The Culture War #53 The Fall Of Rome, The Roman Empire And The Fall Of The USA
Host:
Tim Pool
Guests:
Jeremy Ryan Slate @JeremyRyanSlate (X)
Patrick Casey @restoreorderusa (X)
Producers:
Lisa Elizabeth @LisaElizabeth (X)
Kellen Leeson @KellenPDL (X)
Connect with TENET Media:
https://www.tenetmedia.com/
https://twitter.com/watchTENETnow
https://www.facebook.com/watchTENET
https://rumble.com/c/c-5080150
https://www.instagram.com/watchtenet/
https://www.tiktok.com/@watchtenet
https://www.youtube.com/@watchTENET
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Vladimir Putin was warning NATO that they've got nukes and they will use them against us.
France's President Macron was saying that we won't let Russia win.
NATO won't.
And that means, if we have to, NATO will deploy troops into Ukraine, to which Vladimir Putin responds, that's World War III.
And that would be a declaration of war against them.
And then, of course, he goes on to say, we've got nukes.
What are they thinking?
So certainly you have this threat of international conflict.
At the same time, you have this threat of internal conflict.
You've got the weaponization of the political machine against the frontrunner for the presidential race.
And you actually had Rachel Maddow and Chris Hayes mentioned the other day.
Because the Supreme Court was going to take up the case as to whether or not the President is immune from criminal prosecution pertaining to their official duties, that this is a corrupt Supreme Court system, and that Donald Trump might actually win the presidency and then not face trial for his crimes, which is a weird admission that the only way to stop Donald Trump from winning the presidency is to try and criminally charge him.
So we're certainly facing something in this country.
There's a lot of people that want to believe, or that do believe, nothing.
Nothing happens.
I mean, this is just political turmoil.
It happens.
I'm not one of those people.
The criminal prosecution of a political rival is unprecedented in this country.
The criminal charges, the fraudulent, outlandish civil cases against Donald Trump are insane.
And so, seeing all of this, it becomes fairly obvious that Donald Trump is Caesar.
Am I wrong?
I'm kidding, by the way.
But this is the question that many people are asking now when this meme emerges about The Roman Empire.
And we hear that, you know, women, this woman asks her boyfriend, you know, how often do you think about the Roman Empire?
And he's like, all the time.
And then all these women start laughing, confused, like, what?
Why are men thinking about the Roman Empire?
Which is a really interesting take on the female perspective that we see now.
And, uh, there's some videos that are really funny, I find.
And they're probably just out of context, but there's these videos where a guy will walk up to a woman and say, uh, or a guy walks up to a bunch of guys and says, do men need women?
And they're all like, yes, of course.
And then the guy walks up to a bunch of women and they're like, do women need men?
And they'll say, no, absolutely not.
And I'm not saying all women think that way or all men think that way.
These are probably out of context videos.
But the question then, that arises is what is the perspective, what is the forefront of the, what is the focus of the male versus the female perspective?
And perhaps the reason so many men think about the Roman empire is not because Rome is special in the hearts and minds of young men and boys in this country, but because the United States is facing a collapse.
So this is what we're gonna talk about.
We got a couple of guys joining us.
I don't know whoever wants to introduce themselves first. - By all means. - I'm Jeremy Slee.
He was based, but he was dumb in the way he operated.
Because there's these five emperors called the five good emperors, and they start this system of basically adopting the most qualified person near them to become the next emperor rather than using their kid.
So he says, I'm gonna make my 17-year-old son emperor.
And that 17-year-old son is Commodus.
So that leads to a really bad rule.
He reigns for about 20 years.
The Praetorian Guard tries to kill him several times, and they fail.
And eventually a wrestler smothers him.
So then you have this really weird period, then, where you have what are called the Baric Emperors.
These are emperors that raise armies and then attack Rome.
So they realize that their power came from the military.
So basically, this is the Severan Emperors in the 200s.
And they would attack Rome and give them the military more money.
And that would be how they would do it.
So you have this 200 year period of attack, attack, attack.
So you have the money has been very debased.
I think by 284, it's about 15,000% inflation.
So the money is worth like nothing.
You have all these tribes coming from the North.
You have in the West, you have part of the empire has broken off and become the Gallic empire.
You have in the East, another break off empire.
So it's this really strange situation.
And then you don't have till 284 that Diocletian comes in and says, OK, I'm going to reform things.
I'm going to get hard currency.
We're going to handle the military.
We're going to divide the country up into what's called a tetrarchy, so rule by four, which is similar to how we have states doing things here in the US.
And that gives them another 200 years of stability to actually last.
It's fascinating because people often talk about the fall of the Roman Empire, and they don't mention the Roman Republic.
And I didn't know much about this, right?
So people have made references to Trump crossing the Rubicon, whatever that might mean, or Biden having crossed it because he's now criminally prosecuting Trump.
And then we get a lot of comments from people saying, well, actually, the Republic becomes the Empire, then there's 200 years of Empire.
I mean, Well, if you look at it, so 753 is when Rome's founded.
There's traditionally seven kings of Rome.
509, the last king is killed by a guy named Brutus.
And then you had the Republic going from 509 to 31.
31 is when the Empire starts.
And I think actually that 31 time period is more like 1913.
Because if you look at 1913 in the Progressive Era, you have Wilson, you have income tax, you have the Federal Reserve, and you have the 17th Amendment.
And that's when America really ceases to become more of that FDR?
Republic type thing.
I think if you're looking for your Caesar your Caesar is more like FDR because he's the guy that establishes this new thing And then we kind of go through that until now FDR in a way.
Yeah, because he's kind of the big powerhead in that way.
unidentified
Wow I think it's important to kind of take a look at Julius Caesar and no, that was all those all very good very good context but This idea of Julius Caesar being like super based and he was, I mean, he was loved by the people and, and so forth.
But, um, there, when you, when you kind of take a look at him, a friend of mine on Twitter, uh, Peter Nemitz has the take that basically Julius Caesar was a libtard.
Here me out here me out i hope i do this take justice but basically okay so he goes off to egypt to get a foreign wife he starts dressing in egyptian clothes i seem to recall.
Reading what will who call that reminds me of justin trudeau right wearing like whatever like forget for regalia that was that he that he wore right there is this sense among liberals of just kind of like.
You know denigrating your own thing and exalting like a foreign foreign culture and you know you know when you look he was a he was a popular as well right so that meant that he was and i'm sure there are two sides to that but that means the julius caesar was on the side of like the rabble essentially on you know the the optimist were were kind of more of like the conservative populist.
Yeah, but like, I don't know if he was a super, like, right-wing populist in that sense.
Well, you know, I like the idea of Trump as like a strongman, but, you know, doing everything that Caesar did, and, you know, again, like Trump starts wearing like foreign clothes or something of the sort, and redistributing wealth, which is what, you know, some of the populars were into.
I don't think that's really what Trumpian populism, if you want to use that term, is kind of about.
So I kind of agree with you that the Republic fell in 1913 when they couped in this Federal Reserve, but is it possible that the Emperor now is just some foreign corporate owner or king, the King of England or something like that?
I don't know if I would go that far, because I don't know enough about that power structure.
I think it's more of like intelligence agencies running, you know, the presidency in this case, because if you look at it, at a certain point the Praetorian Guard became who decided who got to be president, and they got to, or who got to be emperor.
Right, so if you look at that, and kind of as Rome fell, as you go past the 200s and you go into the 300s, The Emperor just became basically a figurehead and you had these different barbarian generals like Stilicho and these people that were behind them just basically giving them power and the Emperor was just they come in they make him say something they bring him out very similar to Joe Biden I guess you could say in some ways.
Everybody likes to just point to these hot spots of Roman history, ignoring the Republic, ignoring, like you're mentioning, like things I don't even know about.
But they often say the most common, of course, is crossing the Rubicon.
And the question about are we reaching this point, a tipping point, in the history of the United States where this country either ceases to be or becomes an authoritarian dictatorship or whatever.
Can you describe to me what Rome was like during the Republic at its best?
Does it compare in any way, the Roman Republic in good times to the United States?
So, these were the two guys that were in charge of the military and in charge of running the city.
So, you never had one person that was fully in charge.
And you had this thing called the Corsus Honorum.
So, that was basically the offices you could go up through and you could only be... You had to be a certain age to be each one.
So, you'd go through these different ones and get power.
And Rome didn't have a written constitution.
It was just generally agreed upon that this is the way we've done things for so long.
So, it was very prosperous.
But you also had a lot of wars during this time period too.
You had Wars against Carthage you had different civil wars and things like that too.
So there wasn't exactly There was never really a period except under Augustus.
We weren't really fighting anyone So it was I don't know if you want to add anything to that but during that time period, you know, it just it was There wasn't really one person holding power.
It was more held power by the people, but they were all rich people too.
So it was very classist in that way.
You couldn't, in order to actually even hold office, you needed to have property.
So if you didn't have a certain amount of property, you could never hold office.
You have this, so you have the Roman Revolution, which is 133 to 131, and it starts with these two brothers, the Gracchi brothers, that basically are trying to get more grain for the people, because the people are starving, they don't have a lot.
They get killed in the Senate building.
They basically get killed by an uprising.
So then you have this time period where generals start raising an army and attacking Rome.
And there's this thing around Rome called the Palmerium.
So the Palmerium is like this sacred area around Rome and all armies were supposed to disband and drop their weapons when they basically got past this point.
So to go past the pomerium with weapons was a really big deal.
So you have the first guy that does it is Gaius Marius.
How do you spell that?
P-O-M-E-R-I-U-M.
I feel like it's a spelling bee.
So you have Gaius Marius raises an army, attacks Rome, says, I'm in charge.
Then you have Lucas Cornelius Sulla raises an army, attacks Rome, says, I'm in charge.
And then you eventually have Caesar in 43 that crosses the Rubicon, raises an army, attacks Rome.
So that 100 years is kind of Very, very tumultuous.
And the Roman people during this time period, you have to understand, they've been through civil war for 100 years.
How are you going to feel?
They're not very happy.
So then Augustus comes in.
Caesar has just died.
And Caesar, you could adopt somebody during that time period.
That means give them your name and your titles and your money and everything.
So he adopts this guy named Gaius Octavius, who becomes Augustus Caesar.
But you also have Mark Antony, who was Caesar's top general.
So Mark Antony says, well, if Caesar dies, I'm in charge.
But Augustus says, well, in his will, my father says, I'm in charge.
So these two guys fight each other.
The final battle is this battle of Actium in 31.
So in 31 is kind of the end of the Republic and the start of the Empire.
But Augustus doesn't say like, hey, I'm in charge.
He actually says, I'm not going to be dictator anymore.
There was this office in Rome called dictator.
For six months, you would hold ultimate power and then you'd put it down.
Caesar named himself dictator for life, which really upset them because Romans didn't like monarchy because of the seven traditional kings.
So he says, I'm going to lay down this office of dictator.
And people are like, no, no, no, no, no, please don't go away.
We need you to be in charge.
And that's actually how Augustus becomes the first emperor, but he doesn't like the idea of being an emperor king.
So he comes up with this idea called princeps.
Which means basically first citizen or one above all and that's where Rome isn't called an empire.
I mean what you're describing doesn't sound a lot like what's going on right now at all.
Mm-hmm Is it just buzzwords then people are just like oh look I heard a thing in the internet and that means the United States is like Rome Well, I think, just to chime in real quick, I think that there's a saying that history doesn't repeat, but it does rhyme.
unidentified
And what that means is it's not going to follow the same exact path as any foreign civilization.
But you do see similarities, and that's just because the laws that govern the universe are the same now as they were back then.
They would put different, like, you know, Latin phrases that showed, like, the person's power, or, like, an emperor that wasn't very solid would put his face on one side, and then maybe, like, Augustus or Romulus on the other side, because, like... Oh!
If this guy's as good as those guys, he must be great.
unidentified
That's like women on Tinder where they have the more attractive friend in the main picture.
The final Roman emperor's name was Romulus Augustulus, which means essentially little Romulus Augustus, because he was like, we've got nothing left.
I guess I could go with the two founders.
That works for me.
unidentified
Yeah, it's just stolen valor at that point.
Yeah, definitely.
Well, your question, Tim, is, okay, you've noticed that there are obviously many ways in which Our situation now is dissimilar from ancient Rome.
But I think, generally, just finding yourself in a representative form of government where people on both sides of the aisle are kind of starting to question if, like, the system actually works as it's said to work.
But people on both sides... You look at the most recent election cycles, right?
You had, obviously, 2020 that was, you know, famously, infamously contested by Trump and MAGA overall.
Well, you go back to 2016, well, the other side did the same thing, just in a different way.
Worse.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I mean, exactly.
It was weaponized through, you know, the actual government.
Trump had lawyers file lawsuits to, uh, you know, lawfully challenge the results.
But, um, I think, you know, just finding yourself in a representative government and, you know, you're kind of wondering like how representative it actually is.
And there's just kind of this feeling that, you know, maybe this isn't going to last.
And of course no government lasts forever.
And we've seen throughout history, representative governments turn into more Authoritarian or totalitarian even forms of regimes and i think i think many people are just kind of finding themselves in the situation where you're like you know could we have a better system than this what would it look like or you know are we gonna wake up and find a worse system than this like full blown left-wing totalitarianism.
It is, because if, you know, when you look at what's going on now, this morning, Steve Baker, a journalist, who was clearly- The Blaze, right?
Yeah.
Yeah, he's a reporter from The Blaze, he was at January 6th, he wasn't working for The Blaze at the time, but he's very clearly a journalist, he's friends with a bunch of journalists we know, we've had him on the show, and he's just like a mild-mannered guy, he's clearly filming, and they ordered him to surrender.
And so...
I mean, that right there is Biden's Department of Justice targeting an opposition journalist because he was doing research into January 6th, providing footage, and arguing that some of these officers who testified had perjured themselves.
All of a sudden, the FBI's like, you're being arrested and charged on federal charges.
And so, I had to say to everybody, this isn't...
People take things as too negatively.
Bad things are going to happen.
It doesn't mean it's going to be the worst thing in the world.
It just means bad things are happening.
The night is always darkest before the dawn.
But I don't see how, after everything this country has been through, good and bad, and the prosperity we've had, that we see anything moving forward other than it's going to get worse.
What that means in getting worse, I don't know.
I mean, does it mean you wake up and there's no electricity?
I don't know about that.
Maybe at some point.
But where we are right now is objectively worse than it was a year ago or two years ago.
And so let's imagine that it stays this way.
There's no challenge.
And then Biden becomes president.
He continues the weaponization of the DOJ.
Intelligence agencies begin rounding up other dissidents.
More journalists start getting targeted, which I think is absolutely going to happen.
That's objectively worse.
But let's argue that Donald Trump wins, and he tries to turn things around, there will still be a period by which the establishment, uniparty forces or whatever, will combat that, and you will have some instability, and then, theoretically, It seems like when you look at the probabilities of all the things that could happen, there is a smaller probability that Donald Trump gets elected, starts targeting corruption, firing and arresting people, things like that.
I don't see that as a strong possibility.
I see conflict as more likely to be what we can expect.
unidentified
I think that's an accurate prediction.
Instability regardless.
In the best case scenario and the worst case scenario, there's going to be pushback, right?
Even if we kind of get what we want as people who are right-of-center conservatives.
Yeah, we live in interesting times, for better or for worse.
I think the comparison of Diocletian, we were kind of talking about Diocletian before.
I'll let Jeremy take it with the historical background there.
But the reason I brought up Diocletian is just as a figure who represents, I think what we should expect is kind of the best case scenario.
Someone who's able to make things better, but as to the overall decline, I don't know if anyone on the scene right now is able to totally reverse that.
And over that time period, you have your ups and your downs.
And we have Commodus, who's the son of Marcus Aurelius, dies in 192.
And we don't really get stability until 284.
So that's almost 100 years of craziness.
So Diocletian becomes emperor in 284.
He's one of these barrack emperors, meaning he raises an army, attacks Rome, And he doesn't actually live in Rome because class-wise he wasn't acceptable.
So he didn't really like Rome.
So he lived in a place in the East called Nicomedia.
It's a little bit close to where Constantinople would have been later on.
And he does these very famous reforms because you have this problem of the armies getting raised and attacking Rome.
So he says, the thing I'm going to do with this is I'm going to take and I'm going to put the armies in different places.
So now they can't attack Rome.
So he puts stability in that way.
The other thing he looks at is he creates this thing called the Tetrarchy, or Rule by Four.
And if you actually look at it, our Constitution already fixes this, right?
Because we have a federal government, but then each state is their own state.
Because Rome was too big for one man to rule and defend.
And that was actually way earlier when the Wall of Hadrian happened, because Hadrian says, okay, I can't travel all over this empire anymore.
Let's build some walls and let's stop traveling.
So Diocletian creates this rule by four.
There's a senior emperor in the east and a senior emperor in the west, and each has a junior emperor.
So they're able to now control it more like states rather than like a giant just federal force.
And then he also does something about the currency.
He starts minting new coins because when generals knew that their powers came from the army, well, they doubled the size of the army and they went 30% higher pay, 60% higher pay.
So they needed money to do that.
So what did they do?
They debased the currency by adding other metals to it.
So, one of the things he was was standardized money.
So, if we get back to more of a standardized money, if we get back to more of a state's rights situation rather than just a federalist system like we're running, he gave the Roman Empire from 284 to 476.
So, we could have almost 200 years more... Prosperity.
Prosperity, right?
If you just get in these right things.
Now, the thing he looked at as well is he said, culturally, we're not getting along well either.
Because he had all these different races and nationalities and things like that.
So the thing he does, which probably isn't the right way to approach it, but he starts persecuting Christians because he says, okay, so we're all united against the Christians.
Not the best way to approach things, but he got the idea of, we don't get along culturally.
But wouldn't it be funny if like, it's like 2000 years from now, and they're teaching the history of the great American empire.
And they were like, as the republic began to fall, the emperor, Trump, Attacked the District of Columbia rallying his forces to siege the Capitol for which they resisted for a few you know that the thing is like we're looking at We always look at history, and it's very condensed.
I mean we just jumped hundreds of years Yeah, and so with Trump and January 6 and everything that's going on It's only been three years since since January 6th so the context and the and the mythos or whatever that could be developed it's like It's like yesterday for us.
A thousand years from now, who knows what they're gonna say about it?
It could be something more dramatic, but they'll skip right over it.
It's important who writes it, because 476 for the fall of the Western Empires is often debated, because at that point in time, as I mentioned, there were barbarian generals just kind of ruling through a fake emperor, and eventually, Oda Wacker, who's the guy that takes over in 476, says, you know what?
We're just gonna stop this ruse.
I'm in charge.
I'm the king.
I'm gonna do this.
And then you have Justinian, who is the Eastern Roman Empire, comes in and invades, and Rome had actually functioned normally just with a king instead of an emperor.
It only falls because Justinian tries to reunite the empire, and then they need a reason to say why it fell.
In only, like, two sentences, you condensed this massive campaign of an assault on the capital of an empire into, and then he attacked, he raised an army and attacked, and then moving on.
You know, to us right now, the news is just spattered with nothing about January 6th.
It might, but with time dilation, with the way that data is being preserved in real time, it might be different than that now.
unidentified
So Donald Trump then, it's gonna whoosh right over it. - It might, but with time dilation, with the way that data is being preserved in real time, it might be different than that now.
Like we might be at a flexing point of history where this is like, what is history?
The people watch The Beatles on Ed Sullivan way more than... It's not just a blip, like a line in a book.
It's funny because, you know, when I was younger and I was reading about all this and learning about the burning of the Library of Alexandria, I was so angry.
I'm just like, what secrets did they hold?
And the reality is it was probably just real stupid garbage, where they're like, you know, we think the moon is made of cheese.
Well, I think something that's important to consider though, Ian, is like, if you look at it, how our media operates today, you know, it's, you look at the party in power decides what's, they're basically controlling thought, right?
And I think that's often how our perspective on Rome is.
Our perspective in Rome is only what we've received from those who have written about it.
So those that survive, those are the winning powers.
So we only know what we know in kind of the postscript.
And I think that's what people are dealing with now is they only know how to deal with their time now based on the media, what the media is telling them.
That's why like podcasts and new media and things like that are so important because we're at least getting a different perspective out there.
But in history, people really haven't had this power to have kind of an alternative means of thought.
So what would typically happen is when Rome would conquer other countries, they would take their people as slaves, but also like the empire was interesting.
The way it was expanded was you would have Rome at the center and everything outside of Rome were called the provinces.
They're like territories of Rome.
And those people, they weren't Roman citizens, but they were Roman subjects.
Then what actually happens is in 212, Emperor Caracalla says, okay, everybody in the provinces that's not a slave and not a woman, you're now a citizen.
So that's 30 million people overnight become citizens.
Now, the important thing about that, though, is when... And it's debated on why he did this, but it's thought that he wanted a new tax base because there was a big inheritance tax and things like that you could get from people when they became a citizen.
Because this is in the 200s when the emperors had realized you were spending money on the army in order to have control.
So he's like, I need more money.
And, you know, sadly, Caracalla, the way he dies is by getting off his horse to take a piss and somebody actually knifes him in the back.
Well, what they would do then is they continued to debase the currencies.
They would add other metals to gold and silver, and people lost faith in the currency.
That was one of the big reasons that Diocletian came up with a new silver coin.
There's a new gold coin later on under Emperor Constantine in 310, but one of the big things they took a look at is getting better currency because people don't trust it anymore.
I think you want to say something?
unidentified
Yeah, I was just gonna say, I mean, I could tell by your reactions that you saw a lot of parallels between kind of what happened there with Caracalla, the 212 edict that gave 30 million foreigners citizenship.
It's crazy, but I mean, we just see so much of that today, right?
The idea of what it is to be an American has really lost a lot of its sense of meaning.
And I think you see, not just with Caracalla, but over the course of Roman history, a dilution Of, of what it means to be, you know, Civitas, right?
Basically the, uh, and also Roman, Romanitas, I believe is what it's pronounced.
What Roman-ness, essentially Roman culture.
And you see that in America.
I mean, at the beginning, um, to be an American was you are not only white, but also Anglo-Saxon, Protestant.
You had, you adhere to an American creed, uh, uh, the American culture, you speak English.
And, you know, over time we've seen a process of erosion, whereas today, you know, the right in this country, they uphold somewhat of a creedal identity based on limited government, separation of church and state, things like this, um, and some common American culture.
But, um, to even uphold, and we see this when conservatives come out and say, like, well, to be an American is to, like, you have to like, you know, the First Amendment, Second Amendment.
Well, the left comes out and oftentimes says, well, that's, that's like white supremacy.
What are you even saying?
Right?
So the idea to uphold a common like civic identity has, we're at the point where that's even like, we're losing now.
We're witnessing that disappear before our eyes essentially.
And you see something similar in Rome where what it means to be a Roman by the time of like the end of the empire, it just means nothing essentially.
Well, it wasn't really the right way to go about it, but that was also one of the reasons that Diocletian went after the Christians.
He's like, all right, we all hate this group, so we'll be hating this group together.
Now, obviously that's not the right way to go about it.
unidentified
But that's also, yeah, we said Diocletian was a lot like Trump, but that's also more like what the left is doing these days is where they're saying, okay, well, the left's coalition is defined by hatred and animosity towards, you know, I mean, you think of like the white Christian males, like the archetype of everything wrong in their worldview, but You know, obviously, if you're if you're conservative, regardless of race, if you're if you're white, if you're, you know, Christian, some combination of those things, then, you know, so much of the left's coalition, they say, like, the rights coalition is about, like, hating immigrants or something.
Not really the case.
You can oppose immigration without hating them, of course.
But in terms of animosity and animus, like, it's clear what the left is like, what the glue that holds their coalition together is.
We're talking about 30 million people being granted citizenship, the right to vote, access to public resources overnight.
That, I think, is just mathematically the end of a country, or at least the beginning of the end.
It used to be in this country that you had to be a landowner and white in order to vote.
And these leftists look back and they're like, how, how wrong?
How evil?
And it's like, well, think about what the culture was like back then.
The country was 99.9% white.
So that's just what everyone, you know, you lived here.
We knew who you were.
And the reason to be a landowner was because it proved you lived here.
Over time, however, because of cultural changes, I certainly don't think race should be a factor in whether or not you get to vote.
But I certainly think there has to be some tie to the community in order to vote.
Because now in a situation where you can... We had this in 2020.
It was Andrew Yang saying he was going to move to Georgia for the Senate race, I believe it was, so that he could help a Democrat win.
It's like, but you don't live there!
This person's supposed to represent the people who live there.
You don't!
You're saying you're going to go there.
And so people do this.
And then what happens is someone will move somewhere, say, I now vote for this, destroying that place, and then they leave.
You can't function that way.
So if we have all these illegal immigrants coming to this country, they bolster the census numbers, creating electoral college votes and congressional districts in the states they go to.
Diluting the vote of the citizens, making citizenship worthless, and people who do not have obligations, responsibilities, and ties to this country will not vote in favor of these things.
This is perfectly exemplified by the illegal immigrant Venezuelan in Times Square who is shooting at people and shot someone in the leg, and then Venezuelans rallied to his defense.
Against our laws in our country because they're not part of our community.
So if you, if you overnight say all these people are now citizens, they're immediately going to say our interests are not yours and we vote against you and that will destroy or begin to destroy the fabric of whatever was the stabilizing force was.
unidentified
Yeah, absolutely.
And when you look at what the Democrats and even the more radical left-wing elements of, of, you know, left of center have to say about what it is to be an American, like I said, with like the civic identity is gone, but even citizenship, like is, you know, even if it's just that, that, that legal classification, you've gone through the steps to become, you know, legally an American citizen, even that's gone as well.
I mean, what did the Biden administration recently put out?
They referred to these illegals that are being You know, bust in and, like, NGOs are stashing them at these hotels.
So, the drug abuse thing, I don't have any... I'm not gonna lie to you and tell you I have information on that, I don't.
But the thing I will say is... Probably opium or... Well, maybe.
But the thing you have to look at, and this is one of the big things that causes instability in the third century, is you have, in the East and in the West, you have two Roman generals that basically break off part of Rome and say, this is my empire now.
So you have Gallienus who's the emperor who's in charge and he's just lost two parts of the empire and from the north he has barbarians coming down.
The barbarians had been settling in the actual empire and so you have he's trying to handle on the left, he's trying to handle on the right, and then he's got people coming down from the north.
So you have all this instability plus The emperors were lasting, like, you know, emperors previously lasted 20 years.
They would last a long time.
They're lasting months.
So you have turnover, turnover, turnover, no central power, and then they're trying to fight off other people while trying to keep central power.
So Cincinnatus is, and that's why George Washington is called the American Cincinnatus, in the early Roman Republic, and it's a legend too, so we don't know that Cincinnatus actually existed, but there was this office called Dictator that the Romans believed, and Dictator comes from the word dictatus, which means to speak.
So by his words, they would do whatever.
And Dictator would be an office you would hold for six months, and it would be absolute power, because the Romans believed that Multiple people couldn't agree on things fast enough to get a problem handled.
One person could.
So this person would hold power, handle a situation, lay it down.
So Cincinnatus, allegedly dictator for six months, leads the legions, handles the problem, and then lays down his power and goes back to farming.
So that's why George Washington is called the American Cincinnatus.
Cause now the problem we have with politics in this country is that you have people who are mediocre, if not below average, and their only path towards notability is to hold office for which they are incapable of functioning properly in.
And it seems like we're in a maelstrom swirling our way to oblivion.
And you have Edward Gibbon, who wrote the decline and fall of the Roman Empire in 1776, is like kind of the most famous one in that point, in that standpoint.
And he has kind of this, this all cause thing, like not saying it's just one thing, right?
Like you have the currency is suffering, you have the empire is expanding.
And if you look at it in, I think it was around 130, you have of the five good emperors, you have Emperor Hadrian that built- This is BC.
This is 130 A.D.
A.D.?
A.D.
So you have the five good emperors.
The second of those is Hadrian.
And Hadrian builds the wall through Britain, right?
And he says, we're not going to go past this point anymore.
This is our wall.
This is how far we go.
And when Rome stops expanding, that's one of the things that stops it from being able to bring in new resources and new tax base and things like that.
So that expansion is one of the things that hurts now if we kind of come back to Now my brain stopped working if you're always going with us Mercenaries mercenaries.
Okay, cool.
So they bring in they bring in these different mercenaries to fight the wars because they don't have enough soldiers anymore there's this plague in the the Antonine plague which is in the 260s and Where there's 2,000 people dying a day, around 8 to 10 million people die in that year, or in that time period, and you have 10% of the empires actually died.
So there is a extreme need for soldiers, and you have in the 200s emperors realizing their power comes from soldiers, so they need more of them.
So they start bringing in barbarians, and I think people have this weird idea about the barbarians is they're just like these like Crazy long-haired guys with beards and it's they actually would have been closer to Roman than what we believe and they're called barbarians because when the Greeks heard them they sounded like bar bar bar bar bar and Barbarus is actually the Latin word for beard.
So they were just kind of these bearded guys that were actually closer to Roman than what we want to believe.
When they spoke, it sounded like they were saying bar, bar, bar, bar.
So the Greeks said, oh, these are barbarians.
unidentified
Wow.
That's funny.
So you're now making, you know, drawing somewhat of a similarity between the Romans and, you know, these kinds of Germanic or Celtic barbarians, but the Romans wouldn't have appreciated that.
No, they would have thought they were much better than them.
unidentified
Right, right.
I mean, there was... I was reading a little bit into Julius Caesar and how he kind of... I don't know if he started this process of... He was definitely, like, very early in establishing, like, colonies and so forth.
Maybe he was the first.
But with that came granting, you know, citizenship to some of these, you know, inhabitants of the far reaches of the empire, like these... The Gauls.
Yeah, and there was this one anecdote of, you know, some Roman was complaining about how You know, Caesar was giving, you know, that they were peeling off their stinking trousers and putting on togas and going down to, uh, to whatever.
But, um, yeah, I mean, obviously the barbarians were a big part in Rome's decline as well.
They started bringing them in as mercenaries.
They were battling them.
And, uh, yeah, it didn't, uh, lo and behold, that kind of demographic change oftentimes doesn't work out for the best, does it?
Some of the effects are the same if you let in, like, yeah, as we talked about earlier, you know, tens of—infinity people from, like, the far reaches of the world, but— Well, I'll just cite Bernie Sanders.
I don't know where he's at today, but that was—that was almost ten years ago.
unidentified
Yeah, you can't say that anymore, can you?
Definitely.
Were the Romans like the Nazis?
Because they wrote the history books, so you look at them as the history wrote them, but were they actually like genocidal, racist, nationalist, just conquering?
I was just going to say, I think they're maybe a little more like civic nationalists today in the sense that they had this idea of Romanitas, I believe it is, Roman-ness.
So I don't think they were racially exclusionary when it came to who could become a Roman.
It changed a lot over the years too, because you had the Roman army, but then you also had the auxiliary.
So the auxiliary were people that weren't Roman citizens and were serving under Rome.
And what would typically happen is if you could serve for 20 years and somehow not die, you would become a Roman citizen, but also your wife would, your children would, your descendants would, so you could get it for your for your whole family.
'Cause you know, one thing I see is the-- - But it doesn't matter because you've also talked about how it changes congressional representation and that's actually the bigger game.
- Right, especially as it pertains to the electoral college.
So when people argue that illegal immigrants vote, it's like, well, they're not voting, they don't need to, because this country's president is not chosen by a popular vote, it's chosen by Electoral College.
So if a non-citizen is in this country, they are counted, and California, it's estimated, has between, on the lower end, about one extra congressional seat and electoral vote.
Upwards of seven extra votes for the president.
So California's interests are overrepresented in this country because of non-citizens.
We're not a direct democracy.
If they're here and they get a seat in Congress, they are voting, their will be done.
Not really.
And it creates this interesting circumstance where in these districts that have large portions, large populations of non-citizens, you can't vote that out.
Those people can't vote.
So there they are.
Let's say you've got 15-20% of a congressional district is illegal immigrant.
It's probably not that high.
They spread it out.
But that means that a politician only needs 700,000 instead of 775,000.
So you can't vote against those people.
You're not going to bring in Republicans to counter something like that.
When I look at the arguments by Democrats today, what I see is If they win, if this worldview wins, they will abolish the idea of citizenship.
What they will say is, they will equate it to slavery.
A hundred years from now, they'd say something like, you know, it's shocking that citizenship existed.
The fact that a human had no right to speak up about where they lived because they didn't have papers.
Isn't that crazy?
And these people had to, they couldn't get access to resources.
They had no access to the public sphere, no say in how things were done.
They were basically slaves.
The difference, of course, being these people come here by choice to bask in the prosperity of this country, but that's the argument they're trying to make.
And now the left has been doing a few things.
They've been calling them undocumented citizens.
So they're going to use this idea to say the fact that a person could live in the United States and not be allowed to speak and vote on their own home was an affront, it was authoritarian, it was a barbaric practice, and we abolished it in the Second Civil War.
But you know, I think that's what's so important about shows like this and companies like Timcast and The Daily Wire and things like that and why we do what we do at my company.
There's never been the ability to get alternative voices like this out there before.
All you've received, or what you're saying right now, is all people have received.
There's been nothing we can do about it.
That's why I'm super hopeful about where we are now.
Sure, if we have Trump doing some reforms, we can handle that.
But also, people have never been this aware of what's happening to them before.
Is it a great situation?
No.
But I think you're actually getting people educated in a way they feel like they can do something about it.
You know what's fascinating is I pulled up barbarian on Wikipedia and they have this amazing passage where it said, Greek writers called them barbarians because the language they spoke, this is Egyptians, Persians, Medes, how do you pronounce that?
Medes.
Medes and Phoenicians, their language sounded like gibberish represented by the words barbar.
That's hilarious.
But it shows this map.
Routes taken by barbarian invaders.
And this is, you know, so what's fascinating here is invasions of the Roman Empire.
Are we looking at right now a, and I don't mean this as an insult, I mean this historically, a barbarian invasion of the United States.
In that various groups of people from various different countries are Invading this country, but they're not even invading because because Joe Biden said come on in like I think I think that's the difference is the Romans were you know They they Marcus Aurelius spent so much of his career fighting them off, right?
But we're just saying come on in guys, you know, the water's fine And I think that that that's the difference between what was happening Rome.
It's not an invasion.
unidentified
They're just coming I'd say it's a different type of invasion.
Yeah.
It's not an invasion in the sense that there, you know, we have the political will to keep them out, but we don't have the ability.
Uh, yeah, they're being, they're being invited in obviously.
And for reasons we already discussed for demographic change, for changing, uh, you know, the political institutions in this country, bringing us closer to left-wing totalitarianism, but, uh, Yeah, it's crazy.
I mean, I don't know if there's ever been an invasion of this type in, you know, human history where you've just had, you know, the gates totally opened by, you know, a corrupt ruling class and the people.
I mean, most Americans, you look at the support for things like a border wall, immigration restriction, opposition to what they're seeing at the southern border.
I mean, depending on the poll, most of them show like a majority, a plurality are against this.
So now there are obviously still a lot of people who are for this because they're, uh, they think, you know, every, every, uh, you know, African or Chinese, uh, immigrant coming across the border is going to be the next Bach or something of the sort.
They're going to be, you know, doctors and lawyers.
If you have a hundred people and they, uh, let's say they all believe in, you know, one particular religion and you start allowing other cultures and other people to come in.
The more they come in, those people will alter the voting patterns of the community, and then eventually start favoring themselves, and then you no longer have a country.
Well, you did an explanation, I think about a week ago, about the ties people wear, and I think that's a really good explanation, right?
One group says, okay, we all wear bow ties, and then they bring in more of their friends that say, we wear bow ties too.
Like, I think that is a really good explanation of you bring people, those people come in, they change the rules, and then what are you gonna do about it?
If, yes, so if you have a hundred people and they all agree, like, everybody has to wear a bow tie, that's our uniform, and they bring in, they say, we're gonna allow more people to move in here, but they gotta wear bow ties.
Many of them will, but they don't want to.
And so they're like, everything's fine!
We invited 10 of our friends in, and they're wearing the bow ties.
Then they say, let's invite 10 more people in, we'll tell them they gotta wear bow ties too.
Once you, you go from 100, and now you've got 80 people, so there's 180 total, the dominant force still votes, everyone wears bow ties, but those 80 people...
They'll do it.
They don't want to do it.
They don't hold those same cultural values and traditions.
They're adhering to them out of necessity.
But once you invite 20 more in, now there's a contest in the vote.
All of a sudden, bow ties are out.
And this cultural tradition your country had, which in this instance, bow tie doesn't really matter.
But let's say it's free speech.
Let's say it's free speech and you have 100 people and they're all like, free speech must be no matter what your idea is, no matter how bad it is, as long as you're not inciting violence, we're gonna share ideas.
They invite people in who keep screaming, we hate free speech!
And they're like, yeah, well, free speech is the law of the land.
Then they invite more people in who hate free speech.
Once you get to 100 free speech supporters and 101 who oppose it...
Well, and that's how Rome fell, if you want to explain it in the basics.
That's how it fell.
You bring in a whole bunch of people over a long period of time, and eventually you have in 476, the barbarian king, Odoacer, says, okay, no more emperors, you know, we're in charge anyway, so just get rid of them.
If you want to explain it in basics, that's how it happened.
unidentified
When they made 30 million citizens, was there a blowback to that?
Maybe that was part of it, but... Yeah, but it's a lot of... He probably did a lot of... A lot of emperors were stabbed to death at that point in time, too.
So... There's not documentation of the citizens turning on the new people?
Which is interesting because they're still fighting barbarians on their borders during that time period, but Rome itself was very peaceful and prosperous.
In the 200s too, so you have Caracalla and then you have his stepmother, this lady named Julia, comes in with this 11-year-old kid and says, hey, this is Caracalla's son.
It most likely wasn't.
And this guy's name is Elagabalus.
And Elagabalus is a priest of the cult of Elagabal, so these people that worship this black rock.
And he made all of Rome come to his Black Rock's wedding to another Black Rock and he married a Vestal Virgin and he rode around in a chariot that was towed by prostitutes and he took his hairdresser and put him in charge of Rome's grain supply so like this was kind of the final thing that made all the military guys just like This guy's crazy.
They're loyal to their general, and that became the problem, right?
That's why these barrack emperors happened, because in the fourth century you have, like, I think it's like 47 different guys that claim to be emperor.
Now only a few of them are ever actually officially emperor and and that's the problem and that's why Diocletian changes things the way he does with who's in with where the military station who's in charge of them because he realizes that all you need is enough money that's been debased to pay your troops and enough troops and you're the guy in charge.
So, 470, so you have Diocletian starts the division, right?
He starts the division between East and West.
And you would have Constantine, who reigns in 310, is kind of the last one to rule over a united empire.
And then you just really have an Eastern line and a Western line.
And that's really when that delineation happens.
Interestingly enough, I'm sure people listening might disagree with me, but if you look at the reason the Eastern Empire lasts, it's really only because it has the richer tax base, which is Egypt and Syria and places like that.
There was more money there.
Syria, Palestine.
And then, as well, Constantinople was hard as hell to invade.
Like, it's literally just geography protects Constantinople.
It can't be invaded like Rome could, because Rome, you just kind of come down.
You come into, see that entrance point into the Black Sea there?
You have the Hellenspont.
It's called the Hellenspont.
That's where you get in, and then on the other side of it is where Constantinople was.
So you really only could get to Constantinople from the water, and that's the thing that really protects it, because they only had to protect themselves from the north.
In Rome, you had to protect yourself in basically three areas.
You had them come from the north, they could come from the east, they could come from the south.
So it's very easy to protect a city like that, especially when you make the walls you make around it.
unidentified
They would like chain off the waterways in there and people couldn't get in and then at some point somebody like walked boats, they picked up their boats and walked them around behind Constantinople and then came in from behind, you know?
So there's still this idea of wanting to have a united Roman Empire and every emperor wants to be, you know, the big guy.
So you have Justinian in the 500s, that's the 6th century.
He actually comes in and displaces the barbarian king that's in charge to try and Unite Rome.
But if you look at it, this attack is actually one of the things that causes the West to just fall apart.
His attempts to reunite it because he kills so many people, displaces so many people, creates so much problems, Justinian actually causes the fall in the West.
And it's actually his writers that will call the 476 fall to the barbarians because they don't want him to be responsible for it.
So that's actually what happens.
And then after that time period, you have Justinian is the last guy to have the whole Roman Empire, and then it just kind of fades away for that point.
And after 476, you have all the different tribes come in and kind of take over the area.
And they still had aqueducts.
They still had all these different things, but they weren't using them as much.
And they didn't know how to fix these things because they didn't build them.
So that was one of the major things.
They went back to what they already knew.
They didn't know how to create these things because they had lost... With the Justinian invasion, they'd lost a lot of the Romans that knew what was happening.
So what happens like when Rome breaks, basically all this prosperity and advancement shutters and then people end up living in the dark ages, like it's disease, it's squalor, what is it?
unidentified
Well, there's a lot to be said about it, but there's a sense of separation from, uh, right?
Like from... It's just a separation from Roman history is really all it is.
Like, they, they, they would have been a much, like, sure, they didn't have any indoor plumbing, but they would have been more similar to, to, um, what we see as Frankish France and things like that.
They, they, they were much more established than people want to believe they were.
So, but it's, it's just that the writing from that time period would have come from the Eastern Roman Empire.
But if you look at kind of Southern France, Southern France is really interesting.
It's this area called Occitania.
And during this time period, they take Latin, French, and Spanish, and they create this really... If you ever get a chance to read about Occitania, it's a really, really interesting... I think I've heard of this.
It's a really, really interesting place.
And the papacy gets a little concerned because they take Christianity and they mix it with the worship of Apollo.
But they create this, like, really equal society, you know, people are really getting along, but then you have what's called the Albigensian Crusade, where the Pope comes in and he's like, oh, these guys are kind of rough, and he kills them all.
Well, because they also wanted to be seen as Roman.
Like, I think that's what's interesting, is they had...
They actually admired Rome and the system that had been built, but they had to take it in the way they understood it, right?
Like, if they understood it with, you know, more of a Spanish influence, then that's how you're gonna do it.
If you understood it with more of a Frankish influence, that's how you're gonna do it.
So that's how they devolve.
unidentified
Yeah, and then Latin, which was the kind of colloquial, like, common tongue for Rome, ended up obviously becoming the You know, the more elite scholarly, uh, you know, language and, and kind of retained that, that, you know, status over the course of, I don't know, hundreds, maybe a thousand years of, of history.
Well, there's so many things that come from that that people don't expect, like even C-section, Caesarian section, because there's legend that Caesar was born in that way, too.
So there's so many things that we use every day that come from that we don't expect.
Sorry, because actually what I assumed, and as you know, I'm sure there's a lot of people who know a lot more about this than I do, but my assumption was, you know, if everyone's speaking some form of Latin, there's a unification in this culture where the writing is going to be similar, everyone's going to be able to communicate, When the capital breaks, basically, and now there's no more cultural ties, the empire falls.
My assumption was, everyone who spoke Latin continued to do so, but now being isolated, they start to create their own endemic evolution of the language.
And that's actually what it says.
When the empires declined, the fragmentation and collapse of its western half in the 5th and 6th centuries, the spoken varieties of Latin became more isolated from each other.
With the Western dialects coming under heavy Germanic influence, the Goths and the Franks, and the Eastern dialects coming under Slavic influence.
The dialects diverged from classical Latin at an accelerated rate and eventually evolved into a continuum of recognizably different typologies.
The colonial empires established by Portugal, Spain, and France in the 15th century onward spread their language to other continents.
Could you imagine if the United States were to follow the path of... Let's say World War III happens.
An EMP just goes off.
Let's say Russia is like, they've invaded, NATO troops are coming, and then the NATO troops are pressing on the eastern border of Ukraine.
So Russia just fires a couple MIRVs, peppering the eastern seaboard.
The EMPs shut down all the major data centers.
Internet is gone.
And then...
After, you know, global decimation of technology, people will still communicate for the most part, but you will start to see rapid evolution of new languages.
I don't think it's possible with communication technology, even if a war were to happen.
But let's say, like, we get an Einstein, I don't know what World War III will be fought with, but World War IV will be fought with, Six and Stones type scenario, where everyone's reduced to the Stone Age.
People in Texas start creating their own, you know, the South starts generating their own language because people stop, they're not traveling as much, they're not communicating over long periods anymore, and then after a couple hundred years, Seattle speaks a different language to Texas.
I'm watching this, and you know, this guy is saying like, You know what really irks me is when people claim that people in Chicago say Chicago because they don't.
And maybe they did 40, 50 years ago, but they don't now.
And people like, I will jokingly say Chicago and then people think it's a literal pronunciation because their exposure to like this word.
I'm like, no, it's ah, it's always been ah, as long as I've been alive.
But the fascinating thing is we did have these dialects that emerged across the country, but then you started getting television, and television started doing away with these regional dialects.
If not for mass communications, the regional dialects absolutely could have started to evolve into new languages.
Anyway, Ian, we're gonna ask about the Federal Reserve printing of money.
unidentified
Oh, uh, yeah, that was, um, so when the Republic fell, the Roman Republic, did it get, was it like expedited by some paperwork signed by some dudes in a back room one night and they were like, all right, it's over?
Or was it, was it actually literally Julius Caesar coming in with the troops?
Caesar kind of expedites the situation because he pisses everybody off, but really it only falls because Augustus keeps it going, right?
People had really been damaged by 133 to 131.
They're just guy invading, guy invading, guy invading.
So eventually they just say, we just want some stability.
And that's what Augustus promises them.
So that's really all people are looking for.
They're looking for a savior.
unidentified
It sounds like, I don't know if you guys know the business plot, you ever hear the business plot?
1933, a bunch of businessmen asked Smedley Butler to lead a fascist coup on the United States.
500,000 men, they wanted him to march to Washington DC to overthrow FDR.
And that sounds like, that was the proposition of like, let's create the empire blatantly, and they, you know, Smedley said no, but that's like the Rubicon, would have been the crossing of the Rubicon, literally.
It's subjective, but you also eventually have this barbarian king, this barbarian guy named Oda Wacker, and he's like, all right, all the troops are with me anyway, so we're just going to end the charade and I'm in charge now.
That's basically what happens.
One guy just says, all right, it's over, I'm in charge.
The reason I ask is because my view of government is basically the confidence of the people.
If the people believe it, it is so.
When we get to a point, as we're getting to now in the United States, people do not believe the police have authority, what do you see?
You know, I just watched a video where a guy gets out of his car and starts punching motor cops, like cops on motorcycles.
He's just beating them, and then he gets in his car and leaves.
That's wild to me.
Because that means that guy is thinking, you have no power.
You can do nothing.
We see these, there's a viral video from New York, where a guy's playing the cello in the subway, a woman walks up, grabs a bottle, and cracks him on the head with it.
She gets arrested, she gets released, no problem.
You got the cops, the people who beat the illegal immigrants, who beat the crap out of the cops, get released right away.
What happens is, people see these stories, and in their minds they think, police have no power.
What happens then?
If we come to a point where, this is how I've explained it in the past, you hear a knock on your door one day, and you walk up and you look through your people, and there is a clown, like a literal clown, with clown makeup and a big bright nose, and he's got an angry expression on his face, and he knocks on the door, and then he goes, on his nose, and you're like, what's going on?
And you open the door, and then he looks at you and he's like, I have a clown warrant for your arrest!
You'd be like, get off my property?
What is this, is this a joke?
Now, the absurdity of seeing a clown do that and call for your arrest, everybody understands the clown can't arrest you.
It's a weird guy.
Now imagine the exact same scenario, but the clown costume is the Bureau of Public Legal Services and you're like, I have no idea what your department is.
Who are you and what authority do you have?
I'm not listening to you.
When it comes to the point where people equate A police officer showing up at their door, knocking on the door and saying, I'm here for your arrest.
I have a warrant from a judge.
And people feel the same way as they would, were it a clown.
But I would say, starting with COVID, they started releasing all these criminals.
Then you look at New York and their very extreme bail reform policies.
It doesn't matter what a court says if there's not a human being to enforce it.
So I, you know, thinking about the end of the Roman Empire and the reason I asked was it like a couple guys in a room being like, we're gonna stop giving the orders, we're gonna stop paying the bills.
That's more of like a very quick thing.
Hey, soldiers are like, we're not getting paid anymore, we're leaving.
And then you don't have soldiers versus a soldier walks up to someone and says, I represent the empire.
And they're like, no, you don't.
There's no empire.
Get out of my house.
So what I see here in the United States is we are moving very rapidly towards the scenario where Cops gonna show up to someone's house, and he's gonna laugh in his face, and he's gonna be like, good luck, dude.
Like, it's wild when you look at these videos out of grocery stores, out of malls or whatever, where people would just steal whatever they want, and the cops are like, I can't do anything.
unidentified
I think it's, yeah, I think that's definitely a narco-tyranny, and just in the general sense of certain classes are allowed to get away with behavior like that.
The reason why in San Francisco you can go in and steal under X amount of stuff and get away with it is because it's predominantly certain minority groups.
And the people who are running in full speed, smashing up these stores and stealing it, it's because they're willing to.
And so, you know, I've dealt with law enforcement in my life, and I've seen this stuff coming for a long time.
When we have a guy, you know, in Chicago, firing a gun And we call the police, they say, what do you want me to do about it?
Like, you're a cop, come here and- No, absolutely not.
But then you get a guy who's speeding, and the cop's gonna be like, I will pull him over and give him a ticket.
Why?
Path of least resistance.
For the law enforcement officer, not always, but it's increasingly getting worse.
The question is, why bother?
Now, if you are a Steve Baker, and I tell you on your knees, and you do it, it's easy.
I don't gotta risk anything.
I don't gotta fight anybody.
He's doing what he's told.
So if you are your average citizen, you're not gonna commit a crime.
The police know that if they want to arrest you, it will be easy.
But they know that these gangs, these various groups that are willing to do these smash and grabs, which from the videos do tend to be mostly one minority group, they tend to be Black people, we tend to see a mix of sometimes Hispanic, and then there was a video out of Home Depot where a white guy was doing it.
I don't think... I don't care to get into the racial component of that.
unidentified
Right, well the reason I brought the racial component up is just because that's why they're allowed to get away with it is because you have this...
It's because they're willing to do it and the cop's thinking to himself, if I walk up to this far leftists, they will throw bricks at my face.
So I will not do anything about it.
Conservatives will get on their hands and knees and say, thank you, officer.
And I'll give you an example.
Gavin McInnes was speaking in New York City.
Far leftists were throwing things at people, threatening them and surrounding the blocks outside of this Republican club.
When the Proud Boys guys were leaving, there's this video where they're just like, alright, let's roll, and they run at the- These Antifa guys in all black are literally attacking people.
And then you get Proud Boys who say, you want to fight?
We'll fight.
They run at them, get into a fight, and beat the crap out of Antifa.
When the police show up, Antifa says, F you, and they run full speed away.
The Proud Boys go to the cops and say, Thank you, officer.
The cop smiles, puts them in cuffs, and put those guys in prison for four years.
Antifa gets away with it because the cops know they can't do anything about it.
The Proud Boys go to prison because they are willing to subject themselves to the rule of the police.
If our society continues in this direction, and we come to the point where people on the right just say, you have no power here, then the police cease to function.
And if there's no police, there's no government.
A judge can bang the gavel all he wants, and then people will smile and carry on.
And that's what we're seeing now in places like New York, where there was one viral story.
Where a guy had been arrested something like 40 times and they kept letting him go.
And finally, he committed some violent crime.
He committed a violent crime and laughed as he was getting arrested saying something like, y'all keep letting me do it.
This is where it's so long as the cops are weighing the, is it easy or is it hard?
unidentified
But these are people that are turning themselves in though, right?
These are people that are turning, they are surrendering to the police and they're nevertheless being let out.
The point that I was trying to make- No, no, no, they're not.
They're not.
So like this guy in New York was a shoplifter, turnstile jumper, and then the last thing he did was like a snatch and grab or something, actually attacked somebody.
And he laughed being like, every time I committed a crime, they'll just let me go.
They walk him in, walk him out in 16 hours.
He's getting arrested.
And the cops are thinking to themselves, what's the point?
So You know, when we were hanging out, we periodically go hang out at National Harbor in D.C.
It's beautiful.
It's in Maryland, but it's just south of D.C., and they got great restaurants.
There's the casino, of course.
One of the DOs at the poker table said, crime has gotten really, really bad in my neighborhood, and he lives, and he was mentioning that he lives in a relatively nice area, or did, and he said there was a guy standing in the middle of the road waving a gun around, and everyone just peels out trying to get away as this guy's just, and nothing happens.
Police won't show up.
What I see happening now is, I know it's really really complicated, it's not so simple, there's a lot of nuance.
When it comes to certain groups, gangs, they refuse to submit.
And the cop, am I gonna run after him?
Nah.
But most Americans aren't gonna commit the crime.
And then what happens is, cop pulls somebody over.
Let's say, you know, I've been given false tickets.
Two times.
I had a cop riding my ass while I'm driving in my car to the point where I thought he was gonna hit me.
So I put on my right signal.
Give myself a little gas to make some space before I turn over.
The moment I'm like three miles over, the lights turn on.
It was a cop.
He pulls me over and starts laughing, saying, why would you speed when there's a cop behind you?
And I was like, you were going to hit me, dude.
I was trying to move.
And he's like, tell it to a judge.
Throws me this bunk ass ticket.
Because he knows I will do nothing about it.
There's no resistance.
I will submit.
Then you get these other scenarios where these guys run around the city with guns and the cops are like, I'm not going anywhere near that.
You get in New York City, where Luke Grudkowski, he interviews this guy, a dude with a knife starts stabbing people and the cops are like, I'm not getting anywhere near that, and they refuse to intervene.
This is the path we're on, and again, the reason why I ask about, like, how does the Roman Empire fall?
Is it eventually, like, imagine if the city said, we're not gonna pay the police officers anymore.
Was it We're the soldiers who like you know you have all these soldiers that are loyal but they're not getting paid so they don't enforce anything or was it people just stop caring what the soldiers had to say?
Right?
Where we are right now in the United States is we're coming to the point where police the word of a police officer is becoming that of a clown.
They knock on your door and you say, there's a, honey, there's a clown at the door complaining saying he wants to lock me in a cage.
Ignore him.
We're getting to that point.
And when that happens, a judge can claim whatever he wants.
The Supreme Court can say whatever he wants.
The president can say whatever he wants.
But as Michael Malice says, these orders are letters to Santa, were it not for the police.
More importantly, the police can do nothing if the people no longer believe in the authority of the police.
So that's, again, to go back to Roman, why I asked.
Was it the authority, the chief of police basically saying, guys, there's no more taxes anymore, we can't pay your salaries, you're fired?
Or was it a Roman soldier in a town being like, hey, you listen here, I'm in charge, and they went, no, you're not.
We've got this invasion on the southern border of people from various countries, including China of all places, Sub-Saharan Africa flying to Brazil and then making their way up.
And we're coming to the point where we are watching these migrants beat the crap out of police.
Michael Rapaport hated Trump, but now he's losing his mind.
Imagine this unchecked for another four years if you get a Joe Biden and you will be in a country where the police will be clowns.
The more people see non-citizens taking whatever they want and the police just being beaten by them, like at what point do the rest of the people of New York or any other city just say, there are no police anymore?
Like there's roving gangs that just do what they want and then what happens I see is You take a look at what's going on in New York City, that spreads.
What are you gonna get?
Suburbs are going to start creating their own de facto police forces.
Call it militia, call it whatever you want.
We saw this during the George Floyd riots.
There was a car driving down the road and there's like three dudes with ARs, low-ready, just standing there as the rioters are doing their thing and they're like, we're guarding our neighborhood.
When it comes to the point where the police basically just say, we can't do anything.
When people believe that police are incapable and the roving criminal alien gangs have more power.
I mean like this Venezuelan criminal alien who has opened fire in Times Square and Venezuelans are rallying behind him to raise money.
Like at a certain point.
American is meaningless.
And you're gonna say, you know, you're from Chicago, but you're not gonna say, I'm from Chicago.
You're not gonna say I'm an American.
You're gonna say, I'm part of the Garfield Ridge Defense Force.
Nobody really calls it Garfield Ridge in Garfield.
That's where I'm from, the Midway, they call it.
But what's gonna happen is a bunch of families are gonna come together and say, the cops aren't, like, we're getting people raiding our stores.
The cops won't do anything about it.
We have to.
There's a viral video right now we showed you the other night where a guy is stealing from a Home Depot.
And a bunch of people just go up and start beating the crap out of him.
Like, we're getting to that point where it's like, the police will do nothing, I don't care anymore.
And the joke we made was how much you want to bet when the cops showed up, they arrested the shoppers who stopped the thief instead of the thief because they assaulted the thief.
Like, look at what happened with Daniel Pena in New York.
Exactly.
It's like people see that and like the person that actually does something is the person that then has to defend themselves and could possibly lose their freedom for actually handling a situation.
And this is where you combine police being beaten by criminal aliens who are being given luxury hotels and being brought in en masse to the tunes of millions.
Then you add on top of that, A veteran who is trying to defend people from a psychopath threatening to kill them goes to prison.
And people are going to say, there is no longer a legal system just roving gangs.
At what point do we get to, when do we get to the point where, let's say there's a guy in New York waving a gun around like this Venezuelan criminal alien, shoot someone.
And then someone else in New York just tackles him, fight ensues, and he kills the criminal alien.
The police show up, and they say something like, you're under arrest for murder, but then other citizens pull out crowbars and baseball bats and say, back the f off.
unidentified
I think we could get there eventually.
I think that we're, I don't know how close we are to that.
And the reason why is because I do think it is a narco-tyranny.
I do think it's, I brought up the minority shoplifters.
You said white Antifa also, you know, get away with this.
Both of those are client groups for the people in power.
So it's not like, yeah, if you're non-white, you can get away with anything, right?
If you're non-white at January 6th, they're going to throw the book at you, sure.
But I do think a lot of the chaos that we see is allowed to happen.
It's not that our ruling class is trying to maintain order.
It's that certain classes that are aligned, that are clients of the people in power, are getting away with quite a bit.
And I think that if you tried to just say no to the cops and say, we've got our community defense system, I think they would still Waco you.
I think we're still at that point.
I agree.
On a long enough timeline, yeah, maybe we move away.
Where you watch a video of illegal immigrants beating cops, and then they get released immediately by the system.
the system is broken.
unidentified
Sure, sure.
But if the people in this room went up and beat up a cop, say, and we would never do this, of course, a female minority police, let's make the cop trans just for added effect, that would have a very different effect.
We would not be allowed to have that happen.
And it's because the ruling class has different standards and different rules and expectations for different groups.
But I do think that it's not inconceivable that we're heading in that direction.
And the point that you're bringing up is just kind of a decline in the ability of a central government to maintain order and to have this kind of monopoly on force.
That's a reasonable thing to maybe 100 years from now to say.
Let's break down what you said, though, that there's one political faction that certainly is ignored or allowed to do these things.
And, you know, I mentioned Antifa.
They're mostly white people.
I mean, overwhelmingly white.
And so why is it then that the police back off?
They allow these things to happen.
Take a look at DC, January 20th, 2017.
Several hundred far-left extremists, mostly white people, smashing up DC, smashing windows, setting fires, torching vehicles.
And not only were they acquitted, they were paid out by the city to the tune of a million plus something dollars.
The reason is, the political forces in these places know their power is derived from these masses.
And if they oppose them, they will lose political power.
They know that by opposing the more libertarian, post-liberal, or conservative faction, they will be empowered.
So these are the... So eventually the point I'm bringing up is, The true power base of the police is the taxpayer, not the far left.
But the far left wields media power and influence, and taxpayers are footing the bill.
Now you've got, in places like Boston, these wealthy elites panicking because they're bringing criminal aliens into their neighborhood, and they're like, why?
Well, you voted for it.
Sooner or later, the true power base, the taxpayer, literally the rabble, the people who do the work to support the system, say no.
When the far left is allowed to commit crimes and get away with it.
When they bring in criminal aliens into the neighborhood of the wealthy elites.
The wealthy elites start to recoil and- and- and- God, I can't believe this is happening!
And then, something interesting will happen when regular working people, normies, who don't pay attention to stuff and don't care, feel like the police are not doing their job.
What- what we're seeing right now, I'll put it this way, when judges let Antifa go, and then prosecute the most minor offenses from January 6th, Law enforcement confidence is shattered in half.
Already people on the right have been screaming to the high heavens, two-tiered justice system.
What happens when these people outright just say it's no longer an issue of justice, it's an issue of criminality?
And when a police officer shows up to enforce something that is clearly not a crime, or I mean, this is the issue right now.
Steve Baker is the name to know.
A journalist, friends with a bunch of journalists, hanging out with a bunch of journalists with a, like one guy, it's not the first time this happened.
One guy was a local camera operator from, I can't remember where he was from, with a large network camera filming in the Capitol.
He thought he had this big breaking story.
He's like, I got all the footage.
His newsroom was super excited, and as soon as he got home, none of the newsroom people would answer his phone, they wouldn't respond to emails, and then the police surround his house and arrest him as an insurrectionist, and they charge him, quite literally, a journalist.
Now, it's happened to Steve Baker.
Already, people know.
What we're seeing with the FBI is not law enforcement, it is crime with the CBP.
Dr. Phil does this story.
Of all people, it was funny when I tell people, like, you hear Dr. Phil say that CBP is facilitating child sex trafficking?
They're like, wait, wait, like, Dr. Phil, Dr. Phil?
I'm like, Dr. Phil from Oprah did an interview on Rogan and The View where he said, the head of the CBP union said it is absolute that they are facilitating child sex trafficking, and they know it.
Like at a certain point, They're, you know, I looked at the founding fathers.
Everybody taught, you know, there's this meme of George Washington and it says, me and the homies would have been stacking bodies by now.
Wrong!
Read about the American Revolution.
It was a year and one month into the Revolutionary War, and the Founding Fathers were still trying to petition the crown.
That's amazing.
They were like, please, please stop killing us.
Please stop shooting at us.
And then a year and a month later, they said, okay, that's it.
For these reasons, we're going to declare independence.
Lexington and Concord happened a year before the Declaration of Independence.
So no, the Founding Fathers were not stacking bodies.
Well, I think that's, when you look historically, that's one of the major areas people mess up.
They're like, oh, you know, this is the time when it all ended, right?
You look at 1776, we have the Declaration of Independence, but we don't have a president until 1790.
So it's like, it's, it's a very, and even leading up to that- And a constitution until what, 89?
Yeah so you look at that and it's like you have a long it's to even get to 1776 you had a 20 or 30 year period and I think people look on history and it's it's interesting now because you look at it with even world war one right they people say Franz Ferdinand was shot on this date and that's what caused it well you don't know that until you're way in the future and you've been able to write about history and I think if you look at it now Are we in the period people are going to write about?
When looking at this, you know, Steve Baker stuff and the other journalists who have been targeted with, I don't view this as law enforcement.
I view, certainly you can argue the rioters on January 6th, people actually fighting cops and smashing things.
Well, yeah, you could charge for that.
It's a crime.
Everyone agrees.
And then as for the journalist, This is an FBI agent just kidnapping somebody.
It's just kidnapping.
It's not law enforcement.
Like, a guy who films something and then provides it to news organizations works as an- He's clearly not intending to break into a building to overturn an election.
They're lying.
And the Capitol building is public.
So journalists should be covering this.
They're targeting innocent people.
We're getting to that point where it's like, If I saw a clown walk up to a journalist and put him in cuffs, I would be like, hey, what is this clown doing?
You're attacking a guy.
It's not a law enforcement agent.
And so, much with like the Revolutionary War, could January 6th be a shot heard around the world type moment?
The shot heard around the world in the Revolutionary War refers to Lexington and Concord.
The crown is a long history that results in this.
The Boston Tea Party results in the Intolerable Acts, which results in colonial government basically forming its own, like, sep.
The crown basically says, we're in charge.
Colonists are like, no, we're going to form our own de facto government.
Outside the city, people are armed to the teeth.
The crown says, surrender your weapons.
They say, no.
The crown tries to march on Lexington and Concord.
At some point, someone opens fire and you get the shot heard around the world moment.
But there was no Revolutionary War.
At the time it happened, they were like, wow, did you hear?
Some regulars were getting shot at and shot back and killed some people.
That's all it was.
A year later, a year and a month later, even at the time, you know, Ben Franklin's going over there and he's being like, guys, come on.
And you get letters being written, petitioning, petitioning, petitioning.
And then a year and one month later, they're like, and there it is.
There's the Declaration of Independence.
They did not know.
So now we look back at it and we say the start of the Revolutionary War was the shot heard around the world at Lexington and Concord.
Not at the time.
Battle of Fort Sumter.
This is what we call as the start of the Civil War.
But then you have the first Battle of Bull Run where civilians gathered around thinking there would not be a Civil War despite the fact historically we say it already started.
Well, you even look at, like, the transition from, you know, the Roman Republic to the Roman Empire, like, it wouldn't have, their day-to-day wouldn't have changed that much.
Like, people still saw it as a functioning Republic.
They're just, like, kind of this new guy in this new weird job, and he's here, and he's kind of doing stuff, but he kept everything intact.
So, we look at it now, and we say, oh, that's when the Empire started, but for people living in that time period, it really wasn't any different.
There's a possibility, depending on, you know, who wins.
In the future, we look back at 2020 as this insane period.
If the Trumpian faction, or whatever you want to call it, you know, wins and arrests people, holds people accountable, these things happen, the history books will write that a coup was staged, the election was stolen, all that stuff.
And they'll write about the corruption of the Democratic Party, how they began arresting journalists and opposition, and it was abject corruption.
If Trump loses, they will write the inverse.
That a coup was attempted by a dictatorial fascist, you know, who rallied his troops, exactly everything Chris Hayes said.
So it really does just come down to which side holds the seat of legitimacy.
The only thing that matters in the end What do people believe?
And if the average person truly fears that the power of government rests in the hands of Trump, Trump can write what he wants.
If they feel that it rests in the hands of the FBI, then the Democrats, the FBI, Biden, I don't say Biden because he's not going to write anything, but that's what will happen.
I feel like we're getting to the point where the uniparty establishment, the elites, whatever you want to call it, They're losing, and it's their own fault, because they refuse to operate as a legitimate law enforcement apparatus.
So long as they arrest journalists, they have basically ended their legitimacy, and we're getting dangerously close to the point where an FBI guy's gonna knock on a door, and the guy's gonna say, no.
He's gonna say, you are not law enforcement, you're a criminal gang, and I won't listen to it.
And then the issue becomes, if 10 people in the country defy federal law enforcement, you see the emergence of a dangerous pattern.
If 100, the federal government begins to lose the ability to police.
If 1,000, then you're getting to the point where people will question whether or not it exists at all.
And if it comes to the point where there are 10,000 individuals who are to be arrested, the federal government has no capability to actually bring those people to justice.
Like, I'm talking about January 6th.
If they were like, here's a list of 10,000 people we have to go arrest right now, and not a single one of them cooperate and actually resist, the federal government will be unable to actually deal with that.
There are not enough federal law enforcement agents.
The only reason the system operates is because people have confidence that there's an overwhelming force coming from the federal government.
With them arresting journalists, they are inching themselves to the point, and perhaps on purpose, Where, sooner or later, there will be an FBI SUV, a couple of them, trying to drive into a small rural town in Oklahoma to serve a warrant, and there's going to be four guys with ARs and a checkpoint, and they're going to say, hold up there, and they're going to say, howdy, show me your papers, and they're going to be like, we're FBI, we have a warrant, and be like, that means nothing here, turn around, get out, and they're going to say, you can't say that to us, and they're like, the hell we can, this is our town, you mean nothing here.
That's the dangerous point we get to.
Now, a lot of people might be saying, like, that'll never happen.
That's scary.
Well, how could that happen?
Take a look at the NYPD being beaten by criminal aliens.
Take a look at the lawlessness we've already seen.
Take a look at January 20th, 2017.
Hundreds of people smashing windows, setting fires, and the city was forced to pay them.
Take a look at the George Floyd riots.
Where's the accountability?
Some accountability, for sure.
For the most part, thousands of people firebombed the White House, firebombed St.
John's Church, the president's forced into a bunker.
Zero accountability.
You get nothing.
We are already at the gates of this, where federal law enforcement is struggling to deal with leftists.
Take a look at the- I mean, look, guys.
Chaz, Seattle.
Far-left extremists took over several city blocks and firebombed a federal building for 90 plus days.
unidentified
The feds were- You had like a rapper who became a warlord or something.
It was such a bizarre chapter of- You had people shot and killed, and the feds could do nothing.
They could do nothing.
They deployed additional law enforcement to the federal building, and they were incompetent and incapable.
They were impotent.
And it happened at George Floyd Square, they called it, in Minneapolis.
It happened at Atlanta.
Now look at Stop Cop City.
The feds aren't even trying to deal with 100 plus terrorists.
It's state level.
The federal law enforcement apparatus is shattering, and the only reason it's functioning right now, January 6th, is because the J6 defenders are apologizing, they're capitulating, and they're saying, you win, I'm sorry.
But if we get to the point where they eventually say, you guys are arresting journalists, you're not legitimate law enforcement, then the FBI can do nothing but act as a gang, no different than the vice lords in Chicago.
I know Ian, you're big about talking about internet video.
And I think if you look at it, the fact that we all know about that is important.
Because in history, people would not have known about it until well after it was over.
And I think if you look at the rise of new media, you look at the rise of podcasts, why did they want to take out Joe Rogan so bad?
Because all he was doing was facilitating conversations you were not supposed to have.
So people can see these things are happening.
They can experience them.
They're seeing their, you know, like you even watched during the presidential run, DeSantis couldn't sit down and have a conversation with anybody on a podcast.
And you look at that and you actually get to see who these people are, how they think, what's happening, what's occurring.
And you're giving enough people an ability to make a decision.
And I think that's how things actually change.
That's why I'm very hopeful about where we are now.
I know things don't look great, But I think the more you show people what's actually happening, when it's actually happening, not this happened ten years ago and now this is where we're at, that's how the tides of change happen.
unidentified
Yeah, the feds not enforcing some of this stuff is interesting, because like you were saying, a cop city, they could do nothing, but technically they could have surrounded the place with siege tanks, they just didn't.
Thousands of people in DC were involved in the firebombing of the White House and St.
force worse than like a robot force, a force of drones that don't have emotions that will not stop.
Like those things could be more dangerous, but they'd be more likely to enforce.
And they're not going to be afraid to run at a guy that's opening fire in a crowd.
Thousands of people in D.C. were involved in the firebombing of the White House and St. John's Church.
Where are the feds and the Capitol Police to set up offices around the country to hunt those people down and bring them to justice?
January 6th has it, but they don't.
This is the point.
In order to save this country, there needs to be a, like, resurgence of law enforcement.
If Donald Trump gets arrested, perhaps he can then start a task force to balance out the law enforcement apparatus.
But so long as we're seeing opposition journalists get arrested and forced to surrender by the FBI, while the far-left extremists who are firebombing government buildings, nothing happens to them?
Like, we are dangerously close to people in this country just saying, what country?
How much does it make Alex Jones look prophetic now?
He's been talking about for 30 years, there's a war on for your mind.
unidentified
I wonder about the difference between prophesying and actually just guiding society towards a thing.
Because when I first learned Alex's stuff, I was like, why does he call it info war?
Is he trying to manifest a war?
Or is he actually just explaining that there is a war?
It took me a while to kind of appreciate that, I don't know what you call it, negative manifest.
Yeah.
Saying, things are bad, things are bad, because then I feel like things get bad.
And if little kids hear that and they're like, things are bad?
Okay, then I'm going to live like things are bad.
I'm going to steal and take what I get because things are bad anyway.
So you really want to say that things are good, point out the problems, but then, because even in war, you need to inspire people and remind them that things are good.
Like you were just saying, Tim, life goes on.
You can't like If you talk about how bad stuff is, you're just gonna, not only is shit gonna fall apart around you, people will turn on you, like, you've gotta manifest a positive potential future.
Sure, but if your kitchen's on fire, and someone's like, hey, I'm concerned about the kitchen fire, and you're like, come on man, don't drag me down, I'm trying to watch the show.
unidentified
Yeah, don't do that.
You put the fire out immediately, but then afterwards, don't cry about it every day.
Oh, there's a fire, there's a fire, there's gonna be more fires, oh no.
It's a balance between awareness, understanding something is happening and handling a situation, and then putting all your attention on that situation all the time.
We've got to create good stuff.
We've got to create better stuff.
I think it's more important than ever for people to start businesses.
I know we're homeschooling our kids, doing things like that.
If we don't handle those things and we don't take responsibility in our own sphere, we are letting those things happen.
The best course of action right now, the highest probability of survival and stability is Trump getting elected, a new AG coming in, the arrest of the uniparty corrupt who have been selling out this country.
I mean, look at Fannie Willis.
We'll call her Fannie Willis.
Look at Judge Engron.
I mean, these people are abject corruption.
Angaran represents the fall of this republic in so many ways.
Trump was found guilty of fraud in a summary judgment by the judge.
No trial, none.
Just banged the gavel and said, okay, let's figure out how much money you owe us, Trump.
The alleged victims, not really victims, said they loved it.
Trump did everything right, he did everything normal, and they all made money, and they'd like to work with Trump in the future.
He said, don't care, you're victims.
And now Trump pays who?
And then Trump said, okay, I'll give you a $100 million bond, and they said, no, we want all of it.
The amount of money they're demanding from Trump just happens to be the amount of money he has in cash.
They're trying to shut down a political campaign with lawfare.
Look, right now, if the Democrats win in November, I do not think it's hyperbolic to say it is the end of the American Republic and the beginning of the American Empire.
In that sense that we now have rule by a shadow, you know, I say shadow government.
I think the Republic ceased to exist in 1913, and I think we've had a bunch of puppet guys since then, you know, I think, and it's just the latest puppet in a line of puppets, and eventually the people that are in power will let us know, hey, we're in power and we're gonna get rid of the puppets.
unidentified
Yeah, Kennedy getting killed, that's a big problem.
It seems like it's this inevitable swing to global government right now that like this would be like the new empire would be like a global empire and they'll attach the military-industrial complex from government so that it's unaccountable And then they'll be like, cops are so bad, you want our robot cops, don't you?
And people will be like, yes, we want some order, give us anything.
So in the first, the movie's basically a small percentage of the population have superpowers, but they're oppressed because it's illegal to use the powers, you can't do that.
And they have robot police that have guns and kill people.
In part two, the people are upset over it.
So they're like, okay, okay, we'll give you the non-lethal dog robots instead.
And so then they have drones and dogs instead because people are like, oh, the cops are so bad.
So basically just, they just mask it, mass produce it.
I don't want to give away parts of the movie though, but.
Well, yeah, because he paid for the history to be written, so as far as we know, you know, he actually had an official scribe that wrote all the histories from 43 to 17.
If the parent probabilities are the corruption of the deep state and the Praetorian Guard, or a self-proclaimed dictator, or pseudo-foe but self-proclaimed dictator, what's your choice?
Right, so, you know, I say, what if Trump really does, like Rachel Maddow loses her mind, it's like, he will be president for life!
Sure.
What if Donald Trump gets in?
And then he's like, we need law and order in this country.
We need mass deportation.
He begins deporting the millions of criminal aliens.
People begin cheering for it.
And then three and a half years later, he's like, well, that's about doing it.
That does it for me.
And then people rise up in the street saying, no, no, no, no, no, no.
Amend the constitution.
Let Trump stay.
Let him remain.
And then Trump says, I'll do it if you want me to.
But, I guess, philosophically, morally speaking, if Trump begins to enforce the law, the economy improves, the border is becoming secure, wars are fading, would you say, no, no, it's bad because he's being dictatorial, so we should go back to the Praetorian Guard system?
Or would you be like, I accept it?
unidentified
If the choice is Trump or the Deep State, I'm going with Trump, president for life, definitely.
And whether that's, you know, the Trump becomes dictator scenario or another one, it remains to be seen.
But there has to be some kind of change.
Yeah, the decentralization of military authority, I'm not sure which emperor you said did that, went into the empire and was like, in order to stop getting attacked in the capital.
If Trump gets elected and there's a little bit of reform, but it's still kind of bad.
And then some Democrat comes in and wins in 2028, and then things start getting worse and worse, and then you get a couple Republicans, and then after, you know, 15 or so years, or I think 20 years, Barron Trump becomes the self-proclaimed dictator.
He's like, he's almost 7 feet tall, and then the country's in disarray, it's not working, there's a lot of fighting, and then, you know, he becomes 35, he decides, I don't know how old he'll be when he'll first be eligible to run, when the first election will be, but then he runs, and then he declares himself, and it was Barron the whole time.
Not Donald.
Donald means, Donald Trump means Herald of the World Ruler.
I think it goes back to though getting back to a Republican form of government.
I think that's really what we've gotten so far away from that because you look at even the US Senate serves no purpose.
It serves no purpose.
We have two Congresses because they're both elected the same way and state legislatures don't have a say in anything anymore.
State legislatures is actually what would have been able to fix 2020 because they would have had a say to the Senate but instead we just have two Congresses.
There serves no purpose.
unidentified
I think that they stopped the mob from making decisions, but I guess either House could do that, the House could do that, or the Senate.
It could do that, and if you look at the 17th Amendment, they did it for a good reason.
What was happening was...
Um people were taking their political friends because since the state legislature was electing The senators and putting their friends in those positions But I think you figure out how to reform that you don't get rid of it all together because it doesn't serve a purpose.
Otherwise You you the state legislature has no representation And you really just have two congresses then because they're voted for the same way the pro a big problem with The republic is that the guys the people up there aren't representing That's true.
Well, one of the things George Washington wanted is he wanted a much larger representation side for Congress, so there would have been substantially more people in Congress.
And imagine that many people are there, they wouldn't agree on anything.
That would be great.
And like, if you look at the Corsus Honorum in Rome, so that's like the series of things you would go through to actually run the city and run the country.
They had term limits.
You served for a year and then they replaced you.
And then it was several years before you could hold another position.
I think that's actually really important.
And a lot of those people were landholders and they had careers and they were in the Senate.
And I think That is something that we don't have.
We don't have a better term limit system.
Term limit on the people in the jobs, but also the people that work for them.
Senate staffers and congressional staffers, they're the same people that just cycle over, man.
unidentified
- Did the Romans have a deep state? - The Praetorian Guard later on.
Well, the senators didn't actually, so they would, the Roman Senate would make recommendations, and then the people that were actually in positions would later implement that.
It was typical when the Senate said, we recommend this, it would be through a decree, that it would be put into actual usage, but the Senate didn't actually put anything into motion, they just recommended things.
However, German officials do confirm a long, long, long time ago it was a surname, but the general consensus seems to be that it literally just means Trump.
It's the same thing.
And, you know, that's about it.
So Trump literally is the Trump of a trumpet.
You know?
And Donald means ruler of the world.
Baron means nobleman or warrior.
So it does really seem like Donald Trump is the dude.
Like if he was to be, it's not going to be his son, it's going to be him.
But, you know, I think it's also kind of silly.
With that being said, my name means one who honors God and is judged by him.
Yeah, I would say it's similar, but I think at the same time, we're in a good position to have a reformer put things back where they are and put things back in position.
I'm very hopeful because at the same time, you know, we're able to have conversations like this and we're able to have more people be aware and understand.
And at JeremyRyanSlate on X, same thing for my YouTube channel, and once again, my company's Commander Brand, and we help to facilitate conversations like this and make a big impact, so I wrote a book on it because I think this is really important, so that's over at BestPodcastBook.com.
