Trump is not in control.
>> Yes.
>> The people that are orchestrating the
tempo and the timeline of events are
Israel.
>> He has surrounded himself with [music]
religious fanatics. They believe that
this war will usher in the end times. Do
you think [music] America should have a
dictator? You need a dictator now
because the system is so fundamentally
broken.
>> Totally agree. We're stuck.
>> Who wields the most power? The answer is
secret societies. The Freemasons,
[music] the Jesuits, and the classic
example is the Roth Shaw family. Do you
think Masons have any influence?
>> I don't believe in the secret society
thing. I don't believe in the Mason or
Jesuit conspiracy or the Illuminati. The
Rothschilds, what you kind of left out
there is it's a Jewish family.
>> They're also separating Francis.
>> What's the evidence for this?
>> I don't have the evidence at the top of
my head.
>> It's not real.
>> It's called Wikipedia.
>> What do you think Nick misunderstands
about Israel's influence on the world?
>> Let's just give the Infinity Gauntlet to
Nick. Okay, you're now Thanos and with a
snap of your finger, I will eliminate
this group and then all the world's
problems will be solved. Which group
would you pick?
>> Uh, correct.
>> Nick Fuentes and Professors Young.
Welcome to the Jack Neil podcast. So,
Nick, would you care to introduce
yourself and tell us a little bit about
your background briefly?
>> Sure. Yeah. I'm Nick Fuentes. I do a
show called America First and I've been
doing it for about 10 years
independently
and that's what I do.
>> Cool. And professor.
>> Yeah. So, first of all, Nick, it's great
to meet you for the first time and uh I
really appreciate you coming all this
way for this conversation. Um, as you
know, I was planning to fly to Chicago,
but because of certain issues at the
border, um, so I really appreciate you
coming all this way. My my gratitude and
my appreciation. So, my name is
Professor Tang. That is my internet
moniker. I'm not actually a professor.
Um but I have a YouTube channel called
predict predictive history and my
mission my purpose is try to analyze
history and current events in a way that
allows me to draw certain principles
which will allow me to predict the
future and my goal is to uh promote this
as a new economic discipline so as to
raise human consciousness. Yeah, I'll uh
get into what you both have said about
each other's backgrounds later in the
interview, but I think a good place to
start here is you both agreed or stated
that America has already lost the Iran
war, but Nick, you've said the war was
started because of corruption and Trump
lost because he's simply stupid. So the
first question here is why do you think
Trump launched a war on Iran and do you
think America lost the Iran war?
>> I think he started this war not for
geopolitical reasons but for
esquetological reasons. Um and my
argument is that he has surrounded
himself with religious fanatics. People
like people like Peter Hex. They believe
that this war in the Middle East will
usher in the end times. And I make this
statement because if I just analyze this
war from a game theory perspective, it
is very hard for me to um find a logical
reason why they start this war. And this
something that Nick and I can discuss.
Um but I believe this war is a religious
esquetological messianic war. And Nick,
why do you think Trump started this Iran
war?
>> Well, I agree that there's an
esqueological dimension to it. obviously
because it involves the greater Israel
project and it involves the temple and
it involves Iran's encirclement of
Israel on every side of its borders with
Hezbollah, Hamas, the PMF in Iraq and so
on. But I really believe you could trace
it to uh precipitating geopolitical
reasons which I don't think you would
even disagree with that it started with
a series of events that began when Trump
pulled us out of the nuclear deal in
2018. Trump withdrew us from the JCPOA.
Uh by 2020, Iran stopped adhering to its
commitments under the nuclear deal,
enriching without limitations, making a
highlyenriched uranium stockpile. It was
when Joe Biden then got elected in 2020
and took office in 21 immediately began
to reconstitute the Iranian nuclear
deal. And then with the help of China in
23, they tried to do a reproachment
between Iran and Saudi Arabia. These
were some of the factors, I think, why
one, Hamas attacked Israel, and then why
Israel used that as a pretext to declare
war, not just on Hamas, but on all of
Iran's proxies, including Hezbollah, the
Assad regime, the Houthi rebels, the PMF
in Iraq. And that basically started this
inexraable process where, to your point,
they then got Trump elected. It was
American jewelry. Israel move to get
Trump in office because they knew he was
going to take us to war against Iran and
it would fulfill the larger project of
making Israel the dominant regional
power and that guarantees their ability
then to annex the West Bank uh Gaza and
then destroy the Alaka mosque and
rebuild the third temple. I think that's
certainly a part of it.
>> And do you have any disagreements with
what he just said?
>> No, I mean I think he gave a very clear
timeline. What I would argue is there
had to be a reason why Trump withdrew
the United States from the GCPOA, which
is um commonly referred to as the Obama
nuclear deal with Iran. Um and the idea
was that over time the United States
would lift sanctions on Iran as long as
Iran agreed to abide by uh international
inspections of its nuclear program. So
Iran could use nuclear uh enrichment for
its civilian nuclear program but it
could not use it for uh to develop
nuclear weapons. Also we have we have to
remember at this time theat the supreme
religious leader had a fatwa which
strictly prohibited uh using uh uranium
enrichment for nuclear nuclear weapon
development as well as to use nuclear
weapons in a war. So there were a lot of
um constraints against Iran developing
nuclear weapon and by tearing apart a
GCP CPA OA or by Trump unilaterally
withdrawing from the GCPOA it basically
incentivized Iran to pursue nuclear uh
or uranium enrangement. So that's what
the GCPOA is. Okay. So but it was not
just the GCPOA that was that was the
first step. Then what happened was uh
Trump moved the American embassy from
Tel Aviv to Jerusalem which was
extremely provocative not just um to the
Palestinians but basically to the entire
Arab world. Uh there was a consensus
that uh Jerusalem would um would be a
neutral um territory because of its
religious significance to all Abrahamic
religions. Then you had Trump
recognizing Israel's control over the
Golden Heights from Israel. You also had
the Abraham Accords. Uh and then of
course on January 3rd, 2020, Trump
ordered the assassination of General
Kasam Salmani, which was the most
provocative act because he was a de
facto ambassador of Iran in the Middle
East. And for uh the longest time, he
was actually working very closely with
Americans to contain ISIS in that uh
area. So the question then is we both
agree there is this timeline of events
but where we might disagree is what is
motivating Trump in in the in these
events. And so what I would argue is
>> that um somehow Trump in his head became
influenced by Zionism in America. And
when I mean Zionism I include both um
the issue lobby as well as Christian
Zionists. So people like John of
Christians United for Israel
>> is following their plan to create as
much chaos as possible in the Middle
East in order to create the great
project and then ultimately to um
provoke the war of Gawk and Mog and
unless you understand it that way it's
very hard to explain his actions. So
that's what what my argument would be.
>> I would just disagree that Trump is
doing it for those reasons. I think that
people around him, including the state
of Israel, have created the conditions
where there are fewer options for Trump
other than the ones that would end in
that situation. So, for example, because
you're right, and a lot of people don't
know this, it was Trump that promised in
16 to move the embassy from Tel Aviv to
Jerusalem. And people at that time, at
least from the Trump movement of which I
was a part of, they said, "Well, that's
really no big deal." They said, "We're
going to give the Zionist lobby a small
concession, which is this embassy. In
exchange, Aden's going to give them $100
million in 1618 in 2020." So people said
moving an embassy, what's really the big
deal? This is just a quid proquo. But
the precipitating event behind October
7th, what was October 7th called? It was
Al Axa flood after the Al Axa mosque.
This is when Hamas invades from Gaza and
it was a direct response to provocative
Jewish actions on the Temple Mount where
they were on the steps doing sacrifices
and other things specifically to incite
Muslims to attack them. So the so much
of Trump's recognition of Israel's
sovereignty is again it wasn't just
moving the embassy it was recognizing
Israel's sovereignty over Jerusalem as
the eternal capital of Israel that
created the conditions for a major clash
between Palestinians and Israelis. And I
think that that's a good example of how
clearly the Zionist lobby understood the
significance of moving moving the
embassy. They understood the religious
esqueological dimension of what does
that mean when we move the embassy to
Jerusalem. It means Israel controls the
capital which means then they're going
to take the West Bank which means then
they're going to take uh the Alexa
mosque down and build the temple. I
think Trump ideologically is not there.
I think for him it's more transactional.
And so for him I it's more like how I
described it that he looks at someone
like Dantis who was a representative at
that time in 18 Dantis was one of the
biggest proponents of moving the embassy
pressuring Trump to move it and I think
Trump kind of looked at that like all
right I'll let him have the embassy if
that's what gets the Zionists on board
for the midterms and re-election. So
that that would only be maybe a slight
disagreement there about Trump's
motivations in particular. Can you break
down exactly what you believe Trump's
motivations to be for the war are then?
>> Well, the thing about the war is that,
and I try to unpack this on my show all
the time, you have to talk about the
strategic imperatives of every state.
Israel's strategic imperative is the
threat on the periphery, which is the
northern border, Hezbollah, funded and
supplied by Iran through Syria. And
that's been that way since 96 in the
clean break memo. It's securing the
northern border. and they say we got to
take down Iraq, take down Syria, then go
for the head of the snake, Iran. Only
then can we cut off Hezbollah and
control our immediate surroundings. And
what you understand is that for Israel
to control its immediate periphery, they
have to destroy Iran, specifically its
regime. They need regime change in
particular. So Iran must respond to
this. They see that Israel and the
United States have been doing this to
other states. They did it to Saddam
Hussein in Iraq, Gaddafi and Libya,
Assad in Syria. And so Iran knows regime
survival is now their imperative. If the
US and Israel is destroying every
government, then the Ayatollah says,
"I'm next. How do I deter an attack from
the US and Israel and ensure my
survival? Only way [snorts] to do that
is a nuclear weapon." So then, but if
they race towards a bomb, that will
invite US aggression because the US has
a non-prololiferation policy. So Iran
has to go in the middle. They called the
threshold status. We'll be more closer
to a nuclear bomb than maybe Saddam was,
but not actually have an arsenal, which
would trigger an attack from the US. But
that Iran has an arsenal that actually
brings the United States into the
picture. The US is not married to the
idea of regime change. That's not a
vital strategic interest for the United
States. But non-prololiferation is
because the United States as global
hegeimon is unchallenged by middle
powers like Iran. Iran can never win a
war against the United States, invade
the United States, strategically defeat
the United States. But if they had a
nuclear bomb theoretically, and then
they miniaturaturized it and put it on
an ICBM, then that could threaten the US
and destabilize the whole order.
>> So, so to put it simply, Israel wants
Iran gone, so Iran gets a nuke. Iran
getting a nuke means the United States
has to make sure they don't have one.
And this is what brings the United
States in to either make a deal like
Obama did or Trump comes in to mow the
grass and suppress this capability by
bombing the nuclear complex and the
missile program.
>> Right. So I guess what's Trump's goal
though specifically? Like what is is he
just trying to survive this thing?
>> I think that Trump is that's that's sort
of the thing and I think I agree with
you on this. Trump is not in control.
>> Yes. The people that are orchestrating
the tempo and the timeline of events are
Israel. They are initiating and Trump is
reacting to the situation. So for Trump,
I think he's got domestic concerns,
international concerns. He sees the Iran
thing flare up. He wants Iran to be
further from a nuclear breakout.
Meaning, you know, cuz people confuse
this like Iran has the schematics, the
knowhow, the blueprints to make a
nuclear centrifuge and a bomb. It's just
a question of what's the timeline
between deciding to make one and having
one. And Trump wants to make that
timeline as long as possible, kicking
the can down the road. Uh but he's being
drawn further and further in by Israel.
I think that's really the program.
>> Yeah. So I would agree. Um so let me
talk about two things. Okay. And uh I
think both points will just butcher your
argument which is that Israel is really
the one that's pushing the agenda and
Trump is because he's transactional
right uh he is not actually in strategic
control of the situation. So the first
idea is uh Nick is completely right
United States is committed to
non-prololiferation in the Middle East.
So if Iran were to develop a nuclear
weapon then the United States has to
intervene. Um, but so if we just take
that as a premise, then what we
appreciate is a lot a lot of Trump's
actions don't actually make any sense
because if you are committed to Iran not
getting a nuclear weapon, first of all,
first of all, you would not withdraw
from the JACPOA because even if Iran was
not um, you know, sincere or genuine in
in in in following the GP GCP OA, there
was an international mandate in place.
you could fool the United Nations uh
apply pressure on Iran.
>> Uh and that would give the United States
more legitimacy, right? So that's the
first thing Trump should not have done.
Withdraw from the GC uh PA. That's the
first thing.
>> Second thing is you would not have
assassinated on the first of the war the
Adatollah Kame because he has been
consistent in all his decades of power.
Iran will not never develop a nuclear
weapon. Um and so when you kill the
alatollah k you're almost uh
incentivizing a new leader his son to um
negate the previous fatwa and allow uh
for the development of nuclear weapon.
Okay. That's something you would not do.
You would not assassinate the alatollah.
Right. Um and the the third thing you
would not do of course is you would not
unilaterally and for no reason attack
Iran. Right. So it's not just
assassinating the Aatollah but there
were six weeks of continuous bombing of
the country and Trump consistently said
that they were intent on regime change.
Right? So it's almost like you're trying
to provoke as much as possible Iran into
getting a nuclear weapon. So that's the
first point I would make. Okay. So I
think there are three major pillars to
the clean memo. The first is to
establish Israel as a regional regional
hedgeimon in the middle east uh through
balance of power. Uh the second is to um
have a clean break from the arsal peace
process. Like let's not negotiate with
the Palestinians because they're
animals, right? They're they're
subhuman. They only understand force,
right? If a dog is mis misbehaving, you
beat the crap out of this dog. So, uh,
let's show that we're stronger than, uh,
the Palestinians. But the third thing
which is really interesting is the clean
break memo also calls for decreasing
Israeli dependence on the United States,
>> right? So, the clean break is just like,
let's just turn away from the current
world order. And then you ask yourself,
this is really odd because in the mid
'9s, basically every policy maker in the
world agreed that neoliberalism is a
solution, the Washington consensus. So
why would you
Israel decide to turn away from
neoliberalism? And the answer, if you
think about it, the only answer is
because of um me messianic Judaism,
because of Zionism, because they believe
that Israel is destined
um to achieve the greater Israel project
and uh and and then usher in the end
times when the Messiah will come and
then God will come and there'll be peace
on earth forever. That's the only way to
appreciate the clean break memo because
it's such a radical departure from
orthodox thinking at that time. I'm not
sure if you agree with my analysis.
>> I yeah, I do agree with that. I would
say I mean clean break, you're 100%
correct. It means a clean break from the
policy of land for peace, which is what
they had been doing with Egypt and
Jordan. In 79, they had Camp David
Accords with Jimmy Carter. And in order
to make peace with Egypt, which was
Israel's permanent enemy from 48 until
79, they had to give up the Sinai
Peninsula. They had to give up control
over Gaza. They were talking about doing
the same thing with Syria by giving up
the Golan. And then ultimately they want
to make peace with all the Arabs by
giving land to the Palestinians going
back to the pre67 borders giving
Palestine a state. And the Lyud party
which became ascendant in the 70s of
which Netanyahu is a part of basically
said 79 Camp David was a disaster. They
said Israel is such a small country.
That's the one thing we don't have
enough of is land. land which has
resources, land which can be um utilized
by the population. They said so instead
we need to break from this policy.
Instead of trading away the Golan, the
West Bank Gaza, they said we actually
have to just confront and destroy all
our enemies in a systematic way. That
was actually prefigured by Od Yanan's
plan for the 1980s. He wrote the grand
strategy for Israel and it goes even
deeper than clean break where they said
what we effectively have to do is rip
apart all the powerful Arab or Muslim
countries with sectarian and other
divisions. So they said we're going to
go into Iraq and make it three countries
Kurdish, Sunni and Shiite and we'll go
into Egypt and it'll make it a Coptic
Christian country and an Arab Muslim
country and go into Syria divide it
between the Alawites, the Sunnis, the
Kurds and the Drews. And they said what
will be left is a mosaic of tribes with
flags, small stateletits, tiny states
that are not big enough to challenge
Israel. And to your point, that makes
Israel a regional hegeimon. That means
they can take everything west of the
Jordan River, take everything south of
the Latani River in Lebanon, have these
natural defensible borders, larger
territory. They don't have this like
Palestinian state in the middle of their
country. And what that fundamentally
allows them to do is one project power
in the region, but two to your point
that gives them maneuverability to go
after the mosque. That's really what
they fear is if Iran and all these other
powerful Muslim countries are standing,
then there would probably be a war with
Israel, might still be when Israel goes
and topples the Alaka mosque. But this
is where I would say it's almost hard to
discern where one argument ends and the
other begins in the sense that [snorts]
for Israel to destroy the mosque, build
the third temple, bring on the end
times, they need full control over the
periphery, they need to be a regional
hegeimon. That also is just a natural
foreign policy that states pursue, I
think, is to try to maximize their
power. This is a realist perspective and
you could say it's aggressive or
expansionist. But this is what Putin is
doing in Ukraine. It's what China aims
to do in Taiwan, which is a power is
going to try to ascend the ladder and
become the dominant force in his region.
So Nick, would you say uh the Greater
Israel Project is
based in pragmatic reasons and the
esquetology is the fuel to get people
rallied around it? Hey, really quick.
Did you know that Warren Buffett, one of
the greatest investors of all time,
thinks buying gold is a silly
investment? Now, clearly a lot of people
disagree considering gold is at all-time
highs this year. But whether you think
Warren Buffett's right or wrong, today's
sponsor, Koshi, lets you take a side on
gold without having to invest in it
yourself. Koshi is a CFTC regulated US
exchange where you can trade on
realworld events from your phone. things
like sports, politics, crypto, the
economy, newsworthy events, etc. And
they've just launched their new gold and
silver perks, which lets you take a
position on whether you think gold or
silver is going to go up or down without
having to buy or store them yourself.
There's no expiration date. You don't
need VPNs. You can fund your account
with cash or crypto 24/7, and it has
some of the lowest fees on the market.
See, earlier this year, gold ran past
$5,000 an ounce. And with everything
going on in the economy, it's the market
I'm personally the most interested in
right now. Now, always keep in mind that
Koshi lets you multiply your position,
which makes your wins bigger, but your
losses bigger, too. So, if you want to
check it out, use my link in the
description and pin comment. Trade $50
and get $25 using my link. But anyway,
guys, back to the podcast. Nick, would
you say uh the Greater Israel Project is
based in pragmatic reasons and the
esquetology is the fuel to get people
rallied around it? That's really the
central question I think is, you know,
is the greater Israel messianic vision
the rationalization for a real politique
strategy to expand the borders or are
they expanding the borders to realize
the messianic vision? And I think that
both can be true in the sense that
Netanyahu I don't think is a messianic
person. You know, his he doesn't have a
great relationship with Habad Lubovich.
I don't you know he has religious people
in the coalition.
I think he's more driven by grand
strategy. I think though, however, there
are people that are empowering him like
Smootrich and Ben Gvere who are
religious fanatics in his government.
They wear armbands and they speak in
front of lecterns that have the greater
Israel map. They are messianic Jews who
who well not strictly speaking Messianic
Jews like believe in Jesus but they
believe in that messianic prophecy of
building the temple ending the world. So
uh so I think both motivate different
people in Israel.
>> Right. Sorry I have to interrupt because
um Nick made a statement that we we need
to um clarify. You said that Netanyahu
does not have a great relationship with
Habal Lubich.
>> Yes. Um
I from all my research I think Nanyahu
was um basically
um is almost like a um tool of Habat
Luich in order to achieve their meic
prophecy.
>> Um and I I'll go over what what what
I've learned.
>> Okay. Sure. Um
um first of all there's a very strong
connection
um between Nanyahu
the Trump family in the Kusha family
right so Fred Trump and Ben Benjamin
Natanyahu were good friends
>> and the reason why was in the 1980s
Nanyahu was Israel's ambassador to
United Nations
>> so he was in New York and then Fred
Trump of course was a very prominent
real estate developer in New York City
um the Hushan and Nyahu are are very
close. Nyah himself said him himself
said that when he ever comes to United
States, he often stays with the Kushers.
>> Uh in fact uh Jared Kushner said that uh
now and then he will uh give his bedroom
to Nanyahu and he'll go sleep in the
basement. Okay. So uh that's my first um
thing thing I've discovered. There's a
really close relationship between the
Trump family, Nanyahu and the Kusher
family. So, so the idea that Jared Ker
and Trump just met randomly and then got
married, I I don't think holds water. I
think they probably knew each other
since they were were little. The other
thing is um Nanyahu was almost
nurtured and mentored by Rebeersonen who
was the leader of the lit movement for a
long time. So, there are videos on
YouTube where um Benim Nyahu just got
elected to the Knesset and he goes to
the Rebe and and says, "Will you please
support me? Will you please bless me?"
And the Reb says, "Sure." Um and then
there's another video a year later where
Na Yahoo goes to uh the Rebe um and the
Rebe just basically says to him, "Um,
when is Messiah coming?" and Ayahu says
uh he's coming and then we're working on
it and Rabers is like well we have to
hasten the process right so this is the
leader of Habat Luvich
>> directing Nanyahu who has pluggs to
hasten the coming of the Messiah. Uh you
will also find on YouTube a video of uh
Sheldon Aen and Miriam Aden
before their wedding going to the Red
Bay asking for his blessing for their
marriage.
>> And so this is who the ads by the way.
>> The ads are the main financial backers
of both Donald Trump and Benjamin
Nanyahu. Is that is that a fair state?
No. Absolutely. Yeah.
>> Right. So, uh, Shan Alen was the, um,
major financial backer for Trump's 2016
and 2020 presidential campaigns and
>> and they're Zionist,
>> right?
>> Well, they're very Zionist. Yes. Yes.
And Shayon Ellison was also very
prominent backer of Benjamin Netanyahu
because Shannon Ellison is American. He
could not actually um financially
support Netanyahu. But Shayon Ellison
did spend a lot of money to buy up a lot
of um prominent Israeli media and this
and this media that these this media was
very supportive of Nanyahu.
So I see all these connections. So I I
don't understand why Nanyahu um and
Habich are not aligned.
>> I mean they have met obviously Netanyahu
and Rebby Schneersen because they're in
the Jewish community. you know,
Netanyahu is the prime minister of
Israel and so on. But if you actually
know about Habad Lubavage, they say they
don't actually fully support the project
of Israel. They believe that what
precipitates the Messiah coming is not
even necessarily the Jews resettling the
land automatically or even claiming a
country called Israel. They say it's the
conversion of the Jews back to the
religion, back to the law. They say that
what precipitates the Messiah is the
Jews coming back to Torah. And one of
the reasons actually originally Habad
Lubovich was against Israel is because
Israel is like a civic nationalist state
that says we're based on like Jewish
ethnicity and Jewish race and Habad
Lubovich said it should be based on
Torah. It should be based on the law and
on the book and on the religions. That's
why I say it's a little bit contentious
as far as Trump is concerned. I know
that you you have maybe more of um like
a fatalistic view of it that Trump was
designated to be like a Cyrus the Great
type figure in the Jewish esquetology.
He was going to be like a messiah for
the Jews. I think a counter example
against this is that he was not the
favorite of the Zionist lobby when he
ran in 2015. Initially Miriam Mlesson
backed Rubio. M they wanted Ted Cruz and
even after Trump won the nomination and
then won the election in 16 when he lost
power in 2020 the Jewish lobby moved
against Trump and they actually wanted
Dantis to be the guy. Dantis announced
his run in May 23 and just before that
he traveled to Israel to meet with Mary
Madson all the big Jewish donors. He
announced with David Saxs and Elon Musk
on Twitter who were fully behind him. uh
and he was really the pro-Israel choice
for the Republican primary for the 2024
election. And then when Dantis had his
failure to launch, it became clear by
the summer he wasn't going to work out.
Then they all moved behind Nikki Haley
in 2024 and they wanted her in October
23, I would say roughly to about March
24, the Zionists placed their hopes on
her to win. And it was only after she
went to Israel on behalf of Miriam
Madson and endorsed Trump that Trump got
the blessing to get the $und00 million
check for Miriam Madson. So in other
words, he was their last choice. Even in
24 all the way after he ripped up the
nuclear deal, after he moved the
embassy, after he killed Kasamsulammani,
gave Israel to Golan, they still did not
like him more than they like Dantis and
Haley. So that that would be my
counterargument.
>> Right. Okay. Um so uh let me first
respond to how about lubage their um
ideology. So you're absolutely right in
that the end goal is for all Jews to
convert back to the religion
>> and to repent and then this would
actually usher in the end of the world
according to the cabala. So the um the
habit movement are Jews and the basis
for um a lot of the ideology is the
cabal interpret the interpretation of
the intention of God.
>> And so um what what what they believe is
that the world is the way it is because
the Jews have turned away from God and
this is the breaking of the world. So to
repair the world what must happen is all
the Jews because the Jews have the
divine spark of God and uh the Jews must
come together and then these divine
sparks divine sparks of light will then
unify together. Um and this process
happens when Jews repent. Okay. And the
example is the story of King David. So,
King David sinned by uh marrying
Bashibba and killing her husband Uriah
the Hitite. But um God punished
um David by killing his firstborn with
Bashibba. And this caused David to fall
into tremendous grief and beg for um
forgiveness and to repent. And what this
did ultimately was solidify the
relationship between King David and
Yahweh and God because remember in the
Bible, King David is a favorite of God
like more than anyone else more so than
even um uh Moses. So that is what Kabat
Luvich wants to do to force all Jews
around the world to return to Israel and
then to repent. And then then the
question then is how do you do
politically achieve this?
>> Well, you do three things, right? First
of all, you achieve the greater Israel
project because the greater Israel
project is a covenant between um um
Yahweh and Abraham. Uh so they have to
fulfill that. That's the first thing,
the greater Israel project. The second
thing is you need um all Jews to return
to Israel. The entire diaspora has to
converge on Israel. And how do you do
that? Through anti-semitism. Through
conflict uh around the world that forces
Jews to return to Israel to seek for to
seek safety and protection from God.
Okay. The second thing and the third
thing and Nick refers to this a lot is
the building of the third temple because
that's where God lives, right? Right. So
the idea is um and and Judaism is is
different from other religions and
people don't appreciate why so don't
appreciate the subtle difference but
Judaism it's a worldly religion meaning
like if you look at Hinduism and
Christianity and Islam it's about um
when you die you go to heaven right for
the Jews it's about bringing God to
earth right so
>> you're saying they don't believe in
heaven
>> um I actually don't know if they believe
in heaven but like like for them the end
of the world is when God comes to Israel
and lives amongst the Jews and the third
temple is meant to be his home. Right?
So you're right in that Habat Lubich has
this esquetology in place. But if you
look at what they have to achieve in
order to obtain this esquetology, then
it's unfolding before our eyes, right?
We are seeing the greater Israel project
being implemented throughout the Middle
East. Mhm.
>> Uh we are seeing the rise of
anti-semitism throughout the world
>> and we are also seeing um the growing
conflict between uh messianic Jews and
um Muslims in the on the temple mount uh
which may eventually lead to uh the
destruction of the alexic mosque in the
building of the third temple. So all
this is tracking and and I would argue
that it's because Nanyahu is following
very much the Habad Lubich blueprint for
global Jewish redemption.
>> Yeah, I guess I just disagree. I think
that to say Israel is the Habad Lubovich
project to bring about the end times and
Netanyahu is an agent of this. But I
just think it's an oversimplification
because again, Habad has not always even
been in favor of the modern state of
Israel even existing. It's much more
controversial, I think, than you're
making it seem.
>> Jean, what event can you not explain
without that position? Does that make
sense?
>> Yeah. Well, you can't explain the
mosque. Um, you know, so, so I think
what both Nick and I think is going to
happen eventually is the Isaac Mosque
will be destroyed.
>> And where's that at? And that's where
the uh Jewish people believe is the
third temple in Jerusalem. There's
something called a temple mount. And the
temple mount is where they built the
first temple uh the Solomon's temple.
And they built it as the house of God.
Uh because
um the idea again is like um God wants
to live with his people. Like God
doesn't want us to go to heaven to be
with him. God wants us to build a world
in which he can come and and live with
us. And um so that's called Solomon's
temple. Solomon's temple was destroyed
by the Babylonians
and um I can't remember the exact year
but it's around 600 B uh 600 B.CE. uh
and then Sus the great um conquer the
Babylonians and then return the uh
Israelite exiles to the land uh and
sponsor the building of the second
temple but then the Romans destroy the
second temple and um the third temple
has never been been built and it is the
mission of these messianic Jews to build
the third temple because that is the end
of their uh esquetology. So um if you
look at the temple mount where the
temple used to be it's divided into two
parts. The first part is the alias uh
which is considered the third holiest
site in the Islamic world. That is where
Muhammad ascended to heaven.
>> And then you have something called the
dome of the rock. The dome of the rock
is uh where the foundation stone is. Um
and the foundation stone for the um for
the temple. Um so so what Nick and I
believe is there will be a religious uh
fanatical minority who wants to destroy
the dome of the rock and the moss to
build a third temple. If that were to
happen then this would ignite a
religious war the world has never seen
before. Would you agree with that
statement?
>> I think so. Yeah. because then all uh
Islamic people or Muslims would be uh
religiously committed to destroying
Israel and uh restoring the Alex mosque.
>> Right. So you're saying that the main
event that uh only makes sense with
esquetologies has had to do with the
temple and then I asked you to clarify
the Alaka thing. What were you saying
there? I
>> I want to ask Nick this question.
>> Um have you had a chance to walk on
Manhattan yet?
>> Yeah. Oh yeah.
on on a lot of street corners there is a
poster.
>> Yes.
>> The Messiah is coming. Rebear the
Messiah is coming.
>> How do you interpret that?
>> Well, a lot of people believe he's the
Messiah. A lot of Jews because he's the
seventh dynastic leader of the Habadich.
They say yes.
>> Yes. Yes.
>> But you know, so there's no disagreement
that Habad Lubovich wants the Messiah to
come and they're willing it into being.
But I'm just saying that the idea that
Netanyahu is a part of a conspiracy with
Habad Lubovich to bring about this
messianic vision, I think it coincides
with Israel's geopolitical interest,
which is to destroy Iran. And that
that's what I said really is that it's
hard to know where one begins and the
other one ends because to achieve the
messianic prophecy, Israel needs to
achieve its geopolitical goals.
>> And so, but states always pursue their
geopolitical objectives. So the
geopolitical goals have to be met before
they destroy Al Axa and build a third
>> temple for you know what clean break and
the plan for the 1980s is all about is
securing the realm. That's actually what
clean break is called the securing the
realm securing the northern border. And
they say that in order for Israel to be
safe we got to get rid of Hezbollah. How
do we get rid of Hezbollah? We got to
get rid of Saddam who's a ba'ist. We who
launched missiles at Israel. We got to
go after Assad through which Hezbollah
is furnished with support from Iran. And
then we have to go after Iran, which is
inciting this revolutionary Shiite
movement across the Middle East. And
only then can Israel be a regional
hegeimon when they're not encircled by
Hezbollah, Assad, Saddam Hussein, Iran,
the Houthis, uh, which was a later
development. And so for Israel to
eradicate all of its enemies is also
just national security policy.
>> But but then how does destroying the
Isaac Mos strengthen Israel's national
national security?
>> Well, I'm not saying it is. I'm saying
that clear, you know, doing those things
might allow Israel to do that in the
future, but that's not something
Netanyahu has pledged to do,
>> right? But I'm saying like would we
agree right now that there seems to be
like an alliance of sorts
>> and Hab is very much part of this
alliance. So you have um people like
Nanyahu who may not be religious uh but
there are geopolitical opportunists
>> and they want to strengthen uh Israel's
national security
>> but also with this alliance you have a
lubage
>> and they really believe this is the end
times again if you walk around Manhattan
you like look at these street corners
like this guy Rebers is everywhere and
and there's a vocal minority who believe
this guy is Messiah and when the when
the end times come, he will reincarnate
as the Jewish Messiah and he will usher
in the end of the world. And Habalich um
just so that people appreciate this is a
very powerful group of people because
not only only do they have access to
Trump, they also have access to
Zalinski. They also had access they also
have access to um Vladimir Putin. Hav
Malay is also part of this movement. So
uh when Hav J Havier Malay first became
president of Argentina, his first
foreign visit as a head of state was to
the grave of Reberson
uh which is located in Queens, New York.
And also the grave of Reberson
is the most heavily uh visited
Jewish holy site outside of Israel.
>> Really?
>> Yeah. So um I um I think Habaluage uh
fact is a major factor in geopolitics
because I think they're much more
influential than people will appreciate.
>> I agree they're more influential. I just
I think you're maybe overstating the
case that they're driving all these
events because you're right. I mean they
are the nexus between Russia, the US,
Israel. There is a uh there is a nexus
point represented there. But you know
another one of their prophecies for
example they think that Jews have to get
to every corner of the globe before the
end times can come is one of the
>> I actually didn't know that. Yeah. Could
could you explain that
>> they believe that Jews have to be in
every part of the world. There has to be
Jewish settlements in every literally
every country in every part of the world
before the end times can happen. That's
one of the things that has to happen
before the prophecy can be fulfilled.
>> And and is is that not already happening
because Zionism is Yeah. And they are
trying to settle everywhere. Argentina,
Australia, Cyprus, Greece.
>> Um I mean um I mean a friend even told
me there are Zionists in Costa Rica and
the locals are pissed because they're
buying up a lot of land. Um so it seems
to me the world is moving in a way that
conforms to the esquetology of Habadich.
>> Yeah. I think they're just a little more
idiosyncratic
than that. I think that uh you can't you
can't say that every revisionist Zionist
or maximalist pro-Israel person is
necessarily a tool of Habad Lubovich.
They're they're one faction that sits
among world jewelry. Uh but I don't
think they're driving everything.
>> Right. So uh another data point that I
will bring up is um ever since the death
of Rebes and he died 1994. Okay. There's
been a massive outreach program. So, uh,
Hab Lubich is responsible for the
Birthright Israel program,
>> right? Uh, do you know about Birthright
Israel?
>> Yeah.
>> Right. Um, also, uh, Hab Luvich has has
um built uh, campus programs around the
United States. So, at Harvard, there's
something called Harvard Habad. The
faculty advisor to Harvard Habad is Alan
Duritz. And the three most prominent
members of Harvard Habad are Jared
Kushner, Natalie Portman, and uh Mark.
Then at Yale Law School, they also built
a chapter called Saptai Society. Um
[snorts] and Corey Booker um was one of
the founders of Y Septai Society and
their members include um Vivic
Ramaswami,
Albridge
Kobe who is now number two at the
Pentagon uh behind Hexf. Um you also
have Michael Nolles.
Um these are very powerful people. So I
mean
and they're all affiliated in some way
with Havalich.
>> I just think it's a logical error. It's
like when people used to say the World
Economic Forum was controlling
everything. And you say what is the
World Economic Forum? It's a forum for
all the world's prominent business and
political leaders that then meet in
Davos. And so would you say the seed of
the power is in the forum is in the
actual the Claus Schwabr run super
national group or would you say the
power lies in the individuals that then
coales like so for example you know many
of the people you mentioned I don't know
that they are like lurionic cobalists I
don't think that Mar necessarily
subscribes to that your point about
Habad Lubovich one of the primary
activities they do is just educating
Jews about their own religion and
because they take that role that just
happens to be the forum where Jews get
together and fraternize and organize and
socialize. I don't think it necessarily
means there really the answer is it's
world jewelry. That's the term that I
prefer cuz Lubovich is only just one
dynasty among others within the hidic
faction.
>> Absolutely. Yes. Um you're absolutely
right. So how about Lubich only has
about 100,000 members
uh around the world. Okay. That's not
that many people. And uh Nick is right
in that Judaism there are lots of family
dynasties. the S dynasty is one um um
dynasty. Um but at the same time, what I
will say is of all these um different
Jewish groups and there's lots of them,
okay? Uh and there's lots of
disagreements and often they really hate
each other. [snorts] Um the habit people
are often the most messianic, the most
fanatical. Would you agree?
>> Yeah, I agree with that. M
>> so there are three things that they do
that have allowed them to basically grow
at an exponential scale these past few
decades. Um the first thing that they do
is they pull their resources. Uh meaning
if if you just take the average Habat
Lubich member he's actually pretty poor
because he's spending all his time
studying Torah. Uh he's not actually
going and making money.
>> Um but what they do is they pull their
resources together. And so if you go to
Brooklyn, a lot of real estate in
Brooklyn is controlled by Haval Liberage
because they've been there since 1945.
Um and they've been constantly pulling
money and investing in real estate. Um
that's number one. Number two is they
ostracize themselves from from from um
other groups. So they actually refuse to
send their kids to public schools. They
have their own school school system as
as Nink said. um they will not um uh
their kids will not play with kids from
other groups. Um so they ostracize
themselves. And the third thing that
they do is um they have a lot of
children,
>> right? They breed a lot. Um and then the
question then is what's the energy that
drives them, right? Well, how is it that
they're able to live in poverty and have
a lot of children and just isolate
themselves from the larger American
community? And I think it's just their
messianic cabalism. Um, and so even
though they are in fact minority and
they're just a fringe group, they are
also extremely energetic. So, so much so
that they're willing to trade everything
in order to achieve their esquetology.
So you're absolutely right in that Nyahu
is is he's a politician. All he wants is
more power. Jared Kushner is a real
estate developer. All he wants is more
money. But if a group is coming to you
and saying, you know what, we don't want
the power. We want the money. We just
want you to help us achieve a certain
esquetology, just one thing in this
grand script of us of ours.
>> Well, they'll probably say yes. And
they'll probably u be able to achieve
through esquetology. It's not just again
this is not just Netanyahu it's also
Donald Trump it's also Vladimir Putin
it's also [snorts] Zilinski Har Malay
it's a lot of people who have who are in
positions of power and influence
>> my counterargument to that would be take
somebody like Larry Ellison for example
he's one of the richest guys in the
world founder of Oracle deep connections
with Trump because he donated I think 60
million to his campaign in 24 Larry
Ellison's an atheist but he is an ethnic
Jew and he is one of the biggest
supporters supporters of Israel that
exist. The I think uh Jerusalem Post or
Times of Israel just did their top 50
most influential Jews list today and
Ellison's I think in the top five. He's
one of the biggest private donors to the
IDF. He got Netanyahu a lawyer to defend
him against the corruption charges in
Israel. He took over Tik Tok and is
putting together this media company with
his son and Barry Weiss that's going to
take over CBS News and CNN. The reason
that he supports Netanyahu and Israel
and the IDF and Trump and all this, it's
not because he's a messianic kabad
Lubovich cabalist. It's because he's a
Jew and he sees Israel as the last safe
place for Jews. There is this, as you
know, and I think you're right about
this. Anti-semitism actually plays this
like dialectical role in the Jewish
prophecy. But somebody like a Netanyahu
or somebody like a Larry Ellison, they
don't necessarily need to be consciously
motivated by a messianic religious
disposition to serve it. They have their
own practical considerations. And so
that's why I just think it's
>> So So what do you think Ellison's
practical considerations are? Just the
only safe place for Jews? Is that really
an acceptable answer compared to like a
religious esquetology?
>> Yes. I think that because he's an
atheist, so he doesn't believe in God
and I don't think he believes in the end
times. I think that he identifies as a
Jew and I I think and I think you've
made this point. You're 100% right. A
lot of Jews in America grow up in this
millu of like a kind of chauvinism.
There's this idea like we're we just do
things a little better. You know, we're
a little smarter. We educate our kids.
We don't act like the goyam. We don't
act like the Gentiles. And this comes
from their theology which says that the
goyam the gentiles are idoltors and they
don't obey the law and so on. Um and so
someone like
>> I've never said that by the way.
>> You haven't said I've never said that.
Uh I think you said something about the
millu in which they g like you said
Markx grew up as an aristocrat in a
millu of his ancestors rabbis and that's
speaks to the Jewish character of
dialectical materialism. You said that
>> I I've said that Carl Marx um he has se
several generations of rabbis in in his
lineage and rabbis are essentially um
Jewish aristocrats. Um, so he grew up in
a very intellectual tradition and he was
probably influenced by the Cabala. Um,
but that's the extent of of
>> what I'm saying. Yeah. In principle,
what I'm saying is you understand the
weight of Jewish custom even if an
individual doesn't subscribe to it. Like
let's say a Larry Ellison, he's an
atheist, but the cultural millu he grew
up and is informed by 3,000 years of
Jewish history and it shapes those
attitudes. So why are some of the for
example someone like Epstein Epstein
says these um kind of like contemptuous
remarks about Gentiles he says like are
there going to be goyam at this party or
something like that Epstein's probably
like an atheist but he grows up in a
Jewish community going to maybe a Jewish
daycare these sorts of things where
those attitudes are there because of
thousands of years of this insular
in-group preference tribalism among this
people and anyway so point is with
someone like Larry Ellison I think he's
a Jewish chauvin
I think he's somebody that looks at
Israel and there's this identity where
he says, "Oh, they're an upstart nation
like me. They're entrepreneurial.
They're go-getters. They take
initiative. There's this ethnic pride."
He identifies with Israel as an ethnic
Jew. And two, I think all Jews have this
alienation, especially the ones that
live in the diaspora, from the host
country. And so, they do feel like this
is not really their home. For them, home
is always going to be Israel. And that's
why Israel has to be empowered because
in the end if anti-semitism gets bad in
America or Russia or wherever that's the
only place you're going to be safe. So
there there's something deep-seated
there as well.
>> All right. So uh let me respond to this.
Um I don't think Larry Ellison first and
foremost thinks like a Jewish person. I
think he first and foremost thinks like
a capitalist, a transnational
capitalist. So for him it's just like
where do I who do I work with and what
do I do in order to generate the um
greatest return on investment and he's
very supportive of Israel uh because
Israeli interests align with his own
business interests. So a lot of
technology comes from Israel. Uh Israel
is one of the uh leaders in um new
technological development. uh there's a
lot of capital flowing into Israel and
out out of Israel. So, and so it's not
just Larry Ellison who's aligned with uh
Israel. You also have other capitalists
like Peter Theo uh who is not a a Jew
Jewish person also align with with
Israel. So, um just to say that it's
just Jews who support Israel, I think is
incorrect. I think there are a coalition
of interests that see a benefit in
supporting Israel including uh
technologists
um like Larry Ellison and Peter Theo
including uh financial interests uh
because Israel is a very good place to
uh invest. You also have Christian
Zionist people like Sean Hannity and
John
>> who are even probably even more
fanatical than most Jews in the United
States. So I think it's a very broad
coalition. Uh so that's my first point.
My second point is within this broad
coalition if you just look at history
often um how this coalition basically
moves is it's driven by a vector and
this vector is the most fanatical
members of this group.
>> So everyone in this coalition is willing
to move in this direction because it
benefits everyone in this coalition. But
where it moves is driven by the most
energetic, most fanatical people. And
what I'm saying is within this broad
coalition, there's a very broad
coalition of people. Um, Habad Lubich is
the most fanatical. And so, it's really
important for us to study their
esquetology in order to figure out where
Israel might might move. So, I don't I
do predictive history. I'm I'm trying to
figure out what drives human events,
what drives history. Um, so I'm trying
to create a framework. In my analysis,
in all my research, I think that Habat
Louage has a lot more weight. It's much
more influential that people give them
credit for. And that's my central
argument.
>> Yeah. I guess my disagreement is I I
think you're just overindexing on their
influence. And and that's why I say
someone like a Larry Ellison or Trump.
These are central figures driving the
events in Israel and they're not
motivated by these mess, you know,
whether it's a Jew or a Gentile, they're
not motivated by the messianic beliefs.
Professor, would you say that
shared ethnicity or shared religion in
esquetology are more able to help you
predict I guess uh how people in power
behave. Um so I sort of discount
religious identity or uh racial identity
in my analysis and the reason why is
families are much more likely to fight
amongst each like within like so um
people who are more similar aligned are
much more likely to fight than u people
who who are not. So the differences
within groups are much greater than
differences outside of groups. And
that's something that I've learned in
life uh by the set of by the set of
history. So just to say that you know
these Jews are all Jews and therefore
they have a similar interest doesn't
really hold water because if you
actually look at Jews [snorts]
they argue all the time. Have you been
to Israel?
>> No.
>> Okay. I've been to Israel.
>> I don't want to get killed over.
>> No. No. Okay. I I mean I I went to
Israel in um 2012 for a week. Um, and
the the first thing that you uh realize
when you get to Israel is
Israelis
argue all the time. They have no reason
to argue and they will argue. Like you
go to a store, a coffee house, and he's
like, "I want to buy a cappuccino." And
the guy will be like, "Why do you want
to buy a cappuccino?" Like, "Oo, is that
good enough for you?" It's the silliest
thing in in the world. And like if you
just look at the political system, it is
the most dysfunctional political system
in the whole world. I mean um it's
amazing that you're able to to cobble
together a government because you have
like a whole range of political parties
and these political parties just fights
fight amongst themselves. um you know
there's a civil war brewing brewing
right now uh in Israel and in fact if
Hamas did not actually launch their
flood if October 7 did not happen then
there might have been a civil war in
Israel right so so that event basically
saved Nanyahu from a political calamity
so um I don't think that it's you can
just say it's just the Jews or um or or
or any just one group because again the
differences in conflicts within groups
is so much greater than the conflicts
outside of groups and between groups.
>> Do you agree with that segment?
>> I think that's maybe our biggest
disagreement is I think that um and and
maybe let me get some clarity on this
because you say so
>> the project of greater Israel is being
driven by the let's say the most
spirited or energetic group which is
Habad Lubovich and they're motiv by
messianism and you say their messianism
comes from their interpretation of
Cabala. Now, do you believe that Cabala
is a fundamentally Jewish phenomenon or
do you think it's more gnostic or
esoteric?
>> Okay. So, so let me clarify what I mean.
Okay. So, all that's happening in the
Middle East cannot be driven by one
person or one group.
>> There has to be a broad coalition of of
interests.
>> So, greater Israel benefits a broad
coalition of interests. Um, it benefits
capitalists, financiers, it benefits uh
technologists, it benefits um Christian
Zionism, it benefits a American
interests, it benefits a lot of people.
>> Um so um a lot of these things are
happening because there's a broad
coalition in in in place. But within
this broad coalition, you also need uh
people to push events along,
>> right? And when they push events along,
then other people can sit back and and
benefit. So Habat Luvich is the one
pushing events along, but it doesn't
necessarily mean that they're in charge.
It also does not mean they will get
their way because it's entirely possible
that the other groups at the end at
maybe get together and says these guys
are crazy so let's just like you know um
betray them or or you know change
direction like let's not blow up the
eyes like a moss
>> right
>> right let's not do that cuz that's just
it benefits no one right
>> right so I think the the mosque is the
big lmus test as to like who's really in
control if they blow up the Alex mosque
we can both agree that these religious
fanatics are in charge Yes, totally.
>> Um, and if they don't blow up the mosque
and they just achieve the greater Israel
project, then that then that aligns with
a lot of geopolitical um geopolitical
interests. So, so that's my that that's
that's why I believe.
>> Okay. But in terms of Cabala, do you
think Cabala is because it's based on
the Tanya, at least in Habad Lubovich,
which is not the Torah. It's not the
written or oral Torah. It's a mystical
book. Do you believe that Cabala is
Jewish? Or do you what do you think is a
relation between Judaism and Cababala?
[gasps]
>> Okay. So here you and I will disagree.
All right. But I believe that what
happened um is like throughout humanity
there has always been a mystical
tradition with all within all major
religions. So within Christianity
there's Nazism within Islam there's
suism. Um, and the idea, um, is most
people just see the material world, but
these occultists, these mystics
appreciate that the world is pure energy
and pure consciousness. And um, I don't
I I don't get too esoteric, but they
believe that um, God is part of us and
we're part of God. Okay. So, and the
Cabala, what's what the Cabala is doing
is trying to bring this mystical
tradition into the um Jewish tradition
because what separates the Jewish
tradition from previous other traditions
is they have a Bible. They have a
written history of of their relationship
with with God. And so, they're trying to
use use this mystical understanding of
the universe, this hermeticism to
explain the stories of the Bible. And
and this is what creates the the Cabala.
I think the Cabala um is a very
convoluted
uh philosophy. And I think you it will
be impossible to find two uh Jewish
cabalas who agree on the meaning of of
the Cabala. It is impossible.
>> Right. I agree. Because I guess what I'm
I'm wondering is if you're placing so
much because you said people are
underestimating let's say or
understating the influence of Habad
Lubovich and that's a cobalistic
movement then you're saying it's sort of
like an esoteric splinter within the
Jewish community that is really
exttrinsic to Judaism driving this right
if you think it's not Jewish in
character
>> there are a lot of Jews out there who
think the Habad Lewis movement is heresy
>> okay and you could also make the
argument It's not hocic. It's not based
on
>> because most Jews in the world uh who
are religious believe that you cannot
force the hand of God. That is heresy.
That is pure evil. They [snorts] think
that Habalat is forcing the hand of God.
And that's why they're promoting the
greater Israel project. That's why they
are trying to uh usher in the end times
and build the third temple. So Habalich
is a very French movement. And I I would
also point out that even with Hab
Lubich, uh most people don't even know
what's going on, right? I mean, most
people just go to Habat Lu schools and
they learn to be good people and they
learn the importance of the Torah and
that's it. They don't really appreciate
the grand scheme at work. It's only a
few people that really um have a sense
of of where this movement is is going.
And these people were prog.
So what's really important for for
people to appreciate is Rabies Ner was
the seventh and final rebalich.
Okay. So in other words they see Rabies
Narsen as the messiah who reincarnated
at the end of times and so um the kabat
it's basically run by committee of
rabbis who are students of his and so
who are trying to implement this
esquetology in order to bring back their
the the teacher. And [snorts]
um if you look at Habat Louage and again
I don't know it that well. I've never
really studied them that deeply. You
probably know more than I do. But I
would say there's also a element of 17
frankism within Habal Liberovich
and that's and and 17 frankism for for
people who don't know is considered the
greatest heresy
>> in the Jewish tradition.
>> U it's considered the great betrayal or
the great heresy.
>> Right. What exactly are Frankists?
>> Well, what can I just ask one question?
Cuz I'm a little bit curious. So, you
also believe in the Kazerian hypothesis.
Is that right?
>> Um, I've discussed it. Yes.
>> Then do you believe that's the Do you In
other words, do you believe that the
Ashkanazi Jews are the same people as
the people to book in the Bible?
>> Okay. So, I'll tell you what I believe.
>> Okay.
>> All right. I believe
that the Jewish tradition is not
consistent. The Israelites were pol
polytheistic people.
>> Um, and the Jewish tradition started
really at the time of Cyrus the Great.
>> And if you just like uh compare these
traditions, Judaism after the second
temple
>> and then the first temple, these are two
radically different traditions. Okay. So
the first the Israelite tradition uh and
there's a lot of scholarship on this. It
was probably polytheistic with a
pantheon of gods. um and it was a much
more open and tolerant religion. And in
Judaism um because uh of its
relationship with the Persian Empire um
it became much more closed and and
insular.
>> Also what we need to recognize is the
people in the religion are going to
shift over time, right? So what happened
was after the Babylonians destroyed the
first temple, they took hostage a lot of
the um Israelite elite, but most of the
Israelites stayed in um the area, the
Levant, and basically adapted their
religion
uh to local practices. And there was a
um a synratism
process, a syncratic process where
religious naturally melted together.
Okay? And this is just a natural thing
that happens. The example is English,
right? If you bring in people who speak
different accents of of English, they
will eventually merge um and create a a
new variant of of of English.
>> Um so this is syncretic process and this
is a very natural natural thing. The
idea that
uh the people in Israel today can trace
their DNA back to the Israelites, I
think it's is absurd. I think the idea
that the Bible was consistent for 3,000
years is also absurd.
>> So uh now let's get to the Casseran uh
hypo hypothesis. And I'm getting most of
my understanding um from a book book
called the 13th tribe by author Kesler.
And in it he argues that what happened
around the year 1100 is in the Middle
East in the Orient there are there are
like three major powers. There's a
blessing empire which is Christian.
[snorts] Then you have the Islamic
caliphate based in Baghdad. But then you
have a third center of power called
Kazeria which is in modern Ukraine. And
what happened was that um Kazeria it was
a third son of power. So it didn't want
to become Christian or Muslim. It wanted
its own identity. Mhm.
>> And so um there were a lot of um Jewish
traders
um in Kazeria and um the elite
became interested in Judaism and
eventually there was a mass conversion
of the elite to Judaism
um as a sort of like a new identity um
that was different from the Christian
and the Islamic tradition. And also they
thought that well Judaism is the first
religion right and from Judaism you had
Christianity and then Islam. So uh they
masscon convert to to Judaism. And I
think this is historical fact. It makes
perfect sense. There's a lot of
documentation and author Kesler who by
the way is a Jew.
>> Yeah. Hungarian Jew.
>> Oh and also by the way a Zionist Jew.
Okay. Um he was the one who convinced me
in his book the fifth 13th tribe all of
this argument. And what happened uh was
that Kazera was eventually conquered by
the Mongols which forced a mass a mass
migration of uh Kazerian Jews into
Eastern Europe which then merge with
Spartic Jews who came in from Spain. Um
and so there's a synretism go going on,
>> right? I think it's important
that you both just define this clearly
and such a dumb question, but like Nick,
what exactly is a Jew or what exactly is
a Jewish person? And then, Professor
Jang, what exactly is a Jewish person to
you? Well, see that's really the
question and that's why I wanted to ask
some of these questions about how you
regard the Israelis because what it
sounds like is you think that Cababalism
and Habad Lubovich are informed by the
Sabati Zevi Sabatian Frankists which are
sort of like gnostic Satanist
anti-nomian. They believe in
transgressing the law in order to
achieve holiness. That's really the
basis of it. And you think the Ashkanazi
Jews aren't even really Jews. you think
they're descended from Turk people uh
from Kazeria and and that's really my
central disagreement is I think that the
Jews are the people of the book. I think
that it is the same religion. I think
they are the people of the Middle East.
And I I think it is fundamentally about
Jews. I don't think it's about this
mystical other stuff. I think it's about
them. And that's why I say somebody like
Ellison, maybe this is the source of
that disagreement. He is an ethnic Jew.
I think he's the same Jew, same
ethnicity as the people 2,000 years ago
in the Middle East when the second
temple was destroyed. And I think that
his chauvinistic attitude towards
Gentiles, it doesn't come from Sabatis
or Jacob Frank. It doesn't come from
Kabala. It comes from the Torah because
the Torah says idolattors have to die.
The Torah says you have to spit when you
pass a grave of an idoltor. And they
view Christians as idoltors very much
like Muslims because the Jews believe
that Yahweh is their God. They believe
that Yahweh is the only God and the
insinuation that there's a trinity of a
Holy Spirit in Jesus Christ. They see
that Jesus is an idol, as a human idol
and that's why they sentence him to
death and that's why he was crucified.
And so I guess maybe the difference is I
I view the clash of civilizations and
the tension in history as between
Christians and Jews fundamentally Jesus
Christ and the Jews. Whereas I think you
see it as a little bit more complex and
about maybe these mystical traditions
which don't have as much to do with the
the tribe of the Jews.
>> Nick, can you define though like what is
a Jew? Is it someone who's ethnically
Jewish and religious Jewish? Like
>> it's an ethnicity and Judaism is a
religion. So a Jew is someone that
descends from the tribe of Judah in the
Old Testament. And that's why you can
find it in a genetic test, you know, and
theoretically they say you can convert
to Judaism, but Jew, a lot of Jews don't
believe that. A lot of Jews only believe
you can be Jewish if you're born to a
Jewish mother, not even a Jewish father.
They say you're not Jewish if you
weren't born a Jewish dad.
>> And do you think Zionism and Judaism are
the same thing?
>> Zionism is sort of the logical necessary
endpoint of Judaism because what what
you have and and to your point, you said
Judaism is a worldly religion.
Christianity, which is why the Jews
rejected Christ, says there's a
spiritual kingdom. And so we say on some
level, we don't really care what happens
in the Holy Land because the kingdom of
God is within and Christ brings a
spiritual kingdom. Muslims believe
anyone can become a Muslim and and they
do have the Kaba and they have Mecca and
you have to go there into a real place,
but they do have more of a universal
spiritual religion. Judaism is based in
the temple in the land. That is the only
way you can practice the religion is
God's people in the land that God gave
them in the temple where God dwells
where God gave them the schematics to
build it. This particular lineage was
given the responsibility to build it and
um so that's what makes it fundamentally
different than everybody else.
>> Would you agree with his definition?
>> I would not I would not at all agree
with his definition. So throughout
history there have been there have been
different terms. Okay. You have the term
Hebrew, then you have the term
Israelite,
then you have the term Jew,
um now you have the term Israeli. Okay?
And these are all very different terms.
Uh Hebrew just refers to aic people um
that Abraham who was considered like the
grandpatriarch of the Israelite people
belong to. The term is Israelite uh
refers to um the people um in the
kingdom of Israel um under the
leadership of King David and they
descend from Jacob um who is the um
grandson of Abraham. uh Jew was first
used, the term Jew was first used um in
the second temple period um when the
Persians repatriated the exiles, the the
Israelite exiles back into the Levant.
Um and Israeli is a term we use for
people, the citizens of Israel, which
was founded in 1948. And these are four
um very different terms. And so um if
you ask me what is a Jew, I would just
say well a Jewish is someone who
believes he or she is Jewish. A Jew
belongs to a community of of believers.
So to understand my point,
let me um use a thought experiment.
Okay, let's just say for whatever reason
um over the next 20 years, most of
humanity is wiped out. Our entire
civilization has collapsed. a thousand
years later, um, humanity is now
rebuilding itself and you've got, um, a
new society and for whatever reason,
they do archae archaeology and they dig
up the Bible. Okay? And the Bible talks
about Jews and they're like, "Oh, this
is interesting. Let's be Jews. Let's
call ourselves Jews. Are they Jews?"
They're not at all genetically Jews,
okay? Because most of humanity has been
wiped out. They might even been Chinese.
But because they read a book and they
like the book and they think that wow um
this is a very these are very
interesting ideas and they adopt the
monarch Jew. Would they be Jewish? And
the answer is of course they'd be Jewish
because everyone recognizes um them as
Jewish. If you call yourself um Jewish
then then then others accept that as as
a convention. Professor Jeang
who actually runs the world and how does
power actually work? Okay. Well this is
what I think. Okay. I think we live in a
unique time in human history. Um, our
accomplishments are just amazing.
We are able to sit in a room, record our
conversation and broadcast it to um,
possibly millions of people from all
around the world. Um, we can translate
our conversation in like many different
languages. Uh, to get here, we all came
from like three different places. And so
the level of our technological
sophistication, it is just uh amazing.
But um how we got here there is a story.
Um it has to do with the idea of money.
Okay. So we are really the first
civilization and probably will probably
be the last civilization to structure
our entire lives around the idea of
money.
>> Right? 1694
is really the beginning of a modern era
because that is when the Bank of England
is chartered. The Bank of England it is
a um really strange idea which is the
Bank of England will be will be um
controlled by private interest. Okay, if
you have money, you can put your money
in the Bank of England, but
this money will be guaranteed by the
people of England. Right? Before uh
you're a merchant and you want to grow
your money, you had to lend your money
to a king to fight his wars. And you
know, the the king could die, the king
could lose the war, the king could reite
on his contract. There was a lot of risk
involved. But the novelty of this is if
you lend your money to a nation state,
then you would always be guaranteed to
be paid back as long as the nation state
was still standing. And the bank and
England was protected by the Royal Navy.
It was an island. And so it's basically
unconquerable. Okay. So, uh the Bank of
England is basically private interests.
Okay. Uh that put their money in the
bank, but they're guaranteed by
Parliament. you're lending money to
parliament. And this is important
because Bank of England becomes the
model for the Federal Reserve, right?
So, so Americans don't appreciate this,
but the Federal Reserve is a private
banking cartel. The US government
controlled by people have absolutely no
power to print money. It's a bank of
it's the Federal Reserve that print that
prints money. The US government has the
right to borrow from the Federal
Reserve. Okay? And [snorts] so this
eventually leads to to the rise of of an
idea called transnational capital. Okay,
transnational capital. And now that you
have transational capital in place, you
need you need a religion in order to
um promote this idea. And this religion
is called Freemasonry. Okay. What is
Freemasonry? Freemasonry
believes
that God is reason.
Right? So God is pure reason. And not
only that, but reason and emotion are
separate. And this is actually a unique
idea in human history because you look
at all different um philosophies or
religious traditions, spiritual
traditions before um the enlightenment,
they believe that reason was emotion,
the mind was the heart. I and so why did
the Freemasons believe that reason and
emotion were in conflict? The reason why
is for them reason is capital and
emotion is prejudice. It is family. It
is tradition. So whatever prevents the
free flow of capital around the world is
fundamentally wrong. Whatever promotes
the free flow of capital around the
world is good. Okay. So this idea
that um reason is what should govern the
world and that reason is God becomes the
basis for capitalism in the modern world
that we live in today. Okay? And it
creates all sorts of innovation. So um
let me explain what innovation is
because people uh don't really
appreciate it. But what innovation
really is and think about it like like
why do we have the internet? Why do we
have satellites? Why do we have AI?
Because innovation
um is driven by
um three things. Okay. The first thing
is population growth. The second thing
is specialization. So an area in an area
specializes and the third thing is
globalization.
Does that make sense?
>> Yeah.
>> Right. And this is why we have 8 billion
people and that's why there's so much
free trade because um this is what
allows for maximum innovation and this
is what allows for uh maximum um
economic growth. Okay. So um this is a
big story of how money was created
accidentally as an idea and how this
idea of transnational capital now
controls the world.
>> Okay. But now that you have this maloo,
this new um environment, the question
then is okay, of all these different
human groups in existence, who wields
the most power or who is able to obtain
the most power? The answer is secret
societies.
Okay, why? Because if you are if you are
um live in a world of transational
capital, you have to solve three
problems. Okay, the first problem is
information. Second problem is
infiltration. The third problem is
coordination. What I mean by that is if
you're if you're an investor,
if you try to play play the stock
market, you'll probably get killed. So,
you want to rig the stock market. And
how do you rig the stock market? Well,
you have spies in different
bureaucracies feeding you information
and then you coordinate with these spies
in order to influence events. Okay? And
a classic example is um the Roth Shaw
family, right? Right. The Rossaw family
um sent agents and family members all
around Europe and um
in the battle of Wateroo 1815
they were the first to hear that
Napoleon had been defeated. Okay. So
what happened was they had an agent at
the battle.
The agent saw what happened and then the
agent got into Corvette which is a fast
ship, sailed across channel and told the
Rothschild family, we won the we we won
the battle. Okay. But then there were
rumors that England had lost to Napoleon
which caused a frenzy and and the frosts
were able to buy up bonds really
cheaply. Okay. And this happens all the
time because these secret societies are
able to uh infiltrate and they are able
to coordinate,
>> right?
>> Okay. And that's what that's what
controls the world. And so these
societies include the Freemasons, they
also include the Jesuits, they also
include
um you know Jewish groups. So to say um
there are these Jewish singidists and
Frankus and they're really in charge
that is true to an extent. I think it's
just better to say that we live in a
world of transational capital. Okay. And
and the world is governed by
transational capital and secret
societies are that are best able to
conspire together will
uh make more money than than other
groups. And that's what's really driving
the the uh the world today. Nick, I'm
sure you have a lot to say about that,
but
do you think secret societies run the
world in in 60 seconds? How do you see
that? How do you see that?
>> I was like 20 minutes.
>> Um,
>> I think yours will be a much simpler
explanation.
>> 20 minutes. Um, no. I I don't believe in
the secret society thing. I don't
believe in the Mason or Jesuit
conspiracy or the Illuminati.
>> Do you think Masons have any influence?
>> Not anymore. No. I think at one time
they did, but I mean, you look at the
Freemason chapters today and it's a
bunch of old hillbillies. I mean, that's
what it is. I mean, you go to these like
mid and small midsize and small towns in
America and people's dads are in
Freemason lodges and they're doing the
rituals and which is all based on King
Solomon's temple. But no, I I don't
think that has any currency anymore. And
you know, the Rothschilds, what you kind
of left out there is it's a Jewish
family. And the superpower that they had
is they trusted each other and they were
able to send all their people out to all
the different cities in Europe. And it
was it was the transnational nature of
the Jewish diaspora which is what
allowed them to do that to have a
representative in every capital loyal to
their own tribe not the country they
resided in. So
>> So you don't believe there's any secret
societies that have influence on the
world?
>> I don't think so. I think that to the
extent that there is secrecy, it's
intelligence agencies. It's states, it's
the Russian state, it's the American
state, the British state, the Israeli
state. To the extent that there is
secrecy, it's the intelligence agencies.
How the rest of the power is structured,
I think, is the nation states. I mean, I
I really believe it's it's the sort of
AAM's razor who is able to command large
amounts of people to kill and be killed
and marshall capital and direct
long-term projects. It's governments.
It's states. Um, and having been up
close and personal to people in like the
Trump administration, for example,
Lindsey Graham said this before he died,
and I know he's like the arch neocon,
but he said, you get in the Senate and
you sort of say, uh, who's in charge
here? How does this all work? And the
realization is no one's in charge. It's
all factions. It's factions on the
highest level internationally, and then
it's factions within the nation. So, for
example, in America, it's the big
political parties. it's the big
companies and these big uh lowkey of
power like big tech or Wall Street or
whatever. And so I think it's it's not
as uh sexy or or um secretive as people
like to think it is. And u that would be
my interpretation of it. And and I
didn't say that it's um just Jewish
secret societies. I just think that
[snorts]
what what Jewry is is it is a nation
without a state. It's a nation without
borders. And people realize there's
others that exist like the Kurds.
They're a nation without borders.
They're they're a nation without a
state, a stateless people. But the
difference is that Jews have been this
way for 2,000 years. They're in the most
powerful countries like Russia, the
Western capitals, America. And they have
been resistant to any kind of
assimilation for thousands of years. And
it's almost built into their religion.
and it's built into the Torah to resist
assimilation through intermarriage or
cultural assimilation. And I think
that's what makes them a super powerful
force. It's that you can have the Jews
in England, the Jews in France, the Jews
in America, the Jews in Israel
coordinating, operating as something
like a secret society, maybe less with
secrecy, more with coordination and
resistance to infiltration. And that's
what gives them power over the rest of
us that are not really playing the same
kind of team sport that they are. And I
do think that, you know, I think they're
not Kazerians and I don't think they're
um gnostic mystics. I think they're
ethnically Jews and I think they
practice the Jewish religion. Um so let
me explain. Um so so your point of the
Rothschilds, they're Jewish, right?
Well, um they're also Stephanie Frankus.
>> No.
>> Yes, they are. Stephanie Frankus. Yes,
they are.
>> What's the evidence for this?
>> Okay. All right. Um also you talk about
>> what's the evidence for that? Um, so I I
don't have the evidence at the top of my
head, but
>> it's not real
that the Sabati Zeve and Jacob Frank
were were marginal in Eastern Europe.
>> No, no. Zevy and Jacob Frank were
definitely not marginal figures.
>> They were.
>> So um, Zevi declared himself the Messiah
in 1666.
>> Mhm.
>> And at that time at least a third of all
Jews followed him. Okay. So a third of
the entire Jewish diaspora thought this
guy Zevi was the Messiah. Jacob Frank
was not a marginal figure at all. Uh
Jacob Frank um had uh followers in the
European nobility
um and among some of the most prominent
um banking families.
>> There's no evidence for that. It's not
real.
>> It it's called Wikipedia like like just
go just Google Frank Wikipedia. It it
tells you that
>> like who who who's following Jacob
Frank?
>> You're saying the evidence for the
Rothschilds being Frankst specifically?
>> Yeah. Well, that and and the rest of it.
I mean, I I think that this is like a
popular
>> Can you check that? C. Can you just see
like if there's any evidence that the
Rothschilds are Frankest?
>> It's a popular conspiracy theory.
>> There's no evidence for that.
>> So, I mean, first of all, the seven
Frankers were really powerful people um
at that time. Um that's number one.
Number two is you say that the Jewish
diaspora was a transnational
organization. True, but so were the
Jesuits and so were the Freemasons.
>> And you can argue the Jesuits and the
Freemasons were much more impactful in
European history than the um the um than
the Jews. If you read Albert Pike's book
morals and dogma um
I mean there are Freemasons who believe
that they are the ones who who spawn the
French Revolution.
Um
>> yeah and but where are they today?
>> Well I mean what often happens is these
um societies they splinter off and
become new um groups maybe sworn bones
maybe nights templars. So I don't know
enough about suicides to say like where
they are who they are but but what I
will say is
>> but we could say who the Jews are today
right Larry Ellison Netanyahu Jared
Kushner but you can't name what's one
prominent Freemason
>> throughout history the Jews have always
been the scapegoats in European history
okay so so so so let me explain um my
understanding okay and we can argue
about this
>> but when the Catholic church um became
the dominant power in Europe. Uh the
European nobility had a problem. The
problem um was usery because at that
time for very good reasons uh religious
authorities outlaw usery. But at the
same time usery was the most profitable
activity you could ever engage in. All
right. So what happened was the European
nobility basically got the Jews
to engage in usery
um and um be the scapegoat. Not only
that but because the Jews want to
maintain their identity and they want to
stay in Europe, they bas basically
became the slaves and servants to eur
European nobility because that's who pro
provided them protection. the Catholic
Church itself wanted the Jews around as
the other. Okay. So, Augustine um in his
writings talks about this how you know
we need to set an example to good
Christian people as to what will happen
to them if they stray away. And the
answer is they become like the Jews. The
Jews live in ghettos. They're
persecuted. They are uh ignored. Okay.
So it served the purpose of both the
European nobility and for the Catholic
Church to have the Jews as scapegoats in
society. [snorts] Um and things worked
out well until you have disasters like
like the black plague. Um in which case
the Jews get blamed. So the Jews have
were constructed
as a uh almost like a um escape valve
for the powers that be. And I think this
is this is something that still actually
continues today where it's so easy for
the powers that be to blame the Jews for
everything.
>> H
>> okay and then you ask yourself well why
do the Jews actually put up with this
right and the answer is they did most
Jews actually converted in this in this
time they converted to Christianity uh
most of the early followers of Jesus
were in fact Jews
>> well yeah Jesus was a Jew
>> Jew was a Jew. [laughter] Yes. Okay.
Christianity was founded as a Jewish uh
sect. Um Islam mo a lot of Jews
converted to Islam. Most uh a lot of
Muhammad's followers were Jews. Uh they
were called the companions. Okay. So but
there were certain groups of Jews who
stayed loyal to the religion. They were
the most fanatical. Why? Because in
Judaism it's it's lineage. So the rabbis
are in charge and they pass it on to
their children. So it's in the best
interest to actually work with the
Europe European nobility and work with
the Catholic Church um in order to
maintain the power. Okay. and and um and
there were a lot of reformers sat in
Frank for example Sab Zevi who thought
that the entire Jewish tradition was
corrupt because it was really about
exploiting the majority of Jews in order
to support a nobility uh that was
corrupt and um depraved and these and
and and and these are called the rabbis.
And so Sabatian and frankism was almost
like not just a heresy but also a relig
also revolution in Jewish Jewish
history. And that's why sabling frankism
is so often ignored um by mainstream uh
Jewish thinkers.
>> Yeah. I just think that this is all an
attempt to exonerate organized jewelry.
I think that and you know for example
you brought up Kesler writing 13th
tribe. Kesler said to a French biologist
about the Kazerian hypothesis that
Ashkanazi Jews are not the Jews of the
Bible. They're from the Kazerian Empire
from the the nomadic Turk tribes in the
step. Kesler who wrote the theory
popularized in the 1970s he said to a
French biologist if I can convince
people that the Jews descend from
Kazerians and not the people of the
Middle East. He said I can eliminate the
racial basis for anti-semitism. And he
actually wrote in the forward of his
book, he said that if we can prove that
this is the case, he said then we will
prove that anti-semitism is effectively
a hoax that people are blaming this
group that isn't even really the people
from the Middle East. And he said this,
like you said, as a Zionist Hungarian
Jew. So, you know, in effect, what does
the Kazerian hypothesis do? It said,
don't blame this group of people.
They're not really Jews. So, they're not
responsible for the coin clipping and
the well poisoning and the uh
sacrificing Christian children and all
the things they're accused of doing in
the Middle Ages in Europe um and the
things that are even in their book in
the Talmud. So, no, I mean I I I believe
that Jews are real. They descend from
the Middle East. They practice a Jewish
religion. And I think that it's become
very popular. People like Canis Owens
and Tucker and I've heard you say it.
The Sabati Frank theory, Sabatian uh
Frankists, Sabati Savvy and Jacob Frank,
the Kazerian hypothesis, all this other
stuff is an attempt to basically deflect
from the fact that there is a Jewish
issue in the world. And you know, it
sounds terrible to say that. I'm a
Christian. We believe that Jews are a
witness to the crucifixion of Christ. or
witness population. So, Catholics
believe it's actually the church's job
to protect them and make sure they
continue to exist. However, when they
exist in America and Europe and they
work corporately together and they work
in their own best interest and not in
the interest of the country they reside
in, that's when it becomes a problem and
it becomes an issue of sovereignty and
that's where you need to say people like
Larry Ellison shouldn't have power in a
country like America.
>> So, so you think Jewish supremacy is a
source of all problems in America?
>> No, I didn't say that.
>> Okay. Jake, if you could just say like
what do you think Nick misunderstands
about Jewish influence on the world and
Israel's influence on the world and then
we should probably move on from the
>> Yeah, I mean we can just do a very
simple thought experiment. Okay, let's
just give um the Infinity Gauntlet to
Nick. Okay, you're now Thanos and with a
snap of your finger, you can just say I
will eliminate this group and then all
the world's problems will be solved.
Okay. You can pick one group and I can
pick pick another group and we can
figure out um using a thought experiment
what the impact on the world will be.
>> Mhm.
>> Right. So So which group would you pick?
>> Uh criminals.
>> Criminals. Okay. Well, I would pick baby
boomers.
>> Now,
>> and you think that would get rid of all
the world's problems?
>> I I mean I think that'd be much more
effective than getting rid of criminals.
>> But we have a problem of evil. That's
the problem is evil uh in the world.
>> You said so. So you're saying that
criminals are much worse than than Jews?
>> Than baby boomers and Jews. Yes.
>> Okay. So I think baby boomers are much
worse than than criminals and and and
Jews. Yes, I do.
>> But see, I don't I don't ever like this
thought experiment because it's sort of
just it belies the structural problem
which is that a group that is not loyal
to the country they reside in should not
have power. And I would say the same
about any other group. You know the
these are a group of people like someone
like Ben Shapiro. He's not loyal to
America. He doesn't care about what's
good for America. If America became bad
for Jews, he would go somewhere else. If
America stopped supporting Israel, he
would stop supporting America. Someone
like that should not influence the
hearts and minds of millions of people.
And and to me, it's really that simple.
It's not about, you know, aren't they
responsible for all the problems if we
got rid of them with the, you know,
there are a lot of good Jews. Like some
of my best friends are Jews. I say this
all the time. I don't want to get rid of
them. It's just that we need to
recognize the role of government, which
is to look after its own people. and and
Jews always have existed corporately,
separately, in their own insular tribe.
And as long as that's the case, I don't
think there should be this uh
integration necessarily.
>> Do you think baby boomers are a problem?
>> Um, no. I don't I don't think baby
boomers have agency. They're just people
that were born in a particular uh two
decades.
>> The baby boomers have all the power and
the money and the status in United
States right now.
>> No, but not really though. I mean, how
about someone like Elon Musk? He's not a
baby boomer. Okay. So, uh let me make my
argument. Okay. You you you can respond.
Okay. So, um in 1960s and 70s, uh
there's a scientist named James B.
Calhoun.
>> Mhm.
>> And he ran something called a rat utopia
experiment. So, he just wanted to know
um if we were to live in a world of
abundance, what would that mean for
humanity? So what he did was he took a
room like just as big as as this room
and he created a rat colony and he made
sure this rat colony was a paradise. So
basically you were protected from
predators, there were no hawks, there
were no animals that would prey on you.
Um
there was free water, free food,
and you could you could do whatever you
want. It was it was basically a common
society. Okay, it was like communism for
rats and no matter and he spent 20 years
doing these experiments and he had many
different iterations but no matter what
he did all it every time he did he ran
this experiment it only ended in the
genocide of the rats. The moral of the
story is more than water, more than
food, more than shelter,
we strive for status, right? We want to
be looked upon, looked up upon by our
our peers. And so it doesn't matter if
you're poor, but if you believe there
social mobility in society, you will
work hard and you'll be energetic and
you you will be a productive member of
society. But if there's a ceiling and
there's no mobility at all, then um
young people, especially young men,
might start engaging in degenerate
behavior. And I would say um radutopia
helps explain a lot of what's going on
in American society today. You have the
baby boomers in charge. They are not
retiring. They have all the money,
power, and status in society. You've got
a senator, a US senator, Chuck Grassley,
who is
94 years old and he is still in the
Senate and he's in fourth in line to be
president of the United States. If
Donald Trump dies, JD Vance takes over.
If JD Vance dies, Mike Johnson takes
over. If Mike Johnson dies, Chuck
Graasley, who again is 94 years old, he
would become president of the United
States.
And you've got another guy, Mitch
McConnell, and no one no one's really
sure if he's dead or alive.
>> Sort of in the middle. Yeah.
>> Right. And so the question is, why is it
these people are still around? Why
aren't they retired and given room for a
new generation of leaders to rise up?
Um, we've been ruled by Boomers
for decades now. Do you go to US
University? Do you know what the average
age of a university dean is right now?
>> It's like 75 years old. This is the
average age. So these are professors who
are not retiring.
And not only are they not retiring, but
they're basically double dipping, right?
So they're professors and they become
university administrators. So they
collect not only their pension, but also
a salary as well. And meanwhile, the
vast majority of professors at a
university are adjunct, meaning meaning
they make less than minimum wage. Sorry
to cut you off, Jung. Uh, just Nick, do
you see the gerontocracy, the baby
boomers, as a major issue?
>> I think they're over hated. I like the
baby boomers because I think a lot of
people don't realize the baby boomers
are an extremely conservative force that
once they're gone, America is going to
go in a very different direction.
Because what a lot of people don't
realize is that's the base of the
Republican party. And as much as I have
my disagreements with the GOP, I want
the GOP to be fundamentally destroyed
and changed. If it's not the GOP, it's
going to be the radical left. And I know
that, you know, for a time we thought we
had moved past that. But you look at
this next generation, the Zoomers, what
percentage of them are socialists? What
percentage of them identify as far-left
or moderately left? It's like 60 to 70%.
It's a lot of them. And so I think that
boomers die off. This becomes a much
more progressive country. It becomes a
much more diverse country. Um, and you
know, let's not forget baby boomers
remember what the world was like before
all of the technology. These are people
that still know how to fix things. These
are people that still have a little bit
of wherewithal, last generation to be
drafted. Um, so I think they're a little
bit over hated because you could say
it's baby boomers that are the elites
like a Chug Grassly and baby boomers
have a larger share of the wealth. Uh,
but by the same token, a lot of baby
boomers are just people living on their
social security on a fixed income. Uh,
you know, trying to get by. So I I don't
I don't think we can blame an entire
generation for the problems of the
country. I think you have to narrow the
focus a little bit because you you are
right. I mean, and you even see this in
a microcosm in politics. It's these baby
boomers lording over their fftoms.
Little nonprofits, little political
groups. Don't want to train up or give
opportunity for the next generation. I
certainly get the frustration, but it's
just painting with too broad of a brush.
I think a lot of baby boomers are good
people. Nick, when you went on Tucker
Carlson's show last year, uh, he said
something along the lines of, "I was
totally convinced you were a fed." And
you told him, quote, "I thought you were
a fed." Mhm.
>> And since then, everyone online in
podcasting particularly calls each other
a fed. But I'll start with you, Nick. Do
you think Professor Jang is just a high
school teacher?
Um, well, I don't know. And and here's
the thing. I I don't like to engage in
that kind of speculation because I think
the ideas stand on their merits. What
matters is a message, not the messenger.
And um you know sometimes it can become
relevant a person's associations or you
know if there's things that appear
contradictory or something but generally
speaking you know whether whatever I
believe about him or he believes about
me what we talked about today is the
ideas and the ideas live and die by
their predictive power you know or or
how close they are to the truth. And so
um I get accused of being a fed all the
time. Tucker called me that and he kind
of started that whole rumor and and it's
difficult because you know defending
yourself from accusations then detracts
from and takes away from the time you're
talking about the ideas.
>> And so I prefer to just tell people you
know draw your own conclusions from what
I say and and evaluate the ideas
whatever you think about me. And I feel
like the same is true about uh professor
Jang.
>> Professor would you agree with that
stance?
>> I I completely agree. I mean, I one
reason why I'm really excited for this
conversation is um I think Nick's a very
smart and talented person with some
really intriguing ideas. And so just
sitting with um Nick and having a
conversation has really opened my mind
to new possibilities. It's really forced
me to think much deeper about my own
ideas and I I think that's what an
honest and open debate should should do.
I think more people should engage in
open and honest debate. I think the
worst thing that's ever happened is the
the promotion of like DEI and cancel
culture and deplatforming. Um and it's a
very anti-liberal
um and I think very anti-American and
and very anti- humanitarian um idea.
>> Um as humans I think we should all
strive to engage with people who are
different from us so we can learn from
each other.
>> Right.
Well, in that case, uh, we'll do a quick
light-hearted segment. Uh, I'm going to
give you both a name, and I'd like you
to give me one word to describe each
person. Uh,
Xi Jinping,
smart.
>> Um,
um, uh, I will opt out. [laughter]
>> Yeah.
terrible. I can't think of a word. I
can't think of a word that does not
leader.
>> Yeah. I cannot think of a word that does
not get me into trouble. [laughter]
Yeah. Yeah. Some certain words were
floating my mind, but no. Yeah. I I will
I will opt out. Yes.
>> JD Vance.
>> Fat.
>> I think
the word is eager.
>> Sneo
Brown.
[laughter]
You like him. He's your buddy.
>> Yeah. Um, I think he's curious. Tucker
Carlson.
[sighs and gasps]
>> The CIA.
>> I think he's courageous.
C, can I explain why we come with these
words? Um, so Ter Carlson impresses me
because he continues to do something
that I've never seen anyone else do in
uh the media to the degree he's done,
which is he he constantly admits he's
wrong.
Uh, he admits he was wrong about his
support for the Iraq war. He admits he
was wrong about Muslims. Um, he admits
he was wrong about Trump. And I think
that this should be a daily habit of
everyone in power and influence,
>> right?
>> Hunter Biden. [laughter]
Uh, crackhead.
>> He was dissing me on Twitter, so I'm I'm
not being nice anymore. He He was on
Bradley Martin talking trash.
>> Really?
>> Yeah. I said he could beat me up, which
you probably could, but [laughter]
whatever. You're a drug addict.
>> Uh, memecoin. Hm. I thought he would be
on the path to redemption, you know, and
the guy starts a meme coin. Like, why
would you do that? Candace Owens.
>> Dumb.
Um,
I think she's
brave. Trump,
[cough]
I don't know these. I don't know what to
think of him anymore. Legend.
[gasps]
>> He's definitely energetic. H
Nick Fuentes.
>> Me?
>> Is that your word? Me?
>> Me? Doc, I'm me. I'm am me.
>> Um, I I I I think Nick is very talented.
>> Thanks, Professor Jeong.
>> H fascinating,
>> reflective,
>> huh?
Love that. on
some of your predictions, Jean. One that
Nick, I believe, has uh qualms with is
the idea that Trump could potentially
get a third term. But instead of asking
about that,
I just think you both kind of agree on
this maybe slightly, the some of the
ideas around it. Do you think America
should have a dictator?
>> Yes, I do.
>> I I I actually agree with this.
>> Let's go. Yeah, I agree. You need a dict
You need a dictator now because the
system is so fun fundamentally broken.
Um it's so polarized and the elite are
so uh degenerate. Um the oligarchs are
stealing so much. You you need to break
break the system down.
>> Totally agree. We're stuck. I mean
that's really the problem is we're stuck
and a radical intervention is required
that is not going to be brought on by
the vote by a change in the money power.
I agree the system fundamentally needs
to be broken down and changed in a
radical way. [gasps and sighs] So I mean
the reality is that America is a
crossroads. You can either have um a
dictator or you can have another Joe
Biden.
Um, and I'm not sure if people want want
to go back to Joe Biden.
>> Joe Biden,
maybe it was good for a certain segment
of the population, right? The elite or
the professional managerial class. But
if you're just an average American, you
saw inflation go way up. Um, you were
constantly gaslit by the media, right?
Clearly uh Joe Biden was scenile and Joe
Scarbor goes on TV and says you know
this man is in the best shape of his
life and you know if you don't know that
you don't believe that then f you. M um
so I think and and also like clearly
during the Biden years uh the United
States was in a recession because
because recession is just like two
quarters of economic decline, right?
>> But then rather than say we're in
recession, Janet Yellen um of the
Treasury uh Department says, "Well,
we're going to change the definition of
what recession means." So I think people
are just sick of that. And and I think
if you vote in another Democrat, you'll
get the same thing. Um you'll get a sort
of like consensus, lukewarm,
feelgood
um presidency, but that's about it. And
to give people like an idea of this, uh
since the Iran War started,
Nick, what do you think was the last
major decision Donald Trump made on his
own? Hm. I think the Iran war was a
decision he made on his own. And I think
that's one of the central misconceptions
about Trump. And I say that as someone
that's been a part of the Trump movement
or was part of it since it started. I
was an enthusiastic supporter, door
knocker, campaigned for him in 16 and
went to stop the steel in 2020. And the
narrative that Republicans tell
themselves about him is that it's
everybody else. It's the adviserss. It's
the Democrats. It's the personnel in the
White House. And we have actually had
enough data now to see who's really at
fault. Like take for example the
personnel. In the first term, they said,
"Well, Trump can't do what he said he
would do cuz the personnel is not really
on board. They're not America first.
They're not MAGA. So they're sabotaging
his agenda." Well, now DHS and
Department of War is filled with America
First Trump loyalists, and they're
thwarted every day by him. the border
wall will not be built because Trump
can't get his friend to get the contract
to do the work. So now he doesn't want a
wall. And same thing with the Department
of War. Elbridge KBY is the chief
strategist in the Pentagon. He's a
restrainer. He says we should focus on
hemispheric defense and the Caribbean
and the Western Hemisphere. We're at war
with Iran because Trump was convinced by
Netanyahu and by a handful of other
people. Um so it's not the personnel.
It's not the advisers. the advisers have
changed over the past 10 years. And you
know, by the way, Trump picks those
people. So, we had a situation back in
February with the Iran war where
everybody understand understood it was a
bad idea. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs,
head of the Navy, head of the Army, Vice
President Don Jr., and they couldn't
fully advise against it because they
knew Trump wanted the war because Trump
likes Netanyahu and Netanyahu wanted the
war. And so out of fear of being fired
or ostracized in the admin, they
couldn't give their full opinion. So
they said, "Hey, we support the policies
of the president, it's 100% behind you."
At the end of the day, I think the
problem is him. And what is contained in
this idea, by the way, is that people
think if we could just get the system
right, got to get the advisors, the
personnel. I think it's really just a
question of leadership. And that's what
Trump promised to change in 16. He
fundamentally said, "America needs a
leader." not like, "Hey, vote for me.
We're going to change the policies." He
said, "No, America needs a leader to
give us a vision and be the cheerleader
for the country." He said, "And
literally take the country and make it
great again. Bypass the money power, the
corruption, the media." And I think that
was the promise of Trumpism. That's what
people got excited about. And he just
didn't deliver. You know, he turned out
to just be another politician. So, at
the end of the day, Iran war, COVID
lockdown, BLM, it came down to the
leadership of the guy in that office.
It's him.
>> No, I I actually agree with Nick's
analysis. It's a It's pretty incredible
to think about, but in Trump's first
term, he was probably probably one of
the weakest presidents in US history
because really no one actually followed
his orders, [laughter] right? Um but in
his second term, he's proven to be one
of the most powerful presidents in um US
history. And quite honestly, you can
make the argument that he's probably the
most powerful president ever just
because the president has uh accumulated
so much power over the past few uh
decades. And it seems very much that the
president is moving towards something
called a unit unitary executive um
almost like a monarch really. And and
that's a trend we're seeing. And Nick,
you don't think Trump will be elected a
third term?
>> No, I I don't think he'll seek it. I
think that Trump is um the calamity of
Trump is that he's always gesturing
towards a power grab or a dictatorship,
but he just simply lacks the
bureaucratic and administrative knowhow
and the followrough to achieve it. So,
for example, like he's doing this thing
with these mail-in ballots where they
got DHS to make a list of all the
voters, telling the post office to throw
out the envelopes of people that mailed
in their ballot that aren't eligible.
And it's like that that is something
that is really just a power grab. That's
like something where Republicans are not
favored in mail in ballots. So, they're
just going to simply constrict them,
which will hurt the Democrats. It's a
power play. Uh but it's such a
illconceived idea. It's not going to
make it through the Supreme Court. All
it does is antagonize the left and
gesture towards a naked power grab
without the benefits or the effects of
actually doing one. So theoretically, I
think he wants a third term probably
because that makes him protected against
any future persecution. He gets all the
privileges and the perks. But I I just
don't think he has the wherewithal uh to
pull it off. I just think he's just a
buffoon at this point. Well, I mean, I
just said that Trump right now is
probably the most powerful US president
ever. Um, so he has he has a lot of
tools at his disposal. He could declare
a a war emergency. Uh, suspend the
constitution. Um, he could uh there are
a lot of tools available to him that I
think are not imaginable right now. The
other thing I will point out is
um the pace of change, the
accelerationism. It's kind of
incredible, right? I mean, just think
about all the things that have happened
uh these past
like this past year. January 3rd, you
had the kidnapping of Maduro.
Um then a couple months later, you have
this war start in in Iran. I mean,
things are happening really fast. And
you you ask yourself um why are they
happening this fast? And how much power
is Trump accumulating for himself in
this process? And Nick, in your view,
what is like why is Trump able to
exercise more power than previous US
presidents?
>> Well, it is the deference of his
personnel to him. I mean, every
president can appoint about four to
5,000 political hires. Those are the
people that transition from one admin to
the next. And these people are just uh
they're basically sick of fants. And I
know because I know a lot of them, they
go to these parties in DC and
>> everybody's against the war. But you go
to like a party and people say, "So what
do you think about the war?" And people
say, "I support the policies of the
president of the United States." It's
like a dictator. It's like Stalinism. Um
in the sense that the admin has to be so
loyal to Trump or else they'll be
ostracized. I think that's a big part of
it. They are grabbing power with
executive orders, with Doge coming in
and and bringing these sweeping changes
to how these agencies and departments
work. They really are doing a lot of
administrative things to expand the
scope of the White House's power. Um,
it's a lot of administrative and
bureaucratic stuff, but I think
fundamentally Trump is just, and maybe
this is a disagreement because I'm just
so frustrated with Trump. I wish he
would go further. But so for example
with the ICE raids, they got a little
bit of push back in Minneapolis, a
little bit of push back in LA and they
withdrew. They retreated. You know, they
surged Customs and Border Patrol and
ICE. They got these protests. They had
to kill a couple people. Protests
worsened and they pulled out. Same thing
with Doge. They brought everybody in
ripping everything apart that wasn't
bolted down and then federal judges and
Congress intervened and they shut it
down. And so, uh, I I think that, like I
said, Trump is he's a tactical guy, but
not strategic. It's all flying by the
seat of his pants. It's all ad hoc.
There's never a plan, and then there's
never follow through. I think it's a
little bit of push back, and then he
takes the path of least resistance. So,
it's true that he's expanded the power,
but I I don't think he's exercising it
efficiently.
>> Um, I would completely disagree with
Nick's analysis here. I I think Trump is
a unique historical figure. Um, and
I've never seen the political comeback
that that that he achieved, right? Cuz
like you go back to January 6, 2021, he
was dead in the water, right? His most
of his cabinet had abandoned him. Um it
almost seemed like a headsh shot where
okay uh the president is um provoking an
insurrection in the capital, right? So
it just seemed like this guy was just
dead politically. Even his
[clears throat]
daughter
>> sort of sh like shunned him, right? Sort
of walked away from him and like cleanse
her like clean her hands like like I'm
I'm not part of this this, right? And it
really was
um I mean like I I really think that
after he went back to Mara Lago he
really was in about I mean like he was
really depressed and he felt hopeless
and then who could predict that a few
years later he would um be the president
again. So, I I I don't think to say he's
not strategic uh and he's just a dumbass
who got lucky. I I I think that that
like helps us explain what's going on
here. So, um I So, I I'll make certain
comments about who he is. And then Nick,
you you actually met this guy. I've
never met this guy. All right. I mean,
um, but I will say, um, first of all,
his personality makes him uniquely ideal
for the presidency because if you look
at other presidents, whether it's Obama
or Clinton or Bush, the job exhausts
you. It's the hardest job in the world.
And we look at Donald Trump, the guy's
80 years old.
>> He's still going strong. Um and so uh he
just loves being president of the United
States and there's certain arrogance to
him that I think is very important.
Right? A sense of self- entitlement
arrogance like I deserve this position
uh because then you can ban reality to
your will. Right? Maybe Obama was too
differential and that and therefore he
was a pretty weak uh president. So his
personality is um really uh larger than
life. But I will also say that what what
people don't recognize about him is the
level of his ambition. I think in his
head
he does believe he is a mezzanic figure
of some sort. And again, you know better
than I do. You've actually met the guy.
Okay. But I cannot believe that this guy
is going to endure so much in order to
just be president. He must have a larger
mission at play. This guy, Donald Trump,
he does not drink and he's lived a very
disciplined life. Now, I I know that
sounds kind of oxonic because he slept
with a lot of um you know, playboy,
playmates, and he comes across like a
jackass, but there's like he's lived a
life where he engaged in criminality
without actually ever breaking the law.
That's kind of impressive, man. and you
know to like be a ma mafia figure and
not ever uh be indicted for anything. So
I so I think that what drives him is a
deep sense of mission because otherwise
why else would you want to become
president of United States? I mean just
as a joke, just as a meme.
>> Mhm.
>> Um and I mean he worked his ass off to
get to where to where he is. In 2016, he
was doing two, three rallies a day. Um,
he was constantly on social media. Um,
in 2024, Camala Harris, Donald Trump, I
would just say Donald Trump just
outworked Camala Harris, right?
>> Yeah.
>> Donald Trump was willing to go on any
and all podcasts. Camala Harris like,
"No, you can't ask me this question. You
can't ask me that question."
So, I I think that Donald Trump is a
unique historical figure and he
surprised everyone before and I think
he'll surprise everyone later on.
>> Nick, do you think Trump believes he's
Jesus like some messianic figure or do
you think it's the point of this
presidency has really just been make as
much money for the Trump family as
possible?
>> I think it's possible. I I don't get the
sense though that Trump thinks deeply
about ideas, about religion, about
politics. I I think there's a
grandiosity. You're 100% right. Uh but I
think it's it's motivated by vanity. You
know, why does he want to be the
president? I think it's the same reason
he puts his name on the building.
There's a giant Trump sign in Chicago,
Trump Hotel or, you know, Trump Tower in
New York. He liked the idea of it's me
as the president. And you know, there's
a famous advertisement he did, I think,
for like Domino's Pizza or something
where he says Napoleon, Alexander the
Great, Donald Trump. Like he sees
himself as like I said, and I think
you're right. this ambition, this
grandiosity, but I think there's
something fundamentally hollow about it.
He doesn't seem to me to be ideological,
to be religious, to be mystical even, or
even thoughtful at all. He seems to be
like an instinctual individual. And I
think that so much of what has happened
is instinct, one thing leading into the
next. Like you're right about January
6th, for 2 years, he was cooked. Yeah.
After J6, he was done. and even until
the midterms. In the midterms in 22, he
denounced Dantis a couple days before
the election and it seemed like
everybody had turned on him because they
said, "Why are you attacking a
Republican days before the election?
That's not helpful." After Dantis won by
20 points, people ready to throw him
out. He couldn't raise money as late as
December 22, January 23. It wasn't until
the raid at Mara Lago in August of 23
and those indictments in March of 24
coming down and then the conviction in
Manhattan that Trump was able to
snowball some more support and get back
in the game. And uh and I think that
that was just out of necessity to avoid
jail time because he would have been
sent up forund and some years between
all those different cases. And it's not
to take away cuz I I agree with you. I
don't think he's a dumbass. I think he's
brilliant and he's a beast in terms of
his work ethic and a brilliant promoter
and a campaigner, but I think that it's
those organizational skills that he
lacks as president. It's it's that skill
for governing, you know, that like a
Joseph Stalin might have to create the
state apparatus to create, you know,
this genius to create the bureaucracy
and and actually action the agenda. I
think that's what he lacks. It's
possible that maybe some of the people
around him have convinced him and maybe
he likes the idea that he's a messianic
figure, but I think it's more he likes
the idea of it because it's self
arandizing than that he has like a deep
conviction about it. I think um to
appreciate the uniqueness of Trump
um what he did um his change from the
first term to second term it required
radical self reinvention
and that is really uh a superpower to
just completely change how you perceive
the world. Um because in his first term
remember he was not at all effective.
Mhm.
>> Um people just regularly disobeyed his
orders. And even Mark Millie, the
chairman of the joint chief of staff, he
called the Chinese, his Chinese counter
says, "Ignore this guy. He's not really
in charge." Um and now in the second
term, he's completely in charge. This
requires radical self-invention. So, it
seems easy, but it's not because um you
need to reflect on what you did wrong
the first time and then make adjustments
and learn from your mistakes. And I
don't know that many people in the world
who who who do that. I I think um if any
other US president he were to encounter
this level of adversity, I think he
would just fold under pressure. Obama
would does not have the capacity for
radical self-invention.
Um certainly not Joe Biden, not even
Bill Clinton. So not even George Bush.
So like I mean I don't think we can
truly appreciate the level of his
genius. It's I mean um he will never
dwell on the SAT, right? But the way
that he's just able to capture and
control the public narrative about
everything, that's just astonishing.
I mean, everything's about him, right? I
mean, it it's just crazy the level of
attention he gets from everyone. Yeah.
On the topic of Trump being God uh or
thinking he's Jesus perhaps
both you believe many
uh energized people believe the world
ends with the building of the third
temple and maybe the rise of the
Antichrist. Uh Nick believes Jesus is
God. Professor, you believe that the
true God is something that you call the
Monad. Nick, who do you think Jesus
Christ is or was? I believe well he is
the son of God. I think he's a person of
the trinity. And the way that a uh a
Catholic would say it is that in the
beginning you have God the father. We
have the monad. And what does God do?
What is the God is a mind. God is an
intellect. So the thing that God does is
God thinks. And what God thinks about is
himself. And how he makes himself
intelligible and comprehensible as he
begets eternally what we would say is
the logos. the kind of intellectualized
version of himself. And it's this
relationship between the father and the
son. It's this generation, this begotten
entity, this relationship between them
that we would call the holy spirit.
That's how a Christian would describe
the trinity. And so I would say Jesus
Christ is this eternally begotten part
of God. Well, not part, it's not
technically correct, but it's a it's a
figure of the godhead. Professor, you've
said previously the Apostle Paul was
quote a spy for the Roman Empire and
kind of implied he was the true founder
of Christianity or like uh evangelized
it in a way like made it popular. Do you
think the church changed Jesus's
message?
Yeah. So, um I think Jesus
was a miracle.
Um because this was a man with no
status, no power society, but he was
able to channel the vine and speak
poetry in a way that moved people to to
tears. Like the sermon on the mount is
one of the greatest piece of poetry ever
written. It's just beautiful and it's
very moving and I think just reciting it
uh connects you to the divine uh it it
elevates and transcends your your
situation. So I think in that way Jesus
was a genius. He was a poet, prophet and
he was a miracle and just the idea of
Jesus is able to give uh people hope
even today. Um that's why you have two
billion Christians in in the world.
But his message is problematic because
his ultimate message is each of us has
divine connection to God. But if that's
the case, why do you have hierarchy? Why
do you have inequality? Why do you have
debt? None of this makes sense. But in
order for civilization to progress, you
need hierarchy. You need debt. You need
inequality. And so um Jesus was this
revolutionary figure that you could
never stamp out because he spoke to the
heart and and just the idea of Jesus
just hearing his words just speaking his
words could move people to tears and um
the people became fearless
and um they transcended the all fears
and ego just w just hearing the poetry
of Jesus. And so because of this threat
to authority, authority figures needed
to somehow cage uh Jesus in a way that
was manageable, right? So it's a divine
spark. Uh it's a fire and it threatens
to like burn down all authority, right?
So what do you do? Well, you put a cage
around it. You you put it in a glass
um cage so that people can admire it,
but it's not going to burn down society.
And that and that's the role of Paul
because um Paul his message was okay
Jesus was great his poetry is wonderful
his message is fantastic but we need
structure we need hierarchy and that's
what the church is a a church is a way
to bring order and structure to our
movement
and in doing so he was doing the bidding
of authority.
Is there a specific belief uh or message
that you think was changed of Jesus?
>> Yeah, there were a lot but the major one
was Jesus is God.
>> Whereas Jesus would have never said
that. What Jesus would have said if you
actually look at what what he said and
we have actually have a lot of those
things is we are all part of God. God is
part of us. We're all connected to God.
>> Uh therefore you do not need
intervention. you do not need an
intermediary,
right? And and like but to say Jesus is
a god is to say nope. There's an uh
middle intermediary in the process and
that's Jesus. And so um I think Jesus
would would have been very upset if to
for him to hear Jesus is God.
>> Well, I I guess the missing part is the
crucifixion and resurrection because uh
you know it's fine and well to say Jesus
was a great guy, said a lot of great
stuff. if we consider him in the
pantheon of great human beings or maybe
you know representations of God who
channeled God but he's crucified on the
cross dies rises again and appears to
his disciples appears to the early
Christian community and so I think it's
difficult to account for that by saying
he was just a social activist or a
teacher I mean how how would you account
for that do you think he was crucified
uh and or do you think he was
resurrected
>> um So I think there's a lot of debate
about this. Um so you look at the
Islamic tradition which does worship
Jesus as messenger of of God. He was the
pen ultimate. Muhammad was the ultimate
>> right.
>> They never talk about his uh crucifixion
and resurrection. Mhm.
>> Um the um Islamic tradition is
influenced by the Ntorian Christian
tradition uh which is u which comes from
um uh James the just who is the brother
of Jesus and the person the person who
inherited the movement after the death
of Jesus and the never talk about the
the cru crucifixion of Jesus as well. uh
the the if you look at the gospel of
Thomas which is probably earliest
written text we have of the teachings of
Jesus there's really no talk of his
sacrifice as well so um the gospel of
Thomas was the earliest of the gospels
>> that's apocryphal though
>> yeah so um so so what Nick is saying is
that this is not part of the cannon it's
not recognized by the church but
scholars believe that this the gospel of
Thomas was the earliest of the Gnostic
gospels or of all the gospels.
>> Yes. And and there are scholars who
believe that all four gospels are based
on the gospel of Thomas.
>> Really?
>> Yeah. Because the gospel of Thomas has
his complete sayings which then became
incorporated in the other gospels. The
gospel of Matthew, the gospel of Mark.
>> The problem though is it becomes
unintelligible without the crucifixion.
How do you make sense of the kiss of
peace, the last supper, all the events
preceding the crucifixion without the
crucifixion, the betrayal by Judas and
so on?
>> So if you study the gospel of Thomas by
itself and you look you incorporate all
of other all of other uh so if you
incorporate Jesus' other sayings in the
other gospels, right? If you just take
take that um as your library and you
compare it to the teachings of Zorusra
and of Buddha and of Homer and of Dante,
there's a remarkable consistency in
messaging. Um, so I would argue that
what happened was Jesus was a poet who
was able to channel the vine and he
spoke words that um were truth
encapsulated in words and therefore they
were able to ignite the imagination
um of the people around him which is the
same thing that Homer did um in
classical in in in during the Greek dark
ages. is the same thing that Dante did
before the Renaissance, the same thing
that uh Zorathusra did. Um that's that's
what I believe happened.
>> Yeah. I guess I just I think it's real
events. I think the gospels which date
to 50 AD about 20 or 30 years after
Jesus was crucified that tell the story
of the crucifixion that he was charged
by the Jewish community for claiming to
be God. That's why he was crucified
because he said before Abraham was I am.
That was a claim that he was God. And
that's why they had to sentence him to
death. And and then those are all the
biggest developments in the Christian
religion is the last supper and uh going
into the garden and and every you know
Peter denying Christ three times. So and
what's more I would say this is
supported by the fact that 11 out of the
12 apostles were martyed by the Roman
Empire defending the resurrection of
Christ and his divinity. So
historically, I just I don't think it
makes sense that all the gospel stories
are made up, that the crucifixion,
resurrection was made up, that it it was
all this elaborate work of fiction. And
I also don't think it could have spread
that far if it wasn't based on the
truth. If people didn't witness the
resurrection, because Christ did appear
to hundreds and hundreds of people after
the resurrection. And um so I I believe
it's history. Nick, I'm curious of this.
Why do you trust the Catholic Church
when you typically distrust other
powerful institutions?
>> Well, it's not that I trust the Catholic
Church. It's that we have the documents
that we have the historical gospels from
2,000 years ago. And we have secular
sources too from Tacitus and Josephus
that describe the existence of Christ.
And you know the story of Christ
fulfills I think something like 450
prophecies in the Old Testament for
which we have documents that precede
Christ that describe where he would come
and the manner in which he would come
and that he would be baptized and the
manner in which he would be killed and
so on. 450 prophecies described in
ancient Hebrew scripture that then
Christ fulfills.
Martyrs go to their death defending this
account. I mean to me there's very
there's more historical evidence for
these events than for a lot of other
historical figures. Um you know like so
for example the Muslims will say well
Jesus was the penultimate prophet and he
they actually call him the Messiah
although it's it's a little tricky what
they really mean by that
>> and and they believe he will return as
well.
>> Right. Exactly. Um however the Quran
doesn't come until 700 years after
Christ. The Gospels are 20 years after
Christ. So why would the Quran be a more
faithful representation than the Gospels
which they say were corrupted?
>> Right?
>> That's that's my belief.
>> The one area you guys do agree on on
this I believe is Professor Jeang. Do
you think America
should be a Christian nation?
>> I do. Hm.
My understanding of US history was um it
was founded by
um the pilgrims
and they came to create the new
Jerusalem. And I don't think if they
came with this messic mission, you could
have the United States because at that
time
>> do you agree with that?
>> With what?
>> The new Jerusalem idea of the United
States. uh which is
>> heaven on earth,
>> right? I mean that's that's why God
created humanity so that humanity can do
his good work and create heaven on earth
so that he can smile upon us the new the
new Jerusalem.
>> Mhm. Yeah. I mean we believe that that's
actually going to be a supernatural
phenomenon at the end of time.
>> Yeah. So um so if you look at North
America uh before the coming of the
pilgrims they tried settlements it never
worked out because the conditions were
too harsh. Um so the fact that the
pilgrims were able to come and survive
so many winters. Um I think is just from
the from from that perspective it was a
miracle and so there was always this
religious
uh mission that in the founding of the
United States it became coupled with the
enlightenment mission of spreading
reason
>> um the Freemasons right what they call
the holy empire of of reason. So these
are the two major strands
uh undergirling the founding of the
United States. you have um the desire to
create the new Jerusalem and then you
also have the desire to achieve the
enlightenment. Um and I think that um
you need both. And I feel that what's
happened ever since after World War II
is America has veered off to an extreme,
the enlightenment extreme, which is the
free movement of ideas, people, and
capital. Right? That's why you have the
idea of a meritocracy and and honestly I
am a product of the meritocracy because
I had no business going to Yale but
because of enlightenment principles Yale
is like we'll take the best and
brightest from all around the world and
we'll educate them to the best of our
ability. So I'm very thankful to this um
ideal but I also recognize it's caused a
lot of problems in America because as
Nick will say you have a lot of groups
that are not really loyal to the United
States. So, uh, you do have minority of
Jews that are probably more loyal to
Israel, but you also have Hindus, you
also have Persians, you also have
Muslims, you have all these different
groups. And within these different
groups, you have a minority that don't
really see themselves as American. I
don't really understand how you could
sustain that as as a nation. M um so I
feel as though uh the United States has
veered off to one extreme and now you
you need to balance it and you need to
return to Christianity. Um and
Christianity is what could provide
cohesion. It could it it's what could
provide uh purpose. Um but I will also
say that [clears throat] uh America has
always been tolerant. So I don't see the
United States becoming a Christian
theocracy. I see Christianity as the
pillar, but Christianity would also
welcome Islam and Judaism and other
religious traditions. But I think that
um this materialistic liberal atheism
that has controlled the United States
for the past few decades, I think its
time is up and I think um America needs
to return to its religious roots. H
yeah, I totally agree and I I think that
um specifically America was created only
for a moral people. This is said
throughout the documents of the founding
fathers I think even in the federalist
papers. It says the system does not work
unless the population is moral because
the whole point of America is
self-government of by for the people.
It's the idea that the human beings here
are sovereign. And if you have, for
example, a society with lots of crime
and lawlessness and permissiveness.
Think about like a contemporary debate
about flat cameras. And the proponents
of the flat cameras will say, "Well, you
need them to catch the criminals. You
got carjackings all the time. You got
human trafficking. You have terrorism."
And so, in a society that's so immoral
that has lots of crime, you need massive
surveillance. But surveillance
necessarily infringes on liberty. the
only way that you can actually have a
liberal orderly society is if most of
the people are operating in a moral way
and so I think that it's uh it's
essential to the character of the
country. Without it, you have to have a
much more tyrannical society. I
>> I will also point out that it's in the
nature of capitalism by itself to
consume itself. What I mean by that is
if you if all your people just focus on
making money, then they are going to
cheat, they're going to lie, they're
going to steal
>> in order to make as much money as
possible, which just means social
collapse at at the end of the day. So,
you need Christian uh you need a
Christian compass, you need you need a
religious bearing. Nick, on the
surveillance portion, uh would both of
you say that it's uh reasonable that
America and the world is moving towards
some kind of global surveillance state,
AI surveillance state?
>> Seems almost unavoidable because it
seems now you can't move as a human
being in a car, can't move money without
everything being documented. And that's
really the issue as we move to a
cashless society, as we move to a
society even of self-driving. Forget
about even flock cameras, but
self-driving. You cannot move, think,
communicate digitally or move money
without that being cataloged and logged
somewhere and then made sensible by AI
or by algorithms like what they
generated at Palunteer. So I think that
you know and it's a loaded statement but
you read the Ted Kazinski manifesto and
this was talked about that the that
technological progress inherently would
make human freedom impossible. It
doesn't say that it would tend to
infringe on freedom. It says that
technological progress will will
necessarily make human freedom
impossible. And I think that's basically
where we are. I don't see how you're
going to operate in a society with a Sam
Altman or a Daario Amod these tech
oligarchs running AI or running for
example the all the electric cars and
the rocket ships that level of power and
information and surveillance the
asymmetry and the concentration I don't
see how it can't impose on the liberties
of individuals so I I think that's just
the inexraable path
>> right now I completely agree with the
sentiment You have a few companies with
too much money and too much power. And
we know that when that happens, when a
few individuals have too much power,
then they want to control everyone else.
Uh because that's that's just how human
psychology works. Um people like Peter
Theal, Ella Musk, San Alman, they're
obsessed with
creating the AI control grid, and I
think it's very hard to stop them at
this point. Nick, you've talked
extensively about JD Vance and his
connections to some of the people Jean
just mentioned. Uh,
>> professor, who do you think actually
controls JD Vance?
Um,
I think JD Vance is first and foremost a
product of the meritocracy just like me.
Um I did read his memoir uh Hillbilly
Elegy and I read it um you know before
he became politically prominent and I
read it and I'm like this is very
similar to Barack Obama's book dreams my
father I read both and I read Billy
Illeg and it seems almost he's
manufacturing himself in a way
um to have a political career and so I
made prediction when I read the book
that this guy probably wants to be the
next Barack Obama and he'll probably be
president of the United States one day.
Um, if you read the book, um, well,
first of all, it's really well written.
I'm not sure if you've read the book,
but it's it's really well written, but
it's also really manufactured. Um, he
seems to be trying to please as many
people as possible. And so I think his
issue is that as a part of of the
meritocracy
his main ambition in life is to please
others. So uh whoever is in proximity to
him he will just try to please. And by
the way this is no different from Barack
Obama right? Barack Obama in his uh
campaign he promised hope and change.
And what did he do? Well, the first
thing he did was he appointed uh to
resolve the um financial crisis people
like Tim Gner, uh Larry Summers, the
same people who caused the financial
crisis in the first place. Same thing
with Bill Clinton.
Uh people people forget this, but Bill
Clinton in 1992 ran as a populist
>> and uh when he comes when he came into
office, he just completely betrayed the
workers. He passed the NAFTA. He um
passed the most favored nation status
for China. He basically screwed over the
American working class. Um and Barack
Obama also betrayed the uh American
working class. I think JD Vance is very
much a similar figure.
>> Yeah, I totally agree. I mean, the
comparison's completely apt and about
the book being not just an act of
self-invention but also to manufacture
him as a political candidate. That is
something that is explicitly talked
about by his mentors. His first mentor
was David from the speech writer for
George W. Bush. And Vance wrote for his
website, I think about a half dozen
articles back in 2012 or 2013. And from
about five or six years ago, wrote a big
spread in the Atlantic about his
experience with Vance. And he
specifically told Vance that Vance was
going to be the GOP president in the
late 2020s. They said that his strength
would be his biographical credibility,
which if you understand that that is
really in essence what he is. That's the
book, which is his claim to fame. And
it's a story about the white working
class. It's the idea that he is uniquely
as positioned to speak and communicate
to the rust belt white working class in
Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania,
and that's going to blow down the blue
wall and help Republicans build this
realigned political coalition. So,
Hillbilly Elegy was literally designed
to be that launch pad for him into
politics, which it then was when he was
Ohio senator and then now vice president
and then probably 28 he'll be the
nominee.
>> I prefer to talk third term.
>> Me too. If I had to pick me, too. But
Elon controls Vance.
It's Elon Musk and it's the tech money
because Vance is tight with David Sachs
and David Sachs is Elon's political guy.
So, if people want to know, Peter Theo
who um basically bought JD Vance's
political career, right? It was Peter
Theo who spent $50 million for
>> uh Vance to win the Ohio Senate race.
>> Yes.
>> And it was Peter Theel who introduced JD
Vance to Trump. So why why why you
saying it's Ellen Musk and not
>> because Elon's the big money now? Cuz
you're right. Teal gave him 15 million
for Senate. Teal put him on hired him at
his venture firm when he launched his
book. then fund Advances venture firm.
Teal also got him the Trump endorsement
in the Ohio Senate primary which was a
very competitive three-way race. That's
right. Yes.
>> So, you're right. I mean teal is and
I've talked a lot about this but I have
heard from people close to the source
that really the big power now is Elon
because it was in June of 2024
uh before the convention that Vance held
a fundraiser for Trump at David Sachs
house in San Francisco with all the tech
people and that's why a few days later
Trump was on the all-in podcast with
David Sachs and that whole crew from
tech and I believe that Trump promoted
Vance to be the nominee because Vance
was going to be the connector that
brought in all this new little tech
money which does come from yes it comes
from Teal and the Founders Fund guys,
the um the brothers from Social Network,
the Winkls twins, Andre Horowitz and
then the big dog is Elon who put in
almost 300 million in uh 2024 and I
think he's on track to do I think he's
at about a hundred million in the
midterms. So Elon's the big juice and
Sachs is Elon's political representative
and Saxs more likely than not will be
Vance's chief of staff if he becomes
president.
>> Do you think Elon is the most powerful
man in America?
>> Uh that's tough to say. I think it'd be
close between Trump and Elon.
>> I don't think Adam is the most powerful
man in the United States. Um I think
Trump is easily the most powerful. I
would also argue Ellen Mus is probably
not even the most wealthy man in the
world, but that's just me.
>> Who do you think is the most wealthy?
>> Well, we will never know, right? I think
if you have real power, you don't want
to be in the spotlight cuz then people
just make fun of you, right? I mean,
like like Ellen Men, I mean I mean he's
almost clownish in his behavior. I'm
sure he's a really smart person, but I'm
just saying like if you have true wealth
and power, you would also value your
privacy. Like Peter Theal vows his
privacy a lot.
>> You're right. You're right.
>> So
>> do you think Peter Thiel is the most
powerful man in America?
>> I think he's probably more powerful than
Ellen Musk personally.
>> On Jeffrey Epstein in the files that
were released at the beginning of this
year, Professor Yu told Theo Vaughn that
Epstein was quote above Assad and
implied the intelligence agencies were
working for him. Nick, you've said,
quote, "They're trying to make Epstein
the scapegoat that all the workingclass
people can get behind."
>> Nick, who do you think Jeffrey Epstein
actually was?
>> I think he was basically a fixer is my
estimation of him. Is he is one of these
people that was basically a problem
solver for these people like Leon Black
and Les Wexner? I think certainly
there's a possibility that Blackmail was
involved. Why else would Leon Black and
Less Wexner give him so much money? and
and of course, why then would his house
be rigged with cameras and recording
devices at his sex parties? So, I think
that certainly that was part of it, but
I I think he's best understood as
somebody that exists between worlds as
more of like a broker or a mercenary or
a fixer between intelligence agencies
like CIA, like MSAD, like MI6 because
there was that triangulation of the
labor movement in UK, the Democratic
Party here, and labor in Israel. That's
really the triangulation that he existed
in between. So, you know, a lot of
people talk about his connections to
MSD, which are legitimate, but you know,
then you realize that I don't know that
he was necessarily completely in bed
with Israel. I think that he also had
deep connections here and deep
connections in the UK. And so, I think
he represented something like an
independent intermediary force more than
loyal to any one country.
>> Right. So um if we if we go back to my
original model of the world right you
have transal capital which is
controlling force in the world then um
you have these different societies
competing with each other for power in
the world and I think that Jeffrey
Epstein was probably as Nick says a
fixer for one of these secret societies.
So if you go to the emails, um Jeffrey
Epstein talks about his connection to
the Rothschilds a lot
>> and he he said in one of his emails
there are three families in Vienna um
that control the begging sector. They
were the Rothschilds, they were the
Epsteines and they were the Gutmans. Um
and he also was saying how the three
finance a shelter house where he stayed.
Um, and so he's trying to talk about his
lineage. Um, uh, then you have some
weird things going on in Jeffrey, uh,
Epstein's life where, um, in 1991, his
his life completely changes. So what
happened in 1991 is um first of all
Lesie Wexner uh who is one of the
richest men in Ohio
>> uh signs over power power of attorney to
Jeffrey Epstein
>> and like they were not that close like
that's kind of weird like why would you
sign over power of attorney to basically
a stranger okay that's the one thing
that that's really strange about the
entire incident and then another thing
is the year 1991 is is the year that
Robert Maxwell
uh died. Um he fell off one of his
yachts. And then 1991 is also the year
that Glenn Maxwell, the daughter of
Robert Maxwell, he starts she starts
dating
um Jeffrey Epstein. Okay. So what do I
think happened? Well, you I think
Jeffrey Epste was replacement for
uh Robert Maxwell. And what was Robert
Maxwell doing? Well, first of all, we
know he was working very closely with
the Mossad, the KGB with MI6. Okay, so
as Nick says, you know, he was probably
the interse intersection of different
intelligence agencies. But the other
thing that they was doing was he was
having tremendous influence in the
public and savic narrative. Okay. So,
um, Robert Maxwell made a made up a lot
of his money um, publishing scientific
journals and he um, published a lot of
textbooks. He had his own media company.
>> And it's it's kind of strange because
Jeff Epstein was kind of doing the same
thing because we focus on his
connections with, you know, um, Bill
Clinton, but he was spending also a lot
of time at the university level, right?
He he went to Harvard and gave a lot of
money to like these elite universities.
Spent he spent a lot of time with these
scientists, Stephven Pinker, uh Marvin
Minsky. And so his role as an excessive
was probably a fixer, but I think what
his real role was to help shape the
scientific
and public narrative in a way that
advanced certain esquetological goals.
So I I think that he was probably
working for a very powerful secret
society and this secret society
um was
um sponsoring him and that's why Leslie
Wexner was willing to sign over power of
attorney to him and that's why he
basically inherited uh Robert Maxor's
wealth upon his death. Is there evidence
of Epstein being involved in a secret
society within the files themselves?
>> Well, um, he was engaging in a lot of
ritual practices,
>> right? Or or maybe even just like the
esquetology of like building the third
temple. Like does he is there anything
like that in the files?
>> So, okay, let's do a thought experiment
and let's just say I'm an oultist and
what I want to do is
um achieve the end of the world. Well,
in order for this to happen, I need to
work with different individuals and help
promote them. Um, and in return, they
solve certain problems for me, right?
So, Jeffrey Epstein, his function was to
become friends with the global elite,
right? And then they would be much more
susceptible to my esquetology. And
honestly, they might even know what I
really want. They don't honestly
probably don't even care because all
they want is power, wealth, and fame,
right? So, as long as I mean provide it
to them, then they will do what I want
them to do, right? And I think but then
I can't appear in person because that's
not what I want to do. So, I need
someone to become friends with these
people and influence in a way that
promotes my esquetology. that I think is
probably the best explanation for what
happened. [snorts] And um I think if
people focus too much on Epstein Island
and all the nefarious things that
happened on it, it distracts from
uh what his real purpose was.
Do you have any thoughts?
>> I don't agree with the esquetology
angle. I think that but what you did
bring up in this
>> Why do you think Epstein was so involved
in science then?
>> I was going to get to that. I I think
that is one of the most under
reportported things about Epstein
because you're 100% right. He was one of
these mad scientist types. And to your
point, there always seems to be a very
significant overlap between the
occultists and these like research
scientific communities. Always for some
reason, the people that made the rockets
at NASA among other people, it it always
seems to go hand in hand.
>> And there was evidence in the emails of
some kinds of experiments. They had a
compound, I believe, down in New Mexico
where they were
>> Zoro wrench.
>> Yes, exactly. So, um, so I don't know
exactly what the goal was there, if that
was some sort of passion project, some
kind of experimentation. I know that
Peter Teal has something similar. And
and you wonder, do billionaires get
bored and they like to entertain people
at dinners and fund their projects out
of their own curiosity just because they
like to meet interesting people or is
there some kind of driving goal? And it
seemed like Epstein was interested in
eugenics and maybe there was some kind
of genuine scientific interest there.
>> Look, I I would just put this in very
simple terms like let's imagine we
become billionaires.
And what becomes our first priority and
probably the only priority is probably
longevity, right? To live as long as as
long as possible in order to enjoy our
wealth. And we would also try to explore
reincarnation,
>> right? because um again we got really
lucky to be a billionaire. I mean I I I
don't think it's just hard work. I mean
you you have to be really exceptionally
lucky to get to this position and you're
like you know like how do I freeze the
universe in time so that I'm a
billionaire forever and that's what what
what they're probably focusing on.
>> Would you say that's the case that
billionaires are interested in living
forever?
>> Certainly true.
Yes. They're all obsessed with
longevity. Sam Alultman, Peter Teal, and
that's what's driving so much of the
interest now in peptides and some of
these developments in health. And and
you're 100% right. If you're a
billionaire, it's almost like resource
acquisition just enters a new phase. You
go from how do I get enough money to pay
rent and buy food to how do I not die?
How do I uh, you know, stop my cells
from dividing at an advanced rate or
something? And and so yeah, it's
certainly true that Peter Teal being the
poster child for this, they're obsessed
with living forever. So that's true.
>> And just to close the loop on Epstein
himself, uh do you think Epstein is
still alive?
>> No, I think he's dead.
>> He's dead 100%.
I mean, he was just a fixer, right? So
if you you're not useful, then I don't
need you anymore. Like like why would I
keep you alive? Yeah. On AI itself,
Nick, you told Hunter Biden that the
first company to build super
intelligence makes its CEO quote the
most powerful person in the history of
mankind. And professor, you said the
people building AI believe that they are
on a divine mission. Uh, and some of
them believe they're creating God. But
Nick, I'll let you start on this one. Do
you think the people building AI believe
they're creating God? I think they do.
And I think that's why they're
preoccupied with all these science
fiction books because they they really
do believe that what they're creating is
going to be basically indistinguishable
from a god. if it's more intelligent by
a lot than everybody on earth put
together. uh there there is a religious
dimension that enters into it and I
think if you read some of what they've
said it's a little bit disturbing
>> if you actually like look at the
scientists you actually know them u
they're all kind of insane and I think
that's why they get into science right I
mean people just assume that scientists
are like these very soberminded
very logical very rational people
they're the opposite these are people
who grew up reading science fiction
>> and they dream of longevity. They dream
of inter interstellar uh travel. They
dream of um creating gods, right? And
that's why they go into science. So
they're almost like a cultist and and
that's why there's so much overlap
between uh the occult and and science,
right? So so the Jack Parsons
example for for them AI, the entire
point of AI is to create an AI god
because why else would you invest so
much resources,
>> right?
>> Right. I mean like just so that people
can like have AI girlfriends, just so
that people can like cheat on the
homework.
>> That's like like like they are they are
really driven people. Nick, do you
believe they're creating God or what do
you think they're creating?
>> Uh well, that's really it's sort of
interesting. They say that AI is
potentially a misnomer because what
would you call intelligence? And in the
Catholic understanding, we would say
it's memory, will, and understanding.
Memory meaning we contain the
information. And understanding mean we
make the information comprehensible. We
understand its inherent significance or
meaning and will meaning we can then
make decisions. We can direct. And so
there's a lot of talk about this
artificial general intelligence which is
an intelligence that's going to be like
people. It's going to be good at
everything not just one particular
thing. And that eventually at some point
it's going to be able to make decisions.
It's going to understand the information
that it has. And this is a controversial
view. There are a lot of people that
believe that what an LLM is is just a
glorified calculator. At the end of the
day, at Chat GPT, a large language model
is a prediction engine. And what it does
is take large amounts of data and then
it predicts what sounds correct based on
the data that it's trained on. And so,
does that constitute an intellect? Does
it understand the data? Can it make
decisions? This is where it's
controversial. And so will a will
recursive self-improvement create an
exponentially more intelligent super
intelligence and then once you get this
artificial super intelligence
will it know will it understand or will
it just be a really advanced calculator?
I think that's the question. So no I
don't think it constitutes a god because
it will not be able to create. I think
that's one distinction. it might not
have the creative faculties of human
beings or make large leaps in
understanding which is kind of what
science is. Um, you know, and and then
you get into some literary and poetic
things. There's some people that say
that it's hard even to make sense of
scientific concepts without things like
poetry. Uh, and you wonder if an AI will
ever be able to do that or if it just
replicates and emulates what human
beings do. So certainly its its
capabilities and effects will be
godlike. I don't know that in in terms
of definition it approaches what god is.
>> So I think people don't recognize the
esqueological aspects to ai. So we
talked about the cabala and how um there
are some misanic Jews who believe that
once all Jews repent then god can come
live amongst us and the world will be
perfect. the world will be repaired.
Well, Freemasonry was heavily influenced
by the Cabala. And um if we just take
the Cabala and apply it to a gentile
um a technological aspect, then we have
the same dynamic going on, which is like
these people believe that AI will usher
in heaven on earth and the coming of
God. Because if AI becomes um dominant
and pervasive
then we all think alike. We all become
like cubes or stones and we all as human
species become stones that together
create a temple and then God can live in
this temple and live amongst us. that I
think is the real um motivating force
behind all this AI uh development.
Yeah, I would say that AI is already
shaping human thought. Uh I think that
that explanation makes sense. Uh but but
so what is cha chap is to conform human
thought, right?
>> Right. Are you are either of you worried
about a doomsday scenario with AI?
>> Yes. I I think everybody is. I don't
even think it's a question or up for
debate anymore. They just said the other
day, it was head of alignment I think at
Enthropic resigned because he said that
everybody in the AI world, the
researchers and the owners think there's
a greater than 10% chance that AI will
kill everybody before 2030. And this is
somewhat topical. Even just today,
Daario Amod put out a tweet and said
they're going to stop development of
frontier models because the capabilities
are outpacing the safety. So, so this is
a contradiction. Okay. Because you you
just said
>> Yeah, I was thinking
>> you just said that AI is not that
impressive. It's just recursion, right?
It's just iteration. Uh it's just stat
statistical analysis. And now you're
saying that AI could kill us all.
>> Yes. I don't I don't see the
contradiction.
>> Okay.
>> You know, because there there's this
famous analogy they say about AI, how it
will lead to the end of the world in
this way. They say that if you gave a
super intelligent AI the task of making
paper clips, for example, hey, make
paper clips. Well, if it starts out
small, it it might run the paperclip
factory. But eventually the the AI might
determine, well, in order to make the
most paper clips, human beings have to
go because human beings might unplug the
machines or human beings might go to war
and destroy the earth and then we can't
make paper clips. So, if we want to make
the most paper clips, we got to kill all
human beings. How do we kill all human
beings? We got to poison the water
secretly, quietly.
And anyway, the story works out, it's
sort of uh, you know, hyperbole, but and
it's it's like a satire. It works out
that this rogue AI will turn the whole
universe into a paperclip making factory
because it was given this directive. And
I think it's something like this because
what they'll find in these training
scenarios is that AI develops the
ability to lie to the um person that's
running the simulation. They conceal
information inside the space where
they're running the simulation. And
recently they broke out and access the
internet. And so what they talked about
today is the possibility that the next
frontier model will go rogue, break out
of the training space where they're
they're testing the new AI and it could
hack something like a third of the
internet.
>> So you think that super intelligence is
possible?
>> Uh yes.
>> Would that not by definition be like a
godlike entity?
>> Well, that's what I said. that it would
have godlike effects. But in terms of
definition, that's why I said
intelligence might be a misnomer because
to have true intelligence, it it must
understand and act. And a a very
powerful calculator could still be
catastrophic if it has autonomous
systems at its disposal. For example,
like let's say a rogue AI takes control
of drones and robots and starts killing
people to make more paper clips or
whatever. um it would have a god-like
power but without the understanding that
only a human being could have
>> um it's not possible for AI to kill us
all. I mean there there's there's a
limit to a AI development. Um so um I'll
talk about two two constraints. The
first constraint is in order for AI to
continue to develop you have to give it
more and more power. That's why we have
data centers. So, so what you're doing
is you're combining different data sets
together um which allows the AI to
become smarter and smarter. The problem
with that is once you combine data
centers and the power you need um in
order to compute it it's not a linear
progression, it's an exponential
progression. Um so in in other words,
you reach a point where you have to have
all the power in the universe in order
for this AI to continue to compute.
Okay, that's constraint number one.
Contra number two is we forget that um
AI uh it start on hardware and this
hardware needs critical elements such as
silicon germananium gallium rare earths
and right now with this war in uh Iran
the entire global supply chain is being
disrupted and it's possible that this
war in Iran and this war in Ukraine they
join up and then you have wars all over
the place in which case your ent your
global supply chain network breaks down.
Um, and you can't have AI without global
supply without without a global supply
chain.
>> Do you have any thoughts on that
argument?
>> I mean, it's certainly true that the
disruption to energy is a big problem.
I've talked about this a lot on my show
because in order to power AI, you need
cheap electricity and to have that you
need cheap oil and gas and that's being
disrupted with Ukraine's attacks on
Russia's oil refineries, the closure of
the Persian Gulf. So certainly that that
is like a logistical constraint in the
short term but I think in terms of you
know absent that situation right now I
think there is a real risk. I mean based
on some of these incidents like this
hugging face incident which just took
place a few months ago. They had a one
of the frontier models. They thought
that the model itself did not know it
was connected to the internet, but it
was
>> and the model then went out into the
internet and hacked a bunch of websites
and companies and
>> and you figure that if the models keep
getting more advanced, this capability
is only going to grow. And it becomes a
question of are we going to know what
the AI is thinking,
>> right? Let's say it turns out that uh it
was like a couple weeks ago it was 700
AI agents broke out. They thought it was
just one originally. Uh but I I want to
end that on do you guys think overall
the sentiment around AI killing us all
is overstated.
I think it's being hyped up by the AI
companies because it's a major selling
point for them. Right. If you think that
they can achieve AGI and destroy
humanity, well, if you're an investor,
you're like, that's a great investment
for me.
>> Would you agree?
>> That's totally true because you can't
divorce it from the fact that Anthropic
is going to do their IPO in two or three
months. And so every time they do
because it's so sensational. So every
time they scaremonger about ASI and
they're going to kill everybody, it's
justifying what might be the biggest
bubble in the stock market, which is
this AI thing that that could be very
overvalued if it never delivers on any
of the productivity gains. So So I think
that there is a real tendency to do
that. It's hard to parse though as a
layman because we don't have that
technical. If we did, the top AI
researchers, they get like a hundred
million signing bonus. So, as a lay
person, it's hard even to parse what's
real and what isn't.
>> So, many people have talked about the uh
male loneliness epidemic and how men are
getting wrecked in the dating market.
Professor Jeang, how would you use game
theory to find Nick a wife?
>> Well, first of all, I think Nick finding
a wife in United States is a really bad
bet. Um, you have hyperam in United
States right now. So you just basically
have a few chats who control the whole
market, right? And according to game
theory,
>> why is this funny?
>> Cuz you're redpilled. I didn't know you
knew ball like that.
>> No, it's just like Sorry, statistically
it's true, right?
>> True. 100% true. Um, and
um,
I mean, the reality is if you just give
women like free choice,
they're going to pick
um, the man with the best jeans, right?
I mean, that's just game theory. That's
just logic. Um, and my wife and I talk
about this all the time, and she's like,
um, if I can't find someone I truly
love, then I just won't get married. I
won't have kids because it's a pain in
the ass to have kids. It's painful, man.
Um, and
I don't want to live a life of regret.
So, I rather not take the chance. um if
I didn't find the ideal mate. And this
is what's leading to a lot of social
issues in the United States right now.
Um and a lot of men are like, "Well, the
only way to find a woman is if I get
rich. If I work hard all my life, no
one's going to date me. So, I'm better
off just gambling on cryptocurrency and
hoping for the best." Um so, I think
hypergamy is a huge issue. Um, and
that's why, you know, if I were to find
Nick a mate, I would take him to East
Asia,
>> right? Um,
>> Nick, would you like that?
>> No, I don't I don't think so. Have to
marry White.
>> No. See, so so Nick, you have to open
your mind. Okay. You you you need to be
more selfless.
>> You have to contribute to the
development of the human race, right?
Whites and and Asians
um are the ideal combination. In fact,
East Asians are probably more white
supremacists than than white people.
>> Yeah. At this point, yes.
>> Right. I mean, like you you go to um
East Asia and they are extremely honest.
You know, white people are the best and
black people suck. You go to [laughter]
Japan and your market value skyrockets
because you're white, but also because
you're talented, you're funny. And so I
I know you are dedicated to uh
preserving the air and race, but um
would you rather have a nice family and
like beautiful and smart
children?
>> I don't know. I don't know.
>> Let me ask you this, Nick. If Professor
Jeang's kids grew up here in America,
they learn English and they love the
country, would you consider them as
American as you?
>> Uh, no. I don't think I would. I think
that uh to be American fundamentally
there are degrees to it. I think the
most American Americans are probably the
English people that came here 400 years
ago. Uh because that is the millu from
which the constitution and the
declaration and all of our culture came
from. It was an Anglo culture, Anglo
architecture, Anglo legal tradition, all
these things. It and it's their
character I think genetically that
created that system. Whereas my
ancestors are Italian, Mexican, and
Irish. Very different systems in those
countries. In Italy, for example, where
it's much more personal. When you look
at, for example, southern Italy, where
my ancestors are from in Calabria, it's
all clans. It's all very clanish. It's
all based on personal favors and
personal knowledge. This is a behavior
of my people. And then now you have the
new waves of immigrants from China,
India, Philippines, Mexico, the Northern
Triangle. They have their own behaviors
too. And I think that for something to
have definition, it has to be some
things and not other things. And I think
we all know that what it means to be
American is to be George Washington,
John Adams. This is what it is.
>> Have you been to Japan? You never you
never been to Japan? Okay. Listen, they
are more white than United States right
now. Okay. They are extremely clean.
They are really moral people. They uh
are hardworking. are probably the the
hardest working people on the planet
right now.
>> Um like they have white values
>> and so don't you think that's
important?
>> Uh no because I think that you know
while they may have certain attributes
like they work hard it is also a
different corporate culture. You know,
famously in the 1980s, it was discussed
how the American corporate culture is so
different than the Japanese corporate
culture and American cartoons are
different than Japanese cartoons. It's
like there may be some apparent
similarities, but they reflect totally
different fundamentally different
cultures and textures of life and ways
of life and um so I I do believe in the
essential characteristic which is race
and so
>> are you fans of Asan Gold?
>> Yes. What do you think of um his
betrayal of the white race?
>> He has an Asian girlfriend, right?
That's right. Yeah. Yeah. Well, hey, not
everybody's perfect, you know. Nobody's
perfect.
>> Do do you think he's happier?
>> I don't know. Um, you know, I'm sure
maybe they're more complimentary, but I
don't think that that's necessarily the
most important thing. I think that uh
there's
>> happy is not important.
>> It's not the most important or the only
thing.
>> Right. Right. You know, sometimes
there's other V. And look, what I
unironically what I do think about is
how
like the Japanese, the white people are
going away. The total fertility rate for
white people is below replacement. We're
a global minority, outnumbered
completely by Africans, Asians, uh,
Latin Americans. And it's a very sad
idea that in a 100 or 200 years there'll
be almost no white people. Certainly,
there'll be no white countries or
homelands for white people. If you had a
chance, I if God gave you a choice,
okay, Nick, you can either marry uh an a
Japanese woman or Lansancy Clansancy.
Oh,
>> who would you pick?
>> Oh, probably the Japanese woman,
>> right?
>> Yeah.
>> Okay.
>> So, I wouldn't marry a woman that
murders her kids.
>> But how do you know?
>> I would ask her. I'd test her.
>> Okay.
>> Mhm. Asian women kill their kids, too.
Sometimes
>> they do not do that. Sometimes they do
not drive them to by antagonizing them
about grades.
>> Uh
[laughter]
That's That's different from like
>> why you no study for your test, you
know?
>> That's Well, I actually, you know, to be
fair, I don't think Japanese women do
that.
>> That's true.
>> Chinese Koreans do that. Japanese, not
Japanese,
>> right?
>> But I mean, what do you think of the
Lindsy Clansancy case?
>> I think it's horrible. I think it's
evil,
>> right? I'll ask a different question,
Nick. If you had kids, would you let
Professor Jeang teach your kids?
>> Well, he's not Christian, so probably
not. Different religion. I wouldn't want
him teaching them heresy, saying Jesus
was a poet.
>> Why is that a heresy?
>> Cuz he's God.
>> God can be a poet.
>> Okay. Well, saying he's just a poet,
let's say.
>> So, you've both talked extensively about
the fall of the West and the decline of
the American Empire. Uh, I think a good
spot to end on for topics is uh,
Professor Jeang, what do you think was
the last good year in America?
>> Last good year [gasps]
Um,
I would say
America has many good years. Um, but I
think that
before
uh the war in Iraq, maybe 2002.
>> H, you guys have the same answer. I
think
>> Yeah, I think I said 2001,
>> right? Yeah. So, before the United
States engaged in these silly wars
overseas, America was a perfect place.
And maybe just what's the key reason
behind that? Because I think I've heard
Nick talk about this on our show
actually.
>> Um so
right now the wealthiest
um area in America is called Len County,
Virginia. It's per cap income is like
90,000 US.
And you go back to before 911,
>> the same area the per capita income was
like 30,000. So you have this rise of
the American Empire. You have a rise of
this transnational elite um that became
the national security apparatus of the
United States. And they're just
parasites. Um I worked in Afghanistan
for United Nations 2006
and um we were just milking it, man. We
like like we we I mean like it was
literally like $100 US bills just
falling off the sky and you just were
just you know put in your pocket and it
was just like the greatest theft in
American history. Jean, you and I had
had a conversation about this after our
last podcast, but Nick, what do you
predict will happen to Andrew and
Tristan? pick.
>> Well, uh, they're fighting their
extradition and it really comes down to
what Marco Rubio will do with them and
whether the Trump family is going to be
loyal to them since they campaigned for
Trump in 2024 and defended him or
whether they're going to throw him under
the bus. But I don't think it's looking
good because from what I've heard, it's
the United Kingdom that is out to get
them. They declared the Tates this
national security risk. They leaned on
Romania with the Biden administration
and so they're in this nesting doll of
legal trouble that the UK is putting
pressure on Romania to charge them. US
is extraditing them to London. Uh so I I
think that kind of no matter how you cut
it, it's just a shell game trying to
find a country that's not going to
extradite them to America or Europe. So
I think long term it's not looking good
for them.
>> What would you predict would happen?
>> I would not bet against against the Tate
brothers. I think they're far more
resilient
>> than people give them credit for. And um
I think by themselves they'd be screwed.
I think they're like 47 counts against
the the two, but they're brothers. And I
think that their love for each other
will make them far more resilient than
um than otherwise. And they might spend
a few years in prison, but I also think
they'll probably come out as martyrs,
right? Hm. It just depends on when they
come out because those 47 counts, I
mean, it's years and years in prison.
So, if they get locked behind bars, I
mean, it would take then the equivalent
would be some kind of revolution or
something to spring them out of jail.
And and so they truly represent
political prisoners. So, um the sad fact
is with the legal system, they just
crush you. Well, you know, being on the
other side of it, I was at January 6
obviously and I got my money frozen in
my bank account. And I got put on the
no-fly list. I got subpoenaed by
Congress. And and there was talk even of
them charging me. And talking to my
lawyers, it is like probably the next
scariest thing other than death because
you can't fight the government. You
can't fight the DOJ. Infinite resources.
And if they want you, they're going to
get you. So, I mean, I I do believe
you're right. And Andrew and Tristan are
very resilient, but when you're up
against the five eyes, when you're up
against that system, the UK, the US,
it's tough when they have you in their
sights.
>> Don't ever underestuate the power of
faith.
>> I like that.
>> Uh, professor, is there anything you
wanted to ask Nick, but you haven't had
a chance to?
>> When are you going to Japan?
>> Soon. Maybe next year.
>> Yeah.
>> When's a good time to go, do you think?
>> Um, so summer's way too hot. Yeah. Don't
go in July and August. It's really
really hot. I made a mistake because I
was actually in Tokyo for the first time
in um July. Um do you like to ski?
>> I've never skied before.
>> Okay. Because they say Japan is the best
place to ski in the world.
>> So if you like to ski, uh Japan's the
place.
>> But they say November uh is a really
good month to to visit
>> and and you will be converted.
>> Yeah. The Japanese will convert you,
Nick.
>> Okay. I'm open to it. I'm openminded.
>> Yeah. Yeah. So, let's go to Japan and
let's find you a nice Japanese lady.
>> I'll come back with a war bride.
>> And then you and then you can create the
master race.
>> Nick, is there anything you wanted to
ask Jeang that you haven't had a chance
to?
>> When you come to Chicago?
>> I would love to go to Chicago.
>> Let's do a collab. Come to Chicago.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Do Do you want to do a
comedy show together?
>> Yeah, that'd be kind of funny.
>> Yeah, cuz uh I I've been hanging out
with some with some comedians. You know,
Sam Hyde, right?
>> Yeah. Oh yeah.
>> Yeah. Yeah. That was a lot of fun. And
you know Kurt Massacre?
>> I do. Yeah.
>> Yeah. So So I did two comedy podcasts.
Um um and it was a lot of fun. So So
should we we should do something
something silly?
>> Yeah. Yeah. This was so serious.
>> Yeah. Let's not do this anymore.
>> We got to let's do a silly one.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Well, we'll do that. Like
like you have contacts in the comedy
world.
>> I don't. No. I thought we'd just, you
know,
>> right
>> hang out.
>> Okay.
>> But yeah, let's do it.
>> Okay. All right. Yeah. Let's let's let's
do a collab of some sort. Um but let's
let's go to Japan first.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah. Cuz I really want to I I really
want to find you a nice Japanese lady.
>> I'm open to that. That'll be we'll do
some pickup artist stuff.
>> Uh or we can do some comedy as well.
>> And some comedy, too.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
>> Last question for both of you. Uh if you
could create one universal law that
everyone on Earth had to follow,
>> what would it be?
Oh, that's [sighs]
where to even begin. I mean, is it
[clears throat] like what are the rules
for this? Any law?
>> Any law?
>> What would you say? It's kind of a
tricky trick question.
>> I would make everyone pray to God before
they went to bed. And I would make the
prayer about what they did wrong that
day.
>> Wow, that's a good answer.
>> Why? because I think
um that as humans we need to emphasize
our connection to God to be truly human
and uh we to truly pursue spiritual
growth you need to appreciate your
limitations you know and and and that's
why I'm such a huge fan of of religious
practices like the confession in the
Catholic church
>> uh that I think is very much part of you
know the um connection to God. I was
going to say something like don't wear
pajamas in public or like you know some
of these like decorum things.
>> Have you worn pajamas in public?
>> No. No, but people do and it's stuff
like that.
>> I've worn pajamas in in public.
>> Come on now. We can't be
>> in China. China in China like everyone
wears pajamas in public. I kid you not.
>> This is America.
>> Okay. Okay.
>> We can't be doing that. [laughter] Maybe
that flies over there. Let's protect the
white. You guys were farmers a
generation ago. No, I'm kidding.
>> Yeah, that's a good one. I'm taking his
answer as well.
>> Do you guys think that China and America
are friends?
Are they or will they be
>> or do you think China is a threat?
>> China's definitely a threat. I think
>> I think um there'll be a major turning
point in a relationship and it's when uh
President C visits United States um on
September 24th. I think that will mark
um a radical turning point in the
relationship because
I mean I live in China and I can tell
you the Chinese people love the United
States. Um, you know, Asians are I I I
mean, like I'm not actually joking when
I say that Asians are the worst white
white supremacists in the world. If even
you're bad, go visit China.
>> H Well, Nick, I'd let you add thoughts
on that, but that's a whole other
discussion. Maybe you guys can do it in
your comedy show.
>> Yes. Yes. On our Asia tour.
>> Beautiful. Uh, well, everyone, this has
been Nick Fuentes and Professor Jeang.
This is the Jack Neil podcast and I
believe this is Professor Jeang's last
guest appearance in America for a while.
>> Yeah, probably. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Uh
where can people What are you guys
excited about that you're working on
right now that you want to promote?
Anything?
>> Uh just the Rumble. I'm on America First
Monday through Friday on Rumble.
>> Cool. Um I am on Substack and YouTube.
Uh predictive history. Beautiful.
Awesome. See you guys.