Today, Dan and Jordan check in on what happened when Alex Jones went down to Georgia. In this installment, Alex teams up with a couple of young upstart bigots to try to do the whole "Tea Party thing" all over again, Alex gets stalked by the FBI and a newsman in a blimp, and Dan offers a pitch for the next season of Infowars.
Anyway, the reason that I'm throwing a bright spot to social media is I started to think about what are ways that social media can be used in ways that are fun and not dumb.
And everyone keeps asking for pictures of my plants.
My bright spot today, Dan, it is back to Assassin's Creed Valhalla, but it is a specific reference in Valhalla that I particularly enjoyed that came out of nowhere, which was a reference to One Punch Man.
Yeah, and he's so existentially destroyed by that, like how bored and awful it is to be the ultimate power in the universe, I guess, that he's just a real bummer all the time.
All of a sudden, every time I loaded the save, the entire screen would just start shaking, and then my character would just fall directly through, and then...
So, if you're out there listening and you're thinking, hey, I enjoy the show, I'd like to support these giants, you can do that by going to our website, pressing that button that says support the show, or...
But I forgot that that means that Owen is gonna be hosting the show.
And, like, I forgot that, like, oh, it's the flip of the dynamic from the caravan where Owen's out on the road and Alex is, you know, throwing to him in the field.
And in the real world, they're just an advancement of the same idea behind a...
No, it's compelled by the mark of the beast.
It's just efficient.
The main reason I pulled this clip was to illustrate how deep into the nonsense Alex is to start this show off.
The second reason I included this clip is probably more important, and it's to use this as an opportunity to explain how people like Alex are broken records trying to make everyone afraid of everything for no reason.
QR codes are something that Alex is trying to scare his audience about, and interestingly, if you look into the history of the thing that preceded QR codes, the UPC barcode, you'll find hysterical people doing the exact same thing 50 years ago.
According to an article about UPC history in Wired, quote, I love Christianity.
And in the year that followed, an urban legend arose warning gullible types that the number 666 was hidden in each barcode.
Some of these paranoid types noted that there were often sixes in the barcode, which were in fact arbitrary, but it doesn't matter.
Again, from the article, quote, early test films of the scanners were labeled with the letters F, G, and H, and some saw this as proof that the code would wind up on more than just Coke cans, assisting the H stood for head and the F for forearm.
It's inevitable because change and the future are both scary things.
The more complex the system is, the greater possibility it has in terms of productivity and effectiveness and ability to help people live better lives.
But as that complexity increases, the theoretical damage that it could cause go up, too.
A simple example is just the internet.
The ability for people to communicate and digitally interact over great distances, it's revolutionary in terms of information flow and directing charitable assistance to places that need it, but it's created a gigantic Tinder box that could explode at any time.
For instance, back in 2013, the Associated Press's Twitter account got hacked, and a fake tweet was posted about two explosions going off at the White House that had injured President Obama.
This wasn't true, but the effect on the stock market was real, and it's the byproduct of a volatility that would not exist without the ability for information to travel exceedingly fast.
Almost every technology you can imagine can be slotted into this kind of balance.
Having a centralized power company in your town relieves you of the burden of having to run a generator yourself, but also, if there's like a bad storm in your area, your whole block might end up losing power for a while.
The complexity of emerging technologies provides benefits, but also increases the problems when something goes wrong.
Alex is just one in a long, long chain of hysterical idiots yelling about how some new-ish Not even that new.
You have a hypnotic power today, George, and I'm worried about it.
So, Alex is on the scene in Atlanta with Ali, and the beginning of the show is what appears to be a pre-recorded, or it could have been live, I'm not entirely sure, thing of them just sort of yelling about this guy.
So, Ali is reporting based on a tweet that was posted by David Schaefer, the head of the GOP in Georgia.
But it's a very misleading tweet, designed to be used by bad faith actors like Alex and Ali to fuel their machines that they're trying to use to overturn this election.
They're conducting this recount in Georgia, and during the recount, someone made a recording error.
That is to say that they mistakenly put down over 10,000 votes for Biden and 13 for Trump, when in reality, the total was just over 1,000 for Biden and 13 for Trump.
This mistake was caught in the recount Yeah, was a big mistake.
Yeah, that'll happen.
The DeKalb County CEO released a statement that basically said that they were unable to verify the claims of this error, but to put it in my words, even if everything Schaefer said is true, it doesn't matter.
I was a little surprised by the tone of this statement.
Based on Chairman Schaefer's Twitter storm, the alleged vote error was discovered, reported to DeKalb elections officials, and corrected prior to the transmission of the official audit report to the Georgia Secretary of State's office.
If the scenario occurred, as Chairman Schaefer alleges, this is evidence that the checks and balances established by Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to ensure the accuracy of the election results performed as designed.
As is always the case with Alex and Allie, this is a dud, but it's a dud that they're probably going to use as a piece of evidence of fraud.
So in Wayne County, Michigan, that's Detroit, the Republicans, two Republicans and two Democrats sit on the canvassing board.
The Republicans decided not to certify the election, but under duress and threat from hundreds of thousands of tweets, the leftists, Antifa, BLM, they reluctantly agreed under the condition that the Secretary of State would...
audit.
unidentified
We are in legal and constitutional limbo as we don't even understand what that means.
What Ali is saying is inaccurate, but let's pretend for a moment what he's saying is true.
That would mean that the Republicans on this council he's talking about were willing to certify an election that they felt was fraudulent because people were mean to them on Twitter.
Alex, I'm sorry, Ali is saying that like it's an understandable thing.
Ali's saying that the people tweeting stuff, this mean stuff, it's like the equivalent of having a gun to your head, which is ridiculous.
If it's your job to make sure the election is fair and your decision-making process is in any way affected by what someone on Twitter says, you've proven exactly one thing, and that is that you're not qualified for your position.
The Wayne County Board of Canvassers met to certify the election results, and things broke down on a party line, with the two Republicans, William Hartman and Monica Palmer, voting against certification, and the Democrats voting for certification.
At issue was the number, there was a number of precincts that had an unexplained discrepancy in vote totals.
According to the Detroit Free Press, quote, most of them recorded discrepancies of three votes or fewer.
In 2016, there were similar discrepancies in voter totals and Jill Stein's campaign had pushed for a recount.
This recount was ended by a court order before it could be completed, but after the election was over, the state of Michigan did do an audit, and it found that a vast majority of the unexplained discrepancies were easily explainable by human error, and that, quote, quote, "Many of the problems encountered in Detroit are attributable to a lack of proficiency using EPB software or the mishandling of provisional envelope ballots.
They found in their audit that votes were accurately counted, but that there were mistakes made in terms of being able to correctly match each vote with its ballot because of these It's incredibly likely...
Almost to a point of certainty that this same phenomenon is present here in the 2020 election.
Ultimately, Palmer and Hartman agreed to certify the Wayne County results when the Democrats on the board agreed to do an audit of the votes.
But apparently Palmer and Hartman didn't realize that the audit would be literally impossible to do prior to the certification of the election.
And so they tried to recant their certification, which is something they can't do.
The cynical-minded fellow out there might think that the real reason that Palmer and Hartman decided to recant their decision to certify is that Trump called them personally, but what do I know?
Now, Ronna McDaniel, the Republican National Committee chair, is calling for Michigan to adjourn their board for 14 days to get to the bottom of these very serious or possibly wildly overblown issues.
At the point of us recording this episode, we don't know how this is going to shake out, because the board in Michigan is set to certify on Monday, which is in the future from us right now.
All signs appear to indicate that, like Georgia, they will certify the results, but this world is fucking insane, so I am not going to take anything for granted.
They're still calling for an audit, but they did go ahead and say they're going to certify it, because things were, quote, out of balance at a record level.
Alex and Ali are making this stuff up, knowing that no one in their audience will question them or go consult the 2016 audit, which I would bet anything I own that even these two dudes don't know exists.
The Detroit Free Press said this of the unexplained discrepancies in Wayne County in the 2020 election.
Quote, Of Detroit's 503 election day precincts, 85 recorded unexplained discrepancies in the vote totals, as did 94 of the city's 134 absentee voting counting boards.
Most of them recorded discrepancies of three votes or fewer.
If you consult the 2016 election audit conducted by the Michigan Department of State...
You'll find that, quote, the Wayne County Board of Canvassers reported during the post-election canvas period that concluded November 22, 2016, approximately 392 precincts appeared to be out of balance.
If you combine the in-person and absentee counting boards from 2020, you have a decrease of 213 out-of-balance precincts in this election compared to four years ago.
And these numbers probably sound high, and they kind of are, but these are almost...
Entirely indicative of minor human errors that do not actually affect vote counts, but they do lead to accounting problems.
For instance, the audit report discusses the case in 2016 of Precinct 152, where the sealed ballot container, it only had 50 votes in it at the end of the night, but the rules indicated that 306 votes had been cast.
This was because poll workers had accidentally left the rest of the ballots in the tabulator and failed to put them then into the sealed container.
It's a problem, and it will lead to a discrepancy, but it doesn't actually have any bearing on the vote tallies or mean there was any fraud.
Most problems that you will hear people like Alex yell about fall into this category, and I would be willing to venture a guess.
That in a few months, whenever there is an audit of this election, which Alex will ignore by that point, you'll find a lot of similar human error issues.
I mean, have you ever counted to a thousand and then counted to a thousand with two people over your shoulder six feet away from you going like, no, that's one more for the other team.
The larger point here, though, is that Ali and Alex are completely wrong and absolutely just making up that there's record levels of precincts being out of balance.
They have no idea what they're talking about, and the actual numbers are the exact opposite of their narrative.
There wasn't record discrepancy, and if you go by the strict numbers, there was a 54% decrease in precincts reporting unexplained discrepancies this election cycle.
Yeah, that would make sense, considering for the three months up to the election, everybody was constantly screaming about how there's no possible way that this would be a fair-counted election, so everybody went so fucking overboard.
Well, and because of those discrepancies that happened in the 2016 election, there were probably a lot of conversations about little things that could be done to limit...
I think that, I mean, obviously you'd like to see that number even lower, but that much of a decrease...
Trump's legal team had argued that their poll watchers in Pennsylvania were not allowed close enough access to voters, vote counters, excuse me, in the Philadelphia Convention Center.
Because of many factors, perhaps most importantly COVID-19-related social distancing, the poll watchers were kept behind a barrier approximately 15 to 18 feet away from the first row of canvassers.
So the workers would have a safe area to come and go as needed, like they had to go to the bathroom or whatever.
The Trump campaign argued that this was not appropriate, and a lower judge reached a compromise where they could set the barrier at six feet.
Then, Trump's campaign filed a lawsuit claiming that the votes that were counted before the barrier were moved were, uh, they shouldn't count since the watchers didn't have appropriate access.
The matter reached the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, who ruled that the initial distance was appropriate for the requirements in the election code, and to mandate that the distance was too great would be the state encroaching on the county's right to run its election through the Philadelphia County Board of Elections.
He's saying that the court decided that it was fine, that the Republicans had no poll watchers, which is not at all the issue that was before the court.
He's lying about it because it sounds better for his side.
This same strategy has been employed by Trump's legal team, including noted weirdo Jenna Ellis, who said, quote, It's inexplicable that five justices on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court would conclude that watchers observing from distances up to 100 feet away is reasonable.
There is no evidence that this is the case at all.
In fact, the only reference to 100 feet in the court decision is, quote, the campaign contends that the board set up imposing a barrier and having some tables in the area over 100 feet away from the edge of the security fence effectively deprived its representative of the ability to be truly present and effectively eliminates the representative's ability to perform his or her role of ensuring openness and transparency.
Transparency in the electoral process.
That idea only exists as a thing that the Trump legal team claimed, but isn't substantiated.
I like that the Trump legal team could just be like, yeah, we're claiming that 30 different drone bombs killed all the Republicans in the United States, and nobody is talking about that.
And the Pennsylvania Supreme Court isn't even going to certify that the election was stolen since all Republicans are dead now.
If you look at the findings of the suit, you can find out what the maximum distance from a person the watchers would be.
There was a 15 to 18 foot divide between the watchers and the first row of tables.
Then from the suit, quote, a designated area of the convention center was divided into discrete sections, each devoted to various aspects of the pre-canvassing and canvassing process.
Each section contained three rows of folding tables, each table separated by five to six feet.
Even if you assume that, like, each table takes up six feet on its own, and you use the high end of 18 feet for the initial barrier, you still end up only with a distance of 54 feet from the barrier to the furthest table.
But, of course, you know, also people could observe from different angles.
Anyway, my point here is that you can easily see how talking points get created out of this.
For someone like Jenna Ellis, she can claim in a suit that people are 100 feet away, and then when the suit gets thrown out, she can claim that the court determined that people 100 feet away is totally fine, and that's not necessarily accurate.
And as for someone like Allie, you know, he doesn't have to worry about things like getting disbarred or anything, so he's free to just make up anything.
So at high noon at the Georgia State Capitol, Alex Jones, myself, and other patriots are here, and we are marching, and we are telling the Secretary of State, stop.
Don't certify.
The chances of that happening are zero.
But we might stop the deadline that happens 24 hours after that, and that's when Governor Brian Kemp, who's been wobbly in this whole issue, then has to certify the election from his office.
We're going to fail, but maybe we won't fail later, even though it seems like planning to fail from the beginning would suggest that we are going to continue to fail.
So, now we get to Owen helming the show in studio, and he's sort of just giving a little talk over the footage, and he gets surprised by a little someone he sees hanging out with Alex.
So, uh, Owen is just throwing to this video as much as he can.
unidentified
The globalists have been caught red-handed, engaged in massive fraud, and the people know!
And the people will not accept this fraudulent election, and just like in other countries, bare minimum, we need a new election called in the disputed states!
I compare things to wrestling a lot, but that's because there's a lot of similarity to the distorted reality that exists on Infowars and in the WWE.
To get really basic with things, there are good guys and bad guys in wrestling.
The good guy is the face, the bad guy is the heel.
The ultimate goal of a feud is to have the bad guy anger the audience, whether it be by cheating in matches or having a shitty personality or whatever, to the point where the audience wants to pay to see the face kick his ass.
There are variations in some middle grounds, but this is the basic dynamic.
There are character types that only work as a heel or a face, and trying to make them work in an opposite alignment does not play.
A cocky showboat who thinks they're too hot works as a heel but not as a face, because the things that they have to do to play their character are inherently annoying.
The exception to this would be Shawn Michaels, but he was a once-in-a-generation talent, and rules don't apply to people like him or Stone Cold or The Undertaker.
Similarly, the scrappy try-hard wrestler who refuses to quit does not work as a heel.
The audience watching a person take a horrible beating and still kicking out of pins makes them cheer for the underdog who won't give up.
The giant they're fighting has thrown everything they have against them, and they just won't stay down.
People love that shit, to the point where it's such a powerful thing that it was used to turn Stone Cold face in his match against Bret Hart at WrestleMania 13. Brett went into that match as the face, and the two had a brutal match that resulted in Brett getting Stone Cold into his submission hold, the sharpshooter.
Stone Cold was bleeding profusely from the face, and he refused to tap out to the sharpshooter, with Brett ending up winning when Stone Cold passed out in the hold.
It left an iconic image, and that performance, where he refused to give in, made it impossible for crowds not to cheer for Stone Cold, and thus, he had to be a face.
Consider that previous to this, his gimmick had been that he was a homicidal redneck that was inspired by the emotionless serial killer Richard Kuklinski, aka the Iceman.
Less than a year prior, he'd broken his former tag team partner Brian Pillman's ankle and then was trying to invade his home to continue attacking him, which led to Pillman pulling out a gun on television to protect himself, which was super fucked up and really scared Okay, well, that's not good.
Anyway, the point here is that there are characterizations that only work in certain contexts, and Alex Jones only works outside any connection to power.
Everything becomes incoherent once he's trying to make excuses for the president who he supports, but everything is still a conspiracy, just a conspiracy that doesn't involve the president and everyone who blindly supports said president.
It's nonsensical, like trying to boo a wrestler who has too much heart to give up.
It doesn't make sense.
This, I think, more than anything else, has made me feel substantially better since the election, and I wanted to take a moment to address that levity that we probably have on the last couple episodes.
It would be easy to get the impression that I don't think that Alex is as serious a problem anymore or that I feel like the work is done now that Trump is out of office.
And I want to make sure no one strongly disagree.
I want to make sure no one thinks that that's where I'm coming from.
to take over the country, but he's apparently also supposed to be the guy that has the president's ear, but he's also the guy who's mad that the president isn't doing everything he says.
It's convoluted.
The truth-teller persona needs to be someone who is ignored, or is listened to by people who are perennial losers, like Ron Paul.
If you don't do it that way, too many unanswerable questions come up that penetrate the facade.
I'm grateful to be able to study Alex Jones during this period where his persona was completely out of sync with the reality he's trying to present, but I'm also incredibly relieved to re-enter a world where he's back where he belongs.
Time will tell if he's able to pull off the transition back to that place where he gets to yell on the street and everyone chants and stuff.
Time will tell.
But if he can, I have a hunch that there's a lot of money to be made off semi-red-pilled folks who find themselves unsatisfied by Fox News but think QAnon's insane.
I can't believe that we're positioned in a place where it seems like all of these right-wing people are just going to slide back into their positions, but we're going to have a higher tolerance for it.
And also another point of that is also that Charlie Kirk is getting older, and his whole appeal as a college ambassador is maybe a little bit less sensible at this point.
But whatever the case, I do think that he set his sights.
On them and whether he's responsible for them having a waning influence.
I'm not sure if Nick understands his political alignment very well, but he should realize that it makes absolutely no sense for him to be calling for a strike of anything.
He's either a paleoconservative or a libertarian, depending on when he's answering the question.
And both of these political philosophies are super anti-union and super anti-strikes.
Typically, libertarians view unions as an extortion racket trying to get in the way of the freedom of an employer and an employee freely agreeing to terms of trading money for labor.
They would likely support a worker's right to withhold their labor if the terms were unfair, but they would definitely, and I mean definitely, be way more passionate about supporting a business's right to replace that worker with someone who would accept unfair terms.
That's what freedom is about, after all, according to libertarians.
We are together recognizing that in the face of an overwhelming government entity, the only method of fighting back we have is to unite together, and all of us utilize our power to neutralize their power, and that's what we call libertarianism.
I don't see any possible way for Nick Fuentes to coherently call for a trucker strike in order to force Trump into office.
If the truckers were to strike over their disapproval about an election, Nick's political beliefs should require that he support the trucking companies bringing in scabs to do the work these truckers refuse to do.
It doesn't matter because this isn't a statement that's meant to make political sense, nor is it even something he can pretend would be effective.
This is a line he's throwing out in hopes of incitement.
He's trying to pump up the crowd and planting images in their head of their side throwing the country into chaos with truckers refusing to work unless Trump is installed as president.
That's why they tested it with Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, and then when it worked to steal elections for the communists in Venezuela, it went nationwide.
So, for the record, Hugo Chavez died in 2013 and won his last election in 2012.
So I guess the theory here is that this company stole the 2012 Venezuela election as a test run, then eight years later paid it all off with the U.S. election.
This naturally raises the question of why the globalists didn't just use it in 2016, but we're playing with conspiracies, so let's not bring real questions into it.
So the conspiracy that Owen is spinning is made out of combining details about two different companies and then insisting you've proven something suspicious.
The two companies at issue are Dominion and Smartmatic.
Part of the way this conspiracy is presented is to claim that these are the same company or that Dominion owns Smartmatic, but that's not the case.
They are unrelated.
Smartmatic is a company that's provided election technology in Venezuela, but they actually have a history of calling out voting problems like they did in August 2017 when they found that the results of the Constituent Assembly election had been altered, which they knew because their system is tamper-evident and set to, quote, self-report any attempt to interfere with it.
Dominion has nothing to do with Venezuela, so the ability to connect Venezuela with Dominion relies on connecting these two companies which are not connected and are actually competitors.
It's important to remember here that the game that these people are engaging in is not to make a coherent point.
Their goal is to create a perception where they're right and everyone's out to get them.
In this case, the connection to Hugo Chavez is really telling, because it's not about a connection that's real, it's about tying this whole thing to a right-wing boogeyman.
The anti-communist right-wing view Hugo Chavez is one of the world's greatest evils, so involving him in this conspiracy is essentially...
I don't know, fan service for weird right-wingers?
There are two roles that currently need to be filled.
One is in studio and one is remote.
And because there are only two people who can reasonably fill those roles, they have to do those jobs.
With two roles and two people, there are only two possibilities of how to organize things, and they're both trash in terms of presentation.
One option is having Alex in studio and Owen on the road.
This is good because Alex is much, much better as a broadcaster and he knows how to move the products.
And he can say nothing passionately for an hour.
The downside, however, is that Owen is not a draw, so you end up with really lackluster, disappointing remote events.
Even on his best day, Owen can't get a crowd revved up like Alex.
Alex is old school on a bullhorn, and Owen is just a pretender.
The other option is what we have here, where Owen is in studio and Alex is on the road.
The upshot here is that you probably get more compelling video from the road, because Alex is probably drunk, and he knows how to get people pumped up.
More people are also going to show up, naturally, if Alex Jones is somewhere, compared to if Owen Schroyer is there.
It's a tough situation if you're in charge at InfoWars and you have to figure out how to assign roles, but if it were me, I would never have Alex out of studio.
He may draw a bigger crowd, but there are going to be a ton of people in Atlanta no matter what, and Owen isn't as exciting as Alex, but combined with Ali Alexander and Nick Fuentes, it might end up not being as poorly attended as the Caravan.
You need Alex in studio for multiple reasons.
The first is that he's the only person exciting enough to make this dumb show watchable, and thus make people more likely to buy the pills.
There's a financial reality that Alex is better for business as the host.
Then, on top of that, the whole point of Infowars right now is that shit is super dangerous.
Antifa and Black Lives Matter are trying to kill all the conservatives.
Remember a few months ago Alex said that China and MS-13 had teamed up with the Democrats to take out conservative talk show hosts?
Anyway, I would advise Infowars to lean into this whole thing and make the studio feel like Alex's bunker.
The whole point of his career is supposed to be that he's the Oracle, the only person in the world who can see directly through the globalist plans.
The literal devil has been trying to enlist him since he was a child because the devil knew that Alex was special and he was a psychic.
If you expect me to believe any of that, you have to protect that person at all costs.
The psychic who's the only person who knows what the globalists are going to do before they do it is way too valuable to have out on the street yelling into a bullhorn with a couple of young enterprising bigots.
Now that InfoWars has become something so comical and hyper-important, it's time for them to get right with the script.
Alex is supposed to be this all-important guru, so he needs to start acting like it.
The studio's already established as having guns everywhere and being super well-protected, so Alex should only be making appearances from there.
Owen is the young gun, the warrior in the fold, so he needs to be Alex's proxy on the streets, willing to risk it all because he knows that his muscles and physical functions Yeah, that's true.
I'm gonna move on now, because I'm getting lost in flights of fancy about the ideal direction for InfoWars to go in the future, and again, as we touched on at the beginning of the show, we keep coming up with better ideas for them, and then they just don't do it.
There's a part of me that, like, kind of, like, I mean, Alex is wrong and he's a monster, but there is a part of me that, like, if he's frustrated with his staff, I get it.
And sort of mentoring them in terms of whatever skills they have not being emphasized, if only illustrated by the fact that Owen's just doing an Alex impression.
I see the Hindenburg level, where it's a giant blimp, and he's down, and he's got a ship's captain vibe to him, doing that whole thing, looking out the window.
Just leaning down, just being like, that motherfucker again.
Right outside Atlanta is the Georgia Guidestones, ladies and gentlemen.
So we're here covering all this, trying to stop the steal, educating people about what's really happening.
And the only way I could bring a security team with Antifa and Black Lives Matter threat here, and they're strong here, the only way we could be here to cover all this and to seriously focus on what's happening is your financial support.
I want to thank you all for going to InfoWarsStore.com, getting great t-shirts, books, films, water filtration, and then all the great supplements.
These are the highest quality, highest in supplements.
There are stories all across the nation, including where I found this story today.
I was doing a deep dive into this where the headline is from a black lady goodwill ambassador who hates white people with the headline, should white boys still be allowed to talk?
That's in the Dixonian at Dixon College in Pennsylvania.
First, this essay that Owen found today on this show, he's complaining about, it was published in February 2019 by the student newspaper at Dickinson College, a school with an enrollment just over 2,400.
It was written by a guest writer, and it's obviously making a point that conversation in classes Sure.
From the essay, quote, It feels incessant.
From classes and lectures to the news and politics, there's an endless line of white boys waiting to share their opinions on the state of feminism in America, whether the LGBTQ plus population finally has enough rights, the merits of capitalism, etc.
The list of what white boys think they're qualified to talk about is endless.
Something very few of them seem to understand is that their ill-informed, uncritical opinions do not constitute truth.
It's kind of funny, actually, because the essay itself explains why Owen being offended by this essay is nonsense.
Quote, The second thing most white boys seem not to understand is that they do not exist separate from the rest of the world.
You do not speak alone.
You speak with the weight of every other white man who has spoken over a woman, erased the contributions of queer people from history, or denigrated broken English as unintelligent.
You speak with the weight of policies and laws meant to forever define intelligence by how it measures up to the bros of America.
As is made clear in the final paragraph of this essay, this is about Black History Month and how the writer doesn't approve of overvaluing white opinions, particularly when it's to the exclusion of other, quote, buried or ignored voices.
Speaking as a white boy, I don't take any offense at this perspective.
The style of writing seems to me very intentionally to be confrontational because it's an opinion piece about how her perspective and voice were being relegated as being less important than others, so rhetorically it works for the writing to be kind of brusque.
It speaks volumes that Owen Schroer decided to spend time on the show complaining about this college newspaper opinion piece from over a year and a half ago because he wants to whine about how bad it is and it's tough to be white.
Because I don't know if people can understand what I'm saying half the time.
It's like, is it just in my head this makes sense, or is this translating on air?
If you're in the high school lunch room, and there's a guy going around stealing everybody's lunch money, everybody's like, where's all my lunch money going?
This is weird.
And then you're like, hey, Steve over there, Has been going around stealing everybody's lunch money.
I gotta pause it real quick because I didn't realize the first time I listened through this that he's imagining a scenario where this guy is stealthily stealing everyone's money as opposed to...
That analogy that Owen used is not great, but I think I get the point.
Owen understands that his position in life and his career is to be a stochastic terrorist and work really hard to inspire people to enact violence on his enemies, but he doesn't feel like he's wrong to do that because he's decided that his enemies deserve it, his imagined enemies.
That's not surprising to hear, and honestly, it's a theme that kind of runs underneath a lot of Infowars programming, but it's weird to hear Owen be so blunt about those feelings of wanting mob violence.
You guys stole everything, and I want everybody to solve this problem, and you deserve violence, so I think we all know how I want everyone to solve this problem.
And he may have even given them a day and just said, you know what?
I'm going to go away.
I'm going to be quiet for about 30 days.
And you guys can concede this election.
And you can stop lying to the American people.
And you can stop making deals with the Communist Chinese and stop working for the UN and the World Health Organization.
And let me be president.
Or you can continue to tick off the Americans.
You can continue to tick off the Republic.
And I'll unleash this beast.
I'll unleash this Kragan.
I'll let this line roar.
And you can deal with that instead.
Because that's where this is going.
Yeah, it's a million marchers in D.C. peacefully now.
Yeah, it's going to be thousands of people peacefully in Atlanta this weekend.
But let me tell you.
If you steal this election from us and you put in a UN communist corrupt criminal Joe Biden in the White House, it's not going to be a million peaceful marchers in D.C. No, no, no.
Trump's giving them one last shot, and of course they're not going to stop.
But see, just like they have to have that metaphysical comfort, just like they have to have that metaphysical comfort of you accepting the mask, you accepting the vaccine, You accepting the tyranny, you inviting the tyranny, that gives them the metaphysical comfort knowing they didn't force it on you.
You accepted it.
Trump, we have to have the same metaphysical comfort knowing that we gave you the last shot, too.
Hey, we gave you one last chance to stop it.
Stop with the enslavement of mankind.
Stop with the lies that you're telling mankind.
Stop all of it.
Stop the election theft.
You can stop it all right now.
The censorship, you're coming after all of us.
And they won't do it.
But they've been given the metaphysical opportunity now.
Owen is telling the audience that once Biden is president, that means the audience's enemies have turned down this imaginary last chance that Trump is offering them to give up their wicked ways.
It's going to be tough to eat your neighbor, but take comfort in the fact that they deserve it, because Trump gave them the last chance.
The second issue I have is with Owen's understanding of Alex's bizarre moral system.
Owen seems to think that it's about the globalists needing to feel comfortable that they gave you a choice, but that's not what Alex believes.
Alex believes there are literal cosmic laws that even the devil cannot break that involve you not being able to act counter to someone else's free will.
It's not that it's a comfort to know you didn't force people to do something.
It's a belief system that involves instant karma coming if you do.
He doesn't share it, and I don't think he actually understands what Alex is trying to convey, and so he just sort of botches it.
But he is doing an Alex impression, and apparently this is some piece of this mythology that's important enough that he feels like he needs to also include it.
And it's just, bleh.
So anyway, I was about ready to say fuck all this, but...
Owen, every time I think I'm out, he pulls me back.
They were lying to you the whole time, but in a different way than what you think.
They were lying differently than you.
Sometimes I wonder, what would happen if the Murdochs just one day were like, hey, we don't want everybody to be killed, so we're just going to announce.
Fox News has been lying to you this whole fucking time.
It was our idea.
We wanted to get you guys to do the bullshit that we wanted to.
But I think that Alex is really into this, too, and I think it's probably a really sound decision on his part in terms of where to take the rhetoric, where to take the narratives.
If you want to try and shift into some direction, going against the ineffective...
Turncoat Republicans or whatever is probably going to be your best bet.
And you saw exactly this model play out with Nick Fuentes when he started attacking Turning Point.
There was a lot of people who were like, let him fight.
Or there were a lot of people who were like, haha, look at this, isn't this funny?
And in the process, they passively or by amplifying and laughing at them making fun of Charlie Kirk, aided in...
Pushing and furthering Nick Fuentes' goals.
So I think that this is probably, if you're just trying to craft, like, what do we do next now that we know there's no chance this is going to work out, it's probably a sound thing to do.
Well, I mean, I would say going back to their terrible military strategy and then update it for us here, when your enemies are infighting, it is a bad idea to just let them...
Watch.
Or to just watch it.
That's when they're weakest.
That's when you destroy both of them.
You can't allow them to regroup after defeating their inner power struggle in order to become even worse.
And we saw that in 2009 onward with the Tea Party.
We are going to probably see that again unless...
And I don't know what you do.
I don't like to talk about crushing because I think that that's kind of...
I don't know, violent imagery, and I'm not super into that.
I don't know what you do to push back against this stuff, but I do agree with you, like, watching and laughing, like, ha-ha, they're destroying each other, is not good when one of the parties that is doing the destroying is far more extreme than...
And that's not to say, hey, we should defend the mainline GOP.
No, I mean, what we should do is what the right has always done successfully to the left and the center, which is exacerbate whatever differences they have and force them to destroy each other instead of just, the right never sits back and watches us fight.
But anyway, Alex says he's gonna take over the GOP, which is what he said years ago, and then he said he had, and then Trump did, and now I guess they're doing it again.
The institutional power the truckers had in the 70s from banding together and keeping those unions strong has disappeared, largely due to political influence of people who Nick and Alex would be largely in agreement with, at least as far as labor issues.
There is often big talk about truckers striking because it brings to mind a complete shutdown of food distribution and the myriad issues that come along with it.
But the sad reality is that these strikes don't really end up having any real impact because they can't.
If you're a trucker and you want to strike, are you going to get the Teamsters to strike to install Trump as president?
Do you really think that's going to work?
That's probably never going to happen, so if you're working in a union shop, that's not going to be a strike.
That's going to be you quitting.
If you're an independent trucker, or maybe you work for a smaller outfit that's theoretically on board with this strike, you probably can't afford to do it, because there's no protection for you.
You have no weight to throw around by withholding your labor, since whoever's hiring you can just hire somebody else.
If those tomatoes need to get to Kansas, and you're on strike to install your fantasy king...
Great, good for you.
You're fired, and this other truck is going to get paid to haul those tomatoes.
The only way this kind of strategy could work is, ironically, if the world was exactly how Alex and Nick don't want it to be.
If the truckers' union was strong and everyone in it could vote to stop work because they felt the election was stolen, it would be super fucked up, but they could make a pretty huge statement.
The political movement that Alex and Nick are a part of has actually ensured that this can never really happen.
Basically them being like, well, we would love unions if they agreed with us, and for some reason we can't get unions to agree that we should destroy unions, and I just don't get it.
During these sorts of periods, Alex ends up getting much more traffic, I think, a lot of the times, because people want to see him drunk and crying or something.
There's a lot of potential for something.
And he's said this a couple times in the last couple weeks, that traffic is way up, but no one's buying anything.
And that's sort of characteristic of either artificial traffic or people tuning in to be like...
The freedom streak of those of us that were pro-Trump, pro-America, we don't go away just if they steal this election from Trump.
And it's the fighting, the fraudulent election that puts us in position to absolutely now, if you thought Trump put a big dent in the New World Order, well, we're just getting started.
Trump gave them an ephemeral chance that they had no idea what was happening because he put it in a court filing where he said that demons were flying in from Stargates to shit on our shoes.
And I don't know if he actually believes this or he knows that Alex believes it, and therefore it's best to play into Alex's beliefs, but he's presenting himself as also fighting the literal devil.
And if the next season and the next project is destroying the GOP who won't bend to their extremist Tea Party will, then the two of them could have common cause and coexist.
It's just once Nick Fuentes in his larger project leaning towards Catholic fascism becomes more apparent.
That's where him and Alex might come to loggerheads, but that's a ways off.
Because people develop and people change over time.
And honestly, I think the most likely thing that's going to happen is that Alex and Nick will have some sort of an alliance and be able to work together attacking the GOP.
I have no confidence in the staying power of my organization, and I had to fire someone, whether it be The Nightly Show or Beloved David Knight, and hey, you know what?
I've learned long ago, or maybe I should have learned long ago and learned fairly recently, not to take anything at face value with Alex's financial talks.
So this may mean something.
It may just be a desperate ploy for money.
I don't know.
But if the nightly show is canceled for a week because Alex is in Georgia...