 Hudson CEO and founder of 21 studios and the 21 convention. Today joining me on this episode is Steve Brulay from studio Brulay on YouTube, a big channel and studio Brulay.com on his channel. He focuses on men's issues, men's rights and criticizing things like feminism. I've been on there once myself and he does a lot of good shows with Janice F. Mango, Paul Elum and many more. Steve, welcome to the show. Thank you very much, Anthony. It's a pleasure to be here. Yeah, it's a pleasure to have you on. Like I said before, I've really been enjoying your tweets lately. It's been very, very nice to see and very, very sharp tweets, very fiery. Well, there's no point in saying something kind of noncommittal. So might as well say it as strongly as you can. I think even if it includes a little bit of rhetoric, I think it's best to make your point as strongly as you can and argue your point as strongly as you can. Yeah, at the end of the day, too, I think the truth only offends liars and people who are willfully dishonest. Well, I really appreciate you speaking up and speaking the truth. I did it. You get to see a criticism. I've been there myself. So yeah, there's some heat. So the title of this episode is the truth about white privilege. I want to go beyond that and discuss kind of feminism, Marxism, things like that. My first question, though, is what was your obviously been, you know, butting your YouTube channel and focusing on these ideas for a long time. What was your first response or initial response to Black Lives Matter pre-2020? We saw it, you know, a couple of years ago in 2016 when it first sprang up. Yeah. At well, at very, very first, I didn't give it much attention at all. But then as as you know, you couldn't ignore it, the movement, it became kind of apparent to me that this was it an offshoot of feminism. Yeah. And, you know, that much of what they say, it's a lot of it is boiler point, boiler boilerplate feminist kind of rhetoric. And their claims are all lifted out of ideological feminism and their, you know, that's actually right on their website, too, of course. I'm sure you've seen this. But what we believe when they talk about dismantling the patriarchy, opposing the Western nuclear family, all kinds of very, very explicitly feminist ideas, we would see boilerplate out of a tumbler for feminism or something. Yeah. And they are feminists. The three women, three Black women who started it, they're all avowed feminists before they got into starting the Black Lives Matter group. Yeah. Yeah, it shows. I mean, looking at the website and things like that. Yeah. So my next question would be, you know, what was your response when you saw take off more recently? Because, you know, all of two months ago in America, at least, in probably Canada, if you were critical Black Lives Matter, you could say something like all lives matter as politicians and even other people did. But now we see people getting banned, people getting fired for saying any kind of disagreement with BLM. So what was your response kind of now with the BLM that took off with the riots and things like that? Because you're not an American, you're Canadian and you're living. I'm Canadian, yeah. But this is global. I mean, the incident with Floyd may have started, obviously, in the US, but the response is global. And the response, most of the responders are going at it from a very simplistic point of view. They're looking at it as a racist white cop who killed a unarmed Black man in cold blood. And they're taking that rhetoric even further. And they're claiming that this is an example of white supremacy throughout the police force and throughout the culture. So that's obviously a grotesque distortion of the situation. But it's deliberately grotesque and it's encouraged by the leaders of groups like Black Lives Matter specifically for their own purposes, which is fundraising and power. Yeah, what else is new? A more specific question, have you seen any evidence that what happened with George Floyd was racially motivated? Because I've looked around and I haven't seen any. It just happened to me that he was a white cop, as far as I can tell, and then George Floyd was Black. Yeah, that's the appearance of it. Now, I have not seen evidence that Chauvin himself personally was a racist guy. Not saying that that evidence isn't out there. I don't know. I never looked to see whether Chauvin himself as an individual was racist. But he was working with a Hispanic cop and an Asian cop. So the three of them were standing there in an initial situation. I think from the beginning of the incident, the three of them were involved. So yeah, I don't see evidence of racism in this. But then there wasn't evidence of racism in Trayvon Martin's example either. And yet the three Black women, feminists, used that specific incident to claim they needed a Black Lives Matter movement because of white supremacy. They're just pulling claims out of thin air. And the weird thing is that their claims fly right through mainstream media, right through the entire culture. Yeah, those claims are really extreme too. Like I was going to ask you, what are your thoughts on the claim that America is a white supremacist country? And these are the really extreme accusations. Or is a racist country systemically in all that nonsense? It's absolute nonsense, of course. And we're getting the same claims in Canada. And even worse in Canada, our Prime Minister knelt in solidarity with Black Lives Matter. So I mean, it's utter nonsense. It's utter nonsense. I mean, clearly there is supremacist movements in the world. But there are supremacist movements of all shapes, sizes, and varieties, and colors. There is a very strong, but small, but a very vocal and aggressive Black supremacist movement in the US. I saw a video of that where they have a white woman sequentially kiss the feet of each of the Black leaders. And that group, I kind of remember the name of it, but I talked about it in one of my coffee break sessions. That group is literally, openly, on the street preaching the supremacy of Black people, and that white people will all be kneeling down and licking the boots of Black people. And that doesn't stop there. This is the issue that I talked about in one of the shows is that this is part of in-group bias. It is fundamentally, deeply part of every human being on the planet, from Asians to Africans to Russians to to white people, Black people. It doesn't matter. And Native Americans, there's a built-in in-group bias, a tendency, a tendency. It's a tendency that urges people along that direction. And that's where racism gets its support by this tendency within human beings to prefer their own in-group. Yeah, I have a tweet that I pulled up from you the other day here about this too. Oh, okay. Okay, great. Yeah, it's universal. I think in order to address racism, we have to accept the fact and face the fact and investigate this kind of in-group bias and its universal nature. It's something that we have to be aware of, that we have to be vigilant about in every group that no one has accepted as an exception to this. If we don't, if we're not aware of it, that's when it becomes buried unconscious and breaks out into these violent movements. Yeah, I agree. So my next question is, why should men care about identity politics like this? Like, obviously, men should care about men's issues, especially within the manuscripts is kind of a given. They should care about maybe men's rights, divorce law, family law. Why should men care about something like Black Lives Matter? Why it should be important for them to understand it and to criticize it if they feel necessary? Well, everybody should be concerned about this. Man, woman, child of every race, because it's not restricted to borders. And the thing is that the reason it has so much power and influence today, and I've experienced two incidents of racism here in the Dominican Republic on the strength of the videos that are being shown and used as proof of white supremacy in the US. So this is because of the nature of social media today, we will see this racism spread globally and fast. So and we're seeing it in the UK. There's been violent incidents already in the UK. Yeah, pretty bad. Yeah, very bad. And the reason I get back to feminism is that feminists have spent over 50 years preparing the culture, preparing the culture to be justify rising up in hatred against white people. They have identified white privilege and white guilt. And these are sins due to the color of your skin. You've been born white and there is no way to rectify the sin of being born white other than dying, being killed. Yeah, genocide basically. Look, if you have a sin or a crime, let's say a sin is a kind of an old term for mistake, really, which is a kind of a crime that a person makes. So if you commit a sin, for instance, you steal from somebody, there's ways to rectify that. Or if you utter hatred or if you subscribe to an ideology like feminism, which vilifies white men for every problem in the world, you can, we can legitimately call that a hate group because you're not required to be a member of feminism, no matter how much they threaten you. You can say right away at any minute of any second of every day, you can say, I am not a feminist. And then you are no longer a feminist. But there is no possible way other than your death to say, I'm not a white man. You cannot escape the kind of sin that they are trying to pin upon you. And it's bigotry. It's hatred. It's racist. It's bigotry. And feminism is hugely successful. There are thousands, thousands of feminist organizations right around the world. It's a really, truly big evil empire. And they are highly, highly funded. Black Lives Matter is untold millions of dollars right now. And they are a feminist group and they are actually undermining the welfare of the very black men who are most troubled in this country, in your country. The black men are troubled by fatherlessness, by high incarceration rates, participation in gang warfare. And I'm coming out with a video on this hopefully tomorrow. If you look at the Black Lives Matter website, they explicitly exclude those very black men from the center of their consideration. The very black men who are suffering the most in your country are excluded from the concerns of Black Lives Matter. It's really ridiculous. Yeah, I agree. Paul Elam posted a great comment about this exact issue you're looking at with the Black Lives Matter website. Black fathers on here don't even exist. Black men are basically not mentioned and fathers are explicitly, or it looks like intentionally excluded. There's mothers and parents and there's just no fathers. They don't even exist. Yeah, it's shy. It's disturbing. Can you draw some more? Can I go ahead? Oh, I was going to say, can you draw some more connections for the audience between Black Lives Matter and what would we consider modern-day woke feminism? Some of the parallels. For example, we see feminists scream about male privilege, and now Black Lives Matter is screaming about white privilege. Yeah, and feminists, sure. Feminists scream about white privilege, too. Black Lives Matter is a feminist group, first and foremost. That is what it is. It is just another feminist group. You know, you have feminist groups. We have equal feminists, for instance. You know? And they put all of their hatred about men and patriarchy into ecological language. Black Lives Matter is a feminist group through and through. That is their one top, top focus. So everything that you can say about feminism, you can say about Black Lives Matter. Look at their website. It's just littered in feminist terminology. You know, intersectionalism, patriarchy, centering the women's voices. It's all feminist. Can you talk to me more? I was just going to say, I wouldn't say, like, what do you really focus in on when they are boilerplate? They just lifted everything straight out of feminism because they are feminists, first and foremost. But they saw, I think, those Black women saw who started Black Lives Matter saw an opening within the feminist fundraising market by leveraging Black issues. But it's just a feminist movement. That's what it is. It's almost like feminists wearing a Black face, like Justin Trudeau and these other people. They just, like, they're covering themselves up and, you know, these racial issues, and it's just more and more feminism. Yeah. It's feminism, first and foremost, you know. Can you talk to me a little bit more about white privilege? Is this a, you know, this is a monthly devil's advocate. Is this a legitimate accusation of white people? Is this just explicit racism? I mean, shouldn't you check your white privilege? Aren't you just white-splanning to me right now into the audience? I reject all of that crap, of course. White, white privilege is, it doesn't exist. I mean, it's a feminist creation. You know, they need to, and they're constantly doing this. This gets into another point. I mean, I could go into a million directions on this conversation. Feminism basically is a giant gish gallop on our entire culture. They throw out accusation after accusation, and that you can never have enough time and energy to counter any of their accusations. But getting to white privilege, there's privilege in the world, and I tweeted about this. I mean, clearly, there's a privilege that comes along with being wealthy, particularly if you're born into a wealthy family. There's a privilege associated with that. But that wealth can be taken away. And you've lost your privilege, okay? There's a privilege about being beautiful, for instance. That can be taken away, too. You can hit the wall. You can get a car accident. You can get a car accident. But there are some legitimate sources of privilege, but that's just the way life is. And I'll give you another example. Tall men, men are over six feet. And these are studies that have demonstrated both these things. The main privilege that comes with for men is if they're tall. Tall men of every description are more likely to get a job, more likely to be promoted, more likely to be rewarded for unconsciously, simply because they are tall, they appear dominant. And the same thing happens with women, beautiful women. A beautiful woman is more likely to get a job, more likely to be promoted, more likely to be lathered in praise and gifts than a woman who's not so beautiful. Those are privileges that you are born with. But there's no privilege of being born white. The other privileges that I talked about is being wealthy and or being politically powerful. But those are transient. Although, if you have an enormous amount of wealth, you're very unlikely to lose it all just from the sheer enormity of it. But political power, for instance, is a privilege, but it's power that can come and disappear. There's no white, there's no privilege that comes from being white. Well said, stated very simply and very clearly. Let's talk about this tweet a little bit. This one came out on June 15th from you. I've received quite a few hate messages for criticizing BLM and identifying it as a domestic terror group. All the hate messages come from white people and their Facebook friend list contain only white people. I find this revealing. Yeah, I found that a bit surprising too. I got the idea to look into this because it was coming from a filmmaking community groups. And I was involved with quite a number on Facebook, independent filmmaking communities. A group who are really a lot of them, not all of them, but a lot of membership in those groups are far left. You'll even say that some of them are Antifa. Antifa, by the way, is a child of feminism as well. BLM is a child of feminism. But the hate messages coming from those people, I started to think, well, because I said that I would not going to kneel to Black Lives Matter. That Black Lives Matter and Antifa are both domestic terrorist groups. In fact, feminism itself is a domestic terrorist group. It's not identified as such because feminism is the dominant religion of the West today. I said the exact same thing in my speech about the 21 convention. Yeah, especially for women. It dominates how they think and believe and act throughout their whole life. It dominates everything. It's way beyond that. Way beyond that. I mean, look at Canada, our Prime Minister is a feminist. Okay. You can almost not get a job if you say you're a non-defeminist in North America. It's very, very difficult. That's how, and if you blaspheme against feminism, you're very likely to be kicked out of your job. And of course, the reason is that the entire culture considers feminism to be sacred, even though it is an entire lie. And if you look into the birth of feminism on Studio Brilay, you'll see details of how the lie, the beginnings of feminism in 1848 at Seneca Falls is the beginning of the lies. It is constructed almost entirely out of lies. But those lies have been effectively accepted throughout the Western world through the reaches of power. There's other reasons for that because it does suit those wealthy and the powerful as well. Feminism serves as a high heel on the throat of every working man, making sure he stays at his job, doesn't complain, and doesn't threaten the power of the wealthy. Some other reasons would include though, like the woman are wonderful effect and some biological things like that, as well as like that. Yeah, okay. There's some of that. I mean, I've never investigated too deeply into the women are wonderful effect, you know. But there's certainly, there's those effects. And Karen Straughn has talked quite eloquently about neotony and how that plays into female power as well. It's a very interesting angle to look at. Talk to me a little bit about white guilt, more specific accusation. You know, the white people should be guilty about the sins of our ancestors as if other demographics of people haven't committed horrible atrocities and things like that. So should white people feel guilty about what someone did 200 years ago that they never met or never knew? Is this a ridiculous claim? Well, the short answer is it's a ridiculous claim. But the more important answer is that every human being is has ancestors who are guilty of atrocities against other human beings. The reason that we focus, of course, on white people today is that feminists have spent, like I said, over 50 years acclimating the culture to see white guilt, to see white privilege, to see white men as oppressing women, you know. And they've built an entire religious structure, an entire creed around all of that. And that's one of the reasons they're such into this gish-gallup stuff, which I'm saying, which is a logical or rather a strategy of overwhelming your ideological opponent with a never-ending flood of accusations from which they can never have the time to refute. Feminism uses gish-gallup in order to dominate our culture. Yeah. You know, would you say as well that it sounds like a way to articulate what you're saying, is feminism the ultimate establishment that we see in the West today? Ultimate? Yeah, I don't think ultimate. I think the wealthy are the ones who truly have power. I mean, you know, people like George Soros, Bill Gates, the truly, truly wealthy, they have more power than feminists, but they fund the feminists for a reason. Feminists are useful to them. Yeah, useful idiots. Yeah, but very effective. Yeah, no doubt. I mean, I've grown up with, you know, I was born in 1988. So my whole life has just been dominated by feminism, you know, the second, third wave, all this stuff. I've never known in America without feminism. I have no memory of it. Yeah, yeah. Would you say though what we're going through, some people on Twitter, some people I follow, you know, big accounts, maybe James Woods, things like that. But a lot of people are saying that what we're going through is, you know, very similar to a Marxist revolution, a Mao style revolution, with Black Lives Matter, with, you know, the other components of feminism, things like that. Is that something you would agree with, or do you have some comments on that? Well, these people all come from that background. You know, as Aaron Pizzi pointed out that feminism in the late 60s basically adopted Marxist theory and just rewrote men as the enemy, or patriarchy as the enemy, and everything else kind of follows Marxism. So it's a socialist kind of movement. Socialism is throughout all of these uprisings right now, whether you call it Antifa, the revolutionary student movement, the Black Lives Matter. All of these movements share that core Marxist kind of approach to culture and society. Yeah, I've even seen some, you know, I saw in 2016, I saw an NBC news article, you know, mainstream media, and they were demands by the Black Lives Matter movement. I think some of the leaders at the time, things like that. And a lot of it was this explicit Marxist, absolute communism. They wanted basically a Black ethno-state, like a segregation for Black people. And why people, they wanted collective ownership, they called it of, you know, businesses and stuff. I mean, all like very Soviet style communism. And mainstream media just printed this like it's no fucking problem, you know, an ideology that's killed millions and millions of people throughout history. Yeah, there's plenty of people analyzing that on the non-mainstream media, as you know, amongst community people that we follow. The analysis is actually pretty good in cases, in many cases. So there's tons and tons of material. I haven't focused into the Marxist connection that joins all of those groups so much. Let's talk a little bit about statues. So we've been seeing history be erased, which is very Orwellian in my opinion, very alarming. But we're seeing statues get pulled down all over America, maybe Canada, but also the UK for sure, there's been some. I think Winston Churchill right now, of course, I think is boarded up hidden by the mayor of London so that it doesn't get, you know, whatever, which is this ridiculous. But talk to me a little bit about how you feel about that, how you feel about statues being pulled down in history being erased or rewritten. I mean, is this alarming to you? Yeah, I don't like it. It's not the biggest issue that alarms me, but it's certainly a sign that there is mob mentality out there that's a very ignorant mob mentality. These people who are tearing down cultural artifacts and burning things and looting, it's a truly ignorant, stupid mentality. I don't think that it's going to do anything other than inflame warfare, inflame mobs and riots and further. It's not going to help anybody with anything. And it is, it's like, it is an Orwellian thing. It's a desire to crush and rewrite history. The quote that you flashed up there, I particularly liked because that was written by that guy who wrote The Art of War. And I can't remember where it's coming. Yeah, yeah. And something like that. I think that's where that quote comes from. He's making a point there that, and this illustrates how stupid these people are. That even if you conquer your enemy, it is a bad idea to wipe out their culture. As he points out, it gives the first reason for the next war to destroy a people's cultural heritage of your enemy. It's bad military practice because it gives the first reason for the next war. You're justifying your enemy's retaliation by doing this. It's inspiring. No, I agree. Yeah, stupid is the way to, well put, simply put, well put. A lot of stupidity, a lot of ignorance. I saw a woman yesterday, I tweeted it today. I retweeted it. She was on channel four, I think, in London with that woman who interviewed Jordan Peterson. That one famous? Well, I don't know what her name was. I saw a couple of interviews of Jordan. I don't know which one you're referring to exactly. It was the big one where she kept trying to read, she kept trying to manipulate what he said. She said, she was saying, she's famous for, she's got a meme now. The meme is like, so what you're saying, but basically what you're saying is, and she would twist his words into the most ridiculous bullshit. I think her name is Suzanne Reed, maybe? Or no, that may be the other woman I interviewed. I don't know. One of these British women. Anyway, she was interviewing another woman in London, a black woman for Black Lives Matter or something. And the channel four interviewer, this is a major mainstream media thing there, she asked her what she thought about Winston Churchill being boarded up and all that. And the woman actually, she was asking about the statue. And the black woman for representing Black Lives Matter said that she didn't really know about it. She was kind of playing iffy with it. And she's like, yeah, I never met Winston. I've never met him. And it's like, no, no kidding, you have it. And this is a woman who was British. It looks like black British. I think she had an accent. So I assume raised there. It's like the level of fucking ignorance not to know. That's pretty outstanding. But you know, the education system, I hate to say it, I do believe that the education system has been degraded and degraded all of my life. Since the early 1980s, the quality of education has been on a steady decline, especially pre-university education. Hmm. Yeah, I can't even imagine, you know, even universities now, though, they're just, I know in Florida now they're trying to get some of the major universities to mandate critical right theory type classes. First year freshman college students. Yeah. Feminists dominate the university system throughout Canada and the U.S. Probably throughout the world, but I'm not sure. Yeah, at least in Western nations, I would imagine. I can't, it's hard to find one that wouldn't be. Yeah, it's truly a global religion right now. And it's enormously powerful, enormously well-funded. Look, feminists took over the university system, entered the university system in 1970. And they started the first, at the time it was called, I think, feminist studies. But they keep changing the name to make it more broadly apparently appealing, you know. Gender studies and things like that. Gender studies and then women and gender studies. And then they even have subsidiary groups called stuff like international studies to hide the fact that it's really feminist theory underpinning at all. But once it got in there, they started to dominate the universities. After they got the affirmative action bills put in place in Canada, that was 1984. And I think it was around the same time in the U.S. They did some similar groups like that. The feminists on campuses started to absolutely dictate who could and what policies had to be applied for hiring professors. And so 20, 30, 40 years later, we have the university system we have now where you cannot even criticize ideological feminism, you know, without losing your job. There was a, and this is a funny one in Edmonton, Ontario, Edmonton, the University of Edmonton in Alberta. This feminist, and she calls herself a, I think, gender-critical feminist. And she, in one of her courses, she teaches an anthropology course on human sexuality. And she made the scientific statement that biological sex is real. And she lost her job for that. Wow. It's, that is how absolutely insane it is. And there's another professor who lost their job. I think this might be the same one. They, they can now, a student can make an anonymous complaint, not even, not even have to register the complaint as an official complaint. It can just walk into the, I forget what they call the office of safety, student safety or something. And they can just claim that a student, that a professor made them unsafe and that professor will be punished. Made them feel unsafe. And they don't even have to write the complaint down at this point. It is, it is anonymous and it is not recorded and yet the professor is punished. That's unreal. It's insane. There's no, I don't see any way to walk this stuff back anymore. I think we're past the point of no return on, on most of this stuff. That's where I was going to take the interview next and ask you, but go ahead. Well, in terms of the university system, they, it's so dominated by the feminists that they have the power and they will use it to eliminate anybody who even in a minor way questions their ideological purity. So they'll be eliminated. How do you walk that away from that? I mean, how do you walk that back? I think what you, the only thing you can do is start up organizations that explicitly reject feminists outright from the start because they poison everything. They poison everything they touch. I'm a fan of that idea myself. I am too. Yeah. I think we're both doing good work, putting out video content and discussing these ideas for the web to the extent that we still have free speech, right? Which is of course under attack as well. Yeah. Yeah. Another option might be just, you know, maybe colleges start going bankrupt as the world technology continues to increase or, you know, advance forward and things like that. Maybe a lot of them will just lose funding. Yeah. That's a big, a big part of it. That can happen. I mean, universities may, I mean, the future is so hard to predict, you know, I mean, they may be forced financially to turn around. Who knows what the economy of Canada and the US is going to be like five years from now? I don't know. You know, and if the students stop coming or, or if there could be riots from the other side on campuses saying, you know what, I'm sick of being silenced. I'm going to speak up and you can fire me. You can, that could happen too. So I tend to be a little pessimistic because I've seen this go in the same direction since 1984 when I sat in, I was working for Dow Chemical in the research department and the vice president of research came in to and traveled all the way around Dow Chemical world giving the same lecture, the same speech to everybody and came in and said that women would be preferentially hired and promoted women and minorities as a result of this affirmative action stuff. And most of us just sat there and said, oh, it's another, another corporate program. These things can come in fashion and leave within six months to a year. I thought maybe a couple of years of this and then, you know, they'll move on. But no, it just got stronger and stronger and stronger and every time, every year or two, when you think, holy crap, it can't get any worse than this, they prove you're wrong before you know it. So I have not seen any evidence that this gigantic oil tanker of a sick hateful movement is showing any signs of slowing down or turning around. It is huge and there are billions untold, maybe trillions of dollars at stake for people to make sure that this continues. The the incomes, think about just that Black Lives Matter is a tiny, tiny fraction of this issue, but they are rolling in money. You know, they're just rolling in money. And do you think that those three women at the top of Black Lives Matter are going to, I don't know what salaries they make, but I'm going to guess it's a pretty, they're skimming a hefty amount off the top of those donations to run Black Lives Matter. You know, do you think they're going to just let that hefty, cushy lifestyle of millions of dollars slip away from them, not without the fight of their lives? It's a bureaucracy like feminism. They wanted to keep going indefinitely. At any time you put that kind of money at somebody's disposal, they're not going to let it out of their hands without a big fight. And there this is repeated at thousands and thousands of organizations around the world going to the right up to the UN. You know, the UN is saturated in feminism at, you know, there. I had a brief look into some of the extent of these organizations some weeks ago. It's, it's staggering the lists of organizations that are, that are rolling in money and donations that are all pushing the same feminist ideology. It's mind boggling. It's a cult, but it's enormously profitable. It's, they're rolling in money. I guess it's profitable to blame people and make them feel guilty for bullshit they didn't do. Yeah. A lot of people, a lot of people seem to fall for that, I guess. I mean, all these white people that are been kneeling and should a really good example that most of my, all the black people I know have been, you know, cringing at that line. Jesse Lee Peterson, those other guys, it's, it's disturbing and disgusting and bizarre. It's symbolic. You know, I've talked about it in this terms, in these terms, for instance, if you kneel before the, before someone like this, an enemy, let's call it an enemy. If you kneel before your enemy, what's the purpose of having your enemy kneel before you? Well, imagine five guys who meet on the street, each knowing that the other has kneeled, knelt before the enemy, the person who wants to, to eliminate them. How is it that any one of them will trust any of the others enough to form a resistance? They will be, suspicion has been cast in each of their minds about each other, even though they may have been forced at gunpoint to kneel. Or they've been forced at gunpoint to repeat the lies of white privilege and stuff like this. They've done it and, and they, they're recorded. They've been recorded doing it. Now when they, when that a group of people like that, or say they get together with some that haven't knelt, what are the chances that the ones that haven't knelt are going to trust the ones that do, that have knelt and repeated the nonsense? That they have sown, this is a very effective psychological strategy. They have sown the seeds of suspicion and doubt in the minds of their entire, those who would resist them. Yep. I was reading the other day on Twitter, a whole thread about this exact phenomena that as a Psyop kind of thing, that the Chinese military was doing this during the Korean War. I guess, I guess when Americans were captured by, you know, during the war, some of the camps are run by Chinese and this is exactly what they did. And it was very slow and very subtle the way they did it. Because if they went too hard, too fast, people, the Americans would resist it. They wouldn't do it. They were trained to resist the kind of manipulation. But this slaughter, this slower, more subtle, you know, kind of manipulation was very effective. And yeah, it sows, you know, seeds of distrust and doubt. Even, even within yourself, because now you're caught doing it. Never mind, people are on you, observing you. And getting, the shame, the shame in yourself. And how can you, with a straight face, then vigorously resist and fight alongside of others after having knelt and submitting, repeating their prayer of, you know, their creed, their credo? Yeah. You can't. It s very, very difficult. And it s a psychological damage is done when you do that. Yep. Going back to what you were talking about just a couple of minutes ago with feminism, what are your thoughts on, you probably saw the J.K. Rowling author, Harry Potter. She got just blasted for discussing, I think, for basically saying that only women, only women menstruate, basically, to paraphrase what she said. And basically she was affirming biological sex and that by not doing that, by failing to do that, women s issues and women s rights would be harmed. Which I think, I think she s correct. Obviously. But she got blasted for being transphobic and all this crap. My question to you, though, is what do you think about feminists kind of turning on each other? And the combative nature that sometimes springs up in there, eating each other alive, basically, cannibalizing their own movement? Yeah. These kinds of very, very authoritarian dictatorial movements tend to eventually cannibalize on themselves. But because they are movements of fear and terror, for instance, and they re showing themselves to be that by attacking anyone who appears to be not sufficiently indoctrinated. These movements persist a very, very long time before they can crumble to the ground. Because fear is an enormous force of control. And in a sense, JK Rowling s, although you and I would say, oh my God, they re eating themselves, you know, great. But what the message it sends is to any other would be JK Rowling s to shut up and tow the line. That s what they get by sacrificing JK Rowling s to the mob. The rest of the mob says, oh my God, JK Rowling s got taken down for saying something as simple as that. I better keep my mouth shut and up my rhetoric and support of feminism. Well, that is definitely some, I agree that that s definitely the way some people will respond to it. Other people, though, might be alarmed. I think, you know what I mean, like kind of woken up to it. But maybe I m being too optimistic. Yeah, I mean, some people will be. But those people already weren t sold to feminism. Their rank and file will see this as a warning shot to them. And they will, I think, go deeper into demonstrating their loyalty to the feminist ideologues. But of course, JK Rowling s has every right to say that. I mean, it shouldn t even be controversial. I think what she said was something like, isn t there a word for menstruators? Help me with this. I saw a tweet something along the line. It was kind of actually kind of humorous tweet. You know, you would have thought that it would have garnered a chuckle or two and then died away. But no, this is a sign of the incredibly intolerant demanding indoctrination, indoctrineaters of feminism. Yeah, I ve read an article a year ago about communism and Marxism and things. And it was, the article was actually focused on humor and comedy and how totalitarian, totalitarian nations, dictators, communists, Marxists, they hate humor. They hate comedy, especially when it s directed at them, obviously. But even more widely, it s an emotional experience that they really, they want to shut down because eventually it s an effective weapon, I think, against, you know, totalitarian ideologies, hate movements, toxic crap like that. And that would be, I think that s why memes, I don t know if you have any thoughts on that, but I think it s why memes have been so effective in the past couple of years at getting points across because they re funny. And they play on, they play on things that are funny to us and humorous and joyous. They poke fun at the toxicity, you know. I ve been, I don t know if you ve seen lately, but I m making some memes about feminists and things like that. And they tend to do pretty well. People like them. One was like a Karen meme for the Karens. It was released the Karen, like the Kraken. Yeah, yeah, released the Karen. I like it. Yeah. Well, comedy is an enormously powerful tool, you know. And comedy is, as you probably heard before, it s funny because of the truth that it reveals, the truth that you re not in public, in polite company, you re not allowed to say. This is what makes things funny, is that everybody knows this thing is true, everybody knows you re not allowed to say it, but there is this comic that puts up the juxtaposition of the truth with what you re actually seeing in society and you can t help it laugh at it. You laugh at it because of, because it s in a way, it s a release that, oh my God, I m so glad somebody said that. I ve been thinking it forever, but I couldn t say it, you know, I wouldn t say it. That s comedy and it s a genius to level the two. You have to be very smart to be a good comic and you have to be very, very attentive or attuned to your culture to recognize those elements of your culture which are suppressed and repressed for sometimes hypocritical reasons. Yeah. And then convey them in a way that s going to pop off the joke and inspire them to laugh at it. To be a good comic, you have to be pretty darn smart and courageous actually today. You have to be very courageous to be a comic today. Definitely. I was a huge fan of George Carlin myself growing up. He was funny, yeah. I like Dave Chappelle a lot too, although lately he s been shitting all over Candace Owens which is really sad. Well, you know, a comic has to go the direction where they feel, you know. If a comic starts to think, I think, this is my view anyways, if a comic starts to self edit themselves based on their political view alone, they will cease to be funny pretty fast. Yeah. Oh, here s a comment we should dig into. So, I think this is a logical fallacy, but I like to see what your take is. Kev H in the chat says, if you disagree with the phrase Black Lives Matter, you are saying that Black Lives don t matter. We don t want more than others, we just want the same opportunities. What do you think of this statement? Well, first off, I ll say Black Lives Matter is not a statement, it s a movement. It s a group of people whose real beliefs are displayed on their website and in their actions. For instance, I can create a group and call it the devil is God. That group could be into painting cars. It has nothing to do with the devil or God. We just paint cars and we like to be known as kind of hip. So, we call ourselves the devil is God, but it doesn t mean you even believe that the devil is God. It doesn t mean that it has anything to do with devil or God. Black Lives Matter is a phrase which is really and only the name of a group. So, to say that you don t agree with the phrase Black Lives Matter, okay, you could be saying that Black Lives don t matter, but that s not what people mean when they say the words Black Lives Matter. They don t mean the phrase. They re referring to the movement and the movement is defined by the leaders and the leaders are feminists and they don t care about the suffering of Black men. That s their behavior. I see some circular reasoning in this too. It s like if you disagree with that, I mean, what you re saying is really good too. You re breaking down the phrase from the actual movement and organization, but also the circular reasoning. It s like if you disagree with the political ideology or what we see now is like an emerging race cult, that means you think that Black Lives don t matter, which is ridiculous. Black human life definitely matters, of course, because all lives matter. I ve every life is precious, every individual life. Yeah. And since we re talking about phrases, remember that the very same people who say, oh, you re disagreeing with the Black Lives Matter phrase, they will attack you for saying all lives matter. Another phrase, which is in fact, if you treat it just as a phrase, is even more important than the phrase Black Lives Matter. So the people who are using in these arguments and who are saying things like that, they re not being honest. Yeah. When they say Black Lives Matter, they don t really mean Black Lives Matter. The movement itself, the founders of the movement don t even mean Black Lives Matter as a phrase. They started this movement as a feminist movement, and they re not addressing the biggest cohort that are suffering in the Black community, which is the Black men, adult Black men and boys. They re going to prison. They re being pressured into joining gangs and becoming thugs. They re excluded from the lives of their own children by the mothers of the own children often. There s huge, huge, huge problems there, and Black Lives Matter, the group, is not willing to look at it honestly. That tells you everything you need to know. Well, there s more, and you ll see it in my video coming out tomorrow or the day after, where the video will be called Get to Know Black Lives Matter. I m looking forward to it. Link, by the way, everybody is in the video description to his channel, where you can see that video coming out in a day or two. Thank you. Before we wrap up, I wanted to get one or two more tweets in here from you. So this is a tweet you put out on June 11. We must remember these businesses. They are siding with the terrorists. It s a civil war, and we should remember who did what, and you re quote 288 tweeting Tom Fitton, the founder, I think, of Judicial Watch, and he was referring to these major Fortune 500 companies, which we ve all seen in our inboxes lately, Disney, Papa John s, T-Mobile. All these companies are just virtue signaling how much they care about the black community. All of a sudden, like a month ago, Folder s Coffee, apparently. They didn t care about black people, and now they do. It s all just ridiculous horseship getting my inbox. Well, my focus of this tweet here though, as you said, is a civil war. Are you referring to a potential civil war in America? A cultural civil war? Can you kind of expand on that? Well, in a way, it s a little bit of everything, and you could call it a civil war, you could call it a revolution, you could call it riot. But what s going on is they re burning down buildings. They re attacking the cultural artifacts that represent American and Western history. They have burnt down a police station. They re attacking police in the street. They re targeting them. I mean, how much has to happen before you call it a civil war, especially since the people doing all of this are an identifiable group. This is not random. This is not random acts of anger about random things or even about the same thing. These acts of violence on the culture and on specific organizations and the police who are there to maintain the peace, these are coming from an identifiable group. At what point and how much do they have to do before you call it a civil war? I don t know. It seems to be widespread, it seems to be growing. To me, it already looks like a civil war. Just because your opponent hasn t won, or just because it s short, a short war, doesn t mean it s not a war. In a way, it s a civil war, I think. Why not call it a civil war? Yeah, I m leaning in that direction. I know about a year and a half ago I saw an article that was discussing a potential American civil war, what the next one would look like. Of course, they were saying it would be different than the last one we had in America, which is 155 years ago now in the 1860s. Actually, what they were describing, it wasn t the one article doing this. Now that we re seeing it, though, they were describing pretty similar to what we re seeing now. They described it in the article as basically there could be riots that break out similar to Rodney King back in 1992 in America and California, but they would be widespread and occurring at the same time. It would be all around Florida, New York, Texas, all around the country. Just looking back on the article, thinking about it, it s kind of crazy that that s quite literally what s happening. This was described as the next modern version of an American civil war. I agree with you that it s how much stuff has to happen before you call it that. Certainly, we re getting much closer to that distinction, I think. Well, they ve also been, for years, telling us that that s what they want to do. They destroy, smash the patriarchy. Take down the white man, kill whitey, but they destroy capitalism. All of these are coming from that same group of people. They are the leftists, and they have been saying, smash the patriarchy, destroy capitalism, down with western culture, get rid of all old white men. They say this in the university system as if that you shouldn t be teaching the intellectual fruits of old white men. Then we have the violence breaking out from that same group, attacking the people that they say they want to destroy in the streets, in the culture, in the police offices. It looks like, and in my opinion, they are following up on their threat. They have started war. We re listening on the other side saying it s just a skirmish. For them, it s the start of the war. It s the war they ve been warning, the war they ve been claiming, the war they have wanted and want to take on. At what point, the question becomes, do we call it a civil war or do we call it a breakout of skirmish? Well, a breakout, a skirmish or civil unrest can be a spontaneous thing or about a particular event. They can come from different groups of people, but these people are all connected through their ideological commitments. Their ideological commitments include the destruction of patriarchy, the destruction of capitalism, the destruction of the West. The destruction of the family, too. That s explicit on BLM. Yeah, it s unreal, man. In America, there s a lot of talk about this, where this escalates, where this goes. Most of the people I follow at this point, people that I know in real life, as well as just on the Internet, they re very concerned about it, that as a civil war at this point, an even more prevalent and more violent one, is that inevitable? I know as an American sitting here in Florida, I m looking at November 4th, the day after the presidential election, and it s hard to imagine that that day s peaceful if Trump wins. If Trump wins, and I think that s going to happen. There s a lot to that, but it s hard to imagine these people don t freak out and start flipping over cop cars, blowing things up, burning down buildings, destroying businesses of all races, you know, black, white, Asian, Hispanic, whatever. There s always so many videos now, these small business owners getting their businesses destroyed, that their whole lives have been brought into. I think you re right. If Trump wins, which I don t know. I m on the fence as to whether he s going to win or not. I didn t think he would win the last time. Yeah. So I was wrong in that in a big way. I didn t think Trudeau would win, but he won twice. Yeah. So I didn t think Trudeau. I thought Trudeau was so transparently stupid and unfit that there s no way voters would vote him in, but they did. That tells you a lot about Canadians. Yeah. And the electoral process. But I think you re right. If Trump wins, there will be riots for sure. But you know, somebody threw out a point. I forget who it was. It was somebody fairly famous. I said maybe we are at an impassable phase of the U.S. history. Maybe the country should be broken up. Let the communists, socialists, feminists take their land and let the freedom people, individual rights people, let the capitalists, if you will, democracy people take their land. Maybe not all marriages can last. And when a marriage is so dysfunctional, the healthy thing to do is divorce. And maybe what the Americans need right now is a divorce. I ve read this too. It does make some sense. I have concerns about it though that are pretty deep and that I don t think, you know, we re not dealing with intelligent, rational, level-headed opponents in culture and politics and all these things. So my concern would be that the divorce would not end the dispute and that eventually they would become aggressors. They would weaponize, the deep state, the U.N., other nations to vilify what you re talking about to make us, you know what I mean? Like they would look at this new nation. It s a white supremacist nation just three years down the line. And how many years are going to go by before all of a sudden they want to invade or do an economic embargo and block things off? So I m worried that if that happens it s not going to stop and it s going to actually result in genocide and a long enough timeline. Well, it may result in war and economic sanctions for sure. It wouldn t be an easy divorce. And in a divorce you ve got two sides, two families, and they often hate each other afterwards, but they re happier, often happier as a result of the divorce. Hello, Steve, are you there? Are you guys still watching? Can you hear me? Yeah, you re back now. You cut off for a second. Okay, I m back now, yeah. I was going to say that on the issue, yeah, sometimes the divorce and the families on the two sides are at war with each other, but they re happy in their own camps. But in the issue of calling it genocide within one side or the other, the likely spot where you re going to find any genocide would be on the leftists because they are an intolerant group. And if the US did split up, I would wager that the majority of black people and Asians and other races are going to go with the Republican Democrat capitalist side. Most of them are smart enough to know. There s a sizable black community that are saying there s no way they ll vote for Democrats. They re for Trump because they recognize that the lies and the manipulation and the rhetoric of the Democrats and that they recognize they don t agree with the Democrats siding with these violent rioters. Yep. Yeah, Democrats have treated black Americans like shit for a long time. Since the beginning, they were the slaveholders. They ve been manipulating blacks for votes. They helped set up feminism. As far as I understand, abortion massively affects black Americans more so than any other race. I ve heard that. Yeah, I ve heard that. Well, last thing I want to wrap up today is one more tweet you re referring to PragerU, video they put out. So do you have any quick thoughts, final thoughts on how blacks are treated by police in America? This video is saying that black people are not more likely to be shot by police than other races. And I m sure any BLM protester would scream at you for daring to suggest that. Oh yeah, of course. I mean, that s well researched. Heather McDonald put that video out and she researches this stuff basically full time. And she s not the only one to come to this conclusion. There is absolutely no evidence that the police are racist as a whole, as a group, as an organization. There s no evidence that the police treat black people or any race worse than another. There just isn t. And you analyze the data objectively. So I mean, what s there to say? If you want to take a look at it, go see the video itself and then research her sources. But I think it s a very consistent argument. Data and statistics are a tool of white supremacist patriarchy, though. Didn t you hear the news? I mean, objectivity, that s for racist white supremacists, man. That s crazy. Well, this has been a great interview, man. I really appreciate your time. Thank you. Can you give us one more review or a tease about your video coming out? It gets into Black Lives Matter. It s the title, right? Yeah. I m going to talk about how the use of chaos and why they use chaos, how they create chaos and what they get out of it. All right. Looking forward to it. And how long is it? About 30-40 minutes? Longer? I don t know. I haven t recorded it yet. I basically got the first draft of the script written today. I sent it to Janice just to get some feedback on it. If she suggests that I make some changes here and there, I don t know. I ll give feedback to me tonight, probably. Hopefully, I can get it recorded in the morning and out in the afternoon. I don t know. All right. I m looking forward to it. I ll make sure to share it on my Twitter or Facebook when I get banned. I ve been banned for opposing the cult. What else is new? Yeah. Facebook has a whole other topic. All right, everybody. Thanks for tuning in to the special edition of 21 Live. I m Anthony Dream Johnson here with Steve Bralee. You can find him on YouTube, Ad Studio Bralee, and a link to his channel for that video and others. A lot of good videos on his channel. You can find that at the top link in the description and I ll put it in a card as well at the top right of the video. Thanks, everybody, and signing out. Thank you. Bye now.