TRIGGERnometry - Zuby: "This is a Moral Panic"

Episode Date: December 9, 2021

Zuby is an independent rapper, author, podcast host and creative entrepreneur. Get TICKETS to TRIGGERnometry Live with Ayishat Akanbi here: https://leicestersquaretheatre.ticketsolve.com/shows/873621622 Join our exclusive TRIGGERnometry community on Locals! https://triggernometry.locals.com/ OR Support TRIGGERnometry Here: https://www.subscribestar.com/triggernometry https://www.patreon.com/triggerpod Bitcoin: bc1qm6vvhduc6s3rvy8u76sllmrfpynfv94qw8p8d5 Buy Merch Here: https://www.triggerpod.co.uk/shop/​​​ Advertise on TRIGGERnometry: [e-mail] Join the Mailing List: https://www.triggerpod.co.uk/sign-up/​​​ Find TRIGGERnometry on Social Media: https://twitter.com/triggerpod​​​ https://www.facebook.com/triggerpod​​​ https://www.instagram.com/triggerpod​​​ About TRIGGERnometry: Stand-up comedians Konstantin Kisin (@konstantinkisin) and Francis Foster (@francisjfoster) make sense of politics, economics, free speech, AI, drug policy and WW3 with the help of presidential advisors, renowned economists, award-winning journalists, controversial writers, leading scientists and notorious comedians. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What do you think is going on, Zubi? I think we're living through a period of moral panic, mass psychosis, mass formation, and overall confusion. And I think what's particularly strange is that this is happening pretty much on a global scale. Hello, and welcome to Trigonometry. I'm Francis Foster. I'm Constantine Kishin. And this is a show for you if you want honest conversations with fascinating people. Doesn't get any better than who we have for you today. He's an author, rapper and podcast and a friend of the show, Zubi.

Welcome back, Ro. How are you doing? Always good, man. Happy to be back. It's good to have you back. Listen, we seem to get you in. I think the first time we spoke, we were probably one of the first people to do a long-form interview with you. Then the world went crazy last year over the whole BLM thing. We had you and then.

And we've got you back now. Give us some sanity, please. We sort of feel like we have to get you in to give us. You've been commenting on the. covered thing extensively from the very beginning. What do you think is going on, Zubi? I think we're living through a period of moral panic, mass psychosis, mass formation, and overall confusion. And I think what's particularly strange is that this is happening pretty much on a global scale. Actually, over the past 18 months, I've traveled to seven

different countries. I spent a lot of time out in the USA. As you guys saw, I went to 10 different States. Beyond that, I've been to Turkey, Mexico, Portugal, Greece, Romania, and the UK, of course. And it's weird to have, this might be the first time in history, actually, where the entire world has been going through the same thing at the same time, and everybody is interconnected and able to communicate with each other and all of that. If you think of it, when things happen, And normally they're fairly localized to a certain country or region. But with this whole situation, this whole pandemic and the response to the pandemic, which the secondary part to me personally has been far more concerning from the beginning,

it's weird that no matter where you go, whatever city, whatever country, wherever you are, you can say COVID or the pandemic or whatever. And everyone knows exactly what you're talking about. It's the same word in every single language. It's COVID everywhere. And everyone knows what that means. and you can't really, you can escape it actually, but it's virtually everywhere.

And one of the points you said is mass psychosis and all of that. I mean, there is a pandemic, right? There is a disease. There's a disease, yeah. So there's a lot of people who would take issue with that, obviously, and they would say, well, there's a global pandemic. We had to respond to it in every way to save lives. That's the argument that people have been putting forward a lot to me

and to you online, etc. So what do you say to those people? Well, that's based off of the assumption and the conclusion that the measures and response has been a net positive and has saved more lives than it's either directly or indirectly killed, let alone harmed. I mean, how do you measure how do you actually measure lives saved? How do you measure harm caused? How do you measure the damage caused to people's mental and physical health, missed cancer treatments and diagnoses, I guess those can be quantified. Well, just to interrupt you very briefly, there was an article in the telegraph, which will pop up on the screen.

There's three quarters of a million missed cancer, up to, three quarters of a million missed cancer diagnosis in the UK alone. So that's about what, five times as many as the official death count from with COVID. Yeah. Yeah. So that's just, and that's just cancer. What about the damage caused to children? What about the effects of unemployment, inflation, mental health, suicide, depression. There are a lot of factors. There's a lot of stuff that has been going on. So if you're going to talk about any measure, and this is what I was sort of screaming from the beginning, you have to weigh up pros and cons. We're still living in this time where, look, when it comes to lockdowns and mask mandates, And one could even argue vaccination rates to some extent, depending on which countries you're looking at. There is no solid, strong evidence that lockdowns have helped to save lives. It's very fuzzy. If you look at the USA, you look state to state, you've got 50 different countries, which all implemented different lockdown policies.

There's no correlation between the lockdowns and the death rates per million, even if you were to look at a country like, like Sweden within Europe, which didn't do a lockdown and you compare it, say, to the UK, Sweden never had a lockdown, never had a mass mandate throughout this whole thing. Sweden, I believe, has lower death per million number than the UK does. If you look at the entire continent of Africa, 5% vaccination rate, maybe not even up to, 54 countries, poor healthcare systems in general compared to the West, poor infrastructure, a lot many places didn't really do very hard lockdowns many places never had mask mandates the entire continent of africa i believe has approximately according to official stats the same death count as the

uk 66 million versus 1.4 billion i don't know what's the uk vaccination rate 80% plus versus 5% so these are huge things that don't make sense based off the of what one would expect. Now, I'm a very pro-liberty person. Even if lockdowns and mask mandates were somewhat effective, I would not be in favor of them being mandated by the force of the state. However, it's an extra slap in the face when people are promoting these policies. And you can look at it at this.

We've got two years of data from all these different countries. And you can't show me a strong correlation between either lockdowns or mask mandates and hospitalization rates, infection rates, death rates, people always want it to do something. I think it's natural for human beings to think that you can't just do nothing, right? Like you've got, there's a threat here. And the answer cannot be do nothing or keep calm, carry on, right? Which is actually, ironically, that's funny what the UK was going to do to begin with. And then Boris got COVID himself and I think he got spooked and the media was pressuring him.

So he kind of copycatted what was going on. whereas countries like Sweden and I believe a couple others like Albania. They were like, no, we're not going to do this. It doesn't make sense based on previous pandemic protocols. They're looking at the numbers and the science itself. They're like, okay, this is the group that's vulnerable. Okay, this group is not vulnerable. This is the infection fatality rate, so on and so forth.

Looking at the actual data, looking at the science itself and going, okay, the response has to be proportionate and I think disproportionate has been one of the key words that struck me here disproportionate and precedent. I think a lot of the precedents that have been set are extraordinarily dangerous because people also have to remember look we're supposed to live in free countries. One of the best things about the Western world, Western Europe, USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, all of that has been freedom and liberty and the fact that people do have individual rights and that they are free to generally make their own choice. so on and so forth.

I'm glad that you've used the past tense for those statements. Well, look, this is the dream we were all sold, right? So that is, it's been weird to me to see in these countries how loosely and easily people have been willing to just jettison that because they're afraid, right? It's like, no, that still matters. And people like to just go to, well, look, this many people have died if you're in the USA, people will scream, you know, but 700. 100,000 Americans have died. People say 140,000 people in the UK have died 5 million worldwide.

Firstly, those numbers are sketchy. Okay, we don't actually know how many people have died of COVID directly from it. To this day, we actually don't have a clue, which is concerning. I think we should know that by now. There should be some kind of audit. The reason you're saying that is because many of the deaths have been people who had COVID. Yes. But there's no evidence necessarily that they died of COVID. In fact, in this country, again, this has been covered extensively in the media, there was a long period of time that COVID deaths was anybody who died having been diagnosed positive for COVID. So if you got diagnosed positive for COVID without any symptoms, walked out of the hospital, got hit by a bus, you died of COVID.

Yes, deaths within 28 days of a positive test. Right. I think that's still how it's counted. I think at some point it was 90 days within a positive. Now, to show people just how absurd that is, to quantify it, okay? Let's talk about the sacred cow is the vaccine, right? You know, no one's allowed to criticize vaccines, et cetera. If I were, and this is not my position, by the way, and this is not how I would ever count it, but I'm using this to make the example, if somebody who is skeptical or cautious or even full-on anti-vax, which is a very, very small minority of people, and they were trying to tell you that the vaccine is dangerous, and they said, and the way that they counted vaccine deaths or deaths was a death within 28 days of taking a vaccine. what would people say? They'd say that you're being disingenuous, mate. Come on. But that's how they count the COVID deaths. That's the official way. So you could say that that's a maximum. So you could say in the UK at most around 150,000 deaths. What percentage of that is from COVID directly versus with? I don't know.

I think in terms of the comorbidities, you're talking about 90% plus of those deaths involved other comorbidities. That doesn't necessarily mean that that person couldn't have died from COVID, but of course these can include people being diabetic, having various types of cancers, all sorts of different illnesses which are factored in there. And also you have to look at the age as well. So again, if you're talking about, you know, when people are looking at figures and facts, you have to contextualize them. So if you're going to say that, you know, so a lot of people say, Zubi, look, five million people worldwide have died of this disease in the past two years. firstly, two important ways to contextualize that.

Number one question I'd ask is, what was the average age of death? Okay. So in the UK, I believe the average age of death was around 82. It was, yeah. Okay, which is about the average life expectancy. So that does matter. Is this me saying that, you know, old people should die? I want to know it's not any of that, right?

I know lots of elderly people whom I can. about and I love. The point is that human beings do not live forever. Life has 100% mortality rate. Okay. So someone in in normal times, somebody who is 85 years old dying of something is sad. Death is always sad. But it's not a tragedy in the way that a 22 year old or a 12 year old dying is where a huge amount of their life has been cut short and it feels very unfair. if someone lives to honestly 70 plus, you'd say, okay, they've had a decent, a decent fair innings. So we were not immortal prior to 2020, and some people seem to have forgotten that. The next point I'd make on that is just people don't aren't aware of, I don't think people are

generally aware of how many people die every year. In the UK alone, about 1,500 people die every day, every day, 1,500. Okay, so when we were here earlier in the year and they're talking about, We've had 15 COVID deaths today. It's 15 out of 1,500 deaths. That's, again, every death is sad. It's all sad. But the fact that 90% of the focus is on that 15, and people aren't even aware of those other ones. On a global scale, about 60 million people worldwide die every year.

60 million. So if you're going to say that 5 million people have died, let's say all 5 million died of COVID. 5 million. out of maybe 110 to 120 million deaths. And then you look at the way people respond to that versus respond to everything else. And there are other viral diseases out there. Sure, the biggest killers are heart disease and cancer. But there are other things which are also transmissible.

But the way people respond is not the same. It's almost like implicitly people have decided that not only is COVID more important, than every other threat and also more important than civil liberties and more important than freedom and more important than happiness and mental health and livelihoods. Also that if you die from it, somehow that is more tragic and more important than all the other things that somebody could get sick or injured or die from. That seems to be the unwritten and unsaid narrative throughout this thing that's then used to justify everything else, that COVID is the most important thing in every country, right? If we have to sacrifice all these other things for it,

then it's worth it because this is the most important thing. And that conversation was never had. It was just assumed. It's actually more of a philosophical question. And everything sort of is downstream of that idea. The civil liberties thing, I find so interesting. The fact that we've just been able to go, you know what, these don't matter. Let's get rid of the right to protest. Let's get rid of the right to congregate. Let's get rid of the right for people to actually buy alcohol. And to one point, they told the Scots they weren't allowed to buy alcohol. It felt like we were genuinely being trolled. Do you remember when they said that? It did. It did. Do you remember that moment where they said, yeah, if you're going to have sex, wear a mask? Yeah, yeah. Or when you could have,

what was, you had to have a substantial meal, when they reopened pubs temporarily. And you had to have a meal, it could have the Scotch egg gate, wasn't there? Yeah. Where you could have a substantial meal, but once you finish your meal, you can't order alcohol. You can drink alcohol with your meal, but not outside of it because COVID. But people just abandoned the right to protest, and they didn't even give it a second thought. The only moment when everyone woke up was when, after the Sarah Everard murder, you had that women's vigil, and then the police went to break it up.

Oh, yeah. And things got a bit, you know, things got a bit out of hand. that's when people woke up, but before that, people were fine. It's so worrying. It's the power of fear. It's really the power of fear. And something, I've been thinking about this a lot, because to me, what's really interesting about this whole situation, and I think why I talk about it a lot, is the psychology,

really understanding the psychology. Of course, there's virology and there's epidemiology, and as people like to remind me, I'm not a doctor, and I don't have a medical degree. I have the same medical qualifications as Bill Gates, to be honest. And in fact, the same as many of the health ministers. I'd say I have better qualifications than some of them. But I've been thinking a lot about fear and just individual and collective human psychology because this is really what's been at play here.

And I think that the powers that be in the media, in politics, because this whole thing has been heavily politicized in every country, they're really praying upon that. They're praying upon this fear, emotion that human beings have. They're praying upon people's desire for social status. They're praying upon people's desire to fit in and not to be socially ostracized or to be the one who's the odd one out or to be different. And they've really weaponized all of these things. And the most dangerous and despicable thing they're doing, actually, there's a lot of them. I think what they're

doing to children is very despicable. But I think one of the most insidious things that I've seen going on I predicted this happening was this demonization of the unvaccinated, right, turning people against each other. I think people do have a right to be angry and people do have a right to feel frustrated. After all, some people have been locked in their houses, unable to, depending on where you live in the world, unable to leave your region or your country or see your friends or family abroad for two years. So I think people do have a right to be angry and feel frustrated.

But what they've done is they've taken that energy and instead of people being mad at, at the people who have actually inflicted this upon them, they're being trained to blame their neighbors. That is a really good point, man. And this is the point, see, because I'm going to ask you why you think they're doing all of this, but before maybe let me just say this because that is such a good point. And this is what I've been saying throughout. The reason politicians are fueling this is not, in my opinion, some great big conspiracy, is just that they recognize that every person who dies of COVID under their watch is going to get pinned on them. Whereas every person who dies of cancer three years later, because their diagnosis got missed,

isn't. And so what they're doing is they are saying these people who haven't taken the vaccine or who don't wear the mask or whatever, they are the reason all of this happening. And it works brilliantly for politicians because what it means is the blame isn't on them. It gets shifted on to these other people who can be scapegoated as if they're somehow responsible for the pandemic or the lockdowns or the other stuff that the government is doing. However, Zubi, you've detailed all of the terrible things that have happened in the last two years, which I personally entirely agree with what you've said. Why is it happening?

Well, there's this, it depends on how deep someone wants to go on this, really. Okay, if we're going to talk about a government. Okay, so let's talk about some of the big key actors here. Let's talk about pharmaceutical companies. Let's talk about governments and let's talk about the media, say. So what is the role? What's the role of a government? The role of a government is to exert control, power, and authority to some degree. Depending on your personal political views, you may differ on how much power and the scope of that, how big you think that should be.

And so when it comes to politicians, we all know all throughout human history, all across the world, modern times are not particularly unique that these individuals exist to seek power and control and to exert authority over other human beings. Right. I'm not full-blown anarchists, so I'm not saying that that should exist to no degree whatsoever. But that's what they do, right? That's what they're campaigning for, whether you're a mayor or you're a governor or you're even a school monitor or you're let alone a president or a prime minister. That's your job. That's your role. And the more you can get people to invest in that idea, then the more votes you can win and the more you can maintain control and authority. So that is their aim.

And the goal of the government and the goal of politicians isn't necessarily to care about you or to take care of your health or your family's health or to do this or to that or for you to be happy. They care about your votes and they care about your taxes, of course. And so typically if you have a decent politician, they're not going to be, you know, they're not going to fully 100% tyrannical because that will ultimately. result in some type of revolt. So when it comes to government entities, power, control, and authority and seizing that is nothing unique. I mean, let's look at history, let's look around the world, let's look at the current world. People like power. That's just how it is. There's people who are wired that way. Some people are more authoritarian than others. And when you give them power, they typically don't like to let go of it, even if it's a very, very minor amount. So that's the

power and control aspects because that has been so centralized and under these emergency powers, which they can keep rolling over as they've done, they have power to do things that typically during peacetime, they do not. So I think that's something that's just very clear. What's the job of a major multinational corporation? Make money. To make money, right? Nothing wrong with that. I'm a capitalist, right? As long as you're doing it ethically, nothing wrong with that. You have a product, you want to sell your product or your service to people who willingly want to buy it. So, When you're talking Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, Moderna, all of these companies, they want to sell as many of their injections as possible. They want to sell as much as possible.

Of course, they've got these governmental contracts with these different governments around the world. And some people miss this when they talk about the vaccine being free. It's like, no, that's coming out of the taxpayer money. By the way, countries like the UK ordered seven shots per person, per person including children, just for 2021. So the amount of surplus is crazy. And so this has been one of the most profitable time periods for them. I mean, these companies are making money hand over fist through all of this. Now, if this were all based on voluntary activity, I have no problem with that whatsoever.

I'm not against pharmaceuticals or against medicine or whatever. I buy medicine sometimes. I get sick. I need this. Cool. I'm going to go buy that. But when it comes to this being in bed with the government, and then the mandating of you must become a Pfizer or Moderna customer in order to have your freedom or your rights back, whatever.

Like you're moving into the realm of actual fascism, not fascism in the way people mess around with it. And this is being enforced. That's really where you are. You're no longer in any type of realm of capitalism. So the profit motive is super obvious. I mean, and as I said before, it's not enhanced. apparently a bad thing, having a profit motive, but in this type of situation, it can lead to all types of unethical behavior. And I think it also explains whether you're talking about suppression

of other treatments, or you're talking about certain elements of censorship, or you're talking about things like natural immunity not being discussed, or you're talking about trying to force these shots on a population speaking specifically of children, who you know are not and never have been at high risk from this particular virus. Yet there's this insane, again, very distant, very proportionate push for everybody to do this. Now it was announced yesterday they want to get people on a three-month booster campaign. So people are taking four injections a year. Has there ever been a time in history where a healthy person, let alone everybody needs to take four injections a year? Like, that's, just think about that. That's unprecedented. That's normal. But that's a lot of money.

That's a lot of money for these companies. It's a subscription model. I'm an entrepreneur. I know that the best, there's nothing better than a subscription model, right? Join our locals, guys. We'll jabby five times a year. With the truth. Yeah. And then moving to the media companies, again, they're companies, right? Their job is to make money, attention, eyeballs.

We know that fear sells. In the media, they have that saying, if it bleeds, it leads. If you can get people afraid, whether it's a war, it's a virus, it's climate change, whatever. If people are fearful, you get them to click, you get them to buy, you get more advertising revenue and so on. The big orange boogeyman is gone now, so you need another thing to freak people out about.

Once they finish this one, you can already see they're moving back into the climate change hysteria. Now they call it the climate emergency or climate crisis because fear does itself. And if you can keep people in that state. So I think that at the minimum to me, money, power, control, and authority, that explains a lot of things.

Now, you've made the point, and you've used the word fascism, to describe mandating vaccines, which I'm entirely on board with, and I think is consistent with the values of fascism. But why is it that nobody talks about it? Why is it you get people like Ursula van der Leyen, a mainstream, well-known German politician? German defense minister, so that's who you want mandating vaccines, man. And who comes out and basically goes, you must. take the vaccine and we're going to mandate it. Yeah.

Why is that not controversial? It's because people have been led here very slowly. It's happened quickly but slowly at the same time, right? It's been what I call a compliance ladder. This is something you can even learn in sales. It's really a sales technique, which is you start with a very small ask. I like to just think back to, I don't know, February 2020 and just remember what the narrative was at the beginning, what the initial request was.

and it all starts with things that you can't, you know, it's very, very minor. It's an escalation. So it started with, you know, wash your hands. Of course, everybody, 100% of course, right? Wash your hands. And then it was, oh, stand six feet apart. Practice social distancing. Normally, I've noticed that it's three word, notice the three word phrases.

Wash your hands six feet apart. Then it was stay at home. Stay at home is a pretty big ask because that's unprecedented. People have never really been told to do that before. in our lifetimes. But again, it was like, okay. And by then, you know, and it was explained. It granted flattened the curve. We need enough time to get PPE. We need enough time to get ventilators. That's how it was all explained. So everyone's like, you know what? Look, if that's, that's a, that's a reasonable request. That was me. I was fully on. Yeah. And I'm not,

I'm not criticizing anyone for being on board with that. Then as time went on, you started to get some some weird requests, clap for the NHS. That was a weird one. That was very ritualistic. You know, this time every week, like a Sunday service, people come out and, you know, start doing this behavior. I'm not going to get into them firing healthcare workers. But like that was, that was an odd thing. But you, you know, you had a lot of people participating in that. But it's just been step by step by step. And then the goalposts have shifted and shifted and shifted.

Right. People forget. People actually totally forgotten what the purpose of lockdowns was. The purpose of lockdowns initially was never to reduce the total number of deaths. was to spread it out so that the hospitals wouldn't get overwhelmed because they thought, okay, if everyone, if 50% of the population gets infected at the same time, you're going to have tons of excess debts because the hospitals are all going to be blocked and people are going to be dying unnecessarily of all sorts of things.

So it was, okay, we're not going to reduce the total number of infections and deaths, but let's flatten the curve and reduce that. Let's reduce the rates, right? And so now this has been another, there have been so many slides of hand, but the slide of hand now is that lockdown saved lives. It's like, wait, that was never, that was never the purpose of them. That was never actually the purpose of them. So now people repeat that and they've kind of memory hold what that initial flatten the curve thing was all about. And then they've done this on all different things.

So I'm not sure if they specifically said this in the UK, but certainly in the USA, President Biden himself and Rochelle Walinsky, the director of the CDC, both said at the beginning of this year that if you get the vaccine, you will not get COVID and you will not transmit COVID, right? They claimed it was a sterilizing vaccine. If you take the shot, won't do it. Now, what's the narrative on them? Prevents severe deaths, sorry, prevents severe illness and death. That's a really different thing. And this is within less than 12 months. So a lot of people, I mean, there are people to this day, who still think that it stops transmission and it stops infection. And that's what, again, that's what all this narrative is based on.

So there are certain myths or outright lies that this is based on. You know, you had the old asymptomatic transmission thing. Act like you've got it. You know, there's asymptomatic. Again, Lord Fauci himself said that asymptomatic transmission is not a major driver of any pandemic. And now everything, all these policies were from the masking to the social, it's all based on the notion that all of us at all times could be sick. and everyone around you could be sick and could transmit it.

So you've got everybody acting like they're ill when there's no reason to believe that they are. And again, this is unprecedented. This has never been done before. And so they keep moving the goalpost. There have been all these slights of hand. And I think each time it happens and when you have the media support as well and the media is not asking these questions, like I just ask a lot of questions. I have a long memory and I ask a lot of questions. I ask for explanations, but the people in the media, the so-called journalists, are not willing to do that,

either because they're on the payroll, or maybe they're just afraid or whatever it is. And so you don't get these answers when... Sorry, what do you mean on the payroll? Whose payroll? Mad. Pharmaceutical companies, for one. And governments, depending on which organizations we're talking about. I mean, Pfizer, he's in the sponsored by Pfizer, sponsored by Pfizer.

Good morning, America is brought to you by Pfizer. CBS Health Watch, sponsored by Pfizer. Anderson Cooper 360. Brought to you by Pfizer. ABC News Nightline. Brought to you by Pfizer. Making a difference. Brought to you by Pfizer.

CNN Tonight. Brought to you by Pfizer. Early start. Brought to you by Pfizer. Friday night on Aaron Burnett out front. Brought to you by Pfizer. This week with George. Devenopoulos is brought to you by Pfizer.

This letter report brought to you by Pfizer. Today's countdown to the royal wedding is brought to you by Pfizer. And now a CBS Sports Update brought to you by Pfizer. Meet the press, data download. Brought to you by Pfizer. This portion of CBS this morning, sponsored by Pfizer. On How to Find the Hidden Sugars in the American Family Diet, sponsored by Pfizer. In the USA, the big pharma companies run, man, they're in bed with so many people,

Congress. I think they have over. I think, I mean, I'm pretty sure, don't, don't quote me on this, but isn't it like Pfizer alone has something like 100 lobbyists in the U.S. government? Let, I think there's several, there's several hundred big pharma lobbyists within the U.S. government. And then so many stocks are held by these politicians. And then they're sponsoring the media channels, whether you're talking, they've got their money in CNN and in CVS and all, all these companies. They've, they've got their money. They've got their money. they've got their money everywhere. And that's a conflict of interest.

I mean, of course, that's a huge conflict of interest. The executive director of Reuters itself is a, he's a board member at Pfizer, I believe. He's either a board member or one of their sort of top investors and stakeholders. That's a very obvious conflict of interest. same when you've got guys like Fauci and the whole thing it's just this web is this is this entangled web of everyone sort of being behind the same thing and so that's why you're not there's really obvious questions that are not being asked and there's really huge elements of science itself and

immunology itself that are being totally ignored if you want to see a huge one and you know the denial or the unwillingness to talk about natural immunity I don't know why people don't talk about it right but We've both had COVID. Yes. And people are trying to get us to take a vaccine to give us antibodies that we already have. Which are stronger. Which are known to be stronger. Yes.

And exactly. So at this point, hundreds of millions of people have had this virus. Hundreds of millions. Right. It's not March 2020 anymore. Right. It's December 2021. And so the unwillingness to even talk about that or address it.

Seriously to me, I mean, there's a lot of red flags. But that that's just a huge. glaring red flag. And so, look, when I view this thing through the lens of health and safety and protecting people from a virus, there's a lot of things that don't make sense. Whether you're talking the denial of natural immunity or you're talking about why someone wants you to wear a mask to enter three steps into a restaurant just for you to take it off again for an hour, which, by the way, they're doing all over the world without question, right? If you view it through health and safety, it makes no sense. If you view it through, like I said before, money, power and control,

it all makes sense right because if you deny that you if you're trying to sell as many shots as possible you're going to go for the kids you're going to go for people who have already had it you're going to you're going to try to get people on a subscription model you're you're going to do whatever is necessarily there and that's to me where it's deeply unethical you will suppress and not want to talk about other treatments right that's another thing that's been mind blowing the complete suppression about other treatments have you noticed that no one talks about treatment right no one no one even talks about treatment. Like, what do you do? If you do get COVID and you want to recover, what do you do? Right? You have to go search on, you know, murky depths of the internet to find that out.

And that's very, very unethical and it's very concerning. So that's why someone like me looks at this and is like, look, this is not simply about health and say, man, you can go on forever. Have they talked about vitamin D? Have they talked about zinc? Have they talked about losing body fat? Have they talked about going outside and getting sunlight? Well, here's the thing, it's been two years, man. We know this is something that mostly affects people who are overweight. You've had two years in which you could have been telling people lose weight. Here's a government program to help you lose weight.

Here's some money to encourage you to lose weight. If this is about health, why don't we make this about making people healthy? And in fact, they did the opposite. They shut down the gyms. They stopped you from going outside. They closed the gyms. They opened McDonald's and came. FAC and all of that.

They offered you a free burger with fries to go and get vaccinated. It's not even just that it's like they did the opposite. And a scratch card. That got you excited. Yeah, it did, mate. The gambling addict to me. What? Yeah, they've done the opposite.

And these are real low hanging fruit. Again, why would you deny vitamin D? Majority of people who died with COVID were vitamin D deficient, right? Do you remember last year when they were talking about black people being more susceptible? Yeah. And they ran with all the racism narratives. stuff and it's like black people are more likely to be vitamin D deficient. And so in a disease that is particularly rough for people who are vitamin D deficient and you have a segment of

the population who due to the melanin content of their skin is more likely to be vitamin D deficient. Like if you want to talk about actual racism, not talking about that is actual racism. Right. And people are there acting like this is basic stuff. Again, as people like to remind me, I'm not a doctor. So why am I the one who knows this basic information and is willing to put it out there? I was talking about vitamin D back in like April 2020 because I myself just every winter need to supplement with it or I'm more likely to get sick even with colds, et cetera, and I just don't feel very well. And it's and it's cheap, but that's the problem, right?

There's no, there's no money to be made from it. So I think that we have seen profit and the desire for power and for control being put being put over human lives and human well-being, which is why I find it extraordinarily funny, but also kind of tragic when people look at someone like myself or maybe someone like yourselves who are critical of some of the policies due to the downstream repercussions of them. And people accuse us of being people who are selfish or we don't care about lives. It's like, no, like that's not the situation. And the people who have been really trying to ram all these policies, one thing I noticed they have in

comment is that they're hardly affected by them and that they've been getting paid all the way through has anyone in the media has any politician taken a pay cut during all of these lockdowns and all these stay-at-home more than no they've been earning their money as usual they've been flaunting many of the rules themselves they have not they've suffered some of the least from it so it's um the one the thing that i always find worrying is the effect it has had on small businesses the amount of small businesses that have shut as a result of these lockdowns the amount of of businesses that have gone to the wall, which then leaves a gap in the economy, which is going to be filled by what?

Black Rock. Yeah. Huge multinational conglomerates. Yeah, absolutely. Hasn't BlackRock been buying up all these derelict empty properties? I believe, I believe someone might want to verify this. I believe that 70% of restaurants in, is it California or Los Angeles specifically have shut down.

Yeah. Well, see, I want to address something because as we're doing interviews nowadays, because of the world we're living, I have this sort of like low IQ voice filter where I just imagine what a stupid person would hear out of what we're saying. So we should address this. I imagine, because this is how I think about it, and I imagine you'd agree with me, that the reason you're talking about the profit motive, power and all of this is not because you think some people got together in a smoke full room with cigars and went, you know what, guys, we're going to make billions, we're going to create a pandemic and then we're going to take advantage of it. And then

this and that. I just think what happens is when people have incentives, I believe this is how the world works. People respond to incentives. So if you're making a product like a vaccine, the motivation for that is undoubtedly to save lives, in my opinion. They came up with this thing to help people. That's what the pharmaceutical companies did. But now that you've made it and you're saving lives, well, of course you want to save as many lives as possible. And the fact that it seems to be making you more money, well, great, because you're saving, that's a reflection of how many lives you're saving. And that's the sort of calculations people make.

And politicians are the same. You know, we are saving lives, so we need more power, so we can save more lives. They're not sitting there thinking with some kind of evil intent, I don't think. I don't know. You don't know? I think it depends on who you're talking about. I think every individual is different. I think that there are many people who have malicious intent or extremely...

What makes you say that, Zubi? Because that's human beings. There are bad people. Bad people exist. Right. Not everyone. And as a good-natured, you know, decently moral person, it's extraordinarily hard to kind of accept that there are bad people with bad intentions out there. For example, if you are a sane, reasonable, decent person, you cannot get into the mind of a serial killer. You can't do it.

Because it's so far removed. You might be able to say, I don't know, a terrorist or someone who kills for some type of cause, as much as you disagree with it. condemn it, you can understand, you might be able to, with a high degree of empathy, understand their thinking. But someone who's just a psychopathic serial killer, you cannot because they're just bad, right? They're just malicious. And so, and I think that when you move into higher, certain areas, you get a higher percentage of psychopaths, right? I do believe that in politics. I do believe that very high up in certain corporations, et cetera. You're going to get more people who have psychopathic tendencies.

Do I think that's the majority? No, I don't think it's the majority. But I do think that there are people out there who genuinely do not give a crap about human life. They do not care about your well-being. They do not care about your health. They do not care about you in the slightest. They care about power.

They care about money. And we've seen these figures throughout history. They exist. They're real people. Right? We can name them, right? These are people. And they've often reached the highest positions of power.

Right? You know, Hitler was a bad dude. Stalin, bad dude. Mussolini. Bad dude. Mad, no. Yeah. Like, so of course, they're going to guise it as this is some greater good and this is for your health and this is your well-being. You know, Saddam Hussein, right? Like, there are bad people who do exist. And so I think that we have to acknowledge that. And then I think outside of that, most people, it's simply, like you said, it's simply incentives. And I think that it's, I believe that most to, to, on the contrary of what I just said, I do believe that most people have good intentions, right? So I'm not saying that, oh, everyone is trying to, you know, I think most people have good intentions, but people can be misled. People can be led by ideology. People can be led by just social pressures and the desire to conform. People can just be led by threat of punishment, right? Fear. People, people are acting in fear.

right you've got people look i mean i'd love to know again talk about the sacred cow i would be interested to see how many people took these shots because they specifically truly thought it was the best thing for them for their for their health and their well-being versus how many people took it due to pressure and coercion or wanting to visit family abroad or whatever yeah i'd i wouldn't classify that i'd call that i'd call that pressure i'd put that at all of course yeah yeah that's what i mean yeah i'd put that in the latter category it'd be interesting to see. I think, again, I think early on, look, if people didn't want me to be skeptical about us, what would have made sense is if they just, you know, rolled these out and pushed, not mandated it, pushed and promoted it towards people over 60, especially those

with comorbidities, and perhaps under 60 with comorbidities and strongly recommended it and then chilled out. I think that would make a lot of people way less skeptical of the whole thing, Now it's like, whoa, you're gunning at the five-year-olds now? Has a single healthy five-year-old anywhere in the world died of this virus? I'm not aware of a single child, healthy child. I'm not aware of a single otherwise healthy child anywhere in the world who's died of this particular virus. I'm not saying it hasn't happened.

I'm not aware of one. Haven't heard a single story. Not one. Not one. So what are we, what are you doing? Because this is a very age stratified disease. We've known this from very, very early. if you're 75 years old with comorbidities versus you're 10 years old with no

comorbidities to treat it like it's the same is insane this goes with all the measures all the policies to treat it like it's the same is crazy and then also the whole thing of the we know people now we we now know this whether someone's got the vax or not and firstly they can both get COVID secondly they've shown they've got the same viral viral load you can still get it you can you can still spread it to other people so on so this whole notion of doing it to protect others doesn't even make sense, but people just keep repeating it because they hear the word vaccine

and they equate them all. If you're talking about a sterilizing vaccine, there's a strong argument that, of course, okay, if it blocks transmission, then you cannot give it to someone else. So it has that effect. If it doesn't do that, it's so-called leaky vaccine, as scientists call it,

then it protects you. And there's nothing wrong with protecting yourself. Every time I take a medicine, it's a totally selfish decision. I don't take medicines for other people. I take a medicine, because I'm feeling sick. And there's nothing wrong with that, right? There's nothing wrong with,

selfish is one of those words that's kind of funny because it's automatically assumed as negative. But it simply means that you're doing something for yourself and to protect yourself. If I'm riding a bike and I put a helmet on, that's a selfish decision. It's to protect my head. It's not to protect anybody else.

But I think that, you know, people want to go with this sort of hero and communitarian narrative, even when it doesn't really make sense. There's nothing wrong with taking it. If you're unwell, if you're, hey, I'm 70, someone's 70 and they're diabetic and they're a rough shape and COVID is a genuine

threat to them and they're taking the shot to protect them. God bless you. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that and a 1,000% support your right to do it. My only issue with this whole thing has been the coercion, the force, the bullying, the shaming, setting people against each other, all of that. It's unnecessary. It's counterproductive. And there's the other element of it, which is a censoring of freedom of speech, which they do online, Particularly, there are big tech overlords, whereby if you talk about these subjects, prime example, if you talked a year ago that maybe the virus might have been created in a lab in Wuhan and then was leaked accidentally, you would get your content taken down.

Absolutely. And now it's the most credible version of events. I mean, it always was. Yeah. It always was. But this is the issue. And look, I'm just interested in the truth. I don't have an agenda, right?

I don't have an agenda beyond wanting myself and people to be free and be able to live their lives and run their businesses and go to work and, you know, not be forced to do this and that. That's my only agenda, if you even want to call it that. I just want life to be like it was, I think people thought January 2020 was a bad time, but I think we'd happily go back to that. That's literally all that I advocate for. I'm for freedom of choice.

I'm for liberty. I'm for, you know, people just being allowed to have their independence and their civil liberties. And it's that simple for me. Hey, Constantine, do you like Christmas? No. In USSR, we cancelled Christmas and we had Lenin Fest instead. What's that? We celebrated glorious leader and rewrote story of Jesus to make it better.

Really? Yes. In our story, three wise men were killed and gifts men for Jesus redistributed to glorious workers of the Soviet Union. Jesus was put on Gulag for having wrong opinion. As we call it in Russia, happy ending. Right. Well, if you do want to celebrate the festive season, then there's only one way to do it.

Grab yourself a ticket to our final live show of the year at the Leicester Square Theatre on Saturday, December the 11th. Yes, it is discussion with one of our favorite guests, Aisha Akhanbi. She is almost as good philosopher as Vladimir Lenin. Yeah, exactly. Are two previous shows sold out completely? And this one will as well. Grab your ticket now before it's too late.

Click on link below. During interval, there will be special entertainment. I will ride bare with my shot off. I didn't realize we were going for that demographic, mate. Oh, yes, we are. Excellent. Well, you talk about civil liberties, and I initially was very in favor of everything that was being done because I was like, we don't know what's going on.

If the scientists or the doctors are telling us the lockdown is what flattens the curve, I'm happy to go along with that. I wore a mask for a period of the time. But we've got to a point now, and I'm going to preface this with an identity politics point just to soften the blow for people. But my Jewish great-grandfather died on the Eastern Front fighting against fascism, right? And I'm not saying where we are now in Austria and Germany mandating vaccines

is the same as Nazism. I'm not saying it's Auschwitz. I'm not saying any of that. But what I'm saying is some people came together in 1945 and went, you know one thing that we really shouldn't do is force people to take medical procedures that they don't want, right? And we seem to have just very casually just walked across that line in several countries now where it's just like being talked about and as it was fascism, the majority of the public support it. Exactly. But this is the thing. See, something that's been really annoying with this, especially coming from people who, spent the past four years calling

Trump Hitler and everyone who voted for Brexit and Nazi whatever is now saying that oh you're not allowed to compare anything to Nazi Germany or to even Stalinist Russia etc and you know number one I just reject that like if you cannot make comparisons then what's the point of knowing that history if you're not allowed to point out

when there are certain things that are echoing it No one is directly comparing this to the Holocaust itself, as in the extermination of Jewish people. But if you are looking at the Nazi Germany didn't begin with the Holocaust, right? If you're looking at the discrimination and segregation and mistreatment and the use of state and the use of the media to turn people against certain segments of the population, you can absolutely compare it. You can compare it to what happened in Rwanda in 1994. I've heard from friends in Germany in Austria that their media is really, really demonizing people who haven't taken the shot. Like, they're, you know, people are actually making charges of hate speech against actual media channels because they're going that intensely with their rhetoric.

And it's just like, stop. Stop. And not only is what you're, firstly, what you're saying is not, it's not even logically coherent. It doesn't make any logical sense because, again, these are not sterilizing vaccines, right? They had to change the definition of vaccine, in fact, for this to even fit into them. That's why I typically call them jabs or injections. It's not your neighbor who is your enemy or who's spreading. It doesn't make any sense.

You can look at places like Ireland, Gibraltar, Israel, where they've got super high tax rates and they're still getting all these infections and so on. It doesn't make sense. And also, you know, I think people need to, I think people need to really just exhale and chill out. I mean, I think it's been, it's been two years. It's been 600 plus days of fear and propaganda and narrative and media and this and this and just, just hammering people nonstop. And I think that people do, for the most part, want to get out of it. But when you demoralize people and you break their spirit and you make them feel like I will do, you put them in a desperate situation

where it's like, okay, I will do anything even if it's unethical, even if it means breaking up my family or my friendship groups or my relationship with my countrymen, et cetera. If this gets us out of it, let's do it. And again, we've seen this throughout history, right? That's part of, you know, Nazi Germany didn't start in a vacuum. It started post-World War I. Things were very desperate. The economy was, and, you know, someone came with a message. And I imagine, I wasn't around, but I imagine a lot of the Germans didn't like some of the anti-Semitic rhetoric and the stuff like that, but the other stuff they were kind of on board with. So they were like, you know, I'll hold my nose and go with this guy,

even though he seems a little bit weird on this. And then again, over time, the slow. Maybe it was the jays. Yeah, the slow escalation and, you know, all of that frustration and anger can be directed towards this people. And look, I think the point is not to be. I want to be very clear. I'm not trying to be disrespectful to anybody who actually has family members, ancestors who suffer under these. I'm not trying to minimize anything here. I'm simply saying that history doesn't repeat, but it rhymes, it echoes. And human beings have not fundamentally changed over this time period. So humans, and this is a really dark thing, but it's real, people are still capable of all the awful things that have happened in history. human beings are still capable of them. So when we start trending in these negative directions,

I think it's important to call it out, to nip it in the bud, and say, look, guys, no. Segregation bad, right? We've done this before. We've done Jim Crow in America, apartheid in South Africa. There are other examples. We've done this before where we say this group of the population is not allowed to enter here

or does not have the same rights of these people. That's been done before. a lot. It's not a good idea. Ultimately, it ends in violence, it ends in bloodshed. It's not good. And we can totally avoid this. And doing this for a virus with a 99.9% plus survival rate in most of the population, extra silly, right? Extra stupid, right? If we were dealing with some great plague level event, still bad, but it would at least be like, okay, I can really understand why people are so jacked up. You wouldn't need to do it, Zubi. If this was a virus with a 40% survival right, everybody would take any sort of vaccine that was offered. You wouldn't need to do this.

You wouldn't have the problem. The only reason you need the authoritarianism is that a lot of people realize this virus is mostly not dangerous to them. Exactly. And this is the thing two years in, again, I give people a lot of grace, right? So I'm someone who from very early, I saw stuff being weird earlier than most people. But I can clearly remember February and March last year, right? So I can understand the fear and their spot. But as you get, as you get more inputs, you get more information,

you get more data, your position should change. And I think that's happened with a lot of people. There's a lot of people who, you know, were, whoa, okay, at the beginning,

I was really freaked out. But, you know, by summer, I was like, okay, wait, I'm not seeing everybody dying around me.

I'm not seeing bodies in the street. I'm not seeing, you know, I haven't lived through like a super scary, mega deadly pandemic. I mean, but from what I understand of ones in history, it's like,

okay, there's no, You don't need advertising. You don't need PR. You don't need to try to scare people. You know, you actually need to try to calm people down because they're so fearful just from what they're seeing with their own eyes. But for most people, it's like, okay, you've been, we're two years into this and you're,

you can, you know, you can have in your head that this is whatever you've led to believe it in your head. But your eyes are not feeding this information to you, right? You're not really living in reality here. So I think with a lot of people now, they have this kind of schism between what they want to believe. I think this is also why, and I made this point before, this is the first virus in history where people want it to be worse than it is,

which is really interesting. People want it to be worse than it is because that would confirm their worldview and it would validate their behavior for the past two years, right? Because otherwise they just look like a cruise. crazy person. And I think that's why, you know, when maybe one of us makes certain comments, it angers people, or when you give people actual stats, right, of survivability, or it not being a big threat to children, and so on, people actually get angry because you are causing this schism in their brain where they are acting as if they're living through the black death.

And then you're like, man, you know, for most people, it's kind of like a flu. There is one, we interviewed a doctor called Dr. John Wyatt, who made the point that we don't actually know the long-term effects of the virus. So that's the one place where you could say, maybe we should try and reduce transmission as much as possible because we don't know the long-term effects. Here's my thing, man. Everyone's going to get it. Almost everyone's going to get it. And I assume this from the very beginning. It's a coronavirus. It's like trying to live your entire life, never getting a colder flu. You can't do it. It just doesn't. work. It's always mutating. There's so many vectors, both human and animal vectors, and it's just there. So you've had COVID? Yep. You've had COVID? I've had COVID. It's only been two years. We've all three. All three of us have already, I've already had it, right? So it's going to get to

most people. That's just the reality of it. And so that's why I think with what they're doing in places like Australia and New Zealand is particularly near-sighted because right now, sure, maybe their COVID death numbers might look good now, but does anyone there have natural immunity? Right? Well, I guess their argument is if they can keep any outsiders out long enough, they can vaccinate everybody,

and then everybody's got some immunity against COVID, and that way you reduce the deaths from COVID. Maybe. You reduce the deaths from COVID. Maybe. Maybe. That would depend greatly on the... efficacy of the vaccines, especially with more and more variants coming out, etc. But again,

it comes back to our point of like, okay, well, what are, what about all the other damage caused by it, right? So, so, so that's the thing. And you know, it's a balance. And again, throughout all of this thing, one thing that I've been very in favor of is simply discussion, right? The amount of doctors and scientists that have been silenced or censored or pushed to the side or just everyday people, all of this, this conversation we're having. Some of these questions were asking, I don't know the answer to everything. I'm just asking, I'm asking a lot of questions and coming up with ideas and someone might say, oh, well, what about this? What about that? This should have just been how it was all the way through from the beginning. Because, again, you have to remember

the models that they started. How many deaths did they predict in the UK? Was it about? Half a million. If nothing was done. If no restrictions were put in, half a million was going to die. Yeah, half a million to a million. U.S., they predicted three to four million. Okay. That was off. Right? That was off. And, you know, someone might say, oh, well, it's because we did the measures.

You don't know, it's always hard to, you know, we don't really have the counterfactual. I mean, I personally would argue the vaccines have definitely reduced a number of people who died. I'm, I think, I'm not against, I'm not against any vaccination, right? I think having as many options as possible, vaccinations, various types of treatments, et cetera, it should all be, it should all be available. I don't have the arrogance to assume that I know the best thing for absolutely everyone, or that I know everyone's medical history and all these details about them. Again, I'm 35 years old. I'm in great shape.

I've already had COVID. I've got strong natural, naturally acquired immunity. My position is not the same as an 80-year-old who hasn't had COVID and perhaps has one or two comorbidities. And it's not the same as a 10-year-old child who's just perfectly healthy and bouncing around and happy. So to treat all of these people with the one size fits all is crazy. I mean, you know, I like, I like peanut butter. But if I were to mandate peanut butter, that's genocide. Look at his face. He hates it. Okay. Yeah. But it won't kill you.

No, but I hate it. But people would kill you if they can eat it. Okay. But there are, there are millions of people that you can, could be killed by a couple of peanuts or peanut. So that's just an example of, you know, the human body is complicated, man. Penicillin has saved tons of lives. There's people you can kill with penicillin. Absolutely. Right? All different people respond differently to different medicines, different foods.

We've known this forever. That's nothing controversial. So that's again why when it comes to things like mandates, I'm like, that's psychotic, right? You're going to kill some people. You are. If you take a billion people and you mandate anything. Any medical injury, you are going to kill some people. And that is why it must always remain a choice, right?

That's why it must always remain a choice. I think that there are segments of the population and demographics where totally, totally makes sense for them. It's reasonable. Even if I don't think it makes sense for them or whatever, if you're an adult, hey, that's your choice. And then you assume the risk on both sides, right? There is a risk on both sides. You assume it. And that equation is not the same for everybody.

My personal view, I think that giving these injections to children is psychotic. I think it's reckless, right? Because the risk of the disease is close to zero in terms of severe disease, let alone death. It's close to zero. We know that. We've got data from every country in the world for two years. We know that. The effect of the jabs on them, we do not know.

We do not know. They're still in trial even for healthy adults up until 2022, 2020. But for kids, we simply do not know. So for me, in my personal opinion, that doesn't now make sense. Again, they do not block the transmission. So you can't even make the argument that, okay, give it to kids to protect. You shouldn't be using kids to protect adults anyway. Well, exactly.

We'll have to wrap up. But the very basic point you've made is there's risks to everything. And if you're mandating vaccines for children, statistically speaking, that is going to have a negative impact. And I'm not going to go into the details of it for YouTube purposes, but it's going to have a negative impact on some of those kids. Statistically speaking, that's a fact. If you mandated peanut butter for all the children in the world, some of them would die. What do you think about it?

I'm not going to get into the details of it, but that's a fact, right? So it's that philosophical question that we always talk about. If you could save a million people by killing one innocent child, would you? That's the conversation, right? I don't think that's the conversation. Don't you? No. No, I think that's a false analogy.

Why? Because you're talking about a mandate. But that's exactly what I'm saying. But what I, yeah, yeah, it is. The mandate will kill someone. No, but what I'm saying is that without the mandate, yeah. Look, everyone who wanted the jab took it without a mandate.

Yeah. Fact. Yeah. Right. Everyone who wanted it took it beyond any mandate or bizarre incentives or whatever. And that's it. That should be the finish line. Everyone who wants it has had a chance to get it.

Yeah. What I'm saying is I'm agreeing with you. I think we're mishearing each other is if you mandate a vaccine for children or if you mandate peanut butter for children, if you mandate whatever for children, in order to protect other people because, as you say, we know children are not vulnerable to the virus. Gotcha, gotcha, right?

If you are doing that, you are knowingly saying we are going to hurt some kids in order to protect some other people. To me, that's immoral. Yeah. That's immoral. Agreed. And also it's not correct in this case. Right.

Because it's not a sterilizing vaccine. Yeah. Before we do, our last question, I'm going to ask you this question. I know what the answer is going to be, but I want to ask you anyway, Zubi. Do you think we're going to go back to, and I hate this term, inverted commas, the old normal? Yes, but I think it depends on the people. I think this ends when people decide it does. Both on an individual and a societal level, it ends when you end it.

And do you think we're going to end it? It depends on the country. Okay. Some places never started. Some places I don't have much hope for. Okay, so let's see. What places do you have hope for, and which places do you have? Do I hope for?

I have hope for virtually every Republican-led state in the USA. I have hope for much of Africa. I have hope for much of South America. Europe has certain pockets, which I have hope for, but overall, many parts of Western Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, I think people are, I think too many people are welcoming in the new regime. I think that if you are a liberty-minded person, you should be doing your best to get out of those countries. That's my personal view. It's actually been my view with the past year. Zubi, we've got last question for you as always, which is what's the one

thing no one's talking about there is it should be. Oh, yeah. I think I went real controversial on the one. So funnily enough, I think it's health. I think actual health. I'm not just talking about masks and jabs. I mean actual health. I think it's been a catastrophe that this time period has not been used to really talk about the obesity epidemic and all of the health problems which have merely been magnified by the COVID situation. I think this would have been the perfect time to really sound this message, especially in countries like the UK and USA, where obesity rates have just been skyrocketing. I think that the lack of conversation about nutrition, about exercise, lifestyle changes, generally living a healthy life and looking after

your own body and taking that individual personal responsibility, I think that's really been lacking. I think it's been lacking for several decades. And yeah, this would have been the perfect opportunity. So I think not enough, as much as people are talking about health, not enough people are truly talking about the full scope of health. All right, Zuba, we're going to ask you questions from our local supporters, which are separate. But for now, thanks so much for coming on. Where can people find you online? Sure. I'm on all social media at Zubi Music. That is Zubi-Y-Musk. I'm on Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Mines.com. And you can find me at Zubimusic.com, where I've got links to my podcast, my merchandise, everything else.

All right, man. Thanks for coming back on the show. Really appreciate it. And thank you so much for watching and listening. We will see you very soon with another brilliant episode like this one or a show. All of them go out at 7pm UK time. And if you like your Trigonometry on the Go, it's also available as a podcast. Take care and see you soon, guys. We hope you've enjoyed this incredible interview.

Remember to subscribe and hit the bell button so that you never miss another fantastic episode. And if you believe that the work we do here at Trigonometry is important, support us by joining our locals community using the link below. Okay, so this is from Res and Pears. Why do Nigerians seldom, very rarely, have a victim chip on the shoulder and often refer to themselves as the Americans of Africa? Wow, I'm not familiar with the Americans of Africa part. I'm not familiar with that term. In terms of absence of victim mindset, I think number of... for one, I don't think there's any reason why we should specifically.

And I mean that in the truest sense, as in Nigerians are not a group of people who specifically in history have been targeted or discriminated against or segregated, say in the way the black Americans absolutely were, right? Just historical fact. I think that's a factor. And then I think beyond that, I think the religiore. strong family ties, lots of focus around responsibility and education, those things just being present in the culture and pretty well embedded from young people. I think that's the second main

factor. That makes sense. And we'll go one more. This is from Rob and Mike Hawke who say, what was the one thing or what were the incidents that made you think, no, that's not right and speak out as much as you do, which I love, by the way, he says, or she says? Just broadly, generally speaking? I think about this particular issue, about the COVID thing. Okay. I think I saw from early. I think it was the fact, it was how unprecedented everything was, right?

I mean, diseases are not new, viruses are not new. We've even had some scares in our lifetime. mad cow disease, bird flu, swine flu, Ebola, Zika virus. There have been things that have SARS. HIV AIDS? Yes. I'm a little bit young for that, but I remember it vaguely. So, but what was different was the response.

We'd never had the masking policies and everyone stay at home and everyone, like, that to me was just set off alarm bells at the very beginning. And so I also saw down the line. I practice a lot of second, third, fourth order thinking. So I realized the way, if people give up these freedoms, then it's really hard to get freedom back if you give it up. And I'm just aware of that. So I thought from early, we have to be very careful that the response is not more deadly and harmful than the actual threat. So I think that's why from very early on, I could just see.

the potential catastrophe, just like I think some people thought, okay, if this virus truly does have a 4% mortality rate like they were suggesting in the beginning, then you're looking downstream and thinking, whoa, this is the catastrophe that could result. Thank God it was much lower than that. And I believe that was the case from early. So I thought, wait, this overreaction is potentially going to cause more damage. So that's why I started speaking out and kind of warning people. I guess of just where this could lead if people, you know, get scared out of their widths rather than into their wits.