Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 23, 2025 - The David Knight Show

01:01:35

Dark Enlightenment vs. Game B: The Battle Over Technocrat Futures

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	All right, welcome back, folks, and joining me now is Courtney Turner, CourtneyTurner.com, and that is spelled C-O-U-R-T-E-N-A-Y-Turner.com, like Courtney, but Courtney, and she hosts the Courtney Turner Podcast.
	Thank you for joining us, Courtney.
	Thank you so much for having me.
	It is a pleasure.
	And, of course, we were talking during the break, and you said you wanted to talk about Game B. versus the singularity and how people are kind of shaping the narrative and how we're moving forward towards the future.
	So I'd just like to get you to kind of break down Game B for the listeners and the viewers since I was fairly unfamiliar with it myself.
	So I imagine that it is something that people could use an explanation on.
	Absolutely.
	So I know a lot of people are probably a little bit more familiar with the Dark Enlightenment currently because a lot of those figures are surrounding the Trump administration.
	So that has come to the forefront.
	What I have proposed is this thesis that they're kind of behaving as a dialectic, but they're both fomenting the technological singularity.
	I see the Game B as a little more of the appealing to like the left-leaning, a little bit more spiritual, theosophical camp.
	And the Dark Enlightenment is obviously the more authoritarian, kind of techno-fascist, GovCorp type of appeal.
	And, you know, the joke I kind of make is that it doesn't really matter if you have mommy issues or daddy issues.
	You know, they're going to give you a pink or blue comfort blankie to specify either one of you.
	And if you have both, they'll give you both.
	They'll give you the managed synthesis.
	Game B. So for those who are not familiar with Game B, they call it a new operating system for civilization.
	It is actually not new at all, and it's my contention that the intellectual dark web was an influence operation of sorts for Game B. And this has been pretty much corroborated in, there's an article on Manifest Nirvana where Andrew Cohen, he doesn't use the words influence operation, so I'll just caveat that.
	Those are my words.
	But he does pretty much say that they laid the groundwork and brought it to the forefront, and they were preparing the intellectual landscape for this concept of Game B. Now Game B doesn't actually exist yet, but it's been in the works since 2011.
	In 2011, Jim Rutt, who was the chairman of the Santa Fe Institute, he had met Jordan Hall at the Santa Fe Institute as well, and they collaborated to create this concept.
	Originally, it was centered around, they had something called the Stanton meetings.
	In Stanton, Virginia, they brought along people like Brett Weinstein, who I'm sure a lot of your audience is familiar with.
	To start a new political party.
	They called it the Emancipation Party.
	So one of the concepts in Game B is a concept I'm seeing really kind of sprout up everywhere.
	It's this trans-political movement.
	It's this idea, very appealing to people who believe that we have a two-party illusion, you know, that they play a dialectical game between the left and the right.
	I'm not denying any of this, by the way.
	The third way, I'm not sure, is the better option.
	So they're appealing to those who, you know, recognize that the two sides get kind of pitted against each other like football teams.
	And they're presenting this one nation type of movement.
	and that's actually one of the parties One Nation party so it was like a There's a lot of overlap with all these things, but this was the Emancipation Party.
	And it didn't really take off, mostly the way Jim Rutt explains it.
	He's kind of the grandfather of this concept of Game B. But the way he explains it is that the boomers were all in.
	He said that the Xers, he could kind of corral, but that the Millennials loved the platform.
	It was very much aligned with like a Bernie Sanders type platform.
	You can still see their reform page.
	They talk about things like a UBI.
	Both camps do, by the way, right?
	The Dark Enlightenment camp talks about that as well because, of course, the robots are going to replace us.
	And so what are we going to do?
	We're not going to have any jobs.
	So we need a UBI.
	That is one thing they both agree on.
	They both say, oh, yes, the robots are coming for your job.
	One of them seems to be a bit more exuberant about it and the others seem more thoughtful.
	Like, oh well, it's going to happen.
	It's not great, but it's going to happen.
	Exactly.
	That's exactly right.
	They tend to be a little bit more, they claim they're more pessimistic about technology and they're not in favor of transhumanism.
	However, if you look at these group of thinkers, most of them are in the tech venture startup space.
	You know, Jim Rudd had something called the evolutionary software.
	That's actually why he was brought into the Santa Fe Institute.
	It's why he was bringing all these evolutionary biologists into the Stanton meetings back in 2011.
	He was also the CEO of Network Solutions.
	He was on the ground floor of venture capital fundraising for what became T-Mobile.
	And Jordan Hall is very similar.
	He was originally our Jordan Greenhall.
	A lot of these characters changed their name.
	I'm still not sure why that is.
	They rebrand, you know, concepts, names, companies, all that.
	Seems to change with time.
	My favorite, I always joke, is that there was a NoMap technology, which I'm pretty sure Jordan Hall was involved with.
	He doesn't explicitly say that, but he talks about the concepts of hollow chains, and it sounds exactly like what NoMap was.
	But one of the originators of NoMap, which became S7 Foundation, changed her name from Andrea to Tan.
	I still haven't figured out why Tan, but it cracks me up every time.
	Probably just general obfuscation.
	They like to hide what they're doing, and it makes it harder to keep track of who they are.
	Yeah, I think it makes it harder to find the trail, and I end up spending a lot of time on the Wayback Machine trying to trace, you know, like Peter Thiel's project.
	He has Prospera, right?
	A lot of the people are familiar with those Bitcoin cities that he's doing in Honduras.
	Well, the subsidiary of that was Vitalia.
	And on the website, it said, you know, it's a city where you can make death optional.
	However, they've now changed it to Infinita.
	But there's overlap here because Jordan Hall has spoken at the Startup Society Foundations, which is held.
	It's a conference that's held at Prospera.
	And four years ago, he talked about Game B startups and network states recently within the past year.
	He did a much shorter presentation on network states and this, you know, kind of game-by concept, but he's converted to Christianity a year ago.
	He talks about liturgy and how that can be used for, essentially, for communitarianism, which I'm pretty sure is not what liturgy is about.
	But he also talks about, it was a podcast not too long ago, he talked about how Ephesians 4 teaches us the collective cognition, which again, I'm pretty sure is fascinating.
	You can make your decision.
	That wasn't my reading.
	So, yeah, so Game B, they talk about it as a new operating system for civilization.
	This Emancipation Party did not get off the ground because the Millennials, as Jim explains it, loved the platform, but they decided they were such anarchists that the concept of a new political party was an anathema to them.
	And so Thor Mueller was part of this Stanton meetings group and told them they should keep the name Game B for branding purposes.
	So they kind of left the Emancipation Party launch concept and they moved forward with this Game B idea.
	And Jim Rutt has written a manifesto, like a journey to Game B. He wrote it in 2018, but he keeps updating it.
	And it's a pretty lengthy document of his prediction.
	And it's pretty interesting because he says that 2045 is when these proto-Game Bs will come to fruition.
	And I think that's just an interesting time mark because what do we have in 2045?
	We've got the AI World Society.
	Which is the UN Centennial Partnership with the Boston Global Forum, based on the book that Michael Dukakis, the former governor of Massachusetts, wrote, and it's called Remaking the World Towards an Age of Global Enlightenment.
	I do think that's a nod to the New Age movement.
	When you look at the website, the semiotics very much indicate so.
	And this is, of course, the vision for the centennial of the UN, where an artificial intelligence world society will take over.
	Sounds a little like the singularity to me.
	What do we have Ray Kurzweil saying?
	The singularity is nearer.
	When is it?
	It's 2045.
	So I thought it was a very interesting marker, timestamp, that Jim Rudd is saying 2045 is when we're going to have these proto-beads.
	So Game Beat, a lot of them are disciples of people like Barbara Marks Hubbard.
	Barbara Marks Hubbard was a, she envisioned herself a futurist.
	She led this concept of conscious evolution.
	The foundation was funded by the Rockefellers.
	Some of her disciples have written a manifesto on cosmoerotic humanism.
	So this would be, yes, it's the first values and first principles on evolving perennialism, 42 propositions on cosmoerotic humanism.
	And it's a three.
	They said it was a synchronistic, synergistic experience.
	This is how Mark Gaffney describes it.
	He and Barbara had this vision all at once, and it was just this super sex moment that Barbara talked about.
	And Mark Gaffney has Eros Mystery School.
	They're very explicit.
	This is not about sex.
	You know, even though that's what Eros, that's the type of love Eros is supposed to be.
	And, of course, super sex has the word sex literally in the name.
	But they say that's not what it's about.
	It's this radical love affair with the universe.
	But Mark Gaffney is one of the authors of this Cosmoerotic Humanist manifesto.
	You can find it at theofficeofthefuture.com.
	You know, it's pretty easy to predict the future when you plan it.
	We see that over and over again where they make themselves out to be prophets despite the fact that they've just been working behind the scenes continually to bring about the things.
	Architects.
	Yeah, they're architects, not visionaries.
	Or maybe visionaries, but not prophets, yeah.
	So it's Mark Gaffney who's working on his Eros Mystery School.
	He's doing cross-promotion with Aubrey Marcus on this, and he talks about how we have to revive the ancient mysteries.
	So it's very much signaling that this is an initiation.
	Interestingly enough, there is a film called An Initiation to Game B. Very much create, I keep saying I need to create glossary because they redefine terms.
	This is a theme we see with all of these types of people, right?
	Jordan Hall actually has a document on mediums called On Sovereignty.
	And he explicitly says sovereignty isn't what we typically think it means.
	You know, it's not about nation states having, you know, autonomy, and it's not about individuals magically being able to make their own decisions.
	So he has redefined the term, and that's just one example.
	But they, so there's Cosmorotic Humanism.
	They're disciples of Barbara Marks Hubbard.
	It's Zach Stein, who is also involved in the Game B film, The Initiation to Game B. He was inducted to the Club of Rome last year.
	Another one of the filmmakers for Game B is Nora Bateson, daughter of Gregory Bateson.
	And she's also a Club of Rome member.
	And then we have...
	And his brother, James Schmachtenberger, has launched this company.
	But if you look on the website, it's something like 60 board members.
	And everybody, all the Game B thought leaders are in it, and so are people like all the evolutionary leaders, people like Deepak Chopra.
	Are on this, you know, Neurohacker now, Qualia Life.
	So it's Dennis Ponchtenberger, and then who was the other one?
	Oh, Kenneth Wilber, of course, Kenneth Wilber.
	You know, his developments of altitudes, that's based on Claire Graves' spiral dynamics.
	It's also based on Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs.
	Abraham Maslow is another interesting character that definitely falls in line with all of this and kind of paves the way.
	He had a document called Politics 3 that was published posthumously in 1972, and it was published by Robert Cantor and Willis Harmon.
	Lewis Harmon was the president of the Institute of Noetic Sciences for two decades.
	And he was also one of the lead researchers and editors on the Changing Images of Man document that was done in partnership with Stanford Research Institute.
	And he used his assistant's name, Marilyn Ferguson, to popularize the ideas in that.
	And that was called The Aquarian Conspiracy.
	So people might be familiar with that book.
	And so these are kind of the disciples of that school of thought.
	Barbara Marks Hubbard was, of course, also an intellectual disciple of J.R.J.
	Chardin, right, who coined this term of the noosphere.
	He wasn't the only one.
	You know, there was Vernadsky and there were several others.
	You know, outlining what the noosphere would be.
	And you see that theme constantly.
	So this is what I'm proposing is that we have these different flavors of something while Game B is presented as being very decentralized, kind of grassroots.
	But I caution people to remember H.G. Wells said that the conduit to the world brain would be the decentralization of information institutions.
	Of course, back then it was the academic institutions.
	But what are the information institutions today?
	I would argue it's the internet.
	It's the technology.
	And in Balaji Srinivasan's book on the network state, He says he doesn't talk about H.G. Wells, but he talks about how it's all going to be decentralized.
	You know, we'll have a dissolution of geographical nation states in favor of ideological network states, but then later they will be re-centralized.
	So he even says it in his book that that is the purpose.
	But right now, they're very much appealing under the banner of libertarianism.
	You know, I would argue that's what Peter Thiel, Prospera, so there's overlap between these two groups, right?
	Peter Thiel is usually thought of as being More of the Dark Enlightenment camp.
	But we're starting to see some convergence between the two.
	And I just really keep saying that, to me, it looks like you get a buffet, like a buffet of poisonous ice cream.
	You can't see all the poisonous chemicals that are in there.
	But, you know, you might see your favorite flavor.
	So if you prefer chocolate or you prefer strawberry or vanilla or whatever flavor, they've got something there for you.
	Yeah, you can pick your preferred salesman for this globalist insanity.
	They have many different faces that they love to market with.
	My producer, Lance, has been telling me about this past week just recently.
	Google released a self-improving AI that was able to not just improve itself, but on an algorithm that has been used for decades.
	And so there's diminishing returns right now, but this is a sign of things to come.
	This sort of thing is coming down the pipeline and it's going to be coming faster than people think it is.
	It's also interesting to me that they're pointing at 2045, and they also have other agendas which they want to come to fruition in 2035, whether it's technological.
	And it seems that that 10-year timeline would give them more than enough time to implement these horrific policies, bring them to fruition, and have people get fed up with the current status quo and be willing to welcome just about anything to get away from what we currently have.
	The way the globalists have managed things.
	And, of course, they love to think in these long-term timelines.
	That's one of the areas that they excel in.
	They plan things out in terms of decades at minimum.
	They sit there in their clouded back rooms, and they work together in these very incestuous sorts of groups where they all tie back into one another.
	So it is very interesting to me, as you said, that it is a 2045 where they're looking at the singularity happening.
	I would be very surprised if it didn't even accelerate from there, in my opinion.
	Yeah, I think it will accelerate from there.
	I think they're really laying the groundwork right now, and they're laying it out in so many different ways to appeal to different people.
	So another modality is, of course, the financial system, right?
	And we're seeing a lot of that discussion currently, where people are cheering the fact that Trump has put his executive order against CBDCs, and I'm glad he did.
	But now he's talking about things like the stable coins and you've got the stable act marching forward under the Genius Act.
	And what we have is I think it's much harder to sell some of this top down kind of centralized authoritative stuff.
	you know, I'm all in favor of efficiency.
	I'm all in favor of transparency.
	Expose all the bloated apparatus and the bloated spending.
	That's all great.
	However, behind that is this concept of the dark enlightenment, which is rage.
	Retire all government employees.
	What do they want to replace all those government employees with?
	They want to replace it with robotics and AI.
	And they're pretty explicit about this.
	This is not, you know...
	They have made that pretty clear.
	I'm hoping there's opportunities in that window before they're able to roll that out, and people should absolutely seize whatever opportunities arise.
	But I think they need to be aware that that's where they're headed.
	And I think an AI-managed system could be way more tyrannical than any fascist or communist type of approach.
	Not that I'm in favor of any of them.
	But I do think the technocratic regime that they're trying to roll out is very, very dystopian.
	But now they're trying to, for people who are not in favor of a GovCorp type of situation, Which, by the way, I think also people don't necessarily recognize that, or if they do, I'd like to just highlight the fact that this GovCorp is privatizing everything.
	So I think a lot of people champion that because they think that that's going to be more freedom and they have this notion of it being capitalistic in a free market sense.
	But it's much more GovCorp, not so much free market where the little guy can have a startup business.
	That's not what they're saying.
	talking about here.
	People like Curtis Yarvin, who helmed this dark enlightenment movement, have even said America needs to get over their fear of the dictatorship, because that is the best system.
	I might be paraphrasing, but basically what he said.
	So these figures are...
	It's not any great philosophy, and it's very poor writing, quite honestly.
	But somehow, the intellectuals eat it up.
	I'm not sure how, but maybe in a soundbite society, it's very appealing to have these long bloviations about our dystopian future.
	But in the more game B, with the kind of libertarian type of umbrella, they're advertising tokenized.
	It's still a gamified tokenized economy, but it's more under a banner of something like communitarianism.
	They keep mentioning West's book on scales and Dunbar.
	So they have this vision that you have to have communities that are less than 150 people.
	because they say that more than 150 people, you need bureaucracy.
	And so with these smaller communities, you could have, However, what's going to replace that bureaucracy?
	It's the same thing as the GovCorp.
	It's going to be done under Jordan Hall talks about hyperstructure.
	And he says that, you know, Bitcoin would be an example of hyperstructure.
	But what he's really talking about is blockchain.
	And he says even more than Bitcoin, he's an advocate of proof of work types of blockchain.
	So things like a QI network is something he's a.
	people think that sounds great they're marketing it and selling it to you as oh so I could have a They're talking about tangible assets.
	But you would like to think, the example I use, you'd like to think that family members and loved ones could share assets.
	But unfortunately, this is why, you know, estate lawyers exist because it doesn't always quite work out that way.
	But that's what they're talking about.
	They're talking about a tokenized economy.
	And that could be just as draconian and tyrannical.
	You still need an ID to enter, a digital ID.
	You still have some sort of a social credit system within that community.
	I'm sure that if you do something that they decide that doesn't, Forget if the community doesn't like it, but it did not comply with the smart contract that has been instituted, right?
	Because it's a hyper structure.
	They want to take people out of the equation.
	And so now you're going to have these smart contracts who are...
	Yes.
	I'm just trying to point out that they're really presenting things in these different flavors.
	And it's not to say that everybody involved is like a bad, evil, maniacal person trying to control the world.
	I think some of them are just utopianist.
	You know, they have a very romanticized vision of the future and they think they're smarter than everybody else.
	So, of course, they're the ones to, or in some cases, they're more spiritually evolved, right?
	They believe in the spiritual eugenics as well.
	I know no one has gotten it right yet, but we're going to be the ones that do it.
	We're more advanced.
	We've come a long way, which is continually what these people tell themselves every single time.
	But yeah, what you were saying about getting people out of bureaucracy, while it does sound like a good idea...
	You can potentially appeal to their humanity.
	When you get a computer involved with it, there is no chance for that.
	It is simply numbers.
	It will look at what is said and done in the law, and it will just apply that ruthlessly.
	There will be no chance for it to have mercy upon you.
	That's exactly right.
	And you also have to consider that any kind of an algorithm has been programmed.
	Who's doing the programming?
	It's only going to magnify whatever that person's worldview, biases, or intention was.
	And so even if they have the best of intentions, it may not align with yours.
	Yeah.
	We see that over and over again, just how rapidly the AIs have been shoved full of biases from the people who are coding them, programmed to adhere to whatever the prominent worldview of the moment is.
	And just got a comment, another one from our producer.
	These stable coins as he's presenting them is just CBD.
	Yeah, yeah, exactly right.
	So I, yeah, I am very concerned just because I feel like they keep finding new ways to appeal to, you know, the resistance.
	And so I'm just trying to sound the alarm so that people are not...
	But you should be aware that they do believe in things like collective intelligence.
	And that is the, so, you know, when you look at the Game B, it's kind of, they're talking about a collective intelligence created through consensus, and I would argue kind of brainwashing.
	There's actually Jake Roos, when he's talking about the Game B, you know, initiation to Game B film.
	They have these, they call it dialogos.
	So I think dialogue has drifted very far away from, you know, what used to be the Socratic method and dialects.
	And now, I think, especially since the Delphi method, it has come to me in consensus building.
	In Game B, they call it sense-making.
	And they're always having these various dialogues.
	but in this one, Jake Ruse was talking about how he's working on a Disney project and he's going to have to Trojan horse game B through this project.
	So essentially, you know, In cold key through the culture, aka socially engineer the masses, you know, brainwash them with this concept.
	So they're presenting it as bottom up, whereas the dark enlightenment people are presenting it as, you know, more of an outright technocracy, you know, in line with like a...
	in Canada from 1936 to 1943 and run by Howard Scott initially.
	So this concept that you build a Technate, but it's still both of them have this idea of kind of power blocks.
	One is more of a grassroots bottom up.
	That's being operated through network states in the cloud, and then the other through these, you know, power block regions, right?
	Technates that are very similar to the Glove of Rome's, you know, globalized adaptive regionalization map.
	It's also very similar to that.
	But again, it's all still going to be run through, what, technology and the internet.
	And I'll just say one more thing.
	I think you want to say something, but the evolutionary leader, Bruce Lifton, who I believe he was on the call, Polyocyte as well.
	But he talks about how we evolve.
	And right, he says we start off as these amoeba.
	He uses a spiral analogy, which is not a coincidence.
	This is spiral metaphysics versus like a plum line, sorry, plum line metaphysics, right, where we have reality anchored.
	I know a lot of people are probably familiar with the spiral analogy from Hegelian dialectics.
	I'm actually in the process of writing a book on Hegel's dialectic.
	It's called Hegel's Dialectic and Gnostic Jacob's Ladder and Machinery of Control.
	And I have a little preview on my substack for anybody who's interested in getting a sneak peek at what I've got so far.
	But he talks about it and he uses the imagery of the spiral and he talks about how we start as amoeba and that amoeba are so intelligent because of their The membrane, that's where they get their intelligence from.
	And then we evolve into these multicellular organisms and they're more intelligent because they have more membrane.
	And then he says humans are complex multicellular organisms and we're so intelligent because we have so much surface area of membrane.
	And then he says we have this potential to co-create.
	This is a term you hear from a lot of these conscious evolutionary figures like Barbara Marks Hubbard.
	This idea that we are going to co-create.
	It's a very Gnostic type of concept, but we're going to co-create.
	And he says that we can, we'll either go extinct or we can co-create and we'll evolve into a superorganism of humanity.
	And that the membrane for that organism is going to be what?
	The internet.
	So again, we have this no sphere concept pointing us towards the technological similarity.
	Yes.
	Just.
	I The way they act is if technology is a democratizing force, whereas these types of technologies are incredibly expensive.
	AIs are enormously expensive to create and enormously expensive to run on a large scale.
	So it seems to me that it is inherently undemocratic and that it gives these...
	It's like, oh, it's democratic.
	But realistically, how are you as an individual or a small group of 100 or 125 people going to compete with someone like Elon Musk, who has multiple billions of dollars to run these sorts of things and utilize them to their full potential?
	Even less democratic than normal when it comes to how much money can influence this type of society.
	Yeah, and with this trans-political movement, they talk about using AI and they talk about using technology for voting.
	I'm putting everything up on the blockchain.
	So you've got the quadratic voting, ranked choice voting.
	There are various different offerings of this.
	There's the conviction voting.
	And Jim Rudd talks about liquid democracy.
	Barbara Marks Hubbard talks about synergistic democracy.
	But all of this is couched in language that makes you think that it's a very direct democracy, which, by the way, I'm not in favor of anyway.
	That's why our founding fathers created a republic, not a democracy, because they knew that a democracy meant mob rule.
	So it ends up being quite tyrannical and barbaric in many cases, as they saw in ancient Greece.
	That is why they did not craft a direct democracy.
	However, they do talk about it being much more direct.
	But you're using AI and you're using technology.
	Which one do we think that there's going to be?
	No kinds of corruption involved there.
	No manipulation.
	What do we see with the voting systems now, right?
	We've already had those kinds of challenges.
	But also, you're having AI.
	It's really AI replacing government.
	That's really what you're seeing.
	And they talk about this in the AI World Society.
	They say how all governments are going to be supplanted and replaced through AI.
	And so in this case, they're just talking about it in a more, again, grassroots, like you're going to opt into this system.
	But we already have this.
	We have in several states...
	And in my state, I believe it's this month.
	And it is on a digital governance.
	And there's already a chatgpt.gov, which you have to be a government official to enter the portal.
	And they're doing these symposiums on digital governance and how we're going to use AI and digital, yeah, governing.
	Oh yeah, it just gets...
	And we've seen just the budget bill that they're working on passing would prevent states from regulating AI themselves.
	It would be completely up to the auspices of the federal government.
	They would be able to do whatever they wanted and the state would have no say in it.
	One of our listeners was just pointing that out.
	We talked about that yesterday.
	But it's just, again, incredibly scary that they're continuing to centralize this stuff.
	What was it?
	The FDA is moving to utilize AI to approve drugs now, I believe.
	I believe we covered that last week.
	So it is just, they are moving at a very, very rapid pace towards this, again, push to incorporate AI into all aspects of the government.
	And as you're pointing out, they then want to phase out the human component, which...
	You know, we're spending less on people, we're spending less on salaries, but we are then completely at the mercy of these algorithms.
	Yes, exactly.
	And the algorithms are using cybernetic feedback loops, right?
	That's what they're, they're busy data mining.
	And we see this in every sector possible, right?
	We see this with the education system.
	We see this with just consumerism.
	That's usually how it's marketed.
	They're just getting information to understand your behavior so they can give you the best ads that you want to see.
	Just the perfect widget for you.
	That's all it's about.
	Just making sure that you can fulfill your consumerist dreams.
	Oh, no, just got a comment again from the reducer.
	Doge is minimizing government but maximizing governance, which is a good way to put it.
	They were reducing the number of people but maximizing their ability to parse the information that they skim from your life.
	Yeah, it's GovCorp, so they're really privatizing control.
	It's no longer in the government, which, you know, outside of the classified kind of black ops types of Government operations.
	Things are actually fairly transparent under the government, right?
	You can go and look up what they're doing.
	Theoretically, you should be able to address your grievances as well.
	That's at least how it's structured.
	I'm not saying it's always how it functions, but it is how it's structured.
	A private company does not have to disclose anything.
	So that's really what they're doing.
	They're taking it all out of the government and trying to put it into Silicon Valley and where they will have the control and into these mega corporations.
	So I think it's something for people to consider is what happened in 2020 where, you know, if you went into your mom and pop shop, oftentimes if you did a lot of money, you know, you might have they might be aligned with your views they may not but they would make a decision and sometimes you would have some leeway there but if you went into a big box store
	And that's actually, we have these B Corps.
	Which, you know, Game B is very much a proponent of.
	There's already 6,000 B Corps, and some of them, they're big companies that you'll be very familiar with, things like Ben& Jerry's or Patagonia.
	Ben& Jerry's famously said that they are not an ice cream company.
	They're an activism organization.
	They happen to sell ice cream.
	But, of course, they have to be an activism organization so that they can meet their ESG adapters.
	So that they can get high scores on their B Corp rating.
	So that's the problem, is that it's going to be incentivized for these big corporations who are tied in with the central banks, the IMF, and these NGOs like the World Economic Forum and the UN.
	Yes, it's amazing how we've seen it trickle down.
	Ben& Jerry's is an absurd example of how they implement.
	Every single one of these companies has been brought on board with implementing these ideas in every single aspect of your life and pushing them on you.
	The gaming industry is a tremendous example of that.
	I know most of our audience probably doesn't play video games, but still, the gaming industry is overrun by people that are obsessed with pushing the current ideology and implementing them into games and putting that in front of a younger and younger audience to push that on them and to make it the Make it their model for the world.
	Because when you get it in front of a person at a young age, before they're able to critically think, it embeds itself in there.
	It bypasses critical thinking since they didn't have it at the time.
	And it makes it very, very hard to dislodge.
	Because since they didn't reason themselves into that position, it's very hard to reason them out of it.
	And I have a comment here from one of our listeners.
	They want to know about the internet of bio-nano things.
	So the AI World Society talks about the nanobio things and they say how it will all be connected through the 6G technology.
	And, of course, the Internet of NanobioThings is operating through humans.
	It's being powered by humans.
	The University of Amherst, Massachusetts, disclosed their study on 6G technology and how it is powered through humans.
	I did a recent sub-stack.
	It was called the Path to Mass Surveillance and Technological Singularity.
	And I outlined, and I'm sure I've left out some, but I do go through a lot of them.
	There's the Internet of Things, Internet of Bodies.
	Internet of nanobio things, right?
	This is nanotechnology.
	Stop on that for a second.
	People like Charles Lieber were very instrumental in this type of research.
	And, you know, when you all know, Harari talks about how 2020 is the year when surveillance goes under the skin.
	I think he meant it.
	And we have Charles Lieber was working on injectable technology that would create self-assembling nanobot technology.
	And people often forget that he was partnered.
	With Elon Musk on the Neuralink, he patented the Neurallace, which is that self-assembling mesh technology.
	That's the Internet of Nanobio things.
	I think it's very concerning.
	Unfortunately, we don't know as much about it as one would like because I think a lot of it is under classified documentation.
	That doesn't mean that it's not real.
	We have a lot of white papers that indicate there is a lot of research and development in this field.
	We also have Albert Barella of Pfizer who is talking about how you can have medication that you would take and it would have a sensor.
	To know if you needed to take your next dose and it could, you know, alert you to this.
	Apparently, Embellify already uses this technology, which is a pretty common drug.
	So people can look that up.
	Don't take my word for it.
	But I did do some research and that is what I found.
	Then we have, of course, the Internet of Behaviors.
	and there's a white paper document on this, and Internet of Behaviors is a little bit concerning because this is kind of the soft technology of a brain You know, of course, the Internet of Nanobio things could potentially, with the brain interface, be more of a hardware kind of control.
	The Internet of Everything, this is where they connect a network connecting people, processes, data, and things to entable...
	You have to understand what intelligent decision-making means.
	It means like automated, AI-driven.
	Internet of medical things, and of course, they were doing a lot of research on this in 2020 with the wireless body area networks in hospitals and whatnot.
	But this is even more overtly, things like pacemakers, typically the patient.
	is aware that there's an external interface and it's usually couched as being for your own good and in some cases it is in some cases it really does help people and it's great that they can be alerted if you know something were to go awry in other cases we have to wonder what If they can control, right?
	What did the technocrat magazine of 1937?
	They said that technocracy, the definition, is social engineering.
	They also said that the purpose of surveilling is to control.
	So we have to consider those cybernetic feedback loops and the role that they play.
	Then we also have the Internet of Industrial Things, which is industrial.
	I think this will play a huge role in robotics.
	And we have the Internet of Smart Cities.
	Now, the Internet of Smart Cities very much ties to this concept, you know, when I'm talking about the Dark Enlightenment versus Game B. We have a whole branch, and that's really what this article was about, was we have all these different types of smart cities.
	Of course, the AI World Society talks about We'll have these C40 cities, which are all under the guise of saving the planet because we have a climate crisis that we have to address, you know.
	So this, of course, means we can't breathe because carbon dioxide is a menace to the society.
	Although anybody who took third grade science knew that it's literally the life molecule.
	But, you know.
	I digress.
	And the Club of Rome actually admitted it was propaganda.
	I have this quote in my book.
	They admitted that it was propaganda because their Limits to Growth document, this is where they say that humans are the enemy of humanity because we were polluting the environment.
	In their Global Revolution document in 1992, they say that they had to get a common enemy for man to rally behind.
	And so, of course, they decided that who's the enemy of humanity?
	It's man himself, of course, because we are the polluter.
	They pretty much admitted that they lied so that they could get us on board with this agenda.
	But the Internet of Smart Cities, the C40 Cities, of course, the 15-minute cities, a lot of people are familiar with those.
	There's a couched inconvenience.
	You'll have everything within 15 minutes, and you can walk to, you know.
	And there's some merit to that.
	But, of course, the part they leave out is all the technology that interconnects and makes everything interoperable.
	But then we have, like, Freedom Cities, which, you know, sound wonderful.
	Who doesn't want a Freedom City?
	I want to live in Freedom City until you realize it's just another They love naming it the exact opposite of what it actually is.
	You know, they gave us this, the Patriot Act.
	Oh, it sounds wonderful.
	I'm a patriot.
	I love my country.
	And then you actually look at the Patriot Act as like, oh, this is the most unpatriotic thing that's ever been put into Congress.
	You know, it's like, oh, of course.
	They love doing that.
	It's just this easy, easy slap on the face.
	Double speak.
	It's literally Orwellian double speak.
	Yes.
	Yeah, so we have the Freedom Cities, and that is very much more of a dark enlightenment kind of concept, right?
	Because it's all about the deregulations.
	So this is very appealing.
	It's like what Prospera is, essentially.
	It's very appealing to these, you know, tech oligarchs who want everything deregulated so they can, you know, make their rules.
	And it's very conducive to their initiatives.
	And then you have in Game B, Something called the Sivium Project, which also sounds great.
	It's very utopian, in my opinion.
	But unfortunately, utopia means nowhere and usually results in dystopia when implemented.
	But it's this idea that we move out of the cities.
	And they very much glorify the indigenous populations.
	And they forget that it was kind of barbaric.
	And that it actually was quite competitive.
	Because Game B is supposed to be non-rivalrous.
	Unlike Game A. I call it the age of Aquarius of technology.
	They want us to move into the...
	And they say game A is just too exploitive and extractive.
	But they're going to take the technology and extract that from game A into game B. And so in these Civium projects, they move out of the city.
	And it is a glorifying, more backward kind of a lifestyle, communal again.
	However, you have the technology from game A that connects everything.
	So you're in a network state, although you may be living more in connection with the land and with people, which sounds like the best of both worlds, except that And even if it's AI controlling it, how much freedom does that really afford you?
	So that would be the Internet of Smart Cities.
	And of course, at the AI World Society, they talk about how Ukraine is going to be the central node for all of these various smart cities.
	And they've done several symposiums talking about how we have to rebuild Ukraine because it's a central hub for all of this.
	So that's why we have to give them so much money and, you know, build them back because they've been...
	You can go look on their website.
	They have all these symposiums.
	You can watch that for yourself at AIWorldSociety.net or the Boston Global Forum has a bunch of videos on it as well.
	And then there's the Internet of Wearable Things.
	This I'm sure a lot of people are familiar with already.
	Very much marketed to the health fitness crowd with the smart watches and the rings.
	You know, all of the heart rate kind of tracking.
	HeartMath, which was actually one of Barbara Marks Hubbard's projects that was large funding from the Rockefeller Foundation.
	And, you know, some of it's great, like helps you with meditation.
	And, you know, that part's pretty innocuous.
	But they talk about creating global coherence through heart resonance.
	And now they're talking about heart-brain coherence.
	So that's got its own connotation there, which, you know, sounds to me like they're trying to use technology to foment this, you know, global consciousness, noosphere concept.
	And then we have the Internet of Robotic Things, which I think will be much more pervasive in the, you know, next coming years.
	I'm sure I've left other things out, but yeah, I don't know if that answers their question.
	Uh, that was fantastic.
	You know, tens, hundreds, thousands of different ways they are working to advance this agenda all at once with numerous little people in different organizations all over the place.
	And as you were saying, they're talking about this as a, oh, this is going to be a non-competitive world order.
	We're all going to be very peaceful.
	We're all going to just, you know, be laissez-faire about everything.
	Anytime anyone starts selling you a sort of utopian worldview, I begin to question it because it seems they themselves don't understand human nature or hoping you don't understand human nature.
	And that we are inherently, you know, we prioritize ourselves and, you know, our family first as a general rule.
	We are selfish by nature.
	To always go after our needs first.
	And if someone else gets in the way of that, we see them as the enemy, the other.
	And we will do what we can to get what we need.
	And if that impacts someone else negatively, that's a secondary concern.
	And people that tell you that we can get past that, again, they just don't understand human nature.
	As a Christian myself, I believe that is part of our—it's built into us.
	It is down deep.
	You cannot get past that.
	That is just— Survival!
	Yes.
	Original sin.
	All these utopian ideals look past that and pretend that it is just something we can, you know, therapize away or however you want to get rid of it.
	They imagine there's a way that we can make ourselves all just these good little care bears and we're going to live in this utopia where we all routinely, you know, everyone looks out for each other all the time and they never have their own self-interest first, which just does not exist.
	It does not happen.
	Any utopian ideology is inherently doomed to fail, in my opinion.
	And so it's always scary to me.
	I couldn't agree more.
	And if you think about the UN, their exoteric veneer is all about peacemaking, right?
	That's their, but if you really, There was a great video.
	It was posted about 10 years ago.
	It might be older than that, but it's still on YouTube with Robert Mueller, who was the Secretary General for the UN for four decades.
	He's the one who created the World Core Curriculum for Education that has become Common Core, or as Charlotte Izabit loves to call it, Communist Core in the United States.
	And this was predicated on the works of Alice Bailey and her book, Education in the New Age.
	But he talks about how.
	And when you really listen to what he's saying, this is why you can't have free will.
	I mean, he doesn't say the free will explicitly, but this is what he's talking about.
	This is why we have to have the consensus.
	This is why we have to have the no-sphere and collective intelligence.
	Because if we have free will, your version of utopia, even though utopia means nowhere, and usually results in dystopia when in trend.
	Attempted to be implemented, but let's just say your fantasy, your version of utopia might look radically different from mine.
	It doesn't make you a better or worse person, but we're different.
	We have different ideas.
	We have different brain chemistry.
	We have different makeup.
	We have different circumstances.
	You know, all these different variables that make us the, you know, beautiful uniqueness of each human being, but our utopias could be radically different, and therefore they are intrinsically in competition.
	And this is why we have competition.
	This is why we don't always agree.
	And sometimes those disagreements manifest in, you know, grave tensions.
	And so the umbrella of peace, while it sounds beautiful and who doesn't want a peaceful world, in order to create that and to achieve that, they have to eradicate the free will of humanity.
	And when they talk about, you know, how this will liberate us and create freedom, I think this is really very much at the core of it.
	It's a spiritual dichotomy.
	Because you have free will, as I believe was endowed by our creator, this beautiful gift, and it's not an end.
	It's a vehicle.
	It's a vehicle to pursue virtue and morality.
	So we have the choice, but it's not an end.
	And the way I think a lot of these occultist, esoteric types of groups that may be couched in more, quote-unquote, rational philosophy, see, they talk about it's really a collective end.
	So think about things like, you know, Alistair Crowley's Thelema, where he talks about Do Without Wilt.
	This radical freedom to do what thou wilt, or Nietzschean will to power, or Hegel, who talks about the spirit of the Geist, right, the world spirit, and how this is progressing towards the rational absolute.
	This is so that we can have the state, which is equivalent to God in his view.
	But he says humans can achieve no freedom at all without complete subservience to the state, which is God.
	So there's just a couple of examples.
	I see this theme constantly, and it's very misleading.
	Barbara Marks Hubbard talks about radical freedom.
	But they don't mean the same thing as free will.
	And so I think that's, you know, but it's all under, you know, whether it's the UN or whoever it is that's trying to put it under the banner of peace, I think we need to really understand what are the implications of that.
	It sounds great.
	Yeah, that is a very good point.
	Again, it could be a Pax Romana sort of ordeal, where they come in and they make peace by wiping out everyone that's making trouble in their eyes.
	And that seems to be the way these globalists always operate.
	If you're going to cause them problems, they want you out of the way.
	Well, Courtney, we've just got a few minutes left.
	I have thoroughly enjoyed our conversation.
	You have given us so much to think about.
	I encourage everyone to go check out your website, CourtneyTurner.com.
	And of course, you're on Substack.
	Is that also under Courtney Turner?
	Yes.
	Fantastic.
	Yes, it's Courtney Turner.
	So it's Courtney Substack, but spelled like Courtney.
	Yes.
	It is Courtney.
	It's spelled Courtney.
	C-O-U-R-T-E-N-A-Y, Courtney Turner.
	In these last few minutes, I would just like to ask you if there's anything else you want to get out there and tell people again where they can find you, CourtneyTurner.com, Courtney Turner on Substack.
	Is there anywhere else people should look for you?
	I know you've got a podcast, the Courtney Turner Podcast.
	What else should they be looking forward to from you?
	I know you said you have a book coming out.
	I do.
	So I actually just released, it's on my Substack, so for my paid subscribers, it'll be there.
	They always get the early access and they get it ad-free.
	So that's just a little treat for them.
	But I just did a symposium.
	It's part of my Cognitive Liberty series with Patrick Wood.
	And Ian Davis and David Hughes on technocracy and resisting technocracy, hopefully, so we can preserve the free will of humanity.
	So that is up on my sub stack.
	It will be available for free on all of my other platforms.
	Rumble is the big video platform, but I'm on all the audio ones as well.
	I do post on YouTube, but it's really just a preview because I'm on my fifth channel.
	They don't love me that much, unfortunately.
	we're not the best of friends.
	So, uh, so I just put a preview on there that goes straight from my sub stack.
	And so it is already up on there.
	So I encourage people to check that out cause it's fantastic.
	They are brilliant minds really doing great work.
	My sub stack is a way that you can support the work I'm doing.
	And then, yes, I have a book.
	I'm hoping it will be launched this summer.
	I will most likely be self-publishing it, but it is on Hegelian dialectics.
	I call it a Gnostic Jacob's Ladder and a Machinery of Control.
	I go through the ancient mystery religions and how they pave the way.
	for Hegel's dialectic and talk about why it is relevant today because I think typically people are caught in these dialectical traps.
	I say the wizard circle, which is not my term.
	I mean, they use that term.
	And I think it's really, they are, they kind of cast these spells through words and through language.
	But what people need to understand is if you read the works of people like Alice Bailey, they explicitly say that, that they have one exoteric And then what they're really doing is initiating people into their esoteric vernacular.
	And, you know, so it's for people to understand that they do speak in this Esopian type of language.
	And that if we can recognize the games that we're playing, then hopefully the spell will be broken and we can step outside the wizard circle and preserve the free will of humanity is the hope that we have.
	Because they seem very bent on, you know, eradicating that.
	So yeah, my Substack, Courtney Turner Substack, and my website are great ways that you can find me.
	And I'm usually accessible on all the social media platforms and my website as well.
	Awesome.
	Well, thank you so much, Courtney.
	I really appreciate you talking with me today.
	And again, the information was fantastic.
	I thoroughly enjoyed getting the download from it.
	And so we are going to take a quick break and we will be right back, folks.
	ORCHESTRA PLAYS
	ORCHESTRA PLAYS In a world of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Welcome back, folks.
	The screen split is still up.
	But thank you so much for joining us today.
	It has been a pleasure to host the show for y'all.
	I see we have a tip.
	Twilight shadow.
	Thank you so much.
	That is very, very generous.
	Travis, we love y'all.
	Hope Pops is doing well.
	He is doing better.
	So thank you so much for your prayers.
	We cannot thank you enough for that.
	Lord1337TunnelLordLite.
	Hey, Travis, do you plan on having the gaming stream later this evening?
	I don't think I'm able to do it this week.
	We still haven't fully gotten anything worked out.
	It's just been kind of in the ether that we've been discussing.
	It is something I want to look into, not necessarily just gaming, but maybe just sort of a more casual hangout discussion of whatever is on my mind at the time.
	So not as focused on the news, maybe about movies or TV, or just ranting about things that have annoyed me during the week, perhaps.
	But yeah, doing some gaming would be fun.
	So if you guys have any strong feelings on that, I'll...
	Just a chilled hangout sort of stream, but I want to make sure that it is something that I could still provide you guys with some insights on things with, or at least you guys could have fun with.
	So, as we close the show out today, we've got a minute left, I again just want to thank you all so much for all the prayers and ask that you continue to pray for Our dad.
	He still needs them.
	Oh, we have a comment from Knights of the Storm.
	At Whistler, are you the one who puts together the videos for the commercials?
	Yes, he does.
	He does all of those sorts of videos.
	So he's done a great job with them.
	But again, thank you all so much for what you have done this week with your prayers and with the support.
	It has been truly amazing to see the outpouring of love.
	And just cannot thank you enough.
	We ask that you continue to pray for us, especially for my dad, that he would receive healing for his speech and for his left side, and that he would be back in this chair soon.
	So thank you all so much for joining us this week.
	I will see you all Monday.
	Have a good weekend.
	Wait a minute.
	Where am I?
	Sorry, Jefferson.
	The scoundrels who put America on central bank fiat currency used our heads on their coins as some sort of trophy.
	Despicable.
	This is outrageous.
	Washington, I spent my life fighting centralized power.
	Now the Federal Reserve monopoly parades us around on their monopoly money.
	Tell me there's some good news to all this.
	Well, there is a coin they can't control.
	One that isn't backed by the Fed, but backed by the Fed up.
	The all-new David Knight Show commemorative coin.
	Now Patriots can support a show that won't sell out with a limited-edition coin that's sure to sell out quickly.
	They say money talks, and this coin has something worth listening to.

▲