The Culture War - Tim Pool - Why Charlie Kirks Assassination Will Start The Coming Civil War

All Episodes

Sept. 16, 2025 - The Culture War - Tim Pool

34:39

Why Charlie Kirks Assassination Will Start The Coming Civil War | Tim Pool Reacts

Participants

Main voices

tim pool

24:42

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Will there be a civil war in the United States?
		It's an interesting question.
		Obviously, I've talked about it quite a bit.
		And let me just switch that real quick.
		We have this video from two days ago with 430,000 views and no description from Moon.
		Why Charlie Kirk's assassination will start the coming civil war.
		Now, even I dare not say it will.
		I say this in the utmost of I don't know, take it for what it will.
		I have been correct on so much of what I've predicted.
		And I have not always been correct on everything.
		I am not clairvoyant, nor am I a super genius.
		I just read the news so often, vague predictions come true.
		That is to say, the example I've given as of recent, that's an old one, was that in September of 2020, I said on my morning show and on Tim Cast IRL, if Donald Trump loses in November, his supporters are gonna storm the White House.
		They're gonna go to DC, they're gonna break in, they're not going to accept this.
		And of course, I was wrong.
		No one in the November stormed the White House.
		Ah.
		But I almost got it, right?
		January 2021, only a few months later, Trump supporters stormed the Capitol.
		Call it whatever you want.
		The general idea I was correct about, just the specifics, I missed.
		Before January 6th, but after November, I was called a Looney Tune crackpot.
		Actually, when I said it was gonna happen, I had people on the left being like Tim Pool's nuts.
		Yeah, Trump supporters are bad, but they're not gonna storm the White House.
		That'll never happen.
		Civil War?
		Get out of here.
		November came and went, and they laughed and said, see, what a lunatic.
		After January 6th, they said, arrest Tim Poole, subpoena him.
		He had foreknowledge of January 6th.
		How about that?
		My prediction was not that good, but it was close.
		So they made fun of me until January 6th happened and then said it must have been foreknowledge.
		Well, I genuinely believe that there is but one path.
		I watched a video where a guy mocked in front of a big crowd of people, mocked Charlie Kirk and acted like he was getting shot.
		I just watched a video where a cyclist, a transgender individual, threatened to kill a lady.
		Vaguely, not directly, but this person said, We kill Nazis and you're a Nazi, which it's a threat of death.
		A man then physically attacked the lady.
		The temperature's not coming down, and there is no reality by which anyone is going to effectively simmer down two distinct moral world views.
		And so I look to Moon, and I will hear what he has to say, and I will offer my commentary as that civil war guy.
unidentified		Famous for bringing open Charlie Kirk's assassination is a tipping point in America.
		Because Charlie was famous for bringing open unfiltered debate to college campuses.
		He was in the midst of one of his signature prove me wrong sessions with his wife Erica and two children being present.
		When on September 10th, a sniper assassinated him just days after a Ukrainian refugee was also savagely murdered on a bus in Charlotte during a race-motivated attack.
		And all of this a year after Trump's attempted assassination.
		Just around the 24th anniversary of 9-11, an attack that united Americans.
		And yet now these attacks are dividing America more than we've ever seen before.
		While most people were shocked by this, thousands also expressed their joy over his death.
		Some of the media even smeared him.
		Charlie Kirk is a divisive figure.
		Polarizing, lightning rob, whatever term you want to use.
		And even the House couldn't agree to have a moment of silence for him.
		Which is why this politically motivated terror attack might just be the one that tears America apart.
		As it seems a line has now finally been crossed in the country, as his death is a window into how far American political discourse has traveled from division to something far riskier for the entire population.
		It's why around 43% now believe a civil war is at least somewhat likely in the next 10 years.
		As we see yet another young 20s politically radicalized guy trying to take down open discussion with bullets, whether it be Luigi Mancioni, Thomas Matthew Crooks, and Tyler Robinson.
		And making Martyr out of one of Americans' most famous commentators is only gonna radicalize everyone so much more.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		I will clarify first and foremost, Luigi Mangione is still on trial, and that's an so their allegations as of now, and this is an important distinction.
		Tyler Robinson, according to Cash Patel, effectively confessed.
		So I think we're gonna have an open and shut case on that one.
		That is important to understand.
unidentified		Because if you followed US politics over the past decade, you've probably seen him at least once.
unidentified		As he was everywhere from Fox News podcasts, college campuses, Trump rallies.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		He showed Tim Cast.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Oh man, this is it's so at least once.
unidentified		As he was everywhere from Fox News Polkart.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		This is uh Joe Biden in the background.
		That's uh demonic Joe Biden uh devouring a little girl.
		Shout out to G Prime 85's art.
		Shout out to Charlie Kirk and the turning point USA team.
		This is particularly brutal to have to see, man.
		That's uh you can see, look at this.
		Where's the chair?
		Can you see the chair behind me?
		No, I got the stupid pillow on it.
		I don't need that pillow.
		There you go.
		Look at that.
		Sitting in the chair, man.
unidentified		Us college campuses, Trump rallies.
unidentified		He became one of the most recognizable faces in the modern conservative movement, building turning point USA at the age of just 18 into a massive operation by the time he died, with 55 million dollars in annual revenue.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		And David 300 the last reported revenue, I think was for 23, as they're probably finalizing their 24 taxes now was 81 million dollars.
		But I'm gonna jump ahead a little bit.
		Because I want to hear his argument on civil war.
unidentified		Or they just straight out used his death for some other point, all while those on the right demand a total war against the left.
		Then things became even crazier.
		When people seem realized that when those taken into police custody were just decoys.
		The first was the 71-year-old George Sin, a local activist with a decades-long history of showing up to political events across Utah.
		Witnesses captured videos of police escorting Zinn away from the scene.
		A uniformed officer was then heard saying on the video he said he shot him, but I don't know.
		We don't know if it's him or not.
		Despite a massive man Hunt.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		That man, of course, lied.
		And we have this report.
		He told the cops he shot Charlie in order to give the real shooter time to escape.
unidentified		Involving federal, state, and local agencies, the actual shooter remained at large for some 48 hours until an extraordinary development.
		The suspect's own father bravely turned a men.
		Tyler had confessed the shoes.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		So this I I look with respect to Moon in this video, I don't want to play his whole thing.
		He's doing a great breakdown, everything.
		I want to get to the civil war arguments specifically.
		And it looks like so far he's just giving us the uh general breakdown at the beginning.
		So let's jump to uh this portion where it gets a little bit more interesting.
unidentified		The danger zone where countries are vulnerable to political violence.
		Now, people will always naturally disagree on when this started happening and which side of the political spectrum is primarily to blame.
		And it's no secret that the US political system swings like a pendulum from Democrats to Republicans.
		But research from the University of Southern California indicates that each side is now further apart than the early 1900s.
		In fact, America has been more polarized for a longer period than any other major democracy on the planet.
		In the kind of conditions the US might be heading for, evidence suggests that the annual risk for civil war conflict reaches four percent per year.
		That seems low at face value, but consider that's a compound risk of 40% over 10 years, and suddenly it doesn't look so small anymore.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		So let me give you an example.
		Uh in the 1820s, there was conversation about the possibility of a civil war breaking out in the United States.
		Uh the reason I say a conversation about the possibility is that it didn't, and it wasn't that serious.
		But the conversation between the states was obviously the issue of slavery being hotly debated.
		You see, the founding fathers actually did not want slavery.
		Thomas Jefferson wanted to include in the Declaration of Independence that the Crown had taken other people from across the world and brought them into the US and used them to levy war for like to create the system that they did not want.
		However, Jefferson ultimately decided to remove that from one of the initial statements in the declaration, as Georgia and South Carolina risked uh it risked those states, those colonies at the time, leaving the their their uh thirteen original colonies, thus they would not have the requisite manpower to go up against the crown for for independence.
		Now, admittedly, they didn't to begin with, and it was the French intervention that ultimately helped the United States win.
		But another important Factor is when we refer to the original 13 colonies, there were more than that.
		Quebec was given the offer to join as the 14th colony, as it was a colony under the crown, and it opted not to.
		Thus it is a part of Canada.
		And the 13 original colonies were just the 13 that said, ain't no thing with Joe Kang.
		So when we talk about civil war in this country, 1820, it didn't happen.
		It took until 1861.
		But still, what many people don't realize is the bleeding Kansas period, which was a seven-year period before the beginning of the Civil War, where in various territories, but mostly centered in Kansas, abolitionist and pro-slavery forces were massacring each other.
		The war was happening.
		What does that mean?
		If you take a look at what we're seeing now and the points being made by Moon, good points, by the way.
		And I mean with with the utmost respect, a surface level overview.
		What you see is the conversations that are happening now, as he points out the 4% compounding factor, 40% over 10 years.
		Every year, with this polarization, the likelihood of civil war increases.
		What you need now is a large group of listless young men with no jobs, no purpose, and no families.
		And fortunately for us, we don't.
		Uh-oh.
		We have absolutely that.
		That's what's terrifying.
		Now we may be, as it is 2025, in a similar situation to the 1820s, where the conversation is emerging, but does not reach that level of hyperpolarization.
		But there are many key differences.
		The 1820s and 1861, these were sovereign states largely viewing themselves as independent nations, part of a union.
		Thus, their militaries and their constitutions were supreme in their land, and they viewed themselves as unified.
		In the United States today, I've lived in California, Seattle, Denver, Chicago, Virginia, West Virginia, New York, New Jersey.
		I've lived all over the place.
		And I don't consider myself Illinois.
		Most people don't.
		You had your home and you lived there and you died there.
		That is a major difference.
		One more compounding factor to all of these details is social media.
		More and more people are online talking to each other at lightning speed, faster than ever before.
		So in the 1820s, news traveled by horseback.
		That meant that you would be sitting on your ranch tending to your chickens and cows, and you wouldn't hear back about whether or not there was an escalation in political violence or rhetoric for months.
		In fact, it was years.
		Because for the most part, Congress in session, they got to travel back.
		News over over whatever Congress was doing wouldn't even make it to your town for months.
		Newsmen would bring newspapers from DC or New York and travel the country for money to read the news from three months ago.
		That's how news traveled.
		Get this.
		When the Declaration of Independence was actually signed, which one could argue we call it a revolution, could have been considered a civil war in a sense that you had under one crown these warring factions, but a revolution in the in the colonies is a better way to describe it.
		So the war already broke out, Lexington Concord, and that was a year just about before the actual signing of the Declaration of the Independence.
		The founding fathers got together and they said, we hereby declare with that declaration of independence.
		It was then put on a boat, and it took like three months to make it to England, to the to Great Britain, to the Crown, then Parliament and the Crown go over it and they're like, what's going on?
		And it took months for a response.
		That meant they signed it, shipped it off, and said, and now we wait.
		Not anymore.
		When the statements are made with lightning precision, everyone knows, which means though we are in perhaps an 1820s period, the hyper-escalation of rhetoric and and and threats of violence is rapidly expanding, much faster than we saw in the 1820s.
		So perhaps the killing of Charlie Kirk, one could say, this is bleeding Kansas.
		Could you deny it?
		Honest question.
		You've got murders, violence.
		We have more political murders now than we've had in the past.
		I forgot that the metric is.
		So not the the academic studying all of the political murders.
		But Stephen Mars said we are in civil strife.
		And that was a couple years ago.
		That's it.
	That is if you have at least 70 political deaths in your country.
	It's a big country.
	So maybe that's hard to say.
	The estimates right now are on 150 political deaths.
	So, Rudyard Lynch of What If Autist, you were wrong.
	But close.
	To be fair, I think it's at a thousand.
	150 this year so far.
	What does that really mean?
	I don't know.
	Because sometimes when they classify political deaths, they say things like, a racist guy stabbed the not you know a black guy or something.
	And you're like, was that really political?
	But online, the rhetoric is rapidly expanding.
	Let's continue the video from Moon.
	And I always want to give a shout out to those that I react to.
	It's just Moon on YouTube.
	I recommend you check out the full channel and subscribe to watch his full video and full credit to Moon.
	Shout out for your video so far.
	I think you've done a pretty good job.
	And uh let's let's listen.
unidentified		In Yugoslavia, in the 80s, it was described as one of the largest, most developed and diverse countries in the Balkans.
		Different ethnic groups lived in the same neighborhoods, went to the same schools, intermarried freely.
		It had been a functioning multi-ethnic state for decades.
		Then the economy started falling apart, and by 1991, Stevenia and creation were declaring independence.
		US intelligence predicted Yugoslavia would cease to function as a federal state within a year, and will probably dissolve within two, and that the violence would be intractable and bitter.
		Over the next few years, more than 100,000 people were killed, and two million were forced to flee their homes.
		Neighbors who had lived peacefully together for generations started slaughtering each other.
		And you can question whether America is really comparable to other countries that had civil wars, but the basic pattern is developing.
		Countries don't usually collapse overnight, they break down slowly, then all at once, especially when foreign hostile countries do everything they can to make sure this happens.
		And singular violent events are proven to accelerate the trajectory, even in historical events as colossally huge as the fall of Rome and World War One.
		But here's the thing though, we don't even need to speculate with historical parallels when we can see what's happening right now in America.
		Since 2024, approximately 2,000 National Guard troops have been deployed domestically.
		Trump signed an executive order directing the National Guard to create specialized military units to quell civil disturbances in American states.
		Right or to be deployed at his command.
		Retired Major General Randy Manor, a former acting vice chief of the National Guard Bureau said the administration is trying to desensitize the American people to get used to American armed soldiers in combat vehicles patrolling the streets of America.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Trump is allowed to do this.
		Trump is allowed to deploy National Guard and even the military.
		However, they can't uh enforce local laws.
		There's there's a law called Possi Comitatus, which says that you cannot use the military for local law enforcement.
		However, they can be deployed under the orders of the president.
		They can protect federal buildings.
		So they're not enforcing the law, they're just basically doing security.
		The insurrection act allows the president to deploy the military in the event that an insurrection occurs.
		That's a simple way of putting it.
		The easy way to put it is if local laws are not being enforced, the federal government can use the military to enforce those laws if Trump declares an insurrection.
		There are two different versions of the insurrection act, one was updated.
unidentified		Meanwhile, threats and harassment against local officials jumped over the past few years.
		The Capitol Police said they have more threats against members of Congress in 2024 than ever before, with even two attempts against Trump himself, when America was just inches away from Trump being dead.
		And then we can also look at how this division is affecting the population itself.
		Recent polling shows 65% of Americans feel exhausted when thinking about politics.
		55% feel angry, and only 10% feel hopeful.
		Most troubling of all, 80% can't agree on basic facts anymore.
		Most critically, people oppose each other more harshly than ever.
		Forty-three percent of Republicans and 38% of Democrats hold very unfavorable views of the opposing party, up from just 17% and 16% in 1994.
		And this is where it gets so crazy with Charlie Kirk's assassination.
		When people live in completely different versions of reality, they start seeing political opponents not as fellow citizens with different views, but as existential threats that need to be taken out.
		All whipped up and catalyzed by our media environment that has basically created those parallel universes in tangent with social media.
		Take campus protest offense, they regularly turn violent, require riot police and tactical gear to move people along, or the storming of the Capitol or the BLM riots.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Now let's just pause and point out.
		The storming of the Capitol was one bad thing, and it was a bad thing.
		But the BLM riots, the college protests are an ongoing thing for my entire life.
		In fact, in the 2000s, I was a part of these anti-war protests marching through the streets of Chicago.
		Everybody was pissed off.
		Then when Obama got in, they seemed to not really care about the war all that much anymore.
		Until the crisis happened with financing and housing, then people started to get upset, Leading us a couple years later to occupy Wall Street, for which I was there.
		I documented it.
		I filmed it, I live streamed it.
		There has every year of my life, since I was a young teenager.
		I can't speak to being 12 or younger, because uh you had the Al Gore Bush thing.
		Leftist liberal protests.
		Nothing from the right.
		Brooks brothers, they say, I don't even know about that, to be honest, not at the time.
		Now here we are today.
		The right is not going out in the street engaging in this violence.
		But that's neither here nor there.
		The question right now, a good point brought up by Moon.
		The polar for the polar uh polarization and the bifurcation.
		What we are looking at is two universes.
		Both sides seeing each other as an existential threat.
		And that's true.
		It doesn't matter what you think is true.
		It doesn't matter.
		You know, my favorite example of this is I state all the time what the truth doesn't matter to a hyper polarized people because they determine what's true from their world.
		If you grow up and all you see over and over and over again are videos of police brutality, then you believe it's a pervasive problem and it's the worst problem imaginable.
		If you've never seen those videos, you'd be like, what are you even talking about?
		So when you come from a traditional American moral worldview, you're going to say child sex changes are bad.
		If you come from a progressive adaptive view built largely on social media algorithms, you're gonna say, what's the problem?
		This is an existential crisis.
		Because the traditional moral worldview of America, and I'm not even talking about Christian traditional, I'm talking about liberals and Democrats from like 10 years ago, would be you don't give kids sex changes.
		But now it's become mainstream and pervasive among the progressive left.
		The traditional American view sees that as an existential threat to our existence.
		Children must be able to grow up free from these this mutilation, and they be otherwise they can't even reproduce.
		And if we can reproduce, what do we do?
		And the left says, abortions for all, sex changes for whoever.
		And well, if they can't have kids, so what?
		Immigration's a solution.
		But immigration threatens the fabric of the nation.
		Because the worldview of those migrants is also drastically different from traditional Americans.
		Thus, no matter which side you're on, you face an existential threat.
		It's not so much about who is right or wrong or what is true.
		It is that if you're a progressive liberal, yes, Charlie Kirk, if he were to win politically, your worldview would be marginalized.
		He didn't want to kill anybody or anything like that.
		But he certainly would say you can't give kids sex changes, which means if you live in a world where you deem it mandatory, you were facing an existential threat to your ideology.
		Not to you personally, but that's what they said.
		They want us to not exist.
unidentified		Respect existence or expect resistance.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		That's how they played it.
unidentified		Depending on which news anyone consumes, they see completely different events.
		And we all know by now how social media and his algorithms play into this.
		As this bar the any money to be made from nuance coverage that says this was complicated with multiple factors.
		Now you need two or more sides to contribute to any debate.
		But a healthy debate needs middle ground, and that's what America has completely lost.
		Mostly because of the way the media treats issues.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		To exemplify what he's saying, I'm gonna show you this post from the Joe Rogan subreddit.
		This was done intentionally by me, and anybody who follows me on X knows this.
		You can follow me on X at Timcast.
		Subscribe to this channel, by the way.
		At Joe Rogan put Tim Poole with great takes as always.
		And it's a tweet for me that says, it should be illegal to not believe in God.
		It's an archived post.
		The top comment.
		This sounds like Sharia law to me.
		I realize I was being reductive, but I was referring to places where legislation is based on Sharia.
		I thought that would be implied by context.
		That's the top comment.
		The next one says it should also be illegal to cosplay as a leukemia patient for the better part of two decades, but here we are, Tim.
		The next one says, I would genuinely like to know what his appeal is.
		He's always complaining about something, blah, blah, blah.
		Ah, yes, because with every great theologian will tell you that God wants people to be forced to worship him.
		Indeed.
		Now, the funny thing is, you gotta scroll down.
		People need to understand that since Twitter started paying its users for more views and engagements, Tim Poole has been like this.
		Lies!
		I have been like this the whole time.
		I have always been, I will refrain from swearing, an ish head who pokes the bear and makes a point.
		Because I ain't on your team, I ain't on anyone's team.
		Let's see how uh how far you gotta go.
		It should be illegal to be that stupid, which God, Poole is permanent, the party of freedom.
		Uh let's see, he hates having his freedom.
		Are there any actual cool conservatives?
		This is where Gen Z. Here's act this is pretty good, actually.
		It's photoshopped me, morbidly obese.
		I look like one of the Duck Dynasty guys.
		I actually think that's pretty good.
		Uh amazing.
		This is the bifurcation of social media.
		Corrupted syntax, finally.
		He followed up with a tweet saying believing in God should be illegal, which got far less engagement, which no doubt he pointed to saying, see, they hate religion, but he still didn't get it.
		Because I made my point.
		And actually, I think if I sort by controversial, because that's what Reddit's giving you, you might actually see he's making a joke for F's sake.
		Yep.
		That's bait.
unidentified		It's downvoted.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Tim Poole tweets our trolls, LMAO.
		I'm not sure why we're posting a tweet from six months ago, but freedom of religion is protected.
		Blah blah blah.
		He tweeted that right after saying it should be illegal to believe in God, he did this to test the algorithm or something.
		Correct, but it'll go over everyone's head and they'll only see a surface level and confirm their beliefs with absolutely no hate in their heart.
		That's right.
		He isn't any petition to make it happen, blah, you're falling for a troll is more shameful.
		Reddit upvoted.
		They ignored that two tweets were put at the exact same time.
		For the purpose of me saying, this is the point.
		The left is only going to share what makes them mad and they can use to justify what they want.
		The same is true largely for the right, but not entirely.
		The reason why I'm more considered to be aligned with the right is because I'm more willing to tell what's true.
		And that means when the media lies, I will call it out.
		When they say the right is more responsible for violence, and I say that's not correct.
		Here's the stats.
		They go, he's defending the right, therefore he's on the right.
		But if you live in a world of lies, that's what you'll believe, but none of this matters.
		You can tell me I'm wrong right now.
		Say, Tim Pool, you're a liar.
		You're a conservative and a liar.
		Fine, I don't care.
		The fact of the matter is, as it pertains to civil war, both sides refuse to believe what is true or what is not true.
		Now I certainly think the right is uh has a has a uh truth, has a right wing bias.
		Reality is a right-wing bias, but it's fine if you think I'm wrong.
		That proves my point.
		In which case, at least on this point, I am right.
		The bifurcation is here.
		I don't know how YouTube's gonna deal with it.
unidentified		And while this isn't exactly new, it's getting so much worse in the last couple of years.
		And this sort of violence has a nasty habit of snowballing.
		Take the 2011 shooting of Congresswoman Gabby Giffords.
		Within hours of the tragedy, both political sides were blaming each other's rhetoric for creating the climate that led to the violence.
		The shooter turned out to be severely mentally ill with no real coherent political ideology, who actually voted for independence and his friends said wasn't left or rights, but that didn't stop the blame game for slogging on for weeks.
		So Martin Luther King was assassinated.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		That's a really great point.
		You can look back at those shootings and say, it was not politically motivated, but it led to the bifurcation.
		The rhetoric that he was this moon was describing on both sides is the conversation that breeds two distinct political classes in the younger generation.
		The older generation is more unified.
		But as time goes on and they age out, you eventually end up with two distinct universes who see the world in entirely different ways, and that's how you get civil war.
		Now it's not always about two groups, mind you.
		It's about two umbrella factions.
		Within these factions of moral worldview, you will get distinct and individual groups with with slightly different beliefs.
unidentified		Riots erupted in nearly 200 cities within hours.
		43 people died, 3,500 would injured, and 27,000 were arrested over 10 days of violence.
		And the significance of this though is that three TV networks basically told the same story to the whole country.
		People could disagree about solutions while agreeing on basic facts.
		But America no longer has the luxury anymore, as we can quite clearly see from the world's reaction to Kirk's assassination.
		It's a horrifying thing to see, because back in 2021, MIT researchers working with the Club of Rome updates their modeling and found that we were on track for quotes the terminal decline of economic growth within the Coming decades.
		In 2022, they put out the laser study called Earth for Rule that basically asked, what happens if we keep doing what we're doing?
		And their answer wasn't exactly upbeats.
		They ran two scenarios through 2100.
		One where we model through too little too late, and one where we actually get our act together.
		The model three scenario shows world being dropping by 40% in wealthy countries by the 2050s, with regional societal class becoming more likely social tensions, food issues, and environmental problems start feeding each other.
		Today we're already half through 2025, and guess which scenario we're following?
		Yes, it's not the optimistic one.
		And this is all before just the recent events of the last month.
		And while plenty of people think that these researchers are just professional pessimists who've been predicting doom for decades, their chart record has actually been pretty solid so far.
		But whether you believe their projections or not, the basic point is that when societies are already stressed on multiple fronts, economically, socially, environmentally, they become way more vulnerable to what researchers called shame reactions of bad events.
		One bad thing happens, then another, then another.
		But it's why it's clear the Kirk's assassination seems to be a huge tipping point in America.
		Adding so much fuel to the fire of a country where 80% can't agree on the basic facts, where political violence is getting more calculated and targeted.
		Where to be in politics and give your opinions in America means you have a very high chance of being killed.
		Where our media politics and social media all then reward division over unity, where people are quite literally excited to see that political opponents get taken out.
		The question isn't really whether America can survive any single political assassination, but whether it can survive becoming the kind of country where political assassinations feel inevitable.
		Correct.
		Because the most shocking thing about all of this is that not that many people are even surprised.
		It almost just felt like something like this would happen.
		And it probably will continue to do so.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		No.
		Maybe.
		You know, maybe that's what he thought.
		None of us thought that Charlie would be killed like this.
		And I've done events, we are gonna do an event, and with all the security threats that I've faced, I I never thought this was possible.
		And it is very strange, even right now, it is difficult to believe.
		Perhaps I'm still in denial.
		I mean, like logically, I get it.
		Charlie's gone.
		But it feels impossible.
		For the longest time I've been warning about the threat of civil war.
		That the escalation we've seen from street violence would make its way to the highest level of politics.
		And in 2018 and 19, I was they told me I was crazy.
		And I didn't understand how they couldn't see it.
		There were two distinct moral universes.
		They were growing, they were expanding.
		They were young.
		And eventually they found their way into politics.
		I said sooner or later this will reach the highest level of politics.
		They said, no, you're crazy.
		I was told the security state would never allow a civil war.
		Doesn't matter if it's the left or right fighting in the street.
		What people didn't understand was that I could see it at the grassroots ground level.
		I have been covering all of this violence for so long that there is a left and a right that completely have different views of what is even true.
		Like one plus one equals two.
		The left believes two plus two equals five.
		It's not an exaggeration.
		You may be saying, Tim, that's crazy.
		No one believes two plus two equals five.
		I'm gonna prove it for you.
		A massive campaign.
		Let me see if I could- Oh, it's it's hard to actually pull up the uh.
		Let's uh here we go.
		I'm gonna pull it up.
		Two plus two equals five was a big debate.
unidentified		Uh for a long time.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Here we go.
		How two plus two equals five, it's time to tell uh.
		Here's a post from Medium.
		No, two plus two does not equal five, but that was never the point.
		In August of 2020, an article popped up in Popular Mechanics why some people think two plus two equals five.
		And why they're right.
		Popular Mechanics published this.
		You may be saying this can't be reality, Tim.
		They even have an image that's two plus two equals five, really.
		It's it's not correct.
		It was never correct.
		What they're basically saying is we can get you to believe falsehoods.
		And if you live in the world largely of the left, you believe this.
		This is why I plead and I beg and I cry.
		To so many liberals.
		Get out of the cult.
		But they can't.
		I'll make it simple for you.
		The argument for why two plus two equals five is because of decimals.
		They say 2.4 rounds down to two.
		But 2.4 plus 2.4 equals 4.8, which rounds to 5.
		Therefore, to simplify, 2 plus 2 equals 5.
		They also make the argument that if you have two individual cubes and two individual cubes, and you put them together, you have one, two, three, four.
		Ah, but five now, because they form a cube unto themselves.
		Therefore, but it's a lie.
		Intentionally breaking apart or tricking, like 4.2, what is it?
		If you're doing 2.25, oh, I'm sorry, 1.25 and 1.25 plus 1.25 and 1.25, you get five.
		That's the cube argument.
		We have language to describe this phenomenon.
		There is no circumstance in which you will write 2 plus 2 equals 5.
		But that's the world we live in.
		And they'll tell me I'm wrong.
		My friends, I don't know that civil war is going to happen.
		I can't predict the future.
		It is a bold statement of Moon to say why it will.
		Interesting, nonetheless.
		He makes a good point, and I'm afraid that he's actually correct.
		In my heart of hearts, I am taking every precaution as if at some point there will be a civil war.
		Why?
		Because it doesn't matter.
		If I live in the middle of nowhere in a secure facility, I'm safe from current threats which exist.
		If civil war breaks out, I'm much safer here than I would be living in a big city.
		If civil war doesn't break out, I got a skate park, I got a big open field to ride around my little dirt bikes on and can get a dog, and it's not bad living in the country.
		So the actions I take are in no way detrimental.
		And if it turns out I am wrong, it won't matter because I'm living good out here in the boonies as it is.
		If you live in a big city, I gotta be honest, even in current circumstances, it's not fun.
		You beat you're breathing in disgusting air.
		Granted, there's a lot of restaurants nearby, I'll give you that.
		But I can get my electric vehicle, my Tesla, and I can drive basically anywhere.
		I got restaurants all over the place too.
		Big open country roads, probably takes me the same amount of time to get there as it does you in the city.
		So weighing all of these realities, there is no detriment to preparing for the worst case scenario.
		None.
		So why not?
		And I hope I'm wrong.
		And I hope one day people look back and they laugh and say, that guy thought that was gonna happen.
		He was crazy.
		Unfortunately, I think we're on a track everybody kind of recognizes.
		I'll leave it there.
		Smash that like button.
		Share this show.
		Welcome to the new at Tim Pool channel.
		Reactions, commentary, less newsy, but this one was pretty newsy.
		I can't help it.
	Thanks for hanging out.

▲