01-06-26 - 10am - Hard to Discern What The Truth Is and Seize Property

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Michael at ol.

Speaker 2 (00:02):
I'm really struggling trying to understand how a person could
delineate the best of Michael Brown from the marginal Michael
Brown to the worst of Michael Brown, and quiring minds
want to know.

Speaker 1 (00:22):
Well, I guess I have to explain everything. It's really
quite simple. Even someone like me, the worst of the worst,
there's always a better worse than the worst worst. So
what Dragon does is he just takes all of the
flam and the boogers and the you know, the out there,

(00:42):
and he just finds that which is the least worse,
which turns out to be the best of the worst.
Got that that's what you do, right?

Speaker 2 (00:51):
Yeah?

Speaker 1 (00:51):
That sounds about right. Yeah, everything is terrible, right, so
you just find the least terrible stuff We've put it
over there, exactly. Yeah, and so that that's the best.
That's the best of the worst. My cash, you, is
this one of those days we have to explain everything?
Holy cow, do you think we get paid to do
something of quality? We should since we moved over here

(01:14):
to Koa from k How but now we're back on
k how. Also, so we have we have conflicting standards.

Speaker 3 (01:21):
Yeah, exactly, conflicting standards even in a free I think
this is a good transition from January sixth What Gouber number?

Speaker 1 (01:31):
What?

Speaker 2 (01:31):
What number?

Speaker 1 (01:32):
You? Seventy seven thirteen? Wow, you're you're in a role today.
Keep at it. You're digging your hole pretty well. This
is a good transition from the narrative of January sixth
to my proposition that even in even in a free

(01:55):
society like ours, as free as it may still or
still not be, the most intelligent and independent people cannot
entirely escape the influence of state propaganda. In nineteen forty two,
Oh my god, they're thinking of themselves. He's going back

(02:15):
to nineteen forty two. After fighting in the Spanish Civil
War from nineteen thirty six to nineteen thirty seven, a
disillusion writer went back to London. He is going to
write about his experience. And it wasn't just that the
fascist in Spain had won and his side, which was
a small anti Stalinist Marxist group, had lost. I want

(02:38):
to emphasize that again. The guy I'm talking about was
anti Stalinists, but they were a Marxist group, a socialist group.
What frightened this individual was the ease in which the
truth itself had been erased and then gets replaced by propaganda.

(03:03):
He wrote, I saw great battles reported where there had
been no fighting, in complete silence, where hundreds of men
had been killed. I saw troops had fought bravely denounced
as cowards, and traders and others who had never even
seen a shot fired hailed as the heroes of imaginary victories.
And I saw in the newspapers in London retelling these lies,

(03:23):
and eager intellectuals building emotional superstructures over events that had
never happened. We see that all the time here, all
the time, and maybe this make number seventy seven thirteen happy.
On both sides of the political spectrum. In fact, I
would say on every little degree of the political spectrum,

(03:45):
we see that. That writer George Orwell in his book
Looking Back on the Spanish Civil War, so you can
see there's a disconnect between reality and narrative, and it
clearly made an impression on or Well because he was
really worried that quote, the very concept of objective truth

(04:06):
is fading out of the world. He was writing that
in nineteen forty two. Really, my point or the point
of Ecclesiastes that there's really nothing new under the sun.
We go through these cycles, and we're going through a
cycle now. We live in a post truth society. I am,
and I haven't yet, but there have been days where

(04:27):
I have truly thought about completely obliterating with maybe the
exception of my Instagram account, because I like seeing the
photos of friends and my granddaughters and grand grandson and
family members and friends. I like seeing those photographs. But
even on Instagram, I'm really sick and tired of the

(04:51):
I don't even call them commercials, but they're sponsored posts
in which it's clearly artificial intelligence. It's clearly a I
generated And then I will just for giggles and grims.
Sometimes that's not what I really want to say, but
you know what I'm want to say, I can't for
FECs and grims. Sometimes I'll go through and I'll look

(05:14):
at comments, or I will take what they have written,
plug it into Lexus and Nexus or some other AI
platform and see is this true? And I would I
would venture to say that at least seventy five percent
of the time it's not true. The same is true
on x Facebook. Oh, Facebook is even the worst is
the absolute worst in my opinion, and in fact, some

(05:37):
of you have been guilty of it because I've had
I've had to take down some posts that you have
put up. We live in a society now where you know,
it's kind of funny because what's our Let me see
if I can pull up my signature. We have to
put on our signature lines. Now, where's my scent folder.

(06:00):
Let's see guaranteed human. That's a new tagline for iHeartMedia.
Guaranteed human. Well we are. I'm here in the flesh
and blood, although from two to four I'm not. Dragon's
here in flesh and blood, so it's guaranteed human. I

(06:21):
think what they really mean is it's really me, It's
really dragon. We don't just sit at home and feed
talking points into, you know, an AI platform and say
come up with a monologue. We just don't do that.
But it's getting harder and harder to discern, because the

(06:41):
better AI gets, the more difficult is to discern. The
truth between must been AI generated. And that's why I
really I do at some point and just think I
just want to delete these accounts. I haven't primarily for
this reason because, particularly by the way you can go
follow me on X at Michael Brown USA. I don't

(07:05):
particularly with X because I have curated my account so
that I've got particular organizations individuals that I follow that
I have either I know they're going to lie, so
I want to see what they're lying about, or I
know they're going to tell the truth, so I want
to see what they say. And I've got a lot

(07:25):
of the news organizing. You know, members of the Cabal
are on my curated list because I want to see
what they're saying. But there's a disconnect between reality and
narrative that clearly made this impression on Orwell, because, as
I said, he really was worried that the very concept

(07:45):
of objective truth is fading out of the world in
nineteen forty two. So the theme of falsified history and
the destruction of truth then surfaced again when he wrote
nineteen eighty four, where he first used the term memory holes,
memory holes that swallowed inconvenient facts and then the past

(08:10):
gets rewritten to suit the needs of the party. That
book would go on to sell I think Well next
to us of twenty five million copies worldwide, And today
we think of George Orwell as a profit for foreseeing
a future in which the state's deliberate power could actually
extinguish truth itself. Yet I don't think that many today

(08:36):
remember that five years before the publication of nineteen eighty four,
there is an Austrian economist in his own magnum opus
that explored how the state destroys the truth, Frederick hit

(08:57):
eighteen ninety nine to nineteen ninety two. Now, I would
guess that if you are a what I would call
a legacy listener of this particular timeslot, then you probably
have heard of Friedrich Hei because I'm certain that Mike
Rosen probably referred to him a bazillion times. And his

(09:18):
book the most Name of which The Road to Served
Them j that got rejected by three publishers before finding
a home. The very first run of The Road to
Serve Them two thousand copies sold out in ten days,
and then it went on to sale more than two
million copies. It has been translated into more than twenty
other languages. And the core argument of The Road to

(09:40):
Served Them was pretty simple. Central planning, however, well intentioned,
erodes individual freedom and set society on the highway to
serf them. Central planning, Yeah, yesterday. It's a minor example.

(10:04):
Two examples from yesterday. One I pleasure the SoundBite of
for lack of a better label. The tenants are that
Zofram Mom Donni has appointed in New York who doesn't
apparently believe in private property rights. I think that's an
example of central planning. The other example is I recently

(10:26):
purchased a new vehicle and I purchased it online out
of state because I couldn't find exactly what I wanted
with any dealership in Colorado. Finally found one in Indiana
had it shipped to me, and of course it's the
first time in my entire life that I've purchased an
automobile from out of state. The bureaucracy that Colorado has

(10:48):
set up is mind numbingly stupid. The hoops you have
to jump through to register from many of you there
are non native that have moved into the state. I'm
sure you've maybe experienced the same thing just trying to
register a car you already own that you just moved

(11:08):
into Colorado. That's probably bad enough. But if you've never
actually purchased a vehicle online and then had it, you know,
transported to your driveway and then gotten all the paperwork
and gone to the you know, to the local DMV.
I want to say something very particular here. The person
who helped me, she was wonderful, she was pleasant, she

(11:32):
was friendly. But my gosh, the paperwork and the double
checking and the checking and going through every little line
by line by line, and you know, well, well, you
know what, what's this phone numbering? And you know you
you paid this, and you you you paid so much
down and you trade it in something of value, and

(11:54):
what's that? And where's your contract? Oh? This contract is
kind of hard to read in the book. It was
just for ever central planning part. I think of Colorado's
desire to kind of discourage you from owning a private vehicle.
That sets us on a path toward serfdom. But I

(12:15):
think something else gets overlooked beyond high x idea that
central planning eventually leads toward serfdom. And that's that economic
control does not remain confined to the economy, because once
the government directs production and prices ineviably, that's going to

(12:37):
morph into what you think, how you express things, even
what you might believe. So for Hyak, the danger of
socialism was not only just a material impoverishment as we
see right now in Venezuela, but the steady expansion of
control over the intellect. He wrote, it is not enough

(12:58):
that everybody should be forced to work for the same ends.
It is essential that people should come to regard them
as their own ends. I am my own end. I
pursue my own self interest. If you've not heard me
I say that, I've always said that a lot. What
makes this country great is that everybody can pursue their

(13:20):
own self interest. Now there are guardrails. My self interest
cannot infringe on anybody else's rights. So I've got to
pursue my self interest within the confines of respecting the
freedom of speech and the freedom of association and everything
else that people engage in the right of contract. I

(13:43):
was trying to warn this. I think that once government
begins to manage prices and production, you'll soon catch on
to that. So therefore the government also has to at
some point start to manage your thinking. And when the
government takes control over your economic life, it must justify

(14:07):
those decisions to the people, and the government has to
make people believe that they are the right decisions that
the government has made, and when they do that, that
inevitably begins to decide which opinions and values align with
the government's thinking, rewarding and amplifying voices that comply, while

(14:29):
at the same time simultaneously punishing, suppressing, and silencing those
that do not align with the government's values or their opinions.
The end of truth, chapter eleven of the Road deserved them.
I read the book for the first time. I don't

(14:50):
know for anom account here fifty years ago. I hate
to say that that didn't really stick out to me.
But take the COVID nineteen pandemic. What was that really?
I'm not going to put on a conspiracy hat, but

(15:11):
you know that I'm speaking the truth when I say
that that was a type of economic experiment. What did
the federal government do? All these health recommendations soon became
a religion. It became the dogmas. And if you were
to question, say, the efficacy of wearing a mask. I

(15:33):
just heard in the news David Cale talk about somebody
flew season they recommend you wear masks. Wear it's a
good grief. We've been through this before. Those masks don't
do anything to stop viruses. Bacteria, yes, viruses, no, you
don't know the difference. Go back to basic biology one
on one. If you question if the efficacy of masks

(15:59):
or the stupid idea of social distancing, which again was
a number pulled out of of pull other butts, you
risk being censored. You were accused of spreading misinformation. And
so the scientific debate collapsed based on official decrees. And

(16:21):
if you questioned the plan, or you resisted the plan,
you could lost your job, you got booted off those
social media platforms. I don't think Hayk would have been
surprised by any of that. He warned that the plans
constructed by central planners must be sacrilsanct and exempt from criticism.

(16:41):
He wrote, if the people are to support the common
effort without hesitation, then they've got to be convinced that
not only the end aimed at, but also the means
chosen are the right ones. Public criticism or even expressions
of doubts must be suppressed because they tend to weaken
public support. It's precisely what's going on in this country

(17:06):
right now, and that's what's going to happen in New York,
because in New York, Zofran has already decided that oh,
police's tenant Zor has that private property ownership or being
a landlord is some form of white supremacy, and it's

(17:26):
somehow enslaving people. The one way I find owning private
property to be enslaved is the fact that I may
have a house, I may have several properties that are
completely paid for, no mortgages, no leans, know nothing, But
do I really own it? Every year I get a

(17:49):
tax bill, the taxes property that I've paid for that
I have no leans, that I have complete ownership of,
except the government still got its faces in that private property.
And what happens if I don't pay the taxes, Well,
it may take them a while, but eventually the bureaucracy
will catch up with me and it will get sold

(18:10):
at a tax sale. And so then my choice is
either pay all the back taxes and reclaim the property
and start paying the taxes again, or let it go.
So is the government's a certain control over the economy,
even things like your own private property? Facts evidence all
that gets subsumed to political goals. Now Orwell illustrated that

(18:34):
vividly in nineteen eighty four, because when the Party refused
to accept Winston Smith claimed that two plus two equals four.
Oh that was heresy. Well, I think there's heresy going
on in the country right now. When I hear mom
DOMI invoke the warmth of collectivism. As I can think of,

(18:55):
is a boot stamping on a human face forever. Yeah,
the boot on the neck. So Lives of TikTok revealed
that her name Sea Weaver. That's mom Nannie's nearly appointed
tennant protection czar. But let's spell zar, not czar. Let's

(19:19):
spell it tsar, you know, like give the old Russian czars.
She's equatess home ownership with white supremacy. Now, the obvious
implication is that private property is going to have to
be abolished because well, anti racist grounds, you got to
get rid of private property. Back in twenty nineteen, she

(19:43):
now she since deactivated her ex account, but the Internet
lives forever, So a lot of people, including Lives a
TikTok and others, have posted these. She wrote, quote private property,
including and kind of especially in old cap home ownership
is a weapon of white supremacy masquerading as wealth building

(20:07):
public policy. Wow. So the American dream of owning your
own home or maybe even owning your own business, like
having a you know, you go somewhere and you build
a small steel building, and you open a small manufacturing

(20:28):
facility or a warehouse where you're going to you know,
drop ship things or something whatever, are your private property. No,
that's a weapon of white supremacy. Now that's almost well
that's now seven years ago, twenty nineteen, twenty twenty six.
So this isn't something like, oh I just came up

(20:51):
with this. This is a long standing belief. This is
what the woman truly believes. We heard it yesterday. I
want you to hear it again. I need to turn
this down. Here we go.

Speaker 4 (21:11):
The centuries, we've really treated property as an individualized good
and not a collective good. And we are going to
and transitioning to treating it as a collective good and
towards a model of shared equity will require that we
think about it differently. And it will mean that families,

(21:32):
especially white families, but some UOC families who are homeowners
as well, are going to have a different relationship to
property than the one that we currently have.

Speaker 1 (21:44):
I think, wow, we're going to have a different relationship
to property. Now. The statement I read to you early
private property, including and kind of especially home ownership is
a weapon of white supremacy. Mass reading is wealth building
public policy. That was left out. You went to talk
about narratives again. That was left out of the glowing

(22:06):
article about her published yesterday in the New York Times.
Oh yeah, I know. You're shocked, right, you mean there's
gambling in the whorehouse. I'm shocked. Now. The article mostly
discussed landlord abuses in places like the Bronx and Brooklyn,
And I'm not here to defend every landlord in New

(22:28):
York City. I'm not here to defend every landlord in
the country. Some landlords really sucked. The landlord of this
really sucked because I noticed that the year at Old
the men's restroom still isn't repaired, and the sign that
I put up challenging them to have it done by
the end of the year is still is still there.
And when did you put that sign up? Way before Christmas?

(22:50):
And in fact management knows about the sign because I
was just in there and had to go to a
stall because Jojo was at the urine, and so you know,
he's seen the sign and he hasn't taken it down.
So I'm not gonna I'm not gonna defend the landlord
of this building. On the first day in office, here's

(23:12):
Mom Donnie a company sofram accompanied by THEO Weaver. They
went to a rent stabilized studio in Flatbush where he
inspected a cracked floor and a bunch of other signs
of disrepair. Now that particular complex is owned by some
out they called the Pinnacle Group. They declared bankruptcy last year.

(23:33):
I do believe in denvery all over the country. Neglectful
landlords are indeed a scourge of the housing market. That's
even if upkeep is at times hindered, particularly in New
York because the government imposed rent ceilings all the lopside
and the loss that make it all but impossible to
evict a tenant that isn't want to pay rent. Tackling

(23:58):
those landlords is one thing, and there is a way
to tackle those landlords, and that is through obviously tenant lawsuits,
class action lawsuits, government regulation, legislation, city council condemning properties
are there are all sorts of things. But it's quite
another for Zamdami, for Zopram and for his tenantsar to

(24:26):
frame all home ownership as a form of racism, because
I think exactly what she's doing. In New York, a
third of African American families and a fifth of Hispanic
families own their own homes, according to New York's Commission
on Racial Equity. Now, I think a lot of other

(24:47):
people of color aspire to ownership, and New York boasts
lots of black and brown landlords. So are those homeowners
or the would be homeowners, the people that want to
own a are they somehow engaged in white supremacy? Said
to me, by wanting to live the American dream and
own their own property. It's that sort of nonsense. I'd like,

(25:14):
it's bull you know what, It's bull crap that kind
of used to float about in left wing circles during
back when wokeness was really in its peak wokeness roughly
between the second half of the first Trump administration in
the early Biden years. But then that kind of absurdity
really did, I think, in my opinion, start to kind

(25:35):
of disappear a little bit, especially with Trumps two point
h because Trump two point oh saw him garner votes
from just under half of Hispanic men. Mom Donnie did
as well as he did in part by playing down
the woke themes focusing relentlessly on the cost of living crisis,
confronting you know, immigrants in particular, and truthfully educated white

(25:58):
people also, which is a point which we should not
gloss over. He campaigned trying to disavow everything that he
stood for, and even before he's sworn in, starts making nominations, appointments,

(26:19):
and statements that belied everything that he talked about and
disavowed during the campaign. Hmm, wolf in sheep's clothing. Absolutely,
But that's what you would expect of a socialist slash
Marxist slash communist. They're gonna lie to you and they're
going to rely on the lies being believed by useful idiots,

(26:43):
which tied back to what I talked about in the
first half of the segment about how government establishes these narratives.
So for him is establishing a narrative. He established one
narrative to get elected, he establishes another narrative by which
he wants to govern, and since he's been elected, there
are signs that he plans to govern as a classic

(27:05):
left wing radical, racialist Marxist communists. And when you hire Weaver,
who honestly has been a member of his inner circle, again.
According to New York Times, that ought to be exhibit
a campaign one way, keep those people back in the closet,

(27:27):
back behind the closed door. Don't let them speak him
when they took Michelle Obama off the campaign trail back
in two thousand and seven because oh my gosh, she
was saying things that were really gonna upset the album Carque,
so let's shut her down. Well, I'm sure so for
him did the same thing with Sea see a Weaver.
Her rhetoric is really nothing short of the kind of
latter day socialism of fools. And that was how the

(27:48):
German socialist leader August Bebel characterized anti semitism himself, crediting
the left wing Austrian politician Ferdinand Croudewater with a phrase
of fools instead of analyzing unjust economic systems anisimitism, I'm okay,

(28:09):
figure anti semitism all forms of racialism blames one racial group,
as if, for example, industrial bosses a century ago need
a Jewish inspiration to lord it over the workers, or
in this case, as if lousy landlords aren't to be
found in non white countries, non white you know, cities,
or among minorities in white countries. Is Zofram wants to

(28:32):
be taken seriously as a model of how the left
can win in a post twenty twenty four environment. He
got a fire, but he won't because he himself is
a true socialist.

Speaker 5 (28:44):
Very interesting post yesterday from Tony Zaruga. His statement is
that he believes the reasonlesstitious six dip of video a
few weeks ago was in the hopes that the Delta
Forces would not to the mcdureau raid and thus protect
the Democrats, Cash cal and the very existence of the

(29:07):
deep state. Would love your thoughts on this, Michael.

Speaker 1 (29:13):
I saw that post primarily because you sent it to me.
But the one thing that I can't get over is
the operational security. The op set on that mission was
so tightly guarded, so closely held that there were zero leaks.

(29:36):
No one knew about it, and I don't understand. I
can't connect what Mark Kelly and the other five, including
Jason Crowe, what they did, however long ago that was
at least a month or so ago, knowing that this
was going to take place on January third. So I

(29:59):
understand the the logic of it, but the logic falls
apart when you look at the timeline and the operational security.
So I just don't think it was. I don't have
much time here, but I was thinking during the break
about everything like today, just today being the fifth anniversary
of January sixth, and it is, as you know, despite

(30:21):
some people are you know, well you eve been talking
about it. It's all over the news, the cable channels.
I just took to the clipping service. They've all got,
you know, sound bites and interviewing people about it. But
just think about the past twenty four hour news cycle.
So Maduro and his little drug running wifey, they appeared
in federal court in New York City before a ninety

(30:42):
two year old federal judge, and Maduro tried to claim
that he had sovereign immunity, that he was a really
nice guy, and that he's a little you know, he's
the president of his country, and this ninety two year
old basically said, slow down, bucko. They'll be time for that,
not now now. Politico characterizes that judge, whose name is

(31:06):
Alvin Hellerstein, as a young ninety two year old, and
I thought ninety two aren't at that point. I mean,
I know it's true for everybody at any age, but
couldn't the pearly gates appear at any moment. You're ninety
two year old. I mean, you're ninety two years old.

(31:28):
It's more likely than not that the gates heaven are
going to open. And this trial go back to the
Noriego trial back in nineteen eighty nine, thirty some months
if I recall correctly, thirty months from arrest through the

(31:49):
all the pre trial motions, the trial itself, and the
conviction I think was thirty months. So we're not going
to hear anything soon. And the ninety two year old
almost three years making ninety five years old. I hope
he stayed that. I know he's kind of anti Trump,

(32:10):
but I don't think that's going to affect many, if
any decisions in this criminal case. But I hope he survives.
You know why, because I don't have to see a
trial start over or a mistrial because the judge died
and you got to start all over again. Now, a
lot of experts quoted in the media anyway, they predicted

(32:36):
that the markets would have a negative reaction. Let me
look up right now, let's see all the endites are
up right now. But they kept talking about the markets
would have a negative reaction to the taking of Maduro. Well,
what really happened? US markets went crazy positive, with the
DALLA sitting a new all hike all time high yesterday,

(32:58):
So I don't get it. In Minnesota, Waltz, Tim Waltz,
the governor, announced he wasn't going to run for reelection,
which then got me to thinking about what was the
sudden turn of events that caused him to decide to
not run for reelection. Did he get a phone call

(33:18):
from oh, I don't know, Pambondi, Cash Betel, somebody that
just said, hey, we just want you to know that
you're under investigation too, and if you resign or at
least do something, maybe you wouldn't fay see any jail time.
Maybe we have decided not to prosecute you. I mean,

(33:38):
I hope that wasn't the deal, cause I hope they
do prosecute him if indeed they have probable cause for
an indictment against the governor. I hope they do that.
But why would you withdraw from the race right now?
I think maybe you got the phone call so we
might see another announcement from Walls somewhere in the near future,

(34:00):
like not only not going to run for re election.
I think I'll resign today. And you wonder why we
have to watch narratives so closely