All Episodes
Previous Next
April 8, 2024 - Stay Free - Russel Brand
01:01:30
“No One Is Coming To SAVE US!” Steve Bannon On How The Next Revolution Will Happen - Stay Free #340
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
you you
brought to you by Pfizer in this video you're going to see the future
Oh In this video, you're going to see the future.
Hello there, you Awakening Wonders.
Thanks for joining me today for a very special episode of Stay Free with Russell Brand.
One man stands astride the political landscape like a colossus.
It's Donald Trump.
But who was the power behind that man?
Whose ideas, whose understanding of populism and power and global trends led Trump to the White House?
Many would argue it's Steve Bannon, a man that's had a presidential pardon and hasn't given yet.
A presidential F-U-C-K.
This is a fantastic conversation.
This is the reason we're on this channel, to explore new alliances that will bring down the establishment.
The minute you have people from across the spectrum unifying, it'll be like sort of the opposite of Ghostbusters when they cross the streams.
Remember, we got incredible merch available for you and every single penny we raise goes towards helping vulnerable people, drug addicts, the mentally ill, the The people that are crushed by a system that sees humanity simply as fuel.
Become an Awakened Wonder.
You get to join us live for these videos as well as meditating weekly, being part of our book club where we look this week at Christianity, mere Christianity to be particular, the brilliant writing of C.S.
Lewis, as well as giving you an exclusive video every single week.
Now Bannon, Steve Bannon is an American media executive.
He was involved in the sale of Castle Rock.
He's a political strategist.
You know what he done for Trump.
He worked for Goldman Sachs, for God's sake.
He was the White House's chief strategist for the first seven months of Trump's administration.
You can watch Steve Bannon on Bannon's War Room on Rumble.
But first, you've got to watch our conversation with Steve Bannon.
If you're watching us on YouTube, Steve Bannon, as you know, is a very, very controversial figure.
Extremely controversial.
So about the first 10 minutes or so, we'll be on YouTube.
After that, we're gonna have to be in that sweet stream of Freedom Rumble.
You are gonna hear things you don't agree with.
You're gonna hear things that inspire you.
You'll probably hear things that terrify you.
But you will be armed with some facts, and you will determine for yourself what you believe and what you don't believe.
Or, you'll yield to an establishment that wants to censor you, control you, and shut you down, that abandoned you in 2008, and wants to use fear to keep you compliant.
So let's find out what we can learn together with Steve Bannon right now.
Steve Bannon, thank you so much for joining me for Stay Free with Russell Brand today.
Thanks for having me, Russell.
Big fan of the show.
Thank you.
I'm fascinated by you as an individual, and I'm astonished by how your early life gives us insight into what would come to pass.
I'm talking about your time as a serviceman in the Navy, your time in finance, your time at Breitbart, and how that led into permutations of independent media.
In a way, we're living amidst perpetual geopolitical crisis, escalating events in the Middle East, a war that would seem to be unwinnable, funded as it is by your nation, between Ukraine and Russia.
We live in the aftermath of a financial crash that perhaps you understood better than most people, its implications, its impact, how it spelled the end of the kind of moderate neoliberalist politics that preceded it.
And gave birth to the populist era that we live within now.
Your experiences, too, in Hollywood, I imagine, give you an interesting perspective on the nature and power of culture.
Soft power, as it's commonly referred to now.
And at Breitbart, you established, among others, Yanis, young Yanis.
What's the dude's name, Yanis?
Yeah, he was unbelievable.
And of course, Ben Shapiro.
For a while, for a while.
He was pretty extraordinary.
And then in our country, PJW.
Commonly, these figures are understood as right-wing pundits.
So now that many of us believe that we're on the precipice of a Black Swan event, will you tell me, Steve, where you think populism is heading?
If you think the left-right... I heard you once say at the Oxford Union that the future would belong to populism.
Do you still believe that there's a chance of either left-wing or right-wing populism?
Or do you feel that a different ideology is about to assert itself?
And over the course of our conversation, I hope to get into all of those areas of which you have personal professional experience.
I would say that if you go back and look at the Oxford Union speech, that was a pretty good call.
Probably because today is several years later, and it's right-wing populism and left-wing populism.
I think the reason is that the oligarchs that particularly control the West, Have been so over the top in their greed, in their incompetence, their greed and their incompetence that people are rising up all over.
You see that whether it's the collapse of the Tory party in England, the rise of alternatives
for Deutschland in Germany, the rise of the right in Latin America, Central America, and
obviously the Trump movement in the United States.
So I think it's a combination of their greed and their incompetence.
The elites have failed us and they failed themselves and it's a populist takeover and
it's going to be determined whether it be right-wing populism or left-wing populism.
Yes, it is.
And there yet remains a further alternative.
I've heard you use the phrase techno-feudalism, and I think that's what many people, wherever they find themselves culturally or politically, fear, is that we're being guided, manipulated, maneuvered, in fact, into a new form of globalism where technological power is utilized to control consciousness, our understanding of the public sphere, To manipulate consent and communication.
Can you tell me what you mean by techno-feudalism, how it relates to globalism, and who sits at the top of that baronial class in this model of feudalism?
Well, if you go back even to the Oxford speech, I tell, I'm kind of calling out Younger people who have had a tendency just to vote for progressive neoliberalism, right, and will be led by the cultural side, that you're nothing but Russian serfs.
You're the equivalent of Russian serfs.
You don't own anything, and you're not going to own anything.
The triad that controls The deal is really what I call the easy money overlords of Wall Street or the City of London or Frankfurt or, you know, Tokyo, Shanghai, but particularly the City of London and Wall Street.
Then you have the corporatists, both the American corporatists, but also the multinational corporatists.
And on top of that, you've got what I call the sociopathic tech overlords.
And right now we basically have passed, I think, late-stage capitalism.
What I would call finance capitalism.
I think you saw that that was kind of the collapse in 2008.
And you've seen the rise since then of what I call techno feudalism, which is now we're basically going back to almost the Middle Ages in a feudal society where you're a digital serf, right?
You're essentially not going to own your own content.
You don't own your own digital self.
You're going to kind of labor away and as long as you don't come off of the being an indentured servant or being a serf you can get along but once you stray outside this and you saw a perfect example and I think was one of your great awakenings was during the the pandemic of what you saw about what public health officials did and kind of the combination of big tech working with with big government and of course the biopharmaceutical industrial complex that was a perfect example of techno-feudalism and unless we Start to break this by a democratic means that means the ballot box and people getting very focused on After you have victories of how you start to take apart these apparatuses Then I think this world is really headed to a new dark age.
You're right, Jimmy To the degree, Steve, that the pandemic period elicited and stirred in me, as well as obviously millions of people, a kind of awakening.
Prior to that, I'd always been anti-establishment and had assumed that the position of the left was also anti-establishment, that the left was about free speech, the left was about opposing corruption and power, that the left was about opposing war and empowering Ordinary individuals, wherever we're from, Britain, France, your country, any of the African nations, to stand up and oppose tyranny, globalism, elitism.
Clearly what's changed in the last few years, and I can't help but consider you to be a significant architect in this transition, is what you refer to as economic nativism has become the default position of the working class or blue-collar populations In America, when you talk of economic nativism, Steve, is that at odds with where I've elsewhere heard you talk about Catholicism, Christianity, subsidiarity, and ideas that are plainly, literally, both in terms of their nomenclature, but plainly their ideology, derived from spiritual ideas?
How do these two opposing ideas sit together?
Economic nativism, which, as the name would suggest, is about economics and the idea that there is something we are aspiring to, that we are people of spirit, that there are values that transcend materialism and materialism in all its forms.
There are the restrictions that rationalism necessitates.
I can see your answers ready, Steve.
I'm watching your body language.
But I'm just gonna keep talking!
So tell me, ultimately, aren't you saying, let the market sort shit out, I don't really care about the Christianity, or are there real ideals behind this?
Now, before we leave YouTube, I want to let you know that if you were on Awake and Wonder, you could have seen this conversation a week earlier.
It's been up on Locals for a week now.
We also do meditations, and a book club, and exclusive videos.
We are building a movement.
A movement that is very powerful.
So, if you watch us on YouTube, click the link in the description, get over to Rumble, join us there.
No, I think, look, we're in a spiritual war, and I'm a Catholic, you know, a Roman Catholic, Irish Catholic, and I'm, you know, as I try to be as close to my faith as possible, but obviously we're all imperfect instruments, I do believe in a form of that the United States is the New Jerusalem, and the United States is particularly endowed with a relationship To divine providence.
I think we've had a very providential history.
The economic nativism or nationalism is that I believe that strongly, though, still the best system we have is the Westphalian system.
The nation state was, as you know, was created a couple of hundred years ago and that sets it out into national units and is still.
Until we come up with something different, it's still the best way for the working class and the middle class to have a shot at what I call subsidiarity through a grassroots effort trying to control, to the best of their ability, that national entity.
Nationalism is for the political leaders and the economic leaders to put the well-being of the citizen First, whatever that nation is to put their economic well-being first and so be economic nationalism.
You would put forward a program of either terrorists or bringing manufacturing jobs back a little bit of this.
We saw in Brexit.
It was very imperfect.
And I think the way Boris Johnson and the Tories implemented.
It was very imperfect.
But you've seen this with the Trump program to try to confront China, but most importantly, confront China's financiers, which are in the United States, private equity firms, hedge funds, Wall Street, to force them to a series of tariffs and economic confrontations to start to bring manufacturing jobs, particularly high value added manufacturing jobs back to the United States.
So I would say Economic nationalism is in the material realm, and of course, Christian nationalism or these more spiritual yearnings are in the spiritual realm.
And I do think we're in a spiritual war.
I think at the end of the day, this is a spiritual war between the forces of light and the forces of darkness.
Well, I think both sides of this war, if I can be reductive for a moment, consider it to be a spiritual or at least an ideological war.
And in the final analysis, they are perhaps synonyms, being both immaterial and difficult to ultimately define other than their immateriality and ineffable nature.
But what I would say when we're talking about a struggle between light and darkness is I wonder what vision we are presenting people with.
If we say that the nation-state is for now the final word, how are we to acknowledge and then eventually overcome how these nation-state models have plainly become corrupted?
The nation-state is now plainly subsidiary to agencies, whether it's militaristically like NATO, economically like the IMF or the World Bank or organisations that I'm probably not well enough educated and I certainly haven't ever advised a president or guided someone to high office, so I guess you know how this stuff really works.
How are we to continue to maintain that aspect of what is plainly a corrupt institutionalized and hijacked system that has led us to this techno-feudalism?
Why and why would we maintain that when plainly your principles of subsidiarity rely on the smallest units of power possible?
That we should have the maximum individual sovereignty, the maximum amount of community democracy?
If you go back to Edmund Burke, the English conservative philosopher, talked about the small divisions, the small platoons of civic society.
Those people that run the sports teams, build the churches, have the civic organizations, whether that's in Tolkien's little village, the Shire.
Or whether it's in the small-town America with the town halls.
That is the basics.
That's the building block of a free people in a nation-state setting.
What you talk about is as you aggregate it up.
Remember, nation-states in and of themselves can't really exist by themselves.
They have to be in some sort of union or some sort of participation with other nation-states.
This is one of the things we get smeared with all the time.
We are far From isolationists.
We're not isolationists, really, in our national security policy, and we're certainly not isolationists in economic policies.
You do that through a series of trade deals and commercial relationships that put your national, that put the citizens of your country first.
That's one of the problems of the United States.
We've entered into all these trade arrangements, all these security arrangements, where the citizen, the little guy, had the burden on his shoulder of the taxes and his pension funds going to fund this on trade deals that didn't work for them, and also having a military made up primarily of the working class and lower middle class that was deployed throughout the world to be the world's policeman.
Just if I could just be specific for a second, if you look at the Basically the world map you take Western Europe let's take the Middle East and particularly around the Gulf the Gulf Emirates you then go around the map to the to the South China Sea and around that area and then up to North you know Northwest or the Pacific or near Japan and Korea those four nodes on the Eurasian landmass if you think about the United States has
Commercial relationships, cultural relationships, trade deals, economic deals, and all of those, okay?
Those are also whether we have NATO or in the Middle East with our forces with CENTCOM, the South China Sea and Taiwan, and then up as a protector of the Korean Peninsula and still Japan with forces still in Japan.
If you look at all the commercial and all the trade deals and then layer on top of it an American security guarantee in back of it, whether that's NATO or troops in the Middle East, That is what's been unfair to the American people.
The reason we've been bled out for the last 40 or 50 years is that those trade deals and the commercial relationships were all one-sided, all lopsided.
By the way, they benefited our 1%.
They're the ones, it's their architecture that created this post-war.
It's called the post-war international rules-based order, and it's kind of become a fetish.
For the wealthy and the connected, they have benefited from that.
But the whole burden of that, whether it's the manufacturing out of balance in the trade deals or the commercial deals, are upside down.
The Americans have also funded both through their tax dollars and our $1 trillion defense bill, and more importantly, their sons and daughters.
Their sons and daughters are the ones that We're on patrol in the Hindu Kush in Afghanistan.
They're the ones in the carrier battle group in the Red Sea right now.
They're the troops, or they're the sailors in the South China Sea.
We're also, you know, we have the 101st Airborne, a whole brigade in Romania right on the border to Ukraine, and probably, in all likelihood, many special force operators already in Ukraine.
So it's that architecture in the post-war Order that has really led to the managed decline of the United States.
And this is this is what has driven along with the financial crisis in 2008, a populist uprising.
And that's why because it hasn't been solved today.
In fact, I would argue it's actually getting worse.
This is why you see with Trump being kicked to the curb after January of.
January 6 of 2021 and sent to Mar-a-Lago is essentially in exile, a ruler in exile, never to return.
He's come back with actually more power in a more powerful and broader movement that now has African American males, now has Hispanic, the Hispanics almost 50%, Asians at 32%.
We're building our coalition every day because people can see that the model that exists in the United States, its economic and governing model, no longer works.
And that's why I think you're seeing populism in Europe and particularly right-wing populism is on the rise.
That this right-wing, anti-populist movement would have to become universally and fundamentally anti-war, except in matters where responding to an aggressor.
Should this sort of nativism, this Westphalian nativism, whether it's your country or mine, be coupled with, if indeed strong borders and migration is, you know, and strong migration rules and regulations is to be part of it, Does it similarly have to be anti-war in order to limit the amount of disruption and migration caused by, in particular, globalist intervention in some of the countries you've listed there, and the more insidious corruption and destabilization that happens through commercial relationships, primarily because of countries or companies, call them what you will, like Apple and their involvement in various nations, their financial relationship with China,
They're mineral requirements in Congo.
Is it?
Would you say that if it is a movement that's actually truly about Helping ordinary working people rather than getting the popular support of ordinary working people.
We would have to say that we are anti-war, including the war in Gaza.
We are anti the conflict between Ukraine and Russia.
We wouldn't fund it anymore.
We'd stop provoking China and that an anti-migration policy would have to be coupled with a non-interventionist policy.
Would you consider that to be reductive, Steve?
That's the end, actually.
No, I think it's okay.
So I think, one, I think we're anti-interventionists and anti-war to the degree that what's amazing about our populist movement, it's principally made up of veterans, of parents of veterans, of sons and daughters of veterans, and many active-duty military.
Remember, we look at the world, America first looks at the world as that our two biggest allies are the Russian people, And the Chinese people, Lao Bajing, old hunter names.
Because in World War II, we see the war against the fascists and really this was a war against corporate interest.
Remember the economic structure of both Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
Creed war is almost virtually the structure, industrial structure of it at post-war.
Almost none of the corporate leaders that supported the fascists and made money off the fascists, both in Imperial Japan and in Italy and in Germany, there were no tribunals for them.
They were almost virtually intact and had their same ownership.
The people that were, and most of NATO, and I'm a big supporter of NATO as long as it's an alliance.
Right now, as I go back around, The Eurasian landmass, like we did a minute ago, but the post-war international rules-based order, it makes all those areas of the world protectorates of the United States, not allies.
Protectorates.
We would fall into the same trap the British fell into.
And I look very much to British history and the British Empire as something, I have tremendous admiration for the British, but I don't want to make the same mistakes the British made, right?
And I see the United States, which is, remember, Our revolutionary generation was an anti-imperial power at exactly that moment that in India and the North America, because they had Canada, were about to build the greatest empire on earth, and they still did, but our revolutionary generation backed off.
They said, we don't want to be a part of something, no matter how much it grows, how fast it grows, that has a worthless landed aristocracy that calls the shots along with monopolistic power like Crown Charter is given to the East India Company.
We're totally monopolistic.
So you're seeing now our movement is not isolationist, and we're not essentially anti-war.
We're anti-intervention and anti-unnecessary wars.
The only wars I think that we would support would be wars of national defense.
And I think, and my point is, if you have a strong enough defense and strong allies, you don't show the weakness that leads to war.
And right now this is my problem with Ukraine.
I think that has been instigated By the EU, I think it's been instigated by NATO, I think it's been instigated by the ruling class in the United States, who never put their children in harm's way, ever, and always depend upon American taxpayers and the pension funds of the American working class to finance this.
So, this is, I think, and my argument is, most of the elites of Europe Except for the British, right, who were essentially fighting for their empire.
Their freedom, obviously, on their own, but their empire.
A handful of people in France and in Poland and a couple other places.
Essentially, the elites of Europe that are the elites of NATO were essentially either neutral, which meant you were for Hitler, or you were for Hitler and the fascists.
Our allies, they lost 65 million people.
We're the Russian people.
Now, we abandoned them at the last stages of the war.
We over, we over-armed Stalin, and there's questions inside the U.S.
government at the time of who was actually pro-Stalin or really pro-America.
We also turned over China to Mao Zedong in 1949, so we abandoned the Russian people, and we abandoned Lao Bajing.
The Chinese people at the end of World War II had sacrificed so much to bleed out the Imperial Japanese Army and destroy the Wehrmacht.
And then in 1989, 50 years later, within six months of each other, which nobody talks about, we had Tiananmen Square, which actually had an uprising against the Chinese Communist Party, and they were on the ropes, and you had to follow the Berlin Wall.
Between June of 1989 and November of 1989, the entire system collapsed again.
And what happened?
The Bush regime, the Bush junta in the United States, Flew over and told Deng Xiaoping, we'll make a deal with you, ease up a bit because of economic relationships, and we'll get you in the World Trade Organization, and we'll get you with the Clintons, we'll get you most favored nation, we'll have a business relationship, and we don't care if you enslave Lao Beijing, we'll have your back.
And the same thing essentially in Russia.
What happened is the West, as predators, tried to go in and essentially steal assets from the Russian people.
And when it got a little too crazy, we essentially turned it back over to the KGB.
And that's where Putin's gangsters were essentially empowered by the West because of our craven nature, what we did to Russia.
So the two biggest allies we've ever had, the Russian people and the Chinese people, we've abandoned twice.
And my point today is, why would we be at war with those two people?
Those people are allies.
They're yearning for freedom.
And right now, and this is why I'm the only civilian in American history that's ever been fully sanctioned by the Chinese Communist Party.
I'm the leader of the anti-Chinese Communist Party movement in the United States to support Lao-Beijing and to take down the CCP.
The enemies of this world are the mullahs in Persia, the Chinese Communist Party, and I think the KGB in Moscow, which has caused a lot of problems and who are not good guys.
Although I fought principally in Ukraine, the West, We're trying to drive this and that's the reason, I think the reason is the West, particularly the elites in the West, hatred of basic Russian culture in society.
I can see that you have to simultaneously contain a good deal of information in your mind when dealing with matters as complex and as current as this with such ...intertwined and baffling contradictory and often falsely rendered histories.
One of the details that I hold on to, Steve, is I know that your background is a blue-collar American background and the principle that I'm guided by personally are spiritual principles of individual sovereignty and community values and when you touched upon The small town communities of America or the small town communities of the United Kingdom and the maximum amount of power for ordinary Americans or ordinary Brits and the ability to control the direction of our nations to have the maximal impact when it comes to whether or not there should be intervention given that it's the sons and daughters of these communities that are sent overseas and coming back in the bags.
I would say that we have to, my feeling and my fear is that what And indeed the attacks of what you might call the metropolitan elites and the professional media class and the legacy media is that this type of rhetoric masks just a power struggle to capture the support of ordinary Americans in order to ensure that the elite that continues to benefit from their compliance is a different elite rather than a non-elitist system entirely.
But hang on, let me take that for a second.
It's a great question.
And I want to compare and contrast what's happened in the United States over the last couple of years to England.
In the United States, we just overthrew, we've taken down in the last three months, four months, the Speaker of the House, a moderate, you know, Uniparty Speaker of the House, Kevin McCarthy, first time in the history of this Republic, 250 years of the Republic, taken out a sitting Speaker.
We took out Mitch McConnell, Right.
He failed on the Ukraine situation.
He's now retired, although he's still sticking around.
He's officially out as the as the head of the of the Republican Party in the Senate.
And we just took out the entire head of the RNC, the Republican National Committee, which would be your equivalent of the Tory party.
We took all this out through a grassroots movement that is called the Precinct Strategy
and also going to school boards.
This is where people using subsidiarity have gotten engaged over the last three or four
years since really, because Trump's first term and our first campaign, it was build
the wall, you know, lock her up.
You know, we had slogans and we had directional feelings, but not really policy to back it
And quite frankly, not a total engagement in people in their own salvation.
The thing that's changed is now you've seen an act of what I call your use of your agency.
You're seeing an empowerment of people through social media to understand that they can connect to each other, build networks with each other through social media and start to take over the local precincts in the Republican Party, their town councils, their school boards.
And that's where change is going to come.
So when you've seen these things take place over the last course, remember President Trump, God blessing, didn't support us on McCarthy really at all.
He kind of had McCarthy's back, right?
Because McCarthy would say, you know, President Trump, I'm going to make it all right.
That was an overthrow of a populist movement.
And the lesson for the world is that we had We had very little to start with.
We only had a handful of people, but we were relentless in using every piece of leverage we could to throw him out.
The same with Ron McDaniel at the RNC and Mitch McConnell.
This is now a populist movement that every day gets bigger, and President Trump realizes this will be his legacy.
It's not simply his presidency, but the movement he's built around that will be greater than Trump and will be bigger and more powerful even after Trump finishes his second term in the White House.
He's built a movement where people can see, I don't have to sit on the sofa and just take him, I just don't have to yell at the TV watching Fox.
I can be actively engaged and I can be a hoplite or a centurion in this army that we're building to take over the country.
The difference is, and this is what I think the great tragedy of Brexit and what's happened before then.
The Tory party never embraced the return of the sovereignty to the United Kingdom.
They saw it, and I saw this when Theresa May and the team and Boris Johnson came to the White House in the first couple months.
They always saw it as a problem to be dealt with instead of an opportunity to be seized.
And this is why I think you're seeing with Nigel Farage and the Reform Party, you're finally, I think, beginning to see an alternative to the Tories that's populist-based.
And I think over the next two years, you're going to see a real flood the zone with people in the United Kingdom and token shires.
The shires are going to rise up and say, hey, as Englishmen, you know, about our own freedoms, our own rights as Englishmen, we're going to stand up.
And I think you're going to see the Tory party thrown out.
And I think that new foreign populist party will be what takes on labor.
And I think a lot of people in labor, just like it was the people in labor in the Midlands that gave us Winston Churchill that had his back against the royal family and the elites in England that all want to cut a deal with Hitler.
And also had the backs of Nigel Farage and those guys during the Brexit.
That same working class who, by the way, in the last election went Tory also.
I think they're looking not for what I call Singapore on the Thames.
They're looking for a real rejuvenation and rebirth.
of England as a manufacturing center and advanced fourth-generation manufacturing, high-tech jobs.
I think you're going to see that as the United Kingdom, and particularly the British, start to grip with what populism is.
And populism, at the end of the day, is fully using your agency, your agency, to affect change.
That we certainly agree on and there's been a massive uprising in this country and across the world among farmers.
A global farming movement as people, farmers obviously, seek to keep control of an industry and way of life that seems to be, like many things, becoming co-opted, politicised, centralised and controlled in ways that are astonishing and extraordinary and normally masked behind the language of good intention, environmentalism And the condemnation of farmers as racist is being practiced right now in Germany, the Netherlands, Sri Lanka, your country, I reckon, and certainly in ours.
One of the other things I'd like to comment on is that our Labour Party, as I'm sure you're aware, being as educated and informed as you are, is now essentially another globalist, neoliberal outfit led by a globalist in the form of Keir Starmer.
Now, I reckon you're right when you're talking about the potential of right-wing populism to rise in this country.
But we are seeing, indeed, Steve, I should tell you, somewhat undergirded by anti-war sentiment, a rise of figures way, way to the left of the Labour Party, which isn't hard.
Comparable to what we saw in 2017 around the rise of Jeremy Corbyn, who's, you know, I know you know, but for our listeners and viewers, a kind of, say, Bernie Sanders, but less corporatist, less financially strong, more idealistic.
There's, for example, and you may not have heard of him, a politician called George Galloway, who's just been elected in the north of our country, who I would describe as a populist.
He don't like the term leftist anymore.
He's planning to stand enough candidates to cause a dent in the presumed majority of Keir Starmer's Labour.
I wonder what you think When figures from the left that are populist are gaining traction, presumably in the case of Rochdale, among the Muslim community.
I wonder what you think, Steve, about the necessity for cultural differences to be respected within these nativist projects.
For when we say things like American communities and British towns, that's not coded to mean, oh, we don't like people that have got different outfits on.
That it's about working people, respecting, loving one another, respecting native or Christian culture, as well as the other cultures that live alongside them.
But perhaps more tactically and importantly, I wonder if you consider that if you're in a war against the globalist establishment, peripheral forces that transcend the former lexicon of left and right, are going to have to be formed. There's people in my
country like Andrew Bridgen who come out hard on the vaccine issue and has been kicked out of the Tory
party. You've mentioned Nigel Farage and not to populate this nebulous question with further matter,
but when you see the rise of Bobby Kennedy in your country, do you not feel that there is room
for truly independent movement outside of the Union party, whether much of their culture
and heritage appears to be derived from the left or right, as long as it is genuinely about
ordinary people from those countries?
Look, George Galloway, I happen to know him and I met him, I think it was in Kazakhstan years ago when we were at a conference together speaking.
He's a very, not just bright guy, I think he's one of the best orators out there.
And so he's going to give a real voice to this.
The one thing I think the difference in right-wing and left-wing populism, I think for populism like Bernie Sanders, we often have the same Directional approach to the elite and particularly the taxation of the elite how much they should own as far as assets go Etc.
I think we differ in that we don't believe in more state ownership We think there's a problem with state ownership of entities one of the problems I think we have with the with the arms industry today in the biopharmaceutical industry they're almost nationalized industry you've had a Elite merger in that regard, not just elite capture.
You have these quasi-state institutions.
That's why biopharmaceutical industry is so powerful in the United States and particularly powerful with the progressive left because it underwrites it.
It's the reason the defense industry is so all-powerful in our country.
It's the reason we have a trillion-dollar Defense budget that we should never have.
One trillion dollars just from one country we should never have.
The one thing I do think differentiates the left and the right, and I think the reason the populace left has a tough time getting traction here in the United States, is this topic of immigration or migration or what we call here in the United States an invasion of 10 million illegal alien invaders.
Bernie Sanders and the populace, even as short as a decade ago,
were more fervent than the Bush administration and the Country Club Republicans
about keeping out migrants or economic migration because it drove down wages.
The one thing that's happening today in the United States is the head of the Federal Reserve and the Biden regime
are very open about why they want so many migrants into the country, so many, we call them illegal alien invaders
is to drive down the wages of working class African-Americans and Hispanics.
That was their theory of the case to bring down inflation.
And now, if you look at our budgets and all these massive deficits,
they have baked in 10 million illegal alien invaders into the permanent economic model of the United States
because they understand that these will drive down wages and the more government assistance they get,
even with the small wages, they spend almost every penny of it.
And as you know, somebody is very focused on health and great food.
These folks, unfortunately, are the ones that buy the Cheetos and buy the Oreos.
And they see that the corporatist elite see that as a benefit.
They've baked it into our gross national product that there's $7 trillion of economic benefit in our latest CBO report.
Right to the illegal alien invaders.
So they make it so that it's almost hard to take it out of the system.
And the only people that get hurt are the people farthest down the chain.
This is why your audience should understand.
Why do we have so many black men today that are looking to even give Trump a chance?
And I'm saying not vote for Biden, but even give Trump a chance or Hispanic men.
It's just not the assault on the family or the assault on the male.
It gets back to economics.
They understand that they're now Forced to compete with the entire world that we let in through this border, and they're revolting against that.
I think this is why you're seeing the Democrats are so freaked out, the elites are so freaked out, because now our coalition is really taking some of the basic foundation of the AOC and Bernie Sanders left.
The Bernie bros are coming to our side.
To a large extent, if they can handle the cultural, we realize there are cultural differences, if they can come to our side.
I think the same thing in England hasn't coalesced yet.
Is that, and in Galloway, remember, the one flying the ointment here, as you said, cultures and societies as citizens living side by side.
Let me just be brutally frank.
The issue with Islam is not Islam.
The issue with Islam is not that it's one of the five great, five or six great religions in the world.
The issue with Islam is the political Islam, which is Sharia supremacist.
The day political Islam Things that Sharia law has to be supreme, and that is a problem.
It's a problem in the Middle East.
It's certainly a problem in Europe right now.
It's gonna be a bigger problem in France.
It's a problem in the United Kingdom.
It's a problem to the fact you almost can't talk about it in the United Kingdom.
That is, and it's gonna be a problem here in the United States, the situation in Michigan.
Where the folks in Dearborn, and I'm not saying they're all Sharia supremacists, but the Muslim community, the Arab community, refused to vote for Biden and put him on notice because of Gaza and the handling of the situation, the Palestinians, they won't.
It is mathematically impossible.
For the Democrats to take the White House or keep the White House in this regard if they don't win Michigan.
And right now, President Trump's up eight points in Michigan.
And that is because there's a significant amount of Arab Americans that are just saying, we don't support the Biden regime in this regard, and we're going to stay home.
Yes, and Bobby Kennedy is also very popular in that state, and it does seem to be a significant interface in that particular campaign.
There's so many things I want to cover, Steve, but just let me touch on... Can I just say one thing about Bobby Kennedy?
Because I think Bobby Kennedy started, and I felt that uh you know although i'm a kennedy democrat as a little kid because of being irish catholic right when you just never even conceive i come from a blue-collar working-class family the conception you would vote for republican would almost be like you would leave the church right it was that ridiculous
Bobby Kennedy, I think, started out and had a tremendous message, and that message was, I've never seen an individual with such clarity about the biopharmaceutical industry and the power it has exerted on modern society.
And he was, to me, the most powerful voice about techno-feudalism and what techno-feudalism really was about.
I think, unfortunately, Over his, I mean, fortunately, as a Trump supporter, because I'd always hoped that at one time we could actually blend the Kennedy movement, particularly the anti-vax part of it, which has a big portion of the MAGA base.
As you know, I'm not vaxed.
We were the most adamant.
We were banned on every platform, never to return because of our election denial and
because of Vax, that we could see a fusion of MAGA and what Bobby Kennedy stood for into
a movement that really could be two-thirds of the populace of the United States.
Now unfortunately, I think Bobby and his team, as he got shut out by the Democrat Party and
ran as an independent, he's almost run to the left.
And so now you're right, he's a dagger to the, particularly with Shanahan, I think it's Nicole Shanahan, his vice presidential pick, he's a dagger at the heart of the Democratic Party right now.
He almost takes very few Trump voters, very few MAGA, even the strong anti-vax nature of our and the anti-biopharmaceutical industry part of the MAGA, which is a very large part, I think would pass on Bobby Kennedy now to support Trump very strongly.
But Bobby Kennedy's a dagger at the heart of the Democratic Party.
If Bobby Kennedy gets access, and they know this, this is why they're coming down on him so hard, if he gets access to the ballots, If he's on the ballot in those states, I think it's very hard mathematically, given the coalition of Biden is not coming there.
The under 35s are hesitant.
The African-American community, the male particularly, is hesitant.
The Hispanic community is hesitant.
The Arab-American or the Muslim community is hesitant.
His coalition is tough to come together with enthusiasm.
You add Bobby Kennedy on top of that, I think it's a dagger to the heart of the neoliberal, neocon, Democratic Party.
If we were to see the degree of subsidiarity that it appears to a degree that we both believe in, how can this be truly achieved when you have behemoths like the biopharma industry and the military-industrial complex?
Where is that regulation coming from?
What do we do about the big tech monopolies and their evident, and indeed we've touched upon it, albeit fleetingly, ability to control and censor open conversation and free speech?
How do you break those things down?
With what mandate?
From where?
Using what force?
Europe is starting, but I think you're seeing here even the TikTok debate.
These entities have to, first of all, two things have to happen.
Number one, you have to begin the breakup, like you broke up the Bell system and other massive communications platforms we have.
These companies have to be broken up into smaller pieces.
We have to get back to their entrepreneurial benefit, not almost their state capitalism controls.
They have to be broken up.
Number two, a whole series of rights, I think, people's digital selves Right now, I think that people have a, you have an analog self and you have a digital self.
The digital self is almost raped and pillaged economically.
I think that that has to be much more controlled by the individual.
That they're going to actually give those rights and those rights are going to have certain economic benefits to them.
This has to happen right away.
The other thing is I took a couple of simple things.
Number one, I think all TV advertising, like for pharmaceuticals, and I think in Canada and Britain, you don't have it.
In the United States, MSNBC and CNN is virtually, if you cut it on, it's virtually a little bit of news between a biopharmaceutical advertisement, right?
It's unbelievable.
That has to cease.
I think all types of programming, all types of almost political support for that has to come away.
You have to restrict your ability to advertise.
You have to, same with the defense industry.
You cut on these Sunday shows and the thought-provoking shows in the United States, it's always a Grumman, or it's always Northrop, or it's always the defense contractors.
That has to be limited.
You have to get their money out of politics to have a fighting chance.
Then we have to have very tough antitrust, and I mean antitrust to the last part of breaking it down.
Now, the hardest part, and the one that overlays our entire conversation we haven't gotten into, maybe it'll be next time, this whole issue of transhumanism.
We are literally, I think, five or six years away from the singularity.
And that's just not AI.
That's the convergence of CRISPR, biotechnology, quantum computing, advanced chip design, regenerative robotics, artificial intelligence, where on this side you have Homo sapien, you have humanity.
On the other side, at minimum, you have Humanity Plus, or what they call Enhanced Man, and I actually think leading to Homo Sapien 2.0.
That is the brightest line we've ever had in since recorded history.
It's going to happen in your, not just your audience's lifetime, it's going to be a major political issue in the next three to five years.
That's why we must break the tech oligarch state.
I am a proud, what I call Neo-Luddite.
Right?
I am all for, I would have treaties and stop this immediately because I think what's happening in transhumanism right now, led by artificial intelligence, and you see the flood to capital and artificial intelligence, well once that happens it gets out of control.
There are things that are going to happen that are so far beyond the Shire's ability to control it.
That'll make a farce of everything else we're working on.
All the other populist structures we put in it, things to try to get down to subsidiarity, it'll be overwhelmed by this.
And I'm to the point, I believe with some of these guys that you have to have actual, if you need to, direct military intervention into data centers, water supplies that would supply this.
What is happening behind the scenes in these big research labs, what's happening behind the scenes in these big companies, and what's happening overseas in places like South Korea, North Korea, Romania, Russia, China, the CCP.
You have no idea how advanced some of this stuff is and how it's hurting.
Once it comes, it's going to be too late to control.
On top of all the issues we have, trying to take back and trying to not be tech-feudalistic, On top of that is really what could be the end of the human era.
And I think that's why to be alive today is to say, hey, Divine Providence put me here for a reason, right?
For every one of your audience members, what is that reason?
And I think the greatest epoch in mankind's history in the, what, 10,000 years or 15,000 years or 20,000 years is about to be upon us, and I think in the next five.
If we are indeed facing something as apocalyptic and as apocal as the end of human supremacy and the ability to control reality into the scale that you've just described, don't our political and cultural affiliations that have either been formed around agriculture, i.e.
monotheistic Abrahamic faiths, or the political ideologies that have emerged from industrialisation, i.e.
capitalism and all of its late and failing expressions, or socialism and all of its derivatives, somewhat redundant, and all and we be looking for extreme subsidiarity as local as possible, new alliances to oppose that potential immediately, because I believe you that it's a real threat.
This is what I think you're awakening your show, other shows, War Room.
And remember, we have a principally a conservative, blue-collar, deeply religious audience.
Yeah.
They would rather watch Russell Brand and our audience watches you more than they watch Fox News, right?
And here's the reason.
I think people Innately know something's up and that's why populism is getting to be that people are putting their time into populism and trying to put in time at the school boards at the at the district level to take things back because they understand there's a dark specter that's over us.
And the only way to combat that, you're not going to combat that with equal structures.
It has to be, if it's going to be defeated, it has to be defeated by essentially an uprising of the Shire.
I mean, is this not what Lord of the Rings was about?
I mean, remember, Tolkien was, it was the trenches of World War I.
We saw the inhumanity of the mechanized German army and what happened to the basic, you know, British Tommy and those great, you know, working men that he'd seen from the Shire and the destruction and how much agony it caused when he went back home.
That's what gave him the whole vision of it.
That's, to me, the vision of the Neo-Luddite movement.
I'm not anti-technology.
I'm anti-out-of-control technology that could end mankind.
And we're playing right now with fire and we're empowering Because it comes with so much money, and I just go back to, remember, ChatGPT just happened.
It was just revealed in Davos last year, 14 months ago.
Right now, you have Sam Altman trying to raise $7 trillion, and people are not laughing.
They're not saying he's going to raise it, but they're not laughing it off like it's ridiculous.
He's actually out there.
Who is he going to?
Some of the worst people on earth.
The hedge fund managers in the United States and the City of London.
The Gulf Emirates that dictate the monarchs there to raise this money.
Well, they're not actually going to be that.
They don't really put the shire at the top of their priority, right?
What happens to the good folks in the shire?
They put money in control.
And that's what you've seen on Wall Street right now.
As soon as artificial intelligence, Merged up with the speculative nature of late-stage finance capitalism.
That's where you get techno-feudalism to the 10th power, and that is our great fight.
We've got to take it one at a time.
The hour is late in doing this and combating this.
Right now, we don't even have an operating philosophy of what I call neo-Luddites.
It's very ill-formed.
I think I'm one of the leaders of the movement, and I can't really give you any more depth and explanation than Russell Brand, who's also one of the leaders of this.
So, it's all a warning right now, as humanity is under pressure to essentially be overwhelmed by enhanced humanity, controlled by the ultimate puppet masters.
Well firstly Steve, we've got to brainstorm the name because I bow to no one in my admiration for Ned Ludd and his attacks on industrialisation and his understanding of what it was about to do to the peasant class of the United Kingdom.
But the Neo-Luddite movement, you've got to You've got to come up with some more White House gear that's going to be a little more catchy.
And also I want to point out this, while we're using image systems that are derived from early political structures, i.e.
neo-feudalism and techno-feudalism rather, it seems to me that what we are actually being opposed by now is something that is a dark power, and yet Luciferian.
We are talking about the apex of evil, potentially, and I believe that, as you indicated earlier, that to oppose that you're not going to be able to bolt something together from these sort of half-arsed, neoliberal, secularized, rationalistic structures.
You're going to have to reach down into the very thing that makes us human, our The realization of the divine, the expression of God, God's self, living Christ on earth, transcendence of the individual self, and a willingness to sacrifice all in order to carry the great fight.
Now, if we are going to practice that kind of a war, doesn't it seem that economic models that are somewhat, if not arcane, arcane's not the right word, nostalgic, are they going to be enough?
To get people up on their feet and out onto the street?
And can I add to that question, do you really believe that Trump is about to impose the kind of demonopolising regulations that are required across the big tech, finance and military industrial complex spaces?
Or will he, when in office, as he has been in 2016, ultimately find himself bound and held in the chokehold structures that exist only to perpetuate their own existence?
But I believe sometimes, Steve, on both sides.
What's the hysteria about?
If you want to know what a Trump presidency is going to be like, look at the Trump presidency there's always, there's already been.
I feel that we have to break beyond these models and my willingness to even look at something as sanctified, though it need not be so, as the Westphalian treaty and the idea of nation is because we have got to unlock something extremely powerful, Steve, extremely quickly.
Well, I think the first thing you know, you got to look it's it's about a process, right?
We would love to be able to wish it away and wave a magic wand and have some have somebody come down and help us and do it.
We're going to have to do it ourselves.
There's there's nobody coming to save us.
That's why I think the power of your show and your audience.
And remember, they've tried to cancel you like crazy, also the warm and others.
People will search this information out.
The one thing we know about our viewers, the hardest thing we have to do is keep ahead
of the viewers because they're out there all day long getting more information and connecting
more dots.
That's where they're cutting edge.
We have to, in the process, take care of first things first.
The reality is we have to take care of the economic structures and that's going to be
a battle all of its own.
We have to also take of the connective tissue of all this, which is deep state or administrative state actors.
On that note, I can tell you Trump's going to come in like a crusader from the 11th century.
The thing about tech and all that, it's complicated.
I know that even people that are with me in the populist movement, there's a lot of divergence about tech.
A lot of people don't want to get too hard on that.
I actually want to shatter it and get it back to human scale, even if we have to lose 40 or 50 years of potential innovation.
I'm all for losing A generation of innovation, as long as this time we do it right and we don't let technology spin out of control, spin out of control of the people's ability to do it.
And like I said, this is all, and I use Neil Luddite as the best term I can come up with, but you bring up a great point.
I believe the Luddites lost, right?
And on this one, Russell, as you know, I'm up there.
I'm just a hard-headed Irishman.
I am 100% confident, not just in Trump returning to power, but that the populist movement in Europe and other places in the United States will start to take on the vested interests of corporate power and the financial power of the City of London and Wall Street.
I tell everybody all the time, I am not overly optimistic on the issue about transhumanism and to take that on.
And I'm a fighter that can often see the sunlit uplands on this one.
It's being formed right now.
And it's going to be it's going to be a fight because the power in it is so ultimately powerful.
It's so much money and power for these tech oligarchs to control essentially what it is to be human.
What it means to have immortal life, what it means to actually be human, to create, to step into the purpose of God.
Remember, I'm a Catholic, so as a believer in the Judeo-Christian West, I believe we're made in the image and likeness of God and the one thing I always refer to is the most difficult Verse in the New Testament in the Gospel of Mark, when the apostles, he sent the disciples, the apostles out very early in Mark to go out and to cure the blind and to heal the sick and to make the lame walk.
And they come back to him and he said, how'd it go?
And they go, it was good.
We did all these things.
But the people said, people were saying, We weren't good, guys, and you weren't God.
They were saying you were Baals above, and we're just taking the power of the devil and doing this.
And Christ tells them, He says, hey, don't worry about what people call you.
Don't worry about what they call me.
That's not the important thing.
The only thing that's a mortal sin, He says, the only thing that's an unforgivable sin, Is to blaspheme the Holy Spirit.
To blaspheme that thing that makes us totally human.
Is we're made in the image and likeness of God, but we're endowed with the Holy Spirit.
That spirit, the Dao De Jing, or whatever you want to call it.
That is what makes us fully human, and that connects us, that's the transcendent connection to God.
Christ said it's unforgivable, the only mortal sin.
And that's what, in essence, is transhumanism.
The power of these oligarchs is to actually be God.
And we saw, if you believe in the, at least the story of the Garden of Eden and what it was about, it's the fruit of knowledge, right?
The knowledge of good and evil.
And this is what we're seeing right now.
That fight is the central fight we have, but we have other battles we have to win in the process to take that on.
Yes, because, in a sense, If it is a truly transcendent connection between man and God as established in the figure of Christ, it is by its nature atemporal and aspatial.
Otherwise, the category of transcendent don't mean much at all.
Therefore, these kind of revelatory epiphanies and declarations in the gospel must be referring to this very battle Where the sanctified nature of man achieved through Christ's redemption is somehow collapsed by the absolute capture of consciousness that this transhuman experiment may yet represent.
That's why it's so important, I believe, for us to be transcendent in our approach to political spaces, that we must indeed capture the hearts and the minds of entire populations rapidly, As well as challenging forces that are extremely powerful but are, by your reckoning at least, about to become yet more powerful when this type of technology is married to the increasing centralized globalist authoritarianism that we're now facing.
I see no way but God.
I see no way through this.
But the expression of the highest possible principles.
And from that place, I feel that we can be absolutist when it comes to the rights of every individual.
We can be absolutist when it comes to what constitutes the right to bring people to a state of war and what doesn't.
And I feel that this is the point that we are at now.
Indeed, the war room seems to be an apposite term for what we are about to encounter, Steve.
Well, thank you.
Like I said, there are many bigger picture issues that I'm just one small player in.
I'm kind of like a field commander of one part of the army, of a vast legion.
And I just know my task and purpose is to, here in the United States, is to assist President Trump in returning to power and grow the MAGA movement and make sure the MAGA movement, at least on a political scale here, begins the process of having the Shire start to take control back from our sociopathic overlords.
Yeah, thanks man.
Steve, that's a fantastic conversation.
I feel like I could talk to you forever.
I'd love to come on your show at your convenience.
I'd love to have you.
I'm most grateful to you for your time.
Thanks.
Love your show and love your audience.
Keep up the great work.
I certainly will.
I'm going to be in touch if that's okay.
Yes, sir.
Thank you, Steve.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Cheers.
Remember, if you become an Awakened Wonder using the code GODISGREAT you get one month free.
You can leave at any time.
You get early access to brilliant interviews like today's.
You can become a member of our weekly book club.
You can meditate with me live every single week and you get an exclusive video on subjects like chemtrails, MK Ultras, conspiracy theories, biblical readings, anything you want really because we are on a journey together.
I want to welcome our new members like SK2023, StoLogis, Okimo, Tamarind and JROY1.
What a gang they are.
Join us tomorrow, not for more of the same.
We wouldn't insult you with that, but for more of the different.
▲
Export Selection