All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 17, 2022 - Jim Fetzer
01:06:49
Fundamental Logic with Dr. Andrew Kaufman
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Thank you.
Hello, everyone, and everyone, and welcome to Medicamentum Authentica.
I'm your host, Dr. Andrew Kaufman.
And I have a very interesting guest on my show today.
And I originally found out about Alexander when someone sent me a video of his where he was on YouTube and he was talking about Harold Hillman.
And Harold Hillman is the biologist who is very critical of electron microscopy.
And of course, Tom Cowan has spoke of his work and introduced me and other people To his work where essentially he showed that many of the findings that we found on the electron microscope that haven't been validated, you know, with living cells or other experiments.
actually represent artifacts of the process of electron microscopy itself.
And this is a theme which has led to a lot of misinformation and misrepresentation in science, as we've seen in virology especially in recent times.
So I was really excited to have a conversation with Alexander about this and seeing, you know, a young person who is not in this particular field professionally, but You know, came to this kind of deeper material and demonstrated a really profound understanding of not only the consequences of Hillman's work, but also put it in a broader context.
So it's really great to have this opportunity to speak with you, Alexander, and I'll just give you an opportunity to tell a little bit about how you came on this stage.
Thank you so much, Andrew.
It's an honour.
Really, it is mostly about fundamental aspects.
You see, I am very defiant and I always question people.
...whom proclaim to be the foremost authority, if you will, on anything.
And especially when they censor those that oppose their views.
Because, well, they say where there's smoke, there's fire.
Well, I say where there's censorship, there's lies.
And because you wouldn't censor anything if you were so confident that you knew the truth.
So then you just start digging, and you start where the conclusion was made.
Basically, how did you come about your conclusion?
How did you make your conclusion?
Because the entire situation that has unfolded before our eyes over the last few years, I mean, I had a friend of mine, a dear friend that had a shop, he had a business for like 30 years, and he had to close it down like a year ago.
And he wasn't very happy about it, he still isn't today.
So the entire situation is dependent upon the integrity of that research, of what has been done.
So, basically, what I have done is just basically try and find some of this research, try and find a scientific paper, if you will.
So I came about like, I have one here, Which is basically a conundrum in most people's views.
People think of this as some sort of conundrum with many intricacies, but it's basically just a statement that has been made, a conclusion that has been made, which in this case is isolation and characterization of SARS-CoV-2 from the first US COVID-19 patient.
That should be very interesting then.
Yes, Alexander, if I may interrupt for a minute, because, you know, what you just described is really almost the same exact way I came to the material, right?
Because I saw things happening in the real world that were explained, you know, by the emergence of some new scientific information.
So I went back and said, okay, let me look at that.
scientific evidence and see what's going on for real, right?
But I also want you to kind of tell the audience, you know, what's your background?
How did you come to question it when, because, you know, 999 out of 1000 people just went along with what was going on, right?
Or brushed it off as a temporary measure or, you know, over enthusiasm, but you obviously took it a step further.
So what, you know, what were the Sure, yeah.
factors from your experience or your background that led you to approach it in this way that distinguishes yourself from the general man or woman out there?
Sure.
Yeah.
I myself, as you've said, I don't really have much of a medical background, but I do had a great interest in science back when I was younger and when I was still in school.
But I never really finished my academic career.
I have just... I've basically come to the conclusion that all that is being taught in schools today is basically just regurgitating what has been told to you.
You're being told to memorize something, regurgitated, and basically just... This is... They're not really...
What science, in my eyes, was all about is making your own conclusions about things in life.
But they're not really telling you how to make your own conclusion.
They're telling you what your conclusion should be, because us authorities said so.
Because, once again, it is my...
The fines against people who proclaim to be authority figures.
So, I have never really been... I've also never been fearful of the whole concept of viruses in the first place.
Viruses.
I've always been critical of it because I wasn't really that much informed about it as I am now.
But let's just say I knew there was something fishy about it.
If I could just unpack a little bit some of the things that you said because I mean they're very important actually.
And so, you know, there must be some experience or something about you that led you to that degree of skepticism, what you're talking about, because, you know, most people, by the time they get to the university level, they're already just used to being, because, you know, what you really described is that the education system, right, is really, you know, you could also call it the indoctrination system.
Exactly.
It supplies you with information that's been, you know, sifted, And it's telling you that this is the authoritative information, like this is the truth, but it never goes into how was this truth established.
You never are taught the reasoning skills to be skeptical, to question, to formulate your own opinions, to learn how to teach yourself, to learn discernment, things like that.
Exactly.
So you observed, right, this, and you said, well, I don't want to just You know, memorize or take in the information you're giving me.
In fact, when I look into that information, I find that much of it is not reputable.
Exactly.
So you broke out of that and that must have taken some courage because you had to separate yourself from the herd, so to speak.
Yeah, exactly.
I myself, to be quite frank, I haven't really been... I haven't had much of a problem with separating myself from the herd because, well, I've seen where people's intentions are drawn to today and it isn't really... I couldn't compare myself to it.
My interest has always been in finding the truth and discovering the truth by means of discernment and questioning things, by means of critical thinking.
And most people, indeed, they don't... Critical thinking is Latin for most people today.
It's just, you know, it is mostly appeal to authority.
It's a logical fallacy, really.
It's just...
You don't question that which has been, that which, what comes from an authority figure, so to speak.
So I was just having this discussion with some teenagers, actually, because they were, you know, we were talking about some of this material and they were saying, oh, you know, my parent will not believe this.
And I said, well, what?
I said, if you give a scientific argument about this topic, then, you know, they can give the counter argument.
This is what they told me.
They said, oh, no, no, they'll just find some expert who says.
Right.
And that's so that's the logic fallacy.
So, you know, this is an example.
I don't know if this is universal, but it's actually being taught right to use this logic fallacy to make your argument of appeal to authority where you say, oh, well, this person is an expert and this is their opinion.
Therefore, it's the correct opinion.
And of course, that's been one of the main arguments to say that viruses are real is simply, well, because these virologists are experts and that's what they say.
And so that's the reality.
But of course, that's a way that people have been misled time and time again throughout history.
Yeah, exactly.
But once you're using the word expert, well, how do you define an expert?
There's experts themselves disagree themselves.
So which one is the real expert that you should base your logical fallacy to?
Right.
Well, Alexander, you know that in my previous career, I was an expert witness, right?
Now, I didn't come up with that term.
But in the United States court system, there are actually specific cases.
I think that The presiding case actually is a Supreme Court case which gives the standard that is required for an expert to give testimony.
But even in that case, so there's a standard, but here what you have is you have opposing experts.
So each side has an expert and of course they're giving opposing opinions.
So, you know, expert does not equal truth.
Exactly.
Yeah, you're absolutely right.
And basically, if I can come to that paper in a second, because I think it's very, very crucial for what I want to be talking about in a few seconds.
So I might start with that, if you will.
Yes, please do.
I basically just came about like, well, how is this conclusion made by these quotes and quotes?
Right, and this is a paper out of Washington, correct?
This was a paper from PubMed.
I believe it was from the National Institutes of Health that it was resourced by.
I remember where the first case was identified because I'm pretty sure I read this paper as well.
Just trying to refresh my memory.
But go ahead, please.
This is basically just one paper.
I mean, there is a plentitude of them.
There is one from the New England Journal of Medicine.
We can discuss many of these articles.
Alexander, I'm sure I've read them all.
I'm trying to remember which one this is, and I think it's this one, but it's okay.
Go ahead and describe it, because they all use essentially the same methods anyway.
Exactly.
That's basically the heart of the matter that I want to come to.
Once again, it's fundamental aspects, fundamental principles.
I go to the methods section.
What methods have you used to come to your conclusion that a so-called virus is the cause of any condition, which in this case is COVID-19 as it is called?
So I would like to read an excerpt of it.
Yes, please.
And let me just also reinforce the importance of this.
So, from even a mainstream perspective, because, you know, I trained in my residency at Duke University, and they stressed the importance of reading the methods section there and actually had us do critical appraisals of clinical studies.
And also my mentor at Upstate when I was a fellow and later on faculty and doing research, you know, actual real medical research, Bruce Way, he also emphasized the method section.
That's the first thing and the most important thing that you have to read because you have to be able to say, okay, did the experiment that they did and the results that they later obtained from that experiment, do they actually mean Anything.
Or do they mean how the authors interpret it, or the conclusions that they draw?
Because those are always subject to criticism.
That is the nature of science.
Until it's repeated over and over again, and demonstrated every which way, and no one can disprove it, then it's generally accepted.
Exactly.
You hit the right word, which is interpretation.
And I have mentioned the word misinterpretation in my video that I've mentioned, that you've mentioned, and we will come to that in quite a bit.
But I would like to read an excerpt from it.
It says, quote, Which are not human cells, by the way.
These are monkey kidney cells, which is foreign genetic material, for your information.
Was fixed for two hours in 2.5% buffered glutaraldehyde.
Well, Dr. Andy, that sounds very familiar, doesn't it?
Glutaraldehyde, I might recall, that was very, it could damage the gastrointestinal tract of humans, didn't it?
It's very toxic, it's related to formaldehyde.
Exactly.
Which is an embalming fluid.
Exactly, which is also a neurotoxin.
Basically, it's just terrible for humans.
Yes, there was this practice in parts of the United States where they would take a marijuana joint and actually soak it in embalming fluid, which is a mixture of formaldehyde and methanol, I believe.
And then they would sell it or smoke it and essentially like pickle their brain.
And I've seen people who have done this repeatedly and have obvious brain damage from it.
So just to give you an idea of what it is.
Yeah, the neurotoxicity of it for certain.
It goes on.
Excuse me.
Specimens were post-fixed with 1% osmium tetroxide.
Now, osbium tetraoxide is another hazardous material which is related to pulmonary edema.
Like fluid underlots.
N-block stained with 4% uranyl acetate.
N-block meaning altogether.
Uranyl acetate, which is another word for uranium, a hazardous heavy metal.
Continuing, it says dehydrated and embedded in epoxy resin, which is where they make all these shiny floors from.
Ultra-thin sections were cut, stained with 4% uranyl acetate again, and lead citrate.
Well, lead citrate, also another familiar term, which is another name for lead.
So they're using uranium and lead, which are two very, very, very hazardous metals, which can cause severe damage to humans.
And you're going to add it to organic matter, which in this case is tissue.
Well, these are, you know, essentially these are salts of the heavy metals, right?
Uranium and lead.
And that means they're in the ionic form, which is water soluble, which is probably why they use it because the biological tissues are initially in water, but they, you know, heat those and evaporate the water out.
But when you're looking at an image, people don't know, under the electron microscope, you're actually not seeing, you know, proteins, carbohydrates, or fats, or water, you're seeing heavy metals.
So these salts of uranium and lead are used to actually replace the biological material in the sample, so that you can visualize something under this device.
Right?
Is that correct?
Exactly.
Well, then comes the inevitable question.
How can you make any conclusions about something that has gone through such immense torture, and something that isn't even alive?
Which is where, basically, logically speaking, if you remove a piece of tissue, or be it blood or mucus for that matter, you remove it from its natural environment, which in this case is a living human body.
You're removing something that was once an integral part of an intact living structure, and now you've removed it, by definition it means it is dead.
You're studying dead matter, dead material.
So once again, how can you make any conclusions about this, especially that which can drastically change society, impact society in the way that it did?
How can you make any conclusions about this?
Really brings up a key, key principle to one of the fundamental flaws of much of the modern scientific research in how it's done.
Because, you know, when you're talking about looking at what you're studying directly, okay, so if you're studying a body or a living tissue, then you need to observe it in its living state, because then you can see the behavior and the function carried out in real time.
So even if something's alive, but you remove it from the body, for example, like the live blood analysis, there still has to be a correlation between what you see under the coverslip of the slide when the blood is outside of the body versus how the blood behaves when it's in the body, right?
So you can correlate these things to a biological state, but it still doesn't tell you what the blood's actually doing when it's back inside the body.
Exactly.
Because you can't observe that directly.
And then, of course, this is far removed when you're talking about dead cells or tissue versus living.
Because once it's dead, then you've really taken time out of the equation because you have a snapshot, right?
And there's kind of different ways of thinking about the hierarchy of knowledge.
But, you know, you can have an experience where you directly experience it through your senses and emotions.
And then if you try to Take a picture or draw a picture of that, it's removed.
And if then if you try to like take that and turn it into words, it's then removed again from the actual experience.
It's like those are approximations that don't capture everything that's going on.
So when we take, you know, the tissue out of the organism and then let it die and then do further things, everything we do to it takes it further against what is actually happening in reality.
And virtually all of the modern biology research that's done in molecular genetics, mostly, and immunology, and other related areas of molecular biology, they're doing only studies in the laboratory outside of the body with artificial situations, environmental conditions, and then they're only looking at Markers that represent something, but aren't the something itself.
So just like that, it's removed.
So instead of, uh, for toxicology, I couldn't believe with a toxicology study, that's very simple because you can take a substance that you don't know how toxic it is and put it in an organism and then observe if it causes disease, but they don't even do that anymore.
They instead take immune cells in a culture from some animal, Add the toxin to those immune cells, and then if they make an inflammatory cytokine, then they say it has toxicity.
But that could mean that if you actually gave it to the animal, they'd be fine, or it could mean that they'd be dead.
They're not studying the thing that they're looking at.
They're studying something that represents the thing.
But they never validate the representation with the real thing.
Exactly.
Yeah, it's in vivo versus in vitro, as basically you can describe it.
Well, but this is also, um, it is also flabbergasting that there is only so few people that actually talk about this.
You see, I mean, there is yourself, whom I have tremendous amounts of respect and admiration for, for your courage and for what you've said over the last few years.
There is, uh, Dr. Harold Hillman, of course, whom you mentioned, that was also very courageous and I admire him wholeheartedly.
And there is Dr. Cowan and a few others.
And it's just, yeah, something that is so blatantly obvious, something that is right in front of your eyes, it's just flabbergasting to see that people just don't even go to that level of depth to even consider such a possibility that even the lies could be further from where you thought it was.
Well, it's so interesting because I think I had some good mentors in my scientific training in the past.
I was taught to be rigorous and to always question my own results and conclusions to make sure that they're bulletproof.
I would purposely give my data and analysis to other people and ask them to look at it and say, do they agree with this?
I'm just applying the same principles as a consumer of the information.
This is what everyone has always done until there have been these forces put into place to really stop people from truly learning this way.
There was a way of classical education, sometimes known as the Trivium.
And a big part of that was learning logic, reasoning, music theory, other sciences to help give you basic principles from which to understand things, but always about teaching yourself and proving things to yourself and using the logic to help you draw the appropriate conclusions.
And that way of education is now anachronistic because we have this indoctrination system that essentially is, I believe, Austrian-inspired or influenced, where they were trying to develop more obedient soldiers.
And they designed a public schooling system for that purpose.
And that's what was adapted in the United States.
And there's so much Interesting information about this, if you haven't looked into it, because interestingly the literacy rates were actually higher before there was a mandatory schooling system than they are at present.
And children of younger ages were able to do much more sophisticated things because they weren't Restrained by the grade system of, you know, pacing this information and limiting the doing and just, you know, have the kids being lectured to and reciting back what they hear.
What you've mentioned is very, very critical as well, because you've mentioned the Trivium, and I have implemented this method in my own life, really.
It was once... maybe people can... might understand it as the seven liberal arts... well, it's a part of it, really.
It's the seven liberal arts of education, which consists of the Trivium and the Quadrivium.
And, basically, The Trivium, as you've said, is you collect an eclectic variety of sources, which you look at, well, what's the mainstream saying?
What does the alternative say, if you will?
You look at all of the information and you start filtering it, which is your understanding.
You're going to come to an understanding of the information, which I'll come to in a second.
Ultimately, it is gaining wisdom.
Because also, wisdom isn't... You can't compare wisdom to just knowledge.
You can know a lot, but you can't... Wisdom is about doing what you know.
It's not just having... There's tons of people who know a lot, but still there isn't much action being implemented.
One of the third parts of consciousness, if you will, isn't actively being used, isn't actively being utilized, which is actions.
It is logic, it is logic and emotions, thinking and emotions.
They think and they feel, but they don't act in accordance with what they think and feel.
This is why I make it a point to Um, go through all of these different healing protocols and experiences personally, uh, before I really talk about them to a larger audience so that I can, uh, develop some wisdom and inner understanding.
And always, always I learn much more from having that experience than, you know, that it lends usually depth, not necessarily volume of information, but like depth of understanding.
To whatever it is that I'm experiencing, you know, in that process.
And, you know, maybe you could call that some modicum of wisdom, but it is a really valuable aspect to learning and understanding that people don't pay enough attention to.
Well, exactly, and this is mostly to people's belief systems today, people's paradigms, if you will.
Allow me to explain what an axiom is.
An axiom is that which has been regarded as being self-evident.
So, in other words, everybody knows that, but it becomes the norm.
So, when you question that which has been regarded as self-evident, it becomes controversial.
Now, controversial is derived from two Latin words, from one Latin word which is contra, meaning which is Confronted with, against or confronted with, and the Latin word verso visare, which means change.
So all together it says confronted with change.
You're confronted with something that needs to be changed, and in this case for certain, and the thing that needs to be changed is the way we look at health and disease.
You see, I myself have never said that people are not getting sick.
What I have been saying is that we should look beyond that which has been agreed by some people to be what is, which is what we call a consensus.
Which is just another word for belief.
Now, belief has nothing to do with real science.
As a matter of fact, it thwarts real scientific progression for very evident reasons that I have described in my recent video I did.
about bacteria.
In there, I have stated that causes like toxins in food, mental stress, air pollution, electromagnetic radiation, or chemicals such as pesticides, don't really have much marketing potential, if you will, i.e.
there is no money to be made with the acknowledgement of such known causes for disease.
So, at least the thing we call a disease, which I'll come to.
But acknowledging these causes that I've described would in fact devastate the incomes of many industries, especially the pharmaceutical industry, which benefits mostly from this paradigm.
On the contrary, the germ theory, so disease-causing entities as the cause of disease, Paves the way for profits in the billions with the sales of vaccines, tests, pharmaceutical drugs.
I mean, Roche, I'm sure you're familiar with the company.
It made tons of, it made a lot of profits over the last couple of years.
And the same goes for many of the pharmaceutical industry, many prominent pharmaceutical industry, pharmaceutical companies.
I mean, Well, yeah, you see, allow me to explain the real nature of disease, if you will, of that which we call a disease.
When you pollute or poison your body with, let's say, glyphosate, BPA, aspartame, phthalates, or pharmaceutical drugs, or chemical preservatives in food, your body... Or all of the above.
Like most people.
Yeah, exactly.
Your body will, quite evidently, not keep it there.
Will not keep it in your body.
It will try to excrete it.
And it achieves this through things like inflammation, fever, coughing, skin rashes, stomach aches, or simply just a runny nose.
And in severe cases of poisoning, we experience things like vomiting or diarrhea, or chronic forms of the previous expressions that I've mentioned.
This is simply the way your body excretes toxins and tries to return the state of the body back into homeostasis, meaning health.
So, if medical science were to acknowledge this, could this be of any benefit to them financially?
Certainly not, because now you're focusing on the causes rather than the symptoms.
You're operating from the plane of causality.
You're telling people to eat healthy, eat right, avoid polluted environments, avoid electromagnetic radiation or the mental stresses of life.
And if time permits, I'll come to that as well.
But nothing is being sold to them ultimately.
And that isn't to say that it's only about money to people in positions of quote unquote, authority in society.
Well, I agree.
There are other motives besides the greed that are driving.
But, you know, the thing is that there are people at many different levels who are taking part in this kind of charade or this enterprise.
And so there are plenty of people here who are Not aware of any deeper motives of maybe to keep people unhealthy, for example, so that or keep people dumbed down so that they don't figure out the things that we're talking about today, for example.
But there, so there is a lot of financial incentive.
And it's not, I think it's important to bring up the food industry, which you kind of tangentially mentioned, it's another huge industry with huge multinational corporations behind it.
In fact, a very small number of corporations are putting all the commercial food out there, pretty much.
And if the medical industrial complex starts recommending to eat clean food, then all of those food companies are going to Suffer tremendously because they don't really sell anything that's clean.
People would have to go directly to local suppliers and just eat whole foods and they would only be organic.
If you eat produce that's not organic, you're basically Eating poison, right?
Exactly.
And once you realize that, you can't go then and eat those foods anymore.
So, it's key.
And you know that the food industry conspired with the medical industry about the low-fat, you know, lie.
Exactly.
And so, I'm sure that they're entangled in other areas related to this, you know, paradigm that's put upon the masses.
Yeah, yeah.
You've mentioned it very precisely.
There is also these fad diets, you know, like the keto diet or the paleo diet, which are very, very dangerous for people's bodies.
And it's just...
Well, you can have a whole discussion about that pretty much about how the food and the pharmaceutical industry are just collided and are bringing about much suffering to people today, consciously or unconsciously, especially consciously when we're talking about the upper the upper levels of the hierarchy.
But you see, the insidious thing about it is medical science, to get back to what I was saying about the misinterpretations of the body's self-regeneration, because it's controlled to and fro by the pharmaceutical industry, they're trying because it's controlled to and fro by the pharmaceutical industry, they're trying to convince you that your body's attempt to heal itself, to regenerate, isn't actually healing you, but that it is a disease which you need to heal
but that it is a disease which you need to heal yourself from with my medicine or my vaccine.
So people go on to take statins or antibiotics and most of the time people become worse so They start vomiting and they experience more fever.
And then they just tell you, you have another disease, which requires different drugs.
So, well, while the doctors are, they are mostly unaware of it, of course, but the blame is constantly being laid upon your body's attempt to regenerate, upon your body's attempt to heal itself, and that your body is basically inferior compared to the pharmacopoeia.
Excuse me.
They're trying to convince you that your body's attempt to regenerate is a disease that you need to heal yourself from with their toxic drugs and vaccines.
Even though it might not be comfortable, the inflammation, the fever, they are nonetheless the solution.
It is your body trying to return itself to a state of health.
It isn't a disease.
And a side note from this, if you will, Which I think is very pertinent in the current discussion.
People are dissuaded from understanding this with lies like, oh, this virus might be from a biolab.
Because if people still believe in this utter nonsense that so-called viruses are the cause of disease, you can keep this paradigm going with all of its vested interests.
Which is also just another illusion of choice they sway at you.
Yes.
You either believe our narrative, or that this so-called virus comes from a biolab.
Either way, the outcome is always the same.
Like, you picture yourself trying to feed your children their vegetables.
Well, Johnny, what vegetables would you like for supper this evening?
Sprouts, asparagus or broccoli?
Johnny thinks, oh well, I have a choice now, don't I?
Well, I'd pick the broccoli, Mum or Dad.
Well, they've been convinced, they've been duped that they have a choice.
Well, the same goes for this story.
You will believe that there is a virus, and you won't look beyond it to discover what is truly going on, what is truly being done, in a pragmatic sense.
It's just like politics, really.
You choose either left or right, but the outcome is always the same.
It is always antecedently determined.
And the germ theory is also very beneficial for, as you've mentioned, power-obsessed oligarchs, if you will.
I mean, they can easily impose on people with health terrorism.
They try to appeal to people's emotions and say that their plans to rearrange and change society with the introduction of more coercive and restrictive regiments will save those that people are afraid of losing.
And because we can stop the transmissions that way, so therefore you have to comply and condone it.
Which is Also, this way they can justify the implementation of more control over people, which shows you how much content people in those positions of authority actually have for people.
You're right.
There is certainly, it seems that way, or if not, that complete disregard.
And, you know, I mean, sometimes you really catch a moment that this becomes really obvious.
Like, you know, I'm not really a fan of Arnold Schwarzenegger.
I'm sure you know him, but he was part of my youth and my, you know, experience.
Right.
So there's like even some nostalgia probably for, you know, like the Terminator movies and things like that.
And you saw him on an interview saying, you know, like basically saying, you know, your freedom is secondary.
Exactly.
And, you know, it's like once you sacrifice your freedom, everything else is gone.
Like it has to always be primary, you know, in order to preserve it.
Otherwise, then you're a slave if you're not free.
Exactly.
Well, obviously, there's a lot wrong with – there's a lot going on with Arnold Schwarzenegger, believe me.
But if he has to say that.
Of course, of course.
If he has to say something like that.
To see someone who is like an American immigrant, you know, had to earn citizenship, right?
And part of that is you have to learn.
The American history of which, you know, freedom is the underlying theme of the founding of our nation here, right?
It overrides everything, like everything has always been related to that my entire life.
And this is a guy who lives the American dream because he comes here, he gets citizenship, he becomes wealthy and famous, and then goes on to serve his nation, right, as a governor.
And, you know, of course, that's maybe really about ego and power and stuff, but it's still it fits this narrative of the Americana kind of popular story, and then for him to publicly just state the direct opposite of everything he's kind of stood for in that way is really jarring.
To me, it's kind of like a smack in the face from the government saying, you know, you guys just thought you were free.
You really never were, and now we're going to show you.
Right?
So it's almost personal in that respect, which is why I bring it up because that, to me, demonstrates the contempt.
It's like I could see the people in the back room seeing that and just laughing at the reaction or laughing at getting him to say that when it contradicts all the other things that he stood for.
Yeah, exactly.
Well, what you've mentioned is also the utter contempt that they have for people by using celebrities who have an IQ of basically minus 30.
You know, they use them to convince you, oh get your jab, get it, it's good for you.
Yeah, and as you've said as well, my youth has also been, these people have also been around my youth, these Famous people, if you will, like Arnold Schwarzenegger, whom is a motivating figure in many people's lives, because as you've mentioned, he's achieved a lot, as it seems.
And yeah, people would like to look up to someone like that.
And basically, when he says something, most people think, well, there should be something to it, because he has some credence.
Yes.
And we should really learn to look beyond it by, as we've mentioned before, making our own conclusions and not expecting that much from society, really.
Not to expect that much from people who we look up onto as heroes, basically.
And there's so much about this, this society, that I myself, I made a video about viruses and bacteria, but I will be covering a lot, on my channel I will be covering a lot more about these fundamental problems pertaining to society.
How it is, what the darker aspects of it, the shadow aspects of it are, because it's bizarre to understand that the world you basically lived on isn't the world you thought it was.
Yeah, well you bring up so many good points and let me mention to everyone that Alexander's website and his YouTube channel are called Realization, like real genuine eyeballs, so real and then eyesation.com.
And so we'll have the links below.
But also, you know, I learned this originally in my psychiatric education.
And then later on, my spiritual mentor, Neil Kramer, brought this up to me.
And it's related to what you were just talking about, but the concept of the grandiose self and the grandiose other.
And, you know, it's essentially, you could say it's a formulation when the ego is broken or split or fractured.
And that a person borrows a grandiose ego either from a public figure, right, or from from themselves that they create another grandiose image about themselves.
And this is one of the, you know, maybe you could call this a disease more genuinely, but it certainly is rampant among the population.
And this is why celebrities play an important role in this type of, you know, brainwashing, influencing, propaganda, etc.
Where the person essentially, you know, like because they feel weak and disenfranchised, possibly because they're in this kind of slavery status, or, you know, it's sort of like transparent slavery, maybe you could call it.
And that they use that person's status as a way to elevate their own identity and they identify with them and they parrot their opinions and they believe what they say.
And then, of course, that's why those figures can then be used to influence many because of this vulnerability, because already there's suppression, right?
And that It partly comes from the schooling, but it's in our culture.
It's been infused there by all of the influences of our culture, like Edward Bernays and his ilk, that have been put in place decades and decades ago to lead to this situation.
Exactly.
What you're saying is very profound.
Basically, you've mentioned exactly the ego, and I've made a video about it stating, well, obviously we should look beyond ego identification, because what you've said, you identifying yourself with the things you like and you ascribe to in society, like those celebrities, and as you aptly described that you that you identify yourself with.
You basically emulate them, sort of, and you parrot their opinions and parrot their worldview and the way they act and the way they speak and also because you look up to them mostly.
But this is indeed very prevalent within younger people and I think it is very pertinent that People understand this trap that is the ego identification, really.
So, you identifying with your labels, your roles in society.
I am a businessman.
I am this.
I am a male-female.
I am a Manchester United supporter.
I am a Game of Thrones lover.
I am a hyper-compliant mask wearer.
Exactly.
I mean, that really is it.
Or like I'm a dancing health care, you know, professional.
Exactly, exactly.
So, you're identifying yourself with the lowercase i, if you will, but then there is also the capital I, which is the real I, your real self.
Basically, it is consciousness experiencing itself in this three-dimensional space-time reality which we call human experience.
By understanding your... by going beyond, I am only... I'm only capable of doing this because, well, I am... I've actually... I've actually heard people saying this from the medical profession, saying that, oh, but I am just a medical doctor.
I am not an endocrinologist or a Real scientists or whatever, I can't, well I just accept it therefore.
I can't go up to their level of knowledge, those virologists and those bacteriologists, those pathologists.
I can't go up to that level.
I am just here.
I'm sitting here and basically I just have to do as I'm told and I just, I don't question the narrative because they know much more than I do.
Right.
And it's, you know, it's, it's compartmentalism.
But you also like touched on, and I'm going to have to, you know, invoke the spirit of G. Edward Griffin here, collectivism, right?
Because what you, you know, when you people give away their agency to the ego identification with the group, especially, right, that that is really, you know, communitarianism or collectivism, where it becomes a philosophy, where the individual loses The prominence and the priority is placed upon the collective.
And that, of course, can be defined in a number of ways.
What is the collective?
And this exploits the group psychology aspects of the sort of mob, you know, psychology, which was even talked about by Freud and Bernays, you know, Freud's nephew, I believe.
But, you know, it was was sort of taking his work and developing it into the propaganda PR space.
And this is one of the biggest things to look at because when you lose your individual identity and identify with the group and then adopt the philosophy that the groups or collectives welfare is above the important of any individual member of the collective, then the whole morality changes and you go apart from natural law.
And you'd be, you know, and then you go into the law of the jungle or the law of who's ever in charge of the collective and you and people will turn against with each other, they'll perpetrate violence, they'll suppress each other's rights, right?
And we saw this with the collective ism influence that came up during the pandemic when you had like individuals Depriving other individuals of rights because they weren't part of the collective, right?
Like, you can't come in my store unless you put on this, you know, slave muscle.
For example, even though, you know, what right do I have to tell you what to put on your face or what to do with your body, right?
So we, but people have done that because they have identified with the group instead of You know, with their own individual self, with their relationship with divinity, and their responsibility to, you know, abide by the natural law, which really defines, you know, human morality.
Exactly.
You've hit the right word, which is natural law.
It's in essence, it should be the foundation, it should be the key foundation, I should say, Of our decision-making, our discernment in life, and if you compare natural law, which is just... You can boil it down to understanding the difference between right and wrong, which is very simple, people, once again.
You see, many erroneous ideologies like solipsism, for instance, dissuade people from looking into something like this.
Like what I've described in my own research, coming to an accurate understanding, you see, discovering the truth by simply knowing what the methods were that led to the conclusion.
And allow me to explain what I mean by this at a greater scale.
People have become convinced that you can never discover the truth.
So, you can never come to know anything about something.
So, why bother?
And most of this is due to their limited view of themselves.
Also, people think, once again, that you need to acquire some sort of degree in histology to be able to deduce whether something is true or not regarding science.
When that isn't true, science is for everyone.
Science is simply the process of acquiring knowledge, coming to an accurate understanding of what you've come to know, and applying what you've come to know and understand in the real world, and everyone can do so.
Science shouldn't be believed, it should be executed, it should be demonstrated, if you will, by which the truth can be acquired, Once again, the failure of the mainstream medical science that we laughingly call science and that we laughingly associate with medical aspects of care for each other.
Well, basically, Yeah, what you've described is basically, authority has no respect, it has no regard for people's rights and property.
I mean, the Trucker Convoy situation, I mean, to say the least, it's people...
Well, people who call themselves authority who say, we don't want to hear your voice, we don't respect your rights, we don't want to hear you speak and complain about us, we don't want criticism from you.
We are such bloody narcissists that we don't even like to receive criticism in the first place, and you're standing all over there thinking that you stand above the law, as they laughingly say.
But basically, it is What people think, people in their worldview, they interpret it as people doing crimes when they themselves aren't actually committing crimes.
They are standing up for their rights.
I mean, people are being deprived of all of their property, their rights.
They're standing up for what is right.
They're applying the You can describe it the self-defense principle.
And you basically have convinced people that those are the criminals and that you are the good guy by actually doing the violence.
You're actually committing the violence by beating those people up, freezing their bank accounts, restricting their ability To obtain their own goods, to get to their money, etc.
Violence is actively taking place and that is the objective definition of violence.
People are being coerced and, which is where the word violence is derived from, they have their rights violated.
And it's all basically, when you actually go down the rabbit hole deep enough, it's all opposite, it's all, you can describe it as, it's all basically backwards.
Yes, yes, the inversions.
In the inversion, indeed.
We have inversions everywhere in this three-dimensional Earth environment.
And, you know, I think you really, this is a great place to kind of wrap up.
And, you know, I didn't expect that we were really going to have a sort of spiritual and philosophical discussion today rather than talking about scientific details.
But I think it's so important because really, you know, where does, and you gave an excellent definition of science that it's execution.
recognition.
Right?
Rather than belief.
And this is really the philosophy of science, which is what we're getting at.
And how, you know, what is information?
What is knowledge?
Right?
Getting back to the basics, the epistemology related to understanding, you know, the truth About nature.
So this is a really important and a foundational type of subject matter to get at.
So I'm so glad that we have the opportunity and of course, you know, bringing everything full circle to show the distinction of how getting caught up in the groupthink, how not using the principles of logic, reasoning, discernment, the trivium approach,
will end up causing you to be led astray from from natural law and to not even recognize when there are clear violations, which, you know, should provide us with outrage and should clue us in that this is part of a bigger mechanism that's violating natural law and we need to change it.
And so these are our major foundational, you know, impediments to most people's true understanding of the nature of this situation and the truths behind it.
So Alexander, I want to, you know, thank you so much for coming on today.
And I think, you know, we'll definitely have discussions about having a follow-up and I want to encourage people because there's a lot more depth that Alexander has to offer on these subjects.
We kind of just touched the surface and on his channel and website, you can find a lot more materials and we will definitely have future discussions.
So Alexander, do you have any final comments or things you'd like to say?
Well, basically, yeah, I wanted to end with something perhaps very esoteric, really, and that's once again about health and, I mean, yeah, health and disease.
And this is also another misconception about polarity, really.
People think of health and disease as being polarities, so as opposites, when in fact they're actually not.
In a lecture I gave previously, I described love and fear as Not being opposites.
And no, it isn't love and hate, because hate always stems from a certain amount of fear.
Now, love and fear are not binary opposites.
Love is there.
It exists.
And fear is the absence of love, like light and darkness.
Light is all of the colors that we can perceive that are within the physical color spectrum, if you will, from visible light, because from Ultraviolet to infrared, that which our naked eyes can see, and darkness is simply the absence of visible lights, because our eyes can't translate those colors that are beyond infrared and ultraviolet, which we perceive as being darkness, and the same dynamic really applies to health and disease.
Health is there, like light, and that which we call a disease is simply the absence of health, or just a certain degree of its absence, if you will.
But disease itself is not a single phenomenon, it's just a misinterpretation of the body's self-regeneration, and we should be very prudent when dubious instances try to convince you it's benevolence, which can be very dangerous.
But, once again, the principle of polarity Fear is actually non-existent.
It is basically the absence of love, and love is where we should all stand.
We shouldn't stand with fear, because fear is once again the place where logic is also ultimately absent.
So that is a beautiful way of thinking, and it applies directly
to the presentation of what is commonly misrepresented as illness because, as you pointed out earlier, that when you have the expression of an acute illness with vomiting, diarrhea, runny nose, coughing, fever, all those things, there's simply your body going through a healing process where it's purging out the toxic elements that have caused the problem and repairing the damage that was done so that you can then regain your full health.
Which may be partially absent during that time, but if you reinterpret that and know the truth about it, that's actually your body healing, which is in severe contradistinction to the allopathic system which says that it's a you know, caused by a dangerous invader and your misery needs to be, you know, ameliorated right away that you shouldn't tolerate any kind of discomfort and use drugs to manage your symptoms.
But if you reinterpret it as what it truly is, is that your body's going through a healing process, it totally changes the experience.
You go from suffering to loving your body for healing itself.
And that love makes that fear and misery recede, you know, so completely if you truly embrace it.
And there's another missing component to that experience because the the Bodily sensations that you have and the emotions that are associated with those contain information that tell you that you have caused this situation to occur.
Maybe not intentionally, maybe not even knowingly, but if you pay attention to those signals of your body then you will receive that information and then you will change how you treat your body to incorporate more love into the process and then you won't need to express that type of healing situation in the future.
Exactly.
Absolutely.
Doctor, you said that I should call you Andy.
I will from now.
I apologize.
No, no, it's quite all right.
It's just that, you know, I don't want to be defined by the title of being a doctor.
I'm a man.
And, you know, I actually The association for many of doctor, right, is someone who gives drugs or does surgery and, you know, that's certainly, I don't be involved in any of those things any longer.
Once again, the ego identification, right?
Exactly, exactly.
I'm a man, you know, trying to do the right thing in every situation and many times I don't succeed, but I keep trying.
Exactly.
Andy, thank you so much for the opportunity.
Once again, I am very, very encouraged by your work and I highly encourage people who are looking this from my channel, if people are looking at it from there, to look at Dr. Andrew Kaufman's website, which I will link below as well.
To look at this person's work which has been an inspiration to many and I hope it will reach so many people and eventually people will learn how to make their own conclusions basically and we can bring about a beautiful world with harmony and with prosperity without fear and purely out of love.
That is exactly correct.
We have this ability to create those things and we can do it.
It is really inspiring to get to know you and hear you speak, Alexander, especially coming to this from a more Youthful perspective, it really gives me a lot of hope that not everyone is lost to the virtual social media pop culture entertainment world.
And that, you know, that people, young people and, you know, hopefully my children will be in this ilk as they mature.
They're already headed that direction too, that they can think for themselves and really make valuable contributions and creation to this world that I know will be Seeing from you in the future.
So thank you everyone for giving your time to listen to this discussion.
We hope that you had a little bit of inspiration as well, and we'll see you next time.
Thank you.
Over a million years in development.
A highly concentrated, complex, natural formula.
Rich in trace minerals as well as fulvic and humic acids.
Mother Nature's ancient elixir for energy, revitalization, and long life.
Shiljit Mumio means conqueror of mountains, destroyer of weakness.
Take in the nutritional wisdom of the ancient past.
Unleash the vibrant healthy being inside.
Become the conqueror.
▲
Export Selection