Rex Jones and Tim Tompkins dissect Europe’s energy crisis post-Nord Stream 2 bombing, its $2.34T threat to dump U.S. Treasuries over Ukraine policy, and NATO’s reckless nuclear rhetoric amid Russia’s escalation. They mock Trump’s "Christian genocide" threats against Nigeria and his selective pardoning of Juan Orlando Hernandez—convicted of trafficking 465 tons of cocaine—while targeting minor smugglers. Fuentes’ Hitler praise sparks debate on charisma vs. extremism, with Rex calling out his contradictions on gender equality and Tim linking it to elite manipulation of grievances. Both expose media-driven heuristics—like the availability bias—that falsely inflate global violence, citing declining per capita deaths despite sensationalized headlines. Ultimately, they argue systemic power dynamics, not inherent traits, fuel modern conflicts and ideological polarization. [Automatically generated summary]
Well, we're going to get a good two, two and a half hour show done before Tim starts seeing a pink bunny rabbit and get some sleep and I'll get some sleep too, but I'm much more well rested.
And we got a lot of interesting topics to go through today, a lot of geopolitical news that I've been fascinated with, some things breaking that are really cartoonish.
And I'm kind of glad you're sleep deprived because you're ready to be shocked.
I want to play this clip of Trump saying he wants to invade Nigeria, quote unquote, with guns blazing.
But just a little while, you know, or a long time that you've been gone during the show, did you receive any like American news information while you were over there?
Maybe because we're a newer country, but it's kind of nice to see.
Like, it's like time stood still.
Like, I know they've had to rebuild things, guys, like because of World War II, but a lot of the stuff they try to preserve the history of specific regions and like all of the architecture that was with that.
And I was like in the grocery store just getting some like fruits and trying to trying to like fuel up.
And I got a basket of items and everything came out to 10 euros, which is not the euro is like 1.1 or like 1.
Less than $1.2.
So it's pretty comparable.
But overall, it was like a whole basket of things, guys.
Like I had at least like five or six items and it was 10 euros.
Whereas here, I know it would have cost me like 25 bucks easily.
But the reason why it's so cheap is because Europeans and Germans, they don't have a lot of disposable income like we have here where we like spend all our money on heating their homes.
Yeah, I mean, I'm in the middle of like a working business at that point.
So it wasn't like something I immediately wanted to bring up.
The main gist of like from the two times that I went there this year, what I understood is like ultimately they're not the cost of living is something that's a very big issue and they're not happy with their politics there specifically.
So they're having the same issues we're having in certain aspects.
But it's just, it made me realize like we take certain things for granted, like they don't have air condition in like most of the places.
But in general, though, like here, even I know California doesn't do it as well, but there's certain places where it can get pretty hot in Europe where you would want air conditioning, but everything's kind of like outdated.
It just feels like sometimes there's certain things you feel like you're going back in time.
And I'm about to throw something up on the screen.
And, you know, we were going to start in a little bit of a different direction, but that's the fun thing about a news blitz show is that you get to go in all different, whichever ways.
And, you know, we're talking about this.
We're talking about, you know, how Americanized Europe is, how really comfortable it was for you were able to be over there, how much you were able to enjoy the seamless experience of feeling like you're in a blended culture, right?
Or like a shared culture.
But the EU is pretty upset because as part of the new, as part of the new United States military doctrine, we've said that we're going to try to extricate ourselves from Ukraine.
And the Europeans have heard this and they're not happy about it.
Europe was selling U.S. treasuries over Ukraine peace fears.
This is a huge story.
This is a real story.
I've seen von der Leyen talk about it.
Talks in some European circles explore dumping up to 2.34 trillion in U.S. treasuries, a move called the nuclear option because they don't have too many nukes that could jolt American bond yields and markets.
Leaders worry about Trump's rapid peace plan with Russia that would sideline Europe and mishandle $210 billion in frozen Russian assets, which they want to seize.
Now, we'll pause right there.
I know I've said this a lot on the show.
People have heard me say it before.
The EU is currently trying to issue the Ukrainians a $170 billion loan.
They don't have the finances to do so, but what they're trying to say is we don't need to put it on our books and we'll just take the Russian money and then leave the loan.
This is why BRICS is a thing because nations realize if they're in the Western financial system, then their own holdings can be used as a weapon against them.
After Zelensky's December 8th meeting with UK, French, and German counterparts in London, skeptics note that much of the holdings aren't directly government controlled and the sale could boomerang with liquidity woes for European banks, plus U.S. retaliation.
I almost read that as retardation.
Like tariffs or less NATO support.
Bond markets stay calm so far amid these transatlantic tensions.
This is a big deal.
And, you know, I've seen some people talking about this on X. I've seen some people talking about it on their shows.
I think I saw Dudisson's talk about it.
This is a real problem.
And I just want to throw this up here.
This is what I've seen a lot of, and this is probably bot propaganda, but it's also probably someone that's nationalistic or patriotic, or they think that they are and they live in Europe.
Could be one of the two.
Next time you brag about saving Europe twice, remember, first time you showed up in 1917 after selling weapons to both sides for three years and only joined when Germany sank your loan repayments.
Second time you waited until Pearl Harbor and Hitler declared war on you.
Meanwhile, the Red Army was already steamrolling the Wehrmacht from the east with bodies you never had to spend.
Yeah, the Russians basically won the war in Europe.
We were mostly in the Pacific.
Europe was the one bleeding out while you turned genocide and total war into your greatest economic boon.
You didn't save us.
You just finally picked the winning side when it became profitable and geographically unavoidable.
A little ungrateful, perhaps, just slightly ungrateful.
Yeah, here's the thing: without the without the without the United States, it's unequivocally that Europe would not have won the war the way that it happened.
They used, even if we didn't throw them manpower, we actually by the time they disassociated with the whole Hitler thing earlier on, the United States was providing so much in resources and weapon and weapons that Europe literally needed at that time.
And then if you think about like in World War II, like the orchestration of D-Day and those types of things, like those were monumental movements, as well as don't even forget about the psychological impact of bringing in another world power onto the stage.
Like as far as do you think that they want to go to war or that they'd be content with going to war?
No, you already saw what when France flirted with the idea in some of these other EU countries, flirted with the idea of sending soldiers over to Ukraine and people went to the streets with like and rioted.
Like two years ago, I knew someone that was doing security and they had a brother that was literally in the French Foreign Legion over there in Ukraine.
Yeah, well, there's a lot of people that went over there also on their own dime that just wanted to support.
Remember at the beginning of the war, there was this large influx of people who were supporting the war and they wanted to send like ex-military people went over there and just like regular Joe Schmoz would just like get up in arms and they were recruiting them.
Now, I'm sure that's toned down quite a bit, but there was a big movement of that happening during that time period.
Meanwhile, in Denmark, like it or not, this will be the consequence of the USA turning its back on Europe and other allies.
Let's check this out.
And I got another thing for NATO Secretary Mark Root.
You've said today.
unidentified
Yes, it's very obvious that USA is no longer going to risk their lives in Europe like they were in the old days, Russia's nuclear threats against Europe have already played a great role in Ukraine.
It's been a great role in Ukraine, it's been a great role in Ukraine.
I'm so tired, though, of the whole nuclear thing being used as like the big, you know, swing your dick and put it on the table type of thing and just puffing up your chest because it's a bluffing game.
Do you know how many times Russia over the last like four years was threatening nuclear conflict?
They said, all right, if you do this, we can go and bomb.
Even when you got to the situation during the Cold War, DEF CON 1 is like the maximum where you're actually nuclear ready and ready to press the button.
We've never in history gotten to DEF CON 1.
Even when you had the Cuban missile crisis, the highest we went up to was DEF CON 2.
And that was like up to that point.
And you saw the Russians turn away.
Here's the thing.
Everybody is smart enough at the end of the day to know that they don't want to die.
They don't want mom and dad to die back at home.
Some people are going to be like, well, Israel and Samson option.
I would argue these people are far more dangerous than the Israelis.
Here's the thing.
I would argue the Israelis are much smarter, right?
I would say the class of leader that you have in Europe for how phenomenal these countries are, not in terms of natural resources or something like that, but in terms of like global connections and global positions in the financial system, the way that they've been able to screw things up, especially over the past decade or so, but really over the past four years since the Ukraine conflict started, these are really, really dangerous people.
And when I see them, I get the most scared because they have the most to lose.
And most of the people, most of the people on that commission are like either descendants of royalty or ex like heads of state or like high position holders.
Ursula Vanderland used to be the German defense minister.
And I'm going to play this clip of NATO Secretary Mark Root talking about this, getting ready for war and getting ready to become warlike again.
That's what he says.
They want to be essentially, it's like we're the younger brother, but we're much bigger than them.
Let's just call them.
All right.
We're the older brother in this analogy, and they're the younger brother, and they're on the playground, and they're kicking sand in someone's face and like slapping them, right?
And that other person, they're antagonizing.
The other person is going to hit them, but they know that if we come in and back them up, they can do whatever they want.
I agree, but we were doing it, I think, ultimately from a grift perspective of like ultimately our politicians, what do they care about?
They care about the defense contracts and they care about those defense contracts going on into the future.
That's the main concern.
We're not necessarily, we may do it accidentally or on purpose if it serves our purposes.
We're not really like, it's not an ideological jihad besides America, use the dollar.
Like, that's our religion, right?
But we, the Europeans, they have been, since the time of Napoleon, they've been trying to get into Russia and break it up because they want the resources.
And now they're seeing an opportunity somehow in their minds with Ukraine in order to force that clash of civilizations.
So there are scenarios where, yes, I think the U.S., I mean, I think Europe has definitely taken the United States for granted.
And there's definitely been scenarios like they were not paying enough into their defense spending because they knew that like we were going to be there to back them at the end of the day.
And so they had no incentive to really pour as much money into the military as the United States.
I agree with that.
But then there's the counterside of it where I see like scenarios where like we use Europe as like the playground to be able to go and execute different things across that whole region of the world.
And we use, we send the little brother out to go do things on our MI6, for example.
You'll see a lot of CIA partnering with MI6 because MI6 has strategic areas in which they operate in which we don't want to send our own people.
So we let MI6 and we just do a cooperation where we send people in.
And in Middle East, we'll send Europeans out there on our behalf so that we don't have to commit American assets because we can ask them to do so.
I would agree with you on the they the reason why Europe is no longer where they're at anymore is because they're no longer able to participate in that colonialistic style anymore.
They're no longer extract resources like they used to.
Great Britain is not robbing India like they used to to be able to drop themselves up.
You made an interesting point and you said, okay, so first hypothetical, second hypothetical, India, Pakistan, they didn't go to using nuclear weapons first.
They fought conventionally and then they de-escalated the conflict.
I would argue 75% of all wars ever fought on the planet were fought in Europe.
Like these are the most violent people.
You look it up.
It's true.
That's true.
Yes, that's the number.
That's 100% true.
75% of all wars ever fought have been fought in Europe.
I would make business deals with Russia and I would embrace the new world, the world that's rising instead of the world that's falling and trying to screw us over in the process.
These people, what they've done, what they did in Ukraine by having Boris Johnson fly out there as an emissary of NATO and the EU, by the way, and tell Zelensky that America, like, did you vote for Boris Johnson?
No, this is a European or a Euro poor, you know, as I like to call him.
I'm sure Tim is far nice.
But these Europoors want to tell people in the West, people in an area that still has, even though it's declining, an area that still is an empire, they want to tell us to commit group suicide with them and drink the Kool-Aid of fighting Russia forever.
I don't buy into it.
I don't buy into that.
If we leave or if we do something, Russia is going to just sweep in and take the entirety of Europe.
Putin doesn't want that.
The nation of Russia, the country of Russia, is bigger than any other.
So let's keep this in mind because a lot of people are ignorant.
Nigeria is a country of 240 million people.
Okay.
So whenever I talk about the Iran conflict possibly escalating the ground troops on the show, I would say they're a country of nearly like 90 or 91 million people.
Like there's no way that a population like that will ever surrender or submit to an opposing army.
The opposing army just wouldn't be big enough, right?
If you get to the point where he's going to go all the way up to the point like he does with Venezuela, where he's like, all right, you think I'm bluffing, but now I'm going to shut your airspace down and you might find out a month from now.
When, of course, like, oh, it's a targeted military strike.
And like, keep in mind, right now we have special forces people in Somalia.
We have them in Sudan.
I'm sure we already have them in Nigeria.
I've heard, you know, like private contractors and people talk about this.
So like this is this is already going on that we have some sort of presence in these nations.
But I mean, if you're talking about like a Venezuela style thing, if you think Venezuela is bad, Venezuela only has 30 million people, they have 240 million people.
I look, it's funny because I was trying to find this story and I typed in oil tanker and then she was the first profile that came up.
So she's my little oil tanker from now on.
Today, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Homeland Security Investigations, the United States Coast Guard with support from the Department of War, executed a seizure warrant for a crude oil tanker used to transport sanctioned oil from Venezuela to Iran.
For multiple years, the oil tanker has been sanctioned by the United States due to its involvement in illicit oil shipping network of supporting foreign terrorist organizations.
This seizure completed off the coast of Venezuela.
It was conducted safely and securely.
And our investigation alongside the Department of Homeland Security to prevent the transport of sanctioned oil continues.
Okay, if they can seize a massive giant oil ship, why can't they seize a little like motorboat with three outboard motors?
I didn't think about that, but can't have oil in the water.
They use the environmental pollution as a reasoning.
Get a bunch of dogmas that they do.
Yeah.
Okay.
And we've got this other story here.
This is interesting.
Trump pledges cartel crackdown after pardoning ex-Honduran leader.
Last updated yesterday.
President Trump promised tough measures against drug cartels, including U.S. strikes on five smuggling boats off Venezuela since September, claiming each prevented 25,000 deaths.
unidentified
I saved 25,000 people every time I killed people on a boat.
On December 1st, 2025, he pardoned former Honduran president Juan Orlando Hernandez, convicted in 2024 of aiding cartel ship or of aiding cartels to ship 465 tons of cocaine to America and was sentenced to 45 years.
Why did he get pardoned?
unidentified
Same reason why we fly terrorists into the New York City.
The reason why hypocrisy sucks so much is because it makes things invalid, right?
It's like everything that's going on in America, it's just like it's a fiction book.
Like it's up, it's choose your own adventure, and the president is writing it.
Instead of following a structure or even laws in the universe, we do like the worst things possible and then we like make sure the best things possible don't happen.
This is like, it's not my favorite story because obviously it's very depressing, but this is one of the weirdest things I've seen in media in a long time.
And shout out to due dissidents guys because that's who I got it from.
Same as the Trump Nigeria clip.
I just hadn't heard about that.
When I heard about that, I was like, what?
Are you serious?
But yeah, that's the world we live in.
And, you know, there's something to be said about when you're on the Titanic and it's like this and you're going into the water.
There's something to be said of the nobility or just the elegance of the people that were playing the violin and the trumpet and the instruments while it was going down, right?
We've all seen that, of course.
So check out Maduro.
Like whatever happens in Venezuela, whatever, like I believe it's more real threat.
But like when you're, when you're a dictator type or like the U.S. declared dictator type, this guy just looks a little too much like Saddam Hussein to stay alive, I think.
Right?
Like the CIA sees him like I see the resemblance.
My first love.
I loved you and I killed you and now you're back again.
I just, you know, some days I miss the days of like diplomacy and just like just presidents being presidents.
Not like this, not this, this crap where I'm literally watching people dance live.
And I'm seeing, dude, I was telling you this earlier.
Have you been seeing the videos of like Homeland Security and like all the memes and stuff that they're making?
i'm blown away i'm like they're they're playing sabrina carpenter and just like you got mad about that And then they took down the one that had, what's the comedian's name?
And I'm not trying to step on your point, but the guy posting this, Pete Hegseth, now the Secretary of War, Fox News guy, combat veteran, right?
And he ends up being picked for the Department of Defense, turns into Department of War, and he's posting stuff like this.
And he's presiding over what I believe, in my opinion, and I'll get flagged for this.
I believe that they're heinous war crimes, right?
Meanwhile, you have Judge Napolitano, his colleague who also worked at Fox News at the same time, who left Fox News because he didn't want to cover up or lie about things anymore and now does his own independent show.
And he's gone the completely opposite direction of Pete Hegseth.
You can kind of see like a light, dark dichotomy.
And anyone that watches those two people knows what I'm talking about.
As much as you know, I want to try to defend Trump in certain things.
I think he set the precedence for something like this.
I think once people saw that, like, he was able to make jokes and like people are like laughing, making memes, it kind of just like made the unseriousness like trickle down through the rest of like his departments and everything like that.
And it became like something that's like normal.
Because if the president can just go on Truth Social, tweet whatever, and Gaza, the new Dubai, and what was it?
Yeah, but the only reason why these people think they're the only reason why they're doing it is they think it's cool and that they're appealing to like the Gen Zs who are online in the social media.
I think it goes to your later topic, which is what we're about to get into on the second hour of the show, talking about heuristics, talking about the people that read the headlines and the headline syndrome.
We've created a system where the people are so ingrained in that mindset that our rulers reflect that, right?
That our leaders reflect that mindset, which is that that's how people think nowadays.
Well, it just shows you people are fundamentally flawed.
We think that there are adults in the room that are making right decisions that are supposed to be the ones that like have their senses together, but it just really just shows you that it doesn't matter about age, it does not equal maturity.
And I'm sure the next uh, I see AOC doing bullshit like it too, and I see Gavin Newsome, they're all doing it now.
Like, you know, as sad as it is, though, as sad as it is, I can actually picture something like this happening in the New Orleans Gaza.
I think they're going to split it in half in the northern part when they go to rebuild it and like BlackRock comes in with like a lot of these other countries.
I mean, these other companies, they're going to build like these fancy stuff that like the average person that used to live in those regions can't afford to live in those places.
Broadcasting or just doing a show or whatever, doing media, it's a lot like athletics, where if you're having a like shitty day, right?
And like you're really tired or beat up or something, it's when honestly you have your best performance kind of out of the blue.
We're doing a really good show here for y'all tonight.
You want to repost the show.
Okay.
Like that's that's number one.
I'm going to, we're going to do a little plug here in a second, but we need you to repost the show more than anything because we usually get a lot more viewers than this.
We appreciate every single person that's on live with us now, right?
But yeah, I mean, like, look, we're doing a really good show, especially tonight.
I've been really happy with how this has gone down.
And really, that's because it's easy, because of the quality of information that we're able to get, and because of the discussions that we have amongst ourselves.
I consider Fuentes, and I do disagree with Fuentes on many things.
I consider him someone that is ideologically honest.
I know you disagree with this, and I consider Piers Morgan to be someone that's ideologically dishonest and therefore a hypocrite.
And therefore, even though I don't agree with Fuentes, I agree with him from the perspective of, hey, I'm honest about my positions.
You're not honest on yours.
I was disappointed in Fuentes because I wanted him to call out Morgan for things like supporting the war in Ukraine and the genocide in Gaza, but he went a different position.
You know, the first thing Piers Morgan started off by doing, I know that you've seen this because you've watched the whole thing in full, right?
I knew Fuentes knew what he was going to get into, but I don't think he was prepared for that.
Pierce is really good at positioning questions.
It was every question that he was asking was setting him up for some trap.
And Fuentes kind of knew, but he had to walk the breadcrumbs because if he were to avoid it, he would literally be like, oh, you're avoiding the question.
You're avoiding the question.
It was literally like honey traps all over the place that he was trying to do.
That's the thing I didn't appreciate about Pierce.
It was like, it's supposed to be a conversation.
It made it seem like it was he was on trial and you've got to go to court and answer for the question.
If he was living where Piers lives, he would be on trial.
That's that's a thing.
And that, that's ultimately, you know, the thing I did like is, you know what?
I'm blackpill, negative, doomer, chuddlet.
Like, I like, I do that all the time.
That's not right to do.
We have to give everyone their flowers and everyone their credit.
Piers Morgan did make a point on the interview to make it clear that he does, at least he does now, supports free speech and wanted to platform Nick and that he didn't think Nick should have been deplatformed.
I think both people in this in this whole conversation, they did some good things and then they both did some pretty bad things as far as the commentary.
I'll be honest, like for me, I'm coming at this like from a purely independent, like not leaning one way or the other and was just looking at this objectively.
Here's the thing, especially with Fuentes, I see what he's trying to do.
I know you have the stance that like he's always been doing this and he's always been this way.
I ultimately don't know what Nick's like primary agenda is at the end of the day.
Like there's a portion of him that I feel like wants to like fight the mainstream, wants to fight the narrative, but then there's other things that like contradict like certain points that he wants to make and that are just not with like for example and and this is where Pierce had him like by the nuts.
He's like your last, like his last name's literally Fuentes guy.
Right.
Like he's literally part Mexican.
And then like Fuentes is sitting there like backpedaling because he was like, well, I'm not really like, no, dude, you were literally a byproduct of an interracial couple.
Yeah, but it's like trying to be the spokesperson when you're not, when you are not truly the true representative of that group, if you think about it.
That is literally what my whole standpoint on this.
I don't think anyone is, because here's the thing.
Everyone had their light in, it had their light at some point, right?
Somebody was the majority at some point and somebody was minority immigrating into something.
And it was like basically Darwinism, where it was like the best player won at that point.
Right.
Like 90 to 95% of the Native American population was literally wiped out from disease, from Europe coming over here, right?
They, you could say, well, that was the native population.
And the reason why they went to war with Britain was because they were trying to defend their way of life.
But then the white man won.
So at that point, it was just, but it's so easy to not take that stance once you're now in the position of power.
Whereas if it was the opposite at that point and the Native Americans were like, had the same amount of power that Americans do now, then the people who were quote unquote white and the Europeans would be like, well, you're marginalizing us and you're doing these things to basically prevent us from trying to have a good life in X, Y, and Z. Like it's always just depends on who's in power.
Good is all as it was, but I would also say good is relative, it's really relative.
No, when I say it is subjective to a certain part, because at the time period, which you're talking about, the right way for these Native Americans, sure, they're not bringing all the same technological advances, but they're also not destroying, they're living in harmony with no, they're killing each other, though.
The myth of like everyone here chilling out, hanging out, especially in South and Latin America, you have giant pyramids where they're cutting people's hearts out and whatnot.
I'm not sitting here denying it, but what people do is they take the whole thing and they say, Well, all of what I'm doing is good, and everything that that person did was bad, and so we should just replace it with everything that I'm doing.
And it's really there'sn't that the Darwinism that you're talking about, but I'm saying the Darwinism is what leads to the macro level argument of like, look, you're not entitled to anything.
I need people to start taking race out of the equation because there's immigrants that come over here that want to assimilate properly, that want to live the American way of life.
And it's like people just dumb it down to like, well, you just don't look like us.
No, like, I'm black.
I got, I was one of the forced, I was one of the forced immigrations, you know, whatever, however you want to classify that.
But the reason why, like, people aren't kicking black people out is because we've assimilated to the culture.
Well, I would, I would argue, and this, this is my argument, especially when it comes to African-American or black people, is that like, y'all have as much in this country as we do, right?
Especially with the blood and the illegitimacy of being brought over here against your will, right?
So to say that like we are going to like, you're not a part of the American experiment would just be flat on its face a lie.
Yeah, I mean, dude, ultimately, America is literally built off of immigration.
There's no way for us to like literally separate it.
Like the whole concept, it's just, it's whoever is in the limelight of each specific century in which is being marginalized at that point.
And it's the marginalization that creates all the things that we're seeing.
It was, like you said, the Irish at one point.
It's the Italians.
Irish and Italians now, you couldn't tell me what an Italian really looks like on the boots on the ground because they look like every other white person.
But at that point.
Besides, if you literally look like you're Sicilian and you've got the dark hair, but I'm just saying people who have like 50%, like everyone's kind of a mutt now in general.
I would think it's just interesting that we go, look at all these ethnic groups, the Somalis, the Indians, the Chinese.
We got all these people coming over here and we're freaking out about it.
Meanwhile, those people are just fractions of a percent versus the people that have come over that are like Hispanic or Mexican that have come over through the border, right?
So I see Trump and a lot of these people make a big Hubbaloo about immigration and ending it and whatnot.
The vast majority of the people that are here are already here.
They already came over.
Right.
So like immigration now, like over the past, over the past four years, like Biden, we played the clip on the show, people showing up to the border in Biden shirts, Biden saying surge the border.
The population that was brought in is mostly monoculturals.
It's mostly Hispanic and Mexican.
Right.
So to me, I look at the immigration numbers and I see something like 65,000 visas or whatever.
And I look at that and I go, okay, so there's 10 million people and we're not talking about that, but we're talking about the 65,000.
Just from a numbers perspective, I just think the government and just the people in general don't really have a concept of solving these issues or figuring them out.
It's just a headline, like you say, to get mad about.
America went, released some crazy ass laws to combat the immigration worse than what we're doing today as far as, well, you could say objectively, whatever, worse, but like, like they outright banned Chinese people from coming to the United States.
Like that was a real thing back in the 1900s.
Like all I'm saying is just like you look at how like we're just forgetting and we're getting amnesia.
We're saying like, okay, well, now Mexicans and some of these other groups are here.
I'm not sitting here defending and being like, oh, well, we shouldn't have, we should have illegal immigration and everybody should just come in.
It's just, it's all the same thing as what I'm saying.
And just like the Italians eventually assimilated into the culture and now you can't really differentiate at that point, the ball's already rolling.
It's going to get to a point where United States morphs into this new society of some sort, creates a specific type of culture that's still American in some form or fashion, but is slightly different.
And that's why I say I don't disagree with everything Fuentes says, but I can't drink the Kool-Aid when he goes like to the far right extreme that of like, that's what his, that's what gets him going.
But like, it doesn't mean that that's, that's the, that's the method.
You know, it's, I don't think he's created the equation that solves the problem.
He just takes an extreme position on a lot of things and he's going to alienate a lot of these people in the center like me.
If you want to incite true change in the world, you don't go to an extreme and have positions where you can like go and alienate a specific base and you just like make a point, get super polarizing, and then you basically get a lot of people to rally around you.
Then you actually lose a lot of people at the end of the day.
There's a reason why Malcolm X wasn't the one that changed the whole civil rights movement.
Malcolm X was going to die from his extreme positions to begin with.
Martin Luther King, his ideology carried on farther than Malcolm X's ever did.
And it will still, because he went to the source.
Went to the political realm where he said, Okay, he did it like in a Gandhi way where he was like, Look, I'm not going to incite violence and I'm not going to get my agenda because at the end of the day, so disobedience.
Yeah, there's ways that that work, and there's ways that don't work.
And there's, here's the thing: when you say stuff like this, Fuentes is gonna is burning bright right now, but they fizzle out really quickly.
When you watch the videos, Darth Vader is pretty cool.
Well, you sort of have to be cool.
How do you win the absolute allegiance of a nation of millions if you're not cool?
If you don't have an X quality, I don't think anyone would deny that he's a charismatic speaker, a visionary, imaginative, that sort of thing, whether for good or for bad.
Most would say bad, of course.
But he's certainly cool.
And I was thinking because I saw a lot of the edits after the interview.
People took that clip where I said, well, the edits, and then they spliced it with a Hitler edit, a hype edit where there's Euro pop music, techno music blasting, and it's the tanks and it's the speeches.
This is the like gain, you know, you know what, you know what gain of function research is, right?
They take a virus and they try to make it more transmissible or more deadly or whatnot.
This is what happens when you do gain of function research on the alternative media.
When you suppress people for years and years and years and years leading up to a decade, this is what you create coming out of the environment in 2015.
The reason why Hitler existed in the first place was from marginalization of like basically treating Germans like second-class citizens after World War I ended and all of the reparations they had to pay, all of the things that they went through, all the things that they basically got treated based even if the people weren't directly involved.
And they got pushed down so far and the company and the country got so depressed that it allowed the racial and ethnic minorities.
It allowed room for somebody like Hitler to rise out of the anger.
Okay.
And that comes from marginalization.
It's the same reason why Martin Luther King and Amalcolm X rise is because when black people were marginalized at that point, I see where he's he makes a point here at some point where he was like, look, at what point do we stop talking about the Holocaust and some of these other events?
And that's my main bone of contention with Fuentes.
I like his show.
I enjoy it.
I have a weird view of things because like I'm a fan of alternative media.
It's like I just like to watch the best people, right?
Like just the highest quality skills and talent.
Like Fuentes is that due dissidents people are that.
There are other shows like my dad's that I watch and I disagree with my dad on a lot of stuff, but I'll still watch the show because he does a great show.
Ultimately, my biggest bone of contention with Fuentes and really what I was raised, the main difference between my father and Fuentes, and this is an ideal that I really, I really do try to, I really do try to have this as a value in my life is being pro-humanity and being a human supremacist and being worried about our future as a collective species of people created in the image of God.
Everyone deserves human rights.
Everyone deserves liberties.
Everyone deserves to be treated a certain way with a certain level of dignity.
And what I don't like is the indemnification of groups of people as being lesser or less than.
That's the part of the racial stuff I support with Fuentes.
Like white people shouldn't be ashamed to be white.
White people should be proud of their culture.
I agree with that.
When it comes to saying other people are, you know, we agree.
And this is why the show is so fun is because you were talking about, hey, like invalidating another culture and saying this thing is better and replacing it, right?
We're talking about the examples we were going through earlier.
It really does come down to treating people and giving them the opportunities to be successful.
And the means to do that is through by giving them liberty, right?
By giving them the ability to thrive.
And I do see a lot of the negative racial narrative as being anti-that.
I just think there are strengths and weaknesses in certain things.
And so like the boss girl era, I was not with that, but I'm also not with going to the complete opposite side of the spectrum and being like, well, now we need to take away voting rights for women.
Like what?
Like it just, it's a red pill perspective that does not work for the longevity of the country and let alone the society as a whole.
I think Fuentes is a very talented speaker.
I think he has a very good way with words and he could be the right messenger, but he has the wrong message when it comes to a lot of things.
If Fuentes, and even Pierce, I'll throw Pierce in this.
If you really look at like what Jesus practiced and you look at like the messaging that he had and what he believed for and stood in, a lot of these people use the name of like Jesus and Christianity and they use it in the wrong context all the time.
50% of the stuff that Fuentes said, just even in the interview alone, let alone the other things that I've watched, Jesus would have never said those things, let alone had those positions.
And it's like, look, you're all for whatever you want to believe.
But when you use Christianity in a way that like you, you take the bits and pieces that work, it's like the, it's like the priest coming in on Sunday after being at the bar on a on a Saturday night and just and preaching and being like, hallelujah, everything is good and glory and stuff like that.
And if you're Catholic, like saving yourself from marriage and one thing, and totally fine.
Fuentes is like leading by example, but then there's a contradiction where he's just like spewing out the N-word and saying Hitler's cool.
And there's like certain things that like literally, if you were to just like take the embodiment and just look at Jesus as a whole, whether you believe in him or whether you're not, the Bible does not push these things.
The final thing that I wanted to come to the conclusion is like this cognitive bias that we have.
The whole time during this debate, they were each taking factoids and spitting out numbers and making it seem like one thing that Pierce wouldn't concede to is like Fuentes had a point.
He was like, look, the number of black violence versus white crime or whatever with the school shootings is not proportional to the population.
But like he wouldn't give him, he was like trying to ask him.
He was like, look, the number of white shooters in the white population is lower than the per capita is lower than black people committing crime in their own race, essentially.
It's not proportional to the population, essentially.
There's two different proportions.
And then he was trying to get Pierce to tell me, tell you, like he was like, hey, give the number.
What's the number?
And then Pierce was kind of like beating around the bush and not trying to concede on that point because Fuentes was right.
But then what people look at that and they're like, oh, well, when Fuentes is like, well, if you see a black person, you're walking down the street.
You should walk the other way.
Look, even if you're looking at the numbers, it's like 5% of black people are actually committing the crimes out there.
Like I could say, like all school shooters are white.
But like, if you look at the percentage towards the population, we have an availability bias is what it's called.
It's where you look at that small sample size and you prescribe it to the rest of the population and it becomes the narrative and it's dangerous because then it causes that marginalization.
And if you're re-watching a live, you're re-watching a stream, you're re-watching a clip, please give us your opinion here in the comment section so we can build kind of a group collective of what people I will wait for some comments because I'm curious.
Yeah, they've kept the stats are pretty not going to be their estimates, but they're going to give you a rough idea of exactly how it is.
You're not going to get it down to the nearest person, but you're going to have a pretty good idea depending on because people do create records, guys.
Like they do have records just like you knew how many people died in World War II because the Germans were literally keeping track of how many Jews they killed during that time period.
This is like very, you're talking, you're looking at these.
Yeah, I guess you're starting to get to the point where you're looking at like high population deaths at this point.
Ultimately, you can look at a million graphs, but we have gotten net negative and we have had a net amount of people have not died as much as back in the day.
These are things like we weren't in the stone ages where people didn't know how to record and take count of how many casualties they had.
And it always talks about wars themselves.
I'm saying he's not going to be satisfied.
Estimates are estimates for a particular reason because they take the culmination of data that they had during that time, and then they can also extrapolate, just like you can go and look at, you're like, how can they tell how old something is?
You have science that backs it up at the end of the day.
But if people were to take it, they would think that we've gotten more violent and that things are worse.
And why do you think that is, Rex?
Why do you think that people think that today is more violent and there's more crime and there's more access to more information, access to more biased information.
Yeah, it's the headline.
It's the clicks, really.
And let's pull up the video real quick so that people can see what this cognitive bias is.
And I'll kind of further explain.
But even before Christ and all the things that happened during that, people are dying.
We have a much bigger population than back then.
And if you look at the percentage of like people dying then versus now, it's even less, like per capita, even though technically it's a higher number like by the numbers.
But if you look proportionally to the population, we're dying less now than we are dying back then.
Nick Fuente should get a per capita back tattoo, like giant letters.
It might be a fun choice.
Just having fun here on the show.
But here's the thing.
We are told that the world is bad, the world's getting worse, XYZ.
And I repeat a lot of that stuff.
But ultimately, is that true to a certain extent?
Yes, I agree because they're taking us into a more primitive realm where these old concerns are starting to pop up and become possible.
But the cause of this is the rich people at the top.
It's the oligarch class.
It's that 0.0001%.
And like we talked about earlier on the show, like the only color these people care about is green, right?
And traditionally, wars are fought over territory.
They're fought over resources.
They're fought for ethnic or racial reasons or religious reasons.
Ultimately, the goal of all these people that are truly in power, and I believe this, I know me and you have debated this, but look, it's going to come to a point where there's nothing really we can do about it.
There are going to be way less people on the planet than there used to be because the elites will be successful in their depopulation, however it happens through environmental poisoning, through vaccination, through new pandemic.
They'll figure it out.
They'll figure out a way to do it.
There will be less people one day on the earth than there really should be, in my view.
And that's where we're all headed.
So you can point at the graph and say, yeah, we've had a lot less deaths, right, than we used to have.
And we're getting better on that front when it comes to war.
I would agree with you.
But there comes a situation where These people like Henry Kissinger, they call us useless eaters, right?
They say, Okay, we have this big population and all the white papers and all the researchers say, Look, we just want to have 500 million people.
And if we have 500 million people and we have automation and we have robots, none of this stuff matters, and we'll never have another war again.
So, in your mind, my question to you, Tim, do you like that vision of the world more or do you like the chaotic pro-humanity version of the world more where we may have more wars, we may have more conflicts, but ultimately there will be more people alive because we're not trying to kill them.
But I, the white pills perspective for me is automation, access to energy at a mass level that's very cheap.
All of these things combined together will create a net positive society where, yes, we'll have less and less wars to fight over because there's less and less of us needing to fight over resources.
But yeah, they can sit there and say that in their writings, but in practice, actually eliminating a large demographic of the population is much more harder than you think, even if you have all the money in the world.
People are going to have kids regardless of whatever they're going to do.
It's really about what are the lifestyle practices?
What are people going to go do with their lives?
What are they being taught?
What things are they not doing versus what they used to do?
That's ultimately what's determining the population.
They want to make the poor people fight over the racial stuff and they want to make them only know about the headlines and the heuristics, like we're going to get into when we play the video.
And they're up at the top profiting and benefiting off it.
I guess you see it as a situation where you go, okay, why would they put all this effort into doing this thing, which is sick when they can just let it all play out and they're still going to be on top?
I've seen, I've, I've been around powerful people.
I've seen the dark stuff that happens.
I'm saying I'm just saying netwise, society has moved in a net positive direction.
And I think what's driving some of this stuff is those cognitive biases that I'm talking about, in which people are not looking at the whole picture.
And just to clarify, some new group here was asking about like, why are those numbers the way that they are and how are they, how do they exist?
There's a couple of reasons for why.
Like one, you have actual physical bones.
And uh, and like an you have of the dead people and skulls and things like that, and then you can, they can do carbon tracing where they can determine how long ago did those bodies.
You're gonna have to do a whole deep dive to make him happy I, I know, but i'm just, i'm gonna.
I'm just just clarifying because I didn't, I did not make it very clear for how you could understand that, so that that's one of the like the skeletons are one thing where they literally can find the burial graves of these and backtrace where the dates.
Then also you you have uh, they did have censuses back then.
The reason, like you're never gonna get an exact number, that's why they call them estimates but they did keep track of who invented the, who invented the Um Census the Romans.
The Romans, they had census where they actually determined how many people were in specific areas and so they kept track of populations that way as well, and we have history of people recording specific things in events that happen.
So you're looking at not just the bones, you're also looking at the records, and then they also have um written records where like uh, there's actually UM city logs.
There's like people who literally would record the deaths and do these things in which they would actually record.
So that's that, that's where i'm driving these, where most of these people are driving these numbers.
It's not just throwing a wild number out there and just seeing like well, a bunch of people died, like the reason why you talk about the black plague is because they recorded how many people were dying as best as they could during that time period and you had estimates during that which you can refer to now.
The records get better and better and the numbers get more and more accurate.
But let's go to the video just to show the blue one yeah, to just show, like this, cognitive explain heuristics for just briefly, just a minute on heuristics.
Okay, all right well, we're gonna cut to the video.
This is the headline culture that we're talking about, but this is it more defined as the default form, right?
So we're going to go to this now.
unidentified
Every day you make decisions and judgments.
Sometimes you're able to think about them carefully, but other times you make them on the fly, using little information.
This is where heuristics come in.
Heuristics are straightforward rules of thumb that we develop based on our past experiences.
They're cognitive tools that help us make quick decisions or judgments.
Life would be exhausting if we had to deliberate over every one of the hundreds of choices we make every day, so instead, we use our heuristics as shortcuts to make judgments about the world around us, for example, rather than spending time deciding what to Wear every day, you might have some default outfits.
It's called whatever's in the drawer when faced with a lunch menu with too many options.
You may opt for what you've enjoyed in the past.
Heuristics aren't about making the perfect decision or judgment, just about making one quickly.
Heuristics play a role in our reasoning about the broader world as an example.
Consider the rate of violence in the world over the past century.
Is the world more or less violent in the past 20 years than previously?
Heuristic reasoning might lead us to think that the world is more violent today than it has been in the past.
Every day we're confronted with images of tragedy in the news and on social media.
We might reasonably assume that the world is more violent today than ever before using what's called an availability heuristic.
That is, examples of violence that are so readily available, we just naturally assume the world is more violent today.
But in fact, the world is more peaceful today than ever before in human history.
We may hear a lot about violent events, but so this is really important here.
Like if you were to look at the headlines, you open up X, you go look at videos, you go look at all these different things.
I know we've had debates about this on previous shows where I'm like, look, I try to tell you, I was like, look, hey, bro, ultimately, you know, life is like net positive right now.
No, like, I was saying, like, yeah, you can, you can look at the specific cases where that's not happening, but you got to look at the net proportion of people living better lives than kings.
Even the poorest people here in America live a better lives.
That's discrimination against red-spotted people like me.
Samantha makes an interesting point.
I want to keep playing the video.
And she says, are we differentiating in violence as in like being degen or just mass carnage?
Like societal standard?
Because a lot of people, like that would be the argument I think on the side of Fuentes that you're really like, you're not seeing because it doesn't impact your worldview.
A lot of people are not happy with like the modern life per se or like, you know, from like a traditional perspective.
So to clarify that, it's very easy to point out what you don't have versus what you do have.
Okay.
There are things that we take for granted on a regular, on a regular basis that we don't account for because they become a habitual nature and something that we're used to.
If you were to take into account and like people were to practice the whole aspect of gratitude and really doing a deep analyzation, the things that we have to complain about today are really not anything compared to what they had to complain about back in the day.
Before you literally had to worry about living past the age of disinterruption.
Yeah, you had so many things to worry about.
And we're sitting here complaining about he said this on the internet and she said that.
And this person shouldn't be walking in here and doing that when literally like you had barbarians at your door ready to come rape your wife and kill your children.
Like there's situations like that where you don't, you know, you don't worry about an interesting thing.
Yeah, it's all about what you put the lens on and what you're focusing on.
I am taking a 10,000-foot view and objectively looking at the things that we're struggling with today.
And I'm saying proportionally to the time period, I would rather be dealing with arguing whether Fuentes and Pierce are right over the fact of like whether I'm going to catch the black plague and die.
You know, here's the thing.
At that time period, like we had the pandemic, right?
If the coup, if, if the pandemic was as if like we didn't have the technological advances, there probably could have been a lot more people and a lot more situations.
Maybe it's not this disease or maybe there's other.
I'm talking about the research itself in which we try to, we have CDC and we have people researching literal like plagues ahead of time to make sure that they're squashed before they even reach the level.
At that time period, it was like you just let it, it just happens.
So all throughout the southern United States, we used to have this problem with this parasite.
And I'm blanking on what it was called, but it used to infect cows and pigs and you name it.
And basically what we did is we irradiated millions of these like bugs or worms or whatever they were.
And then we released them during mating season and they died off, right?
And a lot of these Latin American countries and South American countries still have to deal with this thing because they didn't use that technological innovation like we did at the time that we used it.
So it's stuff, it is stuff like that, like quality of life.
Like we don't have to deal with that parasite here.
And I saw, you know, you ever see like those Kurshkazat videos?
It is a privilege for us to worry about the things that we're worrying about right now because there's so many things that are being taken care of for us in the background that we have no idea.
unidentified
Oh, nothing and you're happy and you'll eat the bug and it's a bit very delicious for you.
I'm just saying, like, there are so many things that happen in the background that are being taken care of for us in a positive manner, not just the negative ones.
I'm saying not just the ones that want to control their dude.
But when you've got enough people that have created a narrative and that pushed like that left agenda when the whole George Floyd and the thing, like that had real lasting consequences that made some white people very angry.
And it was because you took that case of the guy who had the brutality and then you said, let's go and defund the police.
You said, let's go defund the police.
And when that happened, I was like, whoa, defund the police.
I was like, we don't, we don't need that.
Why would we need to defund the police?
Like, if I look at most cops, most cops are not killing people.
I'm just saying the police is one of those things you also take for granted.
The reason why we're not in this whole anarchy situation is because speeding ticket or somebody goes and decides to take your house and shoot you by gunpoint.
People are afraid of consequences.
That's why you don't have mass murders and stuff like that happening all the time.
Our political views can especially suffer from an over-reliance on heuristics.
Just consider how we deal with political issues.
We'll often let our political identities and our heuristics about how right we think they are stand in lieu of important details and information we need to have an informed viewpoint.
Because our heuristics can so easily lead us to faulty conclusions, it's important to be humble about our views.
In light of our fallibility, we have to do something that doesn't come easy.
We must recognize that that gun is an uncertain place.
They're that or they're on Instagram or they're on TikTok.
And you don't see Fuentes on like, I know he got banned off of these platforms, but like you don't see characters.
Like, look at you don't see him just like on TikTok all of a sudden because that's not where his base sits.
And if you look at Pierce Morgan, he makes a post and you say he's very left-leaning.
Look at his comments section.
Most people are roasting him, calling him names, doing all this stuff because he'll never win those people.
But then, if you were to go like look at a TikTok, you would see showering praise where everybody would be sitting there saying, Well, Fuentes is a bad guy and X, Y, and Z.
It's just all about where you exist.
And so, each side takes these little cognitive biases.
They don't take the time to research.
They don't take the time to do the deep dives like I'm trying to do on these shows.
And when he says deep dives, if y'all are tuning into the show, we actually have a pretty small audience usually compared to what we have.
And that's why we encourage everyone to repost the show.
For one, if you're watching this, repost the show, share the link, share the live feed on X. Please do that.
Tim puts together an excellent, it's like an hour, but it usually ends up honestly being a longer prepared segment where we go into causational thinking.
We go into the meta-level or the macro level argument, and we start talking about like actually systems of things and how things have developed or broken down.
And we definitely have a lot to go off of from tonight on building this out and having a more refined discussion.
Because as we've seen, the opposite of love isn't hatred, it's indifference, ladies and gentlemen.
People are opinionated about this.
So we should go in and get the deep dive and see exactly where the research comes from, where the numbers come from to talk about the things that we've talked about tonight.
Coming from a household where I lived on food stamps, half my family lives in that poverty-stricken state.
My cousin robbed a bank.
Like, I know what that life is like where I've got family like that.
But then I also know what it's like to be in the classroom with really elite people and the billionaires going to school with those types of kids and being around rich kids and being the only black kid in my entire grade.
I have my own opinion because I have exposure and people aren't getting exposure from different groups and they're not getting exposure from different perspectives.
And a lot of the times like a sports team for people, right?
Like, this is my team, right?
And they don't even have like really a political ethos or identity.
Like they're a nice person.
They want nice things for people.
I'm sure your family members are all great people.
But it ultimately, if you're working, if you're a normal person that's not like an online schizo like us, you're not, you don't have to be politically aware and you don't necessarily want to be because it's a lot of it, most of it, all of it is negative, right?
So you can't then blame the people for being in that way.
You have to, it's a real gradual process.
It's like eroding.
It's like erosion.
It's like eroding a mountain.
You have to gently introduce these thought experiments and ideas and equations to people.
And only then do they figure out for themselves when they stand.
You got to understand, we make enemies in certain rooms that we have no idea.
I literally know some very powerful people that would not do business with certain people now because of the fact of things that they have stood behind.
Fuentes has lost an entire demographic of the population just from his outspokenness.
It gets him views.
It gets him views.
It gets him clickbaits.
But I'm saying that when you do that, live by the sword, die by the sword.
And you're not going to have, you're not, you're not going to have, if he has an agenda to change the world, he's not going to be able to do it.
These people, he's not the first one to do it, man.
I try to look at it as objectively and scientifically as possible and take the biases out of it because the only thing that is actually sound at the end of the day is math is the only thing that has a true equation that adds up.
Do you realize how cartoonish the world we live in today?
Like the president is an orange war man, and there's conflict all around the globe, and people are fighting over TikTok and Instagram reels and memeing on each other and texting each other across continents, across globes.
People are getting things imported from realms they could never dream of before.
Like we're living in a modern era and like it, hate it.
The future is now.
The future has come.
Like this is no one ever expected this in the history of humanity.
I was driving down the road today in my car and I was thinking about this this morning.
You think about someone from 200 years ago, just the concept of an interstate highway?
Just the fact of you not having to walk or go by horseback to get from where it would take you probably a whole day to get from South Austin to where you are right now.
You know?
And it's like, at the end of the day, there are people looking out for society that just want to invent cool things.
We're just not talking about them.
We're just, don't you realize there's not enough coverage that goes for the good things that go on?
Like no one knows the new biotech that's coming out and the new things that are actually like.
Like, that's the thing is, I don't trust big pharma.
That's number one.
I don't, that's why, that's why I don't trust the military.
That's why I don't trust our government.
All the special interests, the people with money, the people that get the contracts, their motivation is not necessarily to invent the new greatest thing.
They've secured the contract.
They want the contract to go forward in the future.
I think a lot of innovation has gone on that hasn't been released.
Yeah, well, we could go back in time and there's time periods where like, yeah, people were gatekeeping at the beginning, but ultimately the inertia of people wanting a better society.
I think it'll come, the technology comes out of it.
The nuances of human emotion is the one thing that is very hard to predict.
But then also people utilize, it is sort of predictable in itself, too, because you use the not only just cognitive biases, but you know how people can react to specific things.
It's the emotions that actually lead to the control in itself, too.
It's when you're angry, it's when you're hyped up, it's when you're most vulnerable to believe a specific narrative is when they, when they capture the eyeballs and they make you feel, it's when they make you feel fear, is when they can make you go and do whatever you want.
That is the they actually use the emotion against the human to begin with when it comes to these things.
And that's how you control.
And all I'm just saying, go read like a book like the 48 laws of power.
And I wish like sometimes I wish I don't think 48 to understand or to understand how evil laws are true.
Yeah, laws of human nature, 48 laws of power.
They teach you about human nature and you're going to see patterns.
And the thing is, is like if well, the pattern that I got from reading that book was that there are people that are that have dark triad personality traits, like being sociopathic, narcissistic, or psychopathic.
And those people have an inherent advantage because they don't have to deal with the moral system.
And that book is basically an attack or a defense manual against those tactics, but those tactics are imperative in human nature because that predatory class, they universally take power, right?
And the more information you get, whether you get it from us on the show or whether you spend the time going and researching, we're all susceptible to these cognitive biases.
I am susceptible.
I'm not any different than the rest of you guys.
But what I have tried to do is make myself aware that these things do exist and then look for those examples and say, can I do a little bit more to just understand?
And look, X no longer fact checks anymore.
I don't see, I don't see community notes anymore.
I don't like I'm finding myself getting upset because I'm looking at like, have you, do you know who like unusual Wells is?
They post a bunch of baloney now where like they get a bunch of clickbaits, but then their statements are not actually backed by facts.
There's there's a several amount of people that use these people to get their news.
And it's just like, it's just, man, I'm sick and tired of people not just taking a little bit more time before they make the post and just post something that's real.
And I'm, and I would rather spend my time making a thread that's five, five posts that you guys read, but I know I've spent some time doing the research and give you guys some knowledge than to just give myself a little quick, give myself a little quick boost of dopamine by giving you guys like breaking news.
This happened and all white people are racist.
And then I just get a bunch of people that like comment and give me a bunch of engagement.
And negative news is a lot more popular, like, but not, not that people like it, but people are more willing to look at it because it's more interesting to them than positive news.
So you're already from the perspective of distributing information, you're already at a deficit there because people are more likely, not just if it's fed to them, they're also more likely to look for it.
Like, you know, any new technology that's come out that's like helpful to humans now and the things that we just, what you just talked about was pretty positive, right?
Also, you got to be careful about some of the things that people come out with, like MSNBC.
You can't, yeah.
You, you can go and pay the editors to essentially write a good piece of article as like publicity and you pay them a good amount of money and they'll make a whole post about you.
They'll make a whole video and you can make it seem like whatever you're doing is like fantastic, the best thing since like sliced bread.
So you also have to be very careful about those things.
But look, as long as I exist and as long as I'm doing this show, I will do my best to break things down for you guys and just give you guys the honest opinions.
If you guys follow me on X, I try to do a thread at least a few times a week that actually breaks down something that's happening in the news out there.
That's like, and I go deeper than what the surface level post is, where I spend the time finding the pictures, finding the graphs, those types of things.
So I'm going to continue doing that, even if I'm shouting in the dark, because at the end of the day, man, that's the only thing that I can see if we get enough people doing just that.
But at the end of the day, to form a to form a worldview, I can point to every position that I hold and I could say, okay, this is why I believe X thing.
And that could be wrong.
It could be misinformed, but at least it is built on some sort of data bank or wealth of information.
A lot of people literally don't know, don't know that Africa is not a country.
You've got people that don't know what the three branches of government are.
I think it's like one third of Americans, maybe it's higher now that don't don't know what that is.
And then those people vote and it's a whole thing.
You have people that have rights and are citizens and are supposed to be active and involved in their community and in the betterment of their country.
But because of the degradation of our society over time, we've reached a point where people almost take pride in not being informed, going, I'm not into politics.
I'm not into XYZ.
I'm not into this issue.
I won't even discuss it because it hurts my brain.
I'd rather watch the football.
I'd rather movie.
I'd rather watch Netflix series.
Why would I even think about things?
Why would I even try to solve them?
The world is so broken.
No, If you have that mindset, then it's a self-fulfilling prophecy and the world is broken.
We reject that here on the gray area.
And that's why Tim goes into such detail.
And even if you disagree with him, this is data that you have to conflict with that.
You have to rationalize and reinforces or degrades your position based on the information that he's giving you.
You start like there, there's literally trials where people can sit there and like say they're somebody and like brainwash themselves into believing they're somebody that they're not just strictly by like training their brain to continuously treat that behavior over and over again.
So I think at a certain point, somebody can start off being like, I don't want to call them disingenuous, but somebody can really start off at the beginning, just doing it in a way, like just to get the numbers, get the eyeballs, get the traction.
And then eventually, as the other things come out and there's other people that step up and it becomes an echo chamber, then they really start believing.
And that's why you're hitting the nail on the head.
That's why I was saying that is what marginalizing people and putting people down does.
You build anger after a certain amount of time.
And what happens is you breed.
Now, he's not Hitler, but if you look at the video, he says, well, maybe we should see what it's like when white people are unhinged because that's what Hitler represents.
But then don't you see like the knee-jerk reaction is to just now swing to the complete opposite side and just take the opposite position?
When I'm challenged on one of my belief systems, I don't sit there and go to like radical style behavior and just being like, because look, don't crash out.
I don't crash out.
Okay, here's a fun story, not to, not to, to, uh, not to get into the weeds with this one, but did you know, like, back in high school, dude, I was afraid to, I've never really talked about this openly.
I was afraid to walk the street in the town that I used to live in back in high school.
White people, I, I, I lived in, I was the only black person in my entire grade.
Uh, I was the only, uh, the, the population of that city was like 0.001% black.
And I was just like, I felt self-conscious walking.
And like, there were times where like I could be walking and like, you just see like the, you, you kind of walk by the white lady and she kind of like clutches her bag just a little bit tighter.
Things like that.
Or like, you've never been in a store where like somebody sees you like walking down the aisle and they purposely take another, uh, they, they move to the other side because they know like they don't want to deal with like, like I'm telling you, and it's not a coincidence.
Like there's literally literally that that's and that's a unique human experience that based on your background that you have to deal with that I don't have to deal with and Fuentes never experienced that too.
So it's like for me, I will say I kind of look like a burglar now.
This has been a great show, and we're going to clip all of this stuff so that y'all can re-watch it and we'll post it.
And, you know, I saw you had a, I saw you had a thread that did pretty well.
You know, I think the algorithm is starting to like you.
Just got to pick up, you know.
But look, follow Truism Tim on X if you don't already.
He does great work on the show and he really puts a lot of like a lot of blood, sweat, and tears in putting together the present, uh, the uh, the segments on Sunday.
And it kind of just the last thing I'll say: it kind of sucks.
Um, the like, I know we're the new guys starting, and we, we have to allow the time, and like there are people that came before us that started the process, right?
Some parked out my career, but yeah, you had to restart, but that, but you restarting is probably the only way that you and I could have done this show, to be honest.
Go ahead, I interrupt your, but all I'm saying is, is like there are people that have already beat us to the race as far as getting the message out there, and they have the platform to say whatever, and they're not having these conversations.
And I'm not throwing shade at InfoWars, I'm not throwing shade at your dad, but there are some people there are some people that go on there and continue to push that, continue to push that.
And it's like, look, how long are we going to, how long are we going to go with these narratives before we have new things?
I mean, this is the type of broadcast I always wanted to do because, you know, it's really hard to have a constructive conversation when everyone's just agreeing with each other.
And I think that's a big problem with Echo Chamber and just America in general.
And the last thing I want to do before we hop off, anyone in the chat, I don't, I don't really, we don't really have the ability all the time to talk to you guys.
And like Rex and I talk off air and we have conversations.
So I know where it ends, but I'm very curious.
Like, does anyone resonate a little bit?
Like, even if you've never messaged before, let me know if any of this at least pushed you in a direction where you were like, maybe I have a different view on this now.
Like, does this stuff help?
Like, I know I'm speaking to avoid sometimes and we're just having a conversation.
And because like people that are doing it, like if you're at like the Blaze studios or something, if you work for like Glenn Beck, you're getting paid to like be a right-wing broadcaster or something.
If you hold that perspective, like whatever the perspective is, you're holding the perspective to get a check, right?