All Episodes
Previous Next
March 30, 2012 - InfoWars Special Reports
01:05:51
20120330_SpecialReport_Alex
Source
| Copy link to current segment Download episode

Time Text
Tonight we have a special guest in studio.
Billy Corrigan, the founder of Smashing Pumpkins, is in studio with us to talk about the media, music, what's happening right now, and what he sees in the future.
Billy, great to have you in studio with us.
Thank you, Alex.
Happy to be here.
Wow.
You're here for South by Southwest.
How are you liking it?
It's a little crazy, as you know, as an Austin person.
All of a sudden, all the beard people showed up.
Attendees, as you call them, right?
Lots of attendees showed up with beards and white vans.
I did notice that, and like pastel pinks and greens.
Prancing!
I didn't see that, but I did see a lot of people like this with the cell phones, you know?
Oh, and they walk out in front of traffic?
Yeah, yeah.
Well, it's good to have you here.
Tell us about the speech you were here giving, and you had a little run-in with Al Gore.
I did.
Technically speaking, I made the former Vice President wait for me, which is pretty funny.
It's a little payback for something from the past.
I was here at a conference on social media and how it's changing the business models.
In essence, it's essentially revolutionizing the business models because the consumer is
in essence talking back.
And so it's about where the music industry has sort of gotten it wrong in the last ten
years.
When, you know, with the rise of Napster, the music business kind of covered their ears
and thought it was all going to go away.
And it's really hollowed out the music business in many ways.
And so there is a movement there that needs to be headed.
I'm not saying I'm the head of it, but I'm part of a core group artist that wants to come back to where artistic expression and integrity is sort of at the core of the music business.
It was a good business model for a long time.
There were a lot of flaws, but essentially a lot of great work was created, and now you talk to most people, particularly 20-year-olds, they're just not very It has, you know, seemed to lose that real rebel quality that you saw across the board in music just 20 years ago.
We were talking about that at dinner last night.
And they've turned to other things.
They've turned to video games.
They've turned to...
But, you know, music no longer has that sort of special place in the culture.
It has, you know, seemed to lose that real rebel quality that you saw across the board
in music just 20 years ago.
We were talking about that at dinner last night.
How did that happen?
Well, I think any time you have a corporate interest, it becomes the dominating theme.
I mean, it's a central theme of what you talk about in your broadcasts, where corporate interest has taken over America.
I mean, you can go back to the Founding Fathers of America.
They were working their own corporate interests.
I mean, it had a lot to do with the decisions they made in Philadelphia in the late 1700s, but it was balanced against
a set of constitutional rights and the idea that while this
particular model, a free model, a great society is going to yield a greater result. And as
you like to point out many times, I mean America was an incredibly successful
experiment for a It evolved.
And then somewhere along the way, we've kind of just gone like that, where corporate interest has completely taken over our political structure.
And it's also taken over our musical structure, where you have, I mean, yes, it's a business, as somebody once said, it is a music business.
But when it when it when is the prime driving force?
Well, then, of course, you're going to get into things that are salacious, And in essence, overtly negative to the culture because they're just serving a particular interest.
And there is a point where we all have to be responsible for our community standard.
We all have to be responsible for the messages we put out.
I mean, I've said lots of crazy things, done a lot of crazy things, but I've always had an intention in the back of my mind that something I was doing or the collective amount of things that I was doing were going to help somebody somewhere.
If your complete intention is to do nothing but profit on the backs of others, well then you know where that's going to go.
You mentioned the founders, and I think you really brought up a point that I've thought about a lot but never articulated, but reading their writings and what they did, they were inventors, they were really into knowledge.
And sure, they were corporate businessmen, but they were really into the fact that we're so confident, we're so smart, we're not intimidated by other people having freedom.
They were kind of in and talked about this wild experiment of freedom.
And you look at the corporate structures globally today, they are scared to death of any freedom.
And so they're stifling that, and I think that's really pretty simple, but at the same time, it's complex.
Well, I think from a political standpoint, anywhere where you see dissent being stifled, where is the fear?
Or should I say, why is the fear there?
Most people I talk to that would say they have a problem with the government, they don't sit around and talk about anarchy or overthrowing the government.
They just want to see a government that represents their sort of community value.
And I'm not necessarily one side or the other.
I've got people in my family that are total right-wing Republicans.
Some of them are probably even racist.
But they at least have a particular opinion that they're coming from that is rooted in
their own belief system.
When all you have is corporate interests driving something, well then it's got nothing to do
with belief.
It's about looking at you and saying, how can I strip this man or this woman or this
family of their resources?
And that particular aspect is sort of haunting to us as Americans, because even if we were
raised in propaganda, which you and I probably were, we were at least raised to believe America
is a great country.
It represents these values.
We freed the slaves.
We helped stop the Holocaust.
We grew up with a sense of personal ethic about what our country represented.
The corporate globalism is so cold-blooded, it's so robotic.
Well yeah, and I mean you address it with great frequency, and I think, I use that word again, there's sort of a haunting feeling, it's like, like I get it, like I get you want to make money, you know, I get you want to sell me something, but when it's at the expense of my community, when it's at the expense of the values of the people around me, And, you know, people don't even talk to their neighbors, and they're all so locked into this, we talked about it last night, kind of a narcoleptic state, where the TV is enough or the computer is enough.
That's a scary thing, you know, and so there is a connection there between kind of stifling dissent, You know, what did Obama say coming in?
I want to run this great, open government.
Transparent was, I believe, the word they used.
And now you've seen where they go out of their way to stifle dissent.
It's the most closed government.
Right.
But what I say from an artistic point of view, and as somebody who's been in the media and at the top levels of media, and of course I know plenty of things that go on behind the scenes, why are we so afraid of that dissent?
You know, what is the problem?
I mean, isn't that the point of a democracy?
You're supposed to have a kind of a riotous debate about who's right.
It should be an uncomfortable conversation.
There should be kind of a... That's the whole point.
Exactly.
They're always saying, well, you can have your free speech as long as it's not uncomfortable.
Or as long as it's 300 feet down the road away from where the limos go in the back door, you know?
But it is the uncomfortable speech.
That's what's really important.
Yes, and that's why I appreciate what you're doing.
I think you raise a lot of points that are uncomfortable, but they're necessary towards the greater dialogue about where our country is at the moment and where it's going.
And, of course, as alternative media, which you're a pioneer in, as it reveals a different narrative than we've been sold, There's an awareness and awakening that goes on because you start looking at history and go, okay, wait a second, that thing I was told about this, maybe that's not so true.
And then you start looking at things from a different point of evaluation.
I think the biggest mistake we all make is trying to find a form of absolutism.
There is no one truth.
There is no one definitive black and white answer.
it is always going to be sort of shades of gray.
I just have a hard time understanding why there's this fear that's rising up around
the discussion.
And that, to me, that's a big red flag.
Well, the system knows that it consolidates power.
People subconsciously are smart and understand there's a threat.
So the system is very adept at projecting people's natural anxiety over things going in the wrong direction onto some boogeyman.
And the social engineers, they know that.
We talked a lot when we went to dinner last night.
Billy, about media tricks, or trying to keep people in the box.
And, you know, when you were speaking about it, you know, all these data points were coming to my mind.
You were absolutely on target with how they're trying to control reality.
Speak to that.
Well, I can use my own example.
You know, I'm essentially lower middle class.
No one from my family went to college.
I obviously have some gifts that are valuable.
The minute I entered into a bigger, wider swath of media, I was sort of categorized.
And when I resisted the categorization, I was demonized.
You know, now somebody would say, well, that's just rock and roll.
But having been in that game for 20 years, there's this overt pressure to put yourself in that particular narrative.
And if you won't, you will be sort of labeled and tagged.
And it's fascinating for me now to go back and read articles about myself from 18 years ago, where I'm sort of being put into categories and labeled a certain way.
And then it's that weird thing, it's like Kafka, you know, you're accused of a crime, you don't know what you did that was so wrong, and then you spend the rest of your life defending it.
And so I'm very keen to watch how other people are demonized from media entry points.
When somebody rises up with a grand new idea, the way it's either co-opted, you know, like, let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the Occupy Movement started as an organic You know, somebody said, let's do this.
Ten people, four people.
You saw right away where it was co-opted.
You know what I mean?
Or other media forces tried to disclaim it and distance.
And those are the ways that the media sort of tries to take things that they can't control and put it in a box.
And then they start to write the articles.
What does this mean?
Bloomberg comes out and says, Occupy New York is bad for business.
So the comment person says, oh, that's hurting us.
Well, in the greater expression of freedom, maybe it's a good thing that we're having this dissent.
maybe the small downside of blocking traffic or something in the in the greater whole is a necessity. Exactly, I mean
if America 5% of the world population developed half the wealth
because it had more freedom than anybody else, not that we were perfect,
then how is it bad that people are exercising their liberty?
Even if they don't have all the answers
at least they're trying to get involved. So the real question is why is Bloomberg
demonizing it?
Or the way Homeland Security coordinated to try to take down everybody's protests.
I think those are all a really big red flag.
Why are they so scared of people even exercising their First Amendment?
That's a question I don't have the answer for.
I think it's one of those things where you can only look at the reaction to gauge that there must be really something vital going on or there wouldn't have been such a violent reaction against the Occupy Movement if what the Occupy Movement was representing as a whole wasn't threatening to somebody.
You know, and that's why they try to sort of categorize it down into boxes.
It's bad for business.
It could lead to violence.
It hasn't yet, but it might.
You know, this kind of implied nuance.
Yet, it was mostly just a bunch of people in tents, you know, and I particularly didn't agree with all of the Occupy message.
I'm not here to wave the flag for it.
I think there's certain aspects of troubling, troubling aspects about it, particularly the idea of wealth distribution.
You know, in my particular instance, I came from a family that didn't have anything.
Everything I've earned in life, I made myself with songs that I wrote.
So when somebody starts talking about how I've got to give to somebody that didn't do that, well, that's a deeper conversation.
It doesn't mean I don't have a social concern.
It doesn't mean I don't want to contribute to charities.
It doesn't mean I don't want to help my fellow man.
But if you look at Austin where I live, all these young kids of middle class or wealthy, they don't appreciate anything on average because it was all given to them.
And again, America's not been perfect, but it's been better than most other systems because it was an avenue that allowed your natural gifts to be expressed.
Whereas in an old world model, it was completely shut down by the elite.
And that's what I found, is that you have These crony capitalists who are really anti-free market, anti-libertarian ideas, and they basically are trying to get a big government system so that they have government power to shut down their competition.
I think it's a really valid point.
I can only speak from my perspective as an artist because there's different terms that you can use.
Outlier is one of them.
If you exist outside of a given system, and I've been in the system, I've been outside the system, and now I'm probably standing right on the edge of the system.
It's still, you know, like you and I were talking about it today.
I did this thing at South by Southwest where I gave an hour talk with an author who's an expert in social media.
He's written this book, Brian Solis is his name.
We had a one hour discussion in front of 1,500 people and the headline reads, Billy Corgan Rants.
I don't understand how that's a rant.
In our discussion, a sober discussion with two intelligent people about a very complex set of ideas, opinions included, that's not a rant.
But that's that kind of language that gets encoded in.
Don't be too smart, don't step outside, don't stand for anything.
And I think what I really see with young people now is they're responding to passion.
And so, us as people getting a little older in life, we have to help direct that passion.
And what I love, for me, when you really hit the right target is when you talk about liberty and what liberty really means.
The responsibility of liberty, the responsibility of freedom.
It's not just this utopian anarchy.
We have a responsibility to each other.
What is that responsibility?
Well, that should be an open debate.
What is your responsibility as a man, as a parent, as a citizen of Texas, to your community, to the people who work here in your business?
What is your responsibility?
You have to address all those things.
You have to openly debate them within your own mind, and then you're enough of a humanitarian or an insane person or whatever, you want to take those ideas into the marketplace to be bandied about.
That's a good thing.
That's not a bad thing.
You know, even if I disagreed with 99% of what you were saying, I agree with why you believe in what you're doing.
I agree with many things you say, but what I really respect is that you're willing to put yourself into the center of that argument and make that, because that is what our country is supposed to be about.
Our country is supposed to be about innovation, supposed to be about intelligence, we're supposed to be the, even, what was it, old Bush, we're the beacon on the hill.
Okay, well, are we the beacon on the hill?
Well, we should be.
Instead, we've become a beacon for torture and empire and lies and propaganda.
How did we go from, on average, putting out, you know, the most informed people, the most patents, innovation, trailblazing?
I mean, the world said, wow, America's it, to now the world says, man, this is where the evil comes from.
I don't know.
I mean, you can make an argument that if you want to put the evil in quotations, that the evil's been there all along.
We engaged in slave trade at some point.
At some point we took advantage of the Native Americans.
We broke treaties.
As you said, we haven't been perfect.
We're a rolling big ball of dust, like peanuts, you know, like Linus, you know?
I think that's it.
I think it's that we've been good and evil.
And because we've been powerful, when we do shine it's wonderful, but when we're dark it's very, very bad.
Yeah, I think it's a dark time.
And I think, you know, as somebody who listens, you know, what we all need to do We need to start looking at what success looks like.
You know, you use the term Infowar, you know, right?
So what is victory in the Infowar?
Right now, at some point, just resisting seems like victory because there's so little dissent.
It's shocking.
If you and I could go back in a time machine to the 1960s when people were protesting what they were protesting, that generation would be shocked at how little dissent there is right now.
What are we in?
Nine wars?
Seven wars?
Yeah.
Well, proxy wars, it's like 14, yeah.
Okay.
And drones in 11 countries?
I mean, where is this sort of dissent?
And particularly, I would say, from the artistic community.
You know what I mean?
And I'm including myself in this criticism.
Where is the artistic reaction?
In the 1960s, you had Neil Young, Ohio, and you had these great protest songs.
Blowing in the Wind was a protest song.
Where is the artistic response?
It's almost like there's a giving up, but as you... No, no, but I would say this, Alex, and I'm sorry to interrupt you, but, you know, there is a relationship that exists between performer and an audience, or, you know, a singer and the song, right?
At some point, and this is where I'm trying to answer your question, there isn't the hunger in the audience for that message.
You understand?
I could make an album of protest songs.
There's not an audience that wants to hear that.
In fact, oftentimes when I've used, say, my Twitter account to lodge a protest or lodge a point, I get this response back that says, just be quiet and entertain.
So the role of the entertainer as a social icon or an agent for social change has been diminished, and I don't think that's by accident.
Because people in the late 60s, like Neil Young, like John Lennon, they had a tremendous amount of power with the counterculture and with the youth.
And maybe there's a reason there that people like that have been pushed aside to where that message is no longer necessary or required.
A lot of people feel like, don't tell me what to do.
That's sort of the general vibe in the culture.
But then I say, okay, if you don't want me to tell you what to do, that's totally fine.
But what do you stand for?
And most people don't have an answer.
That's what I'm saying.
At least, in your case, you're saying, I stand for liberty.
And you'll interpret your own version of that.
And I have a version that's different than yours, right?
But at least we stand for the common idea of liberty.
I mean, I'm a beneficiary of one of the great countries in the history of the world.
I'm some weirdo that figured out how to do something and there was a system in place that allowed me to rise up and do it.
If I'd grown up in Soviet Union or whatever, I probably would be working on a dock, right?
So I appreciate that part of it.
But it's weird to me when you have an audience that's basically turned that social icon into nothing more than a prop that's like a wind-up toy.
We talked about that, the change in the people, that state of just a malaise or a type of sleeping narcolepsy.
A repeat to the viewers out there, the experience of the way people change, because I've seen this in the last 10 years, the way fans have changed.
Well, I've really noticed that social networking, those types of things, Facebook, that's become sort of people's pride.
So little things you see.
I used to sign a lot of autographs, sign almost no autographs now.
Now it's a picture.
Because the social approval comes from, look, I met this celebrity, here's the picture to prove it.
It's not a physical document, it's a virtual document.
Well, the same thing happens in your interactions with people.
I'm no longer a real person most of the time.
When they talk to me, it's kind of like, you know what I mean?
They've grown up with you, but you're sort of like, you're as real as this table or something.
Well, to repeat your words, you said before it was, oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Corrigan, but I'd really like you to sign this.
I really like your work.
And you're like, hey, Billy, let's do a photo.
And my wife said this years ago, just in my own interactions.
She's like, wow, it's like they know you.
And it's like automatic.
It's like, hey, and they just grab on you.
Yeah, but it's the downside of the virtual reality.
You know, somebody could sit there and watch 24 hours a day of My band or me talking on YouTube, so there's a level of familiarity that comes with that.
But then there's also this degrading of, let's call it, social structure.
I grew up in a world that if you didn't know somebody, you referred to them as sir, you were formal at first, and all that's been stripped away.
Now, that's not a huge indication of something.
No, but it bums me out when I say sir to people, they act like I'm almost lower class, that I'm groveling to them, instead of, no, I'm giving you respect because I want it.
Yeah, there's an erosion of respect for the family, an erosion of the formality.
of life, which I never saw as a bad thing.
And, I mean, like, people will say, oh, what do you watch on TV?
I say, I don't watch anything except a few sports, because I can't stand to watch the American male be, uh, uh,
whatever they've turned the American male to.
Castrated.
That's a good word for it.
I can't, I can't stand it. I mean, I just can't watch that anymore.
Well, they put that image out, I mean, that's in the documents on purpose.
And I don't cover that enough, but I think that's one of the hearts of their system, is to turn women, you know, they claimed it was feminism, but now it's total objects.
Dude, don't you think it's weird, just to bring up a current event, all of a sudden, you know, and I'm certainly no fan of Rush Limbaugh.
But again, I live in a society that's supposed to respect free speech, okay?
So that's his free speech, right?
All of a sudden there's articles, uh, Gloria Steinem, fire Limbaugh.
You know, now I heard you once talk about her and and I did the research and there's all that stuff about her and the CIA and dating Kissinger and you're like, not trying to empower women but get them as taxpayers and take their kids.
It's cold-blooded.
I don't have that.
I mean, I don't do the research like you do, so I don't know that.
But what I'm saying is, it's funny to me how these people pop up in the narrative all of a sudden when there's an agenda.
You know what I mean?
Oh, you're right.
And you're wise enough, and I've learned over time, to see beyond the narrative that's presented.
The surface.
Because the surface is usually not the story that they want told.
And that's where the Bill O'Reilly's and the Rush Limbaugh's don't realize.
They're just Yeah, they promote Limbaugh because he fits in, but now they're wanting to get rid of him.
Breitbart dies, they're trying to arrest Rupert Murdoch right now.
And I predicted, because I could see the move, and I said, watch, purges are going to start.
And there is a purge against kind of the old right.
They want just one big, weird, fake left thing that's launching wars, erasing liberty, but calling itself the left.
Which lends legitimacy to the old left that this new corporate board wants to cover itself with a mantle of the left, you see?
Well, I can say this much.
I have noticed, you know, being a musician and growing up with a musical father, you know, you tend to be around a lot of liberal people, you know, and drugs seems to be a part of that culture.
But anyway, it's a liberal culture, right?
And tend to lean more left.
Growing up in the 70s, that was a more left leaning thing.
It's very weird to me that the left has become The old right in terms of they don't want to hear ideas, they don't want any dissent, they don't want any questioning.
And so when people say, well, what is your political leaning?
I certainly can't identify with that left anymore.
Because that's, I see that now as the party of be quiet and get in line.
Well, that's it.
You've got the mainline right wing, which is trying to suppress libertarians and people that want some semblance of freedom.
And then haters.
It's a mix of people.
And then you've got the left that is just totally sold out to trendiness and feeling like we're good and liberal, not actually standing up for what's right.
And here's where you would probably laugh.
Where I've been attacked the most for expressing any particular opinion, you know, outside of my world, is if I question in any way the global warming, climate change narrative.
That is the most virulent attacks that I've seen from people if I question that.
It is like, I mean, you'd think I was skinning babies alive.
You know, how dare you attack the Earth?
And all I'm saying is, these are very serious issues, worthy of open debate.
You know, if you do research, I do my own research, you're not my only informational source, I'll go on and I'll see climate figures, and this one scientist says this, and this other, so you think, okay, it's not a settled issue, right?
But in this guy's mind, it's a settled issue, and I'm against the planet Earth because I dared question carbon taxes or something, you know?
The reason I'm bringing this up is not to make a point about myself.
It's amazing to me that when you have a lot of corporate money sitting behind something, how can a liberal class be that comfortable with that relationship?
With the amount of money that's behind the Green movements, how can that liberal class be that comfortable?
Shouldn't they be going, why is Monsanto standing behind me on this?
That's where it gets a little fishy.
But look at the genius, Billy.
They're cutting down the rainforest.
They're in genetic engineering everywhere.
They're splicing all the species.
They're building nuclear reactors.
They're leaking everywhere.
So, of course, the megacorporations, who could care less, are going to fund the left.
And take control of the green movement, so it's not about all those real issues, it's about carbon dioxide that plants live off of, that you exhale.
That way they can tax it, and then steal it as corporate welfare.
What I found is the big megacorporations, they lobby for high taxes on the general public, and on Main Street, because A, they're exempt from it, and B, they're getting it in bailouts and contracts.
That's the genius, and that's the The scale on the dragon's belly where you can shoot the arrow is that when you actually explain to someone who's well-meaning and cares about the environment, okay, 160 plus countries are exempt from carbon taxes, but Europe and the US and Australia and New Zealand aren't.
And they're going to build three power plants a week in China, but shut them down here.
They're going to have more carbon going out there.
How does more carbon And they don't know what to say.
You're like, oh, so it's about a power grab.
And then once you show people the backside of those tricks, then it's all laid bare right there.
But again, that's why the media that you've been on the inside of and seen wants to dumb it down.
Because as long as they can say, Kony 2012, there's a bad guy in Africa, invade, doesn't matter.
The actual invasion bill in Congress says every country in Africa.
It just feels good, Billy.
Yeah, that's why I think, you know, you're savvy in these matters.
I'm certainly not.
But I know enough about these systems to know, to look beyond the narrative that's being addressed.
Because I know how these things work.
Somebody's going to watch this and say, he's just a singer, he doesn't know what he's talking about.
I don't know what I'm talking about, but I do know this much.
If you don't have a rigorous debate around any issue, that's a red flag.
Because what's to be so afraid of?
That's my point.
And where you see the lack of dissent in America, and the suppression of an alternate voice, people calling for, you know, regulation of the web, you know, the internet quill switch, these are all really troubling signs because we're moving towards a sort of an agreed upon idea that no one's really agreed upon.
Because the agreement can only come if there's rigorous debate, and there isn't rigorous.
They create false consensus.
Well, they create a false debate.
Yeah.
You know what I mean?
It's a dumb artist versus a wacko guy who lives down here and thinks he knows what's going on, right?
And that's the way they would marginalize us.
Not a passionate person who's done a lot of investigation and self-made person who's, you know, has some level of intelligence to look at the world from a particular angle, one of which is I've been allowed access into different corridors of power because of my success.
I think the fact that you've been successful is the evidence of the fact we should listen to you.
Look, I have seen this, and I'll actually take one issue with what you said.
Well, I'm just a singer, and sure, what do I know?
Most of the experts, this appeal to authority that you see on the news, they don't tell you.
You can look up each and every pundit.
They have got a whole combine, a whole special interest behind them with a talking point And they're there.
I mean, I could find a hundred academics for every academic they push.
If I ever watch one of those shows, right, the minute it says, foundation for, you know, one, that's it.
I don't listen to that person.
If they're a self-made person.
You know what I mean?
Then they're worthy.
So you do have credibility.
I mean, you've run businesses, you've produced music, you've had staying power for 20 years.
I think I have credibility as an American.
That would be my point.
Exactly.
But I'm just saying, we always have this self-deprecation of, well, I'm just a radio talk show host.
Well, I can go look up that the entire crew of the Coney You know, the 2012 movement is government-funded and controlled, and that they want to, and that the White House says it's going to be their plan to invade Africa.
So right there, I don't have to be a PhD in something if I catch somebody in bed with my wife.
I know they're on top of her in bed.
I mean, you see what I'm saying?
No, I completely understand.
And that's what I'm trying to say is, and that's one of the reasons I wanted to come
here is, you know, because like let's say there's fans that have never come into contact
with you, you know, and they do some exploration and they're going to come in contact with
ideas that they're not familiar with.
My point is not to get locked into the idea of whether you're right or I'm right or you're
wrong and I'm wrong, it's to be okay with letting those ideas onto the table and not
be afraid of exploring them.
Now, if you as an individual listen to your ideas and you say, I don't know, I don't know
I just don't get it.
I don't resonate with that.
Then you should follow your own heart.
You know what I mean?
We're humble enough to admit that we're just men, right?
Imperfect and flawed in our own way.
All I'm trying to say is we shouldn't be afraid of the debate.
The debate is necessary because if everything's so great, why do most of my family feel the pressure of the economy?
You know, they keep talking about how the job numbers go up.
Well, not in my family.
Totally fake numbers, but I think you've hit a deep truth here, Billy, and that it's simply getting outside the box, it's accepting other ideas, not being threatened by them, and really having a real discussion.
And why in this modern system is that so taboo?
That is un-American, it's anti-human, it's anti-Renaissance, it's anti-common sense, and that is something no one can disagree with.
Anybody that calls for shutting down ideas, anybody that calls for narrow parameters, they're the enemy of humanity.
Exactly.
So, let's use the Coney thing as an example.
I've read things and saw things that you talked about with the Coney stuff.
I want to do my own investigation on it, right?
You've told me what you thought about it.
I know to not just take the, you know, let's call it the mainstream narrative of that story.
Now I also know that many of my fans are invested in the story.
How do I know?
They Twittered me about it.
They asked me to get involved, be part of the the chain of people that were spreading the information on
the documentary.
I haven't watched the documentary myself.
If it's a propaganda piece, I want to see it with my own eyes.
If it's something that actually touches me.
Where the stupidity will come in is somebody will say, well, don't you care about children
in Africa or don't you care about what, of course I do.
I'm a human being.
But these are very complex ideas oftentimes and if we break them down into their micro,
we miss the macro.
And in the macro, there's obviously something going on globally that is a far greater danger
to humanity than any particular issue.
So we have to be human enough to both address the micro issue, but we can't take our ball
off the macro.
For example, one thing I just shake my head on, and I'm probably wrong in the statistics,
but like what's going on with Greece.
with the debt deals. As far as I know, and if I'm wrong I'm sure I'll hear about it,
but they had to sell their lottery. They're giving away islands now.
And then you find out, I read from reading different economists, that 90% of that debt is
paper debt, right? Well, Goldman Sachs got their president and finance minister to back up the banker's debt.
So they're selling everything to prop up the too big to fail.
Yeah.
But then you can understand why somebody in Greece is sitting there saying, okay, we supposedly owe all this money, but yet, you know, it's not like we got all these roads built to these schools and we went crazy.
It's not, there's nothing to really show for it.
Total fraud.
So that's where you have to look and say something's going on systemically in the global system that's very troubling.
You see these things come up and if you pay enough attention and certainly read outside the American media, I mean if you read European media, there's a great concern for what's Oh, they admit it's the bankers engineered this, it's a coup, but they're holding us hostage.
What do we do?
I mean, the Europeans actually are informed and want to know the truth.
And back to the Kony thing.
Day one, George W. Bush is endorsing it.
Well, I mean, this is a known war criminal.
I mean, so, right there, okay, George Soros is involved, okay, the State Department's involved, okay, this guy hasn't been seen in five and a half years, okay, they want this oil, okay, and then you find out the whole story.
It's just a, there's a bad man we're invading Africa and the average American doesn't even know where Africa is.
So it's just like, oh, our troops are over there fighting that bad man.
And that's where the lack of debate and just this one-dimensional We're the good guys.
And that's why I was saying, I appreciate the alternative viewpoint that you bring into
this because that's what needs to happen.
It needs to be measured against the other ideas that are coming.
Because if I was to say, if I was to go on my Twitter and say, okay, why do you care
about the Kony thing?
The number one thing is kids, women being abused, raped, mutilation.
So it's where those negative systems, if we can quantify them as that, take real human
desire to want to help something, the oppressed and the, you know, and then it gets mixed
into an agenda.
And so if you try to put yourself in the middle of that agenda, you know, you'll be attacked
as somebody who's being unsympathetic.
Exactly.
They use the one dimensional nature instead of saying, okay, these global corporations
have been caught killing a hundred times that.
And they certainly don't care about these populations.
They've used these emotional appeals, waving the bloody shirt over and over again.
Are we going to take the bait again?
But I get it.
They're going to then attack you and say, you're not a nice man.
You want to hurt the children.
I don't want to hurt the children.
And that's what I'm saying is.
And that's why I would say to anybody who is one of my fans.
I'm not here to advocate your position or my position.
is not to be afraid of the ideas.
You take the ideas onto your own table, you discuss them with your family, your wife,
and then you make your own decisions.
Exactly. Don't let somebody else make the decision.
That's it. That's it.
I'm not here to advocate your position or my position.
I'm here to advocate the concept of liberty, right?
And we're two people who are expressing it in different ways.
I express it through music, you express it through a vigorous political social debate.
The ancients, going back to the Greeks as you know, called it the wisdom of the street or the common man.
Kind of that general consensus throughout cultures has been decided that's the best place.
And before we did this interview tonight, you were bringing up John Lennon and he had that street credibility.
Speak to that.
Well, I think it's really interesting, in the rearview mirror now, we know that the, was it the CIA or the FBI?
Both.
Okay, well, they had their eyes on him.
Why did they have their eyes on John Lennon?
Here's a guy saying, all you need is love.
Because when a person amasses enough individual power outside of a system, they're dangerous.
They're dangerous to that system.
And that's why I think there's a systemic level of control, whether it's put in at the entry level, the mid-level, or the top levels, or all levels, to try to keep people like that marginalized.
And I think now we're going to be seeing the digital form of that marginalization.
You call them hit pieces, well now there's going to be the digital version of that.
Well what they do is they create an artificial grassroots movement that wants to help children and really it's a cover for a giant continent wide invasion for resources.
In that particular instance, you know, I hope that you're wrong and I hope that it is about children and I hope that it is about the humanitarian thing.
The problem is we have plenty of history to indicate that that's not always the case.
You're right.
And that's why, that's why your ideas about it should be taken into that debate.
and examined and not feared because it seems to be counter to a humanitarian idea.
If you can look at your concepts in the macro, you're saying,
if this is what goes on, we'll save more children, we'll help more people if we clean these systems up.
If we get caught up in the micro debates, that's why we get into this rigidity in our country
and it gets really dumbed down and the public discourse goes down to, you're an idiot.
Well, that's what I've learned, is that if they left African countries alone on average, and let them use their own resources, Africa would be a jewel.
But Western corporate interests know they can just go wreck a country, fund rebels, or fund the neighbor to attack, and then come in and get it for nothing.
Yeah, well I'm sure you read Confessions of an Economic Hitman.
Oh, yes.
Is it John Perkins, the author?
Yes.
That's a fantastic guide from somebody who was in that system that talks about how Western corporate interests come in and exploit the people of Africa.
Exactly, and he talks about how they'd have a PR article, you know, in the New York Times, Washington Post, about how the person was a war criminal, even if they weren't, as a way to just depose them.
And so, I mean, that's the thing.
The globalists follow the same models over and over again.
Well, because they work.
Exactly.
So it's like, oh, I've seen this.
How do you know a 57 Chevy?
You see it over and over again.
Yeah.
And then you see the trendies getting conned by it.
You see everybody going through the same motions.
and it's just so frustrating to see it happening.
Well the quote that I always think about having been in this
media system for over twenty years is it's either Schopenhauer or Kant but it's
something along the lines and I'm sure I got it wrong but it's like first they ignore you
then they try to destroy you then they try to co-opt you or buy you in
and then they claim you.
Thank you.
And I think that's a really good guide for anybody to look at any public figure.
I don't care who they are.
An actor, a playwright, that system does come into play at some level.
And I think that until that system is eradicated, there's a struggle there that taps a key human resource, which is innovation, and sort of puts it through something that is ultimately serving somebody else's interest.
And I think that, you know, you have books that, is it the Fountainhead or the Ayn Rand, you know, where she basically talks about that particular blueprint.
And I've read interesting information to suggest that she was Illuminati and she was expressing some sort of other deeper blueprint.
It's an interesting debate to consider.
But as somebody who's thrived on the largest stages in that, somebody who's taken himself off that stage and somebody who's readdressing it now from a different, more humanistic angle, I can say that it pains me now, at my age, now I'm going to be 45, to watch where young, talented people are put into that meat grinder from the get-go.
And they're put into it now at an accelerated rate that's Sort of unprecedented, and the technology is in many ways aiding and abetting that system.
So it's up to us to be a little bit more cautious, because right now America needs young people to be smart.
We need them to be debating.
We need them to be protesting for things that really matter, and not getting caught up in the quasi-side arguments like wealth distribution.
Because that's really not the argument, you know what I mean?
Exactly.
The debate should be how to generate wealth, not how are we going to redistribute it.
I was reading that at South by Southwest, I guess yesterday or so, you challenged some of the people there about stop trying to be so cool or trendy.
What did you mean by that?
Well, I think what happens is, you know, in my particular world, trendiness has now become part of the business model.
And you have a lot of websites that exist, let's call it, in an independent tier that have gone into business where creating exclusivity principles, you're not cool enough to listen to this band.
We know what's cool.
That's become part of the business model.
But what it's done is it's hurt the overall creativity of the business and it's also hurt the ability for a young artist who maybe starts in an independent world Compartmentalized niches.
It hurts their ability to transition to the mainstream and that lack of transition of the mainstream keeps those vital
new ideas from entering into the bigger world and then you have so essentially you
have a widening gulf where you have a Invested indie world which really doesn't want their
artists to succeed beyond a certain compartmentalize niches Thank you, and on the other hand you have a growing
corporate Representation of music which most people find alienating
if you're a real real music fan. I can't listen to any of it
I mean, all the new stuff is just, it's bizarre.
It is bizarre the way technology has affected what pop music has become.
I'm not saying it's all bad, but it's hard when I came from a world which valued certain systems of integrity, to see that eroded, basically, to separate into two niche interests which really don't serve the overall whole.
Billy, you were telling me last night that more and more you realize that the answer to just pure empty commercialism, to put words in your mouth, is a spiritual understanding.
Of course, you're not going to find that in a church or in some box, but I mean for you, your spiritual walk, your spiritual awakening, I tend to agree with you.
I think that's really the answer to this artificial system is people tuning in to the fact that we're in a limitless Yeah, I find it inspiring sometimes when you talk about how when you're not really sure what to do, you go outside and look at the stars and you become, you know, integrated with the cosmos, you realize your place in it.
And I think that's what we all have to do.
We can't be so selfish as to not consider others.
We can't be so selfish as to not think that what we do in irresponsibility doesn't have an impact on somebody else.
You know, there's that, you've seen the commercial or the thing in the movie where the guy knocks over the bottle and somehow it's 14 steps down and, you know, somebody gets hit by a bus or something.
There is a continuity in quantum physics to what we do, the power of intention, the laws of attraction.
And I think, you know, and it's by no means a criticism, but we discussed it in terms of your program, I think that Kind of like I alluded to before, we all have to start thinking what success looks like.
If we don't like the system that's in place, and hopefully we'll be able to engage our democracy to change it, that would be my hope.
What does success look like?
What does a healthy democratic system look like in 2012?
I mean, we're far away from it, and I bet if you polled 100 people on the street, most people would say our democracy is It is in need of an update.
But it isn't like these jerk-offs writing on there, the Constitution doesn't work anymore.
You start to see those articles start popping up.
The Constitution's outdated.
The Constitution's not outdated.
No, we left it is the problem.
Yes.
So, a return to constitutional values, emphasis on liberty and freedom, not being afraid of innovation and new ideas, rigorous debate.
But what does that look like?
Let's say we could wave a magic wand and we have the democracy that we can be proud of.
What does that look like in 2012?
I think we need to start focusing on that because the power of intention is strong.
You know, we have to see what happiness looks like and we'll know where to go left and right as we walk down this path.
I agree with you.
That's the biggest part I'm missing is I'm just trying to get people to wake up and see the attack we're under.
But you're right.
You've got to have something to sell against that.
Right.
And I see interesting things.
I see where people are doing co-op farming.
People are forming collectives.
People are getting together to pray.
They're forming their own churches.
If they don't trust their own church, they say, well, let's just have our own church.
It doesn't matter what denomination.
Exactly, and they're creating their own media.
And if you look at it, we were talking in the car today, they're attacking the individual farms and co-ops here in Austin.
People buying their own cows, sharing on their own farms.
The feds and state are freaking out.
All over the country, people are starting home churches, different denominations, different religions.
They're shutting them down with zoning.
Hasn't some community passed a law where you can't have more than two people together to Yeah.
California and areas of California.
But I mean, Colorado.
But you're not allowed to assemble in your own house now.
It was some sort of weird law like that, right?
Exactly.
The reason I'm gibbering in excitement is you're absolutely right.
The system shows us what's powerful by what they freak out by.
And they're going after Amish.
They're going after home churches.
They're going after backyard gardens.
Hey, why do you think there's been a suppression of Native Americans all these years?
The Native Americans is one of the richest, most incredibly beautiful cultures ever created on the face of the earth.
Whether you're talking about the Maoris, the Aboriginals in Australia, these people in many ways hold the key to our success.
And those are values that I really resonate to.
And they're independent, they're not commercial, they're the enemy.
So we need to, as a culture, as a people who care about liberty, care about freedom, care about the future of our country, we need to start setting that intention.
And we're never going to go, unless something horrible happens, I mean, you know, the iPad's a part of our life, the cell phone's a part of our life, so what does that mean?
How can we use technology in the right ways?
How can you be an independent reporter?
How can you create your own systems?
How can people create their own systems to connect people together?
How can you use the systems that are in place, the Facebooks and the Google Pluses?
How can you use that to your advantage?
If those systems are going to be there, you know what I mean, instead of just plugging your fingers in your ear, well, how can you use that to your advantage?
Well, I agree.
You're going to be spied on.
But a lot of people say, don't use any of the system.
I say, do both.
Build an alternative system and come out of the Babylon, but at the same time, go into the Matrix and use its own system against it.
You know, do both.
I can, having been inside the music business, I can agree with you on that.
Well I have to say this.
I have seen an exponential awakening because I don't claim to be the best at what I do.
I mean it's the imperfectness though that...
It basically fits into the larger whole.
I have seen my own personal success reaching tens of millions of people.
And there are so many others that are more articulate, who have greater gifts than I. And I'm seeing them come online.
And I know that in that true diversity, that's what the corporate board can't stop.
They can play whack-a-mole all day long, but they can't stop the signal.
Yeah.
And this is what I would say in conclusion.
Even if you, Alex Jones, were wrong about everything you ever opined, even if you were wrong, the fact that you were willing to put those ideas to create that debate, that is the key.
That's why people shouldn't be so scared of those ideas.
And that is the key to our future, I think.
It's not about whether or not you're right, I'm wrong.
That is a system that's put there in our psychology by people who want to control our individual intuitive systems.
Because at the end of the day, look, people can sit here and watch us talk for an hour.
If they think we're wrong, great!
If it's coming from their own heart.
If people sit here and watch us and they say, these guys don't really know what they're talking about, and that's coming from inside them, that's God speaking through them.
And maybe we are wrong.
That's perfectly fine if it's coming from their own internal system of intuition.
If they're buying a corporate narrative that convinces a What about this point?
I find a lot of people say, you're probably right about this, but what are you going to do about it?
I choose to join the system.
scare them. Because that means they're robots. That means they've been controlled by somebody
along the way. They're actually not thinking their own thoughts, they're thinking somebody
else. And that's Orwellian. And that should frighten them.
What about this point? I find a lot of people say, you're probably right about this, but
what are you going to do about it? I choose to join the system. They think it's like joining
the winning team or a bandwagon. When a team's going to the Super Bowl, well then they buy
the jersey or the t-shirt.
It's almost like they think they can join with this inhuman, cold system because they've made a decision.
I try to explain to them, you may delusionally think you're part of the system because you've joined it, but it's a system that destroys humanity.
I mean, the only way to win is to resist this.
And that's why I say resistance is victory.
It doesn't mean we have all the answers, but we are saying we don't agree with this.
And I think out of that debate will come the answers.
Yeah, any system that's devoid of true leadership is troubling.
And so when I see that in people where they just accept an idea without actually having their own internal debate.
I mean, we've all been in those dinner conversations where you just kind of throw something out in the middle of the table and somebody goes, no.
And you go, well, where did you get that from?
Well, I was listening to, you know, Oprah or something, you know what I mean?
They didn't actually have the thought.
They heard somebody else express it, and they said, oh, I agree with that.
And they repeat it.
But sometimes it's worse than that.
They say, I hear what you're saying.
I've talked to engineers.
One time I was out camping, you know, at our family, you know, ranch, and I wasn't deer hunting, but we had some deer hunters there leasing the property.
And they were all engineers.
And I said, well, they found two of the passports.
In the rubble, that day, that's impossible.
And they said, I hear what you're saying, but as an article of faith, I can't believe that.
And I was just like, well, that's crazy.
But see, the way I look at stuff like that is, if somebody needs to believe something for themselves, that's fine for themselves.
That's okay.
Because trying to convince somebody of something that they don't want to believe is sort of a fruitless effort anyway.
But at the same time, you have to be careful to preach to a choir.
Myself as an artist, and you as a pioneer in alternative media, really what we're talking to people is on the edge who are willing to listen.
The people aren't going to hear you anyway.
It's sort of irrelevant, you know what I mean?
They're just going to put their fingers in their ears or they're going to create a debate within themselves that's going to negate no matter what you say, no matter how brilliant it is.
And the people who already believe you, well, in some ways you're just preaching to the choir.
It's the people who live on the edge who are really uncertain of their own personal narrative and they're looking for information.
Those are the people that ultimately you're reaching out to.
I totally agree.
So many people go and speak to their family or whatever, and they get brushed off and think, well, I'm done trying to wake people up politically, spiritually, you know, whatever the case is.
And I'm like, no!
There's always going to be the mass of people that just want to be followers, that don't want to hear anything complex, that just want to go cook their TV dinner and watch Dancing with the Stars.
We're looking for the people that are in love with information and real reality and who get the fact that it's interesting.
That's who is going to govern our future.
And that's why the globalists try to dumb everything down and have people not have a debate because they're scared of people that do want to have a discussion.
If I can offer a personal take on exactly what you're saying.
I think we're a lot closer to a tipping point in the consciousness of humanity than it would seem to be.
You know, there are people who have done studies of these types of things.
You don't need 100% of the people to go in a particular direction.
You only need like 20% or so.
Well, 10.
Yeah, the studies I've seen, 10.
You got it.
Okay, well let's say it's 20, just to make me look good.
Let's say 20% of a given population needs to believe an idea for the other 80% to actually consider it as legitimate.
Well, I think we're a lot closer to that number than you think.
And again, it's not about the specifics of a particular idea.
It's the idea to be open to the ideas.
And I think we've seen a systemic dumbing down of the population over the last 20 years.
Most of the people that I talk to, and I talk to fairly successful and intelligent people, believe that the country's been dumbed down.
Some believe it's been dumbed down on purpose, some believe it's a resource issue.
There's not enough money for the schools, stuff like that.
It doesn't matter.
But I do see a different type of awakening going on where people are engaging in topics and debates about things that were always off the table.
It's not uncommon for me to be in a restaurant and hear people at the next table talking about the Federal Reserve.
Because that idea has now been introduced into the mainstream culture via Ron Paul or somebody like that, saying, why is this there?
Why is this even in the chain of things?
And even the idea, it's called the Federal Reserve and then you come to find out it's not even a branch of government.
That was shocking to me when I found that out about ten years ago when I saw a documentary by Aaron Russo.
I happened to see him present the documentary.
I didn't even know what it was about and was surprised.
So the point is, as we're on the edge of these ideas, we're closer to the tipping point of people wanting to hear a different narrative.
Because the narrative that they've been fed is no longer working.
So yes, so you see a turning up of the volume of the opiating aspects of society, a dumbing down of our culture to keep people more salaciously engaged, but for this whole other part of the population, they're in a much more rigorous debate than I've ever seen in my life, and I know that you see that.
That's encouraging to me.
So if we can get a big enough number in that particular realm, then that other 80% is going to be much more likely to listen, because in essence, they follow.
They're not You know, they're not people who are going to take the first step into a new opinion.
Well, I agree with you.
That's why the system is panicking and throwing out all the stops.
And I found, with those that are even partially awake, the acceleration of the tyranny is only waking them up faster.
But you see, it's a calculation.
It's like any general is going to calculate his risk versus his reward.
Whoever's running those systems, whether they're benign, conscious, unconscious, You know, whether it was the Soviet eras, or the Nazis, or the Khmer Rouge, at some point they have to make a decision.
If we don't come in and kill all these people, or wipe all these people out, or suppress this particular idea, it's going to get out of control.
Wow, you just scared me with that, because Brzezinski, we talked about this on air two years ago, said the people are waking up, the elite's in deep trouble.
He made statements last month, and he's written about it similar in his new book that just came out, and he said, Twenty, thirty years ago, it was easier to direct socially through propaganda a million people than it was to kill them.
Now it's easier to kill them than to have them believe us.
And that's what's dangerous, is the elite are now discussing killing people to stay in control.
They realize that they cannot... Look, I believe we've already won.
As you said, it's an exponential ripples in a pond.
I can see it.
The very fact that they're so greedy and want to destroy culture to control it and make people poor so we're controllable is gonna make the empty bellies that cause people to wake up.
So the elite have kind of engineered the direction they're going in, but they're not God, they're not all-powerful.
And now they're discussing really draconian things and you see gun sales are at all-time records.
I don't see this working.
But again, well, The way to counter darkness is with light.
And that's why I go back to the spiritual point.
I think everything that you're willing to address is worthy of thought.
And the difference is whether we shroud that in shadow, and anger, and frustration, and powerlessness, or we put light on it and say, you know what, I want to know the truth.
You know what I mean?
Because to me, it's what core central idea you come from.
If you say, I want to know God, or I want to know love, or I want to know the truth, that will direct your discernment.
It will direct what you care about.
If that's true, which I'm sure it is, about the gun sales, that scares me because that's essentially people reacting out of fear.
Now, you may say that's prudent.
And that may be, but in the higher octave what needs to happen is people need to not be resonating with fear because they need to understand if they come from truth that the right things are going to happen eventually.
Now, whether you're a sacrificial lamb or not, whether you're willing to put your ass out there in the middle and get your head cut off, there's plenty of history to indicate that that can go either way.
I agree.
Let me just say this.
I overall do not see it as positive that there's record gun sales, except that it's some form of action.
It's not in a catatonic, narcoleptic coma, at least they're recognizing that there is a threat.
I wish it was, I've said this on air, I wish you were at your city councils and at your state houses and knock it on every door.
That's buying a gun, whether you would agree it's true or not, that's more responding to an existential threat.
The real threat is in your local communities where you're not taking care of the people in your local community.
If everybody's taking care of the people in their local community, It would eradicate a lot of this ability to control us.
Exactly, but at least it's some steps showing they know there's a problem.
And I've said I wish you would use this as energy to go out and reach out to people instead of talking about how you're going to shoot UN troops.
I do believe if we were to... if we engage in... if you're willing to engage in the idea that there's a controlling force that wants something to happen and it's negative, right?
I'm on the side that believes that ultimately that ruling force wants the least amount of trouble.
And the least amount of trouble is to keep people opiated, stupid, uninformed, and believing a narrative which is really simple.
Yes.
Good guy.
I have a wrestling company, right?
What do we do?
Good guy, bad guy.
Okay?
So I sit there and watch all day.
You watch CNN, you watch Fox, good guy, bad guy.
Dumb dumb, right?
So my point is, You know, as long as we're willing to try to understand that the narrative's being narrowed, if we're willing to be awake and listen to our own being in there, and whether they agree with you or not, that is the revolutionary concept.
That is the thing that leads to the victories that all of us want to have.
A happy planet, a safe planet, a green planet, whatever.
It's an info war.
It's a fight in our minds, not physical.
No.
And listen, again, if we're willing to believe that there's somebody standing there behind a curtain that wants bad things to happen, if they have their druthers, my guess is they don't want any trouble.
It's far easier if everybody just gets in line and watches the same TV programs, and just it all dumps itself down and it ends up looking like Brave New World.
Take this, be quiet, go to your job.
So, I'm hopeful that we don't have to get to any point that involves anything horrific or violent, and that may sound a little Pollyannish, but I have to believe in that.
I can't believe in the other version because that takes me into a darkness that I don't believe in.
I don't believe in that darkness.
It doesn't mean I don't believe it's not there, but I don't believe in that darkness.
That darkness is not going to get me or you anywhere.
I know that when I talk to a lot of people in the power structure, they don't like what's happening, and they describe it as a kind of out-of-control beast.
And it's all of our little actions that actually give power to the light or the dark.
And I think, in the final equation, it is about a resonance, about an energy.
Closing comments on that?
I think it's as simple as this.
We've all stood in a line, or we're all trying to go through the same door.
It's in that moment that you don't turn to your neighbor, smile after you.
That's the root of how these systems control us.
Because if you don't, you can't even see the human being next to you as a human being, with a family, a history.
If you're a judgment from the get-go is, they're the enemy, they must be negated, I gotta exist in my little bubble.
I was on a plane the other day, the guy was completely in his little bubble, his little technological bubble.
I didn't exist, he didn't address me, he didn't say excuse me, it was like I did not exist.
And we all know what I'm talking about.
We come in contact with, I've seen that 60 times here in the last couple days.
They revel in it.
I don't know if those people are reveling in it.
I don't think they even know what they're doing.
But the point is, if you engage in that behavior, if you sort of go along with the dumbing down of society, you're part of the problem.
You have to stand for your own value.
If you're willing to walk through life in kindness, in humility, that's the seed by which everything grows.
And that's what I mean about the micro and the macro.
If everything you're saying is true, the way to fight it is with your own being, with your own sense of humility and self.
Now, of course, somebody's going to write, you know, well, when they're coming over the wall, you know, the redcoats are coming over the walls, I'm going to be my AK-47.
Okay?
Well, they're not coming over the wall just yet.
So I'm at this point where I believe in the energetic aspect of it.
Well, obviously there's a time to reap, a time to sow.
I mean, we're trying to be like Obi-Wan Kenobi and loving and friendly.
We've got to defend ourselves, we do.
But I do think it's a cop-out to just say, I'm going to buy guns and get ready for war.
The war is intellectual and spiritual talking to people.
There is plenty evidence to suggest in recent history that the war of ideas can be won.
You see where certain military actions don't happen if there's the right public outcry.
You see if the right people protest, the right people stand up, certain things don't happen.
They don't go down as easy.
Look at SOPA.
Look at the internet censorship.
I mean, on so many fronts.
But see, there's an idea where most people understood the narrative and they figured it out.
And you saw where corporations had a backpedal.
And then I saw other people in my business come out and say, well, stealing is bad.
They've reduced the argument down to stealing is bad.
Well, why has this bill got all this other stuff in it that doesn't have anything to do with stealing is bad?
Exactly.
What's the best?
There's so many.
We're going to be putting websites up here on screen.
What's the best website for people to visit and see all the great work you're doing?
Tell us briefly about your new album coming out.
I have an album coming out probably in June, early June, called Oceania.
We have old Smashing Pumpkins albums being reissued, which is pretty cool, with extra tracks and DVDs and stuff like that.
I'm writing a book.
SmashingPumpkins.com is probably the best, or my Twitter account.
I need that, yeah.
that Billy. Do you have an ad Alex? I guess you don't have the hookup like I do.
I need that, yeah. Tell us more about the album and then give us a little preview
of what's gonna be in the book. The book is a spiritual memoir.
Essentially, my life from the perspective of a spiritual one as opposed to a celebrity one.
We've all read The Celebrity.
I don't think we need to read that version of my life.
The album is called Oceania.
It's coming out in early June and it's a sort of people like kind of old school pumpkins mixed with some prog rock.
That seems to be the vibe in that.
Alright, thanks for coming in.
Thank you.
It's been amazing.
Thank you.
All right, ladies and gentlemen, that is it for this edition of InfoWars Nightly News.
We'll see you all back here tomorrow night and on the radio at InfoWars.com.
▲
Export Selection