Venture capitalist David Sacks has a fascinating piece in Newsweek breaking down how an alliance between the "woke" cancel culture of Twitter and the neocons is careening us toward a totally unnecessary nuclear conflict with Russia. Also today: will Kanye West snatch up Parler to preserve it as a bastion of free speech? Are the cancellers on the ropes?
Watch the Liberty Report LIVE Every weekday at 12pm EST on Rumble!
https://rumble.com/RonPaulLibertyReport
Join us on Locals:
https://ronpaul.locals.com
We don't have to get any coats up, but we might not be able to go out in our pajamas.
Let's not.
But the problems remain, and I saw an article today that fascinated me because I talk a lot about coalitions.
Yeah.
And to me, there's two different things you can do.
You can get people to work together.
Sometimes they call bipartisanship isn't coalition building.
Bipartisanship is each side gives up something and they come together.
So they more or less sell out.
And, you know, a lot of people see some positive thing there because, you know, they can't get anything done unless they do something.
Well, in my case, most of the time I don't want them to get anything done.
But if they come together because they just happen to have, you know, the same beliefs from different spectrums of the political spectrum, I think that's good.
And there is one here.
It happens that this coalition, I don't like.
I just don't like what's going on here.
But I'm afraid it might be true because I've been trying, as you have supported, bringing people together from different factions.
We talk so much about progressives.
We are excited about, you know, Tulsi's announcement and emphasizing foreign policy, all of these things.
So this to me was exciting.
But this one is, here's the headline on that.
The neocons, we know who they are, and the woke left are joining hands and because they used to fight with each other.
But the neocons now are people that dropped out of the Republican Party because in spite of their hawkishness, they weren't hawkish enough and they didn't like Trump.
And leading us, they're claiming the neocons and woke, since they've joined over the militancy of our foreign policy and leading us to woke war, number three.
And people are talking about it, and I think it's exaggerated more than I happen to believe, but every day tomorrow, you know, the nukes are going to fly.
Let's hope it's not that bad.
But the philosophy is there, and it's part of this system to agitate, to prop up a government in Ukraine that is artificially created by us at the same time demonizing Russia when, as bad as they are, they are quite the enemy of people who start wars.
So this to me is interesting because especially under the circumstances that Tulsi, you know, picked this issue.
That was her big emphasis on the war issue.
So, and others are expressing themselves about it.
We do know that there's a couple candidates out there that are taking a stronger position than they have over the years.
So I guess what I'm doing is keeping my fingers crossed that we're seeing the signs of a significant movement.
But if we don't compete with this coalition and come up with a better coalition of people who are for peace, and that would be libertarian, constitutionalists, and also progressives, they should come together because they do agree, at least in the past, somewhere along the way.
But some of them get pushed around for purely political reasons or financial reasons because the military-industrial complex is pretty powerful.
But I think this is where we are, and let's try to take what we see here as an incentive to try to combat this type of coalitions.
Let's go ahead and put on that first clip if we can.
Take a look at that.
This is from Newsweek.
We can put that first one up.
And then, here we go.
And then, so this is David Sachs, venture capitalist, host of the all-in podcast.
He has this fascinating piece in Newsweek, Dr. Paul, that you talk about.
And he starts out by talking about Elon Musk.
And we've talked about this last week.
He got into some big trouble last week because he simply tweeted a peace plan for Russia and Ukraine.
And he was hammered.
Ukrainian, as you know, the Ukrainian ambassador to Germany told him to blank off.
And of course, then when Musk said, well, you know what, I've given you guys $100 million worth of free internet.
Maybe I will blank off and you won't get any of it.
And then that slipped out.
So he's talking about how there's this new coalition, as you point out, Dr. Paul, of the woke left, which dominates Twitter.
It's a Twitter swarm.
If you dare say anything, they will come at you with everything.
They'll get you banned.
They'll mass report you.
I know all about that.
They mass report you and you're gone.
They make stuff up and you're gone.
And how they have reached a kind of ideological agreement with the neocons who love war all the time.
And I would say, I mean, if you look at the history of neoconservatism, you will see that actually it's not that far from the woke left.
And Sachs points it out in this piece.
They both love cancel culture.
The neocons never wanted to debate, for example, in the run-up to the Iraq War.
They didn't want to debate it.
If you weren't with them, then you were with Saddam.
And they said that about you over and over, of course, in Congress.
If you're not with sending billions and billions to Zelensky, who not long ago everyone was saying was corrupt as heck, if you're not for that, well, you're with Putin.
You know, go straight to the city.
No, no, go ahead.
No, no, no.
Excuse me.
But this cancel culture, I think it points out what they really believe in.
They believe in cancel culture, and therefore they don't approach this from an either left or right principled position that war is not good.
And I think there were a few people, a couple of us I see, stood up at an AOC meeting, AOC.
You know, she got all that attention.
You know, and actually, you know, it's a healthy sign that she's losing a little bit of her steam.
But can you think of anybody getting as much positive coverage?
I mean, she was every place in big magazines.
You know, she could have been, you know, in a truly libertarian society, if one person out of 10,000 pops up and says, you know, I'm a communist, they'd probably just ignore them.
But they didn't ignore her.
But all of a sudden, it turns out that she is not such a consistent person in being anti-war.
And what we saw in that little briefing, the little press conference, a lot of anger.
And you just wonder, was it just this one person or two people that said, you know, you're a fraud?
Or are there others out there?
I would think there's more progressives out there.
And that's one thing that I hope Tulsi's able to keep moving on this and keep building this and drag back those progressives that have deserted the anti-war position.
And for those of you that have not seen this clip of AOC being confronted at a town hall, let's put on that first 27 seconds of that when we get that queued up.
Because she's having a town hall.
She's having a great old time in the Bronx, wherever she's from.
Then all of a sudden she's challenged from the left.
This is a great little clip.
Congresswoman, none of this matters unless there's a nuclear war, which you voted to send arms and weapons to Ukraine.
Tolkien gathered, she's left the Democratic Party because you're someone who are hungry, okay?
You originally voted, you ran as an outsider, yet you've been voting to start this war in Ukraine.
You're voting to start a thermal nuclear war with Russia and China.
Why are you playing with the lives of American citizens?
You're playing.
Why are you playing with the lives of Americans?
Why are you playing with our lives?
She did not know what to say when she was confronted.
And this goes on and on.
Another fellow stood up and said the same thing.
Yeah, you know, and this to me is healthy.
What bothers me at times, though, is they're exactly right.
You know, these wars are bad.
And there's a principled stand to be against the war, against the war.
But where we have a little bit of a problem with even a good progressive on the war issue, what about a war against the liberties of people in this country with welfarism, socialism, corporatism, and all the other things where, you know, what was their position, say, on passing out vaccines and things like that.
And so often the war issue is separated.
Remember how frustrated we'd get when we'd get a coalition that vote against, you know, sending troops, but if we could just put on sanctions of them, that's a war, you know, putting on sanctions and terrorists to try to punish people.
That is in a way a preliminary or actual war that could just morph into something violent.
And we see that all the time.
But I think that's the difference between authoritarians that come from a different position.
But the purpose is not to bash them because I want to make that point, only because they're right on this thing, going right on the war.
And I think you build your coalitions, and they know that too.
They've taken the neocons now, and the neocons have walked over there, and they are working with progressives because they like the war and they hate Russia.
But they really look at it narrowly in war, but they're corporatists.
Who benefits the most from these wars?
Where are they on the military-industrial complex?
I'm confused on exactly where they would be.
And that's the kind of questions they ought to be asked.
Yeah, absolutely.
Let's put on that next, not audio, but the regular, the next JPEG, because there's a couple things from Sachs' piece, and it's a great piece, really worth reading this article.
And it's a pleasant surprise that it's in Newsweek, because this is one of those articles that really hits the nail on the head, captures the zeitgeist.
So I couple this thing from here.
It says, what makes the I Stand with Ukraine version of the Twitter mob unique is that it brings together two forces that used to be sworn enemies of one another, the woke left and neoconservative right.
Slightly dispute that, but that's okay.
It turns out they share many of the same loathsome ideological and personality traits and have similar slash and burn approach to political engagement.
It's a new political marriage.
And let's do this next one, if you can.
I'm just going to continue reading.
A regional, this is skipping ahead a little bit, a regional war turned into the First World War because all parties made maximalist demands and assumed others were bluffing.
It can happen again, especially if the media, social media, and foreign policy elite join forces and use woke cancellation tactics to preclude any discussion of any alternatives.
Right now we are locked in an escalatory path and the destination ahead is Woke War III.
Very good point because he's making a point here.
And by the way, read the piece.
He's no fan of Putin whatsoever.
He cannot be called that.
He calls him unhinged.
He calls he's off the rails.
He's not a fan.
But what he's saying is, if we can't even discuss whether this really is in our interest, if you can't have any discussion or debate, then we are on a one-way path to oblivion.
And the one person that's upset about any of this, if there's a decrease in funds, which there isn't, is Alinsky.
Yeah.
I mean, what arrogance to come.
And the American people just seem to, oh, you know, when are they going to get upset?
They're a little upset compared to maybe when they were moving into Iraq, but not really upset because they feel so hopeless.
But maybe we need more candidates, though, that will stand up and state these positions.
And that's why we should encourage, you know, working together at the meantime, but eventually pointing out what the basic principle is and reject the war against the American citizens and the war against people overseas.
And I think the connecting thing there that should wake up the progressives would be the, you know, the thing that should have brought them together on the pharmaceuticals.
But I don't even think we had them with the pharmaceutical companies.
They were all for that.
And so they're corporatists, and corporatism leads too often to a combination of big government and big business.
And so they're not exactly—the progressive is with its spirit, I think.
But it seems like the two individuals that spoke up at AOC's conference, they have to sincerely believe that the war is very, very bad.
But that's only, I think they only get halfway there.
They have to see what else is going on because if you don't have the money, if you don't have a Congress, if you don't have a president, if you don't have professors teaching this rotten philosophy that it is our responsibility to police the world and all this stuff, it doesn't do much good.
But it's very dangerous.
Like I said earlier, that I just don't think that next week the nukes are going to fly.
But that's sure hope.
I'm wrong on that because that would be the end of too much that we know about.
Hopefully some good will come from this.
Challenging Vaccine Narratives00:03:53
That'll be our challenge.
Exactly.
Well, speaking from experience, I don't want to gloss over the fact that we had a wonderful coalition with the progressive left when Bush was in power, because as much as I thought that was the case, and to a degree it was, I found very quickly that when Obama was elected, the anti-war sentiment disintegrated.
All the people, not all, but most of the people that I was, when I was working with you on Capitol Hill, most of my counterparts in progressive offices didn't want to hear anything when Obama started bombing.
And we said, hey guys, can we have a press conference?
Let's speak out against this.
No, they weren't interested.
So unfortunately, not all, but many, many of them, politics really did trump the moral values that they purported to hold.
Hating was much easier and Trump made himself vulnerable than to stand up and understand clearly and figure out how to present the case for liberty and peace in order to get people enthusiastic about it.
So that's, you know, it's a delivery of a message challenge.
And matter of fact, I think that's probably one of the most important things we do.
You can have all kinds of philosophies.
But if you don't deliver the message right and you don't get people to want to open up their minds, that's why I was more excited with young people because I thought I could see that excitement with a younger generation once they hear the difference rather than being influenced only by their professors and the establishment and what the government says to go along with it.
Well, we certainly appreciate David Sachs.
We hope he takes a look at some of our work because it's a brilliant piece.
And as you know, Dr. Paul, that's one of the reasons we're holding this conference next month is we're talking about cancel culture.
It's really big in our society now.
So thanks, Mr. Sachs, for a great piece in Newsweek.
Let's move on a little bit, Dr. Paul, and this is going to go into the head scratcher category.
One of these things where we don't purport to know anything.
However, we note some interesting coincidences, perhaps.
Let's put on that next clip.
This gentleman, Doug Brignoli, was a former Mr. Universe, author of the Physics of Resistance Exercise, absolutely famous, famous bodybuilder.
And here's what he wrote on Twitter or on his Instagram in April 4th, 2021.
I have enough confidence in the vaccine based on my research to get it done.
Those of you who think the vaccine kills people can use me as a test.
If I die, you are right.
If I don't die and have no ill effects, you were wrong and should admit it at least.
Let's go ahead and put on that next clip.
Sadly, and as you said, Dr. Paul, tragically, bodybuilder and fitness author Doug Brignoli has passed away at 63 years old.
That was just a couple of days ago.
And let's put this next one on because we absolutely have to include this disclaimer.
He passed away at 63.
According to different social media platforms, the cause of death has not been revealed yet.
We do not know that it was related.
We only know what he claimed.
Yes, you know, this is a two-edged sword in a way, because let's say he turns out he had taken the shot, and five years later, he always was in perfect health, which a lot of them do.
A lot of people survive it, but a lot of people at the end of five years end up with the diseases that they have.
But even if he did get a positive result from his viewpoint, it's sort of encouraging, still a bad system because you don't have to have 100% of the people who took the shot to die to say, well, maybe it's not a good idea.
Just a percentage or two when they're passing out by the millions of people.
That's a lot of people that died from it.
Kanye's Wake-Up Call00:09:47
And then the unknowns.
And then when it happens, you can't glow.
You don't say, what you did, you should have taken the dumb shot.
So it's hard to win on this because that is the reason why I think our philosophy of personal decision-making, doctor-patient relationship, who assumes the risk.
One thing that as time goes on, and I've talked about this for a couple years, is they have to eliminate this ability for the drug companies to escape immunity, that they can't be sued for anything.
And that to me is criminal because if a system works, you have to have some guiding things that is within the market system.
But you can't have the bureaucrats.
Otherwise, you get Dr. Fauci.
And once an individual or a government or regulations becomes the law of the land, then everybody's affected.
If people say, no, I'm going on my own, I'm going to decide, make my own decision, and they get into trouble.
You know, it's sad, but only those people that make those decisions are responsible.
That is why authoritarianism and big government and corporatism is so evil because it neutralizes people.
And I just, I think this morning there was something on TV about it sort of a question like, if they got into trouble, how many of you would go to the government to get some help?
I think it was like 54%.
I said, well, at least it wasn't 100%.
But they've been conditioned.
How long have they been conditioned to do that?
Especially since the Great Depression of the 30s.
Well, you mentioned Fauci, and that's a great tee off to what I wanted to put up because I do think the rats are bending the sinking ship.
Even a well-paid rat like Fauci, just watch this next video clip, and I'll set it up.
He went on Cavuto talking about, and Cavuto asked him about, hey, you know, don't you think in retrospect these lockdowns were not such a great idea?
They seem to harm a lot of people.
He said, I'm never for the lockdowns, but soever who put this video together, put together that and then put together, and we'll only play a part of it of him actually saying the opposite.
It's just comical to watch.
But let's listen to some of this.
Do you regret, particularly, the last one, the shutdown, the sweeping shutdown that some said made things worse?
No, I don't, Neil.
And in fact, I think we need to make sure that your listeners understand, I didn't shut down anything.
I recommended to the president that we shut the country down.
And the only way to do that is by draconian means of essentially shutting down a country.
We know that we can do that if we shut down.
Well, I think one of the things you really need to do to the extent that you can shut down temporarily the country, I think, is important.
Well, if I knew at the time.
And then this goes on for a couple of minutes, clip after clip of him saying, shut it down, shut it down.
I mean, he's just brazen.
It's just amazing.
Yeah.
Doesn't phase them.
No.
Because truth is what they make it.
Once you get in that position, they become blinded to it.
I think they psychologically, you know, brainwash themselves because people can't be that nasty and live with it.
They have to get sick in their mind anyway.
But it's just horrible how that happens.
But it's generally, you know, he's the exaggeration.
He may, you know, it may, you know, I'm always looking for a thing favorable.
He may be a wake-up call for people.
Okay, he may be the symbol of government interference in medical care.
I think it is already.
Do you want Dr. Fauci telling you what to do?
And I think the evidence is so strong if we can get around the censors.
Because even though the information is getting out, a lot of people wouldn't dare touch those booster shots.
But it's still, they don't give up easily.
They just keep pursuing it and they're determined because so much is at stake.
Yeah, we probably saw the same thing.
I think there was only a 6% uptake on the boosters.
Now, nobody wants these shots.
I think we're going to end with a, I think it's a positive story.
I have to confess, I'm hopelessly out of touch with popular culture.
I honestly have never heard this singer.
Apparently he's very good because he's very rich.
But let's put this up because I do think it's a good news story in a broader sense.
Kanye West, who purchased, quote, uncancelable social media at Parlor.
Now, Parter took a lot of hits, if you remember, around January 6th, Dr. Paul, when they were accused of egging it on.
And of course, subsequent investigations showed that Facebook had far many pro-January 6th posts than Parter.
But nevertheless, they were ripped away from all of the platforms to be downloaded, and they basically were disappeared.
They haven't recovered.
But Kanye West, who now calls himself Ye, I think, he said, you know what, I'm going to purchase because I'm going to make sure that this is for free speech.
And here's a couple, let's do the next clip.
This is what he's talking about.
Parliament Technologies is the owner of Parter.
It says they entered into an agreement in principle to sell Parter to Yee, which is Kanye West, for an undisclosed amount.
The proposed acquisition will assure Parter a future role in creating an uncancelable ecosystem where all voices are welcome.
And I'm not going to go into the next one, but they were saying this is going to change the world.
It's going to change the way things we think about this.
Now, I know that Kanye West is controversial.
He says things that are controversial that we may not agree with.
But in some ways, sort of like Elon Musk, that kind of makes him the right kind of guy, you know, I think, to own something like this.
You know, I think some questions will come up.
There's one question that I hear about, and that is, does that mean people would put it in?
You have to put it up?
What about horrible pornography and, you know, a real effort to overthrow the government?
This sort of thing.
So there would be limits.
But if you don't have a monitoring device from the government, how do you do it?
Well, you do it through contracts.
You do it through contracts, sign something.
And, you know, there was an implied contract with YouTube and these different places because they would tell us stuff over the phone and we wouldn't do that.
And yet, that is, but the contract can do that.
You know, if you have a newspaper and you're pretty good at reporting the news and pretty good at having editorials, they're not required to put up garbage.
You know, that sort of thing.
So anyway, if people worry about that, I don't think they should.
If you have a free market and a contractual arrangement available, you can solve most of those problems.
And it does make you wonder if the sort of woke movement is reaching its high watermark.
Because to me, this seems like a reaction.
Now, Musk's interest in Twitter, for what he claims, free speech purposes.
Kanye West wants to turn Parter into a free speech platform.
All of a sudden, it feels to me a little bit, and I hate being optimistic because by nature I'm not.
It feels like the tide is turning a little bit in our direction.
People are realizing that if you run around canceling each other, pretty soon you look around and there's no one there, right?
It's just you.
Well, I think people live with it, and then it gets bad to the point where they just throw up their hands and no more.
And I think when political correctness came out, that was a soft form of what they were doing.
They would just ridicule you and different things.
And I think in a way that is what brought Trump to the attention.
He was not smooth.
His delivery was a little bit different than what I would do.
But it was there and he could do it.
And I think the people loved it.
You know, this political correctness.
And now this multi-genderism, I think they're finally getting sick of that.
That makes me ill because they've crossed the line as far as I'm concerned.
Because when children end up getting surgeries with no parental permission and butchering these kids, and this stories are so sad that that is a real abuse.
That to me is a crime.
Absolutely.
Well, I'm going to close it out, Dr. Paul.
Thanks to our live viewers.
I'm watching your chat right now, so behave yourselves.
And go ahead and give us a rumble.
Give us a rumble rant.
We appreciate those that have donated on Rumble Rants.
That's a nice thing.
If I had one right now, I'd read it, but I don't see one.
So step up.
Just kidding.
But thanks for your support.
And cancel culture.
Click on that last clip, please, reminding you.
You should know this already.
November 5th, Lake Jackson, Texas.
We're going to have a great little panel, breakfast panel.
It'll go up till about 1, so from about 9 till 1, short conference on cancel culture and the war on speech.
This is the issue of the time.
Dr. Paul, as you say, without the First Amendment, none of the other ones make any sense.
Very good.
I'm going to close with one more little item here because I think the headlines are so important.
And this one seems pretty benign.
Ukraine's Drone Debacle00:02:11
It says, Ukraine spends $5 million to shoot down a $25,000 drone, making the point of the insanity of all.
But the only thing I would correct on this, Daniel, is what I would say, who's spending this money?
Why don't we say United States taxpayers spend this money in order to protect against the weaponry that we probably paid for someplace else?
And what would we do?
How many billions of dollars of weapons did we leave in Afghanistan?
You know, the whole thing is totally absurd.
That's why, you know, either you're involved in interventionism and policing the world and running an empire and have license to steal by printing money, or you don't.
And eventually the one side fails, and that is excessive debt usually comes to an end and the silliness and this foolish policies.
And great nations have generally always failed by inflationary pressures.
Print the money if you need it and also overextend the country overseas.
Well, do you think we're getting close to that?
I think we're there.
And I think sudden changes in all the markets are going to be rather sudden.
And the other day we saw a day when the market was up 500, down 1,000, up 1,000, all in one day.
That's not much stability.
And people are getting confused about what's happening because what we have rejected is a definition of the unit of account.
And whether it's a unit of account for money or the unit of responsibility by the politicians not to lie to us and not to allow the people to come in and say, well, that's it.
Even the former CIA just says, well, that's what we're supposed to do.
And then giggle.
That's what they taught us at school.
How to lie, cheat, and steal.
What do you think we were in there for?
The CIA.
So that was a big joke, yeah.
But unfortunately, it was pretty true.
But I do want to express my appreciation for all of you to tune in to the Liberty Report.