"Nine-One-One" w/ Joe Atwill: Ep. 493

It's a zero sum game. Secularism is a lie. Every system is ultimately based on unprovable assertions, unprovable facts, a reality claim for which there is no scientific explanation. Everything ultimately is based on faith. That's why this is ultimately a religious conflict. Our enemies understand this. They understand the importance of narrative. It's why they're always attacking our figures.

Why they burn Roberty, Lee and Effigy quite literally, because he is a symbol of a previous order, a different god, a different instantiation of the same countries, previous civic religion, ruling order, if you will, Same reason they're going after Jefferson, same reason they're going after all the greats of European history, because they understand that those figures are more than simply

men in history, they are also symbols. They're equally as strident when it comes to defending their own articles of faith. For instance, you've no doubt seen the number of guys thrown in jail for doing burnouts on rainbow crosswalks. It's not really about public disorder, it's about blasphemy. And then if you look at the terms they throw at us, racist, holocaust denier, homophobe, what these really are or other ways to say heretic, you have blasphemed my God, and I

will burn you at the stake. Those terms, those invectives are particularly interesting to me because sure they function in that context as an outgroup marker, but also as a thought terminating device. They end any inquiry, Oh I don't want to know any more about that, because the only people who do, the only people who have research, the only people who dissent are heretics. It's very easy to point out the system of thought control in the medieval

Catholic Church, for example. Voltaire made sort of a career out of this. But it's very difficult when it comes to progressive politics. Not difficult for us, but difficult for them. They're very uncomfortable with it because they have this internal self conception as the eternal rebel, as the guy standing up to authority, speaking truth to power. But just because they're uncomfortable with it doesn't mean that they will stop wielding power.

Once you have thrown a spear at the Odin tree and you have it been struck, dumb, struck down, well, doubt begins to build. And I think that that is the moment we find ourselves in the sacred figures of the progressive state religion are losing their luster, some because they've fallen out of fashion. MLK, for example, it's relatively safe to criticize him because the only people who still cared about him were by and large American conservatives. We've

seen something similar happen to George Floyd. Peace be upon him, a sort of religious figure of yester year. But the real vitriol is reserved for those who attack the real foundations of the empire, the narrative around World War Two. Just look at what happened to my friend Daryl Cooper, look at what happened to Tucker Carlson, merely through association with Daryl Cooper. They were cast out, they were burnt at the stake socially, if not thankfully literally. And our

enemies understand that they're in a precarious position. It's why they are frantically trying to regain narrative control. You may remember after twenty sixteen, when they sort of realized that there was something outside of their ideological control, we saw the rise of the narrative around fake news, misinformation, disinformation, and of course conspiracy theories. And while sure there are lies, there are falsehoods spread on social media as well as

through traditional media for very much aware of that. What this really is is another way to terminate thought, to end the discussion, to say you were a heretic. Go away. But when no one believes in that god anymore, of course it doesn't work. Now they still have official legal, legislative power. They can still ruin your life, deep bank, you send the ADL after you to sue you into oblivion. But they're slipping. They don't have the same extreme level

of control they until very recently enjoy it. And this is why alternative discussions on World War II, nine to eleven, any civil rights era are increasing in popularity because the veil has been pulled back. It's an apocalypse, if you will, that the veil has been pulled away. Everything has been made known. Okay, it's not perfect yet, it's not done. But the very fact that I can have the conversations I am having on YouTube and my friends and family

haven't totally cast me out as a heretic. Indicates that culture is shifting slowly. And of course we understand politics does not come from the bottom up, but it presents a very real problem for them for their narrative control. It's a very interesting moment and part of the reason why I decided to become a professional. I decided to cast myze, cast my lot in right, sort of voluntarily

make myself unemployable by associating my face right. But I think it's a real moment for optimism because we understand change happens slowly and then all at once. That growth from zero to ten percent is gradual, but ten to ninety happens much much faster. And of course we're not evangelicals about this. We're not looking for the magical fifty plus one. We are looking for a few capable, meant decision makers, the guys that actually wield power. And look,

we do not have that. We certainly don't have that yet. But it's better than it's ever been. Our ideas have promulgated, they are continuing to promulgate because they explain reality. Our God, the new God. And I'm saying this small g this is not sacrilege, can actually bring the ring. The system of values has explanatory power and information advantage. So in my mind they're kind of doomed here. Ultimately now they

can do a lot of damage between now and then. Fundamentally, they are fighting against the basic rules of the universe. If you're three hundred pounds eight percent body fat, you can probably hold a beach ball under the water a lot longer than I can, but eventually it floats to the surface, it comes back up. Entropy, at least in

that way, wins out over time. And this process of cultural disintegration, while certainly creating very many real problems, I'm not going to deny that has also atrophied their ability for social control. Look at medicine, look at politics, look at entertainment. The central nodes occupy nowhere near the position of prominence that they used to. And look, there are psyops. There are different attempts to control this. But I wonder if the horse has already bolted the gate is wide open.

It's a provocative thought that and it's why I keep going back to these historical figures, why I'm talking about the Crusades, Why I'm talking about Vietnam, why I'm talking about World War Two. I'm talking about all of these sacred miracles right the moment when the normal order was suspended so that something special could happen. Power could make

itself felt because they depend on that ideological cohesion. And so you and I, as reactionaries of some stripe, as traditionalists with a capital T, occupy a very weird position. We are at once building and destroying the left and the right hand, if you will. It's a very bizarre situation we find ourselves in. But simply there is nothing else to do. We must both be subversive and also creative. It's an venture at the very least, a lot of space for genuine agency to do many things at once.

It's exciting. Part of again, why I am optimistic. It's about further ado. Let's get into the episode. I think it's a fun one, a little bit different from what I normally cover. You guys know where to find me Apple, Spotify, YouTube. If you want the episodes early in ed free, you have to throw me a few bucks. I think it's worth it. It's probably the best deal on Patreon right now. We're substacked too. You can also check out our sponsor

Axios Remote Fitness and Coaching. Oh and by the way, I just garbled the last part of this, you know, or I say keep your head up the I can't last right, and that just came out all wrong. Sorry, it's multiple times a day sometimes you goof so I said it there, So when I don't say it later, just remember you already got one. Anyway, here's Joe Awell. All right, Joe Apwell, welcome to Jay Burdens Show.

become a part of internet culture. And from there I became more interested in doing discussions on you know, the current political situation and have a show with Tim Kelly, which you've acted, well, you've been on with Tim, so you're familiar with that. I'm a you know, someone who does not believe in the sort of current presentation of history. I mean, I really am quite the skeptic. I don't believe in Jesus as a historical person. This is well

known from my books. I don't believe in Shakespeare. If you've read my other works, I have skepticism there. And then, you know, I really sort of changed politically when after nine one one, I hadn't you know, I hadn't really studied the conspiratorial world in terms of you know, current politics until then. And you know, I spent quite a

bit of time studying the collapse at Building seven. I worked with friends of mine who are engineers, and I just came to the conclusion that it's just completely clear that this was you know, controlled demolition, and therefore the entire understanding we have of you know, the media and our political system was false. And I started studying it

at that point. And you know, I should have been more skeptical based on my work in Caesar's Messiah, because I had I had seen how historical narrative could be used for social control. I mean, Christianity, you know, on its face is so benign and Jesus seems so you know, so beneficial to mankind. But then you see how the feudal system is generated, you know, out of the trust or partially out of the trust that the population gives to the leaders of the religion, and so the next thing,

you know, you're in a slave state. So because of that, I should have been more skeptical. But following my understanding of you know, of September eleventh, two thousand and one, I became just you know, more focused on how we are controlled and who controls us. And it's funny. I write sometimes for the UNS Review, which I regard as a you know, place where there's good intellectual freedom, and I'll have an article coming out within two weeks on

the meaning of September eleventh. It's strange. It's almost full circle from the beginning of the sort of introduction into the conspiratorial world, where you know, I'm sort of explaining the symbolism of it which has not really been understood in my opinion. So it's a it's just a way.

The article is just a way to help people understand our world and the kind of analytic approach we need to take toward it, particularly towards the historical you know, events that were given that are are meant to model us, to shape us. I mean, like the Holocaust, like nine to one one, or you know, the the nature of the you know, the sort of political heroes. I mean, these things I think in general are you know, have

our faults and they are designed for social control. And so the public in general needs to be you know, I would use the expression more socratic. We need to be more based in logic and scrutinize every single piece of you know, historical claim that comes our way. We just can't at this point, we really can't accept anything on face value. The media, mainstream, dominant media is under the control of the oligarchs, and the history that they

give us is literally completely corrupt. I mean, it's just tip to stern designed to produce the inability to think. So the response at this point, particularly with more and more power going to the oligarks in terms of media control. I mean, you look at AI, you look at the iPhone, for example. The way that the amount of time they have access to our minds is just dramatically increase in the tools that they have to you know, shape ideas

is more and more effective. So for us to maintain democracy in any reasonable degree, we have to develop our own skills. We have to become better citizens, which is to say, we have to be more skeptical and more we have to be able to use logic and reasoning in a more powerful way.

pushed out kind of socially signaled against. And for many people who are ten to fifteen years older than me, the moment they left the reservation was nine to eleven. It was a lie too great to count it. And look, in my mind, I am an older member of Generation Z. When people talk about, okay, what's the dividing line, you know XYZ, you know date of birth, and sure, you know that's helpful, but really, in my mind is it Can you remember nine to eleven or note? Is that

something that entered into your conscious mind. I was alive for it, but I was so young. I was, you know, in diapers at the time. It didn't make an effect. And that kind of dramatic before or after, right that both the from what I've heard, the sort of I guess you could say mass panic, right that happened afterwards, but also the same sort of top down narrative control we saw during the pandemic, which is for my generation, the moment where many left the reservation. But you see

this pattern again and again and again. Of some sort of crisis, a moral consensus forms around that, or at least there's an attempt to form a moral consensus, to push political ideas to get people alongside with a change to their life. And so I'm curious, as someone who lived through it, what was that moment of crisis, like what was being pushed sort of behind the scenes, not necessarily the yellow ribbons and you know, the kind of like obvious kind of uh you know, talk radio angle.

how I looked at it. I didn't really uh even become aware of, you know, sort of the truth or music movement. Uh for several years. I was just you know, I was Besides, I had been doing h uh, you know, religious and Shakespearean textual criticism, and so nine to eleven.

You know, the idea of of like studying something that occurred in real life when I was doing so much textual historical document analysis was it was hard for me to switch gears and uh and oddly, you know, I I did not understand nine one one in in a symbolic sense. And this really hasn't happened unfortunately whatsoever until until uh, you know, until even even until this point, which is one reason I wrote the art this article be coming out. I'll mention, you know, the analysis and

stopped me if it becomes, you know, too abstract. But what what people, what I did not understand and what was just lost completely is that nine one one was a representation of Tisha above, which is a the Jewish day of mourning, which celebrates the commemorates the destruction of the temple. And this is uh, you know, the gives

you a complete understanding of the of the event. And I don't think people could really understand it if they don't understand how how the symbolism for the day was created. The Jewish Temple had been destroyed on two occasions, and it was on the basically the same day both times, you know, once by the Babylonians and in five eighty six BC, and then the Romans destroyed it in seventy,

you know, five hundred years later. But according to the historian Josephas, that occurred on the same day when the Romans destroyed it. Now, this is obviously falsification of history. I mean, it's just so improbable. And in fact, Josephus even mentions that it wasn't accidental, it was something that God had brought about to punish the Jews for the rebellion against Rome. So you can see that history is

being used here as propaganda. Nine to one one occurred on two thousand and one because the basically the Judeo Masonic oligarchs that had organized the event were trying to reverse the prophecies are fulfilled the prophecy in a way that they wanted to of revelation. Revelation mentions these two one thousand year periods, so that the date of you know,

two thousand and one was selected. And then, of course, if they're going to deliver an eye for an eye, what really motivates these oligarchs was the destruction of the temple. That was that it's the centerpiece of the Judeo Masonic sort of, you know, the things that they most want to achieve in the future would be to reverse the

defeat that they experienced in the first century. So they chose that year two thousand and one, and then they put the date as of the September eleventh, because it represents nine one one, the tish Abov who occurs on the on nine one one, even though of course in the Hebrew calendar it's reversed, but in other terms of month and day, but nine one one is the way you can represent it. And that's why nine one one

was chosen for the date. You know, the World Trade Center they were named that because they were again they're trying to reverse the idea of revelations, you know, the destruction of world trade, which is a concept in as revelation,

you know, reveals this prophetic future. And and then just to show how misunderstood the whole day was, you have the a newscaster talking about the collapse of the Solomon Building actually uses the expression the Solomon Building collapse but nine one But the Solomon Building, you know, is literally erect and back of her while she's making the statement.

So the point is is that this is just kind of a witticism of you know, that the Solomon Buildings collapse, that the that the date is really you know, referring to, and the event is really relating to, was the original collapse of the Solomon Building, which was back two thousand years ago. This is just how they how they you know, kind of organize their their symbolism. And I know this is I have a feeling that some people will have

a hard time following my logic here. You have to you know, sort of see it in its totality to really make sense of it, I suppose. But this is just how they they shape our world. Nine one one was a symbolic event. It was basically to usher in it would could be called a Judeo Masonic period of history.

The two thousand years of Christian history were now ending, and the they were having, you know, they were linking to the events that brought about the Christian era with their symbolism nine one one, the collapse of the Solomon Building. And you know, bear in mind that George Bush Senior, eleven years to the day, had actually talked about this and this is you know, they'd like to this something

that they enjoyed doing. George H. W. Bush on September eleventh, nineteen ninety he gave his family speech, which I don't think people have really understood. But what he said was is that you know, we stand on this extraordinary moment with a new world order will emerge and the rule of law will supplant the rule of the jungle. Now this is the rule of law he's talking about, is the you know, the Noahide law, and in the rule of the jungle is, in his opinion, sort of the

Christian history. And there israel malevolence in what he's saying, in the sense that he certainly knows that there's going to be mass slaughter on the on the day that he's envisioning with his speech, you know, his New World Order speech on September eleventh, and these things. When you know, Jay, Here's the thing is that any one of these these events and these assertions can be seen as circumstantial. It's

easy to think of it argue it that way. The problem is you need to look at all of these things as a and when you look at you know, the George HW's New World Order speech on September eleventh, and then the more or less obvious Temple in Solomon

building symbolism in two thousand and one. It is just not really clear minded to not see that they are all related and that this is basically regarding a new world order that they are heralding with the with the destruction of the World Trade Center, I mean, even Building seven, you know, the other name for the final building. I mean this is because seven is the number that this

group uses for the conclusion. It's all, you know, like the world was created in seven days in the Torah, the different uses of the number of seven for conclusion. I mean, this is why it was the last building brought down. The whole thing was just this grotesque orchestrated symbolic carnage that pleases these individuals, but obviously the rest of us must suffer with. And you know, whereas at one point people could say, well, how would anyone be

so evil? Why how could they possibly do this? But now with you know, when we have like the overt Gaza genocide, and particularly with the Epstein files, where people can actually see the sort of complete absence of any you know, kind of humanity. I mean, these people think that they are gods, they can do whatever they please,

there's no moral restraint on them whatsoever. So you know, when I started, you know, kind of making claims that these things were occurring like twenty years ago, I started to uncover them. You know, there was a lot of office obviously, you know, it makes sense that people would not see this as plausible. But now, you know, particularly with the Epstein files, I mean, you can look inside them and you can just see who who's actually involved in what they're sort of moral restraints or lack of

them they are. And so when we come to September eleventh, I think that you know, it isn't enough to think, well, it's sort of an inside job. I mean, that doesn't really take you anywhere. You need to put the time

in to really understand the event. And I'm glad I can bring out this article on the symbolism because I think that'll help people start to use it and with the actual with the analytics strength that understanding the event has, so you can move forward and then start to see things like well, you know, the Gaza genocide and what's

revealed in the Epstein files are very logical. They are something that we can and anticipate and in fact we can imagine these things will be more common and get even worse as we go forward if we don't stop them.

people wavering. They don't necessarily buy, at least initially, the story that there will oftentimes be a limited hangout, a deliberately stupid version of the story, amplified seemingly in a deliberate ploy to say, oh, if you don't believe the government line, you must believe this clearly pants on hand

retarded truther version of it. Is that something you've noticed as well, that there seems to be a desire to create a tar baby sort of buy association with anyone who doesn't follow the government line.

It's important to them. Unfortunately it's false, just is flatly incorrect, and so something like nine to one one has to be put into a particular sort of format for them to bring it into their mind and accept it, because to really accept the totality of the event and have an honest understanding of what this means, it's just too

great of a sort of psychological movement. Because if you know, if nine to one one was basically an inside job, which is the expression that was used, you know, when it was first criticized, Well, that means that the media is an inside job, right. I mean you couldn't put something on like this without having control over the media. And it means that the government is an inside job, because you couldn't do this if you didn't have control

over you know, the whole political system. Well, that means that the world that if you accept those things that the media is controlled in false and that the government is also controlled in false, well that means your understanding of reality is false, and so it's just too great of a movement at one time. Someone cannot go from believing in sort of the American you know, historical beneficial role to seeing nine one one for what it was

in one moment. It's just it's just too great a leave and so there has to be this way station. There has to be you know sort of well maybe it was done because of you know, there was there. They wanted to create a distraction from money being stolen, you know, or just whatever explanation they want to give.

So this is what just as you say that there is always this sort of will when when you come to these moments, you know, where you really see the historical narrative, some major part of it is being fault. It's just not something that people can accept whole cloth. So they're going to have a way station. And that's why there which is which is fine. I mean, there's

nothing wrong with that. That's actually some movement. It's it's a hard thing, and it's one of the reasons why, you know, it's so important now that you and people like you are putting on these kinds of podcasts because these are the ways it's having discussions like the ones that you have that enable people to sort of have the kind of intellectual space to be able to really make movement, make some moat, you know, take some new analytic steps to really understanding the world as it is,

because they that it's when they hear all so many people discussing it openly, all of the different ways that you know, our historical, historical narrative can be criticized and to see how strong the analysis actually is, that they can sort of get the psychological capacity to move forward themselves. You know, a good example of this is the Holocaust, which was you know, so powerful and just so impossible to to critique objectively because of fear of this, you know,

charge of Holocaust denial, anti semitism. But now if you look at the statistics concerning it, you'll see that the boomer my generation still to a large extent, cannot, you know, criticize the the the events that make up the Holocaust subjectively.

But the younger generation, because they've been they've been through the process so many times of listening to shows like yours that they can, you know, consider it objectively, and they're the event is becoming less and less powerful in terms of social control and more and more, you know, the subject of skepticism. So this is this is why you know, when you see that way station, it isn't

you know, you shouldn't be critical of these people. You should have recognize the psychological issue that they're dealing with as they move toward, you know, more clear understanding of something like nine to one one, and then recognize the power that all of the podcaster has have in a general sense, it's just to be able to talk about these things honestly and openly over and over again. That enables people to start moving into a more powerful analytic position.

And there are dozens, if not hundreds of these despairing posts of people saying, I can't believe the kids these days. I tried to talk about XYZ historical event, and the kids all started laughing at me. A famous one where a teacher says at a conversation with a seven year old and he was shocked to learn that nine to eleven was real. He thought it was a joke, and so, okay, that's stupid. You know, that's a kid who's not even out of elementary school. That's not necessarily going to change

the world. But it shows that that event has moved from being sacred sort of an article of faith that you can't touch. It's like the Holy of Holies to history, Joe, would be absurd if you and I were sitting down at a bar and I said, oh, yeah, you know, hr at work discovered my opinion on the War of the Roses, and I got fired, Right, it wouldn't make any sense. That's fully and totally within the realm of the academic And I think that we're watching that happen

to nine to eleven and also to the Holocaust. It's moving out of the sort of civic state religion into being just normal history. And this is something that's happened a number of times. One of my favorite authors, Thomas Carlyle, he did this for Cromwell somewhat understandably after the restoration. Cromwell was basically Satan Hitler and Genghis Khan rapped together. You can sort of understand why it was something that

you couldn't talk about. Carlisle writes a book where he has sort of a biographical sketch of Cromwell and he returns to history, he becomes less than this sort of like homunculous social monster of all evil wrap together. And I think a big part of this, and this is both a pro and a con depending on how you look at it, is that American culture is completely and totally fracturing the era of one unified pop culture where everyone is tuned into you know, even something like MTV

is gone. Some of that's ethnic, you know, there are fewer and fewer Americans per se. But that has also enabled a very very quick erosion of these social narratives of control because people aren't unified or congregated around certain media figures. If you see what I'm getting at there.

hominine power against analysis. Right, you you bring up say you're just as an example, say you're you're critical of the amount of political power a small minority of Americans who are Jewish have in our Congress right recent Massy defeat, you know, the amount of money that AIPAC put against him. So if you bring this up as an issue that there is a kind of religious or ethnic component to you know, this this power, then the response is, well,

that's anti semitism. And so if the power of the phrase is sufficient, it stops the analysis and the process you're describing will be successful or is moving toward, you know, opening up the process when instead of succumbing immediately just automatically to you know, the humiliation of being called an anti semi the person who's making you know, this concern about the lack of the fair democratic process to have

such a small group with so much political power. If that person says, well, you know, let's continue to discussion, because you're saying that I am having this position because there is a mental problem, there's a racism. You know that I am confused, and my thinking is weak because I am being affected by this emotional problem that I have, this race, this hatred of Jews, okay, which which is

anti semitism. But there are now the the the power cultural power of the expression is diminished enough that an individual very often will go, you know, I don't think

I'm crazy. I want to continue to discussion. I'd like to I want to have more explanation of is this fair in terms of democracy or the kind of money that was spent to defeat Massey right, coming from a I pack and coming from other Jewish donors who are have this narrow, self centered, uh you know, desire, and that all the rest of us then have to accept, you know, this political consequence. So the the process is

in motion and if people want to accelerate it. When ever, the terms that have been used to like end analysis are brought up, you know, and they're well known, the truth or anti semitism, conspiracy theorists, you know, there's others, is to say, well, you know, I don't think that your assertion, which which is what you're doing with these expressions, that there is some kind of mental problem that I am suffering from, is correct frankly, I would like to

continue the discussion. So this is really what we need to do, is we just have to gently demand that the discussion continue and that the assertions are evaluated objectively. And we aren't. We aren't stopped in the process by the terms which frankly were invented for the purpose of ending analysis. And I just think it's going on. The process is going on very fine at this point, you know, because I'm like you, I get quite a bit of information and emails and people you know, who are communicating

to me about these ideas. I can see it. I can actually see the momentum that is occurring within the younger generation. They are more and more or less willing to just you know, have the charge leveled against them of you know, psychological problem and then stop the process. They are becoming more aggressive about no, no, we have

to continue the discussion. I know you think are wished to think that I have some kind of mental problem that makes me think that it's undemocratic to have forty million dollars spent in the congressional district by people who don't even live in the in the congressional area to defeat someone just because he was he's been critical of Israel, or he brought out the Epstein files. I want to continue the discussion. This is what we need to do. We need to continue to discussion. And again I will

harp on this as many times as I can. This is why the shows like the one you put on are so important, even they are just geometrically important. I mean, they will expand and have benefit one hundred times more than just the audience that you're reaching, you know at any one moment, because the people who hear your discussions, they become freer to have other discussions, and other discussions follow from them. You see what I mean. It's just

this is really the power that we're seeing. They are they're shutting down more and more of the podcast, but it isn't working because there are just more and more people who are springing up with and using the internet in the correct way. So you know, you're to be praised, and you know, hopefully your audience will will take the effect that you're trying to create and then use it in their own lives and have more discussions with more

people and we can start moving forward. I'll just you know, finally I'll conclude the rant with the If we can get, by my estimation, like just ten percent of the population to really understand your discussions, ten percent, you couldn't have the kind of political process we do now. It would

come to a stop. They couldn't do things like the Iran War because the population would be would be tipped in another direction, and they couldn't you know, put in place, you know, people like Cruise or Ted Schumer, things like there would be enough of like a tipping of like five to ten percent would would make it impossible to elect people like that in the whole political system as we experience, it would come to an end. So we

just have to keep going. I think we'll start seeing good political effects out of the process, says probably in ten years.

But Madness and Civilization is a really great book because what he does is he talks about how insanity is weaponized by the state. For instance, you know, you have a samples in Russia of dissonance being declared insane shuffled off into mental asylums. And of course his argument was, this is exactly what we've done to pedophiles like him,

you know, bizarre sexual minorities. That's the same process. We can disagree with that analysis and say that process of treating dissent as it is the result of a mental failing, a medical condition that needs to be corrected. Well, I mean that's one we've seen over and over and over again. Right, you mentioned the point, right, Even the term anti semitism a better one, perhaps homophobia. The idea that your you know,

opinion on you know, sexual politics. If you have the wrong one, well then you have a phobia like hydrophobia, like you have rabis. Right, your political opinion has become a medical diagnosis. And look, a lot of the kind of alternative health sphere is pretty out there. It's pretty weird. Not all the ideas are correct, but I think it is an interesting sign of people rejecting that system of control.

And look, okay, fair enough, a lot of people aren't necessarily looking at it in explicitly political terms, but we are seeing a widespread rejection of that system of control. COVID did a great job of delegitimizing it. And to your point about percentages, there's a really interesting and I

don't remember the name for this law. Stormy who will probably be listening to this will shout at me for not remembering this, but that sort of models how a technology or idea grows that at the very kind of narrow end of the wedge, you have early adopters, right, the real kind of out there folks, the witches that get burnt, you know, the people who pay a very

high cost for an information advantage. And that slowly grows to a tipping point as people who were ahead of the curve maybe not that much, start to pick up on idea, and then once it hits, depending on who you ask, ten to fifteen percent, it goes viral. You see this with technology. I distinctly remember the first person I saw with a smartphone that was a big deal. A year later, everyone has them, right. It quickly grows and we can use anti semitism as a rough proxy

for not trusting the government. Put scare quotes around anti semitism.

I realize that means very different things to you and to Randy Fines, but whatever, that sort of collection of ideas that has for people my age to a little bit younger, effectively become synonymous with sincerity, become synonymous with not being a part of the machine, to the point where you know, those sort of jokes are ubiquitous, and okay, does the guy making fun of his friend for being late to pay his beer tab and calling him rabbi

blah blah blah? Is that a well formed political idea? No, there's not much more to it than that, you know, or photoshopping a photo of you know, you kissing Benjamin Netmyahou or the wall or whatever like it's it's a joke, of course, but that is that process of normalization that

is that idea escaping containment. And so many of these things, whether it be APAK, whether it be the ADL or the uh oh ADL and the SBLC, so many of those rackets, and they are rackets, depend on a sort of social shield, depend on being seen as generally pro social. Cars for Kids is another one, right, this, this incredibly corrupt charity run out of California, where all of those require a certain preponderance of marks, right guys to take the bad end of the deal, and once that information

is out there, those don't work. And now look that doesn't stop bombs raining down in Gaza, that doesn't stop up you know, Raytheon or APAC from having a lot of power and a lot of money. But it makes it exponentially harder to pull the con when people know you're pulling a con, you see what I'm getting at, Joe.

the you know kind of logic are anti logic. They are they are designed to stop people from thinking and designed to stop conversation. So it's they've had a good run at it, and they have put in amazing amounts

of capacity to control. I mean, television was certainly, you know, a step in the direction they wanted to take, you know, as oligarchs, and then with the idea of the personal computer and then information technology and communications, they could go beyond anything that anyone in nineteen forty five could even have imagined, you know, where everyone has an iPhone and is staring at it in a restaurant rather than the

person who's sitting across the table from them. It's just horrendous what they've been able to achieve in terms of social distortion with this device. But it also has a, you know, the capacity to be used against them, and I think if you look at the statistics, it's it's working completely in the wrong direction. At this point, there's just too many people who are becoming skeptical because of

the ability to share information. You know, well, yeah, it's just it's happening and we're experiencing it well.

history is you know, great for this. You know, you have the attack on sort of legacy American figures like you know, Robert E. Lee, which is, you know, okay, you can have your opinion on Lee one way or the other, but he was a foundational part of the American myth right, one of our sort of secular saints. Well, it turns out that exact same process of delegitimizing him can be done to someone like George Floyd. George Floyd is the punchline of more jokes now than almost anyone

else in history. He is fully entered into being a comedic and derisive figure, and it's very funny to watch them be forced to play defense. You can tell they're not used to it at all. And again that's part of that same historical process, right of that kind of their own ideas are sort of being eaten away. So, Joe, as we come to this sort of the end of this, the conclusion you mentioned that that ten years where you

think that we're going to start seeing political changes. You mentioned you mentioned Massy, and I got a lot of criticism for my commentary on Massy. Some of it justified, some of it not. But one of in my mind, I think the most interesting aspects of his race was the generational breakdown right where we saw his support shift. Because you know, if you would have tied me to a radiator, stuck a gun to my head and said

where do you think think the split will be? What age? Maybe, just being a little bit pessimistic, I would have said probably about forty Right, that seems to be at least anecdotally what I'm seeing. What wasn't It was fifty five, Which that's dramatic because that means their margins are much thinner than even I right died in the whole reactionary Internet conspiracy theorist whatever term you want to use, would

have said. And I think that's interesting because if you are stuck with that fifty five plus demo, to be blunt about it, that is a non renewable resource, and they're dealing with a population that is at least to some degree, you know, reproducing. There just there's a population pyramid. And so where do you think we're going to start to see these changes? Because in my mind, look, you can drop forty million dollars. Maybe you can do it a number of times, but at a certain point, as

demographic trends continue, that becomes unsustainable. You see what I'm saying.

at that point. I mean, you couldn't You could spend four hundred million dollars and in ten years and not defeat massive You see my point? Because the demographic that is not something you can control, is just too large of a force. And so I think the numbers you're talking about are really valuable and people should look at that, look at them and try to understand it, because will give them hope because a lot of times people say, oh, gee,

it's so difficult. You know, they have all this media control. The government thinks, yeah, but they're losing what got them into power, which is the control of sort of the historical narrative. They're losing this. And when you see the younger generation so skeptical and you see the boomer're about to exit the stage, then you know, I mean, it's just not going to be that difficult to start seeing political change. What will be hard is to sort of

generate the right candidates. And I think we're going to have to go through, you know, a period where it'll be almost impossible to not have co opted individuals, you know, people in other words, they'll they'll see this, they'll see the demographic chip and they'll try to get ahead of it and create heroes, you know, for this group that they can then run for office. But the problem is at this point is that process itself is now under

tremendous scrutiny. You know, just because you step forward and say, you know, I'm an independent thinker. You know, there is a lot of people in the in the indepis so called independent media now who are who are also receiving skepticism, you know, like, well, what is the backgrounds of Alec Jones for example, you know, why does he have this background you know into you know, support from Zionism. They they will attempt to you know, control the opposition by

leading it. But that's something that is just well known at this point, you know. And so it's it's going to be harder and harder for them. And I would just say that you're using Massy's election as a template. You know, they were able to get forty five fifty five. You can calculate the moment in time when when that the ten percent parality would be gone just under into the you know, it's just with the current trends going forward.

So I think ten years on the outside, you'll start to see it'll be harder and harder to It will almost be impossible to elect anyone from the old guard, the old way of thinking. But even the new candidates that come forward will be subjected to a kind of scrutiny that isn't in existence right now. They'll that really be looked at with the possibility that they are from some kind of controlled opposition, and ways will be developed

to vet that. You know, it's just a part of our the political process you have to go forward with to be good citizens is you have to have a better way of vetting. You know what I call lifetime actors. You know, people like Ted Cruz, who you know, purports to be you know, an American citizen for America, and you know, a Christian, and then there's just this Slavish Zionist you know, and you wonder, well where does this

come from? I mean, are headsets you know, the Minister of War where you see video of him talking about the miracle about to occur of the restoration of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, and you know, you scratch your head and you go, well, you're a Christian, you know, I mean, does Jesus talk about the restoration of the temple? He seems to talk about the destruction of the temple, not the restoration of it. So where do you where

do you come up with these ideas? The vetting will I think, you know, it'll also have to go through a process and the public will have to you know, become wise in it. But it's going to happen, and these things are inevitable.

of office, my thought is, okay, that's you know, that's a relatively narrow race. Massy certainly didn't do himself any favors with other things he said and did. It's an older demographic in a ruby red area, right, so there's some variables there, but at a certain point, well, how much money does it take is there an amount of

money that can make it happen? Like if you resurrected Jerry Folwell from the debt and wanted him to run for the mayor of San Francisco, how much money would it take for him to win?

of the validity what I'm saying here. How many people that you know have ever made the transition from kind of a normal understanding of history to being profoundly skeptical, right, which you know are are to the to the extent they're part they can understand the independent media discussions. Right, how many of these individuals have ever gone back, have ever reversed? And then we you know, I now believe you know the assertions regarding the Holocaust. For a while

there I was a denier. But you know, I found other information and have you know, and I've gone back. I mean, I'm in touch with this group. I've seen thousands of people have like I've never seen a single one move backwards. You say, it's impossible, the mind doesn't work this way. So so money isn't going to help when when you have enough people who who are really analytically clear, it just it won't. It won't do anything. So in fact, what it will do is it'll create

mistakes on the parts of the old Arks. They'll become desperate, they'll be they'll be ham handed, draconian, they'll be you know, trying to use violence and intimonation. That's that's not going to slow the process down at all. That's just going to accelerated.

college campus. Like I'm old enough to remember when there were full scale riots that didn't get this sort of reaction. And to your point, like, as more more of these, you know, oligarchs get desperate, they start just flailing around. And look, you know, a wounded animal is still dangerous. You know, a tiger and a trap can still rip your face off, So don't do anything stupid. But look,

we are concerned with trend lines here. How are things evolving into the future, And well, it's not looking good for them. So, Joe, this has been a fascinating conversation. I really enjoyed it. Thanks for making time. You've mentioned the article at the UNS Review in your books, is there anywhere else people can find you?

Are interesting times. Tim and I have a discussion every week. Gosh, you've had four hundred of them and they're available there if people want to listen to. Let me cover every single topic and over and over again. So it's you know, and I'm a public person. Just send me an email at Joe Atwell at gmail dot com. I get a lot of emails. I try to answer all of them if I can, and you can if you're interested in the books, you can go to Caesarsmossiah dot com and buy the books there.

over us are are disassembled, you know. I mean this is like our discussion, like all the discussions you've had, y I mean, they all are part of the process. So I enjoy being in that world, and that's just how I spend my time.