Dec. 17, 2024 - The Truth Central - Dr. Jerome Corsi
37:09
Jean Baudrillard, Post-Modernism, the Matrix and the Truth
Dr. Jerome Corsi examines the philosophies of Jean Baudrillard, whose focus on hyperreality is the basis for much of the Identity Politics festering in today's society, where people will believe what they want to believe, set their own pronouns create a false reality and demand you and all else comply. This is prevalent today and given relevance by Leftists as a vehicle to gain power through feeding into such behaviors.Visit The Truth Central website: https://www.thetruthcentral.com If you like what we are doing, please support our Sponsors:Get RX Meds Now:https://www.getrxmedsnow.comMyVitalC https://www.thetruthcentral.com/myvitalc-ess60-in-organic-olive-oil/Swiss America: https://www.swissamerica.com/offer/CorsiRMP.php Get Dr. Corsi's new book, The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy: The Final Analysis: Forensic Analysis of the JFK Autopsy X-Rays Proves Two Headshots from the Right Front and One from the Rear, here: https://www.amazon.com/Assassination-President-John-Kennedy-Headshots/dp/B0CXLN1PX1/ref=sr_1_1?crid=20W8UDU55IGJJ&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.ymVX8y9V--_ztRoswluApKEN-WlqxoqrowcQP34CE3HdXRudvQJnTLmYKMMfv0gMYwaTTk_Ne3ssid8YroEAFg.e8i1TLonh9QRzDTIJSmDqJHrmMTVKBhCL7iTARroSzQ&dib_tag=se&keywords=jerome+r.+corsi+%2B+jfk&qid=1710126183&sprefix=%2Caps%2C275&sr=8-1 Join Dr. Jerome Corsi on Substack: https://jeromecorsiphd.substack.com/Visit The Truth Central website: https://www.thetruthcentral.com Get your FREE copy of Dr. Corsi's new book with Swiss America CEO Dean Heskin, How the Coming Global Crash Will Create a Historic Gold Rush by calling: 800-519-6268Follow Dr. Jerome Corsi on X: @corsijerome1 Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-truth-central-with-dr-jerome-corsi--5810661/support.
This is the best of Dr. Jerome Corsi on The Truth Central.
Thank you for joining us on thetruthcentral.com.
We're doing podcasts every weekday.
Now today I want to do a special presentation.
Some of these are not just covering the news every day, but I want to get into some of these topics more deeply.
And I want to really penetrate into a question here of the new book I've just written.
It's coming out.
It's in print right now.
It's in press right now.
It'll be in print in November, but it's finished.
And Chris will show you the cover of it.
It's the truth about, it's the second in the series of the truth books, the truth about neo-Marxism, cultural Maoism, And anarchy.
And I find these topics to be fascinating.
I think they're kind of bizarre.
And we're going to explore postmodernism today.
This is my second in this series.
The first one was the truth about energy, global warming, and climate change.
And these books are about the truth.
They're about difficult subjects, but I think they're the books I'm writing.
I'm trying to make these books definitive.
So that we expose the truth.
And once you've read the book, you'll understand why the climate science of carbon dioxide is junk.
And it's actually pretty silly.
And we're going to do the same thing here with neo-Marxism, cultural Maoism, and anarchy.
If we don't deconstruct these, if we don't show that they are not truthful, This is what will destroy the world.
We're headed towards a nuclear war because these people are in charge.
They're demons.
And they are insane.
They don't believe in God.
They don't believe in truth.
They don't believe in objective reality.
Now, today we're going to deal with one of my absolute favorites.
This is a guy, I think, John Baudrillard, French.
Okay, now...
He lived from 1929 to 2007. They always say he's one of France's leading intellectuals.
He's a coffee shop, nut house, sipping café on the streets of the Champs-Élysées.
And I've been to the Champs-Élysées many times.
It's a big, wide avenue, and the French think it's the center of the world.
And I think it's a big, wide avenue with an arc in the middle of it.
So, John Baudrillard is a postmodernist.
Now, he also became part of the Matrix movies.
Because his thinking, when the producers of the Matrix, and I'm sure everybody's seen the Matrix movies, there are probably very few who have not, which is how they find out that the world is really all these numbers and a computer system.
The world is a computer system.
And we're living in an artificial reality.
It looks physical, but we're really just in a computer game.
We're characters in a computer.
We don't know who we are.
It's a Truman Show.
If you could see it from the outside, you would realize that this is not what it appears to be to us.
We're just the characters in this game.
We think that we're real people.
We're not.
Okay, so postmodernism challenges the concept of reality, which is what the Matrix movies did.
And the people who made the Matrix movies, like Baudrillard, and they actually put him in the movie.
I'm going to show you how.
I'm going to show you a clip of this.
It only lasts about two minutes.
And these are a group of people who are discussing the philosophy of the Matrix and Baudrillard.
And it's pretty bizarre.
Now, I don't promise that this is going to be a normal conversation.
I think you're going to find this bizarre, but I think you're going to find it amusing.
So, Chris, would you play the video?
Welcome to the desert of the real.
According to continental philosophers, we're now in the postmodern condition, a condition in which reality has all but disappeared.
And in fact, one of the interesting things about Baudrillard is that if you take him seriously, he appears to...
Postmodernists are fond of thinking that they work as something sort of radically different from what's gone on before, but I think it's a sort of straightforward extrapolation of the sort of stuff we get in Kent and the idea that the world is in some way or other a construction of what's going on in my mind.
It's really striking that it's one of the few movies that shows a work by a real philosopher.
In the context of the movie.
So Baudrillard's simulacra simulation turns up towards the beginning of the movie in this book that Neo has its contraband software in.
If we turn to page one of Simulacrum Simulation, we see Baudrillard commenting on a Borges fable in which cartographers of an empire create a map that is so perfect and coextensive with geography that it touches the real geography at every point.
What's really interesting is that for Baudrillard, the map is what's important.
The map has primacy for us.
The map is a simulacrum that, as a model, Loses all reference to reality.
In Baudrillard's fable, reality exists only as rotting shreds that are attached to the map.
And this is the state of our age, according to Baudrillard, that the model itself has primacy for us.
The real has become irrelevant, if undefinable, and clings only as vestiges.
And he's coined the phrase, the desert of the real, to describe the state of our age.
Okay, that's Bob Rulliard.
And I always like to see him smoking his cigarettes.
I'm sure John Paul Sartre would have loved to have coffee with him.
These guys are armchair intellectuals.
They're dangerous, though.
And his idea is really not particularly novel.
Plato is dealing with the same idea in the myth of the caves where Plato in the Republic portrays us as if we are sitting in a cave and we can see ahead of us but we can't turn around and see behind us.
Behind us are people moving with torches and they're projecting images onto the screen and what we see as reality is just projected images.
We don't see the real reality behind us of the people with the torches who are making the images.
So the idea here, when the guy said Kant, K-A-N-T, Kant.
Kant was a philosopher in the 1700s, a German philosopher, and I write about Kant in this book.
Kant started out from the premise that all of our experience is subjective.
In other words, okay, you come into the world and you've got your senses.
So everything you know about the world is through the five senses.
You know, smell, sight, sound, touch, taste.
And that's how we experience the world.
And what we do is we make an image of the world.
We form a mental image of the world in our minds.
Now the question is...
The fundamental question that Plato's asking all the way through Kant, through Baudrillard, is, is there anything real?
In other words, is there objective reality outside of our living within our mental construction of reality?
Now, that's an important question, and it's one that philosophers have dealt with for ages, not new.
It goes back into pre-Socratic, and I'm sure you can find even earlier references in Hindu and other earlier religions where people are realizing that our experience here is ephemeral and only through our senses.
We don't have any other way of knowing if there is an objective reality.
You know, the philosophers have asked, are we some kind of an entity that's riding on the back of some turtle somewhere?
And, you know, we really don't exist except in the mind of the turtle.
Okay?
I mean, these kinds of musings are interesting.
Now, what Baudrillard does is he takes this...
By the way, he did not like the Matrix movies.
Because the Matrix movies, the rebels knew that they were living in a computer...
They knew the world was in a computer image.
Neo was going back and forth with fighting with these characters who were trying to block him because he had the perception that they were all living in a Matrix and he was trying to break this illusion.
The rebels were trying to recover reality, objective reality.
Well, Baudrillard...
He said there is no objective reality.
There is only the illusion.
Now his primary book, and you might think, why are we talking about all this?
We're talking about all this because this is the core philosophic concept behind woke.
And if you go to university today, this is what you're taught.
You know, I've taught in universities.
This is what you're taught.
This is where the philosophy is gone.
The postmodern, neo-Marxism, cultural Maoism is what is being taught in philosophy today in every university in the country, virtually.
Okay, so this is not irrelevant.
If you want to understand Wolk, you're going to have to understand what we're talking about today.
Now, his major book was called Simulacra and Assimilation.
Now, what is a simulacra?
Simulacra is a Latin word, and it means like an image of something.
It is not the thing itself.
It's a portrayal of the thing itself.
Okay?
And a simulation is instead of reality, you're running a possible scenario of reality.
You're doing a what-if.
Okay?
It doesn't really exist.
It's just a simulation.
Okay?
Now, what Baudrillard is going to say is everything is simulacra and everything is simulation.
Now, he starts out the book with a quotation from Ecclesiastes, which, by the way, is not in Ecclesiastes.
He made it up, but it sounds like Ecclesiastes.
He says, the simulacrum is never what hides the truth.
It is the truth that hides the fact that there is none.
The simulacrum is true.
I'm going to read that again.
A simulacrum is never what hides the truth.
It is the truth that hides the fact that there is none.
A simulacrum is true.
That's another thing about reading these guys, is that they're dense.
They're hard to read.
You have to drink a lot of coffee.
I don't smoke cigarettes, but Bob really, I'm sure, smoked a lot of cigarettes writing this book.
The point is, what he's saying is that The truth is that everything is subjective, that there are no real objects, that there are just constructions.
Now, Kant ultimately said that there was a a priori truth.
In other words, Kant postulated there is objective reality.
And that we have an intuitive understanding of objective reality, and that's how we judge our subjective reality.
The point is Kant wanted us to reconcile these a priori truths into our perception of objective reality, and he believed that on moral principles We could have categorical imperatives.
In other words, by reading these a priori moral laws into formulations of rules of behavior, we could come up with absolutely certainly true and internally consistent rules of behavior, like it's wrong to lie.
That would be a categorical imperative.
Categorical means in all categories, it has to be.
It can't be otherwise.
That's what Kant said.
Now, Baudrillard is on the other side of the pole.
Since Baudrillard doesn't believe there's objective reality, he believes that whatever reality you have is as good as anybody else's reality.
Now, what the woman who was talking about in that clip was he begins this book by quoting Borges.
Borges was an Argentinian writer of fiction and poetry who dealt in the mystical.
I started reading Borges in my 20s, and I have read him in Spanish, and he's intriguing, fascinating.
And the story that she's relating to, Borges talks about a country where they did a very intricate map of the country.
The map became the country.
The map disintegrated.
The country didn't exist anymore because the map was the country.
The simulacrum was the reality.
Okay, that's the whole point here.
Now, I want to read a couple parts of what I wrote, and I want to get you into the understanding of how we deal with this, because this is going to be important in dealing with postmodernism and in dealing with the entire woke culture.
I call John Baudrillard the high priest of nihilist postmodernism.
Okay, now, postmodernism, This whole phenomenon of...
And it dominates philosophy right now.
It dominates the entire...
Frankfurt School dominated a group of largely Jewish philosophers who escaped Nazi Germany when they lost to the fascists.
They came to the United States through Columbia University, and they wrote books, Destroying America.
They were behind a lot of the anti-war movement in the 60s.
They're still behind, to some extent, the woke movement today.
At least it traces to their thought.
Now, what Baudrillard is saying is a radical concept that there is no objective reality behind our subjective perception of reality.
Going one step further, he argued that reality itself is nothing more than the images we create.
Such that these images become reality.
He doesn't really deal with the fundamental problem of interpersonal, intersubjective agreement about reality.
How is it that two or three people can see the same chair?
How is it that a bunch of people can see the same baseball game?
Those people don't really exist.
They're only in his mind.
So they're watching the baseball game that's in his mind.
And if he's not watching it, there is no baseball game.
Okay, that's basically their reality.
So simulacrum, it comes with the verb simulare in Latin, which means to make like, to imitate, to copy.
His point is the copy is the reality.
The made-up is the reality.
It's a fictional quote from Ecclesiastes.
I'm going to do one more thing here, and I want to ask Chris what he thinks about this.
Now, the fabricated quote which I just read, you know, it sounds like King Solomon, it sounds like a lot of the verses you read in Ecclesiastes, but King Solomon laments that a life lived to pursue wisdom involves much grief and sorrow, contemplating human madness and folly.
That's Ecclesiastes 1.17.
And I'm saying that's really the conclusion I come to reading Baudrillard.
In other words, it's dealing here with a lot of human madness and folly, and it has caused a lot of grief and a lot of sorrow.
Namely, the madness and folly of his writing have propelled Neo-Marxism and cultural Maoism to a new level of value relativity that has produced much subsequent sorrow and grief on Earth.
Baudrillard's point in his rendering of King Solomon is that simulacra and simulations are the only reality.
His nihilistic denial of objective reality elevates every subjective human perception of reality, including the subjective perception of schizophrenics, the level of a natural law that all must accept as universally accurate and true.
What's a schizophrenic?
Schizophrenic is a psychiatric term for a person who has created for themselves a fictional reality.
And they live in that fictional reality.
Now, there are famous cases of schizophrenia, and I'm sure most of the people watching today did not see some of the television shows that were produced in the 1970s where they were showing cases of schizophrenia where people had multiple personalities.
Multiple personalities are very interesting in psychiatry because a person can be one person, they shift to a completely different person, They behave, and they don't connect the personalities one to the other.
Some schizophrenics have many multiple personalities.
They may have seven or eight personalities, and you never know which one that you're talking to until you figure out how it's behaving, and they shift.
Because they're all disturbed.
They're all imaginations.
They're all created.
They aren't the person.
The person is nothing.
Schizophrenia is a form of very deep psychosis in which you've lost touch with reality.
Okay, now, paranoid schizophrenics.
John Nash was a paranoid schizophrenic.
He was a brilliant economist who...
We came up with a theory that challenged Adam Smith.
There have been movies on him.
A Beautiful Mind was about John Nash.
He went to Princeton.
Paranoid schizophrenic means you think that there are people out to get you, and you actually create these people.
He was living in a reality of Cold War, where he was talking to military agents, and he was on government assignments, and he was finding secret clues, and he was putting together all this puzzle of what the Soviet Union was trying to do and communicate to us.
It was all made up, but yet he was brilliant.
And he challenged Adam Smith.
Adam Smith had a theory in economics that everybody doing their own thing, competing with each other, is the way you advance.
John Nash said, no, you've got to cooperate.
And John Nash in the movie shows that he and a bunch of his buddies go out to a bar, and if they all kill the most beautiful girl, nobody gets them.
Nobody gets that girl.
If they divide up the girls, they divide their attention, somebody's got a chance of getting some of the girls.
So they cooperate to decide who's going to talk to which girl.
And they have a better opportunity to win than if they all went after the one they really wanted.
Now that's, again, brilliant thinking.
But it also reflects some of the schizophrenia because it has to do with the reconstruction of reality that is interesting.
And schizophrenics are often very interesting.
It's just you don't want to let them be in charge.
That's the basic problem.
Now, I want to get one more point.
First of all, Chris, what do you think of all this?
You talk about the schizophrenics, and this is a very serious disease when it comes to psychological disorders.
What we have today are people who seek attention at this point, maybe use that sort of thing.
They create their own realities.
But aside from just living it inside them themselves, they try to demand that other people accept those realities and interact with them as such.
We can go to the lowest level and find the child that identifies him or herself in the school as a cat.
And the teacher will get fired if he or she does not identify that child or refer to him or her as a cat.
This is something that was an interesting philosophical discussion over the years.
Now it's a serious societal situation now.
Right.
They're actually playing this out.
Let me read this next part.
And Chris, you can stay here.
You can show the book a couple times, but we're not going to run any more videos.
I write this.
I said, when discussing this transition and how people perceive images in history, which is part of what Baudrillard was talking about with Borges, Baudrillard explained that the view of images as accurate reflections of a profound external reality He's saying that because we believe there was this objective reality,
we believe there was objective right and wrong, we believe that there was some meaning to our experience here, and we'd be judged by our behavior.
Now the technology allows us to appreciate that there is no objective reality to perceive.
In other words, the Matrix movie or the whole idea of simulated reality, the metaverse, all these things in which we can exist in a frame that is completely imaginary, but yet very seductively so.
Video games.
So that now that technology allows us to perceive there is no objective reality to perceive, we finally perceive there never was God, because there was never objective reality.
Okay, so we also understand that theology implying the necessity of a last judgment to impose natural law rulings on mortality of human lives was, as Freud maintained, an illusion that we create for social control to control people.
Freud believed that religion was an illusion, that it was a mental disease, that we needed to get beyond religion, because there was no God, because there was no objective reality.
So Baudrillard writes this, he says, the transition from signs that dissimulate something to signs that dissimulate that there is nothing marks a decisive turning point.
The first reflects a theology of truth and secrecy to which the notion of ideology still belongs.
The second inaugurates the idea of simulacra and simulation in which there is no longer a God to recognize his own, no longer a last judgment to separate the false from the true, the real from its artificial resurrection, as everything is already dead and resurrected in advance.
Okay, so Vaudrillard is extreme on this.
And in the following sentence, he asserted that when the real is no longer what it was, nostalgia assumes its full meaning.
For him, the harsh reality is that the myth of origin and the signs of reality were always false.
However, we poor humans still regret losing those wrongfully conceived but comfortable illusions, refusing to accept that our reality is a reality of nothingness.
Probably in the concluding chapter of his book on nihilism, Baudrillard declares, I am a nihilist.
Again, he explained, as Shakespeare had posited, that life is full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
I believe that comes from Macbeth.
Or Hamlet, one of the two.
I've footnoted it.
By the way, this book's got 1,400 footnotes in it.
I observe, this is Baudrillard, I observe, I accept, I assume the immense processes of the destruction of appearances and the seduction of appearances, this is how these guys write, in the service of meaning, representation, history, criticism, that is the fundamental fact of the 19th century,
the true revolution of the 19th century of modernity, It's the radical destruction of appearances, the disenchantment of the world, and its abandonment to the violence of interpretation and history.
So Baudrillard rejected Kant and Hegel because they presumed that we would advance the human spirit through the workings of an historical dialectic.
The Marxist dialectic was invented largely by Kant, although it goes back into pre-Socratic thought as well.
Thesis, antithesis, synthesis.
Disagreeing, Baudrillard concluded that the only working out we humans can do in history is to realize how deluded we were to assume objective reality.
Natural rights of law and right and wrong, a creator, an all-knowing benevolent God who ruled heaven and earth.
Indeed, Baudrillard reveled in the celebration that the 20th century was the dawning of human consciousness to our appreciate that our existence amounted to nothing.
He concluded, I observe, I accept, I assume.
That's out of, you know, Descartes.
I think so.
I think therefore I am.
I think, I'm here.
I exist.
So his statement was, Baudrillard made sure that he did not confuse, that we don't confuse him with Kant or Hegel, with the Frankfurt School of Critical Theory.
He said the dialectic stage, the critical stage is empty.
Nothing in dialect, there's nothing in the critical theory.
There's no more sage, there's no more meaning or therapy through meaning.
Therapy itself is the generalized process of indifferentiation.
Okay, so in a sentence or two, Baudrillard dismissed the neo-Marxist critical theory of the Frankfurt thinkers as Adorno and Benjamin, various of these thinkers.
And what he's basically saying is that there is no meaning.
There is no end to history.
There is no...
Now, the combination of taking the The Frankfurt School adopted a lot of Baudrillard's thinking, and postmodernity is the underlying theme of critical theory of wokeness.
So these people simultaneously assume that the world is advancing to a better stage through the dialectic, and they're going to create the utopia.
And they alternatively believe that That there's no meaning except for meanings that we posit, whatever that will be.
So you can have an infinite number of genders because since there is no objective gender, sex is not defined by your physical organs.
It's defined by your idea of how you want to engage in sexual activity.
Now that's the separation of the physical reality of sex from its mental component, saying the mental component is all there is.
Therefore, anybody who has a view of it is legitimate in having that view, and everybody has to accept that view.
That's wokeism.
It goes a couple more levels.
Because combined back to neo-Marxism, they say, well, we don't have to deal with facts because there aren't any facts.
It doesn't matter that carbon dioxide is not the turning knob of the world.
That's our narrative about it.
So our job is to invent narratives.
Our job is to invent memes, themes, and make these themes real.
So I find the easiest way to explain it is John Lennon was affected by this, the songwriter, the Beatles.
He said in his song, Imagine, and he said, Imagine a world with no religion.
Imagine a world with no God.
Imagine a country with no borders.
Well, how about imagining a world with no John Lennon?
The point is that London was saying, like the Marxists say, that we need to posit, we need to, here's the principles we want to be the truth.
We want to imagine a world with no police.
We want to imagine a world in which there's no criminals.
We want to imagine a world in which there is no United States, no slavery, no racism, no disease.
We're going to imagine these, and then we're going to make them come true.
Imagine a world with hydrocarbon fuels.
Everybody's going to have everything they want, but we're going to imagine it doesn't work.
Because Baudrillard is nuts.
And he wrote books.
This is one of his favorite books.
It's actually hard to get this book.
Chris, I'm going to have you comment in a minute or two here.
But he actually, this book is very hard to get.
They've tried to keep it out of print.
I've got one of the originals.
It's the Gulf War did not take place.
1991, Gulf War did not take place.
And it's a series of essays that he wrote, and he published it in 1991. Now, he knew there was a Gulf War.
You know, he saw President George H.W. Bush with a coalition of troops go into the desert to get Saddam Hussein.
But Paul Rillard's point was the narrative of what that was all about.
What the White House was saying was, well, he has invaded Kuwait.
He has weapons of mass destruction.
And we've got to go get Saddam Hussein.
We've got to make sure he doesn't take Kuwait.
We have all these countries coming in and we're going to have a war.
And we're going to go get...
And it's going to be put on TV. That was when CNN first came into vogue because CNN was the only one there covering it live.
People were glued to CNN to see what was going on.
And Baudrillard is saying, that's all a narrative.
That's not what the war was about.
Saddam Hussein stayed in power.
Kuwait didn't make any difference.
We still have the oil.
So that whole thing was just a made-up narrative.
It was just a subjective idea.
And we got put through.
Now, what they learned from this is what we're dealing with today.
So this postmodern world can say, COVID, we're all going to die.
Well, they knew it was a bad flu.
It didn't matter.
They were making a narrative.
And through the narrative, they realized that they could get control of people.
Because people would then obey.
Once they could get that narrative sold.
It's a very hot summer.
Well, it's because it wouldn't be this hot without global warming.
If we just stop using hydrocarbon fuels, they can get that convinced to people.
Then we stop using hydrocarbon fuels and they get what they want.
Millions of people, billions of people die because you can't produce enough food for them.
That's the known end result.
But for Baudrillard, it doesn't make any difference since he doesn't believe he exists.
He doesn't believe anything exists.
He's a nihilist.
He doesn't believe any of this is real.
It's all just made up to him, so he's playing with it in a destructive way.
And these people are destructive.
They can only destroy.
And unfortunately, the reality here is, and a lot of what I'm arguing in this book and a lot of what I'm arguing in general, is that there is objective reality.
There is right and wrong.
There are consequences to this behavior.
It's not accidental.
It may have an aspect to it in which we experience it the way we experience it.
We experience it different than dogs do or different than cats do.
But yet, it's real.
And it was created by God.
We could be living in the mind of God.
But it is in the mind of God.
It's not in the mind of some sea turtle.
And it's constructed for a reason and it has rules.
And that'll be my third book because what these people want to do next is create superhumans, transhumans.
And the vast majority of human beings they don't need.
Guys like Hirari at the World Economic Forum are there.
It takes a lot to explain this.
And I'm going to ask you to be reading these books.
Because if you really want to master this, if you really want to understand the world you're being led into like sheep, you better wake up and you better start reading these things and you better pay attention.
Chris?
Well, they've been doing it for several centuries.
It's just a little more streamlined now and easier to do.
Funny thing, with something like the internet, where we can actually, in theory, look things up and find counter-arguments and form our own opinions through a variety of real sources, now that those sources are getting censored, the narrators,
those who create the narrative and control the narrative, can actually keep the opposite And truthful information from us, where the narrative becomes the truth, that virtual reality that Baudrillard talks about or kind of makes up on his own is ours now.
Maybe not ours, but that belongs to many people because it's easier to live in that narrative.
Like you said, imagine if there was no war.
Imagine if there was no government.
Imagine if there was no church or anything else like John Lennon said.
No poverty, no sickness.
It would be nice.
It would really be nice.
The fact is, if we don't do anything about it, Then everybody goes into a lull and like what you talk about your theme many times is a lot of these people are for depopulating the planet and lulling people into this kind of sense is a surefire way of doing so.
Especially with the technology we have today, it's devious.
And the ability to control through messaging, through architecting a reality, through convincing people that it's true, a lot of psychological techniques used to subliminally plant these ideas.
And they're hard to dislodge because we're also simultaneously not teaching people to think, we're not teaching people to read, we're not teaching science, we're not teaching math.
We're basically just teaching cultural identity.
We're in a Maoist cultural revolution, and the ones who are in charge are the Maoists, and they're waving their little red books, and they're telling us all that their reality, their baudrillard, their little red books, are the truth.
And I'm doing my best to get people to think.
Before these people do what Mao did and Stalin did that has killed millions of people, today they've got the capability of killing billions.
And these people will create nuclear war if we don't stop them intellectually and understand what they're talking about and understand the philosophic basis from which they come.
It's not easy.
It's complicated.
And it's very, very powerful and very evil.
Let's wrap up.
I don't like to go beyond this amount of time.
Thank you, Chris.
This is Dr. Jerome Corsi.
Today is Thursday.
It's August 3rd, 2023. In the end, God always wins.
God will win here, too.
Please join me in the spirit of 2 Chronicles 7.14.
Help join me, getting on our knees, asking God's forgiveness for having let it get to this point.
God's been removed from our schools, God's been removed from our society, and the demons are in charge.
