CLASSIC: What is 'Antifa?'

If you've been watching the news, you've probably heard journalists and pundits throwing around the word "antifa," often in relation to protests. The phrase, a portmanteau of "anti-fascist," has been used to describe multiple groups and individuals. It's become the subject of several conspiracy theories as well - but what exactly is "antifa"? Tune in to learn more.

They don't want you to read our book.: https://static.macmillan.com/static/fib/stuff-you-should-read/

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Friends and neighbors fellow conspiracy realist, pro fascist, and anti
fascist alike. Back in twenty twenty, there was a word
that kept popping up in US discourse Antifatifa antifa there, Yes,
did you.

Speaker 2 (00:19):
Guys see the recent Well it's all some clips going
around with an FBI official testifying before a congressional committee
about antifa and how it's the most dangerous domestic terror
threat within the United States right.

Speaker 1 (00:34):
Now, and really dropping the ball when as specifics, because
it turns out it's kind of like saying the biggest
threat to the United States is feminism and you say, well,
where's their headquarters?

Speaker 3 (00:45):
Well, and I go, I don't know. Well, I guess that's
the thing. I mean. Back in the simpler days of
twenty twenty, where this was really just starting to get
thrown around, I think it was pretty clear what it
was in terms of like a concepts or you know,
the idea of being anti fascist. But then like a
lot of terms in the wrong hands kind of get

(01:06):
weaponized and redefined and taken over. So it'll be kind
of an interesting time capsule, honestly. Oh yeah, to see
where we were and where we are.

Speaker 2 (01:16):
Well, we know, when it comes to things like revolutions,
and idea can be one of the most dangerous and
viral things that exists. Right, So there is something maybe
to be thinking about here when it comes to an
opposition to whatever the status quo is or you know,
a current administration or something. Maybe the idea of whatever

(01:37):
antifa is could be their biggest threat, which is weird
to think about.

Speaker 1 (01:43):
Yeah, the mission creep of definitions, Right, this phrase is,
as we said at Portmanteau, of anti fascist, which in
general is something people can universally agree upon being bad
in a democracy. But now, as we'll see it, may
the term may have experienced definition creeps such that it

(02:04):
becomes defined as anything antithetical to what I like.

Speaker 3 (02:09):
That's right. You'll even remember in that recent kind of
love fest in the Oval Office between Mondomni, the recently
elected mayor of New York City, and President Trump, who
had previously been mega mega against that dude, he made
a little joke about, Oh, it's okay, you can say
I'm a fascist. Just go ahead, it's fine, it's fine.

(02:29):
Like the level of truthlessness almost that that term has
achieved in a way, it's a little it's a little concerning.

Speaker 1 (02:42):
So to that earlier point, let's roll the tape and
let's see what we learned in twenty twenty and how
it's aged in the modern day.

Speaker 4 (02:52):
From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
learn this stuff they don't want you to know.

Speaker 5 (03:04):
A production of iHeartRadio.

Speaker 2 (03:16):
Hello, welcome back to the show. My name is Matt,
my name is Noah.

Speaker 6 (03:20):
They call me Ben.

Speaker 1 (03:21):
We are joined as always with our super producers Paul,
Mission Control Decand as well as Alexis nicknamed to be
Determined Jackson. Most importantly, you are you. You are here,
and that makes this stuff they don't want you to know,
or at least that's the name we use when we
describe this show. Today's question starts with first figuring out what's.

Speaker 4 (03:47):
In a name.

Speaker 1 (03:48):
We know they're powerful currency in the modern media, right,
They're a cognitive shortcut. You've only got so much time
on air if you're a news anchor. Names can also
function as what's known as a thought terminating shay. This
is familiar. It's a long time conspiracy realist, and the
more we think about this insidious practice of grouping multiple
things under one phrase, the more often we notice it.

(04:11):
Conspiracy theorists. That's an easy phrase as an example, but
then there are things like truthers, for instance, snowflakes, or
for an historical example, forty nine ers. This is common.
This naming practice is common in all walks of life,
numerous fears of debate. There's not one political group that
does it more than any other. If you're watching the

(04:33):
news in the United States recently, you are aware of
a term that has attained a new prominence all its own,
antifa or antifa, antifa, antifa antifa.

Speaker 2 (04:47):
I think it just depends where you are when you're
saying it. Perhaps we're gonna find out what it means
and you'll realize that all of those kind of work.

Speaker 1 (04:54):
It's it's funny because antifa sounds like someone's aunt who's
like named fa, you know, or like short for parah. Well,
we're also, regardless of how you choose to pronounce it,
you're probably aware of just how controversial this term and
what it represents can be. It's not a stretch to

(05:15):
say there are, if we're being diplomatic, differing opinions about
what antifah actually is and we can't even agree how
to pronounce it. And as we explore these opinions, we
quickly find ourselves hip deep in conspiracy. But first, here
are the facts.

Speaker 3 (05:32):
Yeah, I mean, so, you know, let's just do a
little housekeeping with the term here. What does antifha actually mean?
Where does the word come from? It seems to many
of us to be a very recent development, at least
here in the United States. The term traces back, however,
to Germany. In the nineteen thirties, the Communist Party of

(05:53):
Germany had a wing called I'm going to do my
best here anti fascistischa achchion. I'm not perfect, but I
think that was close. There's a lot of repeated sounds
in that one. It's I had to do a double take.
And this later became referred to by a much more
abbreviated and punchy word antifa, or of course anti fascists.

Speaker 1 (06:16):
I got okay, So one thing I want to hear
what you guys think about this is entirely my unfounded opinion.
This is not a fact and should be not taken
as such. But it seems to me, if you want
to build a lasting movement or rally around some sort
of cause it's smarter to make a name that stands
for something rather than against it. Like a good example

(06:37):
in this nomenclature would be the two very different names
used on others on opposite sides of the abortion debate.
Supporters of abortion are most likely going to describe themselves
as pro choice, right, and opponents would describe themselves as
pro life. They're not anti abortionists by their own description,

(06:59):
and people aren't necessarily on the pro choice side describing
themselves as.

Speaker 3 (07:04):
Pro abortion.

Speaker 1 (07:06):
I don't know, there's a marketing power in names there, so,
Like anti fascism starts as what like it's against something
that already existed, right.

Speaker 3 (07:15):
Yeah, but it's against something that I think most people
would typically characterize as bad.

Speaker 1 (07:22):
Right.

Speaker 3 (07:23):
That's the thing that's so interesting about this whole debate,
Like when well, yeah, I don't know, Matt, what do
you think?

Speaker 2 (07:28):
Well, I just I would say, first we have to
know what fascism is, right, And that's another part of
this whole thing that that word, that term gets thrown
around an awful lot, and you know, it's on us
to learn what that is before we, you know, are
throwing around antifa.

Speaker 3 (07:45):
Yeah, like if my boss makes me work on a weekend.
I call that person a fascist. That's appropriate use of
that term. Right.

Speaker 2 (07:51):
Well, we're gonna find out here in a moment. The
big thing is that today when that you know, that
term antifa is thrown around, it's really misleading because it's
being applied to a ton of different individuals, of groups
and organizations, of even the the tactics that are employed
by individuals or groups. And you know, the idea here

(08:13):
is to fight fascism, right. It is short for anti
fascism against fascism, So what exactly is fascism?

Speaker 3 (08:23):
Right?

Speaker 1 (08:23):
And now now we're in even deeper definitional water, right,
because fascism, like antifa or anti fascism, doesn't really have
its own solid, uh solid definition. Fascism does have a
fascinating history.

Speaker 2 (08:42):
Sorry, I'm gonna leave.

Speaker 6 (08:44):
Yeah, I can see you can't leave. You're already home, Matt.

Speaker 2 (08:47):
Where are you gonna go anywhere?

Speaker 6 (08:49):
But here I've seen all of the zoom going. We're
just gonna move on. We'll pretend that.

Speaker 3 (08:53):
No, no, we were all with this here on. They
don't want you to know, but it's true. It's it's
a word that comes from something seeming pretty innocuous. It's
an Italian word fascio, referring to a bundle, which in
this case would represent groups of people. So, you know,
I think we'll get to this, but it's become negative

(09:14):
by association. The initial like it wasn't designed to be
an inherently negative thing. It was just designed to be descriptive.
It's origins date all the way back to ancient Rome,
when the fascis was a bundle of wood with an
axe head that was carried by leaders in Roman politics,
and the finding fascism today is much more complicated because

(09:38):
of the fact that many governments, organizations, and individuals have
been called this. It's been lot you know, lobbed around
as kind of a term of abuse. In post World
War Two, this was often used as an insult by
opponents or critics of a given movement or a government,
like the way I, you know, talk about.

Speaker 6 (09:57):
My boss who loves this show.

Speaker 3 (09:59):
By the way, I know, I don't mean it, which.

Speaker 6 (10:02):
One I don't know of the loves is show.

Speaker 2 (10:04):
We have so many bosses.

Speaker 6 (10:05):
Now that's corporate America, my figurative boss.

Speaker 3 (10:09):
You guys, this is not this is just for the
purposes of demonstration. Here, But it was Mussolini that really
got the phrase to kind of catch fire and be
associated with what we think of as fascism today.

Speaker 6 (10:22):
True story.

Speaker 1 (10:23):
Yeah, you're right, Noel in nineteen fifteen, one of the
only bad bends in history. There aren't a ton of them, Yeah,
Benito Mussolini. That's where we think of fascism. That's the
sort of origin story of modern fascism. And when we
tried to define it, we see that a lot of

(10:44):
people in academia and politics have made their careers based
on arguing what the hell this is or is not.
Generally speaking, it's somewhere between a specific genre of authoritarian
government and a set of tactics deployed by governmental institutions.

(11:05):
So kind of like how all mazes are puzzles, but
not all puzzles are mazes. All fascist governments are authoritarian,
but not all authoritarian governments are fascist.

Speaker 2 (11:18):
Very good, ben I love the old mazes, puzzles analogy.
So let's talk about what those characteristics are, right, and
some of them are. You know, how they function and
then what they do, actions they take. So you could
describe a fascist group or government as being very very

(11:40):
against and opposed to their opposers to anyone who is
going to be a dissident or not believe the same
things that they believe or fight against I guess the
desired beliefs of a populace. They're going to aggressively attempt
to suppress that or block that in some way. They

(12:00):
are going to attempt to, you know, use whatever power
that they do have this group or government, to essentially
use it in a dictatorial way. So what they say
goes anybody else. Again, going back to the first one,
is not welcome. They want to have intense control on
everything that occurs within their society, within the whatever it

(12:24):
is that they control. Right, that's everything from the economy
to what people can and can't do in their personal lives.
And another characteristic here is that depending on how let's say,
let's just say it's a government, depending on how the
politics and government work within an individual area, when you
have a fascist group in power, essentially this group is

(12:45):
going to see fit to change whatever rules existed prior
to them coming into power. Right That's I guess one
of the things that we could say there.

Speaker 3 (12:53):
Well, I think hand in hand with that comes a
strong sense of nationalism. Yes, because it's there has to
be an other ing, you know, in order to say
we are the ones who are right, we are the
righteous path. All others who oppose us are wrong and
therefore need to be shut down. And that requires kind
of like a you know, it's us against the world,
and that inherently is a pretty nationalist kind of view. Right.

Speaker 2 (13:15):
Well, yeah, that's a very important important thing here, is
that wherever they are functioning, there's going to be a
US versus everyone else's attitude. Essentially, that's put forth in
everything from laws to you know, small things on the
books that you wouldn't call a law necessarily just kind
of a norm. Ultra nationalism is certainly a factor.

Speaker 6 (13:38):
Here, and it can't. It's sort of the way that.

Speaker 1 (13:43):
This is a weird sentence I never thought I would say,
not as a dean on capitalism or fascism, but a
comparison I think that's worth making, is that the same
way capitalism must have a profit motive to exist for
that mechanism to work, fascism must have a conflict motive

(14:03):
to exist. Fascism must exist in opposition to something. And
also it's super convenient if you're an iron gloved dictator,
because you can just change what fascism means whenever you want.
You know what I mean, We've always been at war
with East Asia, Right, that's one of the most pivotal

(14:24):
impactful lines of fascism in fiction and or well in
self of course about anti fascist or antifa member. But
so antifa is something we can't fully define fighting something
and we also fully defined we know the characteristics, we
know the actions and the tactics. But I'm intrigued to

(14:48):
hear more about antifa history because, like you said, Nola
doesn't it didn't start in twenty seventeen in Charlottesville.

Speaker 3 (14:57):
Yeah, that's right. I mean, as a movement, it has
its own origins and what we might describe as the left,
even the Communist Party, the Socialist Party, the idea of
anarchists and the like. So while fascism is often characterized
as being a far right, militaristic, you know, hypernationalist ideology,

(15:18):
again problematic to even you know, assign it to an ideology.
In particular, anti fascism is the opposite. It's it's it's
very much something that that that leans far to the left.
Part of this comes from the simple order of operations
that you find in history. Leftist groups were the first
primary targets of fascist violence, and it arose as a

(15:41):
reaction to that violence, as a way to organize and
protect folks that were identifying in this way from these
types of attacks.

Speaker 2 (15:52):
And there's an author who is cited quite often when
discussing this topic. His name is Mark Bray and he
wrote Antifa the Anti fas Just Handbook, and he writes
about how you know, the modern movement of antifa, it
really started in the nineteen eighties, and there's a group
at that time called Anti Racist Action. Its members confronted

(16:15):
neo Nazis, another pretty modern movement of an older thing.

Speaker 3 (16:19):
Right.

Speaker 2 (16:20):
They would go to punk gigs, you know, music performances
and everything, and they would gone in the Midwest and
other places in the United States and they would just
actually have confrontations with people that they believed to be
neo Nazis.

Speaker 1 (16:34):
Are you guys familiar with the sharp movement yep, Skinheads
against racial Prejudice.

Speaker 3 (16:39):
I always found that to be fascinating. It's like, you know,
with a rise and skinheads, and like punk rock scenes
and hardcore scenes in the eighties, there was a splintering
and folks who like I guess, still identified with the
aesthetic of a lot of that, but we're not about
that life, not about that nationalists ideology, and it was

(17:02):
something that began in New York in nineteen eighty six.
But the idea of you know, someone that like, hey,
skinheads can be cool too, you know, we can also
be like about equality, and so therefore you have the
sharp movement.

Speaker 1 (17:16):
I think it's a tremendous point. It's one that echoes
what we set up at the beginning, which is these
grouping disparate movements or people under the same convenient figure
of speech or turn or phrase. Sure it feels good
to do that, because we're humans. We categorize and classify things.
We want to see patterns, but we do a disservice

(17:38):
to ourselves and others when we fall into that trap.
By the early two thousands, the Antifa movement in the
US was I guess considered mostly dormant in terms of
mass media, Like, there were definitely groups who align themselves
with that, they just weren't getting in CNN.

Speaker 2 (17:58):
Yeah, and they certainly weren't getting but they were also
they were showing up every once in a while. I
don't know if you guys remember, especially during George W.
Bush's presidency, there were a ton of protests and there
was some reporting on anti fascist movements, but it was
very few and far between, and I can't recall at

(18:19):
least any major protests that turned violent in a way
that the you know, group in power, whoever was president
at the time, whoever was running the show, that they
had such a response I guess, or a public response
against this group or people who they labeled as Antifa.

Speaker 1 (18:42):
Or like Black Bloc as well and occupied movements, which
we'll get in Doorri. We'll meet the Black Bloc later.
Now fast forward to just a few years ago. Don't
call it a comeback, or do call it a comeback?
Antifa is back in the new whose they get new
modern prominence after the events of what was called the

(19:06):
Unite the Right rally. You probably remember the photographs that
went around the US and the world of people marching
with tiki torches saying things like Jews will not replace us.
This was a gathering of numerous right wing groups, including
as you can tell from that slogan, white supremacist in Charlottesville,

(19:27):
Virginia and August of twenty seventeen, Antifa was back in
the news described as counter protesters in this debacle, and today,
you know, it'd be surprising to look through most news
sources on their websites or watch most news channel shows

(19:51):
and not notice some sort of mention of Antifa. But
the groups, there are groups who identifi as anti It's
a very real thing. This wasn't made up out of
whole cloth. The problem is that there are a number
of groups identifying with this, and they have different, at
times contradictory goals, and they have an even wider range

(20:11):
of different tactics.

Speaker 3 (20:13):
Right, yeah, that's right. I mean it would typically be
stuff you would categorize as non violent, like chanting, shouting,
having sit ins, human chains, you know, holding up signs,
the like. But ANTIFAP has become controversial because they're like
any loved together large movement that there are many, many

(20:34):
kind of splintered factions of like with the skinhead example,
there are going to be more extreme, little kind of
offshoots of this. So some of these factions of protesters
that's often referred to as agitators, which is another kind
of term of abuse that's very easy to categorize. All

(20:56):
of the members of this movement as agitators because of
a couple of bad apples or whatever, if you will.
Got to hate that term, but it's what we have.
So there's a belief in direct action, confrontation, and at
times violence. That can include things like actual weapons, pepper spray,
brass knuckles, throwing bricks through store windows and cars, vandalism, graffiti,

(21:22):
knives and you know, switchblades, things like that that are
easily conceivable, and in the modern day, it can include
internet based tactics, things like doxing, when you release people's
personal information or basically, you know, just outright misinformation, spreading
about individuals and trying to ruin people's reputations online. So

(21:47):
for example, releasing personal information about a victim online, getting
someone fired for their political views, putting them on blast
in that way, not in a positive way, which someone
maybe deserves it, but I guess deserving it depends on
side of the argument you're on. Some of these folks
who are righteously indignant might believe that they are doing
the right thing that that's not really the point. So

(22:07):
why are there so many conflicting narratives and is there
one way?

Speaker 2 (22:11):
Is there like a truth core to this whole thing.
So it really does take us back to the main
problem here. And that's in the same way when you're
dealing with a group that has no leader, right, that
has no head, that has no mission statement essentially for
the entire group, and control you know, from one sector

(22:34):
or from one governing board, however you want to put it,
Just like Anonymous, the same thing with Antifa, there is
nobody at the helm. It is like minded people that
identify as this movement as Antifa. And again, much like
groups like Anonymous with Antifa, when someone claims they are

(22:55):
on Tifa, they are on Tifa. That's how it goes, right,
and that's.

Speaker 6 (23:00):
Your qualification is wanting to be that right?

Speaker 2 (23:04):
Yes, and then generally, you know, there's no swag to
buy necessarily. I'm sure you could find it somewhere on Pinterest.
Somebody's got an amazing Antifa store there.

Speaker 1 (23:15):
It's not like the KKK or the Communist Party. I'm
picking two different organizations, so I'm not picking anyone. Like
you want to be in the Communist Party, you have
to apply dual body, you have to join, there's a membership,
there are probably dues. KKK is the same they have ranks,
they have a hierarchy that doesn't exist in this concept.

Speaker 2 (23:36):
Yeah, or like the Crips and the Bloods who both
had their own soda in Atlanta at least for a
while there thanks to Killer Mike. Good on you, Killer Mike.
You know you have to you have to look at
this in from both sides, right, And that's what we're
tempting to do today. So not only do you just
get to decide that you're Antifa and then you be

(24:00):
come Antifa. In the same way, if you have an opponent,
let's say, or someone that you dislike their views with
and you label them through your words or actions Antifa,
then guess what they are until that person comes forward
improves that they are not right.

Speaker 1 (24:17):
And then you could say, that's exactly what an ANTIFA
member would say.

Speaker 2 (24:23):
Yeah, yeah, it's really good.

Speaker 1 (24:27):
You're absolutely right, Matt. The definition is dangerously malleable if
you think about it. It's like beauty or pornography. The
definition all too often lies in the eye of the beholder.
And for anyone interested in what a problem those two
definitions have been, I would recommend checking out the court

(24:49):
case in the US pertaining to James Joyce's ulysses where
the I think the deciding legal opinion was some high
faluting version of pornography is pornography. Everybody knows what it
is when they see it.

Speaker 3 (25:05):
With maple Thorpe as well. Sorry, I mean to know,
you're totally right, and that's problematic because that's how Antifa
is used as well, where we don't have a good definition,
but it's used by people in power as Oh, that's
what it is because I know it when I see it.

Speaker 1 (25:19):
And it's this slippery definition that fuels the numerous ongoing
conspiracy theories about Antifa. What are we talking about? We'll
tell you after a word from our sponsor. Here's where

(25:39):
it gets crazy. First, I you know, thinking about this
off air, it's it's always it's like a fireworks show.
Do we save the big explosion for the end or
do we start big? I feel like we have to
start big with the most prevalent conspiracy theory about Antifa.

Speaker 2 (25:59):
Oh, I know where you're going with us, Ben, Oh boy,
don't know exactly where you're going, So all right, all right,
let's just do it. So the first thing you've probably
read likely on Facebook. I'm gonna bet Facebook maybe Twitter
to Twitter. Actually, you know what, anywhere on social media,

(26:21):
you've probably heard something on there about how on tifa
and tifa whatever it is. You know what are these
groups of all these differing contradictory aims. Somehow all of
these people are knowingly working together in secret and have
a leader.

Speaker 3 (26:39):
They actually have a leader, right.

Speaker 2 (26:41):
People who really put this theory forward, or people who
at least believe it right, they will argue something like
astroturfing that we've talked about a lot on this show,
where essentially there would be a lot of varying groups
standing in that you would see in the spotlight, right,
but they're actually standing in for something else, and the group, well,

(27:05):
I mean, that's kind of like a front company. But
in this case, it would be as though every time
you see a big group of protesters, they aren't actually
there of their own volition. They aren't actually there to
protest something. They're being paid to be there. They're like,
I don't know, straw end protesters. I don't know what
to say about that, guys. But ultimately, people who believe

(27:27):
this would put forward that these these really wealthy, generally
left wing individuals and groups are the ones that are
behind Antifa. They're the ones funding them, radicalizing them, putting
them on buses or in other ways to send them
to towns and cities everywhere to wreak havoc on the
United States on both the status quo, on the infrastructure,

(27:50):
on the economy, on everything. And they're doing it for
their own nefarious and probably for money and power reasons.

Speaker 3 (28:00):
But Matt, a leader of this type would have to
be very, very wealthy and have lots of resources and
also wield a lot of influence politically.

Speaker 7 (28:07):
Right.

Speaker 2 (28:08):
Oh, yes, there is a prominent figure here that you
have likely heard many many times before, mister George Soros.

Speaker 6 (28:20):
Oh yes, you know him, you love him.

Speaker 3 (28:23):
George Soros.

Speaker 1 (28:24):
He's a billionaire. As of May, his estimated net worth
was in the ballpark of eight point three billion dollars.
Fellow listeners, It's important to keep in mind, however, that
every person at that level of wealth is more than
capable of hiding the full extent of their assets. So
while that's a good financial guess, you should not take
it as gospel. Soros has been accused of so many things.

(28:48):
He's he occurs in conspiracy lore, not as often as
the Rothschild's, but he's an up and comer on the charts.
He's been accused of vowing to destroy the United States.
Reuters claimed to have debunked this, but the belief remains.
He's also been accused of outright owning Antifah, kind of

(29:09):
the way you would own maybe a trademark or a
company or a battalion. And he's been accused of owning
the Black Lives Matter movement as well. This comes from
one of his primary political enterprises is something called the
Open Society Foundation. Longtime listeners, you know that innocuous names

(29:30):
with a lot of money behind them usually means something
something fishing.

Speaker 6 (29:34):
Might be going on.

Speaker 1 (29:36):
Just be suspicious anyway. This foundation OSF claims that they
support the aims of the Black Lives Matter movement, and
they support the aims of other protests, but that they
do not pay these organizations. They don't pay them to organize,
they don't importantly pay protesters to show up, and the

(29:57):
leaders of Black Lives Matter say that they're relatively dis
centralized group.

Speaker 6 (30:01):
However, you do a little.

Speaker 1 (30:02):
Bit of digging, Open Society Foundation makes a lot of donations,
they create a lot of grants. They did set up
a twelve million dollar grant and this is the verbatim
quote here to help organizations fighting institutional racism. They also
donate to a number of related groups things that ally
with their aims across the planet. And it's concluding things

(30:24):
like planned parenthood. It's including things, you know, like groups
that try to address systemic or institutional racism. So kind
of this the heart of this conspiracy sort of hinges
on whether what's the difference between a donation and what's
the difference between out and out payment, Like are you
giving people support because you believe in their mission or

(30:49):
are you paying them to do to do a specific task,
you know what I mean?

Speaker 2 (30:54):
Yeah, Well, and also it arises the question of whether
or not by supporting you are talking about bussing in
protesters or some action like that, which is something that occurs.
We've seen it happen in the past for you know,
various protests for various photo opportunities that have occurred in
the past. It is a real thing that has occurred

(31:15):
where people are shipped in from other places on purpose
by a group that is willing to pay the money
for the bus.

Speaker 3 (31:23):
Right, But is that inherently like bad or a criokeet
or disingenuous. I mean, you know, people who support certain
political parties might bus folks into the polls who couldn't
get a ride otherwise, or you know, I mean, isn't
this just a way of supporting a movement.

Speaker 2 (31:39):
I'm not saying it's bad. I'm saying we know that
that occurs, and it is possible there if you were,
let's say, going to pay several bus loads of people
to go, like you're paying for the bus and giving
each person there a small amount of money, who is
going to go and spend their day doing that? That
would be riding the line, right.

Speaker 1 (32:00):
Yeah, I mean these are both fantastic points. I guess
I would say, like, first off, I can't speak for
everybody in the conspiracy stuff fam, but I've never donated
millions of dollars. What I have donated, you know, has
not at this point at least reached some threshold where

(32:22):
an organization cares specifically what I want. Like if I
donate to a literacy fund, they're not going to me
and going, oh, you know, is there any book you
don't want kids.

Speaker 6 (32:34):
Or the elderly to read? They don't care.

Speaker 1 (32:36):
I'll just get a letter that says, hey, thanks for
agreeing with us that people should be able to read.
So I don't know how much power is there, you know,
but but that point about what services are rendered or
you know, what that money is supporting. It's kind of like,
you know, the argument is like with the Tea party argument,

(32:56):
where people said, these folks might think their grassroots testers,
but they're being funded and pushed into the forefront by
very powerful right wing entities, and that that did turn
out to be at least partially true.

Speaker 6 (33:11):
I just don't know.

Speaker 1 (33:12):
I think also, I've got to I don't know about
you guys, but I have a little bit of a
billionaire prejudice. I just like, we see the way that
countries with less money than Soros are able to already
influence elections right in a tremendously effective way. So isn't
it kind of circuitous to like take the long road

(33:33):
around when you could just buy politicians.

Speaker 6 (33:37):
I don't know. Maybe it's about the journey. I don't
know what it's like to be a billionaire.

Speaker 2 (33:40):
Whatever it's about, I think it is worth us doing
an entire episode on George Soros because there are so
many current conspiracies surrounding him, that it would be worth
our time just to look into him and all his
various groups and see what we can discover.

Speaker 6 (33:56):
Yeah, people on, here's where it gets crazy. We're asking
for that as well.

Speaker 1 (33:59):
So agreed. Okay, So that's like the big tents. That's
what you're most likely to hear about antifa conspiracies. And
it's not always Soros. We just think he's an excellent
example because he is so prevalent in these ideas. But
there are other antifa conspiracies out there, and some of
them might surprise you, I guess because first group the

(34:21):
anti antifa conspiracies, the anti anti fascist conspiray, I don't.

Speaker 2 (34:25):
Know, yes, And to jump into these anti antifa conspiracies,
it would be really helpful if you could take your
mind back to the good old days of Batman. And
now when I say the good old days of Batman,
I mean just before Ben Affleck got involved.

Speaker 3 (34:42):
So like.

Speaker 2 (34:45):
Around the time of Batman begins in the Dark Knight,
there is specifically in the Dark Knight there is this
amazing scene where mikeel Kaine comes in and he says,
some men just want to watch world Bone And I
think he's right now, I'm just joking. I don't know
if he's right or not, but that is the accusation

(35:07):
of Antifa or groups calling themselves out or people identifying
themselves as that and wearing you know, shirts that have
it written on them that are usually black. But the
concept here is that, you know, the true motives behind
this group or people believing that is the abs It's
essentially chaos, but the absolute dissolution of any kind of government,

(35:30):
any kind of ruling faction that exists, and just bringing
us all back to zero. It kind of reminds me
of mister Robot in a way, like it reminds me
a bit of the F Society from from that show
and series.

Speaker 3 (35:46):
Just occurred to me that maybe the F Society stands
for like F society.

Speaker 2 (35:50):
Yeah, this is very true. Yeah, well the problem here
is that they're not you know, people making this accuisation
aren't necessarily wrong, but they also aren't necessarily right either.
There's it's all of this stuff. It's such a great
area because there's probably some truth in that concept that

(36:11):
there are people who identify themselves as Antifa that would
like to see some of the major you know, governing
bodies and governments across the world just kind of having
to start over at least to some degree, right, I
mean there anarchists are real. Anarchists are probably at least
to an extent involved in Antifa gatherings, let's say, or

(36:35):
people who identify themselves as that. But how much or
how little like what that actual influence is. We just
have no idea. We honestly nobody has any idea.

Speaker 6 (36:45):
Yeah, it's true.

Speaker 1 (36:46):
I mean it ties into the other, the other anti
antifa idea of subverting the rule of law. Right, Sometimes
it's a billionaire individual like Soros, Sometimes it's a group
accused of one world ordering the planet, like the CFR
or something. And then sometimes it's just plain old anarchists

(37:07):
want to see the world burn. This does tie d though,
with the other conspiracy of using well intentioned movements to
as a vehicle to push for a different, unrelated violent agenda.
This thing works, though, That's the problem with this one.
We know even the most cursory study of human history

(37:28):
shows that people are easily led and easily misled. So
this idea is that factions of Antifa, whatever their origins,
whatever their motivations may actually be, will infiltrate an otherwise
peaceful protests or movement and then try to push it
further and further toward radicalization and violence. Like you know,

(37:51):
like let's say, Nol, Matt, Alexis, and Paul are all
it at a prot test, a peaceful protest against the
closing of the local Applebee's, and then some other guy
that no one has met shows up and is like, yeah,
they should keep the apple bees open. As a matter
of fact, you know, if you think about it, we

(38:12):
should burn down the chilis next to the street, you know,
this the next street over. We're like, no, we're peaceful
apple Bee's people. They're like, yeah, well, you can't be
a peaceful Applebee's person if you're not also burning down
that Chili's.

Speaker 3 (38:25):
Well, isn't this a lot of the same stuff we
covered in the Agent Provocateurs episode. I mean it really
they do kind of go hand in hand, the idea
of someone infiltrating a cause that has one particular aim
that could well be peaceful protests, and then trying to
kind of cause i don't know, cause division within those
ranks and try to convince people to lash out and

(38:48):
do violent things in the interest of either co opting
that movement or potentially even having the protest be shut down,
you know, to aid theirular you know, viewpoints, or you know,
would you say these things are related, Ben.

Speaker 1 (39:04):
Yeah, absolutely, you know that's I would categorize that as
a left wing Antifa conspiracy. So that's the that's the
crazy part you'll hear about the right wing antifa conspiracies.
But you may be surprised to learn organizations that are political,
that are affiliated with the political left are often themselves
not automatically fans of what they consider antifa. Part of

(39:27):
that is the agent provocateur question. You know, we've covered
that in other episodes. But that's not a conspiracy theory.
That's an active conspiracy tactic. It happened before, it's maybe
happening now. In my opinion, it probably is happening now,
and it will definitely happen in the future. Uh. We
know also that left a lot of left wing institutions, movements,

(39:51):
and groups have a huge problem with antifa direct action
and they say that this this action, violent action, whatever
the motivation or intention on the part of protesters, creates
more problems than it solves.

Speaker 3 (40:08):
So what makes antifa in particular different from other movements.
We'll talk more about that after a quick break, and
we're back with the question what makes antifa different? Why

(40:29):
is it so special? Why is it popping up now
more than in the past. And we've discussed that it's
historically been a thing for for a while. There are
some purported crimes of the Antifa movement, or you know,
the multiple movements that exist under this kind of umbrella.

(40:49):
One of them is something called black block tactics.

Speaker 2 (40:53):
Yeah, and when you're talking about black block, this is
something you've undoubtedly heard about or seen videos of somewhere,
if not on live leaks than in other places. Generally speaking,
you would describe a black block that's bloc as a
group that deploys some kind of violent tactic in you know,
one form or another during a protest that is occurring

(41:16):
for another completely other reason or you know, an individual
reason for that protest, the black block would be there independently,
right and they would be doing things like we've seen vandalism,
destruction of some kind of property occurring, you know, while
the protest is going on. A lot of times a

(41:37):
group that we would call a black block would be
targeting sites of significance to probably the economy. That's a
very popular one to government. You know, any kind of
building like a city hall or something, a bank, headquarters
of a large corporation, there would be what would be

(41:57):
considered or described as rioting. They would, you know, do something.
This one's a little lighter fair, but you know, demonstrating
without a permit or outside of a free speech zone.

Speaker 1 (42:11):
I think that's an important one. When we were what
is in Chile in Santiago, we saw a lot of
kind of black block things, but they were escalating in
step with the police, you know, and a lot of
South and Central America has heavily militarized police forces. But

(42:32):
calling and demonstrating illegally it sounds like a small thing,
but if you withdraw the legal means to demonstrate, then
every demonstration is illegal. I think there's some tricky things
that legal authorities can do there.

Speaker 3 (42:45):
Well.

Speaker 2 (42:46):
Yeah, and even the act of demonstrating you are knowingly
bringing about a police response, right, so if it if
it's not legal to do that, you know that's going
to happen. So then essentially a group like this would
or functioning as this would prepare they preferre defenses essentially
you know, barricades. They would encourage others to come out,

(43:08):
you know, with them and do the same thing. They
would provide perhaps weaponry or other equipment for others, as
well as providing medical care on site for anybody who's
injured in their efforts.

Speaker 3 (43:22):
So why are they called this why Black blocks bloc?
By the way, they are known for really leaning heavily
on remaining anonymous, wearing black clothes, covering their face, and
identifying marks like tattoos. That being said, though, these are
all things that are any protesters are going to be

(43:43):
doing now a lot of especially with the pandemic, it
can be a lot harder to differentiate these groups. And
we in our episode about protesting one oh one, we
made it pretty clear that it's a good idea to
cover any identifying marks, et cetera. But here's the thing
moving in a unified mass, the being they can't get
us all. And that's true of any kind of I

(44:05):
don't know, I don't want to characterize this as like a
gang or any kind of thing like that. That's not
the same thing. But that is a tactic that folks
that are saying like motorcycle gangs would employ they ride
in a group because you can't chase down everybody. You
think people can divide and conquer and split and just
kind of cause the authorities to be overwhelmed.

Speaker 1 (44:22):
Yeah, and that's still sort of the case, right, That
sort of works for any I mean, that's the reason
why if you want to get away with a robbery
of a small business, you go in with twenty people
and you move out fast. There is a power in numbers.
It's an arguable, but it might not always make you anonymous.
In the future, the surveillance state has been expanding. We've

(44:44):
been in a massive expansion this phase of that since
post nine to eleven. It hasn't stopped since. Pretty in
the future, it's conceivable that it doesn't matter what you
wear or where you leave your phone, authorities will be
able to find you or at least make a plausible
case against you and then proceed from there. Probably another

(45:05):
tactic that differentiates Antifa in the mind of the mainstream
media is property damage. It and it can feel pretty
you know. I don't know about anybody else again speak
for anybody else, but it feels a little off and
pretty cold when you're seeing protests about massive injustices and

(45:25):
loss of human life. And then the first thing someone
in authority says about it is like, we have to
protect the corporate building, you know what I mean? Like,
what what is the hierarchy? Where do where do people
stand in relation to property? It's an ongoing argument in
this country. So the idea here is that antifa is

(45:48):
different from a lot of other protests groups or ideologies
because purposeful physical violence is in place somehow. So in
twenty seventeen, Active is self identifying as Antifa or Black Block.

Speaker 6 (46:03):
We're accused of throwing.

Speaker 1 (46:04):
Molotov cocktails causing one hundred thousand dollars worth of damage
in the Berkeley protest February seventeenth, twenty seventeen. So that's
like one example. You can find a bunch of other
examples as as well, and they're often What's weird about
this is a lot of the accusations of violence against

(46:24):
people or against property on the side of protesters is
leveled at antifah when it's when people calling themselves Antifa
show up as counter protesters to write wing events, you know,
unit the ride or like a I don't know what
I making up a plausible title in my head would
be like freedom rally, I don't know, sort of like.

Speaker 3 (46:47):
In movies that don't have a lot of budget, where
you see products and it's like a jug of milk
that just says milk, you know, or like a thing
of juice that just says orange juice.

Speaker 2 (46:58):
Nice.

Speaker 3 (46:59):
It's like that.

Speaker 1 (47:00):
But the thing here, though, that's interesting is that proponents
of Antifa, their supporters or people who say, you know,
they identify with this or related movements, they'll argue that
the media is misleading people that what is characterized as
purposeful violence is often instead self defense. And this is

(47:21):
something you brought up, Matt, that I think is a
very very interesting thought that doesn't get addressed often enough.

Speaker 2 (47:27):
Oh yeah, sure. And it goes back to the nineteen
thirties again, this time instead of in Germany, in Britain,
and they had their own anti fascist movement there Antifa
when there was a group gaining in popularity, a political
group gaining popularity. They were known as British Union of Fascists,

(47:50):
at least according to reporting done by Vox and around
that time, in nineteen thirty six, this group was attempting
to have a large parade. Okay, this is place called
Cable Street in London there and what this group did,
the British anti fascist group did was actually throw homemade

(48:10):
bombs and bricks and other weapons at this group attempting
to have a parade down the street to the point
where they had to leave. The whole point here was
to preemptively attack them in self defense, and which sounds crazy,

(48:30):
but the reasoning here is to defend against the possibility
that a fascist group would eventually come to power, right,
so they're defending themselves now for what the future would
hold if this group came to power. It's it's logically difficult,

(48:52):
but imagine if you could have done that prior to
the Nazis getting to power, and you did it effectively
enough where the Nazi just had to go home and
be sad.

Speaker 1 (49:02):
Yeah, but but that's the time travel question. You don't
know what happens because you're changing the timeline and history
is obdurate. History doesn't always hinge on one person. Guarantee
you if you go back in time in that era
of Germany, pre rise of Nazi power and Adolf Hitler,

(49:24):
and you kill Aidolf Hitler as a child, there will
probably still be a Nazi party there will just be
a different lunatic making speeches and you'll be locked up
because you went back in time. And as far as
they can tell, you just killed a baby.

Speaker 6 (49:37):
That's it.

Speaker 2 (49:38):
You're not a hero. Yeah, well, you know, it does
go back to the United States campaign of preemptive strikes
against a lot of countries in the Middle East that
were occurring in the early two thousands, like they might
attack us someday. Yeah, it's weird because I think anybody

(49:58):
listening with a critical enough mind can see both sides
of that. I think you can see the concept of
wanting to protect yourself against a group that may arise
to power that would be very dangerous at least that
you believe personally that would be very dangerous, and also
that you're not You can't predict the future.

Speaker 3 (50:19):
That's man.

Speaker 2 (50:20):
It is just okay, it's a it's a complicated process
of thinking through.

Speaker 1 (50:25):
Well, let's look at it from another side too. I
think this is a tremendously important thought. So let's flip
flip it a little bit, flip the narrative and say
what if in the halls of power? The argument is, look,
we're playing fast and loose with the Constitution. We're cutting
some corners because we are preemptively defending the country because

(50:50):
Antifa may be you know, primarily known as protesting groups now,
but we think they're going to be terrorists. That's not
just the thought experiment that's litter early. What's what's happening
or what's what's kind of in the mix in the
in the dirty, dirty cauldrid known as Twitter.

Speaker 3 (51:07):
Well, and that's sort of where we get to the
point we are in terms of the rhetoric surrounding Antifa
and the way it's used to label folks that may have,
may have nothing to do with it, may not identify
as it, or even align with any of these concepts,
but it's something that the President has used quite effectively

(51:30):
to label folks who disagree with him or his policies
or with protests, to to kind of you know, malign
or in some way diminish the idea of a peaceful
protest or the idea of the cause that a protests
might represent. By labeling folks as Antifa and consequently labeling

(51:51):
Antifa as a terrorist organization, this is something that he
has pushed for. In June, he tweeted the something to
that effect and this is absolutely in line with the
administration and the Justice Department's ongoing argument that antiphok groups
are the source of violence in all recent protests. And
yet if you've been paying attention, it's not one thing.

(52:14):
So it's that absolute leaning into this kind of bundling
up of labeling this, you know, multiple kind of splintered
groups into as one thing, all of which must be
about the exact same thing, which is violence, disruption, agitating,
and you know, just basically characterizing it as being against

(52:37):
the rule of law.

Speaker 1 (52:38):
Yeah, and of course, you know, anyone can have any
intention they want at any time, just like an opinion.
But when it comes to the law, there are tricky
things there. The US doesn't really have the legal mechanism
to do what the current administration wants to have done.

(52:59):
The US government only formally designates foreign groups as terrorist
organizations or ftos, and that means the actions have to
be taken internationally through a larger organization. Right, the Soros
theory would have to be real and Antifa or people

(53:19):
identifying as that. To your point, Matt, they do exist
in other countries. It's not an American enterprise. It started
in Europe. But those folks are acting autonomously. They just
sort of agree that they would like to use the
same methods. So it doesn't seem like that meets the
requirements for the State Department to label it a terrorist organization.

(53:44):
But again, what's in a name, what's in a designation?
Federal law enforcement already uses domestic terrorism categories to organize
and describe cases right where they bring up the name
or the phrase antifah, And then there are already a
host of anti terrorism laws that authorities can use against

(54:04):
what are called domestic extremists. So we get we really
quickly fall into legalese here, But as we know, in
a post nine to eleven world, that kind of kind
of legalese is too often words and wind, you know
what I mean, and the practice, the practice can be
very very different. On the ground, we should say, of course,

(54:27):
that people who identify as anarchists and activists using these
tactics disagree, surprise, surprise, with the administration's claims. They say
there's not any evidence. And then some other people say, well,
shouldn't you consider designating far right extremist groups terrorists?

Speaker 6 (54:45):
As well?

Speaker 3 (54:47):
Fair question? Yeah, I mean, remember when the FBI tried
to label Juggalos as a terrorist organization.

Speaker 6 (54:55):
Oh I thought it was just a gang.

Speaker 3 (54:57):
Yeah, that's it. Sorry, my potato, patato. No, they're very different.
But no, you're absolutely right. It does point to a
political motive. One cannot, at least at the very least,
it's hard to argue with that.

Speaker 2 (55:11):
It is weird that the Anti Defamation League actually had
some information on this, and their findings were that well,
well over seventy percent of murders that would be considered
extremist essentially that have occurred within the United States were

(55:31):
committed by groups that they would describe as far right
or a white supremacist. That's pretty interesting. Seventy percent of
those at least according to the Anti Defamation League. And
you know, as you can probably imagine, if you don't
believe that statistic, if you don't agree with a group

(55:51):
or organization like the Anti Defamation League, you probably disagree
with that statement, right or do you believe it's the opposite.
A lot of this ends up coming down to belief, unfortunately,
So what has the government itself done in response to

(56:14):
these concepts about antifa and the rumors and conspiracies that
have been roiling up around them.

Speaker 1 (56:21):
Things fall apart, the center cannot hold, you know what
I mean. The problem is that there's not a unified
response the US. The current US administration maintains a view
that ANTIFAJ should be considered a terrorist group and subject
to the considerations that definition includes. But Mark Bray, the

(56:45):
author you mentioned at the top. Matt says that this
is an attempt to control the conversation and shift it
away from what he describes as widespread socioeconomic discontent in
the US, which you know, goes across all levels. We're
being honest, and there's not like one group of people.
There's not one large group of people that's super happy, right,

(57:10):
And he says that there's a mathematical problem here. He
believes that there are literally not enough members of various
ANTIFAG groups out there to be doing all the stuff
that the DOJ, by the way, and the administration are
claiming that they have done. So yeah, and then you'll

(57:32):
see other of course, the ideas in municipal, regional level governments,
state level governments may differ. Your individual mileage may vary.
That's the problem. There was a report by a national
counter terrorism unit in January of twenty twenty I want
to say that found the same thing they were, Like,
no one's on the same page about this.

Speaker 6 (57:53):
We have these serious gaps.

Speaker 1 (57:56):
I don't know if we can go out and call
a group terrorist and just keep changing the definition of
what terrorism is or what that group is until we
get it to work, because.

Speaker 6 (58:05):
That's a little bit like, well, far be it for
me to say the.

Speaker 3 (58:08):
F word fascism?

Speaker 7 (58:10):
Right, Yeah, it's a little bit right to like, Look,
we all love improvisation, love improv yes, and is such
a such a beautiful panacea balm?

Speaker 6 (58:23):
But does improvisation belong in these kind of things?

Speaker 1 (58:27):
Does it belong in government?

Speaker 6 (58:29):
I don't know.

Speaker 3 (58:30):
Yeah, I mean, I guess it's true. But there's definitely
a lot of things that don't belong in government, but
we see them every day, and improvisations certainly become a
big one.

Speaker 1 (58:40):
Yes, And this is an ongoing story. Sorry I'm not above,
but this is an ongoing story because right now, if
this would if this perspective was pushed through and this
designation became closer to being a reality, no one really

(59:01):
knows what would happen. We haven't been to that like
part of constitutional argument.

Speaker 3 (59:07):
Yet.

Speaker 1 (59:08):
Constitutional scholars are the majority of them are like, Okay,
this would be illegal, but no one can No one
has one hundred percent proof about that.

Speaker 6 (59:19):
Like we, it would be an argument.

Speaker 1 (59:22):
And while it was being an argument, you can bet
your bottom dollar that forces on the ground would just
act like, you know, the argument have been decided in
whichever way they wish, whatever that way might be, And
that's where we're at. We tried on this one to
give an objective view of antifought and the conspiracies and
the differing narratives about it, and also the huge again,

(59:46):
the huge, the tremendous problems with definitions. If I start
calling people pop farts and the definition of a pop
fart is that I think you're a pop fart, then
it just depends on what kind of day I'm ating
right as to whether or not you were prosecuted as
a pop fart.

Speaker 3 (01:00:03):
That's just yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:00:05):
Best pop farts out there are definitely strawberry frosted, just
so everybody's aware.

Speaker 3 (01:00:10):
I like the cinnamon sugar ones myself. I can't stand them, really, Okay,
I guess, uh, I guess we're on two sides of
the pop part divide here. My friend, I'm a Smores guy.
I like the Spores Ones two. No, I like this
Smores one too, because they've got the Graham cracker or
kind of crust you know that really sets them apart.

(01:00:31):
But it's the same as like, you know, this labeling
thing is something that we see too in in in
political rhetoric, where people are given kind of insulting nicknames
and it starts to kind of sink into the public
con when you repeat something enough. Our brains tend to
bucket things in those ways that you were talking about.

(01:00:53):
Then at the top of the show, our brains look
for patterns, and that could be something as simple as saying,
you know, farty binn Bolan, but before you know it,
people think Ben Bollen's got a flatulence problem. I'm sorry,
I'm just sticking with the fart thing here, you know.
But it's it's true, and the words are very powerful
and Antifa because it's such a pithy, little brand name

(01:01:15):
sounding thing. It's something that's very easy to lump folks into,
even if you don't really know what it is, which
a lot of people don't seem to.

Speaker 2 (01:01:23):
So we would love to know your opinion about all
of this. Are you extremely anti antifa or are you
down with whatever that cause represents?

Speaker 1 (01:01:38):
You know?

Speaker 2 (01:01:39):
According to you, are you like Chandler, We're a steck
of Charlotte, North Carolina, who, according to the intercept, wrote
wrote a message to the FBI and was all like, hey,
I lead Antifa over here in Charlotte.

Speaker 3 (01:01:54):
What's up?

Speaker 2 (01:01:54):
And then they totally came out to his house to
have a little chat with him. Read the intercept. By
the way, that story is called, he tweeted that he
was the leader of Antifa. Then the FBI asked him
to be an informant. It's fantastic, but you know, how really,
how do you feel about this? What do you think
about it? We would love to know your opinion, especially

(01:02:15):
if you identify as Antifa or you are part of
a group that would consider themselves Antifa. We'd love to
hear from you and just know your story. You can
contact us anonymously, by the way, if you wish to
do that through an email or through a phone call
that you can just you can talk to us if

(01:02:36):
you're worried about your own safety or privacy.

Speaker 6 (01:02:40):
Right yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:02:43):
Also, while you're at it, what's your where are you
at with this whole pop tart pop fart thing. You know,
we want your opinions. You are the most important part
of this show and this has nothing to do with anything.
But I don't know about you all. I'm curious. Why
is it normal in the US the candy for breakfast?

Speaker 6 (01:03:02):
Let us know.

Speaker 1 (01:03:04):
Let us know about the antifas stuff first. That should
be the priority you can get in com.

Speaker 2 (01:03:09):
People should be eating bacon, right, just bacon.

Speaker 6 (01:03:13):
Just bacon, you know it. Let us know.

Speaker 1 (01:03:17):
You can find us in so many ways. As Matt said,
you can find us on Facebook. You can find us
on Instagram, you can find us on Twitter. Of the three,
we highly recommend our Facebook community page. Here's where it
gets crazy. You can also find us as individuals online.

Speaker 3 (01:03:33):
Yeah, if you'd like to do so. You can find
me on Instagram. I am at how now, Noel Brown.

Speaker 2 (01:03:38):
If you want to know my Instagram handle and your upset,
you're gonna have to listen to another episode of Stuff
they don't want you to know to figure out my handle.

Speaker 3 (01:03:47):
Well played, Matt, Wait, hold the audience hostage, my man.

Speaker 2 (01:03:51):
Oh, the master at work, changing the rules as we go.

Speaker 6 (01:03:56):
Doing a chef kiss for you man.

Speaker 1 (01:03:58):
Okay, yeah, you can also so I've been building out
some survival kits for friends and families. You can watch
a little bit more of that at Ben Bolan on Instagram.
You can also find me on Twitter at Ben Bolan HSW.
But I hate social media, you might be saying, we
of all people get it. If you have a message
you'd still like to relate to us, we have a
phone number you can call.

Speaker 3 (01:04:18):
That's right. You can reach us at one eight three
three STDWYTK. Leave a message at the sound of Ben's
dulcet tone, and I think they're what three and a
half minutes is ish apiece, So you know, try to
be brief if you can, but feel free to leave
a couple if you need to continue the story. And
now we've got a weekly outlet for these wonderful messages

(01:04:39):
from you the most important part of the show, So
bring them on and you might hear yourself with the show.
Please be sure to let us know if you want
to remain anonymous, if you want us to take your
name out entirely. We've been taking last names out just
to standard operating procedure, but just let us know if
you want what level of anonymity you wish, and we.

Speaker 2 (01:04:55):
Will honor that, and just as a counterpoint, the shorter
and sweeter you make your message, no matter if it's
a suggestion or comment or whatever, the better, because honestly,
we're still in the midst of June messages right now,
trying to make our way through, so hopefully very soon
we will catch up.

Speaker 3 (01:05:13):
But it's a relatively good problem to have. These are
these are really great stories, and we're finally at a
place where we can actually kind of push some of
those out for all of you to hear. I'm personally
excited about it. Me too.

Speaker 2 (01:05:24):
I think we're all excited. Just shorter and sweeter could
be better if you wanted to, if you wanted to.
If you don't want to do any of that stuff,
but you still want to contact us, you can always
reach us at our good old fashioned email.

Speaker 5 (01:05:36):
We are conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com.

Speaker 2 (01:05:59):
Stuff they don't want you to know is a production
of iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.