Speaker 1: Hello, and welcome to another episode of The Mark Mass Show,
Speaker 1: where we talk about the decentralized revolution each and every week,
Speaker 1: the way the world is changing from a centralized world
Speaker 1: to a decentralized world. And it is not, unfortunately, not
Speaker 1: going to be a smooth transition, but I'm hopeful. There's
Speaker 1: massive hope and prosperity. On the other side. Things might
Speaker 1: be getting worse before they get better, but there is hope.
Speaker 1: But we look at it through the lens of politics, finance,
Speaker 1: and technology, so you can understand what is going on
Speaker 1: the context of the world. And today I got a
Speaker 1: big topic. It's a topic that I talk about somewhat frequently,
Speaker 1: and in my opinion, it might be the most important
Speaker 1: topic of our day right now. If this goes down
Speaker 1: the way, they and who are they? They being the
Speaker 1: leaders of the world, all the governments of the world,
Speaker 1: let's call it that. To put a name on the
Speaker 1: faces there, the leaders, the governs of the world, and
Speaker 1: the NGOs. We'll talk about who they are. If they
Speaker 1: have their way, Oh boy, things are gonna get bad.
Speaker 1: This is the fight. This is the fight right here.
Speaker 1: And so this is a big episode I want to
Speaker 1: talk about. We're gonna talk about censorship. We're gonna talk
Speaker 1: about the end of free speech, and I'm gonna break
Speaker 1: down exactly what's going on all around the world. There's
Speaker 1: massive amounts of movements, laws, regulations going into place right
Speaker 1: now to change the freedom of speech that we have
Speaker 1: in the United States and all around the world. And
Speaker 1: if that goes away, everything that we know goes away.
Speaker 1: The ability to even change things goes away. If we
Speaker 1: don't if we can't talk about things, And so we're
Speaker 1: gonna talk about that. Like I said, this is gonna
Speaker 1: be one of the most important shows that I've done
Speaker 1: because this is the most important topic of our lifetime.
Speaker 1: And I guess we're seeing this authoritarian push everywhere, from
Speaker 1: pushing fer mental medicines into our bodies. If we don't
Speaker 1: even control our own body, what do we control. But
Speaker 1: controlling speech isn't just controlling speech. If they limit what
Speaker 1: I can say, it's not just limiting what I can say.
Speaker 1: It's also limiting what you can hear. More importantly, if
Speaker 1: it limits what you hear, then it limits what you know.
Speaker 1: And then if it limits what you know, it limits
Speaker 1: what your ideas and creativity are. If it limits me
Speaker 1: from what I can say. Then it limits my thoughts
Speaker 1: because I have to start thinking about censoring myself, which
Speaker 1: I find myself doing on YouTube all the time. I
Speaker 1: still remember the time that at first happened to me.
Speaker 1: I was horrified to think that I was actually in
Speaker 1: that situation. But yet here we are in that place now.
Speaker 1: I had an interview recently with an author, Martin Gurry.
Speaker 1: He's the author of a book called The Revolt of
Speaker 1: the Public. It's on my main YouTube channel. Just search
Speaker 1: Mark Moss on YouTube Mark Moss, Martin Gurry if you want.
Speaker 1: It's an amazing book. I read through the comments, and
Speaker 1: you know, him and I didn't read on everything. I
Speaker 1: have a little bit different viewpoints on some of the
Speaker 1: history that he kind of was riffing off of. And
Speaker 1: I read through a lot of comments on YouTube video
Speaker 1: and a lot of people were like, you know, why
Speaker 1: would you have this guy on. It doesn't agree with
Speaker 1: anything that you say. That's not the case. A lot
Speaker 1: of people thought he paid me to get on as
Speaker 1: an interview. Obviously that's not the case. No one's ever
Speaker 1: paid me for an interview. I read the book. I
Speaker 1: really liked the book. I think I would encourage you
Speaker 1: to read the book. It had a lot of question
Speaker 1: I had a lot of questions after reading the book,
Speaker 1: and I wanted to bring the author on to talk
Speaker 1: about it. It's okay, we didn't agree on everything. That's
Speaker 1: the way it's supposed to be. That's the point of
Speaker 1: freedom of speech. We're supposed to have open and honest debate.
Speaker 1: That's how the truth is found out. The truth is
Speaker 1: found through open ons debate, and so in the book,
Speaker 1: he basically talks about the revolt of the public, and
Speaker 1: he talks about how in order for governments to stay
Speaker 1: in control, they have to have the ability to control
Speaker 1: the narrative, meaning they have to be the source of truth,
Speaker 1: the arbitr of truth. They have to tell you what
Speaker 1: they want. Now we know this. We've seen this many
Speaker 1: times throughout history. We can go back five hundred years
Speaker 1: to the Protestant Reformation, when the church and the state
Speaker 1: had control over the people and they told the people
Speaker 1: what was in the Bible. Once the printing press changed
Speaker 1: that once technology was always think to change. As technology changed,
Speaker 1: that we got the books out to everybody and people
Speaker 1: could read the Bible for themselves. They said, hey, Church
Speaker 1: and state, you're lying to us, you're manipulating. What you're
Speaker 1: telling us is wrong. We have this information now and
Speaker 1: the whole world changed. They always need to control the narrative.
Speaker 1: Now as the governments of the world continue to become
Speaker 1: more corrupt the people and now they're no longer able
Speaker 1: to control the narrative. That people see this and the
Speaker 1: people want to push back. And basically what the book
Speaker 1: frames up as the revolt of the public is that
Speaker 1: the Internet has changed everything. In two thousand and one,
Speaker 1: the year after the dot com boom, so that was
Speaker 1: twenty two years ago. Martin Gurry was, I believe, working
Speaker 1: at the CIA at the time. He said that that's
Speaker 1: when things change from when he saw that in two
Speaker 1: thousand and one more information was created that one year
Speaker 1: than all of history before that. And then two thousand
Speaker 1: and two more information was made than two thousand and one.
Speaker 1: And we've had this, We've had this explosion of information,
Speaker 1: and as we are now able to have this crowdsourced information,
Speaker 1: we don't need this arbiter of truth anymore. Now. Part
Speaker 1: of the argument, well it's not even an argument in
Speaker 1: my opinion, but the reason why centralization always fails, and
Speaker 1: specifically central planning so central planned governments think socialism, communism,
Speaker 1: et cetera is because one guy or a dozen, a
Speaker 1: dozen people or two dozen. However, many two hundred lawmakers
Speaker 1: don't have enough knowledge and information to coordinate an entire economy.
Speaker 1: So in the United States, you know three hundred and
Speaker 1: thirty million people. Globally eight billion people, and this global economy,
Speaker 1: eight billion people are constantly changing their once needs and desires,
Speaker 1: and we constantly want different products, and somehow the exact
Speaker 1: product I want shows up on the shelf at the
Speaker 1: exactly the time that I want that. Take an iPhone
Speaker 1: for example, The parts of this iPhone come from over
Speaker 1: six continents. How is it that all these people and
Speaker 1: all these different continents, from the people in Africa that
Speaker 1: dig the coal balt out of the ground, to the
Speaker 1: people that make the glass, to the people that assemble
Speaker 1: it in China, all the way to the Apple store
Speaker 1: here in the United States where I could pick it up.
Speaker 1: Somehow all of those people across all those continents, get
Speaker 1: all the parts, assemble them all. There's a market, there's
Speaker 1: a price, and it all shows up when I needed.
Speaker 1: How does that get coordinated? Well, it gets coordinated through
Speaker 1: a market, through the people, the collective power. The crowd
Speaker 1: is way more powerful. It has way more knowledge than
Speaker 1: a group of central planners will ever have. And now
Speaker 1: we do that with information. So we crowdsource this information.
Speaker 1: And so now I talk about this all the time.
Speaker 1: You've heard me. If I see something on Twitter, for example,
Speaker 1: I might think, oh my gosh, that's such a good point.
Speaker 1: I hadn't thought about that. But then when I start
Speaker 1: to read the comments, people just start picking it apart, right,
Speaker 1: And so that is the revolt of the public. They
Speaker 1: can no longer control the narrative. Now we've seen mainstream media,
Speaker 1: you know, CNN, CNBC, ABC, CBS, etc. They just continue
Speaker 1: to get demolished, continue to be eroded, continue to lose
Speaker 1: their grip on this narrative. Now, there's a couple of
Speaker 1: reasons why this has happened, one of which is that
Speaker 1: the world's changed. No longer do I want to tune
Speaker 1: in at seven pm on Monday night to watch this
Speaker 1: show just not the way the world works anymore. Now.
Speaker 1: The world's on demand, so when I click on a link,
Speaker 1: I just want to watch the show. So to try
Speaker 1: to coordinate everybody to be at this slot, the entire
Speaker 1: idea of a news network like CNN is just outdated.
Speaker 1: It's obsolete, Like we don't need a network to have
Speaker 1: a lineup of shows working literally where I have one
Speaker 1: show after the next show, after the next show, after
Speaker 1: the next show, after the show, and have to watch
Speaker 1: it in that slot. Those days are over. Once we
Speaker 1: had TEA. If you remember that, TVO was what changed
Speaker 1: the world for me. We could, of course record shows
Speaker 1: with the VCR before that, but no one could ever
Speaker 1: figure that out. Then we had TVO, I could start
Speaker 1: recording it. Now we have video and demand, so I
Speaker 1: don't need a TV network to give me linear shows.
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna line up at seven pm to watch
Speaker 1: that show. So that's the Model's outdated, But it's also lost.
Speaker 1: It's relevant in the last couple of years because we
Speaker 1: constantly find out we're being lied to over and over
Speaker 1: and over and over. We constantly are losing trust in that,
Speaker 1: and so we have the rise of alternative media like
Speaker 1: my show, My show is small Potatoes, but you have
Speaker 1: Joe Rogan's of the World, et cetera that are blowing
Speaker 1: it up and changing the narrative. And so what happens
Speaker 1: if they start to lose their grip on controlling the
Speaker 1: narrative because people are starting to go to these decentialized
Speaker 1: choices like Tucker Carlson who just got fired and we'll
Speaker 1: talk about that. Unfortunately, what their opportunities are to control
Speaker 1: the narrative are very dark and very scary. And it's
Speaker 1: like I said, I'm gonna talk to you about what's
Speaker 1: happening right now. I'm gonna give you some hope at
Speaker 1: the end. Don't worry abou Now, if you're just tuning in,
Speaker 1: you're listening to the Markmas Show talking about the decentralized revolution,
Speaker 1: the way the world is changing, and we are talking
Speaker 1: about what I believe is the most important topic of
Speaker 1: our lifetime. Right now, I'm going to be back. I'm
Speaker 1: going to lay this out. What's happening in the risk
Speaker 1: and the hope that we have. Don't go away. I'll
Speaker 1: bear back, all right, Welcome back. If you're just tune in,
Speaker 1: you're listening to the Markmas Show. We talk about the
Speaker 1: decentralized revolution. I'm talking about right now, this centralization of power.
Speaker 1: The governments of the world have continued to consolidate and
Speaker 1: get more and more and more and more power. You know,
Speaker 1: just for example, the United States was a decentralized government
Speaker 1: fifty independent states, a republic, not a democracy or republic.
Speaker 1: And now we have the federal government that's centralized the
Speaker 1: power over that right. And we have the European Union
Speaker 1: has centralized the power over Europe and all those different countries.
Speaker 1: And then we have NGOs above that. We have the
Speaker 1: World Health Organization, World Trade Organization, the UN, etc. That
Speaker 1: have centralized control over all those countries. So this massive
Speaker 1: central is but we're witnessing a decentralized revolution. So now
Speaker 1: things are starting to swing back the other way. We
Speaker 1: no longer want the centralized new source of CNN. Now
Speaker 1: I'll listen to all types of people online, independent decentralized
Speaker 1: voices like Joe Rogan or Matt Walsh or Ben Shapiro
Speaker 1: or Russell Brand or yes, Mark Moss. If you're not
Speaker 1: following me on other social media, why don't you do that?
Speaker 1: Check it out at one Mark Moss. You can find
Speaker 1: me on Twitter and Instagram at one Mark Moss. But
Speaker 1: so as they're losing the grip, people are moving to
Speaker 1: these decentralized solutions, what can they do? How can they
Speaker 1: maintain their grip? If people are leaving. If they can't control,
Speaker 1: if they can't feed you, spoon feed you the propaganda
Speaker 1: on CNN and ABC and CBS, because now you've left
Speaker 1: those to go watch people on YouTube or read their substacks.
Speaker 1: What do they do, well, censor you. That's what they do. Censorship.
Speaker 1: And there's two levels of censorship that are very scary here.
Speaker 1: So censorship number one is you're Alex Jones. You say
Speaker 1: something mean, we deplatform you, so we kick you off YouTube,
Speaker 1: we kick you off Instagram, Facebook, social media, we wipe
Speaker 1: you out. And we've done that all right. We've seen
Speaker 1: recently this get blown wide open by Elon Musk buying
Speaker 1: Twitter and then releasing the Twitter Files. I've talked about
Speaker 1: this extensively, the Twitter Files, which exposed the level at
Speaker 1: which the government is controlling Twitter to actively suppress accounts
Speaker 1: they don't like, actively suppressed posts they don't want, actively
Speaker 1: suppressed topics they don't want. Of course, during the Hunter
Speaker 1: Biden laptop story, we saw this first and four foremost
Speaker 1: in front of everybody's plane view to see. And the
Speaker 1: Twitter files really expose that so they can censor. But
Speaker 1: what happens when a billionaire like Elon must buys Twitter
Speaker 1: and doesn't allow them to do that. What happens when
Speaker 1: these people like Alex Jones who got wiped off the
Speaker 1: face of the map, just goes onto his own website
Speaker 1: and starts broadcasting there. What do they do then? How
Speaker 1: do they control it? Well, let's talk about that. So
Speaker 1: I was reading this article, a great article by the way,
Speaker 1: Michael Schellenberger. He started a substack blog called public which
Speaker 1: I'd highly recommend that you check it out. You can
Speaker 1: find it at public dot substack dot com. And he
Speaker 1: was talking about how things are changing and the world
Speaker 1: being on the cusp of woke totalitarianism as governments act
Speaker 1: to end freedom of speech. Now again, I've kind of
Speaker 1: talked about this, the importance of free speech. It underpins
Speaker 1: any free society. You can't have free society if you
Speaker 1: don't have free speech. But it's more than that, because,
Speaker 1: like I said, it's how we share information, it's how
Speaker 1: we get collectively smarter, and how we progress, and how
Speaker 1: we have creativity, how we invent new things, which is
Speaker 1: why when you see a totalitarian country like North Korea,
Speaker 1: they don't have any of that. So we have. Now
Speaker 1: they're trying to end freedom of speech as a matter
Speaker 1: of fact, for some crazy reason that I never could
Speaker 1: have imagined. Today, even in America, freedom and freedom of
Speaker 1: speech is somehow like right wing now, Like, how is
Speaker 1: that even political? It's just speech. One thing that separates
Speaker 1: humans from animals is our ability to speak. We should
Speaker 1: be able to speak. But here we have a media
Speaker 1: blackout as politicians in the European Union, the United States,
Speaker 1: the United Kingdom, Brazil, Ireland, Canada, Austria, all of that
Speaker 1: are now trying to jail citizens for wrong things. So
Speaker 1: if we can't control you on CNN because you don't
Speaker 1: watch it anymore because you know, we just lie to
Speaker 1: you all the time, then we try to control you
Speaker 1: on Twitter, but then Elon must buys it and we
Speaker 1: can't control you there, and then you like Alex Jones,
Speaker 1: just go broadcast on your own website if we can't,
Speaker 1: if we can't censor you, then we'll just kill you.
Speaker 1: How's that? And that's basically what they're doing now. They
Speaker 1: want to jail citizens to protect you. Of course, it's
Speaker 1: always for your protection, to protect you from hate speech.
Speaker 1: Hate speech is what they call it. So, like I said,
Speaker 1: Twitter gave us this window into how this was being done.
Speaker 1: But now this is going to a whole nother level.
Speaker 1: Of course, under the guise of preventing harm, right protect you.
Speaker 1: It's always about protection. As Ben Franklin allegedly said, those
Speaker 1: who were or you know, maybe Franklin, maybe Thomas Jefferson,
Speaker 1: those who are willing to give up freedom for safety
Speaker 1: deserve neither. But it seems like people are always willing
Speaker 1: to give up freedom for safety. And so now we're
Speaker 1: seeing that all these countries are working together to interleague
Speaker 1: their systems and this censorship apparatus. Now we have politicians
Speaker 1: in go's. These are non government organizations that are all
Speaker 1: working together to protect you from disinformation. But what's disinformation?
Speaker 1: And if we're not able to discuss this information and
Speaker 1: have people collectively chime in and openly debate it, how
Speaker 1: do we know it's disinformation? They give them very vague definitions,
Speaker 1: specifically so they're able to arbitrarily apply these any way
Speaker 1: they want. Take Ireland for example, Ireland, the Government of
Speaker 1: Ireland may soon be able to imprison people for simply
Speaker 1: just possessing material that they've decided is quote hateful. But
Speaker 1: what's hateful? Now we can go to the absurds like,
Speaker 1: my daughter hates vanilla ice cream, So if I talk
Speaker 1: about vanilla ice cream to her, is that hateful? I mean,
Speaker 1: that's absurd, of course, But what is hateful? Who decides?
Speaker 1: In the United States I talked about a few weeks ago,
Speaker 1: they're trying to pass a bill called the Restrict Act,
Speaker 1: which would give the United States the government the ability
Speaker 1: to throw you in prison for twenty years and take
Speaker 1: away all your property with no due process. Which the
Speaker 1: United States is built on a rule of law that
Speaker 1: gives us due process, but no no due process for
Speaker 1: you if you were to use one of these Internet
Speaker 1: sites that we don't deem to be okay. In Canada,
Speaker 1: now they want to filter and manipulate what Canadians can
Speaker 1: see online. In Australia, they have one single government official
Speaker 1: that can now force social media companies to take down
Speaker 1: any posts that they don't want. We see this all
Speaker 1: over In the United Kingdom, lawmakers are now threatening to
Speaker 1: imprison again if you don't like what you say. We
Speaker 1: can't control you. What's put you in jail, or we'll
Speaker 1: kill you. They're threatened to imprison social media managers who
Speaker 1: don't censor enough content. In Brazil, they've introduced severe penalties
Speaker 1: for platforms that failed to remove what they deemed to
Speaker 1: be fake news like the Hunter Biden Latov story, which
Speaker 1: all proved to be real, like ivermectin, which got taken
Speaker 1: down all across the world, and now they're starting to
Speaker 1: give it back again. The European Union is seeking sweeping
Speaker 1: new powers to regulate social media companies under this new
Speaker 1: EU Digital Services Act, where basically they're forcing all these
Speaker 1: large tech companies to share. They're forced to share all
Speaker 1: their data with what they consider quote vetted researchers. Who
Speaker 1: are these vetted researchers, That's the problem. Who controls the ledger? Well, nonprofits, academia, NGOs,
Speaker 1: non government organizations. Now we've had the Internet for over
Speaker 1: thirty years, We've had free speech forever, for all of history,
Speaker 1: it's never been a problem, But now it is. Why
Speaker 1: Why is the censorship industrial complex rising up and coming fast?
Speaker 1: I'm going to talk about that. I'm going to talk
Speaker 1: about where this is going, why it's going there, And
Speaker 1: like I said, there's hope, there's a rising group to
Speaker 1: push back on this. I'm a part of it. I'm
Speaker 1: going to challenge you to be a part of it.
Speaker 1: I'm going to talk about that a minute. You're listening
Speaker 1: to the Mark mas Show talking about the decentralized revolution
Speaker 1: and the censorship industrial complex, the most important topic of
Speaker 1: our lifetime. I'll be back with more in a minute.
Speaker 1: Don't go away, we're back, all right, Welcome act. If
Speaker 1: you're just tuning in, you're listening to the Mark Maas Show.
Speaker 1: We talk about the decentralized revolution. Of course, each and
Speaker 1: every week, the way the world's changing, and it's changing
Speaker 1: really fast. It's changing for it's scary. Unfortunately, times of
Speaker 1: change are typically not smooth, and that's exactly where we're at.
Speaker 1: We have one system that's dying and it's trying to
Speaker 1: grasp and hold on as best as it can as
Speaker 1: the new system is emerging. And the old system that's
Speaker 1: dying is this central, central plans, central controlled system that
Speaker 1: uses lots of methods to maintain its power, including the narrative,
Speaker 1: the propaganda. But now we have these decentralized applications and
Speaker 1: technologies that are sprouted up and they've lost their ability
Speaker 1: to do that, and so the rise of the censorship
Speaker 1: industrial complex. And it's not just countries like North Korea
Speaker 1: or other countries that you would see going into communism.
Speaker 1: We're talking about this happening Indian I States, the West,
Speaker 1: which would be Canada, the US, Europe, et cetera, is
Speaker 1: on the cusp of a way more powerful form of totalitarianism,
Speaker 1: way more powerful than communism, way more powerful than fascism
Speaker 1: ever was It's global and they're using technology to scale this.
Speaker 1: And if we are going to defeat this, then we
Speaker 1: have to understand it. Why are the governments seeking to
Speaker 1: crack down on freedom of speech right now? Why? New Zealand, Netherlands, Brazil, Canada, UK, EU,
Speaker 1: United States? Why are they all doing this? And what
Speaker 1: is the relevance of the timing and the speed of
Speaker 1: what all this is happening. The timing of the global
Speaker 1: crackdown on free speech isn't coincidental. Now think about this.
Speaker 1: Last year, the Biden administration tried to implement something called
Speaker 1: the Disinformation Governance Board. They had this idea to elect
Speaker 1: this lady to be this information czar, who actually was
Speaker 1: one of the largest spreaders of disinformation. We have numerous
Speaker 1: accounts of the information she was spreading was all false,
Speaker 1: but somehow she was going to run this. It was
Speaker 1: the brainchild of a former CIA, of course, former cioperative
Speaker 1: Renee de Resta of the Stanford Internet Observatory, And when
Speaker 1: they tried to put this in place, it got massive
Speaker 1: amounts of backlash. Of course it did. We're America, the
Speaker 1: land of the free work guaranteed by our constitution, freedom
Speaker 1: of speech, and so of course we pushed back on that,
Speaker 1: massive backlash on that, and so they had to pull
Speaker 1: that back. But here's the thing. When you see these
Speaker 1: crazy bills get introduced, like the restrict Act will come
Speaker 1: back to that in a minute, or like this disinformation
Speaker 1: government sport they tried to put forward, and it looks
Speaker 1: like we win, hoorai, congratulations, we win. We get complacent.
Speaker 1: They're not done, like this is going to be put
Speaker 1: into place. They're going to bring this back, just in
Speaker 1: a way that you maybe don't see it or recognize it.
Speaker 1: And so here it is, we push back. The Biden
Speaker 1: administration had to shut that down. But now they're just regrouping.
Speaker 1: Now they're trying to get it put in another way
Speaker 1: now instead of what they did, and they're changing the narrative. Right,
Speaker 1: So they had this woke defense of what they were
Speaker 1: trying to say was they were trying to prevent harm.
Speaker 1: So what they were saying it was a matter of
Speaker 1: national security, so we need to protect you. It's a
Speaker 1: matter of national security. This is why you have to
Speaker 1: allow us to do this. But of course nobody wanted that,
Speaker 1: so now they've changed it, saying, well, it's not national
Speaker 1: security now it's for your protection because you know there's
Speaker 1: all this hate. We have to protect you from hate.
Speaker 1: How we can't have you see any of this race
Speaker 1: based hate or whatever online. Even though we know statistically
Speaker 1: that the world has become much more tolerant, we're not
Speaker 1: getting more hateful. We're getting more tolerant. For example, percentage
Speaker 1: of Americans who approve of marriage between a white and
Speaker 1: a black American has gone from four percent in nineteen
Speaker 1: fifty eight to eighty seven percent in twenty thirteen to
Speaker 1: now ninety five percent. We're getting much more tolerant. There's
Speaker 1: no evidence of any of these other types of hate
Speaker 1: based crimes that we're seeing. Sure, anytime you do a
Speaker 1: crime against somebody, you probably hate them. There's always going
Speaker 1: to be a hate. Unfortunately, I hate to tell you this,
Speaker 1: There's always going to be hate, and people are always
Speaker 1: going to make fun of you for whatever reason. They
Speaker 1: can Hey, you're ugly, you're dumb, you're fat, you're stupid,
Speaker 1: you're white, you're black, whatever, like someone's there's always going
Speaker 1: to be that bully or that person that does that.
Speaker 1: I don't approve of that, I don't condone it, but
Speaker 1: it's always going to be there. So basically, what they're
Speaker 1: saying is we're going to just get rid of everybody
Speaker 1: being mean because they're going to change human nature through legislation,
Speaker 1: and that's obviously not going to happen. We've seen in
Speaker 1: Ireland lawmakers advanced legislation that criminalizes the possession of material
Speaker 1: with quote the potential to cause violence. So that's just
Speaker 1: by having something that they think has the potential to
Speaker 1: even cause violence, now they can criminalize that. That means basically,
Speaker 1: if they catch you with information that they think has
Speaker 1: the potential to do harm, they can arrest you and
Speaker 1: you could face up to five years in prison. Now
Speaker 1: that's a pre crime. You haven't done anything. You're presumed
Speaker 1: guilty until proven innocent. If you even have the material,
Speaker 1: you didn't do anything with it, you didn't cause any harm,
Speaker 1: but you had the potential five years in prison. In Brazil,
Speaker 1: they have a law proposing censorship to protect institutions from
Speaker 1: violence and institutional delegitimization. So if you say anything against
Speaker 1: an institution, particularly a government institution, that would somehow make
Speaker 1: them look dumb or stupid or irrelevant or as they say,
Speaker 1: de legitimate, then you go to jail. So again, if
Speaker 1: we can't control you, because now you're not on CN anymore,
Speaker 1: and we can't control you on Twitter anymore, then we'll
Speaker 1: just kill you. In this case, we'll just put you
Speaker 1: in prison without even doing any crime. In Canada, they're
Speaker 1: advocate advocating censorship in the name of promoting Canadian culture
Speaker 1: and content. A lot of that because of what happened
Speaker 1: with the Freedom Convoy, which they said was racist. We
Speaker 1: see other places. Of course, they're saying it's to protect
Speaker 1: the children. So that's what they're coming back to. In
Speaker 1: the United States, So now they're sweeping surveillance measures, trying
Speaker 1: to ban TikTok because we're supposedly the Chinese or using
Speaker 1: TikTok to spy on us. Never mind that all your
Speaker 1: information from your phone is already being sold to every
Speaker 1: corporation in the world, including China. They already have the information.
Speaker 1: But of course it's to protect the protect the children.
Speaker 1: But Europe is by far the worst offender here. The
Speaker 1: EU is seeking far reaching powers to censor any views
Speaker 1: or dissent that they don't like, and they want to
Speaker 1: They want all content moderation decisions to go to private
Speaker 1: in geo's, non government organizations. Private in geos, not democratically
Speaker 1: eglected people, people that have no visibility, no accountability. Private
Speaker 1: in geos are going to have the ability to that. Now,
Speaker 1: why why are the politicians trying to crack down a
Speaker 1: freedom of speech? Because back to the book, they're threatened
Speaker 1: by the revolt of the public. Because the public will
Speaker 1: always seek truth, will always see what is going on,
Speaker 1: and that is the revolt. The revolt it will be
Speaker 1: when we know they're lying to us, when we know
Speaker 1: these institutions are full of fraud, we want to hold
Speaker 1: them accountable. And any time the public want to revolt
Speaker 1: against us because with this information, that that's what they
Speaker 1: want to crack down. They want to hold the power.
Speaker 1: Scary stuff. Like I said, this is the most important
Speaker 1: topic of our lifetime. If this fails, everything fails again.
Speaker 1: Without freedom of speech, there is no freedom. No Also,
Speaker 1: I also also often say that without the freedom to transact,
Speaker 1: there is no freedom. But it goes in one and
Speaker 1: the same censorship. They want to censor our transactions, the
Speaker 1: way that I can send money to you. They're doing
Speaker 1: that with Central Bank, theusiccurrencies. They want to censor my
Speaker 1: ability to communicate with you, which then censors my own thoughts.
Speaker 1: It's all censorship. So it's scary. Mark. You're full. You're
Speaker 1: full of dooming gloom today, and I'm not like listening
Speaker 1: to you. I was hoping to force some hope here. Hopeium,
Speaker 1: give me some Hopeium, give me another hit of that. Okay,
Speaker 1: So let's talk about that. I believe there is massive hope.
Speaker 1: I am confident because I know that their plans will
Speaker 1: not work. Central planning always fails. I do believe that
Speaker 1: we beat this. I do believe there's a massive hope,
Speaker 1: but not unless we do the work. So how can
Speaker 1: we stop them? That's next answer. So we're going to
Speaker 1: talk about that. How do we stop and what can
Speaker 1: we do? If you're just tune in, you're listening to
Speaker 1: the Mark Mass Show talking about the decentralized revolution. Of course,
Speaker 1: each and every week, the way the world is moving
Speaker 1: from a centralized world to a decentralized world. The changes
Speaker 1: might not be smooth, but it's gonna be great on
Speaker 1: the other side. So we'll be back with more in
Speaker 1: a minute. Don't go away. I'm gonna take a very
Speaker 1: quick break and I'll be right back. All right, welcome back.
Speaker 1: If you're just tune in, you're listening to the Mark
Speaker 1: Moss Show. Of course we talk about the decentralized revolution,
Speaker 1: which is a very big topic on its own, one
Speaker 1: that you need to know about. But today we are
Speaker 1: talking about the most important topic of our current time,
Speaker 1: and that is the censorship that we're facing. And so
Speaker 1: I've gone through a lot. If you've missed it, I'm
Speaker 1: not gonna go back and repeat it all. But you
Speaker 1: don't want to miss it. It's that important. So either one,
Speaker 1: you can check it out on the podcast. Don't worry,
Speaker 1: I got your back. So just go to the podcast
Speaker 1: search Mark Moss Show on your favorite podcast player you
Speaker 1: can listen to it, or go to my YouTube channel
Speaker 1: and search Market Disruptors and you can watch me and
Speaker 1: you can listen to me there as well. Now, also,
Speaker 1: just one more shout out, go to the YouTube. Also,
Speaker 1: you can follow me on social media at one, Mark Moss.
Speaker 1: That's the at number one, Mark Moss. So it is
Speaker 1: a very important topic. You need to listen to this.
Speaker 1: But now we're going to get to the last part,
Speaker 1: which is great. Mark is very scary. I'm very worried.
Speaker 1: What are we gonna do about it? And you should be,
Speaker 1: as I say, sort of joking around just as an exaggeration,
Speaker 1: so you sort of get it, which is I say,
Speaker 1: you know now that they can't stop you. So now
Speaker 1: that we have these open communication tools like Noster and
Speaker 1: like Bitcoin, they can't control those, they can't shut those down,
Speaker 1: and so well, if we can't shut them down, then
Speaker 1: we'll just kill you. No one's really offered to kill
Speaker 1: you yet, but they are. In the United States specifically
Speaker 1: with this restrict Act. They literally want to put you
Speaker 1: in prison for twenty years, take away all your property,
Speaker 1: a million dollar fine, and no due process so you
Speaker 1: don't get to go to court like most people. This
Speaker 1: is unilaterally decided. That's the United State. That's worse than
Speaker 1: you would get for second degree murder. That's worse than
Speaker 1: they do in China. And this is in the United States.
Speaker 1: Every other country is putting things just like this into place,
Speaker 1: and as a matter of fact, they're already doing this
Speaker 1: as a matter of fact, because of these Twitter files.
Speaker 1: As I was talking about, the United States government pulled
Speaker 1: all the people into Congress and said, hey, they got
Speaker 1: they got Michael Schellenberger, and they got Matt Taibi and
Speaker 1: they brought him in front of Congress to talk to
Speaker 1: the censorship industrial complex and basically said, hey, we need
Speaker 1: to know what's going on. The FTC Federal Trade Commission
Speaker 1: sent letters to Elon Musk. We need to know who
Speaker 1: the journalists are, which that's not the way the country works.
Speaker 1: Journalists are supposed to be protected. As they were testifying
Speaker 1: before Congress, they sent the irs to Matt's home. You
Speaker 1: see how they're doing this. Then they had MSNBC host
Speaker 1: Mehdi Hassan, who again censorship propaganda out outlet for the government.
Speaker 1: Medi Hassan was talking about Matt Taybe on air, and
Speaker 1: then they falsely claimed that they had debunked the information
Speaker 1: in the Twitter files. So they came up with a
Speaker 1: fake narrative saying, oh, we debunked all that information. And
Speaker 1: because they debunked it, supposedly, then a member of Congress
Speaker 1: threatened Matt Taybe with prison time for lying to Congress.
Speaker 1: And I'm gonna say her name. Rep. Stacy Plasket again. Rep.
Speaker 1: Stacy Plasket know her name, send her a letter. So,
Speaker 1: because they got medi asan to go on and lie
Speaker 1: on mainstream news that they debunked the Twitter files, then
Speaker 1: they tried to say that he lied to Congress and
Speaker 1: that he they wanted to give him five years in
Speaker 1: prison for this. This is how this is where we're
Speaker 1: at right now in the United States. Now, the Twitter
Speaker 1: files blew the lit up sensorship industrial complex. They were
Speaker 1: mad about that. Obviously, they're trying to scare people by
Speaker 1: going to prison to shut this down, but they're not scared.
Speaker 1: They're willing to back up. Now. We have multiple very
Speaker 1: credentialed reporters that have gone in to affirm everything that
Speaker 1: the Twitter files showed and to discredit, to discredit the
Speaker 1: claims that Mehdi Hassan made, showing that it was debunked.
Speaker 1: So they discredited her. She's the one line and they
Speaker 1: affirmed all that information. Of course, she doesn't get threatened
Speaker 1: for five years in prison because she's giving the information
Speaker 1: to the military in destrial complex or the censorship industrial complex. Okay,
Speaker 1: so enough scaring. What are we gonna do about it? Well,
Speaker 1: like I said, this is happening. Sotalitarians are getting away
Speaker 1: with it. And a lot of these countries they've already
Speaker 1: passed the legislation. They've alread passed the legislation in Europe
Speaker 1: now they're implementing it. They've already passed it in Canada,
Speaker 1: They've already passed it in Ireland. Next month, they'd probably
Speaker 1: get passed in Brazil. This is happening in the United States.
Speaker 1: That's restrict Act hasn't got passed yet. But I think
Speaker 1: there's I had the number here. I think there's twenty
Speaker 1: five co sponsors. This isn't just some like freshman whack
Speaker 1: job that just putted this bill together. No, twenty five
Speaker 1: co sponsors thirteen Republicans and eleven Democrats and one independent.
Speaker 1: So you know, don't think I'm some political right wing whatever.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna go hard on both sides of the aisle.
Speaker 1: Anyone that's against freedom. I don't care if you're Republican
Speaker 1: or Democrat. Thirteen more Republicans signed on to this bill.
Speaker 1: It's pretty disappointing. Mark Warner, Democrat, Virginia Shelley Capito, Republican,
Speaker 1: Deb Fisher, Republican, Jerry Moran, Republican, Dan Sullivan, Republican. I
Speaker 1: mean it's just, of course, Mitt Romney, you might figure that.
Speaker 1: Joe Manson though, I mean, come on, Joe Manchin. So
Speaker 1: these are these are not some fly by night people.
Speaker 1: These are some big, big names. So anyway, what are
Speaker 1: we gonna do about it? Okay, Well, obviously one, we
Speaker 1: have to stand up to this. You know, the United
Speaker 1: States used to be kind of being driven and being
Speaker 1: pushed by this enlightenment of liberalism. I remember when I
Speaker 1: was a kid, my parents tell me about like Berkeley
Speaker 1: in California, and it was like this free speech mecca
Speaker 1: and how bad it was because they were speaking. They
Speaker 1: wanted freedom of speech to push this new you know,
Speaker 1: sexual revolution and drug culture and all these things, and
Speaker 1: the conservatives didn't like that. So we had this enlightenment
Speaker 1: of liberalism. But now it's been taken over by woke totalitarianism.
Speaker 1: So what they used to push for free speech, now
Speaker 1: they're pushing to restrict speech. As a matter of fact,
Speaker 1: you can see there was a video done, a documentary
Speaker 1: Dennis Prager and Adam Carolla, No Safe spaces. I highly
Speaker 1: recommend check it out the documentary. And they basically went
Speaker 1: to these colleges and they were just trying to have
Speaker 1: you know, colleges would have people come speak, and these
Speaker 1: colleges will not allow anybody to come speak that they
Speaker 1: don't agree with, and they shout them down. And Ben
Speaker 1: Shapiro wanted to come speak, and they couldn't have them there.
Speaker 1: They didn't have enough security. They'd just spent all this
Speaker 1: money in security. It caused all these problems. So it
Speaker 1: went from this enlightenment to now woke totalitarianism. But we
Speaker 1: see this resist resistance growing both from the right and
Speaker 1: the left. It's happening, it's happening fast. Michael Schellenberger, Matt Taibi.
Speaker 1: They've teamed up and they've created a global resistance movement
Speaker 1: to totalitarianism. If you want to join in this global
Speaker 1: resistance move in to totalitarianism, you can go to Censorship
Speaker 1: Industrialcomplex dot org again, Censorship Industrialcomplex dot org. Now I'm
Speaker 1: not associated with them, not yet. Maybe they'll allow me
Speaker 1: to be associated with them, So I'm not getting paid
Speaker 1: to promote this, but it's important to me and it
Speaker 1: should be important to you. So check that out the
Speaker 1: Censorship Industrialcomplex dot org. But like I said, this is
Speaker 1: growing really fast. We're seeing people from both sides coming on.
Speaker 1: In Ireland we have echo socialist Paul Murphy trying to
Speaker 1: promote people to join join in on this. In New
Speaker 1: Zealand we have documents that showed direct coordination between the
Speaker 1: Disinformation Project. In Australia, there's a free speech think tank,
Speaker 1: Institute of Public Affairs. They're fighting against this constitutional referendum.
Speaker 1: In Brazil, there's a name that I can't really pronounce
Speaker 1: full hot Day, Sao Paolo Give basically uh Pulitzer winning
Speaker 1: journalists is trying to push this anti censorship, you know,
Speaker 1: fight back against his crackdown. The takeaway is is that
Speaker 1: they are they the governments of the world. The elites
Speaker 1: are grasping at straws. They're doing everything they can to
Speaker 1: maintain power, and if they can't censor you, then they'll
Speaker 1: just kill you or literally throw you in prison. If
Speaker 1: they felt good about what they were doing, they wouldn't
Speaker 1: have to censor. There's a saying this is you don't
Speaker 1: prove a man wrong by ripping out his tongue. You
Speaker 1: only prove that you have something to hide. If they
Speaker 1: felt secure in the sensor and agenda, they wouldn't be
Speaker 1: hiding and trying to rush all these things through in
Speaker 1: the legislature. This is the most important thing of our
Speaker 1: time right now. Check out Censorship Industrialcomplex dot org see
Speaker 1: what you can do. If you're just tune in you
Speaker 1: are listening to the markmas Show. Of course, I talk
Speaker 1: about the decentralized revolution, and this is exactly what I'm
Speaker 1: talking about. The censorship is from centralized central planners, and
Speaker 1: as we're leaving their centrally planned world into a decentralized
Speaker 1: world of internet and new sources, they want to shut
Speaker 1: it down. But we're not going to let him time
Speaker 1: to speak up and fight back. That's what I got.
Speaker 1: You've been listening to the Mark Maas Show. Thanks for listening.