Feargus O'Connor Greenwood is the author of 180 Degrees - Unlearn the Lies You've Been Taught. Six years in the making, 180 Degrees is possibly the best 'conspiracy theory' book ever written - more digestible than Tragedy & Hope and written in such a cool, level-headed manner it's the perfect rabbit-hole entry point for your Normie friends. In fact, if everyone owned, read and digested this extraordinary book all the world's problems would be solved in a trice.
You can order it from Amazon https://www.amazon.co.uk/180-Degrees-Unlearn-Taught-Believe/dp/1915236002/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=180+feargus&qid=1688500546&sr=8-1 Or direct from the author at feargusgreenwood@protonmail.com
↓ ↓ ↓
Earn interest on Gold:
https://monetary-metals.com/delingpole/
/ / / / / /
The Delingpod LIVE IN DORSET | James Delingpole x Clive de Carle
For the first time in Delingpod history, James will be bringing his podcast live to Dorset to chat with Clive de Carle. Purchase tickets here:
https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/the-delingpod-live-in-dorset-james-delingpole-x-clive-de-carle-tickets-670815646657?aff=ebdshpsearchautocomplete
/ / / / / /
Buy James a Coffee at: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/jamesdelingpole
Support James’ Writing at: https://delingpole.substack.com
Support James monthly at: https://locals.com/member/JamesDelingpole?community_id=7720
Welcome to The Deling Pod with me, James Delingpole, and I know I always say I'm excited about this week's special guest, but I'm really looking forward to this one with Fergus O'Connor Greenwood.
I've pronounced your name right, haven't I?
You have, James, yes, thank you.
I was expecting more of a kind of an Irish lilt, I have to say, with a name like that.
Yes, well, given it's also spiked the Irish way, I think that's fair dinkum, but no, there's actually no Irish connection in our family, but it does go back to the head of the Chartist movement, sort of the original Fergus O'Connor.
I'm sure there's a few before him, but yeah, he was around in the 1840s and what happened is he was so well respected After he died, I think a lot of families would name one of their sons after him, and that's how the name came into the family line.
And I'm sorry that we can't see what you look like.
I mean, some of my audience, they consume things just on audio, but there's an element that likes to see things.
Do you kind of live off the grid or something?
Well, I'm pretty much, yeah, very 20th century in my tech.
No website, no social media, just an email.
Well, anyway, I first of all wanted to congratulate you on an absolute masterpiece of a book.
I mean, people in awake circles are often dropping the name of books like Carol Quigley's Tragedy and Hope and saying it's all It's all in there.
Have you ever tried wading through Carol Quigley's tragedies?
I did cheat because there's a book called A Tragedy in Hope 101 by Joseph Plummer and he's distilled I think Quigley's, what was it?
Was it 1,200 or 1,300 pages down to about a manageable 265 or so?
So I have delved into the original, but if anyone wants to dig into that, I would recommend Plumbers because he's cut out a lot of the chaff. - Right.
Great.
Anyway, the point I was moving towards was that you've written a book which I think if every person had a copy of this book and marked it well and digested it, Our work will be done.
The world will be saved.
It's a fantastic book.
I must confess I've only dipped into it rather than read the whole thing.
But your book is called 180 Degrees, with 180 spelled out in numerals.
Sorry, in numerals.
And then I like the subtitle, Unlearn the Lies You've Been Taught to Believe.
And you can buy it on Amazon, which sort of surprises me slightly because it's such a radical, radical book.
Can I ask how it's selling?
Yeah, it's doing very well now, particularly after I had one interview at the end of March.
Following that, I think I sold 6,000 copies in a month.
Did you?
Well, I hope that you sell at least another 6,000 and preferably 60,000.
Yeah, that'd be nice, yeah.
Yeah, so I can't imagine you being invited on to Joe Rogan to talk about it.
It's a bit... well, have you got a view on Joe Rogan?
I do, yeah.
I think most of the people who get that level of visibility are some form of Controlled Opposition.
I mean, in the book I call them Bikini Opposition rather than Controlled, and that's based on the slight sexist quip made by Aaron Levenstein in the 1950s comparing statistics with bikinis.
He said what they Reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.
And I think this is the point a lot of people still miss, and it's the same with someone like Musk, is that these people can be 99% pro-truth, but just omitting to talk or negating the 1%.
And the difference is, the 99% they're talking about doesn't change the status quo.
But the 1% they're not talking about or negating would.
So, for example, with Julian Assange, can't say I've disagreed with anything he's said, apart from one thing, which was in, I think, 2010?
He was interviewed by the Belfast Telegraph, And he said, I am sick and tired of people talking about false conspiracy theories like 9-11.
And you go, hang on a second, for the guy who specializes in dealing with conspiracy and everything, day in, day out, he could have chosen not to say anything.
But to negate that when it is the most obvious false flag, including what, in terms of physics and chemistry, is impossible, then that sort of gives the game away that, yeah, there's something untoward there.
Yes, I'm totally with you.
A bit later on in this chat, what I'm hoping we're going to do is talk about the different methods you've established at successfully red-pilling normies, and there are different types of normies that need red-pilling, aren't there?
But before we do that, let's talk a bit about the book.
Annoyingly, I was searching around my house for my copy, which was given to me by Sandy Adams, who said, like, you should read this book.
Yeah, Sandy's a good friend.
Well, Sandy's brilliant and I'm very grateful to her for introducing me to you because I'm not exaggerating, dear viewers and listeners in this case.
This book is absolutely, apart from everything else, it's a work of tremendous rabbit hole scholarship.
It must have taken you quite a long time to write.
Yeah, about... I'd say all in all, I've spent about 15,000 hours on it, so you're looking at five to six years.
That includes, of course, all the research, then the writing, then the editing, fact-checking and everything else.
So, yeah, it wasn't an easy task.
Would it be fair for me to call it a conspiracy theorist's compendium?
And you can call it whatever you want to, James.
I'm from the North, so anything that you describe is probably going to be taken as a term of endearment, even if it doesn't sound like one.
Well, I suppose what I'm trying to say here is that you can leaf through the book and find many of the things that have been dismissed as conspiracy theories.
Demonstrated to be conspiracy fact.
I'll just give you a couple of examples that I remember from skimming through.
You demonstrate that the Lusitania was not a ship, a passenger liner that was tragically and accidentally torpedoed by an evil German U-boat.
This was a very cynical bid.
Probably orchestrated by Winston Churchill to bring America into the war.
And you've got the receipts.
And you do the same with Pearl Harbor.
The US High Command knew that they wanted the Japanese to attack the American fleet at Pearl Harbor.
It was again, you know, part of their devious maneuverings.
But tell me what else you cover in the book.
So we start off with those and of course the two you've mentioned there I'd call sort of I've put under false flags but the really hybrid false flags because of the nature that it was more let it happen on purpose as much as make it happen on purpose.
Obviously we deal with the ones that were 100% false flags such as 9-11 But we then deal with other stage atrocities in Chapter 4.
Chapter 5 and 6 is all about the banking industry and how that ties in with some of the global events.
Chapter 7 is called American Gulag.
So we start with the Bolshevik Revolution and how the families who set up the Federal Reserve also had their hands puppeteering that.
And why go into that?
Because a lot of what's gone on with Black Lives Matter and all the critical race theory all ties back in to the same hidden hand really.
Beyond that we're delving into the pyramids, religion, always a tricky one.
Chapter 9 is a really dark chapter on satanic ritual abuse, blackmail and how that's used to control many politicians around the world, certainly in the States, certainly over here in Europe.
Beyond that we're into higher states of consciousness and maybe looking at how the universe really works.
Particularly focused on remote viewing and that type of thing.
Chapter 11 has an A and a B. It was only going to be Chapter 11 which was more on Vaccine stuff, but then along came the pandemic and hey-ho, we had to put that in.
I just thought I'd finish the book at the end of 2019, but that happened and I thought, well, this has to have its own chapter.
And then we go on to talk about media, academia, other things like that, and then chapter 13.
Do you do Flat Earth?
No.
I'll chat on solutions, because I think that's often what's missing within the truth movement.
And chapter 14 is taboo and speculation.
Do you do Flat Earth?
No.
Do you want to know why?
Yeah, well, since I asked, I guess, yeah.
So, when it comes to things like 9-11, and there's theory out there, was there a plane, was it no plane?
We've had the same with COVID, the virus-no-virus argument.
I've put flat earth under the same as that, which is it doesn't matter whether it's true or not, it's the wrong vector of attack in terms of argumentation because there's so much more going on which is absolutely provable.
Yeah.
And therefore, what I don't want to do, I mean I haven't bothered looking into Flat Earth so I don't have a big opinion on it either way, but the point is I'm trying to get the reader from the beginning to the end of the book.
And if you're throwing in things where you're going to get an instant, oh my god, this is absolute rubbish, then you're going to fail in that task.
And so I say it doesn't matter whether no plane is true, no virus is true.
If you've got 160 years of telling people you've got a virus, and then military-grade propaganda for three and a half years telling it's a virus, You might well be right if you say there isn't one, but it's the wrong argument in my opinion.
There's so many other things that they got wrong that are demonstrable and absolutely provable right now that I don't think it's... well, it's why I haven't touched those particular points.
I think that's a very good and a very wise answer, Fergus.
I mean, I personally incline now towards no virus.
But what I would say is to some of the people on my side of that particular argument is that as Talleyrand said, surtout pas trop de zèle, which means don't be too zealous, that actually,
for some of the no-virus people, they're happy to write for some of the no-virus people, they're happy to write off the arguments of anyone who's not on their side because they're so angry and disgusted at the fact that anyone could be so stupid as to believe there was such a thing as viruses and haven't looked at the evidence.
You're right.
It doesn't particularly advance the cause.
More divide than conquer.
And I think the other thing with any type of conspiracy you have The conspiracy theory which often proves to be flat, but the intel agencies also throw out the junk conspiracy in order to throw people off the track.
So for example I say, if we look at what happened with Covid, did they get anything right?
Transmission of the disease, wrong.
Asymptomatic spread, wrong.
PCR testing, wrong.
Fatality rates, wrong.
Lockdowns, wrong.
Quarantining healthy people, wrong.
Impacts on youth, wrong.
Hospital overload, wrong.
Plexiglass barriers, social distancing, outdoor spread, all wrong.
Mass, wrong.
Variant impact, wrong.
Natural immunity, wrong.
Vaccine efficiency, wrong.
Injections staying at the site, wrong.
Vaccine injury, wrong.
So, there's a quote from James Forrestal that was made in 1946 which said, Consistency never has been a mark of stupidity.
If the diplomats who have mishandled our relations were merely stupid, they would occasionally make a mistake in our favour.
The fact that they've got everything wrong means they didn't get it wrong, they just lied about everything.
Yeah, yeah.
I think that applies for a lot of things.
In fact, it's something that I talked about in my recent podcast with Miriam Finch.
Oh, yeah.
The way that the royal family is a good example of this.
The Royal Family has created this image of itself as this archaic, bumbling institution.
They're all living on their uppers.
Struggling to make ends meet.
And they're struggling for relevancy in this crazy new world of ours.
They're constantly trying to make a bid for our sympathy to be understood.
And it's just a PR lie.
I mean, that's not how it works, is it?
Well, Matt, nearly everything... I argue in the book that nearly everything you're being presented with is theatre.
Yeah.
You know, even particularly, you know, the left-right paradigm.
You see it in the States, you see it over here.
You know, Boris locked us all down.
What did Keir Starmer do?
Want to lock us down harder and earlier?
Well, that isn't a choice.
So...
I mean voting is not going to get you anywhere because you might get the odd change of policy but the agendas are the same because they're both under the same level of blackmail.
Yes, yes.
I mean if we went to, I don't know if you caught the quote by Jennifer Akuri, Boris's ex-partner.
Yeah, she said, you can believe me now or find out later, that man, Boris, entered office blackmailed and compromised.
What did Ken Livingstone say in 2012?
in 2012. I was raising in Parliament against Mrs. Thatcher, the Kinkora boys' home where boys were being abused and MI Fine was filming it because they were hoping to be able to blackmail senior politicians.
Ted Gunderson, former head of the FBI in LA and the Los Angeles division said why doesn't someone investigate the international child kidnapping ring being operated by the CIA?
And it gets worse because for those familiar with Ronald Bernard, he was an elite inside banker.
He said, I was invited to participate in sacrifices abroad.
That was a breaking point.
Children.
So, you know, for anyone listening, if you think you live in a democracy with all this going on, I'm sorry, but you're badly deluded.
It says something, let's assume that your theory is correct, that it is impossible to rise above a certain political level unless you agree to allowing yourself, in a way, to become blackmailed, to give them compromise.
That's definitely part of it, you don't get there unless you agree to it.
So, in that musical, Hamilton, people go into the room where it happens, and it seems to me that the room where it happens involves children and adrenochrome, or something similar.
I don't know about you but I'm thinking if I'd gone into politics thinking I wanted to make a difference and I wanted to maybe have a nice pension whatever else people become politicians for and I got told at some stage, right, we're going to this party now, and at this party you're going to find yourself in bed with children, some of whom you may have to either have sex with or murder.
But it's okay, because this is the next step in getting on.
I think I'd say this is not the deal that I wanted to sign up to.
Well, I'd certainly hope not, James, anyway.
But it seems that our leading politicians decide, well, it seems a reasonable thing to do in order to get on, if that's what I'm... Well, I think it's more subtle than that.
So, I mean, I have a quote in the book from Dave Janda, and he was part of giving advice, I think, on medical grounds to the Reagan administration in the 80s, and this is what he was told.
A very well-known political figure, I will not tell you who, said I'm going to give you some advice, and it might sound off the wall, but I want you to listen to it.
When you're in Washington, never go to a private party in Washington DC, and that includes at the Vice President's house.
The Vice President at the time was George H.W.
Bush.
It might seem to be an innocuous situation.
You were invited by a congressman to go over for a football game.
You were there and there is alcohol and kids walking around.
But Dave, someone will slip something in your drink, you will wake up hours later and there will be a Polaroid picture on your chest with you with one of those kids.
This is how they get you.
So it could even be that you're not intending to do any of the nefarious stuff, But there's ways to capture you in that process.
Right.
Well, that's very generous of you towards the political class who are giving the message.
Yeah, that's probably about the only time I'm going to be, so... Particularly given we've only had one MP out of 650 to stand up and question the genocide that's happening.
Yes, it is pretty shocking that, isn't it?
Well, I think in some ways it's good because it actually proves how much the MPs actually represent you when push comes to shove.
And I think we'll possibly get into this because I was going to maybe start with, well we discussed about talking about a framework for understanding the mechanism of tyranny and how to combat it and within there we have the different groups and the descriptions.
Do you want to dive into that?
I think we're just going to do a bit more foreplay first.
Yeah, go on.
As long as we're not involved in the vinegar stroke.
Well, we're having a few drinks.
We're down the pump!
Okay, good.
Trust me, trust me, I'm a podcaster.
So, what I want to know is a bit about your background.
I mean, who are you?
What's the story?
Well, originally I did a degree in mathematics.
Other academic qualification is a master's degree from TS, the Dutch Business School.
I did 16 years in the corporate world, flying around, ended up looking after a 200 million euro budget in the late 90s.
Beyond that, after leaving there, I did some SME business turnarounds and then eventually got around to writing the book.
Fergus, you're really quite high-powered in what I may call the beast system.
Were you aware at the time what was going on at all?
Not while I was in the corporate world, no.
I was probably doing what a lot of other people were doing, which is... I mean, I was, for example, living in London overworking in Germany, So I think I took about probably a thousand flights in 10 years, so probably doing 12-14 hours a day.
So no, it was work hard, play hard, head down, do all that and then back at the weekend for going out, seeing friends and there may have been alcohol involved.
And did you In the course of your career, obviously I'm not talking about parties with the Vice President, but were you ever required to do things you found that sort of made your moral compass flicker slightly?
no because I don't know why but that's always been I think something innate I mean, because I was in buying, there's lots of opportunity for taking freebies, particularly in the 90s, but we would always refuse.
Not necessarily, we'd be happy to go out to have a business lunch, but presents and that sort of thing, no, because I didn't want to be owned by anyone.
That's probably too low level to be honest to be for anything more nefarious.
Right.
For example, I often bring up this story.
A friend of mine, a contemporary of mine, joined the city, as so many of my contemporaries did, and he ended up working on something, a product you're probably familiar with, called collateralized debt obligations.
Oh yeah.
Which I've likened to taking a dog turd, sprinkling it in... I think you're being too generous.
Okay.
Taking a fox turd, because fox turds really smell, fox turd, sprinkling it in glitter and then wrapping it in expensive paper and passing it on to somebody else as premium artisanal chocolate.
Not a bad analogy.
Now I wonder, had I been in his shoes, I imagine he was quite junior at this point and so he'd have been wanting to make, what is it called, you're not a partner are you?
Obviously you want to get to the level where you can Educate the kids and you can buy a couple of houses and it's and make the wife happy How many of us in that in in a situation like that would have said I'm sorry, but this product is unethical I'm going to abandon my career at this point Probably most of us wouldn't would we?
Well I think that's been proven time and time again that most people wouldn't know.
Not that there aren't individuals who would step out at that point, but I would also say that it could be that those individuals might not really have known exactly what those products entail.
I mean, we're making an assumption that it depends how high up in the hierarchy they are, but, you know, maybe it wasn't explained to them either.
It's like, get out, sell that, don't look at the product.
Yeah.
And haven't we also maybe alighted on a fundamental problem with the nature of the world?
That you don't have to be Actively evil.
Or, yeah, you have to be an evil person, cackling satanically, to be propping up this system.
You've just got to be somebody who looks the other way, or even somebody who's been kept in the dark by a system of systematic cradle-to-grave brainwashing.
Yeah, absolutely.
But we know from the Stanley Milgram experiments from the late 60s, was it,
And there is some dispute over what it tested, but I think it's reasonable to assume that it was sort of testing obedience to authority, that 70% of those candidates who were involved were willing, or at least in their minds, were willing to put a 450 volt electric shock through another human just because they got some answers to a question wrong.
So it's one of the reasons I deal with obedience on page two of the book, because I think it was Oscar Wilde who said, for anyone who's read history, disobedience is man's original virtue.
Yes.
This is probably not an experience you have often, Fergus, but I would call into question the Milgram experiment.
Anything that we know about, particularly a social science experiment, because I mean, how many social science experiments have acquired the status where merely to mention the name is to, everyone goes, oh yeah, the Milgram experiment.
I'm not even sure that that wasn't itself a PSYOP designed to demonstrate to us that, look, there's no point resisting because you're all basically compliant and you're all going to be concentration camp guards.
It's in your nature.
That's the deal.
And also, you mentioned Oscar Wilde.
I've got to the stage where I think that a lot of these literary figures, historical figures of note, with whose sayings we are all excruciatingly familiar, that they too are part of the PSYOP.
I'm not even sure that I trust anything that one reads about Oscar Wilde.
Well, brilliant.
I think you're at the perfect position, because that's where I got to as well.
I just accepted I knew nothing, and that's a much better starting point to try and work out what's going on than assuming you do.
Just jumping back to the Milgram stuff, I don't know if you ever read Opening Skinner's Box, the lady who wrote that book did actually go on to re-interview a couple of people who were involved and that did give some interesting insights because there was one person I believe who
When he realised what he'd done afterwards, he absolutely ensured that he wouldn't fall for the same trick again.
And another person who stopped halfway through said he did so because he was thinking he was about to have a heart attack.
So there's definitely more nuance in there than the headline suggests, and yes, I'm willing to go with the fact that the 70% may be a bit high.
I mean, it was redone by Derren Brown again, where they did it with four people on would they push an old man off the top of a building, and three of them did.
But again if you looked at that he did a lot of pre-screening so maybe that 70% is too high but I mean let's just look and I know that everyone got subjected to sort of three years military grade propaganda But it's a question of how many people took the vaccine.
So, you know, it's a significant percentage.
So, yes, it could be less than 70, but I'm not sure if it's that much less.
But I take your point.
Tell me about what woke you up.
2006.
I'd just finished turning a business around, phoenixing it, and had some time on my hands, so was on the internet and came across a video by Paul Grignion called Money is Debt.
And it was a sort of cartoon take on how our financial system works, or more precisely the monetary system.
And I was like, no, surely this can't be true.
Well, it's just created out of thin air.
And so that really was what started my Deep dive into everything of course once you dive into the financial system that connects to everything else So I wouldn't say it was an immediate awakening, but a long process you know Because normally I often ask people this question and normally there has been some Traumatic experience where they've realized that
The authorities cannot be trusted.
And once they realise the authorities cannot be trusted on anything, it opens their mind up to the possibilities that everything they've been taught is a lie.
Did you have such trauma at all?
I wouldn't say trauma, no, but the point you've just described there is why I've written the book.
Shining a light on how people are being manipulated is perhaps the best defence against being thus manipulated in the future.
Before we go on to your cures to this terrible disease, have you got Any theories on who is behind all this?
Yeah, we do.
So in the book I referred to them in the beginning as they, the acronym The Hierarchy Exploiting You.
But that investigation starts really with the Federal Reserve and the families and the cartel families that came together to ensure that it was a few people that had basically the right to issue.
And when you follow that rabbit hole you link up with the Russian Revolution and what's going on there.
And there's, if anyone's interested, I'd certainly recommend, I mean you've got books like Fritz Springmeier and The Bloodlines of the Illuminati, which also I cover briefly, but I would direct everyone to a book called Red Symphony, and that was a book, I think it was transcribed in 1938,
It was supposedly a very high level insider being interrogated at Stalin's orders and there was only ever meant to be two copies of that book produced.
The translator took a third one and that was found later on and it really is insightful and there's a whole list of names at the back of that.
But the only two people he names at the time are Walter Rathenau and Lionel Rothschild.
I haven't even heard of Walter Rathenau.
No, and you won't have heard of many of the family names that are in Red Symphony.
I probably should have listed them.
I mean, some of them you will.
There was Baruch, Schiff, a couple of others you'd be familiar with.
The rest I haven't heard of either.
Now, that's going back to the 1930s, but again, it gives an entry point.
I'm not saying that covers everything, but it's a good starting point.
It's weird, isn't it, that we don't know the names of the people who run the world?
I mean, well, we've all heard of the Rothschilds, but you don't think it's all Rothschilds?
No.
I think there's a cabal of people, and I think you interviewed Mazzynski, didn't you?
Gerry Mazzynski?
Yes.
Yeah.
So, I mean, that's where it starts getting interesting, because... Yeah, well, absolutely.
So like, OK, we're dealing with an anti-human agenda.
I wonder if there's a possibility that what we're actually dealing with here is non-human.
So I don't touch on the Mazinski stuff until the Taboo and Speculation chapter because you need to be able to read the rest of the book without that.
But I do find his work compelling.
And I do reference it a lot, and particularly some of the examples he gave with his own experience, because I cross-reference that with lots of other people who are dealing with those type of things, and it all checks out.
So, you know, I think one of the big ruses is to get us to believe that, you know, we're just here once or having a physical experience and we're not a spiritual entity.
That's part of the psyop as well, I think.
Yeah, absolutely.
I was just I was just thinking when we're talking about these these some families that one doesn't These these names with which ones are completely unfamiliar.
I a Few a few months ago.
I am Got sat next to at dinner this very very interesting Young young woman We were talking about, I think we were talking about hunting and stuff, and she was talking about comparing the experience of hunting in France, which she rated more highly than in England.
What are we hunting here, by the way, James?
Oh, foxes.
Oh yeah, not children.
Okay, so we're not at Birmingham Grove then?
No.
Okay, good.
She mentioned her surname, and She did it in a way like... Do you realise what my background is?
It was clear that she belonged to one of those families which runs the world.
And she was lovely.
I mean, she was an absolutely delightful companion.
I'm sure lots of these people are personally charming.
It's just that we don't ever get to meet them normally, do we?
It's...
Well I don't, but maybe you do, James!
I'd love to know where they hide out.
We know, for example, that Jacob Rothschild lives at Waddesdon, and he's got this lovely place in Corfu as well.
The reason I'm familiar with Jacob Rothschild is because, through gardening, And gardening is very much a sort of posh person's activity and if you go to any gardening events near that there are people who?
designers who get to work on Jacob's Jacob's garden or Whatever, but it's it's not often.
I think that that that their world and our world Meets it's it's it's odd um and so I haven't I wish I'd got the book with me, or I wish I'd had the chance to sort of skim, well, you know, people should buy it.
I mean, they absolutely must buy it.
But where did you end up on religion?
Do you think it's just a kind of another trick or do you believe in God or what?
Well, I'd say I'm not religious, but I am spiritual.
I always quite like the observation my religion is kindness.
But as that was said by the Dalai Lama, and he's since told everyone to get injected and started sucking on young boys' tongs, I think I'm going to have to get a new mantra for that one.
In the book, I've been very careful to split what I would say faith and religion, because I think they're two separate things.
One is your connections with the divine.
The other is a third party that got stuffed in between you and your God, however you want to define that.
And unfortunately nowadays it looks more like a corporate entity due to the financialisation, politicisation, sexualisation and infiltration.
So I've tried to do a warts and all thing particularly on Christianity whilst defending its principles because I think you have to try and stand in the truth because of course what we're up against in many ways is a communist agenda
And this is why I don't really like having too hard a go at the church in some ways, is the communist said, our only real enemy, and sort of last hurdle to overcome, is Christianity.
Well, yeah, going back to what you said about who's really running the show, it is whatever name you want to call him, Satan.
He's really calling the shots.
And if you don't get this, if you don't get the spiritual dimension to this war we're fighting, you're not really in the game, are you?
Because they take it very seriously, these families that we talked about.
Absolutely, yeah.
Yeah, tell me about your... Now I know your background, Fergus.
Now I know you're a mathematician, so you think completely differently from me, certainly.
I like flitting all over the place, whereas you're quite, sort of, systematic.
And now I know your business background.
I can see why it appeals to you, formulating this method of reaching out to different people.
So take me through it.
Okay, so I think we should start with something that isn't from me, so I have to give props to James Lindsay on his new Discourses channel, and I think he also references Charles Eisenstein and René Girard.
But there is a framework to begin with for understanding what we're up against.
So it's a simple 5x5 matrix.
It'd be better if we had a visual, but it's easy enough to explain.
So down the left hand side we have the ringleaders, the strivers, the normies, the doubters and the rebels.
So we're putting people into five categories.
You can subdivide them slightly differently but like anything it's a framework to make so you can more easily understand it.
Across the top, we have a few different columns.
We have a general description of those groups, the tools of control used against them, what they're lacking, what their motivations are, and how to flip them.
So if we start with the descriptions and start with the top ones, we have the ringleaders.
They're obviously pushing the agenda and the narrative.
Below them, we have the strivers.
Now, the strivers don't really care about the politics of the situation.
They just want to come out on top.
Below them, we have the normies.
The best description for them is they're mystified and confused as to what's really happening.
The doubters, well, they're sceptics, but they don't want to put their head above the parapet.
And the rebels, we can call those the bullshit detectors.
Now the rebels are not so united as also within that reaction is, but let's keep it simple.
So back to the ringleaders and what are the tools of control used?
Well we've already discussed one which is blackmail.
And the other one is they're told they're part of the inner circle.
Quite often they're not part of the inner circle, but there's nothing like telling someone they're part of the inner circle to get them on board.
With the Stryvers, they're controlled via incentives and threats.
So, for example, a classic one in the last three years, we could say the Stryvers, for example, were the doctors.
They had the financial incentives to vaccinate and threat of losing their job if they didn't.
The Normies, well, they're controlled through the propaganda.
The Doubters, well, they're controlled through the demonisation and ridicule of any rebels that stick their head up above the parapet.
It's like, oh, I don't want to do that, otherwise I'm going to get slaughtered.
And the rebels, they're generally controlled via censorship, cancellation, in the worst case scenario, elimination.
So if we go to column three, back up to the ringleaders, and what are they lacking?
So the ringleaders are lacking humanity and empathy.
The strivers are lacking morality.
The normies are lacking information.
The doubters are lacking courage.
And the rebels are lacking fear.
So then let's look at the motivations.
For the ringleaders, they're about power and control over others.
For the Stryvers, it's about money and social status.
For the Normies, it's about status quo.
They just want everything to stay the same.
You know, just put your head in the sand, do the ostrich thing, because they don't want to know about half the stuff.
Doubters?
Well, they're motivated by fear of what could happen to them.
And the rebels?
Again, not exclusively so, but I've said that they are motivated by truth and ethics.
So we then come to the point of how do you flip each of those people or cascade them down from their group into the rebels?
Because I believe with all this is once everyone's aware then I think the thing starts falling apart.
So if we go to the ringleaders, they're probably going to be the most difficult to flip because it was their idea in the first place.
But if they are being blackmailed, if you can obtain the blackmail material, then at least you've got something over them.
For the Stryvers, The best way of dealing with them is really to show them what's coming down the pipe and this is where we get into the useful idiot category.
In many ways I think the doctors were set up and should have known better because I think Brett Weinstein's covered this now and he said basically every aspect of the Nuremberg Code was broken with regard to these vaccines that were given out.
So let's give a definition of the political jargon, a useful idiot, because it is a technical term rather than just a term of abuse.
It's a term used to reference a person perceived as propagandizing for a cause, particularly a bad cause originating from a devious, ruthless source.
Ain't that the truth?
Without fully comprehending the cause's goals and who is cynically being used by the cause's leaders.
And the other thing you can tell them, with regard to the useful idiot thing, is in the past, those are the people who get thrown under the bus first.
And I think this will be the case again, because when all this comes out in the wash, and it has to, because the truth always does, It's going to be shown that yes, they've been paid, and yes, they should have known above everyone else about the Nuremberg Code, yet they still went ahead with it.
So they're trying to move the blame from the people at the top to both companies and the doctors.
So if you can show them what's coming down the pike for them, then you can get them to flip.
And the good thing about a striver is they don't become a normie or a doubter.
They generally become, immediately flip into being a rebel.
Now for the normies, if they're lacking information, All we need to do is communicate the truth.
So what you're doing with your podcast, for example, is a classic example in really you're trying to get as many normies cascaded into doubters or rebels.
But it's not about just what you're communicating.
It's about how you communicate that.
And that's what I've done in the book in something called the Trim Tab Experiment, where we cover the five hurdles, one communication trap and ten solutions.
Just to finish off the table, we have the doubters.
How do you flip them?
Well, if they're motivated by fear, you could scare them to death, i.e.
make them more worried about something than the government has.
But there's another thing here which is less negative, is you can explain to them that there's lots of things worse than death.
And of course, we're back to the spiritual aspects of this situation with that.
And the rebels, you don't have to flip them because they're already there.
Yeah.
I like the theory.
Have you had any personal experience of this working in practice?
Have you tried it?
Yeah, I mean, this particular table I've only come across more recently, so as I say, it's not in the book.
What I have had is experience of giving out the solutions of how to communicate to people, and yes, I have people come back and said their success rate has gone exponential.
Oh, tell me more.
Okay.
Well, shall we dive then straight into how to communicate the truth without alienating people?
Yeah, please.
Okay, so I say we've got, there's more, but generally five hurdles.
So this is what most people are facing.
Number one, as Walter Lippmann in Public Opinion in 1921 said, we do not see and then define, we define first and then see.
What does he mean?
We decide on a story first and then go and find the evidence that confirms that that story is correct, i.e.
heavy confirmation bias, not the other way round.
This is why, yeah, well, we'll get to point two.
It gets attributed to Mark Twain, but he said it's easier to fool people than to convince them they've been fooled.
So it's easier to move someone into a position than it is to get them out of that position once it's been adopted.
And this is one of the reasons why the media has such power, because generally they've got the story in first.
One thing we do have to accept is in this process, some people will be unreachable.
So we have the great quote from Yuri Bezmenov, the KGB defector, who was interviewed by Geogre Griffin in 1984.
If anyone hasn't seen it, seen that interview, I highly recommend it.
But here's what he said.
A person who is demoralized is unable to assess true information.
The facts tell nothing to him.
Even if I shower him with information, with authentic proof, with documents, with pictures, even if I take him by force to the Soviet Union and show him a concentration camp, he will refuse to believe it.
So, we have to accept, I don't know the exact percentage, but let's say maybe 10 to 20% of people you're speaking to are unreachable.
Does it matter?
Not at all, because we're dealing where it's the other 80% that are the important part.
The next hurdle you face is something called the backfire effect.
Now, that's when people have their strongly held beliefs challenged, those existing beliefs become more embedded, not less.
And we'll get on to this in a second with the solutions, but you cannot challenge people because you immediately get the backfire effect.
So we can learn from that.
And there's a counterintuitive one which is people will forgive you for being wrong but often won't forgive you for being right.
And of course that taps into this subconscious aspect that I think Jordan Peterson talked about which is we have this counter in our head and if we're shown to be wrong in public or even in private that knocks us down the social hierarchy and therefore subconsciously we're desperately trying to not go down that ladder and therefore feel very uncomfortable if we're proven wrong.
Whereas we don't mind other people being wrong as long as they apologise for it.
Because it's them that's going down the social ladder, not us.
Okay?
So those are the sort of five hurdles.
Now, we get to the communication trap.
I've done this.
You've probably done it, James.
Probably every truther out there has done it.
And it goes something like this.
You learn the truth.
Get angry at being lied to, because this also inflames the truth tellers need to be right.
Communicate that truth while still being annoyed at being duped in an unconsidered way, triggering the backfire effect, rejection of the message in others.
Become frustrated at people not seeing the truth.
Try again with even more evidence and conviction.
Fail more, you know, fail bigger.
So the conclusion I came to is the Truth Movement doesn't have an evidence problem, it has a communication problem.
And here on now we can discuss the 10 solutions that I've come up with, I mean referencing other people as well, on I Believe What Works.
Shall I plough into them?
I think you should.
Okay, good.
So number one, be kind first, be right later.
OK, so imagine the person in front of you is you've gone down to Battersea Dog's home and you're going to meet a traumatised puppy for the first time.
You're not going to try and teach that dog a new set of tricks, are you, as soon as you meet it?
You're going to try and win it over with love, compassion, empathy, maybe even feed it.
The same works with the human variety.
Number two.
You win by not winning.
If your aim is to convince the other person of your position, you have already lost before you open your mouth.
Let me repeat that.
If your aim is to convince the other person of your position, you have already lost before you open your mouth.
Why?
Because you've got the wrong objective.
A good objective could be simply to get them to ask you a question or simply to keep them in listening mode.
So the idea then becomes number three, you seed, not succeed.
So seeding an idea is a bit like seeding a pit from an apple tree.
You're not going to put it in your garden and expect to see a fully grown tree overnight.
So why are you expecting that person in front of you to change their position overnight?
What you're not giving them is what they need and that's absorption and processing time.
Yeah.
So, next up, I'd say, I think it's number five, let the vitriol wash over you.
So quite often, if you're speaking to someone who's been heavily propagandised, they're going to want to regurgitate everything they think they know over you.
The idea is just let that happen.
You don't have to absorb their emotion but let it pass you by.
Only when they've got all the emotion out will they then be in listening mode and be prepared to listen to anything you're saying.
I think that taps in a little bit to Edward de Bono's Red Hat technique, where I think he got meetings from Royal Dutch Shell down from 150 days to three.
And one of the techniques was like today, the red hats on the table, everyone's emotions and what they feel about what's going on.
And when everyone felt that they'd been heard, they didn't keep then regurgitating the same point over and over.
So you've got to let them get their energy out.
Next up we have, and this is one from Jonathan Haidt, although it was really Daniel Kahneman who first tapped into this I think, he gives the example of a rider on an elephant.
So if the rider is the logic of reasoning and the elephant is the emotion, so you're looking at your brain effectively, Logic is on the top and the elephant, the bigger part, is the emotion.
His recommendation?
Talk to the elephant first.
It taps into what we've just said as well there.
Dealing with people's emotions is more important than trying to deal with the logical side of the argument.
Next up, your task is to keep the conversation going.
So if someone you're speaking to is speaking what sounds like a complete load of utter bollocks, please don't tell them this.
It's not very helpful.
So you can just use statements from like Zen philosophy saying, is that so?
You're not agreeing or disagreeing, but it keeps the conversation going.
With the aim being to keep them in listening mode and out of combat mode.
Combat mode is anything where you've got a frown, crossed arms, any body language tip that shows they're not agreeing with you.
At that point you have two options.
Either shut up...
and say nothing else, or sometimes you can pull them back with statements like, look, I'm not trying to convince you of anything.
I'm just trying to show you the door of possibility.
It's up to you whether you walk through it.
When you do that, you're giving all the power back to them in the conversation.
And sometimes that flicks them out of defensive mode.
So it's important to make questions, not statements, because the question opens the mind, a statement tends to close it.
And one that most of us aren't aware of, but is super important, is that people slide from A to Z, they don't jump from A to Z. So, if you're speaking to someone who believes everything the government is telling them is true, they're at A.
If you start talking about some of the blackmail stuff and worse, they're going to look at you like you've got three heads.
So it's important to understand who you're speaking with, what their views are, and where they are in that scale, and then you can just... the idea is to then lay out a breadcrumb trail.
So I picked this up off the internet, which I always use as the example because it's very quick and simple.
This guy said, Everyone needs to stop trying to red pill people who are in a coma.
I've been pink pilling people.
I take one small truth and show it to them.
Then let them think about that.
Then they will start asking questions.
Then I will show them another and it is working.
And it does work because we've given these techniques people and they do.
And lastly on the list is facts don't change minds, friends do.
It's getting away from the fact that it's all about the evidence.
It's not about the evidence.
It's preparing the other person emotionally in order to be able to absorb the information.
Well, do you know what?
Just before we did this podcast, I was in a textbook conversation of how not to win friends and influence people by doing the exact opposite.
What you say makes so much sense.
I'll just tell you briefly.
So, I was in The Butcher.
And the chap in front of me was, I guess he must have been in his 70s, and I just caught, I arrived mid-conversation and he was very, very angry.
Yeah.
And he was expostulating to the butcher and he was talking about a dam which had been burst and which had flooded an area.
And I realized that he was incensed that evil Putin had blown up this dam and flooded the area because Putin is so malign.
And he was giving the example of the dam busters and saying at least when we blew up that dam there was justification.
Building you know it was designed to flood the factories, but here was he was just doing it for because he's he's wicked and Rather than do any use any of the techniques that that that you suggested I I said I don't think I don't think Putin brought the down I think it was Zelensky had far more reason for doing so and and Did he lose his shit at that point?
No, he didn't actually.
I think he was so shocked at finding somebody that didn't buy into the narrative that he didn't know what to make of it.
Maybe he thought I was just having him on.
It didn't end in him storming out.
He just walked out of the shop probably trying to Process the crazy stuff I'd said to him But but many anyway that I'm sure that I didn't convert him because I was true.
I was trying to win I was trying to be right demonstrate how right I was I was asserting I wasn't asking any questions.
Yeah So yeah, I can see so have you?
Have you can you give could be more specific about the people who've had success using these techniques?
Well Yeah, there's obviously people I know personally, but I've had emails back from people who've read the book.
The one was from a doctor in Australia who said, yeah, thank you so much for giving us these techniques.
My dialoguing with people has improved massively.
Have you found in your own life, because you were, as most of us were, a straight up normie, believed in the system and everything, what do all your old colleagues and acquaintances make of you?
You better ask them, I suppose.
Out of the corporate world, I mean, a big company I work for, I think I'm only in touch with one now.
So, frankly, I wouldn't know.
I mean, I think I was always seen as A little bit of a rebel even, you know, before going down all these rabbit holes.
I think you come in with a certain set of ethics and values and if you're lucky in the black world we currently live in you can stand by those without getting distracted.
You know, in any way.
Not that I'm wearing a halo, far from it, as a few of my friends would probably tell you, but don't know.
And one of the great things is, James, when it comes to other people's opinions, I don't really care.
Yes.
The people at the tier below the evil dark overlords, what do you call them, the strivers?
Yeah.
That certainly gels with what I've learned independently.
I keep meaning to get her on the podcast.
My speaker agent, Dan Ricks, as far as my own career has been concerned, has been the worst speaker agent in the world.
I'm on his books and none of his clients will ever give me work because I'm just too much of a nutcase.
Oh jeez, I'm in big trouble then!
Well no, no, you'll probably be fine, you've probably got the... I tell you what Fergus, reading your book, you are very good at making crazy stuff sound completely normal, because it is normal, but you're good at expressing it in a way that doesn't frighten the horses.
Yeah, well what's the phrasing?
Easy reading is damn hard writing.
Yeah, well it is, I was not exaggerating when I said it's the book, the book, that could change the world.
I mean, I'd also recommend everyone read Anna Karenina as well, and probably War and Peace, and some Dostoevsky, but on the non-fictional front, this is, you've knocked it out of the park.
Thank you.
So well done there.
Yes, what I was saying was, I mentioned Dan, one of his clients, I used to work for this very high-powered trade body which dealt with the kind of people who run Corporations and run banks or all the different sectors.
And what she has found in the last two or three years is that her clients or the members of this organization have woken up to the fact that although they thought they were masters of the universe, they have not been allocated a place at the top table.
You're part of the inner circle, oh no you're not.
Yeah.
Yeah, yeah.
And that of course is, I can well understand why if you suddenly realise that, that you're not after all going to be at the top table, you're going to be sent to a gulag with all the other useless eaters, that might incline one to join the rebels pretty damn sharpish.
Correct.
And I think that's part of the aim of the book, is to show what's going on.
Did you... is it self-published?
I didn't use a traditional publisher.
I mean, we need to define our terms here because with self-publishing it's just like printed up.
It's been through an independent publishing process where all the skills were brought in and paid for in order to make it as professional as possible.
But yeah, I didn't want to go traditional publisher because I didn't want to be censored.
Yes, and they wouldn't have taken it anyway.
I don't think so.
It's too near the knuckle in places.
Yeah, it's one of those can you handle the truth moments and the answers generally no they can't.
Yes, but given the nature of the book and given what dynamite it is, I just was curious as to whether you'd had any obstacles put in your path?
Not on that front, no.
Because I took control of it all.
Right.
But I mean, there's obstacles with anything, you know.
I mean, my editor was some alcoholic who sat on a mountain in Japan, you know.
That had a few challenges along the way, but hey-ho, you know.
He's a bit of a cool editor to have.
Wow.
Oh yeah, there's always... Yeah, yeah, you know, he's good, but yeah, somewhat combative in the early days.
But I thought that's actually a good thing, not a bad thing, because you don't want a sycophant editing your book.
You want someone to go for your jugular, just in case.
Well, it's going to happen anyway later on, isn't it?
So you might as well get it out of the way first.
You say that one podcast sold 6,000 copies.
How many has it sold in total?
Do you know or do you want to tell me even?
Yeah, I can give you the stats.
It took me nearly two and a half years to sell 2,300 copies.
Or two years to sell 2,300 copies.
And then I sold 6,000 in a month after that.
years to sell 2,300 copies and then I sold 6,000 in a month after that so I think we're up to about 12,000 oh Fergus you it deserves you you need to you need to multiply by that by 10 at least in It's what it deserves.
It's fantastic.
Do you still work?
No, I haven't worked for about 10 years as such.
So yeah, I had no income, basically, while I was doing all this.
So it was a little bit of labour and love, you could say.
But that's fine, I had some savings.
Yes, well, I was going to say, thank goodness that you put all those years into the Beast system, because the Beast system enabled you to write the piece that drives a dagger into the heart of The Burning of the Beast.
You could put it that way, I suppose.
I'm going to.
You have?
I have.
It is my podcast.
I think we've said all that needs to be said for the moment.
I like your succinct, punchy delivery in telling it like it is.
There's no room for waffle.
Tell us where we can get the book.
Remind us of the title and anything else you want to tell us about.
Okay, so the title is 180 Degrees, Unlearn the Lies You've Been Taught to Believe.
There's two options for getting the book, basically.
Well, there's three, but you can get the paperback.
It's print on demand from Amazon.
I think it's available in about 15 countries.
If people want the hardback version, you can get it direct from myself.
So, can I give you my email address in case anyone wants to contact me?
That is Fergus Greenwood, so that's Fergus spelt the Irish way, F-E-A-R-G-U-S, Greenwood, G-R-E-N-W-O-O-D, at protonmail.com.
You can get it through bookstores as well, but that will only be the hardback, and it's coming from me anyway, so you might as well drop me a line, because I make more money that way.
I can't believe there are bookstores that stop it.
There must be independent bookstores only.
Well, I think one of the things maybe I've been a little bit clever about is if you read the contents page, a lot of the titles are quite oblique.
So, when I'm dealing with all the vaccination stuff, I mean, some of the subtitles are... where are we?
Well, the chapter's called Quack Attack, and it's the drugs don't work, trust me I'm a doctor, nil by mouth, sceptre of power, what's the frequency, Kenneth, no fool's errand, and pattern of suppression.
So I'm guessing that the algorithms might be struggling working out what the book's about, basically.
Oh, well, that's...
That's clever, that's clever.
I didn't do it for that reason, it's just a side effect.
I did it because I thought it'd be more interesting reading.
But yeah, the feedback's been fantastic.
I always mention the story I had from Lancaster, because a guy came up to me there and said, oh, I've already read your book.
I said, thank you.
He said, I've got a story for you.
I said, go on.
He said, yeah, I gave it to my friend's teenage son who doesn't read books.
I went, hmm, OK, how did that go?
He said, well, I passed it over and the kid said, what the hell am I meant to do with that?
And he said, oh, just read the prologue and see how you go.
Well, the teenage boy who doesn't read books finished 180 Degrees in two weeks flat.
Which for an 800 page non-fiction book, I reckon's not bad going.
Nice work, Fergus.
That's really good.
Yeah, I won't get a better compliment than that, for sure.
No, you won't.
You won't.
Well, it only remains for me to thank my, not my viewers, unless I put up a picture of me reacting to your marvellous text, to my listeners, for listening to this, I think you'll agree, amazing podcast about an amazing book.
Please continue to support me.
I really appreciate it.
I love it when you buy me a coffee.
And I love the messages you get, by the way.
I just haven't quite worked out how to reply to them on the buy me a coffee thing, which is why you don't hear from me.
But I do love it, and I do get the messages.
And more importantly, the money.
And locals, you can support me.
That's probably the best way.
Subscribestar, I'm going to develop that.
People who like reading rather than looking at stuff.
You can support me on Subscribestar.
And I'll be putting more stuff out there.
Patreon... Sorry, I meant Substack, not Subscribestar.
You can do Patreon or Subscribestar if you want to.
They're not working so well these days.
And thank you.
Thank you very much.
And come to my live events as well.
I've got one coming up at the end of... What is it?
July.
Yeah, end of July.
I think it's the 28th in Dorset with Clive de Carl.
We've got a few others coming up as well.
Thank you very much Fergus again.
You're very welcome.
Thank you for having me on the show.
Maybe next time we can get into the 5th gen warfare and 10th gen warfare, the war for your soul.
