people that I know or that I've heard of where you've got your own, just become as a way decentralized away from the system as possible and then just keep putting spokes in the wheel because we don't know exactly how you know I think ultimately this is going to progress given my biblical worldview but I think the work a lot of people have done just individuals resisting in their local area you are pushing back you know like the example of Mexico tried to

get us all to use phone payments. And in the banks, they had something called Cody. Nobody used it. So they're like, back to the drawing board. So the fact that nobody used it, then they had, they created another one called Demo or Demo, demo. And again, that shows you that they're having a hard time. Let's continue giving them a hard time.

And just my example, I've told the story many times that in my, I literally predicted six years ago, they'd bring in biometrics to my neighborhood. They did. I was literally the only person. who out loud said they're all Mexicans all my neighbors and I was like I said hell to the no I'm not doing it and just me doing that maybe I educated a few people and created a wave of pushback and education and that's basically all we can all be doing I don't know what else yeah I agree you have them take you screaming well I always say I'm going to laugh on the way to the gulag I'm not going to be crying

I'm going to be laughing, but kicking and screaming, effectively. That's how we got to go out with the blaze of glory. And I think this is going back to what you said earlier, but the other populace, people are such cowards, and we have to stand strong and firm and regardless of what happens. I mean, I think because the work that you do and I do in others, that makes us as well politically exposed persons, I think, is the term. I applied for a job recently in an American school.

and was not, I was a very good candidate for history teacher. I mean, I'm shaking hands with Gorbachev, three passport, citizenships, you know, walking around the Soviet nuclear test site for a history teacher, who better would you want? Right. But I'm assuming they checked out my podcast and it's like, you know, you can't, that's the price I'm willing to pay. Exactly. I guess to speak the truth. Well, to fight for what you believe in, to do what you believe is right.

You know, like there's always consequences for that, especially when it's in a contentious time, you know. And I, you know, I just on a side note, you know, the technocratic side of this, there are apps, there are programs they have now for these people and any employee side of it to basically scoop up your social media data, you know, just to go, here's like a one page brief of what he believes. And of course, that's being fed through the lens of he's a conspiracy theorist. And he believes, you know, even though you can prove you're right, you know. But yeah, I think the important point you made there at the end is, I think Corbett did a podcast on the Milgram experiment, you know, the idea. Like he does a point of the TSA, but essentially the experiment is in one part of it that ultimately, that people don't, like, we're herd, we're followers in a sense as a human species. We're herd animals in a way.

And that people tend to sort of follow the lead, you know, and that if nobody does anything, nobody says anything, most people, the average person is going to kind of look around and not fuck the system. But when you stood up and said, no, like, this isn't right. Somebody in there might have been like, oh, I didn't even realize I could say no. Like, that's a real thing, you know, and then suddenly they start considering that. How many of them might still go along with it, but somebody might find the courage to do what they believe because you showed that path, you know, and this is the whole point is what we do out here is we're not always right.

Everybody's wrong time to time, but we do what we believe in. We fight with integrity. We stand by our principles and we continue to shine the light on what we can. And like you said, that's what we should continue doing because. Brother, I believe we're making a difference. I see it every day. So thank you for joining me, brother. Anything you want to say on the way out, upcoming events,

last thoughts, what we talked about today? No, I guess just to add to what you said, I'm trying to think the effect that I possibly could have had because I told them in the message, I said, what about my private data that can be stolen by administration or, you know, and then a month later, you had the government phone registry and the people who registered their,

phones like good little boys and girls a good little sheeple they had all of their data hacked so it's like for me having warned them about my worry of the privacy of my data in the community system what just happened with their phones it's like I found one of the keys to success and what we're doing has been accurately forecasting and being impression because when I was in

Kazakhstan in 2020 when COVID happened, you know, since 2010 when I was teaching in Mexico, I was talking about all of this stuff. Some of the people, you know, you wake up, others think you're crazy. But in 2020, I got messages in Facebook and WhatsApp from former high school, former university students who are like, Professor, what's going on? I'm like, when you predict something and it happens, you're not crazy anymore. And that's what I think is the most effective thing for waking up because when the phone registry is hacked like maybe that crazy Croatian foreigner

was onto something because now my data is hacked from the phone and now my data is hacked from the Mexican tax agency which is just hacked this week and every other agency is like maybe he's not so crazy after all but no we just got to keep fighting the good fight that's all. Stop

being cowards, encourage others convert others from cowardice to becoming brave and yeah I'm over at geopolitics and empire.com as all. Absolutely. Well, fantastic, brother. I hope we can do this again because I really enjoyed the conversation. And I hope people can check out your work.

I'll include all the links down below for everybody to dive through it. And as always, question everything. Come to your own conclusions. Stay vigilant. One man who knows the dangers only too well is Aman Jabby, who was at the forefront of digital development in Silicon Valley, California, for 25 years. He left when he recognized the, dark side of surveillance technology, choosing instead the peace and beauty of Montana.

He's an expert in facial recognition. It's a technique that is used to uniquely identify the biometrics of any face. So in a device like your smartphone and most modern smartphones in the last five or seven years, they have a 3D camera module in the front of the phone which you cannot see. Within that module is a near-infrared projector which projects tens of thousands of dots on your face. Those dots are then distorted based on the contours and the features of your face,

and there's a near-infrared camera then takes a picture of that distortion, captures it, and then reverse engineers the exact profile of your face. In the longer term, facial recognition will be used to unlock your digital identity, which is going to be a tool of control for the agendas that are coming down the pipeline. Elements of that control are already with us. Alexa, good morning.

Good morning. You are never alone in your home, and this is why. All your devices at home and all smart appliances, they are all connected on a wireless network. Many of these devices will have cameras, many will have microphones, and so they are monitoring everything all the time. Your smart appliances are communicating with the smart meter and sending it real-time usage data.

If there's a ring camera also in your home, a mesh network is formed, and all your devices are being tracked within the home, its location, its usage, and all the data is going to Amazon servers. When you leave your home, all modern Vahelps, are connected to the internet. So your automobile is being tracked all the time. When you're going under a string of smart LED poles and smart LED lights on the highway and in the streets of your towns and cities, those form a wireless network and are tracking your vehicle.

They are tracking all the devices on you from smartphones to smart watches when you're walking on the streets. So data is being collected 24-7, continuously on every human being, whenever you are within these. are within these wireless networks. And it's obviously not good for health also because of all the electromagnetic radiation. In the long term, the plan is to pretty much lock up humanity in smart cities, which is kind of a super set of a 15-minute city.

They've sold all the state and local governments and countries that smart cities are about sustainability and the good of the city. But in reality, the language from the UN and WEF and their white papers is all inverted. So, air monitoring is really about limiting mobility and no car ownership. Surveillance control via LED grid is why the smart lighting is death. Water management is about water rationing. Noise pollution is about speed surveillance.

Traffic monitoring is about limiting mobility. And then, of course, energy conservation is all about. rationing heat electricity and gasoline another concept one should be familiar with is called geo fencing and that's think of it as an invisible fence around you where you cannot go beyond a certain point and that will be related to your face recognition digital identity and access control your smart contracts soft brick can turn off your digital currency beyond a certain point from your house our world has been turned into a digital panopticon that

means you can be monitored, analyzed, managed and monetized. Surveillance capitalists are already making billions of dollars selling our information to big corporations, because this kind of detailed knowledge enables them to predict and influence our behaviour.