Speaker 1: Hey, everybody, Robert Evans here and I wanted to let
Speaker 1: you know this is a compilation episode. So every episode
Speaker 1: of the week that just happened is here in one
Speaker 1: convenient and with somewhat less ads package for you to
Speaker 1: listen to in a long stretch if you want. If
Speaker 1: you've been listening to the episodes every day this week,
Speaker 1: there's gonna be nothing new here for you, but you
Speaker 1: can make your own decisions. Uh, welcome to it could
Speaker 1: happen here a podcast about things falling apart and how
Speaker 1: to deal with that and hopefully take care of yourself
Speaker 1: and your people. UM. Today we have a returning guest,
Speaker 1: Carl Casarda from Enranged TV. UM. Now, Carl, every time
Speaker 1: you and I have chatted on a show together, it
Speaker 1: has been about firearms, which is obviously your passion and specialty,
Speaker 1: well one of your specialties. But today we're not talking
Speaker 1: at all about guns. UM. I mean maybe here and there,
Speaker 1: but today we're talking about the thing that is has
Speaker 1: been your your career, uh for what most of your
Speaker 1: working life. Fair to UM, you want to kind of
Speaker 1: walk through your background, he because we're gonna be talking
Speaker 1: about information security and like sort of the future of
Speaker 1: threats that are going to be like coming uh throughout
Speaker 1: like the next few years of our lives. Obviously this
Speaker 1: year in particular, there's been a bunch of stories about
Speaker 1: like Russian attacks on digital infrastructure and vice versa. And
Speaker 1: that's always, like pretty much has been something that's in
Speaker 1: everybody's backburn since we got the Internet, usually through like
Speaker 1: questionable films with Sandra Bullock. Um, I think net that
Speaker 1: was net right? Um? The Net? The Net? Yes, exactly, Yes,
Speaker 1: where they somehow hacked a car and nineteen or something.
Speaker 1: You gotta do that when you're flying through cyberspace with
Speaker 1: your right yea. Um. But yeah, you want to walk
Speaker 1: everyone through kind of what your actual background is in
Speaker 1: this industry first. Yeah, totally. So if anyone watches in
Speaker 1: Rangers watched it for a long time, you'll see this
Speaker 1: reflected in some of my content because I do deal
Speaker 1: with some of this intermittently on the channel. It's definitely
Speaker 1: influenced how I approach my work there with the social
Speaker 1: media and all that. But so way back when I
Speaker 1: was like one of those kids that was in the
Speaker 1: hacker space, and I grew up like trying to make
Speaker 1: computers and technology do what it wasn't designed to do,
Speaker 1: and learn to make it do things it shouldn't have
Speaker 1: done for my own interests or others around me, Not
Speaker 1: not in any really negative way, but like just a
Speaker 1: deep curiosity and how does this stuff work? And being
Speaker 1: part of the early online community. We're talking pre internet,
Speaker 1: where you have like an acoustic coupling jack modem and
Speaker 1: you would dial in like war games, yea, literally plug
Speaker 1: your headset into the fat. I was on boards like
Speaker 1: that way back when whatever should have gone past those days.
Speaker 1: Doing things wirelessly was such a mistake, Like I'm so
Speaker 1: piste off that when I like sit down to research,
Speaker 1: I'm not like jacking into a gigantic box um like
Speaker 1: it that makes me live it Like shadow Run promised
Speaker 1: me that I was going to be like using one
Speaker 1: hand to shoot at the approaching corporate security guards and
Speaker 1: have another hand on my like keyboard that I wear
Speaker 1: around my neck that I like plug into the wall
Speaker 1: to hack buildings. Well, hey, maybe someday we'll have neurological
Speaker 1: implants or wet wire implants brought to us by Monsanto
Speaker 1: that'llually the RM and will just get shut off in
Speaker 1: our own rooms right from the mouth to God's ears,
Speaker 1: Carl absolutely, who doesn't want that? Who doesn't want my
Speaker 1: neural tissue tied directly to a corporation? But that fuck yes?
Speaker 1: But anyway, so I grew up in that space, and
Speaker 1: it actually, back then it naturally turned into a career.
Speaker 1: It wasn't like now nowadays you pretty much have to
Speaker 1: go get a bunch of certificates and a college degree
Speaker 1: to even start looking at an infract career. But back then,
Speaker 1: if you kind of had like skills with a Z
Speaker 1: at the end of you could get a job. And
Speaker 1: I landed up doing like help desk at this one company.
Speaker 1: Landed up they noticed that that's where my interests were,
Speaker 1: and I ended up becoming their information security architect over
Speaker 1: a couple of years, and that turned into a multiple
Speaker 1: decade career pretty much culminating and working at a Tier
Speaker 1: one Internet backbone provider doing sub seed fiber optic like routing,
Speaker 1: networking and de DOS mitigation and bought neck control search
Speaker 1: and destroy. So it really turned into a really wide career,
Speaker 1: not only like when I started off backbone Internet, but
Speaker 1: like encryption, firewalls, application layer controls across the board for
Speaker 1: multiple corporations. So it was a weird and interesting space.
Speaker 1: But I don't really do that much anymore except on
Speaker 1: the side, but I've had a pretty exciting career with it.
Speaker 1: So I think probably a good place to start is
Speaker 1: just in general, because folks are always interested about this.
Speaker 1: What what do you What is your recommendation for people
Speaker 1: ask like, what should I be doing to kind of
Speaker 1: protect myself as I forced my head under the constant
Speaker 1: stream of sewer water that is social media these days? Well, yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, the simplest thing and everything, an infosec is
Speaker 1: always controversial, just like anything life or any any recommendation
Speaker 1: makes someone's gonna be like but otherwise or anyways, or
Speaker 1: there's a better solution, and there always is a better solution.
Speaker 1: But the realistic thing is when you talk to the
Speaker 1: average person, the average person isn't gonna sit there and
Speaker 1: hack a Linux box to have a better social media experience.
Speaker 1: That's just not realistic. So the best thing anyone can do,
Speaker 1: the simplest, best thing, is to get one of the
Speaker 1: trusted password managers. There's a number of them out there.
Speaker 1: I'm not going to recommend an individual one right now,
Speaker 1: because anyone I recommend someone's gonna go. But there's another one,
Speaker 1: but there's a few of them out there. Having a
Speaker 1: password manager and having a unique, difficult, complex password for
Speaker 1: every account you log in onto on the internet is
Speaker 1: the first number one thing you can do as an
Speaker 1: individual to protect your interest. Because if you're logging in
Speaker 1: with the same password monkey to Facebook, Twitter, and your
Speaker 1: bank account, that is a disaster waiting to happen. So
Speaker 1: the first thing you can do password manager passwords you
Speaker 1: yourself can't remember. As a result, I allow the password
Speaker 1: manager to generate like twenty four character long alpha numeric
Speaker 1: crypto nonsense. You put a gun on my mouth to say,
Speaker 1: what's your password to your bank and I don't know.
Speaker 1: I can't give it you. I have no idea. And
Speaker 1: so that right there is the first thing any basic
Speaker 1: individual can do to protect themselves on the Internet that,
Speaker 1: uh is totally sensible. Um, I don't I'm not great
Speaker 1: at password managers, but I never know what my passwords
Speaker 1: are and they're all different, and so my life is
Speaker 1: this constant stream of like needing to figure out what
Speaker 1: my password was, failing and resetting it. But it does
Speaker 1: mean that I change passwords regularly, right, But what's so
Speaker 1: great about password managers. You can have passwords that you
Speaker 1: could never human remember, and you can have neak ones
Speaker 1: per website, every website you log in, you could be unique.
Speaker 1: And by having it in this database that's properly encrypted
Speaker 1: with a key phrase or even dual factor, then at
Speaker 1: that point means you literally just can cut and paste
Speaker 1: your passwords into things you don't yourself know what they
Speaker 1: are and if depending on your privacy levels, you can
Speaker 1: do that locally with local solutions with files like on
Speaker 1: your own machine. But frankly a couple of the cloud
Speaker 1: based solutions, as much as the cloud freaks people out,
Speaker 1: is the better one because it'll work on your phone,
Speaker 1: it'll work on your black top, it'll work on everything everywhere.
Speaker 1: That makes total sense. Um. I think Another good thing
Speaker 1: to get into while we're on this subject. We just
Speaker 1: started talking about passwords, and obviously it is important to
Speaker 1: keep and secure though is um I think one thing
Speaker 1: folks don't often think about, especially people who are activists
Speaker 1: um who who may foresee or have engaged in things
Speaker 1: that are legally questionable, don't think about enough is social
Speaker 1: media networking um as, and by which I mean having
Speaker 1: social media that like it is possible to find your
Speaker 1: other social media by like knowing you know, like having
Speaker 1: the same name and Twitter and on Instagram and stuff. Um,
Speaker 1: having social media that like can be tracked across accounts. Um.
Speaker 1: Most people would be surprised at how easy it is
Speaker 1: to do that. A hug and melanct a huge amount
Speaker 1: of tracking. Nazis tracking even like a ton of the
Speaker 1: what the work I did not do, but my colleagues
Speaker 1: did to like doc docs Russian like secret service agents
Speaker 1: and stuff. Was like, oh, we found them in you
Speaker 1: know somebody, uh, their their bosses wedding, Like they're tagged
Speaker 1: in this thing in VK And from that we were
Speaker 1: able to like find their their account on this other
Speaker 1: site and like from that, like now we have this
Speaker 1: like map of everywhere they've been for the last like
Speaker 1: three weeks, and we can build this social map of
Speaker 1: their entire life. Yeah. No, by list by just literally
Speaker 1: existing in modern space, you're constantly leaking some form of metadata,
Speaker 1: right you are. You are always leaking metadata, And the
Speaker 1: more of you allow to exist in the world, the
Speaker 1: more that's the case. So, like there's also you've got
Speaker 1: to think about what the threat is and what the
Speaker 1: risk is. Right, there's the risk of the individual having
Speaker 1: a pair of social relationship with the Internet like I
Speaker 1: do as a content creator is one thing. People, there's
Speaker 1: always someone that wants to delve into your private life.
Speaker 1: But that's a very different risk than a nation state actor. Right,
Speaker 1: those are two different things. And when it comes to
Speaker 1: a nation state actor, quite honestly, unless you're real good
Speaker 1: and I've been doing it for a long time, the
Speaker 1: individual bluntly is kind of fucked word. As a general rule,
Speaker 1: your best security as an individual in that situation is
Speaker 1: the anonymity of the crowd. But when we're also not
Speaker 1: talking about most people who are threatened to kind of
Speaker 1: by the state and that situation are not being threatened
Speaker 1: by the federal government, but they may have they may
Speaker 1: like be attending protests and not want the Louisville Police
Speaker 1: to like put together that they're in an affinity group
Speaker 1: with people and like something you can do for that
Speaker 1: is make sure you're not like, if you have a
Speaker 1: personal account that's under your name with your friends, that
Speaker 1: account shouldn't be liking and sharing things from like a
Speaker 1: political account that you have, or from the account of
Speaker 1: like a group that you're a part of, or something
Speaker 1: like that like, just try to think about and look
Speaker 1: at your your digital footprint from the outside and think,
Speaker 1: is it possible to connect me to people I don't
Speaker 1: want to be publicly connected to through this And the
Speaker 1: minute you've breached that connection once it's gone forever. Right,
Speaker 1: this is the forever. Yes, this is the same thing
Speaker 1: as like with phones, like someone will have like their
Speaker 1: regular phone, which, by the way, all these smartphones are
Speaker 1: just surveillance devices in our pocket. Right, Let's let's say
Speaker 1: you go get a burner so that you don't want
Speaker 1: to be connected to the device that you normally use
Speaker 1: on on a level that's one step above the regular
Speaker 1: individual level. If you ever have those two devices emanating
Speaker 1: at the same time, they're now connected in a way
Speaker 1: that like, let's say, the authorities can associate them together
Speaker 1: because of triangulation and seeing a burner phone and your
Speaker 1: phone coming from the same house, you've breached all the
Speaker 1: privacy you would have had from your burner phone for example. Now, Karl,
Speaker 1: do you have much to say on the subject of
Speaker 1: because I know one thing I have seen people do
Speaker 1: people who are you know, having conversations that they're concerned
Speaker 1: about is put bags in Faraday cages. And I've heard
Speaker 1: mixed things about how reliable Faraday bags and stuff are
Speaker 1: for actually stopping signals. Do you have much to say
Speaker 1: on that matter. My experience with that is not all,
Speaker 1: not all bags that you can just buy off the
Speaker 1: internet are made equally um So what you want to
Speaker 1: do is tested, and you can only test it to
Speaker 1: a certain degree. But the really simple tests are you
Speaker 1: put it in the bag and you try to darn
Speaker 1: dial the darn thing or use any WiFi connections to it.
Speaker 1: And that's a simple test. Now is it as good
Speaker 1: as like? Is it as good as not having the
Speaker 1: thing on you? Of course not leaving or else is
Speaker 1: always the best answer, but it properly In my opinion,
Speaker 1: a properly built Faraday box or cage or bag that
Speaker 1: you've put some testing into is a pretty reliable solution.
Speaker 1: And it's you know, there are so a problem that
Speaker 1: you might encounter is um or that I have. So
Speaker 1: one thing I have heard people talk about it is like, well,
Speaker 1: in order to have kind of a private conversation, we
Speaker 1: like drove to a specific location and we left our
Speaker 1: phones off in the car and then went on a walk.
Speaker 1: And the problem with that is that Now you have
Speaker 1: both just driven to a location with those phones, and
Speaker 1: those phones are associated with each other, right right, Well,
Speaker 1: so first of all, you got to think of a
Speaker 1: world where all of this metadata is being collected at
Speaker 1: all times. So these phones and their associations in physical
Speaker 1: proximity to one another is stored somewhere at all times,
Speaker 1: whether or not it's going to be resourced or accessible
Speaker 1: to the powers that be when they wanted to be.
Speaker 1: It's all there. My phone next to your phone, next
Speaker 1: to that guy's phone. Those associations all exist. They're all
Speaker 1: talking to the same cell phone towers in the same area,
Speaker 1: giving them not only GPS coordinates but triangulation data, which,
Speaker 1: by the way, if you go way back to the
Speaker 1: hacker Kevin Mitnick, that stuff was going on back then
Speaker 1: before they had triangulation data to get him, right, So
Speaker 1: that stuff is all still happening, and those association does occur.
Speaker 1: In regards to saying I turned my phone off, how
Speaker 1: do you know that's off? Most of the moderate phones,
Speaker 1: what does off mean? And yeah, okay, pull the battery maybe,
Speaker 1: But even then, I would not trust any of these
Speaker 1: devices in the regards to them quote being off, especially
Speaker 1: things like phones that have unremovable or not removable batteries.
Speaker 1: Off is more like sleep it is, right, Yeah, I mean,
Speaker 1: I think one of the worst things that's happened for
Speaker 1: personal security is the end of the phone where you
Speaker 1: can remove the battery, Like being unable to actually cut
Speaker 1: power to it without you know, disassembling it is a
Speaker 1: real issue. One could argue that there was like that
Speaker 1: that's a much much more insidious reason they did that,
Speaker 1: or one could argue that it was just one of
Speaker 1: design and comfort, And it's like hard to say. It
Speaker 1: doesn't really matter if it was insidious or not. Reality
Speaker 1: kind of a poor Knolos dose situation, right totally is
Speaker 1: so when now that we're talking about phones, here's another
Speaker 1: thing that's been near and dear, and I think you've
Speaker 1: seen some posts from me out this um. Everybody really
Speaker 1: likes the convenience of things like biometrics, thumb authentication, fingerprint
Speaker 1: i D, facial identification. And here's the reality of that.
Speaker 1: We know this already and there's legal this exists in
Speaker 1: legal space already. But the reality is that you can
Speaker 1: be coerced to provide biometric data against your will. So
Speaker 1: if your phone is authenticated to you with a fingerprint
Speaker 1: I D or your facial i D. They can pretty
Speaker 1: much say you must give us your thumb to unlock
Speaker 1: this phone, or for that matter, frankly, they could hold
Speaker 1: the phone in front of your face in certain circumstract circumstances,
Speaker 1: even against your will, and it will unlock the device,
Speaker 1: and that is considered not a violation of your rights. So,
Speaker 1: for example, if you had a long, strong password on
Speaker 1: the phone, they cannot coerce you to give that up
Speaker 1: because that would be a violation of your own rights
Speaker 1: and Fifth Amendment, which is interesting um so. But at
Speaker 1: the same time, one could also argue that at certain
Speaker 1: circumstances where there's a lot of cameras that are not
Speaker 1: necessarily watching everything you do. But you could also consider
Speaker 1: that pass phrases could be dangerous, like saying an airport
Speaker 1: because all those members could see you plugging in your
Speaker 1: pass code. So it's a matter of if, when and
Speaker 1: where right, So what's the right solution at the best time.
Speaker 1: But I would say that if you were going to
Speaker 1: be in a place that was contentious, um it is
Speaker 1: almost always better to make sure you do not allow
Speaker 1: for any biometric authentication on device. Yes, I never like
Speaker 1: never turn on don't even like ever have had it
Speaker 1: in the like ideally you have never turned on facial
Speaker 1: recognition on your phone, like even if you like deactivated,
Speaker 1: I don't know, I don't, I really that was That
Speaker 1: was one of the first I used to be in
Speaker 1: tech journalism. Right, obviously I'm not an expert on any
Speaker 1: of this, but like the worst thing in terms of
Speaker 1: like my personal comfort with devices was when they were like,
Speaker 1: everything's gonna read faces and fingerprints. Now I don't. I
Speaker 1: don't love that, um, but you know it's it's inevitable,
Speaker 1: right because it is and I had in the past.
Speaker 1: I did a fingerprint unlock earlier in my life, and
Speaker 1: I do not have any devices that unlocked that way anymore.
Speaker 1: But you do like that it is more convenient, right,
Speaker 1: You miss it when you need to get to your
Speaker 1: phone quickly and you can't do it. But like, I
Speaker 1: don't even I don't even let my phone have just
Speaker 1: like a four phrase like password anymore. Like it's eight
Speaker 1: characters for me. It's a little bit of a pain
Speaker 1: in the ass, but it comes with fewer risks and
Speaker 1: one of the things that's challenging to every individuals, they
Speaker 1: have to look at what their threat profile is. Right,
Speaker 1: So like, for example, UM, soccer mom driving her kids
Speaker 1: to school and stuff, she might be really good, well
Speaker 1: off with a bottometric authentication on her phone, frankly, because
Speaker 1: if she didn't use that, maybe she wouldn't even use
Speaker 1: a proper four character pass phrase. And if she's not
Speaker 1: concerned about being at a protest, for example, and having
Speaker 1: some authoritarian take her phone away from her and authenticate
Speaker 1: to it, maybe she doesn't need to worry about that.
Speaker 1: But for a lot of us in the world's we
Speaker 1: live in, that's a different risk profile, right. We got
Speaker 1: to think about what our risks are as individuals and
Speaker 1: what makes sense. So if your passphrase is going to
Speaker 1: be one, two, three, four or use a thumb print
Speaker 1: I D. For most people they'd be better with the
Speaker 1: thumb print I D. But for someone like myself, no,
Speaker 1: it's not a good idea. Yeah, and that's m Yeah.
Speaker 1: I think that kind of brings us to uh, probably
Speaker 1: the last part of this, which is UM, do you
Speaker 1: have specific advice on like VPNs UM? Obviously I recommend
Speaker 1: everybody you signal I I just firm messages in general,
Speaker 1: But like a specially stuff that is secure. Don't if
Speaker 1: you if you like number one first rule of any
Speaker 1: kind of this sort of security, don't ever put anything
Speaker 1: on your phone ever that's legally questionable if you can
Speaker 1: avoid it, like conversationally, like right, do not don't send
Speaker 1: it over a phone if it's something you would not
Speaker 1: be able to survive having read d you in a courtroom. Yeah,
Speaker 1: for the audience, a lot of the audience may not
Speaker 1: know what signal even is. Right, So signal ism is
Speaker 1: a is a text messaging alternative. So like for example,
Speaker 1: on your phone, you've got regular text or if you've
Speaker 1: got an iPhone, you've got I message. Signal is an
Speaker 1: end end encrypted solution that you install as an app.
Speaker 1: And because it's end end encryption, it means that it
Speaker 1: passes the wire in theory not decryptible by the parties
Speaker 1: that are passing the data packets in the middle. So
Speaker 1: that's a man in the middle the decryption. Right. So
Speaker 1: for example, I message is encrypted theoretically end to end,
Speaker 1: but Apple ultimately has the cryptographic keys, so there is
Speaker 1: while they might say one thing, there is nothing really
Speaker 1: preventing them from being man in the middle and being
Speaker 1: able to read the message in transit from a to
Speaker 1: be But if the keys are stored on your device,
Speaker 1: which are then protected with your passphrase or whatever your
Speaker 1: authentication mechanism is, and those keys are not archived or
Speaker 1: kept by some hierarchical man in the middle authority, if
Speaker 1: it's done right, which Signal is done pretty well, it
Speaker 1: means that your data in transit is probably not decryptable.
Speaker 1: And that's why signals a good solution, and it's a
Speaker 1: good one for the average person. Install the app. It
Speaker 1: works just like testa text messaging, but you can have
Speaker 1: a pretty good level of a knowledge that the data
Speaker 1: you're passing is not being decrypted or caught in transmission
Speaker 1: or in the path. So I would say get get Signal. Um,
Speaker 1: it's it's your best bet, right Like and again we said,
Speaker 1: I said, you know, you don't want to ever say
Speaker 1: anything over a phone that is something that can get
Speaker 1: you in trouble. But also like life is life, and
Speaker 1: that's not always realistic for people in certain situations. So again,
Speaker 1: signal is your best bet. Nothing is perfect. And again,
Speaker 1: if you're putting it on your phone, there's a number
Speaker 1: of things that could go wrong every single time you
Speaker 1: do that. But um, that that's one of your better
Speaker 1: things that you could do. And then of course we
Speaker 1: talk about VPNs. Yeah, so so VPN to those like,
Speaker 1: I'm just gonna go with the basic levels because I
Speaker 1: don't necessarily know the level of knowledge that people are listening.
Speaker 1: VPN is a virtual private network. So what that is.
Speaker 1: You connect to this virtual private network and it passes
Speaker 1: your data through an encrypted tunnel to an exit point
Speaker 1: somewhere else on the Internet in theory masking the source
Speaker 1: and origin of your requests. So like, for example, let's
Speaker 1: say you were looking up something on the Internet that
Speaker 1: you didn't necessarily want people to know you're looking up. Yeah, like,
Speaker 1: let's say you're researching the truth about the assassination of
Speaker 1: President John F. Kennedy by Bernard Montgomery Sanders. Um, and
Speaker 1: you know that the n s A is looking for
Speaker 1: truth seekers who are who are finding out the reality
Speaker 1: of that situation. You know, you don't necessarily want them
Speaker 1: to know that you have have become pilled. Right, So
Speaker 1: if you were to do this from your computer at home,
Speaker 1: But what happen is to people that don't know how
Speaker 1: this all works, you would be coming from an I
Speaker 1: P address that's associated with your account that you're connecting to,
Speaker 1: whether it's Verizon or Comcast or whatever. And you go
Speaker 1: and search up that truth and the n s A
Speaker 1: finds you with a keyword search for JFK and the truth.
Speaker 1: And therefore, because of that keyword search, they go to
Speaker 1: Comcast or to Verison and say, hey, we are requesting
Speaker 1: you tell us who did this search. They will get
Speaker 1: them essentially a request that's a legal request for information,
Speaker 1: and then Comcast or Verizon will provide the n s
Speaker 1: A this is the IP address account of the person
Speaker 1: that did that. What VPN does is you connect to
Speaker 1: the vp and service first, the connection from your machine
Speaker 1: to the VPN services then encrypted. Now does the VPN
Speaker 1: service know your IP address? Yes, but when you actually
Speaker 1: type in that information or go to the Internet to
Speaker 1: request that data, it actually goes through the VPNs Private
Speaker 1: Tunneling network and egresses from somewhere else on the Internet,
Speaker 1: thus masking your actual I P address and in theory
Speaker 1: your origin of source. Now that's not true, but what
Speaker 1: that does is mean that if someone if say the
Speaker 1: n s A I wanted to know who's doing this
Speaker 1: truth search, they would then find an eat IP address
Speaker 1: that actually came out of let's say Joe's VPN service,
Speaker 1: and they would have to go to Joe's VPN service
Speaker 1: and go we noticed this emanated from your network? Who
Speaker 1: did this? At that point, you have to trust Joe's
Speaker 1: VPN service to not disclose their account information about you.
Speaker 1: So what you've done is you've changed it. We know
Speaker 1: the telecoms will communicate with the government or whoever if
Speaker 1: they need to, they always will have You don't necessarily
Speaker 1: know if Joe's VPN service will. You've changed your trust
Speaker 1: model from your telecom to your VPN service. So if
Speaker 1: you're gonna pick a VPN, you have to do a
Speaker 1: little bit of research to know that it's a trustworthy
Speaker 1: resource that won't just give you up at the lightest
Speaker 1: form of interrogation. Yeah, and none of them again, there's
Speaker 1: nothing perfect and often like we did find out what
Speaker 1: was it last year that one of popular vpn was
Speaker 1: like run by the FEDS, Like it's yeah, that's not
Speaker 1: an impossible thing. Um. I know a lot of folks,
Speaker 1: particularly journalists, use proton Um, which is I think based
Speaker 1: in Switzerland, and you will get given up if you
Speaker 1: if the Swiss government is angry at you right, you
Speaker 1: brought up a very good point. Uh, services that exists
Speaker 1: outside of the KNUS, the continental US mean that they
Speaker 1: are under different legal jurisdiction the ones that exist wholly
Speaker 1: within the KONUS. So as a result, if something from
Speaker 1: the United States government comes as a request to the
Speaker 1: Swiss company, there's a much like like higher chance that
Speaker 1: a Swiss company would be like, we don't really care
Speaker 1: about your reports. That's worth considering. Also, think about this,
Speaker 1: This actually works in reverse. And I don't want to
Speaker 1: get too deep into this, but when you're working at
Speaker 1: a tier one internet back one provider, you should know
Speaker 1: that sometimes traffic strangely gets pushed offshore and then back
Speaker 1: to the United States for analysis that would normally be
Speaker 1: let's say, not necessarily constitutionally legal in the United States.
Speaker 1: So there's a lot of shenanigans going on. Yeah, and again, like,
Speaker 1: I think protons are generally a pretty good service. I've
Speaker 1: had no problems with it um, But we should should
Speaker 1: be clear here none of these are perfect solutions. There
Speaker 1: is no perfect solution. The only perfect method of digital
Speaker 1: security is not putting things on the Internet or like
Speaker 1: through you know, the mobile networks and stuff like that is,
Speaker 1: if it stays between you someone else, Um, that is
Speaker 1: your best bet of it not being you know, intercepted
Speaker 1: or something. A conversation that you have in the woods
Speaker 1: without phones anywhere near you is the most secure kind
Speaker 1: of conversation. Let me second on proton I agree, it's
Speaker 1: a good service. There are others out there. We're not
Speaker 1: trying to pick on one in particular or pick against
Speaker 1: anyone in particularly. There's a bunch of at work. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Another thing that you need to consider in this sort
Speaker 1: of thing is also what you're dealing with. Like so
Speaker 1: for example, on I put up a post a while
Speaker 1: back because there was a bunch of stuff going on
Speaker 1: in Ukraine with with people posting photos that got their
Speaker 1: locations add things happen that I mean, that's and that
Speaker 1: has been happening for a decade in that war, like
Speaker 1: a well almost a decade as long as it's been
Speaker 1: going on, And I posted something about it. And one
Speaker 1: of the recommendations I made on there was a contentious one,
Speaker 1: but I'm gonna back it up in a minute. As
Speaker 1: I used I mentioned pour the onion relay. So the
Speaker 1: tour is essentially it was originally created as a as
Speaker 1: a way to deal with the dark web quote unquote,
Speaker 1: and to also relay traffic in a way to mask
Speaker 1: the origins, very much like a VPN service. Now there
Speaker 1: are a bunch of these. So what it was is
Speaker 1: there's these Onion relay nodes all over the Internet, and
Speaker 1: when you connect to the to the Onion network, your
Speaker 1: traffic bounces through three, four, or five, six, seven of
Speaker 1: these nodes. You can sort of dictate what you want
Speaker 1: depending on the client you have. And so let's say
Speaker 1: you connect to an Onion router network node in Arizona
Speaker 1: and then you egress somewhere in France and you've jumped
Speaker 1: through six nodes in the process. Well, one of the
Speaker 1: things that's a well known fact is that a number
Speaker 1: of these Onion relay routing nodes are owned by nation
Speaker 1: state actors, whether it's the United States or others. So
Speaker 1: so one of the things I got taken to task
Speaker 1: for and I want to explain this is people like, well,
Speaker 1: that's not the compromise network. It doesn't mean that it's useful.
Speaker 1: Actually it does, because depending on what you're trying to do,
Speaker 1: may matter. If you're trying to mask the origin of
Speaker 1: your data source or your upload or your search for
Speaker 1: a short duration of time, this will still help you
Speaker 1: jump through six nodes. They've got to relay back six
Speaker 1: nodes to figure out the origin of the person connecting
Speaker 1: to the relay network. And that's assuming that there was
Speaker 1: a compromise node in the process. So that means if
Speaker 1: you're passing data through a compromise node, does that mean
Speaker 1: the data in transit is safe? No? But is the
Speaker 1: Is the anonymity of the origin of the poster safer
Speaker 1: for a longer duration of time? Yes, So these things
Speaker 1: get really complex, real fast, and this is again one
Speaker 1: of the best things you can do, because there's no
Speaker 1: single perfect solution, but stacking, so not just going through
Speaker 1: tour but also tour into VPN at the same time,
Speaker 1: and you're I think one of the better ways to
Speaker 1: think about security is kind of the way Sebastian Younger
Speaker 1: describes how insurgent war works, which is it's all about
Speaker 1: creating friction for anybody trying to spy on your ship.
Speaker 1: There's no perfect answer, but the more things you can
Speaker 1: make be a pain in the ass, the better your
Speaker 1: odds that you will not have an issue. Right Like,
Speaker 1: that's all you can do is make it potential really
Speaker 1: more annoying and more difficult for for whoever might be
Speaker 1: looking right like it. The more friction you can create,
Speaker 1: broadly speaking, the more secure you're going to be. Absolutely
Speaker 1: now another thing to think about, and we're getting kind
Speaker 1: of deep in the weeds too. This is above and
Speaker 1: beyond the average person, right, the average person, get a
Speaker 1: password manager, don't use your same passive everywhere, and don't
Speaker 1: use biometrics unless you're forced, like pretty much have to
Speaker 1: and move on with your life. But once you're beyond
Speaker 1: the average person, this is what we're talking about now.
Speaker 1: So like if you're if you have a computer and
Speaker 1: you use it as your normal day to day operating system,
Speaker 1: talking to your friends, doing dot dot dot dot dot,
Speaker 1: but then also need to do something else a little
Speaker 1: more privacy inclined, you should not trust that device. So
Speaker 1: at that point, your web browser may have all sorts
Speaker 1: of cookies and metadata and storage in it that, even
Speaker 1: if you're going through a VPN, still may be able
Speaker 1: to reveal your identity a spell as mac addresses and
Speaker 1: other stuff. So if you really want to get pretty
Speaker 1: into the weeds with this, you have to do something
Speaker 1: like use an ephemeral operating system install that it has
Speaker 1: no legacy data on it. One example of that that's
Speaker 1: a Linux based when it's called TAILS. You essentially use
Speaker 1: it like a live USB drive. You boot off of
Speaker 1: that only, or you use a machine dedicated for this,
Speaker 1: and you burn the OS down every time you're done,
Speaker 1: because there's no legacy information or data that can be
Speaker 1: pulled out of your web browser or your cookies or
Speaker 1: your Mac dress information that can associate it with you,
Speaker 1: regardless of if you've done everything right to mask your
Speaker 1: IP address of origin. God, that's the hot girl shit. Um,
Speaker 1: when you're when you're when you're doing when you when
Speaker 1: you're doing that kind of stuff. Um. And again I
Speaker 1: think at this point, I think, up through most of this,
Speaker 1: it's been kind of like people being like that's too much,
Speaker 1: and people being like, Okay, yep, this is exactly what
Speaker 1: I already am or need to be doing. Um, this
Speaker 1: is probably very few people need to be concerned about
Speaker 1: that sort of thing, but um, you know it it is.
Speaker 1: I I've know I note Like again, I worked at
Speaker 1: Belling cat Um. I had a number of colleagues who
Speaker 1: were like personal enemies of the Rush in state who
Speaker 1: had to do stuff like this, um, and it's you know, paranoia.
Speaker 1: I mean, and here's the thing going above. So again,
Speaker 1: like if you're a normal person, you probably don't need
Speaker 1: to be you know, doing stacking a VPN, you know,
Speaker 1: getting signal and all this stuff. But also why not, right, Like,
Speaker 1: there's no harm in in the additional security. It is
Speaker 1: a little bit frustrating. But here's one of the things
Speaker 1: I think people don't often think about enough. You're not
Speaker 1: engaging in that kind of security stuff purely because there's
Speaker 1: a threat now, but in part because you don't know
Speaker 1: what the future is going to bring. And one of
Speaker 1: the things that I would point out for that is
Speaker 1: a lot of people right now have been having for
Speaker 1: years conversations about a thing that may soon legally be
Speaker 1: murder on a federal level, you know, um, abortion, right,
Speaker 1: And so it is possible that overnight an awful lot
Speaker 1: of conversations a bunch of people have had legally will
Speaker 1: suddenly be very illegal conversations. And then you may be
Speaker 1: glad that you took greater care with your your personal
Speaker 1: security prior to that point. Yeah, I mean, like, so
Speaker 1: think of the I mean, I'm not a person that menstrates,
Speaker 1: but on menstruation tracking app is very useful to a
Speaker 1: lot of people who do and those tracking apps, now
Speaker 1: that metadata in there at some point could be extremely
Speaker 1: dangerous or incriminalized or incrim criminalizing, incriminating excuse me, to
Speaker 1: someone who otherwise was doing nothing more than trying to
Speaker 1: maintain their natural health. And so that is a really
Speaker 1: dangerous concept. So at this point, I mean, within the
Speaker 1: United States, I hate to say this, those apps are
Speaker 1: probably dangerous to the individual because that data could be
Speaker 1: easily used by a government resource to uh, to do
Speaker 1: something bad to someone who's done nothing wrong. So I
Speaker 1: think we should move. I mean, at this point, I
Speaker 1: think we've covered the basis that you could kind of
Speaker 1: responsibly the advice you can responsibly give someone in a podcast.
Speaker 1: And and folks, should it be able to add let
Speaker 1: me throw one thing out real quickly. So you mentioned like,
Speaker 1: for example, we don't you don't necessarily have the risk
Speaker 1: actor that requires using VPN or signal. Let me see
Speaker 1: this way back when gosh, when I was doing crypto
Speaker 1: work decades ago, I was what you mean cryptography and
Speaker 1: not we should specify these days? Oh yeah, excuse me,
Speaker 1: cryptogracryption work. Yeah, yeah, I I had the opportunity. We're
Speaker 1: Phill Zimmerman of p GP, and actually p g P
Speaker 1: pretty Good Privacy, which was one of the fundamental UH
Speaker 1: security project or projects way back when, was actually written
Speaker 1: for human rights violations. He wrote it because people were
Speaker 1: doing research of like warlords were getting their laptops taken
Speaker 1: away and then finding out who spoke to them and
Speaker 1: getting people killed. So p GP was like this human
Speaker 1: rights thing right from the beginning. And cryptography back when
Speaker 1: I was young and naive, I always thought to myself,
Speaker 1: this is what we need. This is the future when
Speaker 1: everyone gets proper crypto will blind the government will blind
Speaker 1: the corporations. We're gonna have this crypto anarchist future where
Speaker 1: the government and corporations can't get us. And the reality
Speaker 1: is most of that God who served. And the truth
Speaker 1: is cryptography is too hard for most people to use,
Speaker 1: and as a result we don't. But here's what I
Speaker 1: will say. The more people that do something simple like
Speaker 1: you signal or use a VPN just to browse the Internet,
Speaker 1: not because they're doing anything various, just because their privacy
Speaker 1: like conscious, because it makes it normalize and that means
Speaker 1: that the person that's using it because they need to
Speaker 1: for like, let's say, to protect human rights doesn't stick
Speaker 1: out like a needle in the haystack, because everybody's already
Speaker 1: doing something sane in the first place. Normalizing proper privacy
Speaker 1: and cryptography is better for everyone. Yes, yes, absolutely agreed.
Speaker 1: This is a nice segue because you were just talking
Speaker 1: about the past and how beautiful and bright it seemed. Um,
Speaker 1: let's talk about what you see as kind of the
Speaker 1: future of info security threats. Well, I mean, so there's
Speaker 1: so many levels to that. First of all, if we're
Speaker 1: talking nation state level, I personally strongly believe that all
Speaker 1: of the big players have already compromised everyone's network. Everybody
Speaker 1: got everybody has got us. China's about us, We got China.
Speaker 1: Anybody right now could go in and pretty much funk
Speaker 1: up the grid on someone else like that, And there's yeah,
Speaker 1: and that's not actually the least that's that's safer than
Speaker 1: other possibilities, like because there is a level of of
Speaker 1: mutually a shared destruction there where it's like, yeah, man,
Speaker 1: Russia could take down the grid, but like that wouldn't
Speaker 1: be good for them, and vice versa. You know, yeah, no, true.
Speaker 1: So the reality is though everybody's and everybody's network, those
Speaker 1: days are over. Um. When it comes to the individual
Speaker 1: and I'm gonna have a the audience, there might be
Speaker 1: people in the audience to feel differently, and it still
Speaker 1: doesn't mean that we don't try. So one of the
Speaker 1: things I want to say is you're gonna hear some
Speaker 1: skepticism here because I've been doing this career for a
Speaker 1: long time and I've seen things go wrong more than right,
Speaker 1: and so in that regard, this is gonna sound kind
Speaker 1: of cynical. But when it comes to the idea of
Speaker 1: individual privacy, in my opinion, with the exception of when
Speaker 1: you're taking a very active effort in something very specific
Speaker 1: that you want to keep private because that's something you're
Speaker 1: working on personally, the reality is individual to all privacy
Speaker 1: is dead and gone, and we're just starting to smell
Speaker 1: that corpse um. Whether it is credit card data transactions,
Speaker 1: your cell phone history, your phone numbers, what you've done
Speaker 1: on the internet, what you've done on social media or
Speaker 1: not done on social media, whether you have an account
Speaker 1: on Facebook or not, doesn't even matter. The metadata and
Speaker 1: the trailer you're leaving behind you is all aggregated, all
Speaker 1: of it behind big data corporations, all of it compromised,
Speaker 1: all of it searchable. Even stuff the government has on
Speaker 1: you has been sold to large corporations because I can
Speaker 1: tell you that some of the data that they kept
Speaker 1: for like let's say D m V or m v D,
Speaker 1: they decided to sell it off to a corporation and
Speaker 1: they themselves access it through a third party when doing
Speaker 1: research on you. So all of that big data, there's
Speaker 1: a law of physics. The more you aggregate, the more
Speaker 1: it will get compromised. Um, geez, I'm sorry, that's the truth. No, no, no,
Speaker 1: I mean yeah, you're you're you're like, it's this Uh,
Speaker 1: there's this frustration because I can remember the days when
Speaker 1: the privacy hounds. And I don't say that in a
Speaker 1: negative term. We're like warning everybody about, Hey, you don't
Speaker 1: want to be aggregating all of these different social media
Speaker 1: things together. Hey you don't want to be using all
Speaker 1: of these services. Hey there's actually some like real downsides
Speaker 1: like all of what's happening. Like part of why things
Speaker 1: are so cheap on Amazon is you know that that
Speaker 1: your data there is is one of the assets that
Speaker 1: they have, And um, those people were absolutely right, and
Speaker 1: they lost harder than anyone has ever lost at anything like. So,
Speaker 1: Like when I was back there at that company doing
Speaker 1: all that cryptography work, we were trying to give crypto
Speaker 1: like to the average general population of the Internet, I
Speaker 1: had this, like I said, this naive view of like
Speaker 1: the future that was gonna be this place where we're
Speaker 1: gonna have the Internet where everyone was connected, and it
Speaker 1: was gonna be not only would we have personal privacy
Speaker 1: through cryptography, but we would be able to transfer information
Speaker 1: to one another in a way that would make the
Speaker 1: Shenanigans impossible. Well, to some degree that's been true what
Speaker 1: we've seen some of that, But to another degree we
Speaker 1: also have Snowden dropping the bomb on revelations about what
Speaker 1: the government has done to the individual and how they've
Speaker 1: broken the law with all of our privacy and data
Speaker 1: and what came of that a man in exile in
Speaker 1: Russia and pretty much fucking nothing, Yeah right, nothing, And um,
Speaker 1: I was sitting at a Defcon presentation where General Alexander
Speaker 1: was on the screen talking about what they weren't doing,
Speaker 1: while Snowden was dropping revelations proving him to be lying,
Speaker 1: and nothing comes of it, right, nothing really comes of it.
Speaker 1: And one of the things that's so real. And so
Speaker 1: whether it's the tribal level, your neighbors across the street
Speaker 1: or the internet tribe, we as a people in the
Speaker 1: aggregate are always willing to give up our rights to
Speaker 1: something bigger for convenience. And we've done that and it's
Speaker 1: called Facebook and Twitter and social media. And in the process,
Speaker 1: what was going to be an amazing resource has become
Speaker 1: the trap. Uh. It's such a it's because you know,
Speaker 1: you know Garrison, I I my my friend who is
Speaker 1: much younger than me, Um has grown up with the
Speaker 1: Internet being being what it is now right like this
Speaker 1: this kind of like nightmare trap. You know that that's
Speaker 1: sucking us all in this like giant squid that has
Speaker 1: us in its tentacles. Um. And it's I get I
Speaker 1: sometimes like dissociate talking with them about certain Internet things
Speaker 1: because in my heart it's still the Promised Land. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I wish, I I guess my I wish I felt
Speaker 1: that way. It doesn't feel like that way to me anymore,
Speaker 1: to be honest, I mean, it's it's not right like
Speaker 1: and what I mean that in like sort of I
Speaker 1: have this I don't know. I've never entirely been able
Speaker 1: to like let go of the vision of like, oh
Speaker 1: it could have been There's so many things that could
Speaker 1: have been. Well, it's like, you know, it's like all technology,
Speaker 1: anything can be remponized, right right, Like an a R
Speaker 1: fifteen can be used for good or for evil, a
Speaker 1: knife to be used to make a beautiful meal or
Speaker 1: to commit a murder. And the Internet is technology, and
Speaker 1: it has been weaponized. It's been weaponized against us. But
Speaker 1: at the same time, if we just turn a blind
Speaker 1: eye to it and then not learn how to use
Speaker 1: this technology to our advantage, we're allowing them to do
Speaker 1: that unabated. And that's where like the kind of hacker
Speaker 1: mindset comes from, which is like, how do I make
Speaker 1: this thing do what I wanted to do for me
Speaker 1: while not letting someone else do it for them. And
Speaker 1: unless we take control of the technology for ourselves, like
Speaker 1: I said earlier, normalizing using signal and even basic VPN
Speaker 1: and cryptography, then we're just giving it up. We're not
Speaker 1: even making it a challenge. We're just like here, you
Speaker 1: go have it. And Uh, that's something that I think
Speaker 1: that's more important as a community. Maybe as people grow
Speaker 1: up on the Internet versus seeing it becoming something that
Speaker 1: I saw become something maybe either a they'll just accept
Speaker 1: which I hope isn't the case that the reality is
Speaker 1: privacy is dead, or maybe they'll approach the Internet differently
Speaker 1: than say someone at my age did. We're frankly, we
Speaker 1: kind of messed up and we didn't realize the Primrose
Speaker 1: path was actually trapped, and that's a like that was
Speaker 1: a mistake and maybe we can kind of like evolve
Speaker 1: beyond that. But like you're asking, where is info set
Speaker 1: going now, I I don't have good notes for that.
Speaker 1: Like when I first started working in the career, it
Speaker 1: really felt like a great thing. We were doing important stuff.
Speaker 1: We were doing the DOS mitigation. We were going into
Speaker 1: hospitals and making sure that insulin pumps weren't compromised as
Speaker 1: a DIDOS host believe it or not, hospitals are infosect nightmares.
Speaker 1: And we were doing stuff that felt good. And then
Speaker 1: later in the career I realized, wait a minute, I'm
Speaker 1: not doing anything to secure anybody's personal information or make
Speaker 1: the Internet safer. I was just protecting some corporate coffer
Speaker 1: and the reality was that the private information that we
Speaker 1: were supposedly protecting. The debate would turn into calls which
Speaker 1: was what's more expensive losing the data or the lawsuit
Speaker 1: for losing the data. Literally, those were the conversations and corporations,
Speaker 1: and those are the conversations that corporations have now about
Speaker 1: each and every one of ours personal information. Now when
Speaker 1: you when you think about because so I obviously I'm
Speaker 1: in a different was in a different field. But when
Speaker 1: I was doing a lot of the research on terrorism
Speaker 1: that I was doing, I had these things that were
Speaker 1: like sort of the this kind of attack is going
Speaker 1: to happen at something I feel that very much about,
Speaker 1: Like drones. There's going to be like a mass killing
Speaker 1: of civilians not in a war zone by a civilian
Speaker 1: weaponized drone at some point in the not too distant
Speaker 1: futures going to happen. It's going to be done. It's
Speaker 1: absolutely inevitability. Um that kind of stuff. Do you what
Speaker 1: are you when you think about kind of the the
Speaker 1: digital equivalence of that, like, what are you looking towards? Well,
Speaker 1: I agree with you about the drone, Like you can
Speaker 1: see stuff. God, yes, you plot the you plot the
Speaker 1: dots and you know what's going to occur, right, It's
Speaker 1: it's not it's not possible to avoid. We unleashed that
Speaker 1: out of the cage, and it's going to happen. Quite honestly,
Speaker 1: I think we're seeing it already. We're seeing we're seeing
Speaker 1: the level of privates see invasion that I don't think
Speaker 1: people already know has happened. Like I know some of
Speaker 1: us realize that, we talked about that, we rant about it,
Speaker 1: but like, I don't think people realize the level of
Speaker 1: the incursion that has occurred to the point where all
Speaker 1: of this data aggregated to the point they know what
Speaker 1: toilet paper you prefer to buy. Like I'm talking like
Speaker 1: people like Facebook knowing that um or the size of
Speaker 1: the corporate oligarchy that controls the Internet, whether it's the
Speaker 1: small like Alphabet, Core, Facebook, Apple, Microsoft's becoming a smaller
Speaker 1: player weirdly. But when you think about those big names,
Speaker 1: they kind of like control everything and every piece of
Speaker 1: data about you and everything you move, and say that,
Speaker 1: I think, I think, what's the end of that. I
Speaker 1: don't think we got to the end game of that,
Speaker 1: But I don't know how we roll it back. And
Speaker 1: that's the thing. So what's the prediction My prediction is
Speaker 1: it's gonna get worse, and we're gonna get to the
Speaker 1: point where there isn't room to move without that surveillance
Speaker 1: tracking you. And like so, for example, you think of
Speaker 1: things like Sci Fi Minority Report, you walk to the
Speaker 1: mall and there's facial idea happening everywhere you go with
Speaker 1: targeted advertising at the mall. Oh, that's coming. I guarantee
Speaker 1: that's coming. And all of that's happening already, and that
Speaker 1: facial recognition stuff that's going on is happening currently now
Speaker 1: we're just not that aware of it happening. The cop
Speaker 1: cars driving down the road and every license plate is
Speaker 1: being measured with the cameras being o CR optical character recognition,
Speaker 1: and that's coming back, and they're tracking every car they're
Speaker 1: driving by on the highway even though there's not a
Speaker 1: GPS unit on your car. The ability to not be
Speaker 1: tracked will soon be impossible. How's that? Yeah, I mean allegedly,
Speaker 1: when I was younger, they were like certain stupid petty
Speaker 1: crimes I would commit just because like people will not
Speaker 1: be able to do this in the future, and I
Speaker 1: have a moral responsibility to steal the light bulbs from
Speaker 1: in front of this bar and throw them in the thread.
Speaker 1: It's like, what, one day that will be a thing
Speaker 1: that people can't do without getting caught. And so like
Speaker 1: I just I had to, you know, there are like
Speaker 1: some bright spots because I I think you're absolutely right,
Speaker 1: there's no on like a broader scale, there's no turning
Speaker 1: back the clock for stuff like facial recognition and how
Speaker 1: funked up it's going to get. There are states like
Speaker 1: where I live in Oregon, where like they have passed
Speaker 1: laws that are just like you, public facial recognition is
Speaker 1: not a thing that is legal in this state. Um.
Speaker 1: And I definitely support more attempts like that because again,
Speaker 1: anything you can do to sty me them, to reduce
Speaker 1: the spread of the grid, to reduce the profitability of
Speaker 1: these things, even though it's again overall a doomed cause. Right. Um, yeah,
Speaker 1: I don't know. I mean I obviously I think that
Speaker 1: that's a good law, But I don't know that laws
Speaker 1: stop corporations when the corporations have more power than law, yes,
Speaker 1: of course. Um. And it's like, I mean, obviously you
Speaker 1: can you can ban it for police to you and
Speaker 1: stuff which does something to the extent that you know
Speaker 1: they follow the law, but none of this is I
Speaker 1: don't know, like I That's one of the things that
Speaker 1: makes me most depressed about the future is the thought that, like,
Speaker 1: the space for this is not like a major issue,
Speaker 1: I guess, but like the space for kids just like
Speaker 1: funk around and do dumb ship when they're nineteen is
Speaker 1: going to get so much smaller. I mean, I would say,
Speaker 1: I mean, I think the thing is like, as a
Speaker 1: natural human being, whether you're doing anything wrong, even if
Speaker 1: you're not doing anything wrong, the nature to feel like
Speaker 1: you have a private space that's to you, your private
Speaker 1: community space. I'm not even talking about wrong or right here,
Speaker 1: We're just talking about just that feeling that at this moment,
Speaker 1: this is my space where I'm not being watched. Is
Speaker 1: a natural, healthy need of the human orgasm or organism.
Speaker 1: Um and interesting, uh, but no, it's it's a it's
Speaker 1: a human need. And I think we're gonna find those
Speaker 1: spaces because the smaller and smaller, And I think when
Speaker 1: you said, what's your prediction, I hate to say it,
Speaker 1: but I think the prediction is it will become impossible
Speaker 1: to not be tracked. Now, the bright side of that,
Speaker 1: the bright side of that maybe maybe there's a bright side.
Speaker 1: Maybe at some point when that's the reality, it could
Speaker 1: somehow also affect the people that are powerful and the
Speaker 1: people that are small. And we all realize that humans
Speaker 1: are humans, and therefore the failings that sometimes we have
Speaker 1: as all human beings, we just kind of acknowledge it
Speaker 1: and be like, oh, yeah, of course that's just what
Speaker 1: people do. Like maybe we just realize people are people.
Speaker 1: But the idea that there's never going to be a
Speaker 1: space to not get tracked, I don't know. To me,
Speaker 1: I find darkly disturbing. It is disturbing. I do think
Speaker 1: it kind of to pivot off of what you were saying.
Speaker 1: The other aspect of that that is more positive is
Speaker 1: that all of this stuff, all of this surveillance shiit
Speaker 1: um or at least not all, but quite a bit
Speaker 1: of it is you know, in a way, it's can
Speaker 1: knife fight. There's no way that both parties don't get cut,
Speaker 1: and you know, the ones wielding the knife might get
Speaker 1: cut less, but they're still going to get cut. And
Speaker 1: part of what that means in this situation is that
Speaker 1: the prevalence of all of these different ways to surveil
Speaker 1: and track also allows us to track in the same
Speaker 1: way that like police law enforcement watches people through their phones,
Speaker 1: but also a hell of a lot of cops are
Speaker 1: getting filmed doing fucked up ship now right now. Again,
Speaker 1: the balance of the cuts I don't think is going
Speaker 1: to be work out in our favor, but it's not
Speaker 1: going to be nothing on them either. And and and
Speaker 1: you're right, I think there are there are some things
Speaker 1: that we will learn in the future about the people
Speaker 1: in power in the world that would it wouldn't have
Speaker 1: been possible for us to learn in the past or
Speaker 1: may not be possibly even right now. And that and
Speaker 1: if we learned that about people in power, then they
Speaker 1: can't weaponize it as much against the people that aren't
Speaker 1: in power. Right yeah, Yeah, you know one thing that
Speaker 1: I'm because I'm thinking a lot about the fact that
Speaker 1: a bunch of folks the reproductive healthcare industry have pointed
Speaker 1: out that right wingers have started using drones to follow
Speaker 1: people home from like planted parrot hoods and follow them
Speaker 1: to their cards to like build databases of the people
Speaker 1: who are going to places to potentially like do that
Speaker 1: kind of reproductive healthcare that these folks don't think should exist. Um,
Speaker 1: the other side of it though, is that Um, it
Speaker 1: is also possible to surveil them. Um. And it will
Speaker 1: be possible to track the people doing that sort of thing,
Speaker 1: and it will be possible to do that in terms
Speaker 1: of like legal accountability. And it will be possible to
Speaker 1: do that for the people who embrace h questionably legal
Speaker 1: tactics for for frustrating those efforts, um or illegal tactics
Speaker 1: for frustrating those efforts. They have access to the same technology. Um.
Speaker 1: And again it's it's it is a knife that will
Speaker 1: cut everybody, um. And I guess that's better than just
Speaker 1: one person getting cut in this situation. That's that's the
Speaker 1: concern I have, right, I agree with that. Like I said,
Speaker 1: technology goes it's a weapon and as weaponized in all directions,
Speaker 1: depending on how to use it for good or for bad.
Speaker 1: And so this is the same place I come to
Speaker 1: when it comes to the gun control argument. I mean,
Speaker 1: we can do no, no, no, the same the same problem, right,
Speaker 1: because if we allow only one side to have all
Speaker 1: of the control and power and understanding of the technology,
Speaker 1: then we at ourselves are at a huge deficit. We
Speaker 1: cannot defend ourselves or fight back. So when it comes
Speaker 1: to this kind of data and technology. Knowing the basic
Speaker 1: fundamentals of what you can do to protect yourself, understand
Speaker 1: the reality of what the surveillance state or corporation is,
Speaker 1: and then doing your best to not make it easy
Speaker 1: for them is at least one step forward. But if
Speaker 1: we don't own this technology, if we don't own the tech,
Speaker 1: someone else will, and they will use it against us.
Speaker 1: It's as simple as that. And like they're super simple
Speaker 1: stuff Like I was gonna bring us up with like
Speaker 1: you can't see video because it's a podcast, but like
Speaker 1: there's these cool glasses from doctor are called reflectacles, but
Speaker 1: I'm showing you Robert, and it looked like regular sunglasses.
Speaker 1: But when you put them on, they do they reflect
Speaker 1: i R light and actually mess with cameras in a
Speaker 1: way that your turns are diet face into a ball
Speaker 1: of light. So you can wear these, you can wear
Speaker 1: the cold reflectacles. You can wear them and just walk
Speaker 1: around the mall and all the cameras get blown out
Speaker 1: by your by your glasses. Like doing that just because
Speaker 1: you can. It's kind of fun. That's the hot ship.
Speaker 1: That's the ship I was promised that that at least
Speaker 1: does exist. It's not everything I had hoped it would
Speaker 1: be in terms of its ability, But it is like
Speaker 1: that kind of stuff rules and I will be picking
Speaker 1: up a pair of those. UM. Well, we should probably
Speaker 1: close out. I did want to note because I mentioned this, UM,
Speaker 1: I got something a little wrong when I was talking
Speaker 1: about the facial recognition ban. Um. It is in an
Speaker 1: ordinance in the City of Portland itself. Um. It's the
Speaker 1: first city that has done this, and it prohibits the
Speaker 1: use of public facial recognition technology by all private businesses
Speaker 1: in the city. UM. So that is the scope of
Speaker 1: the band that a band that exists in Portland. I
Speaker 1: recommend looking it up. It is the kind of thing
Speaker 1: that I would support everyone pushing forward in their city. UM.
Speaker 1: Because again, the more holes you can make in this thing,
Speaker 1: the better. Yeah. I don't want to put that down.
Speaker 1: That's a good thing. But the challenge of this is,
Speaker 1: just like I mentioned earlier, moving the data out of
Speaker 1: the konas and back the minute photos from Like I
Speaker 1: take my iPhone and scan the crowd and then put
Speaker 1: that picture up on the internet. It's not under their
Speaker 1: jurisdiction and all that happens on every face in that yep,
Speaker 1: and that is again, well, we'll do another episode at
Speaker 1: some point about things that you can do to just
Speaker 1: get like there. That's a whole different bag of tricks. Um,
Speaker 1: But this has been really useful and really valuable. Carl.
Speaker 1: Do you want to plug anything before we roll out here?
Speaker 1: Not much, just my normal thing. If you're interested in
Speaker 1: this kind of content, but with a more firearms oriented thing,
Speaker 1: you can find me an en range dot tv. But
Speaker 1: you'll also find some information security stuff there as well.
Speaker 1: I cover that intermittently when it applies to both topics.
Speaker 1: So if you, if you even if you disagree, but
Speaker 1: appreciate my approach to this, come check me out. I
Speaker 1: appreciate it. Awesome, Check out Carl, check out in Range tv,
Speaker 1: and continue to listen to podcasts because the only thing
Speaker 1: that will save us is podcasts. When I didn't the
Speaker 1: same Ryan, but good for business. Oh it could happen here,
Speaker 1: Um is the podcast. We're talking about things falling apart.
Speaker 1: And you know a place where things have fallen apart
Speaker 1: a bit is large chunks of Ukraine due to a
Speaker 1: Russian invasion. Um. And you know we've chatted about this
Speaker 1: a bit on the show. We've had some interviews with
Speaker 1: some folks who are living and fighting over there. And
Speaker 1: today we're going to talk with Jake Hanrahan Uh friend
Speaker 1: of the pod Um who has been over a couple
Speaker 1: of times this year, including since the more expanded conflict began.
Speaker 1: It has just released a new documentary on the popular
Speaker 1: front YouTube called Ukraine's Anti Fascist Football Hooligans Fighting the
Speaker 1: Russian Invasion. Jake, how you doing, Thanks for having me back,
Speaker 1: Thanks for being on now, Jake. First off, I guess
Speaker 1: we can get into YouTube censorship stuff, but um, I
Speaker 1: want to chat about like how this story came about
Speaker 1: and when you kind of got in contact with these people,
Speaker 1: because kind of in brief, what you have, you know,
Speaker 1: the clips notes that you hear from like folks who
Speaker 1: have kind of an ax to grind is that like
Speaker 1: you know, Ukraine is all neo Nazis and the government's
Speaker 1: all run by neo Nazis. And the reality is that
Speaker 1: Ukraine obviously has a substantial Nazi problem. And as with
Speaker 1: any country where you have a substantial Nazi problem and
Speaker 1: some degree of freedom in terms of you know, your
Speaker 1: ability to organize for their political purposes, you also have
Speaker 1: a shipload of people who are anti fascists and who
Speaker 1: have been fighting those fascists in the street, um, often
Speaker 1: with intense levels of violence. UM. And this is a
Speaker 1: story about a group of those people, um, who have
Speaker 1: now kind of retooled their organization and capacity towards fighting
Speaker 1: the Russian invasion. Yeah, man, exactly that I mean, so
Speaker 1: what I wanted to do with Popular Front. You know,
Speaker 1: I've been reporting from Ukraine since sixty and I've been
Speaker 1: there more than ten times on the ground in the
Speaker 1: bombas like way before you know, people were focused on
Speaker 1: the area and before the invasions, so I was very
Speaker 1: aware of. Yeah, there is a significant fascist element to
Speaker 1: the militias out there, but it's the same. Any country
Speaker 1: in Europe that would have a war would have the
Speaker 1: exact same thing. Trust me, if we had it in Britain,
Speaker 1: we would have a similar issue. You know, Eastern Europe.
Speaker 1: Obviously it's a little bit more hardcore, um, but that's
Speaker 1: the way it is. That's Eastern Europe for you. And
Speaker 1: I will mention just at the top as well, I
Speaker 1: would argue that Russia has a much worse neon Nazi problem.
Speaker 1: They Um, more than fifteen people were killed between by
Speaker 1: an actual Neo Nazi serial killer gang in Moscow that
Speaker 1: filmed these attacks. They have a massive neo Nazi party.
Speaker 1: Um you know they they're they're exporting Nazis all across Europe,
Speaker 1: and we know there is several, um, you know, well
Speaker 1: trained neo Nazi battalions fighting for the pro Russian So
Speaker 1: it's neither here nor there. Yes, there's Nazi problems in
Speaker 1: the region, but I didn't want to constantly be on
Speaker 1: this back foot like no, actually, yes there's a Nazi problem,
Speaker 1: but not this, not that. I was like, how can
Speaker 1: we do a documentary that's kind of a positive way
Speaker 1: to be like, well, instead of saying no, not everyone
Speaker 1: is this, or having to film with a unit and
Speaker 1: then being like, actually, these guys are fascists. How can
Speaker 1: I show, you know, like they're uncomfortable. Yeah right, like
Speaker 1: oh a total cough again. Like it was like, how
Speaker 1: how can I kind of put a doc out there
Speaker 1: where it's like, oh, no, actually, like here's a different
Speaker 1: side to it, and you know, this group obviously as
Speaker 1: soon as the war started again. Ukraine is a country
Speaker 1: of forty four million people and it's a very diverse,
Speaker 1: a very smart, very open country in terms of people
Speaker 1: will tell you what they think, and they will argue
Speaker 1: with you and you won't be you know, you can
Speaker 1: have like really serious discussions with people about politics there
Speaker 1: and not fall out. You know. Um, so they're very
Speaker 1: I think, like a very clever people, are really nice people.
Speaker 1: I love Ukraine. I love Ukrainians, So so it's to me,
Speaker 1: it was I knew about the players, Like, yeah, of course,
Speaker 1: there's a massive anti fascist element in Ukraine. Okay, it's
Speaker 1: definitely smaller than the fascist element, but already since the
Speaker 1: war started with there's Eco Platform, there's Harky hardcore, there's
Speaker 1: the Resistance Committee Let's hold towards Klan. There's Operations Solidarity, like,
Speaker 1: there's a nest the Macno machine gun repair unit, Like,
Speaker 1: there's so many different anti fascist left wing elements to
Speaker 1: the to the conflict. They just get a lot less
Speaker 1: attention because the fascists have got really good at propaganda
Speaker 1: over the years, and and let's be honest, a lot
Speaker 1: of the fascist groups are fighting in the East and
Speaker 1: right now it's kind of can't back. Yeah, well, it
Speaker 1: all hands on deck, right, It's like everyone's like, yeah, okay,
Speaker 1: we don't really care, like we just want to not die.
Speaker 1: Which is understandable. So my point is, Um, I looked
Speaker 1: at this this group, the Resistance Committee, which is this
Speaker 1: kind of anti authoritarian um, you know, coalition of various
Speaker 1: different units. They have Red Deer under their wing, which
Speaker 1: is an anarchist group in Ukraine that I made a
Speaker 1: documentary with a few years ago. So I was looking
Speaker 1: at maybe we'll do a doc n of Deer again
Speaker 1: now that they're fighting on the front. But then I
Speaker 1: see this other group with them put towards Klan and
Speaker 1: it's like what who? Like? Firstly, the name is kind
Speaker 1: of weird in the US. That brings up some unpleasant
Speaker 1: connotation in the US. Yeah, I mean it didn't really
Speaker 1: click to me, But what does what does like hoods?
Speaker 1: Hoods mean? So basically, when they would go and do
Speaker 1: you know, when they would go and beat up fascists,
Speaker 1: they'll be like, right, hood's up because you're you're like
Speaker 1: putting your hoodie up so you don't get like spotted,
Speaker 1: right because act the goods up. Um. There's totage of
Speaker 1: them beating up Nazis as well, chanting they had a
Speaker 1: chance Dodds, like you know, to put the fucking fear
Speaker 1: into them like a yeah, yeah, and then clan, I
Speaker 1: mean the Ukrainian translation of Plan. It's with the K.
Speaker 1: It's not about the you know, it's just also anglicization
Speaker 1: can lead to some unfortunate things, right right, But also
Speaker 1: you know, they're smart guys, and at first I thought
Speaker 1: this wasn't true, but then I spoke to me it
Speaker 1: was true. They were kind of aware. They're like, yeah,
Speaker 1: h h K who towards clan. They're kind of trolling KKK,
Speaker 1: Like it's like a second meaning because in Ukraine that
Speaker 1: you know, they've got that culture. They're very cheeky. They
Speaker 1: think it's very funny to be like ha ha, you know,
Speaker 1: fuck you. Um, So for them, they were like, yeah,
Speaker 1: we're basically trolling the fascists, like they hear who towards
Speaker 1: clan and they're like surprised, Sorry, we're anti fascists, you
Speaker 1: know what I mean, your head's broken. So it was
Speaker 1: kind of that vibe, and you know, they didn't really
Speaker 1: think about it. And when I asked Anton, you know,
Speaker 1: he's like the kind of the fact old leader. He
Speaker 1: was like he told me this and then he was
Speaker 1: I just kind of wanted to piss people off as well. Um,
Speaker 1: and you you gotta remember these guys started over ten
Speaker 1: years ago, before you know, politics was as online as
Speaker 1: it is, um, and they started off in the hardcore
Speaker 1: punk scene. Now you know, I'm sure you know, Like
Speaker 1: you know, hardcore punk, especially in Europe is like a
Speaker 1: very very exciting, very fun, very happy and like Gnari
Speaker 1: fucking scene. So for them, it was like yeah, with
Speaker 1: a hood towards clan like you know what I mean.
Speaker 1: But but unfortunately some people in America like why they
Speaker 1: go to hood to clan. I don't believe that they're
Speaker 1: empty fast. It's just like mate, there's over seventy videos
Speaker 1: of them beating up Nazis successfully. But it's a whole
Speaker 1: continent that doesn't have the same history as the United States,
Speaker 1: right you can't. I mean yeah, I mean even if
Speaker 1: you said in England like KKK, like now, people would
Speaker 1: be like who oh yeah, like yeah, I've heard of that.
Speaker 1: It's not like we didn't have it here like that.
Speaker 1: You know. Yeah, it's one of those So, I mean
Speaker 1: one of the things that um, that's interesting here that
Speaker 1: you you hit on a new documentaries like these folks,
Speaker 1: the that that these are not just like um, anti
Speaker 1: authoritarian folks, they're they're very much committed to anti racism,
Speaker 1: which is, um, you know, a place like Ukraine where
Speaker 1: the history of their being, you know, folks who are
Speaker 1: not white is not quite as extensive as it is
Speaker 1: in a lot of places. It's really interesting to me
Speaker 1: to have people who are kind of organizing specifically for
Speaker 1: that purpose. Um, and I think, really cool. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: it is really cool. And it's for them. What I
Speaker 1: found very fascinating is it's just natural. So, you know,
Speaker 1: I said, you know, their political I geology. Some of
Speaker 1: them are like, well, some of us are anarchists, some
Speaker 1: of us are kind of anti fascists, but otherwise kind
Speaker 1: of a political and you know, when it's very simple
Speaker 1: for them, it's like why are you I asked, how
Speaker 1: come you guys are anti fascists and they're like, well,
Speaker 1: we just see life differently, like you know, it's like
Speaker 1: obviously like there was no big political theory. It was
Speaker 1: just like, no, it's just basically they were like, it's
Speaker 1: just wrong, you know, like fascism is just wrong. And
Speaker 1: we're tough guys, you know, and we joined we were
Speaker 1: we wanted to be the ones that said no, we're
Speaker 1: not the fascist of the anti fascists, and luckily for them,
Speaker 1: they had a really good friendship group and a very
Speaker 1: solid group who were all very good at combat sports,
Speaker 1: and like in the dock, you know, Anton says, our
Speaker 1: enemies is almost every other Ukrainian football firm in the
Speaker 1: whole of the country. But you will ask even their enemies,
Speaker 1: they will tell you like, yeah, unfortunately, those guys are tough.
Speaker 1: You know, they can fight. You know, they have to be. Yeah, exactly,
Speaker 1: they had to be. They were like we had to
Speaker 1: be you know. So I mean, I I do my research.
Speaker 1: I found um kind of a fascist football ultras for
Speaker 1: Hum in Eastern Europe that banned any mention of Houdswood's Klan,
Speaker 1: and it kind of boiled down to the fact they
Speaker 1: were just so embarrassed that so many of the fascist
Speaker 1: groups were getting beaten up like by by anti fascists
Speaker 1: and often outnumbered. You know. It even got to a
Speaker 1: point where Hudsward's Clan weren't allowed to they wouldn't even
Speaker 1: talk to them to do like arranged fights anymore in
Speaker 1: the field. So instead of quitting, Hudson's Clan said, Okay,
Speaker 1: then when we see you, we'll just beat you up
Speaker 1: in the subway, we'll beat you up in the street,
Speaker 1: you know, And a lot of people might say, oh,
Speaker 1: well this is violent. So for me, the football Luganism
Speaker 1: side of it, I don't see an issue with it personally.
Speaker 1: I mean, they're not attacking anyone innocent, they're not attacking
Speaker 1: by standards. It was all very contained. It was all
Speaker 1: very you know, it was that was their thing, you know,
Speaker 1: so that that to me is whatever. And when you're
Speaker 1: talking about neo Nazi groups that were i mean in Ukraine,
Speaker 1: that they've stabbed up the Roma community, they're destroying LGBT events,
Speaker 1: and you know, the clan were just like, no, we're
Speaker 1: not about that, we don't we don't think you should
Speaker 1: do that. And so they formed and for ten years
Speaker 1: they were fighting. But now they have called a truce
Speaker 1: because they're like, you know, Anton explains in the dock.
Speaker 1: He says, look, there's a bigger problem now because Ukraine
Speaker 1: is actually not a Nazi jump as the Kremlin says.
Speaker 1: It's actually quite easy to kind of you know, it's
Speaker 1: a very small subset in the in the relative size
Speaker 1: of the actual military, so you know, it's actually for them.
Speaker 1: They said, well, yeah, it makes sense. We put all
Speaker 1: our other political differences aside, because this is way bigger.
Speaker 1: You're talking about one of the most powerful militaries on
Speaker 1: earth invading our country and killing our people. I mean,
Speaker 1: we've seen the massacres in Boucher and up in Um.
Speaker 1: You know, people killed civilians, hands behind their back, executed
Speaker 1: in the street. M thirty of the people killed in
Speaker 1: Butcher with children, like you know, this is just insane.
Speaker 1: So for them they were like, yeah, we we can,
Speaker 1: we can call the truth. You know, we don't like them,
Speaker 1: but right now we're not going to beat each other
Speaker 1: up on the front line. Um. But I think it
Speaker 1: really kind of shows the testament of how serious too
Speaker 1: towards Clara about the anti fascism that even whilst in
Speaker 1: the truth, most of them actually still joined the resistance Committee,
Speaker 1: the anti authoritarian groups, so they're not just directly next
Speaker 1: to fascist battalions. But again, you know, a lot is
Speaker 1: changing out there on the front now. I think, yeah,
Speaker 1: I don't know. Anton said to me, he was like,
Speaker 1: I'll be honest with you, Like we didn't put this
Speaker 1: in a DoPT, he said, I'll be honest. I think
Speaker 1: after this war, a lot of these far right guys
Speaker 1: might change their minds because now we see what totalitarianism
Speaker 1: brings death, you know what I mean, whether that whether
Speaker 1: however that's which we're thinking or not, I'm sure, but
Speaker 1: you know what I'm saying because obviously, like the I mean,
Speaker 1: I I would obviously I would hope that that's that's
Speaker 1: what happens, but I tend to do it. But yeah,
Speaker 1: the thing that scares me, of course, is there's just
Speaker 1: as at least as much a chance that you know,
Speaker 1: they get more powerful. Um, which is again part of
Speaker 1: why it's important for folks like Hudson's plan to be
Speaker 1: organizing and getting weapons and being prepared because like, yes,
Speaker 1: that if that conflict comes after the war, you know,
Speaker 1: you don't want the fascist militias to be the best
Speaker 1: armed and most organized. Yeah, and this is the issue,
Speaker 1: you know. But I think for them it's like, okay,
Speaker 1: we'll deal with that when it comes, you know. Like
Speaker 1: I think they're very aware that this war is going nowhere,
Speaker 1: you know, and you know they say, and our dog, oh,
Speaker 1: we just want to go and kill Russian pigs. I mean,
Speaker 1: you know what they mean is I mean some people
Speaker 1: are like, ooh, that's really bad. I was like mate,
Speaker 1: you're talking about that. They were It's a war, right,
Speaker 1: they were. They were guarding the areas where the massacres happened. Know,
Speaker 1: Hood towards Klan got shelled trying to get civilians out
Speaker 1: of Boradanka when Russians were shelling. You're talking women and children. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm surprised they said that mildly, you know, like yeah,
Speaker 1: like you know, it's a woman, it is what it is.
Speaker 1: And also their football hooligans they're wild people, you know, Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's it's um. I mean that is kind of interesting though,
Speaker 1: I'm curious, Um, do you have kind of, ah an
Speaker 1: assessment of what kind of numbers they're looking at, like
Speaker 1: how many folks they've actually got in the field on
Speaker 1: a regular basis. Yeah, so the resistance Committee is I
Speaker 1: don't know, like fifty hundred right now. Good towards Klan
Speaker 1: they have like maybe twenty to thirty year there guys
Speaker 1: in that group. But then they also have other people,
Speaker 1: um that join different units in the East. So they
Speaker 1: were like already military, so they didn't have to go
Speaker 1: you know, former militia, they just joined the military. So
Speaker 1: there's like quite a strong hood towards Clan Um mortar group. UM,
Speaker 1: and I know that. So. So one of the footage
Speaker 1: we included in our documentary where um, a Russian tank
Speaker 1: gets blown up like very close core as he gets
Speaker 1: hit with the javelin, he's like a hundred feet away.
Speaker 1: That was a hood Toude clan attack. That was one
Speaker 1: of their guys doing it, you know. So yeah, so
Speaker 1: that there's they're all over the place. Um. Unfortunately, due
Speaker 1: to various bureaucracy within the Territorial Defense, I do think
Speaker 1: that the Resistance Committee might have to split up to
Speaker 1: actually get to the front, you know what I mean,
Speaker 1: Like they're they're probably gonna have to join other units
Speaker 1: because there's some issues that the you know, various people
Speaker 1: they're just not sending them out there. It's not because
Speaker 1: they're anti fascist or anything. It's nothing to do that.
Speaker 1: It's it's because you know, it's corruption, man. There, there's
Speaker 1: there's some corruption emerging. Some some commanders just want to
Speaker 1: sit sit around and not actually have to go to
Speaker 1: the front. Um. Whereas you know, the fighters themselves are
Speaker 1: desperate because they're like, you know, our people are dying.
Speaker 1: We want to avenge them and we want to stop it.
Speaker 1: So you know, right, nowhoods Planner essentially on their way.
Speaker 1: They're doing a lot more training right now. They've been
Speaker 1: given the go ahead. Yeah, they're going to the east.
Speaker 1: Um and as far as I know, they're they're kind
Speaker 1: of on route obviously stopping off doing training. I think
Speaker 1: they have an upeat. They're going to be an APG unit,
Speaker 1: so they'll be a very close cause, you know what
Speaker 1: I'm saying. So it's going to be Narlie for them.
Speaker 1: These guys, as you stayed at all, kind of started
Speaker 1: out as a friend group, right, Like they weren't. This
Speaker 1: isn't a political party, These aren't like these guys didn't
Speaker 1: start as ideological comrads. They were like buddies who are
Speaker 1: into the same team and into the same kind of
Speaker 1: combat sports. And now they're you know, they're going to
Speaker 1: be some of them are gonna be dying in front
Speaker 1: of the others, which is like a difficulty I think. Um,
Speaker 1: I'm interested in kind of how how are they actually
Speaker 1: organizing sort of in the field or is it just
Speaker 1: as I've heard of a number of like militia units
Speaker 1: kind of along the lines of the Ukrainian military, or
Speaker 1: have they have they kind of adopted different organizational styles
Speaker 1: in their their hoods, hoods units as befits sort of
Speaker 1: their unique kind of origins. Yeah, that's a good question. Well,
Speaker 1: I mean it's kind of trickly because essentially there, you know,
Speaker 1: I guess, I guess they phoned as a militia. You know,
Speaker 1: as soon as they stir they got guns. But then
Speaker 1: you know, Anton was like, we have everything from the
Speaker 1: anti ashes networks, everything we need apart from the weapons.
Speaker 1: So they had to sign up as a part of
Speaker 1: the territorial defense the weapons. So they're under the territorial
Speaker 1: defense as are you know, a hundreds of different people
Speaker 1: that did the same thing. Um. So luckily forward towards clan,
Speaker 1: I think because they're so close friends. I mean you
Speaker 1: can see it in the Dock, you know. I even
Speaker 1: the subtitle of our Dock is like, you know, this
Speaker 1: is a film about friendship, m violence and resistance, because
Speaker 1: that's essentially what it is, you know. So they're very
Speaker 1: close friends. So commanders have recognized that that, Yeah, this
Speaker 1: is a group that is disciplined as well. A lot
Speaker 1: of them are straight edge, which is actually a discipline
Speaker 1: in itself, you know what I mean. So they're very
Speaker 1: well disciplined. They're very good. You know, the training is
Speaker 1: very good. They know what they're doing. But they have
Speaker 1: like a commander that is from the Territorial Defense if
Speaker 1: you like. It's not he's not hood towards clan. He's
Speaker 1: never been assigned a commander sort of thing. Um, So
Speaker 1: they're being taught just the same kind of tactics as
Speaker 1: anybody else. As they're an RPG unit. I think, you know,
Speaker 1: there will be a lot of close quarters stuff, but
Speaker 1: they're just doing a lot of a lot of arms training.
Speaker 1: There's you know, Constantine and the dark. One of them
Speaker 1: is like, I just want to get better faster. They're
Speaker 1: just they're very they're very focused on being like not
Speaker 1: an elite unit, but they want to get it perfect.
Speaker 1: They're not just like, yeah, let's go and kill. They're like,
Speaker 1: now we have to be good, you know what I mean.
Speaker 1: We have to go in there and have the same
Speaker 1: discipline and organization as we had in the streets when
Speaker 1: we were fighting. There was a reason that they were
Speaker 1: renowned as being a good street fight in football, looking
Speaker 1: firm despite being completely outnumbered. It's because they had good discipline. Um,
Speaker 1: they're tough, they trained and also because they're good friends.
Speaker 1: They will have each other's back. It's it's not hobby
Speaker 1: for them as a lifestyle, you know. Um, yeah, it's
Speaker 1: just so much went into it, you know who plan
Speaker 1: started off the back of um anti fascist punk punk
Speaker 1: hardcore in Ukraine, and then that itself was a scene,
Speaker 1: and then the football organism and then yeah, and now
Speaker 1: it's it's crazy, really, it's it's honestly one of the
Speaker 1: most fascinating stories I've covered. Now they're fucking frontline unit,
Speaker 1: you know. It's it's sad and I hope to guard
Speaker 1: nothing happens to any of them. Probably the nicest guys
Speaker 1: are filmed with you know. Um and yeah, it's it's, it's,
Speaker 1: it's it's a good question on it. It's very tricky
Speaker 1: to know how it's going to happen for them once
Speaker 1: they're on the front. I mean, Anton, the main guy,
Speaker 1: he has served before, joined the militia to fight in
Speaker 1: the dom Bus. So they do have some experience, you know,
Speaker 1: and it does seem like um kind of their natural
Speaker 1: the skills that they've been developing, because there's there's broadly
Speaker 1: speaking from my understanding, kind of two main types of
Speaker 1: combat going on in Ukraine. There's the what you're seeing
Speaker 1: a lot in you know, the Don Boss, which is
Speaker 1: this kind of like meat grinder like frontline ship, and
Speaker 1: then there's sort of the seek and destroy kind of
Speaker 1: stuff where you've got people sort of hunting convoys and
Speaker 1: and doing ambushes. And it does strike me like these
Speaker 1: guys talents would lend themselves more to the ambushes then.
Speaker 1: I mean, there's not really any talent that helps you
Speaker 1: in the in the sitting in a trench meat grinder
Speaker 1: kind of ship. But obviously you don't have that choice
Speaker 1: when you're when you're serving under you know, the national military. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: it's I think you're right, like they would be much
Speaker 1: better um placed as like you know, I guess like
Speaker 1: a kind of shooting scoot kind of unit exactly. Yeah,
Speaker 1: And I think they will be because you know, the
Speaker 1: train with RPG UM some of their fighters already have
Speaker 1: javelins on the front um and and laws. So yeah,
Speaker 1: I think that's where it would be if they just
Speaker 1: put them in some kind of meat grind of position,
Speaker 1: which very much could happen, you know. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: bad for anybody, let's be realistic. It's getting very bad
Speaker 1: in the don Bass right tonight. Yeah, yeah, yeah, um,
Speaker 1: I mean, and that's one of the there's been posts
Speaker 1: and stuff from people talking about like, um, you know,
Speaker 1: the a lot of the funk ups that are happening
Speaker 1: because you know, Ukraine started this war with everyone being
Speaker 1: kind of overwhelmed by the competence of their military effort,
Speaker 1: and now that things in in the Don Boss have
Speaker 1: turned into this kind of ugly slug Um, there's been
Speaker 1: some you know, oh the you know units getting hit
Speaker 1: by their own our hillary fire, the kind of messy
Speaker 1: stuff that happens when you have a fight like this,
Speaker 1: right like it is it is unavoidable, um, when you
Speaker 1: have like a situation like has developed in the Dan Boss.
Speaker 1: But that doesn't make it any less unpleasant to endure
Speaker 1: as an actual soldier. Like it's just it's one of
Speaker 1: those I mean, there's only so much that like competence
Speaker 1: and training can do if you wind up getting squeezed
Speaker 1: into that kind of position. Yeah, And and there's this
Speaker 1: is why a lot of people are even Ukrainian has
Speaker 1: actually had a conversation with Ukrainian friend yesterday that was saying, like,
Speaker 1: you know, the situation is so bad in the East.
Speaker 1: We really need to be honest about this because you know,
Speaker 1: if people think it's going better than it is, Okay,
Speaker 1: it's good for morale, but it's not good for the
Speaker 1: guys on the ground, like they're not going to get
Speaker 1: what they need. And the reality is that it's getting
Speaker 1: really bad and it's not anything to do with incompetence
Speaker 1: from the fighters. It's just the war. The level is
Speaker 1: being so hot, and you know, Russia has learned from
Speaker 1: its mistakes unfortunately from the start where they can be
Speaker 1: funked up. But now you know, things are getting a
Speaker 1: little bit Harry, Um, Ukrainians are doing like an incredible effort.
Speaker 1: But again it's like, yeah, you're talking about decades and
Speaker 1: decades of armor and you know, um weapons that Russia
Speaker 1: has and it's all very well, us being like, oh
Speaker 1: it's their armor is blah blah. I doubt it, you know,
Speaker 1: I very much doubt that. Um, it doesn't look like that,
Speaker 1: certainly from when people I'm talking to in the East.
Speaker 1: You know, so I think again, when when you know
Speaker 1: Ukrainians are like, well we do need more weapons, it's
Speaker 1: because they need more weapons, you know what I mean,
Speaker 1: they really do. Well, this is like one of the
Speaker 1: This is uh one of the things that's that's difficult
Speaker 1: to I think get across to people, um, because there
Speaker 1: is such a you know that we are dealing with
Speaker 1: the legacy of decades of shipping weapons places, um, and
Speaker 1: not having that helped the conflict in a lot of
Speaker 1: in a lot of ways, um, in decades of stories
Speaker 1: like you know, all the weapons that got sent to
Speaker 1: the Iraqi government and then wound up in isis is
Speaker 1: Marie and ship um, which creates kind of an easy
Speaker 1: narrative for folks who are like, well, you know, you're
Speaker 1: just trying to prolong the conflict in making it worse
Speaker 1: by shipping and weapons. But the reality is one side
Speaker 1: of this war has a substantial percentage of all of
Speaker 1: the artillery that exists on the planet. Yeah, and the
Speaker 1: other side does not. Yeah. And I do understand the
Speaker 1: argument though, Like I totally get it, but it's it's
Speaker 1: I lived through the early two thousand's as well, I
Speaker 1: understand it. It's like war isn't a template. It's not
Speaker 1: like does this happened there, this will happened there or whatever,
Speaker 1: And it's like you have to weigh up no matter
Speaker 1: what bad is going to come from this, Do you
Speaker 1: want the bad to be Okay, there's a problem with
Speaker 1: arms in Eastern Ukraine, which the Eastern Europe, which there
Speaker 1: already is, and it gets worse. Or do you want
Speaker 1: the bad problem to be Russia has taken over the
Speaker 1: whole country, massacred everybody and is unlike undoubtly going to
Speaker 1: try and move into other countries. Do you want aids
Speaker 1: or do you want cancer? I don't know, you know
Speaker 1: what I mean? Indeed, do you want the Do you
Speaker 1: want the lesson from this to be that if you're
Speaker 1: just willing to burn a couple of hundred thousand human
Speaker 1: lives as a state like Russia or any other state,
Speaker 1: you can easily gain access to, you know, a pile
Speaker 1: of wealth right in the shape of a country. Um,
Speaker 1: which isn't a positive. It's not like a good lesson
Speaker 1: for anyone to take out of this. But like if
Speaker 1: if that's the lesson, right, yeah, yeah, no, that's the reality.
Speaker 1: Like it's all very nice having a fifty tweet Twitter
Speaker 1: threat about why this that and referred should or shouldn't happen,
Speaker 1: But that's just completely removed from real life. I mean,
Speaker 1: a real life is it's going to be very bad,
Speaker 1: very nasty, no matter what happens, and you just have
Speaker 1: to weigh. Oh I don't like natso oh I don't
Speaker 1: like this. Yeah, I mean either, but I care about
Speaker 1: people that die for no reason, you know, Like I
Speaker 1: think that's the real issue. Um. I think people need
Speaker 1: to stand with the people, you know, and if that
Speaker 1: means okay, use the tools that you have, Okay, Like,
Speaker 1: oh I don't like nats. We yeah, but they're going
Speaker 1: to give them. What do you think that Ukrainians like
Speaker 1: having Russian firearms? Probably not. But they also don't give
Speaker 1: a ship because they shoot. It's it's that simple, you know,
Speaker 1: kind of coming back to the subject of your documentary. Um,
Speaker 1: if weapons are going to be going over there, and
Speaker 1: by god they are, um I I would hope that
Speaker 1: as many of them as possible are going into the
Speaker 1: hands of people like the Hoods Hood's client, right, yeah,
Speaker 1: um yeah, I mean that is that is a yeah,
Speaker 1: a lot. There's definitely this isn't from them telling me,
Speaker 1: but it's just from research I've done. There's definitely a
Speaker 1: discrepancy in terms of which groups get what weapons. And
Speaker 1: it's not based on ideology, but it's definitely based on
Speaker 1: some serious paroxy that needs to be sorted out. You know.
Speaker 1: I have some some Western volunteers that I know that
Speaker 1: are on the front right now, and they're saying, like,
Speaker 1: for some reason, you know, one unit that is not
Speaker 1: an RPG unit, for example, will have more rockets than
Speaker 1: the RPG unit, you know, And it's like, what like,
Speaker 1: And that's not because they've used the more. It's it's
Speaker 1: it's supply lines are again. It's it's not even corruption.
Speaker 1: Often it's just supply lines are wrecked or whatever. But
Speaker 1: it has to be addressed as to be looked at.
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm no tactician. I don't know anything about
Speaker 1: that side of things. I'm just basing on what you know,
Speaker 1: people are telling me, because you know, I like to
Speaker 1: talk to them and hear what's happening. Yeah. Um, I
Speaker 1: think we should move into you know, when I when
Speaker 1: I pull up your documentary on YouTube, which is again
Speaker 1: for folks at home, titled Ukraine's anti fascist football Hooligans
Speaker 1: Fighting the Russian Invasion, the first thing that I see
Speaker 1: is this video maybe inappropriate for some users. Um yeah's yeah, well,
Speaker 1: and it's We've talked a lot on our various shows
Speaker 1: on this network about all of the fascist propaganda that
Speaker 1: you can find and not even find on YouTube that
Speaker 1: will be like spoon fed. Do you if you wind
Speaker 1: up like watching a video game review or something. Um, yeah,
Speaker 1: this is something that you've been dealing with, unpopular front.
Speaker 1: Somebody seems to have like an ax to grind with
Speaker 1: you guys. I don't know. Maybe it's just the algorithm,
Speaker 1: but I'll be honest, I I felt like it was
Speaker 1: to the algorithm until this recent one. Right. So so yeah,
Speaker 1: like you said, if people want to fight, I mean
Speaker 1: the dogs called front Line who looking? But yeah, the
Speaker 1: for s c O. Um, yeah, it's it's Ukraine's anti
Speaker 1: fascists fighting Russian invasion. Um. But yeah, the second it
Speaker 1: was uploaded it got age restricted. Now that to me
Speaker 1: is very odd. I don't get why there's no gore
Speaker 1: in it. Um. Okay, yeah, there's violence, but there's a
Speaker 1: guideline where you can show violence in if it's relative
Speaker 1: to report in, which obviously it is because it's an
Speaker 1: anti fascist football looking firm fighting Russia. So of course
Speaker 1: we're going to show what that looks like. But there's
Speaker 1: there's no there's no gore. Um, there's no there's there's
Speaker 1: just it's just lads hanging out talking about their lives
Speaker 1: now they've been tipped upside down and how they really
Speaker 1: dislike the far right. Now. To give you an idea
Speaker 1: of how messed up this is, UM, there's a real,
Speaker 1: a real parasite YouTuber. It's called Danny Mullen and he
Speaker 1: has a video on YouTube where him and his his
Speaker 1: friend both for them scoundrels go to the con border
Speaker 1: and the whole video is trying to get with quote
Speaker 1: like hot Ukrainian refugees. Now, it's the most disgusting thing
Speaker 1: you've ever seen. They're praying on young girls, some of
Speaker 1: them are very clearly underage. UM. And that is monetized.
Speaker 1: That is monetized, and it is even on the algorithm.
Speaker 1: I found it because I was watching Ukraine war stuff
Speaker 1: and it was put onto my recommended. Now, these are
Speaker 1: the biggest parasites you've ever seen in your life. UM.
Speaker 1: And they have hundreds and hundreds of thousands of subscribers
Speaker 1: and they're making money from content like that that is
Speaker 1: not age restricted. There is no censorship thing, There is
Speaker 1: no message saying this might be offensive. But a documentary
Speaker 1: which is one journalistic covering anti fascists fighting one of
Speaker 1: the worst invasions we've seen in Europe is suddenly deemed
Speaker 1: inappropriate and his age restricted on YouTube. Tell me what's
Speaker 1: going on there that doesn't seem right to me. So
Speaker 1: basically you tube by doing that as saying we're actually
Speaker 1: happy to make money off of people that exploit under
Speaker 1: rage Ukrainian refugees, but we're not happy for people showing
Speaker 1: the world a different side to the war. That to
Speaker 1: me is madness, Like it doesn't make any sense to me,
Speaker 1: you know, And it's nothing but soft censorship. Some people
Speaker 1: are tell him it's not it's not censorship. Of course,
Speaker 1: it is censorship. This is the way the world works now, Yeah,
Speaker 1: because I mean a huge chunk of the success or
Speaker 1: the visibility of anything that you're putting on YouTube is
Speaker 1: whether or not the algorithm is going to like suggest
Speaker 1: it to people, even people who have watched you or
Speaker 1: other like that. Not even talking about like suggesting it
Speaker 1: to somebody who's never heard of popular front, but like
Speaker 1: people who have watched multiple things that you've done and
Speaker 1: are just on YouTube. The thing that would make sense
Speaker 1: is for when you put out a new thing them
Speaker 1: to get like YouTube to be like, hey, we know
Speaker 1: you've watched the ship check out this, but that's not
Speaker 1: going to happen for a lot of folks because of
Speaker 1: this kind of thing, which is yeah fucked up, Yeah
Speaker 1: yeah right. And it's like it's not just me that
Speaker 1: like I mean, it's other people it's happening as well.
Speaker 1: And basically what it is is if we wanted somebody
Speaker 1: the doc somehow be allowed to be monetized or not
Speaker 1: even monitored. I don't even want the monetizes the whole
Speaker 1: channel is demonetized. I just want it to not be restricted,
Speaker 1: because that is an algorithm torpedo. And you know, it's
Speaker 1: like I would have to rec the whole documentary essentially
Speaker 1: sense of myself, my own journalism, make you excuse me,
Speaker 1: make the integrity of the doc weaker, just to be
Speaker 1: able people to see it like this is war, this
Speaker 1: is real life. I just it's just really depressing, you know,
Speaker 1: And this is something I mean, YouTube, Twitter, Facebook have
Speaker 1: all been guilty of degrees of this, but there's this
Speaker 1: of all other things that don't that that are allowed
Speaker 1: to spread unchecked on those platforms, they have this consistent
Speaker 1: maybe because it's it's easier to algorithmically go after But this,
Speaker 1: this consistent pattern of going after war journalism, um, and
Speaker 1: like your you know, what's happening to your documentary is
Speaker 1: a piece of this, But like the much scarier pieces,
Speaker 1: a tremendous amount of documentation of war crimes in places
Speaker 1: like Syria have been deleted um kind of automatically over
Speaker 1: the years, which means that like again, evidence of crimes
Speaker 1: against humanity has been lost forever because of these kind
Speaker 1: of like purges of of war content that um, I
Speaker 1: don't think are actually protecting anybody from anything, but are
Speaker 1: are perhaps even making things worse. Yeah, of course, and
Speaker 1: it and it allows um, look Russian propaganda or whatever like,
Speaker 1: people are going to seek that out and they're going
Speaker 1: to digest it whatever way they can. So then surely
Speaker 1: you should say, okay, take the brakes off. Let's you
Speaker 1: know if you care, which I mean YouTube is a
Speaker 1: media platform. You would think that they would say, okay, well,
Speaker 1: this is kind of our duty to balance it out,
Speaker 1: to allow all the free information. I'm not even saying,
Speaker 1: oh yeah, through all Russian propaganda. I think people have
Speaker 1: a choice to see whatever they want to see, even
Speaker 1: if it is completely ridiculous but the fact that they're
Speaker 1: they're censoring the stuff that you you would think is
Speaker 1: okay to see because for for for I know, you
Speaker 1: know our content that you won't find a lie in
Speaker 1: that documentary. You know, we're very honest, very frank with
Speaker 1: the situation. We're not white washing fascism in Ukraine. Um.
Speaker 1: And we're certainly not putting out Russian propaganda. We're just
Speaker 1: telling an interesting journalistic story. So you would think as
Speaker 1: a media platform that would be like yeah, right up
Speaker 1: there street, but it's not really a media platform is
Speaker 1: a money making platform, and you know, they just they
Speaker 1: just survived for adverts yep. Um. And I think that
Speaker 1: is kind of where we're gonna We're gonna leave off
Speaker 1: for the day unless you have Do you have anything
Speaker 1: else you wanted to get into on your documentary, Jake, no, man,
Speaker 1: I just I guess the last thing I would say
Speaker 1: is I want people to kind of know that there
Speaker 1: are many different factions out there. This isn't you know.
Speaker 1: I saw some comment being like, oh, you found the
Speaker 1: only fascists and anti fascists in Ukraine. It's like, no,
Speaker 1: there's there's literally I've been documenting them. There's thousands there's
Speaker 1: so many, you know, and not just like oh, anti fascists, yeah,
Speaker 1: we this is what we believe, like people forming units.
Speaker 1: There's a whole pipeline of um anti authoritarian activists there.
Speaker 1: There's loads and generally like Ukrainians um happy. You know,
Speaker 1: they'll they'll take that out they can get. It's not
Speaker 1: like Ukrainians are like god damn those anti fascists. Not
Speaker 1: they love them. They love them the same way they
Speaker 1: love anybody that's defending the country. You know. It's it's
Speaker 1: just normal and I think people should really, you know,
Speaker 1: if they want to watch our doctor as well, like
Speaker 1: if they can share it, that would be great because
Speaker 1: it's just very it's a struggle to get people to
Speaker 1: watch it now because of because if it's been torpedo
Speaker 1: on the algorithm. So if they go to YouTube dot
Speaker 1: com slash popular Front, they'll find it's the first dot there.
Speaker 1: But yeah, people can share it. I'll be great, all right,
Speaker 1: We'll check it out again. The title is Ukraine's anti
Speaker 1: fascist football hooligans fighting the Russian Invasion on the Popular
Speaker 1: Front YouTube channel. We're also going to have a link
Speaker 1: in the bio. If you are someone who doesn't like
Speaker 1: the type things. Yeah, thank you, Jake. All right, everybody,
Speaker 1: that's the episode. Welcome to Tack. It happen here, a
Speaker 1: show that is currently taking lace in the death abortion
Speaker 1: rights in the US. And yeah, it's not good. Um
Speaker 1: with me to talk about this is sharene Is Sophie,
Speaker 1: is Garrison, and is Robert Evans And okay, So what
Speaker 1: one of one of the things that's been happening in
Speaker 1: the immediate wake of the Supreme Court decision that has
Speaker 1: destroyed Review Wade is there's been a lot of discussion
Speaker 1: about the abortion rights movement in Mexico. And by discussion,
Speaker 1: I mean in sort of classical American fashion. People saw
Speaker 1: exactly one meme and reposted it and that's now the
Speaker 1: sum of like all American knowledge about the abortion struggle
Speaker 1: in Mexico. So to try to get a deeper understanding
Speaker 1: of what's been going on in Mexico and how the
Speaker 1: struggle for abortion was one there, we're talking to Erica Yamada,
Speaker 1: who's a feminist and human rights activist born and raised
Speaker 1: in Mexico. Erica, thank you so much for joining us. Yeah,
Speaker 1: thank you, and you so much. Chris sharing so figures
Speaker 1: and and Robert I'm so honored and excited to be
Speaker 1: here and very grateful to be considered to share about
Speaker 1: the struggle for abortion rights in Mexico. So before starting
Speaker 1: this discussion, I would like to share a little bit
Speaker 1: about myself and the organization I work in to have
Speaker 1: some background about the experiences and data I will be
Speaker 1: communicating in this space. UM I have been involved in
Speaker 1: many agendas for girls and women's rights for approximately eight
Speaker 1: years now. I am currently part of the Woman Delivered
Speaker 1: twenty twenty class and I also work in the non
Speaker 1: governmental organization Gender Quality, Citizenship, Work and Family that has
Speaker 1: over twenty five years of experience working for sexual and
Speaker 1: productive rights in Mexico, particularly for the access to leave
Speaker 1: goal and safe abortion. Our organization promotes and advocate for
Speaker 1: the sexual and reproductive health and right of use through
Speaker 1: that They Said. That They Said is the network for
Speaker 1: sexual and reproductive rights in Mexico that has presence in
Speaker 1: tolve states and we focus mainly on marginalized communities. We
Speaker 1: support children, use women and advocate for change at local, regional,
Speaker 1: and national level and their access is contributing to the
Speaker 1: criminalize abortion, guarenting access to to health services and generate
Speaker 1: a favorable public opinion about women's right to decide. We
Speaker 1: are also part of the National Court Choice Alliance in
Speaker 1: Mexico and effort of bi organizations General Equality, the Population
Speaker 1: Council EPAS Central America, Catholics for the Right to Decide
Speaker 1: and heat It, each with different expertise regarding abortion. Together
Speaker 1: we have worked on comprehensive strategies that include the legal,
Speaker 1: the social, religious, ethical and investigation aspects of abortion and well,
Speaker 1: I would like to start up like sharing some of
Speaker 1: the context and the legal situation of abortion in Mexico
Speaker 1: if it's okay or or in our country, Voluntary abortion
Speaker 1: UH during the twelve weeks of pregnancy is legalized only
Speaker 1: in certain states. Mexico City, the capital, was the only
Speaker 1: state in the whole country that they criminalized abortion into
Speaker 1: two thousand seven. Twelve years later, in two thousand nineteen,
Speaker 1: the state of of Wahaca became the second state twenty
Speaker 1: sure access to this health service. Afterwards, two thousand twenty
Speaker 1: one was historic. It was a very very historic year.
Speaker 1: It was for states Evaluo Vera, Cruz Bacca, California and
Speaker 1: Polyma also the criminalized abortion. Then this year two thousand
Speaker 1: twenty two, three other states have been added to this
Speaker 1: list Sinaloa, Guerrero and California. This means nine out of
Speaker 1: thirty two states have the criminalized abortion. In the other
Speaker 1: states of the Mexican Republic, abortion is only allowed under
Speaker 1: certain grounds established by the law of each entity. For example,
Speaker 1: if it was a companeous abortion, if the pregnancy was
Speaker 1: due to non consensual insemination, if the woman's life is
Speaker 1: in danger of death, if the product pas serious genetic alterations,
Speaker 1: if the pregnancy causes health effects, among other reasons. It
Speaker 1: depends on each Plano code of each state. And I
Speaker 1: also must add that pregnancy due to right is the
Speaker 1: only indication that permits legal abortion in all states. And
Speaker 1: now coming back to what Chris said that there was
Speaker 1: like a meme. I think, uh, you refer to the
Speaker 1: name of the public protests. Yeah, yeah, yeah, the black
Speaker 1: clad female protesters attacking is it? I couldn't tell. I
Speaker 1: don't recall it's a city hall or a police station
Speaker 1: or something. I I have also seen some of these
Speaker 1: media reports that that they say that we achieve legal
Speaker 1: abortion thanks to these radical public demonstrations, and well, it
Speaker 1: is undeniable that among the most significant achievements is the
Speaker 1: pro mobilization of feminists and women to eradicate violence and
Speaker 1: learn justice Mexico. Mexico has demonstrated the world the revolutionary
Speaker 1: progress with the mass feminist protests and this image is
Speaker 1: from two thousand nineteen. It was a huge feminist protest
Speaker 1: that are condemned violence against women, especially sexual and feminist
Speaker 1: side violence, police brutality, and the intunity that permeates the
Speaker 1: governmental system. We received a lot of internet national media
Speaker 1: attention and it has been one of the like the
Speaker 1: recent highlights of the feminist movement in our country. But
Speaker 1: like the struggle for abortion entails so much more, and
Speaker 1: yes it did have some influence. For example, in two
Speaker 1: thousand twenty, feminists in two states, Quintana and Puebla took
Speaker 1: their local congresses and demanded the discussion of abortion initiatives,
Speaker 1: and they have put this agenda on the table. It
Speaker 1: is worth mentioning that the struggle for abortion that it
Speaker 1: goes back so many years. Feminists have been fighting for
Speaker 1: reproductive rights, including the access to legal abortion for that
Speaker 1: it's now the progress regarding this struggle has unfolded historically
Speaker 1: during the recent years. For many other reasons, One thing
Speaker 1: I want to go back to a little bit to
Speaker 1: talk about is you were talking about the protests being
Speaker 1: pro abortion protests but also talking about antifemicide and anti
Speaker 1: violent stuff, and I was wondering if you could talk
Speaker 1: about the anti femicide it campaigns too, because that's been
Speaker 1: a really big part of this that gets basically no
Speaker 1: coverage in the US. Well, in Mexico, eleven women are
Speaker 1: murdered every day. We have a huge femicide problem that
Speaker 1: has been silenced by the government, even by the president
Speaker 1: who minimizes this horrible situation. So in two thousand nineteen
Speaker 1: there was a UH emblematic case where police officers rape
Speaker 1: and tortured a row and that's how this protest UH
Speaker 1: started and since all the two thousand nineteen, like most
Speaker 1: feminist protests, have been regarding the violence against women. But UH,
Speaker 1: I would also like to add about the struggle for abortion.
Speaker 1: I think that in the global cells the mare, the
Speaker 1: green type it played like the most fundamental roles. UH.
Speaker 1: This movement, which came from Argentina, is one of the
Speaker 1: main successes that strengthened the struggle for abortion rights and
Speaker 1: even the feminist movement in Mexico. It expanded in many
Speaker 1: countries including Mexico. Here we have a national Green Type
Speaker 1: and many local Green type in all of our space,
Speaker 1: and these collectives have played a large role demanding social
Speaker 1: and legal thecuminalization of abortion across the country. And there
Speaker 1: is also an increase of networks that provides self managed
Speaker 1: abortion information and accompaniment services, which have contributed to fighting
Speaker 1: the stigma that still surrounds abortion. And the Green Tide
Speaker 1: and the feminist movement, it's it has become like how
Speaker 1: do you say it's been merged merg and like feminist
Speaker 1: movements and the Green Tide fight for legal and safe abortion,
Speaker 1: but also to radicate the violence against girls and women. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that makes that makes sense. And about the Green Tide,
Speaker 1: I have two questions about the Green Tide. One is
Speaker 1: what kinds of tactics have Green Tide groups been doing?
Speaker 1: And also how how linked have the international movement has been?
Speaker 1: Like how how close how closely have these organization has
Speaker 1: been communicating across and working together across the different countries? Okay, uh?
Speaker 1: Since the Green Tide came from Argentina like the most,
Speaker 1: how do you say the the communication comes from regional
Speaker 1: countries in Latin America and Mexico has been learning from
Speaker 1: these Latin American countries the experiences we have seen the
Speaker 1: feminist movements, the protests also more in the South and
Speaker 1: the the green handkerchief has this very very powerful symbol
Speaker 1: of legal and safe abortion, and these have also contributed
Speaker 1: to the social be communalization of abortion. And wearing the
Speaker 1: green handkerchiefs and in the protest also means demanding this
Speaker 1: health service. And one of our tactics is of course
Speaker 1: pressuring the government. In Mexico. Political will, primarily from the
Speaker 1: left leaning ruling party, has been fundamental for for the becommunalization.
Speaker 1: With the new government that I wade in two thousand
Speaker 1: eighteen headed by Andreo, we have more allies and progressive legislators.
Speaker 1: So due to the majority uh that this political party
Speaker 1: has in many local converses, the feminists of each state
Speaker 1: have been able to pressure and work with these legislators
Speaker 1: and keep pushing this agenda. That's awesome. I think something
Speaker 1: that I'm still stuck on is that at the very
Speaker 1: least all the states agree that abortion is okay if
Speaker 1: it happened from from rape. Is that what you said earlier?
Speaker 1: Like that's the one we we have a federal lot.
Speaker 1: It's the zero forty six met official Mexican norm that
Speaker 1: states that abortion is legal if the pregnancy is due
Speaker 1: to rape, and all the states, all the public officials
Speaker 1: have this obligation to to ensure that this that this happens.
Speaker 1: But sometimes, um, like we we have so many prejudices
Speaker 1: that sometimes even doctors don't respect the law. But by
Speaker 1: not it should be legal. And it's not that they
Speaker 1: all agree, it's the it's the one. Yeah, it's just so,
Speaker 1: I mean, it's definitely has its flaws and people with
Speaker 1: their own biases. But like here, usually the rapists will
Speaker 1: have more rights and protection than the person that got raped.
Speaker 1: Like there are the family is allowed to sue the
Speaker 1: person that got an abortion, for example. It's it's insane,
Speaker 1: but so for then here, a lot of it, a
Speaker 1: lot of the biggotry comes from like Christianity and religion.
Speaker 1: Is it the same, like is that the baseline for
Speaker 1: the opposition there too? Yes, because Mexico is a predominantly
Speaker 1: Catholic country and abortion and feels many controversies due to
Speaker 1: the different positions that are come from this. Religious stances
Speaker 1: is stances that ignore and deny the access to this
Speaker 1: service and deny it's a human rights issue. And religious
Speaker 1: anti rights groups or how how do you say anti
Speaker 1: choice groups have a powerful presence and are actively hindering
Speaker 1: law proposals regarding this topic. The prejudices and stigma are
Speaker 1: present even amongst healthcare providers and sometimes uh the religious people.
Speaker 1: They pressure these healthcare providers, the legislators. For example, every
Speaker 1: time there is a line on local congress. There are
Speaker 1: so many religious groups outside the Congress. They are how
Speaker 1: do you say, like bothering the legislators. They even get
Speaker 1: their personal numbers and they are harassing them. Yes, harassing
Speaker 1: is the work. They're harassing them. So yes, they have
Speaker 1: a lot of power, a lot of money, and these
Speaker 1: effects even the states where abortion is legal, because as
Speaker 1: I said before, sometimes doctors denied it even if it's
Speaker 1: requested under the legal indications. So yes, it's a problem.
Speaker 1: I'm curious what you see as kind of the value
Speaker 1: of the street actions that were carried out as opposed
Speaker 1: to um kind of the the actual organization on the
Speaker 1: legislative side of things, Like what what degree do you
Speaker 1: think both contributed to, you know, the successes that you
Speaker 1: all have seen. I think both were very very important
Speaker 1: to the recent successes. The public demonstrations help the feminist
Speaker 1: movements strengthened. Like it is like yes, this recent protests
Speaker 1: have been the what do you say? It has been
Speaker 1: where the most women have gone out to the streets,
Speaker 1: taken the streets, and it has helped because the government
Speaker 1: has responded to some of our request. But also it
Speaker 1: is extremely important too to talk about the organization. And also, Uh,
Speaker 1: something I didn't mention and that I would like to
Speaker 1: emphasize is that in two thousand twenty one, the Supreme
Speaker 1: Court of Justice in Mexico ruled favorably in four abortion
Speaker 1: related cases, and this provided us with with progressive jurisprudence
Speaker 1: and legal interpretations in favor of recognizing an increasing abortion right.
Speaker 1: So this has how do you say, this has served
Speaker 1: our movement and all the argumentation to push the decriminalizations.
Speaker 1: And well, about the four cases. In the first case,
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court declared that limitations to access legal abortion
Speaker 1: after it must be removed. In the second case, it
Speaker 1: declared that the absolute criminalization of abortion with consent is unconstitutional. Uh.
Speaker 1: And in the third case is it declared that the
Speaker 1: protection of life from the moment of conception is unconstitutional.
Speaker 1: And in the fourth case, the court ruled that legislative
Speaker 1: reforms broadening the boundaries of conscientiens objection in that federal
Speaker 1: health law are unconstitutional. And the Supreme Court is the
Speaker 1: highest court of justice in Mexico and all judges should
Speaker 1: respect what they established. And well, unfortunately it doesn't happen
Speaker 1: in all states. And what it is like the most
Speaker 1: important president we we have right now, and it is
Speaker 1: fundamental for our argumentation in local congresses. I have has
Speaker 1: the national government done anything at all to try to
Speaker 1: force the states who are like not following the rulings too,
Speaker 1: like except the rulings. No, because our president uh he
Speaker 1: he is very neutral in this topic, and he has
Speaker 1: spoken against feminist movements and he thinks that any protest
Speaker 1: means like uh, conservators against his liberal government. So now
Speaker 1: we we don't have this this support from the national government,
Speaker 1: although assignmenttioned before. We have a lot of allies and
Speaker 1: in many instances that have helped to pressure state state
Speaker 1: public officials too to respect a law and to keep
Speaker 1: pushing this agenda. Is the president. I'm just curious and
Speaker 1: I'm ignorant that is the president? Like, well, how is
Speaker 1: he received by the general public, Like what people's like,
Speaker 1: is he neutral because he needs a coward because there
Speaker 1: wasn't one of the rockety votes? But what all right,
Speaker 1: what's the response for the public. He he still has
Speaker 1: a lot of support from from the majority. He he
Speaker 1: is one of the the first how do you stay
Speaker 1: progressive presidents, Although we have been very disappointed by many
Speaker 1: of his actions, for instance the increase of militarization and
Speaker 1: the communalization of feminists, of human rights activists, of journalists. However,
Speaker 1: it is the first time in so many years that
Speaker 1: a president talks about poor indigenous people that uh sends
Speaker 1: support to rural communities. So he still has a lot
Speaker 1: of support. M UM. One thing that I don't know
Speaker 1: how much. I don't know how much you want to
Speaker 1: get into it, but UM we talked to some people,
Speaker 1: Oh god, I don't remember how many months ago now,
Speaker 1: but we talked to some people a while back who
Speaker 1: were UM doing trans rights organizing in Mexico, and they
Speaker 1: were talking a lot about how UM that they were
Speaker 1: talking about how I guess like anti choice conservative groups
Speaker 1: have been using UM have been using sort of organized
Speaker 1: transphobic groups as a way to sort of different attention
Speaker 1: away from the abortion struggle, in the femicide struggle into
Speaker 1: stuff that doesn't like challenges that is quo And yeah,
Speaker 1: and I was wondering, I just wanted to talk about
Speaker 1: that a little bit. Yes, thank you so much for
Speaker 1: talking about this transphobia and in the feminist movements is horrible.
Speaker 1: Like the Transforbaic feminists have been getting to conservative public officials,
Speaker 1: they have been approaching religious groups, and they have even
Speaker 1: affected the abortion agenda because some of our laws include
Speaker 1: people with the capacity to get pregnant. So these health
Speaker 1: services include ah, trans meant and non binary people. But
Speaker 1: this Transforbaic feminists have been how do you say, obstaculizing.
Speaker 1: There's this struggle because of these prejudices, and it is
Speaker 1: very very sad. And some of are some of the
Speaker 1: main and most famous reference references and feminism have been
Speaker 1: signing this transphobic side. And yes, they are approaching to
Speaker 1: the ultra right, and they they have been hindering not
Speaker 1: only trans people's rights, but now women's rights. In Gentlemary, Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think was it. I'm trying to remember off top
Speaker 1: of my head. I think that there was there was
Speaker 1: a picture that was going around. That was some of
Speaker 1: the organizers from one of the Lake trans phobic feminist collectives.
Speaker 1: I like taking pictures with sleeping held around. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: think I think it was sleeping held around. Yeah, but
Speaker 1: I don't know. I haven't seen that. But there was
Speaker 1: a forum some weeks ago. It was a forum in
Speaker 1: the National Altonomous University of Mexico, and it was a
Speaker 1: feminist on discussion and most of the familists who are
Speaker 1: so so famous in all Latin America started to say
Speaker 1: some transpulbic points. So, yes, this anti rights movement is
Speaker 1: very present and in feminism. Yeah, I guess. The other
Speaker 1: thing on that point that I was wondering is how
Speaker 1: have like pro trans feminists been sort of fighting back
Speaker 1: against these people. Has that been happening a lot? Uh, well,
Speaker 1: we're trying, but it has been very, very difficult because
Speaker 1: literally there are transpolic people everywhere everywhere, I mean government
Speaker 1: and non governmental organizations and institutions, and the majority of
Speaker 1: the people are not well these says um socially conscious
Speaker 1: about about trans right, so transport with people who have
Speaker 1: so much more power, but uh, sometimes we we denounce
Speaker 1: it in social media. We reported to two international organizations
Speaker 1: and like, we have all the human rights narrative and
Speaker 1: argumentation in our favor, but it is difficult because there
Speaker 1: are so many trans transports everywhere. Um. We have also
Speaker 1: contacted international organizations to to publicly say that, for example,
Speaker 1: if you want to access a certain grant, you have
Speaker 1: to have an inclusive position. What other ways, uh, we
Speaker 1: like the trans movement has strengthened so much since two
Speaker 1: thousand nineteen because in Mexico City, um uh, the a
Speaker 1: lot to recognize trans children and adolescents was pushed for
Speaker 1: the for the first time, like via the ministative way.
Speaker 1: So there has been how do you say, a commission
Speaker 1: of of trans organizations collectives. So I think that is
Speaker 1: the the most noteworthy thing progress. Yeah, I guess there's
Speaker 1: been a lot of people like looking to the green
Speaker 1: tide and looking to sort of the broader Latin American
Speaker 1: feminist movement for sort of inspiration and also for sort
Speaker 1: of tactical advice. And I was wondering, what, like, what
Speaker 1: advice would you give people in the US who are
Speaker 1: coming into this fight now, and where would you send
Speaker 1: people to learn more stuff about it? Mm hmm. There
Speaker 1: some some key points I consider relevant is firstly the
Speaker 1: visibility of the pro choice agenda and the social ecommunalization
Speaker 1: of abortion. When we talk about Lettle abortion, we we
Speaker 1: have to emphasize a lot also on the social the communalization.
Speaker 1: It is very important to work on strategies to to
Speaker 1: reduce statema and demonstrate that abortion is a common reproductive
Speaker 1: event that must be approached using gender perspective and the
Speaker 1: human rights framework. We we encourage public dissemination of the legal,
Speaker 1: medical and social information with with hard sustained data from
Speaker 1: international organizations that position abortion as a as a human
Speaker 1: right and an essential health service. And related to this
Speaker 1: first point, the narrative and the argumentation, we have to
Speaker 1: focus um the access to save from legal abortion as
Speaker 1: a human rights issue, which means it's a governmental obligation
Speaker 1: to ensure access to this service. On our case Mexico
Speaker 1: as nationally and international commitments regarding girls and women's rights,
Speaker 1: and I'm pretty share the United States also has this commitments,
Speaker 1: so it's their obligation, it's the government's obligation to to
Speaker 1: ensure and also regarding their narrative, we have to work
Speaker 1: on naturalizing abortion and encourage people to stop using this
Speaker 1: word as a crime. Abortion is a human right and
Speaker 1: it is a reproductive event in the life of women
Speaker 1: and people with a capacity to get pregnant. And it's
Speaker 1: a reproductive event that has always existed and will always exist,
Speaker 1: either naturally or induced. And some of the organizations that
Speaker 1: I know of here that that can provide information are
Speaker 1: the Poor Choice Alliance, organizations, Catholics for the Right to Decide.
Speaker 1: They can give the religious and ethical arguments. UM my
Speaker 1: organization Gender Quality, we have the social argumentations. We re
Speaker 1: a company and work with with the girls and women.
Speaker 1: We we are in twelve states and we are in
Speaker 1: the mobilizations. We are in the state on the local congresses.
Speaker 1: Also Heated Heated in Spanish is utiful informers. They have
Speaker 1: all the legal expertise UH and they worked this reforms
Speaker 1: and lost with the criminalized abortion. We have EPAS. EPAS
Speaker 1: is an international organization and they are medical experts and
Speaker 1: they provide all types of data and information regarding this
Speaker 1: part and the Population Council. They are the experts on
Speaker 1: monitoring and investigation and they have many research papers and well.
Speaker 1: There are also like other pages that that can give
Speaker 1: information for example about these they self induced abortion the
Speaker 1: health organization has a protocol. It's a public protocol for
Speaker 1: for self induced abortion, and it is completely safe to
Speaker 1: do it at home. Well, I really appreciate all the information.
Speaker 1: Uh yeah, thank you so much. Yeah, thank you so much.
Speaker 1: I think it's really helpful to hear um what other
Speaker 1: countries have done in the same struggle. It's like so
Speaker 1: similar but different, the say at the same time, because
Speaker 1: we've dealt with the same similar things like turfs and
Speaker 1: religious like opposition and everything. So it's really helpful, I think,
Speaker 1: to see to realize that first of all, it is
Speaker 1: a basic human right, like it's not even it's like
Speaker 1: internationally an issue. And then just to see how other
Speaker 1: people have organized it's really important, I think, yes, And
Speaker 1: now I believe that we have like kind of a
Speaker 1: similar situation whether well, it's a situation of legal discrimination
Speaker 1: in which only women who live or have the resources
Speaker 1: to travel to the states that have the criminalized abortion
Speaker 1: can exercise the right who a voluntary legal interruption of
Speaker 1: their pregnancy? Am I right? Because I like, I don't
Speaker 1: know much about the situation and the United States, but
Speaker 1: I know that it is legal in some states, right, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: some states. And then like in contrast to that, it's
Speaker 1: like legal even in case of rape, and like the
Speaker 1: people that have been raped can be suited. It's like
Speaker 1: a very like up and down kind of balance. Um.
Speaker 1: But yeah, there's definitely both that exists, and I think
Speaker 1: that's where it becomes really hard to extinguish the bad side.
Speaker 1: It's part part of our struggle to be criminalized abortion
Speaker 1: in the other states is because woman who who live
Speaker 1: in poverty and marginalized conditions, who want to have an
Speaker 1: abortion but reside in other states where it's illegal, kind
Speaker 1: of do so under legal circumstances. So it's also a
Speaker 1: class problem. Its yeah, definitely. And also in Mexico there
Speaker 1: are some states that even criminalize us contaneous abortion. It
Speaker 1: it wasn't even induced and instead of calling an ambuments,
Speaker 1: some people called the cubs when when a woman is
Speaker 1: dying because of christ containous abortion. So yes, and this
Speaker 1: has caused also a public health problem affecting girls and
Speaker 1: women in more vulnerable situations who live in the in
Speaker 1: the most restrictive context rural and indigenous communities, also migrants,
Speaker 1: girls and women victims of of sexual abuse, women with disabilities,
Speaker 1: among others, and always, always, always the most vulnerable. Vulnerable
Speaker 1: women are more susceptible to get an unsafe contesting abortions,
Speaker 1: which can get to infections, camorrhaging, uh, injury to to
Speaker 1: internal organs. And even there there are some places like
Speaker 1: in communities work there is not even access to to
Speaker 1: internet or or to basic health services. And m h,
Speaker 1: you're awesome. Women are still buying betool once safe abortions. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and they are like a hundred percent preventable this. Yeah, no, totally, yeah,
Speaker 1: thank you, you're even amazing. Um, but it's interesting because
Speaker 1: that's true. I think regardless of the country, the most
Speaker 1: vulnerable are the most affected. Whether it's I mean it's
Speaker 1: a class issue, it's a race issue, it's a disability issue,
Speaker 1: it's like all these things that I mean, rich people
Speaker 1: will get abortions either way, like privileged people will always
Speaker 1: have a route to take care of themselves. Um. So
Speaker 1: it's just I don't know, it's unfortunate for seeing how
Speaker 1: like humans have functioned regardless of the country that they build. Yes,
Speaker 1: sad and criminalizing abortion does not reduce its practice. I
Speaker 1: think that prohibiting it will like and its practice, and
Speaker 1: it only increases the probabilities of decent, safe procedures, and
Speaker 1: it increases the stigma and prejudices, and it even strengthens
Speaker 1: this empty rights and choice groups. But when abortion is
Speaker 1: performed in a in a safe and important matter, it
Speaker 1: is even less risky that childbirth among other interventions. And
Speaker 1: us for example, it is much safer for for our
Speaker 1: goal to have an abortion than to what you said,
Speaker 1: than to continue with with when when the pregnancy is
Speaker 1: like threatening her life. Ye yes, um, well, that's why
Speaker 1: we have to keep fighting for people. I was really
Speaker 1: getting down there. Yes, and here in Mexico, like bills
Speaker 1: continue to be promoted in different states, we keep forming
Speaker 1: and strengthening alliances, and we have to strengthen these alliances
Speaker 1: with all types of sectors. And that's why the the
Speaker 1: alliance work, for example, because we are the religious sectors
Speaker 1: that we work also with legislators, with doctors, health care providers,
Speaker 1: even in schools, and with the public general. So uh,
Speaker 1: it is a collective effort and the collective commitments mm hmm, yeah,
Speaker 1: very true. I have nothing to add. That's a good
Speaker 1: better than that. Um. So, thank you so much for
Speaker 1: joining us, and I'm going to step away now. Thank
Speaker 1: you asually, of course, yeah, and I guess uh. The
Speaker 1: last thing, well, do you do you have anything else
Speaker 1: you want to say? And then b I where can
Speaker 1: people find you on the internet like if they want to?
Speaker 1: And do you have other organizations and stuff do you
Speaker 1: want to promote? H? I'm like Erica Yamava. You know
Speaker 1: my social media and the organization I work in, it's
Speaker 1: I Giva the Middle Silvavania, Bravai from herere but the
Speaker 1: the National Network for Reproductive Rights where we are intolves states.
Speaker 1: It's called they said, but it's B B E, S
Speaker 1: E R. And you can find those uh in most
Speaker 1: of these states. And we can provide information regarding abortion
Speaker 1: if you write to us. And also something I would
Speaker 1: like to say is that even after it's even nice,
Speaker 1: one must continue to to ensure that these abortion services
Speaker 1: are are when they say, our implement that, and that
Speaker 1: they can reach to all girls and women. That it
Speaker 1: must be guaranteed in paper and in practice. And yes,
Speaker 1: the emphasis in reaching the most underserved and vulnerable populations.
Speaker 1: M hmm all right, well, uh, I think that's probably
Speaker 1: going to do it for us today. Erica, thank you
Speaker 1: so much for talking about It's a wealth of information.
Speaker 1: It's really valuable. Thank you, Yeah, and thank you all
Speaker 1: for listening. That's your episode for the day. Welcome to
Speaker 1: it could happen here. I'm Garrison with me today is Chris,
Speaker 1: and today we'll be talking about something that I was
Speaker 1: wanting to do for Pride Month but time kind of
Speaker 1: got away from me. But we'll be talking with Noah Adams,
Speaker 1: who does research into the kind of crossover between autism
Speaker 1: and being trans I know we've we've briefly mentioned some
Speaker 1: like rhetoric around this on our War on trans People
Speaker 1: series episodes, and Noah was kind enough to reach out
Speaker 1: to me to be willing to discuss this more in depth.
Speaker 1: Of greetings, Hello, thank you. It's it's always Pride Months
Speaker 1: somewhere in the summer. So that's true. That's true. Um So,
Speaker 1: I guess let's I first want to kind of hear
Speaker 1: how you how you personally kind of got into this
Speaker 1: field of research, and then maybe kind of clarify what
Speaker 1: what exactly your your field of research is? Sure, Um, well,
Speaker 1: I guess where do you start? I mean, I'm I'm
Speaker 1: a trans person and I'm also autistic, so it's sort
Speaker 1: of a natural yeah crossover for me. Um, I got
Speaker 1: started in trans research uh or transactivism doing suicidality work.
Speaker 1: Um in such a long time ago now, but in um,
Speaker 1: I think two thousand and six, myself and my best
Speaker 1: friend cycled across Canada to bring awareness for trans suicidality
Speaker 1: um and in memorandum of a person, a friend who
Speaker 1: who committed suicide. UM. So you know, we went to
Speaker 1: a lot of different communities in Canon, including Saskatoon, did
Speaker 1: talks about you know, did talks with local trans communities
Speaker 1: about suicide, audy prevention and stuff. Uh and met a
Speaker 1: lot of great people. Um. And then I came back
Speaker 1: and I did my Master of Social work also on
Speaker 1: trans suicidality research, kind of looking at how there's a
Speaker 1: lot of different research out there and who knows, you know,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of different rates that are given all
Speaker 1: high and and where are we supposed to you know,
Speaker 1: fall on that? Um. And then I finished that and
Speaker 1: I was kind of tired of doing suicidality work. Yeah,
Speaker 1: speaking it's a little bit a little bit exhausting. UM.
Speaker 1: And kind I have a I have a much darker
Speaker 1: sense of humor than I used to. Yeah, um so
Speaker 1: a friend I was kind of drifting into autism work,
Speaker 1: and a friend who, uh Jake Pine, who who's a
Speaker 1: professor now at your university, UM, suggested I kind of
Speaker 1: move into that area. And and here I am so
Speaker 1: with the kind of crossover between being trans and have
Speaker 1: and and uh, I guess I'm not the best I
Speaker 1: don't I don't know, I consciously don't kind of know
Speaker 1: all the what the most appropriate languages would you say
Speaker 1: that you would you prefer to say that you like
Speaker 1: have autism or you are artistic? Um? I mean I
Speaker 1: think it's pretty universal in the autism community to uh
Speaker 1: talk about identity first language. So yeah, exactly, logism kind
Speaker 1: of leads and and that's yeah. I mean I guess
Speaker 1: i'd say I'm autistic. Most people don't say person with autism. Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 1: So with that, how have you kind of what what
Speaker 1: initially got you to? You know, because we see a
Speaker 1: lot of propaganda and stuff trying to almost like take
Speaker 1: away people's agency around both being trans and and and
Speaker 1: um with and how and being autistic? Right, there's a
Speaker 1: lot of a lot of propaganda, especially from the Turfs
Speaker 1: in the UK really started this out and really accelerated
Speaker 1: on this point. Um. And I mean we're not. There's
Speaker 1: a whole bunch of basically autism exterminationist groups out there,
Speaker 1: um and a whole a whole bunch of other kind
Speaker 1: of problems around this. How when when these kind of
Speaker 1: crossovers start happening, where did you kind of what what
Speaker 1: kind of prompted you to see this and be like, Hey,
Speaker 1: here's this thing that needs to be researched, and here's
Speaker 1: how I'm going to go about it. Because you see
Speaker 1: a lot of people talk about this thing, but it's
Speaker 1: always generally to like attack trans people, um or attack
Speaker 1: autistic people. I mean, you know there's a lot there.
Speaker 1: I mean I would say, you know, my sort of
Speaker 1: seedling of interest is is I just really don't like injustice.
Speaker 1: I really, I mean that's such a broad thing to
Speaker 1: say that I really, you know, injustice against people for
Speaker 1: the sake of who they are really just kind of
Speaker 1: pisses me off. Um. And you know, I mean, when
Speaker 1: you pick a research topic, you've kind of pick something
Speaker 1: that you're willing to spend hours and hours and hours
Speaker 1: in a library or you know, um a virtual library.
Speaker 1: What have you just kind of plowing away at it?
Speaker 1: And and it seemed like I was piste off enough
Speaker 1: at the injustice of the way autistic people, in the
Speaker 1: way trans people are treated, and especially the way I
Speaker 1: think I think we're ignored by both the theaters, by
Speaker 1: both you know, for for turfs and trans exclusionary folks. Um.
Speaker 1: I really feel like we're an easy target where you know,
Speaker 1: autistic people or or for that matter, people with the
Speaker 1: volment of disabilities or people with with any kind of
Speaker 1: um and I'm using having finger pots on as any
Speaker 1: kind of impairment based disability feel like a soft target
Speaker 1: for people that just want to attack trans folks, right like,
Speaker 1: because they're they're a group that are so it's incomprehensible
Speaker 1: to them that we would be able to speak for ourselves.
Speaker 1: So so they're you know, I mean, I don't even
Speaker 1: think that they I don't think they care about autistic people.
Speaker 1: But I don't think they even even occurs to them
Speaker 1: that autodic people might have and trans autistic folks might
Speaker 1: have something to say for themselves. So, what's kind of
Speaker 1: the scope of your research been the for however however
Speaker 1: long you've been working on this for it's it's for
Speaker 1: a PhD program, correct, Yeah, Well, I started doing I
Speaker 1: wrote a book on trans authentic folks. That's sort of
Speaker 1: a series that interviews with folks um and you know,
Speaker 1: I mean I just asked them like about their lives
Speaker 1: and what it was like to be trans and what
Speaker 1: it was like to be autistic, and what it's like
Speaker 1: to you know, try to transition as an autistic person,
Speaker 1: and a lot of stuff came out of that around
Speaker 1: you know, how difficult it can be for folks that
Speaker 1: are their boat to access trans healthcare and to sort
Speaker 1: of navigate their way in the world. Um. And this
Speaker 1: is for my PhD work. It's sort of an outgrowth
Speaker 1: of that. So I'm looking specifically at how trans autistic
Speaker 1: community groups sort of grassroots group formations are are forming
Speaker 1: and and what their goals are. How do you, like,
Speaker 1: how do you go about like ethical research into this topic,
Speaker 1: because definitely the like, you know, there's a certain way
Speaker 1: to like, there's a certain way to be like, I'm
Speaker 1: researching autism and trans people to be like, huh, that's
Speaker 1: a little bit of a side I right, because because
Speaker 1: of how some of because of how like the turf
Speaker 1: groups talk about it. Obviously you're treads and autistic and
Speaker 1: that's two completely different. But like, definitely Yeah, I was
Speaker 1: definitely wondering, like, is there, like how what what types
Speaker 1: of like ways does ethical research go about so that
Speaker 1: you actually understand people when you're when you're talking to them.
Speaker 1: It's not it's not about like here, we need to
Speaker 1: we need to like solve these problems, because they're not
Speaker 1: problems to be solved, But it's it's research into living
Speaker 1: people who are like having lives. Yeah, mean, that's that's
Speaker 1: a great question. Um. I'm sort of starting through that
Speaker 1: myself right now because I'm just you know, working through
Speaker 1: my ethical research proposal. Um, but I think you just
Speaker 1: have to be really honest and open and and really
Speaker 1: write all this stuff out, like how are you going
Speaker 1: to contact people and what are you going to talk
Speaker 1: to them about? And showing other people what you're doing
Speaker 1: and being very open to that process, if that makes sense. Yeah. Yeah,
Speaker 1: In what types of ways do you see the crossover
Speaker 1: kind of between ableism and transphobia and like what how
Speaker 1: how have you seen that crossover be used to kind
Speaker 1: of hurt both trans people and people who are artistic
Speaker 1: and people who are both you know, I mean I
Speaker 1: think the most explicit way has been I you know,
Speaker 1: I see a lot of articles by the Guardian or
Speaker 1: the Daily Mail, you know, bring up the specter of
Speaker 1: autistic people and being overrepresented, overrepresented again in finger quotes, Uh,
Speaker 1: I'm the trans population going to gender clinics and and
Speaker 1: there isn't ever any explanation after you say that that
Speaker 1: the scaremongering is just saying there's artistic people supposedly overrepresented
Speaker 1: among trans folks. Oh no, but as if it doesn't
Speaker 1: need saying. It's it's assumed that that's that's appalling, you know,
Speaker 1: but I like a little bit more explanation. There's there's
Speaker 1: there's a lot said by how they how there's how
Speaker 1: they frame it and how they and like what they
Speaker 1: don't say, um really fright, Like the it's all framed
Speaker 1: as if this is, you know, something that everyone recognizes
Speaker 1: as like a problem. Um, and countering that is really
Speaker 1: challenging because it is. Yeah, because like again you're you're
Speaker 1: doing research into this in this into this specific crossover,
Speaker 1: and what kinds of stuff have you kind of learned
Speaker 1: throughout your research about about this. I mean it's interesting,
Speaker 1: like it's that attitude is also represented in the academic literature,
Speaker 1: like over the last I bet I'd say over the
Speaker 1: last five years, the literature on the crossover of of
Speaker 1: autism and trans folks has like skyrocketed, Like in I
Speaker 1: always say, in to twenty alone, something like a hundred
Speaker 1: and fifty articles were published, whereas two years before that
Speaker 1: maybe twenty UM and and the vast majority of them
Speaker 1: are mentioning the um the co occurrence uh in passing.
Speaker 1: So they're saying, oh, well, we read these other things
Speaker 1: where autism and trans identity co occurs, So thus you
Speaker 1: should be very careful prior to providing trans healthcare because
Speaker 1: they might be autistic. Yeah, That's the only thing I
Speaker 1: wanted to talk about was like people medical gatekeeping aspect,
Speaker 1: and like you especially you see this like turfs. You know,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of like infantilization with the turf Frederick
Speaker 1: around this, and then that kind of leads to this
Speaker 1: type of medical gatekeeping. Yeah, I just think, you know,
Speaker 1: I see I see this. I saw this in a
Speaker 1: book with the interview as I did, and I see
Speaker 1: it in so many other places, and especially conversation with folks.
Speaker 1: Is that, you know, the problem seems to be if
Speaker 1: you tell an unexpected narrative to the person in charge
Speaker 1: of gate keeping you for transgender healthcare, you're going to
Speaker 1: make them nervous. And if you make them nervous, they're
Speaker 1: they're not necessarily gonna say no, but they're gonna say
Speaker 1: to themselves at least, oh, let's wait and see. And
Speaker 1: for for autistic folks, waiting and seeing might mean forever, right,
Speaker 1: Like I talked to folks in the book, uh that,
Speaker 1: you know, without without mentioning actual cities, because of the
Speaker 1: you know, the particular situation of this person. But let's
Speaker 1: let's you know, let's say he lived in New Orleans, uh,
Speaker 1: and he wasn't able to access trans healthcare and New
Speaker 1: Orleans because it just wasn't available to folks who were autistic,
Speaker 1: And so he ended up moving to Chicago, which which shows,
Speaker 1: you know, he moved to Chicago specifically to get trans healthcare,
Speaker 1: which shows a level of capacity that there implying in
Speaker 1: the context of trans health care in New Orleans that
Speaker 1: he's not capable of. But you know, he can upbroot
Speaker 1: his whole life, move across the country, find a doctor.
Speaker 1: And then he talked to the doctor in an informed
Speaker 1: health clinic in Chicago and and they were like, oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: we knew that you were from this city, and we
Speaker 1: do that you were autistic before you told us, because
Speaker 1: there's this whole pipeline of autistic trans folks making the
Speaker 1: migration to Chicago from this particular city because they can't
Speaker 1: get healthcare. I mean, like, you know, I'm also thinking
Speaker 1: about you know, like kids trying to come out as trans,
Speaker 1: um who have autism or have any other kind of
Speaker 1: you know, quote unquote developmental disability UM, and like just
Speaker 1: all of the ways that that can be used to
Speaker 1: gaslight kids about their gender identity. UM. I know in
Speaker 1: your book you mentioned stuff around like self discovery and
Speaker 1: coming out and issues with family. UM, what kind of
Speaker 1: what kind of things have you heard heard about that
Speaker 1: in terms of how how kids that that the kids
Speaker 1: are figuring figuring out gender stuff while also having this
Speaker 1: whole other thing that people use to kind of, you know,
Speaker 1: add on to their experience. I mean, I think, you know,
Speaker 1: one of the things I noticed, especially in you know,
Speaker 1: sort of trans autistic autobiographies, is that you know, gender
Speaker 1: doesn't really make an inherent sort of sense do a
Speaker 1: lot of autistic folks. I mean, it doesn't make sense
Speaker 1: to do. But I mean I have I have something
Speaker 1: going on in my brain. I don't know what it is.
Speaker 1: I don't think it's autism, but yeah, genders never made
Speaker 1: sense to me either, And I think like where you
Speaker 1: for autistic people, especially where you come across things that
Speaker 1: don't make an inherent sort of sense, it's difficult to
Speaker 1: accept them. Like so much in the world doesn't make
Speaker 1: inherent sense. But that can be a real sticking point
Speaker 1: for autistic folks. So, you know, what I see, what
Speaker 1: I seem to see a lot of is that by
Speaker 1: the time folks come out, well, first of all, it's
Speaker 1: see was like, although you know, I don't want to
Speaker 1: quote any particular kind of research on it because I
Speaker 1: think the jury is still out, but it seems like
Speaker 1: autistic people are more likely to identify as non binary
Speaker 1: um or to just not identify with gender at all. Um.
Speaker 1: And it does seem like by the time folks come
Speaker 1: out as trans, whatever you know, permutation of that there
Speaker 1: is for them, um, They've they've tried just about every
Speaker 1: other identity they can, you know, they can try out
Speaker 1: like especially you know, I mean, we're aware that there
Speaker 1: are social stigmas and and and social expectations around gender.
Speaker 1: So I think for for a lot of autistic folks,
Speaker 1: they're going to try to fit that, even though it
Speaker 1: doesn't make sense to them, They're going to try to
Speaker 1: fit within that because they know it exists, and that
Speaker 1: by the time they come out as as trans, like
Speaker 1: or main or female or what have you, like, we
Speaker 1: pretty well know. Is there any any kind of sense? Yeah? No,
Speaker 1: I mean I think that there's a lot of misconceptions
Speaker 1: people have about about i mean, both being trans and
Speaker 1: big autistic. Let let a load being both of Is
Speaker 1: there any like, yeah, like, what's the common misconceptions about this?
Speaker 1: Only kind of on like a broader level. Would you
Speaker 1: like to dispel? Um? Sure, Yeah, I mean I think
Speaker 1: a lot of people get told, you know, you can't
Speaker 1: you can't be autistic because you're too you're too articulate,
Speaker 1: or you know, you have too much of an opinion.
Speaker 1: Autistic people can't have an opinion of themselves, of their
Speaker 1: own life. And yeah, that's gross. I'm paraphrasing, but I
Speaker 1: think that's what it is. Yeah, absolutely, Um, And then
Speaker 1: you know, trans folks get told It's not uncommon to
Speaker 1: get told, oh, well, you can't be autistic because you're trans,
Speaker 1: so you're sort of in this this no, no person's land.
Speaker 1: That's such a it's such like an ontological attack on
Speaker 1: someone's being. It's so really like that's you know, like
Speaker 1: you know already like again just being solely trans or autistic,
Speaker 1: you get some of that, and then together it's like
Speaker 1: it's just attacking every kind of part of you that
Speaker 1: you're trying to figure out. Um well, I mean, I
Speaker 1: mean in terms of attacking people rhetorically, it's sort of
Speaker 1: the perfect weapon because you can make autistic trans people
Speaker 1: into whatever you want to be convenient to you. What
Speaker 1: kinds of stuff do you think people should know about
Speaker 1: this to help kind of either you know, to help
Speaker 1: either like counter some of like the rhetoric around this,
Speaker 1: or just to gain better like personal understanding, right if
Speaker 1: they have if they have you know, people in their
Speaker 1: lives who are like this, or maybe they suspect that
Speaker 1: they're that they're trans and they're autistic. Like how what
Speaker 1: what kinds of what kinds of stuff would you like
Speaker 1: people to be more aware of about this intersection? Well?
Speaker 1: I guess I remember a story someone from the book
Speaker 1: told me about how you know he was He had
Speaker 1: his best friend is is trans and autistic as well
Speaker 1: and has a number of physical disabilities, and he was
Speaker 1: kind of he's sort of the caretaker for him. Um,
Speaker 1: and he was kind of talking to him about how, oh, well,
Speaker 1: I don't know if I'm trans, and I don't know
Speaker 1: if I should you know, if I should use that
Speaker 1: label or like, you know, maybe it's not the right
Speaker 1: thing to do or it's bad or something. And his
Speaker 1: friend was like, well, you know you're not You're not
Speaker 1: a hormone of vampire. Like you're not gonna like suck
Speaker 1: the hormones out of somebody else and and hurt them
Speaker 1: by taking away their testosterone. Like, oh I wish is
Speaker 1: I wish it worked like that? Um, you know I would.
Speaker 1: I would be a trans empire. Um, this is about
Speaker 1: you and what makes you comfortable. It's not about like
Speaker 1: you're not hurting anybody else being yourself. And I think
Speaker 1: you know, autistic folks like anybody else you know, worry
Speaker 1: about I mean, we're we're just as susceptible to the
Speaker 1: attacks on trans folks. Yeah, is anybody else right? Like
Speaker 1: and you worry that, like, well, maybe this isn't the
Speaker 1: right thing to do, but like what are you hurting
Speaker 1: by by exploring it? That doesn't mean you have to
Speaker 1: be trans or you have to transition, or or you
Speaker 1: can't change your mind like, but it doesn't. It doesn't
Speaker 1: hurt anybody, even though you to just be open to it,
Speaker 1: even just like temporarily trying out different names or pronouns. Right,
Speaker 1: it can can be like such a big deal, um,
Speaker 1: and it can be very incidental. Like it doesn't. It
Speaker 1: doesn't need to be so cataclysmic. Right, that's something that
Speaker 1: you can experiment with and it's fine. Right, you never yeah,
Speaker 1: you don't lock yourself into anything. Um, but of course
Speaker 1: you know what it's about, your personal sense of identity.
Speaker 1: Of course it feels much bigger. Well, I think I
Speaker 1: think people worry about what other folks I mean, obviously
Speaker 1: people worry about what other folks will think and mean
Speaker 1: for them. Um, I don't know what I mean. It
Speaker 1: seems like a strange comparison to make. But I don't know.
Speaker 1: If you've seen Crimes of the Future, I've not yet. Oh,
Speaker 1: it's it's really good. It's it's the most recent David
Speaker 1: Cronenberg movie. And there's this great I'm going to give
Speaker 1: away the end of the movie, so spoiler boilers. I
Speaker 1: know we're giving this into a movie podcast what I've
Speaker 1: always wanted. There's this great scene at the end though,
Speaker 1: where Vigo Mortison is like in this he has this
Speaker 1: special like very David Cronaberti bone chair that he has
Speaker 1: to like be in to move him around what he's eating,
Speaker 1: and he finally is convinced by his partner to like
Speaker 1: try the plastic chocolate bar that's you know, supposed to
Speaker 1: be like it's a whole digestive thing. I will get
Speaker 1: into it. But you know, there's this moment of realization
Speaker 1: and like he's been avoiding this for the whole the
Speaker 1: whole movie, and he like tries it and he's eating
Speaker 1: it and and suddenly there's this this realization moment in
Speaker 1: his face where he's like, oh, this didn't have to
Speaker 1: be so difficult, Like, I society doesn't want me to
Speaker 1: do this, and it's it's seen as a crime, and
Speaker 1: it's see is as terrible. But actually, when you cross
Speaker 1: that rubicon, it wasn't as bad as you thought. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, especially if you if you're even even if
Speaker 1: you're not like coming out to everybody you know at
Speaker 1: the same time, right, you can start you start off
Speaker 1: with a smell group of people that you know are
Speaker 1: gonna be with you, and you try it out with
Speaker 1: them and if you like it, then great, that's that's
Speaker 1: a really good sign if you if you start it
Speaker 1: and you're like, and this doesn't feel right, then you
Speaker 1: don't need to commit. Like it's not a thing. Right.
Speaker 1: That rubicon can feel so big sometimes, yeah, and it
Speaker 1: feels like you're you're jumping across a giant like the
Speaker 1: Grand Canyon. But really all it is is you're stepping across,
Speaker 1: you know, a small stream and you can step right
Speaker 1: back across there if you didn't like it. Yeah, So
Speaker 1: what kind of things we like to see happen around
Speaker 1: like the medical gatekeeping so that it's less fucked up?
Speaker 1: I mean, I know a lot of I'm actually act
Speaker 1: a conference in Belgium right now for trans health sort
Speaker 1: of medical trans health stuff. Um, and you know, I mean,
Speaker 1: I think one of the things I keep coming back
Speaker 1: to is you don't need to treat autistic people in
Speaker 1: the realm of trans healthcare any differently than you do
Speaker 1: anywhere else, like anyone else, Like, especially in the gate
Speaker 1: keeper model, we have like either you have the capacity
Speaker 1: to consent or you don't like that that test is,
Speaker 1: and I have lots of thoughts about that if that's
Speaker 1: for another day. But you know, whether you meet those
Speaker 1: tests or not, it should not be any different just
Speaker 1: because you're autistic. UM would like to, I guess talk
Speaker 1: briefly about your book. Um, you know, what's it like? What?
Speaker 1: What what the scope of it is? Where people can
Speaker 1: find it? Um, trans and Autistic Stories from Our Stories
Speaker 1: from Life at the Intersection by Jessica Kingsley Publishers. UM.
Speaker 1: It was out in I think people can find it
Speaker 1: on Amazon or wherever you buy books. I'm sure Paul's
Speaker 1: book store over there in Portland has it. Um. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's it's a series of interviews with folks who are
Speaker 1: trans and artistic. I sat down with folks and and
Speaker 1: asked them about their life and and what's going on
Speaker 1: and what that looks like. And then I sort of, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, try to transcribe that into into a text,
Speaker 1: into a narrative form and put that in a book.
Speaker 1: And here we are. That sounds wonderful. Um. I see
Speaker 1: the I see that, I see the listing on Amazon
Speaker 1: dot c A for our for our Canadian Canadian folks
Speaker 1: as well. UM. Yeah, thank you so much for talking
Speaker 1: about this. Um, is there any other kind of random
Speaker 1: thoughts that you would like to you would like to
Speaker 1: mention that we haven't that we haven't brought up yet. Sure. Um.
Speaker 1: You know, I always like to plug groups Walsh's work,
Speaker 1: which looks at you know, they do a lot of
Speaker 1: work in trans autistic stuff too, and they kind of
Speaker 1: look at why more people may be trans and autistic, uh,
Speaker 1: And one of the things they've they found is that
Speaker 1: it may be that uh, autistic people are both less
Speaker 1: capable of hiding the fact that they're trans and less
Speaker 1: less capable of caring um or caring about hiding it,
Speaker 1: so it may be more obvious that there is a concurrence.
Speaker 1: They're not an actual overage of a concurrence, let's say, yeah,
Speaker 1: of course. Yeah, that means that was definitely in the
Speaker 1: back of my mind. Yeah, huh. Well again, no, thank
Speaker 1: you so much for coming to talk with us. Yeah,
Speaker 1: can I can I plug a couple of things? Is
Speaker 1: that plug? Plug away? This is still still your time, okay. Um.
Speaker 1: So I'm leading a refugee sponsorship group for a group
Speaker 1: of five for a trans guy from the Middle East,
Speaker 1: and we're raising funds through the Metropolitan Community Church in Toronto.
Speaker 1: We got to raise a certain amount before we can
Speaker 1: put the application in and I can give you that link,
Speaker 1: but it's at Canada helps dot org. And the Navy
Speaker 1: is trans Proud, trans Proud, trans and proud you are ill,
Speaker 1: but it's kind of long. I will I will put
Speaker 1: if you send me that link, I will put it
Speaker 1: in the description for people to click on. Awesome and
Speaker 1: you can find me at no atoms on Twitter because
Speaker 1: I got in early enough to get my name. Yeah. Wow,
Speaker 1: March two thousand nine, just right right on the cusp
Speaker 1: right well again, thank you so much for reaching out
Speaker 1: to talk about this intersection. Hopefully if anyone was interested
Speaker 1: what we were talking about, UM, please check out Noah's book,
Speaker 1: UM to just read a whole bunch of stories from
Speaker 1: from from people about this. Yeah. Awesome, thank you, Yeah,
Speaker 1: all right, everyone that does it for us today it's
Speaker 1: the on the other side. Oh yeah, Sophie, that's how
Speaker 1: we opened the episode. I didn't think anything could be
Speaker 1: more appalling than that other thing that you said that
Speaker 1: I want. What I was talking about, Brett Kavanaugh and
Speaker 1: Clarence Thomas wrapped together so tightly that they can't tell
Speaker 1: who's where one person's skin begins in the other. I
Speaker 1: walked you right into it, just like Neil Gorsch walked
Speaker 1: right into that and then decided, you know what, in
Speaker 1: for appendy, in for a pound of um? This is
Speaker 1: it could happen here the podcast about serious problems, where
Speaker 1: we talk about them seriously, and sometimes about the Supreme
Speaker 1: Court having a threesome like that, like that, like that
Speaker 1: cruise ship where there was a threesome and then a
Speaker 1: giant six fight. How's everybody doing today? I think the
Speaker 1: opening will work better if we just believe out and yeah, yes,
Speaker 1: always bleep outcome um except for right there. So I
Speaker 1: I feel like today we should chat about one of
Speaker 1: the many things that's that's a problem, which is a
Speaker 1: specific piece of disinformation that is spreading and not quite
Speaker 1: like wildfire. It's more spreading like in the background, like
Speaker 1: monkey pops on the internet. This is not like the
Speaker 1: number one piece of of of of like conspiratorial nonsense
Speaker 1: that's getting around, but it's getting around deeply, and I'm
Speaker 1: seeing it on the left and the right. You have
Speaker 1: if you spend any time at all on social media,
Speaker 1: which statistically you do, you've probably seen a bunch of
Speaker 1: stories and like freaked out posts about fires and arson
Speaker 1: at agricultural facilities and factories of food factories is often
Speaker 1: how it's phrased. I think the post I saw about
Speaker 1: it that was sort of most emblematic with someone being like, hey,
Speaker 1: you know, uh, you're probably not aware that some huge
Speaker 1: number of chickens died in this fire recently and a
Speaker 1: bunch of cows died in this field. But if you were,
Speaker 1: it's the only thing you'd be talking about. And the
Speaker 1: idea kind of that people are pushing when they when
Speaker 1: they uh, catastrophize this is that there's this massive rash
Speaker 1: of attacks on American food infrastructure, UM at a year
Speaker 1: when we're already due for a food crisis because of
Speaker 1: the Ukraine, and um, it's going to be this this big,
Speaker 1: like looming disaster and some like shady group is trying
Speaker 1: to starve everybody. UM. And we brought in a friend
Speaker 1: to talk about this because it's it is not at
Speaker 1: all what what people who are kind of catastrophizing or
Speaker 1: saying UM. And I wanted to introduce Carl to the show. Carl,
Speaker 1: how are you doing, buddy? You know, living living life
Speaker 1: in a one party state. Yeah yeah, Um, I don't know, man,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of parties these days, like the one
Speaker 1: on that cruise ship. Uh so, or is the Forward
Speaker 1: Party our our favorite? This is a big Yang Gang podcast. Um. Now, Carl,
Speaker 1: you and I had buddies on the old Twitter for
Speaker 1: a while. You were the origin of one of the
Speaker 1: terms that that that we use a lot on this show. Um,
Speaker 1: and uh yeah, I wanted to I wanted to talk
Speaker 1: to you because this is this is a pretty potent
Speaker 1: piece of weaponized on reality. Um. You have been tracking
Speaker 1: this for a while on kind of your Own. Yeah, well,
Speaker 1: this is one of those ones that's it sits in
Speaker 1: between a lot of the other conspiracies, right so, like
Speaker 1: you said, it's it's kind of the background operating thing
Speaker 1: right now. Um. And you know, so when we think
Speaker 1: of the big conspiracies right now, they kind of revolve
Speaker 1: around what they always did, depopulation, weird n W. We
Speaker 1: like secret Society stuff, the Q, the Q brand of that. However,
Speaker 1: we want to look at this is a little bit
Speaker 1: different because this is more overtly political, right So, this
Speaker 1: is this is looking to not just dig the hole
Speaker 1: of well, everyone's out to get us Bill Gates is
Speaker 1: buying all the farmland, you know, the crazy stuff we
Speaker 1: normally I mean, you know that's right in this, but
Speaker 1: it's not the center part um. And yeah, I've been
Speaker 1: looking at this for a few months now since I
Speaker 1: first saw it, and I first saw kind of traces
Speaker 1: of this right after the invasion of Ukraine started, so
Speaker 1: early March. Things started to kind of shift and nothing,
Speaker 1: you know, post here and there that are now missing,
Speaker 1: stuff like that, the kind of classic Well, let's test
Speaker 1: the waters. Let's see how people accept the idea that
Speaker 1: maybe something out you know, in the in the conspiratorial
Speaker 1: way is going on just asking questions type yeah, exactly exactly.
Speaker 1: It's the just asking questions It said, just well maybe
Speaker 1: think about it kind of thing. And those those pique
Speaker 1: my interest because those tend to be test balloons, and
Speaker 1: for this kind of thing, I had a weird you know,
Speaker 1: they're weird feelings you kind of get when you watch
Speaker 1: some of this as much as we do. Yes, yeah,
Speaker 1: and you think kind of sense when the thing has
Speaker 1: enough ingredients to catch on exactly, and especially when they're
Speaker 1: super kind of inflammatory ingredients, right, you know, the Bill
Speaker 1: Gates um buying all the farmland is a good example,
Speaker 1: not quite as inflammatory, but catches on because people, you know,
Speaker 1: it's it's the social paradelia thing. There's always like, there's
Speaker 1: always this, I mean, and this is something again that's
Speaker 1: a broader thing with conspiracies. There's always a germ of truth.
Speaker 1: The germ of truth with that is that Bill Gates
Speaker 1: is on a lot of farmland. Now, if you compare
Speaker 1: it to the total quantity of farmland he has bought,
Speaker 1: very it's like, yeah, it's a fraction point oh three
Speaker 1: or something. I mean, it's an absolutely tiny amount of
Speaker 1: the total, right, Yeah, Because this this country is I
Speaker 1: don't know, if you've looked at him, appresently pretty sizeable country,
Speaker 1: the United States of America kind of a big place
Speaker 1: when you actually look. Yeah, and so the kernel of
Speaker 1: truth is there there. There are fires right there, industrial accidents,
Speaker 1: there are weird stuff happens in big industrial situations. We
Speaker 1: have a large industrial farming situation in this country. So
Speaker 1: you see it. And I think part of what makes
Speaker 1: the kind of the idea that oh, this is suddenly
Speaker 1: happening and it's suddenly like a massive problem easier to
Speaker 1: sell to people is that most Americans know next to
Speaker 1: nothing about the food supply and how it works. Like
Speaker 1: if you have because I grew up in and around farms,
Speaker 1: I've been a lot of my life in agricultural areas.
Speaker 1: Farms and things related to farms catch on fire fucking constantly.
Speaker 1: You may not be Yeah, they're they're like I think
Speaker 1: they said there are five thousand annually annually, about fifteen
Speaker 1: a day. I mean, it's it's giant fields of dried grain.
Speaker 1: It's deeds of dried grain, and it's shipped like silos
Speaker 1: full of like flour and stuff, which is like there's
Speaker 1: nothing like, yeah, silos explode like like the like a
Speaker 1: a silo full of grain is slightly less explosive than
Speaker 1: like a military like missile or some ship. Like they're
Speaker 1: like they detonate if you catch them at the right
Speaker 1: way exactly. And like I know here in Minnesota a
Speaker 1: few years ago and there's video of a floating around.
Speaker 1: You know, there was a you know, a corn, a
Speaker 1: corn silo split and the dust goes out and something
Speaker 1: you know, a car or engine because it's hot, sparks
Speaker 1: it off and it's a fireball. You know, So these
Speaker 1: things happen, and I can remember there was one of
Speaker 1: the last things I saw and I went and covered
Speaker 1: in Texas before I moved, was there's this little town
Speaker 1: called West which is not in West Texas, it's in
Speaker 1: North Texas. It's in between, um, Dallas and Waco, which
Speaker 1: is in between Dallas and Austin, because no, Waco is
Speaker 1: not a destination. And they had this big god it
Speaker 1: was some sort of what was the I'm gonna google
Speaker 1: what the facility was, uh, but it was it was
Speaker 1: this like, um yeah, it was a fertilizer factory and
Speaker 1: it caught on fire. There's a terrifying video of this
Speaker 1: guy with his daughter watching it and it goes off
Speaker 1: like like a fucking fuel air bomb, the massive exploit.
Speaker 1: It killed the entire town's fire department, like all of
Speaker 1: them dead in a second. It was basically fucking anfo
Speaker 1: And because it happens this is like two, I think, um,
Speaker 1: it never it's just this big tragedy. If it had
Speaker 1: happened a couple of years later, there would have been
Speaker 1: like a conspiracy attached to it. It was just yeah,
Speaker 1: it was just slightly to r a but like this
Speaker 1: ship happened. I mean, the point of making is that
Speaker 1: and that we're making here is that like this ship
Speaker 1: happens all the time, and to the numbers we were
Speaker 1: quoting earlier, there's no evidence whatsoever that there are a
Speaker 1: higher number of of these events this year than there
Speaker 1: ever are. Um. Basically, one of the things that we've
Speaker 1: seen is as of like the spring of this year,
Speaker 1: a list has been compiled, um, mainly in places like Gateway,
Speaker 1: Pundit and zero Hedge, where they've got like a hundred
Speaker 1: different events too, and and it it looks very compelling
Speaker 1: when you just see this list of and there's this fire,
Speaker 1: and this many chickens died here, and this many cows died,
Speaker 1: and there was this explosion. But again, if you actually
Speaker 1: look at the number of events that are expected in
Speaker 1: a year, there's nothing abnormal about this, and in fact,
Speaker 1: it's pretty middle of the road for any year. And
Speaker 1: like the bird, the bird calls right, like that's a
Speaker 1: great example of this being just absolutely out of the
Speaker 1: park conspiracy land. I mean, there's a massive eight and
Speaker 1: flu epidemic going on right now that's killed more birds,
Speaker 1: you know, than the last ten years. And so when
Speaker 1: you start talking about you know, three hundred you know,
Speaker 1: three hundred million birds worldwide being called whatever the massive
Speaker 1: numbers that funny how avian flu does that, and that's
Speaker 1: a response. But when you get into the zero hedge,
Speaker 1: who is really pushing this right now world that's one
Speaker 1: of the top ones on the list. And it also
Speaker 1: makes you know they have their little maps up right
Speaker 1: now with all the drop tabs that show right they
Speaker 1: love doing and there's a you see this in other conspiracies.
Speaker 1: I think one of the big ones that that kind
Speaker 1: of was a little I don't know, on the edge
Speaker 1: of of of getting mainstream recently was like the conspiracy
Speaker 1: about people disappearing at national parks where it's like mapped, yeah,
Speaker 1: exactly like it, yeah, and it's like, yeah, man, um people,
Speaker 1: there's three million p in the United States, Like and
Speaker 1: also people go missing while hiking and one of the
Speaker 1: like a bunch of stuff isn't on that list, like
Speaker 1: the number of those people who were found again and
Speaker 1: what exactly a lot of people just like slip and
Speaker 1: fall and never a seat again because they falled out
Speaker 1: a cliff. Yes, national parks are kind of dangerous, funny
Speaker 1: enough once you're off, Yeah, that's why they're fun Yeah exactly.
Speaker 1: There was there was a whole four wh one documentary
Speaker 1: made a few years ago about this person who went missing,
Speaker 1: you like were they were They dropped into a secret
Speaker 1: underground government bunker where they abducted and they like a
Speaker 1: year later they found his body at the bottom of
Speaker 1: a cliff. Yeah, and like it it doesn't you know,
Speaker 1: that doesn't talk about the horrible stuff done with like
Speaker 1: especially in Canada with all of the missing indigenous women.
Speaker 1: Is actually it is actually a big problem. But I
Speaker 1: mean to back to back to the fact, back to
Speaker 1: the farming thing. I think what all of these you
Speaker 1: know stories show is just the innate holder of industrial farming.
Speaker 1: It's actually the scar Yeah, yeah, it is absolutely scary, um,
Speaker 1: but it's also like normal scary. Like the thing that's
Speaker 1: scary is that the system of industrial farming is incredibly dangerous.
Speaker 1: And like, if you actually want to be properly horrified
Speaker 1: about something relating to food production, look at how many
Speaker 1: people die because they get sucked into bogs of pigshit
Speaker 1: or drowning grain stile or drowning grain sile. I mean people, legit,
Speaker 1: whole families. One person will fall in the grain silo
Speaker 1: and they'll try to get him out the whole families.
Speaker 1: I know, I know people who have who have died
Speaker 1: that way because I grew up in the very agricultural area. Yeah,
Speaker 1: a lot of this is just like people don't know
Speaker 1: the country, but sharine, yes, um so industrial. I mean
Speaker 1: like yeah for me, for me someone that hasn't growed
Speaker 1: up in any agricultural area at all, and this is yeah.
Speaker 1: Grain is like so it's like quicksand it sucks you in.
Speaker 1: It takes you to that bottom. If you don't spread
Speaker 1: out immediately, you're going down and there's really no way
Speaker 1: to save somebody. It's stay pretty, stay the funk away
Speaker 1: from grain silos. Yeah, do not play around grain silos,
Speaker 1: around with the grain silo. It is it is. It
Speaker 1: is killed entire families because people will try to save
Speaker 1: each other then they get sucked down and it's it's pretty. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's bad when you have livestock livestock poop, and sometimes
Speaker 1: that poop is super useful. Chicken ship's one of the
Speaker 1: best fertilizers ever. You can make. Chicken ship very very useful.
Speaker 1: Pigshit is like nasty, it's toxic. It is very hard
Speaker 1: to do anything. It's it's in the ground long enough
Speaker 1: it's a bio Well theoretically, if you were to like
Speaker 1: really care about it, you could you could make a
Speaker 1: use of it given enough time. But there's so many
Speaker 1: pigs because our hunger for bacon is insatiable that you
Speaker 1: wind up with this this massive tox of massive toxic sludge.
Speaker 1: So there's the chunk of the country in which most
Speaker 1: of the pigs come from. There are these huge pigshit
Speaker 1: bogs that are like there are countries smaller than bogs
Speaker 1: of pig ship that we have in the United States,
Speaker 1: and people die in them all the time. They get
Speaker 1: sucked down into the big ship or you suffocate because
Speaker 1: you get one of them bursts. I mean, there's so
Speaker 1: many weird things because it's a meth their methane and
Speaker 1: hydrogen sulfide scences. So it's just like bad things around
Speaker 1: farms all the time, and that's just that's just farming
Speaker 1: and what we're ultimately what we are seeing here. If
Speaker 1: you want to like actually analyze the thing that is
Speaker 1: happening um with all of these conspiracies, it's it's what's
Speaker 1: called the frequency illusion, which is the idea that like
Speaker 1: if you've ever I don't know, if somebody when somebody
Speaker 1: like teaches, like you learn a new word, right, or
Speaker 1: you like you hear about a historic event, and then
Speaker 1: you keep seeing everywhere. This is something that's an author
Speaker 1: that Garrison and I quite like Robert Anton Wilson played
Speaker 1: with a lot um. It's why, like twenty three is
Speaker 1: one thing you'll notice in like Hollywood movies and TV
Speaker 1: shows if you look out for twenty they're fucking everywhere
Speaker 1: because a whole bunch of people who got into Hollywood
Speaker 1: are fans of the same guy. And there's this conspiracy
Speaker 1: with the number of twenty three people sticking. It's all
Speaker 1: over the fucking wire. It's in a bunch of ship um,
Speaker 1: and it's it's yeah, at the base of things like right,
Speaker 1: humans are paradelium, right, So we're looking for patterns and
Speaker 1: static that's what we do. It's part like in my mind,
Speaker 1: it's part of our like ancestral uh, you know, deep
Speaker 1: in the past protection, right, how we cont me? Yeah,
Speaker 1: exactly what's that? And it's how you look for monsters
Speaker 1: in the woods, you know. It's like when we're looking
Speaker 1: for eyes in the dark. That's part of it. And
Speaker 1: so you know, we tend to find meaning in points
Speaker 1: and then try and connect them because that's how we work.
Speaker 1: And so this is a great example of this because
Speaker 1: it hasn't gone full Q level yet where it's just
Speaker 1: absurd to be absurd. The shield itself, like you can
Speaker 1: see where people are trying to pick together points that
Speaker 1: normally are just industrial accidents. And you know, some of
Speaker 1: the stuff I saw early on, for like the cow
Speaker 1: death posts and the stuff related to climate change, what
Speaker 1: you really were seeing was people trying to make order
Speaker 1: out of what is just chaotic accidents and now and
Speaker 1: now yeah, yeah, no, it's it's it's something you rarely
Speaker 1: actually see in the cascade of you know, conspiracy theory
Speaker 1: like this so overtly and it's been really interesting for
Speaker 1: me watching that because you know, as someone who's far
Speaker 1: too into watching people melt their brains. UM. This this
Speaker 1: kind of lays out some of the ways that this
Speaker 1: works for all of us, UM, and I think it
Speaker 1: also offers a roadmap in certain ways to like see
Speaker 1: past it and be able to correct it for yourself
Speaker 1: so you don't get into the same Oh there are
Speaker 1: a thousand points a light here, let's fall all of them. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's UM. One of the things that's interesting. So, like
Speaker 1: we just called it the the recency bias or the
Speaker 1: frequency illusions, is also the recency illusion, which is like
Speaker 1: the belief that things that you have like noticed only
Speaker 1: recently are a recent phenomena rather than things that go
Speaker 1: back a long time. There these are kind of inter related.
Speaker 1: But this, this sort of phenomena that we're seeing is
Speaker 1: often called the bottom mine off phenomena. And that's so
Speaker 1: so the bottom I'm pretty yeah bottom the bottom mine
Speaker 1: Off group was a it's also called the German Red Army. UM.
Speaker 1: It was a yeah, it was a West German terrorist
Speaker 1: organization from like seventy years ago. Like this is not
Speaker 1: a recent thing, but there was an article about them
Speaker 1: in like a Minnesota St. Paul newspaper in nineteen four
Speaker 1: that happened to be one of the first newspapers with
Speaker 1: an online comment page. Oh no, well yeah, so this
Speaker 1: is like you'll always here referred to as the bottom
Speaker 1: mine off phenomena. It has nothing to do with this
Speaker 1: terrorist group other than the fact that one commenter on
Speaker 1: saw an article about them, um within a couple of
Speaker 1: hours of someone else in their life telling them about
Speaker 1: the group, and so they named it in the common
Speaker 1: section the bottom mine off phenomena because yeah, like it's
Speaker 1: it's which is an example of the phenomena. Um, but
Speaker 1: like that's it is. It is. It's a thing that
Speaker 1: people do for again good reason. Like like you said,
Speaker 1: like if you're a fucking hunter gatherer and you notice that, like, oh,
Speaker 1: after a rainstorm is when the big cats come out
Speaker 1: and hunt. And like if somebody, if one of your
Speaker 1: friends gets eaten by like a tiger, it's probably after
Speaker 1: a rainstorm. You associate after the rainstorm with danger, which
Speaker 1: is like good, right, Like I live inside urban environments,
Speaker 1: the usually usually less. This becomes useful as relating to
Speaker 1: more of our like instinctual practices. Learning to recognize this
Speaker 1: like first step of delusion is really important. Um, I
Speaker 1: don't think decisions in the future, right, But I think
Speaker 1: it's much more similar than we realized to like how
Speaker 1: people think of religion, because even religions people are Yeah,
Speaker 1: like what you're saying is like there's so much chaos.
Speaker 1: People can't make sense of the world. And just like religion,
Speaker 1: you're trying to make order out of disorder and look
Speaker 1: for signs, to look for patterns. It's like an element
Speaker 1: of magical thinking where yes, you look for reasons that
Speaker 1: this has meaning, so I understand where they're coming from.
Speaker 1: And so the problem, again, the problem is not with
Speaker 1: your brain, because this is not like a bad thing
Speaker 1: your brain is doing. It's just a thing your brain
Speaker 1: is doing. The problem is that this is one of
Speaker 1: the easiest ways that bad faith actors can take advantage
Speaker 1: of you and other people, and so in terms of
Speaker 1: protecting yourself and others from it. And again, one of
Speaker 1: the problems with this and one of the things that
Speaker 1: makes it so so much more difficult twenty years ago
Speaker 1: the batter mind how obviously the bottom line how phenomenon
Speaker 1: was as much of a thing as that dude in
Speaker 1: the fucking Commons page that Minnesota paper proves, But there
Speaker 1: was less ship coming at you, so you kind of
Speaker 1: had even if you might get caught for a little
Speaker 1: bit and they're like, oh, is there something weird going
Speaker 1: on with this this German terrorist group. Um, you kind
Speaker 1: of had the space in your head and the space
Speaker 1: in your media diet to like actually parse that out
Speaker 1: and calm down. But today it all comes with you
Speaker 1: with a flood. There's like three new fucked up Supreme
Speaker 1: Court decisions. Oh, and now all of the food factories
Speaker 1: are on fire and all of the chickens are dead,
Speaker 1: and this war in Ukraine is actually elevating the food prices,
Speaker 1: and it all compounds on itself. If you when you
Speaker 1: start seeing something new like this come into your media
Speaker 1: diet that seems scary, one of the first things you
Speaker 1: should do is just try to get a handle on
Speaker 1: the raw numbers this Well, this is a complexity Yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, you know, this is a complexity issue. That's
Speaker 1: how I like to look at it. And that's exactly
Speaker 1: one of the great ways to to kind of get
Speaker 1: disrupt the complex nature of this and the amount of
Speaker 1: it you're taking in is just to start breaking it down.
Speaker 1: Numbers are great, right, Like if you can look and
Speaker 1: see their eighteen thou instances of industrial accidents leading to X,
Speaker 1: y or z and five thousand fires, you start to
Speaker 1: really get yourself into a better position to understand what's
Speaker 1: being thrown at you. Yeah, but I don't think most
Speaker 1: people can actually understand what those numbers mean. Like there's
Speaker 1: like they're large numbers, but I don't think people understand
Speaker 1: like that means a lot of that stuff is happening
Speaker 1: versus just like one or two things you hear about
Speaker 1: and you don't realize that probability wise, that it's like
Speaker 1: insignificant because I don't think those numbers makes sense. I
Speaker 1: mean even to me sometimes I can't. I can't picture
Speaker 1: so many things, So I think it's I don't know,
Speaker 1: maybe it's just like a deficit and how our brains
Speaker 1: would you be able to understand why the numbers exist.
Speaker 1: But you can try to compare them two previous years, right,
Speaker 1: you can't exactly, you can't expand what you're relating to,
Speaker 1: right if you're if you're looking from is everything from
Speaker 1: March to June two, you're like, whoa, this is a
Speaker 1: lot of stuff just in these few months that if
Speaker 1: you compare that to every preceding year for the past
Speaker 1: few years, like, oh, this actually isn't a regular this
Speaker 1: is this is this is still fucked up, but it's
Speaker 1: actually kind of normalized. Um, and it's not. It's not
Speaker 1: an abnormal phenomenon right now. And so even if you
Speaker 1: can't like understand what the numbers are, you can still
Speaker 1: compare them to previous things. But but yeah, I mean
Speaker 1: that does require more work than just like looking at
Speaker 1: a meme, right, And the reason why this stuff works
Speaker 1: is because people know how to exploit this part of
Speaker 1: our brains really well. Not not not not not in
Speaker 1: this part of this brain is useless, right, It has uses, um,
Speaker 1: you can play with it, but it's also is exploitable.
Speaker 1: And and that's the thing that you want to be
Speaker 1: aware of, is trying to be cognizant of if the
Speaker 1: information you're taking in is exploiting this pathway and then
Speaker 1: choosing how how you want to be be circumvent some
Speaker 1: of those mental effects act like well, and we have
Speaker 1: such I mean, as humans, we have a real issue
Speaker 1: with this kind of brain hacking, and it's something we're
Speaker 1: just all kind of getting up to right now and understanding.
Speaker 1: And we still don't fully understand some of this. But
Speaker 1: you know, I UM a lot of the stuff I
Speaker 1: I kind of initially worked off of for the concept
Speaker 1: of weaponized unreality kind of talks about social engineering in
Speaker 1: the way that like freaking was done and hacking back
Speaker 1: in the day was done, and this is so similar
Speaker 1: to that in certain ways that it's kind of shocking, right,
Speaker 1: Like it's a conspiracy, but it's also a management tool
Speaker 1: and it's a it's a memory management and and you know,
Speaker 1: ultimately a reality management tool and giving it numbers looking
Speaker 1: at context like that does take time, but some of
Speaker 1: these are like gonna gonna be hard and fast rules
Speaker 1: probably going forward to like interact with the digital world,
Speaker 1: because this is gonna be how it is for a
Speaker 1: long while. There's a book that was kind of considered
Speaker 1: to be like the foundational text of or at least
Speaker 1: strategic document of the Islamic State, called The Management of
Speaker 1: Savagery Um. And the title gives away what what you're doing, right,
Speaker 1: you're carrying out You're you're engaging in acts of savagery,
Speaker 1: terrorist attacks that that that kill innocent people, that are
Speaker 1: that exists to disrupt um the state that you're in
Speaker 1: in order to and you're attempting to like you're attempting
Speaker 1: to build kind of a melieu of savagery, which then
Speaker 1: provides you the opportunity to take an exert power. And
Speaker 1: what we're seeing here is like the management of cognitive biases,
Speaker 1: right exactly, the management of like these weird little evolutionary
Speaker 1: holdovers in your brain, um that that don't quite work
Speaker 1: in the modern world. But if you understand what what's happening,
Speaker 1: you can take advantage of them, and you can you
Speaker 1: can trick people into thinking things are happening that aren't.
Speaker 1: It's the same. You know, you can see this. The
Speaker 1: right does this very effectively in a lot of the
Speaker 1: anti trans stuff they've been doing, obviously with gay you know,
Speaker 1: if you look at the population trans and of gay people,
Speaker 1: some number of people in that community are going to
Speaker 1: do things that are bad, right, because it's a population
Speaker 1: of human beings, um, and because the country is large enough.
Speaker 1: If you get people hyper focused on here's a story,
Speaker 1: here's another story, here's two, here's three stories. Now, is
Speaker 1: that does that mean that there's any kind of actual
Speaker 1: systemic problem. No. Um, that community is no more likely
Speaker 1: to do things that are bad than any other community.
Speaker 1: But if you get people focused on each of those
Speaker 1: stories in their head, they feel like there's they feel
Speaker 1: like there's an epidemic, and like, well, we have to
Speaker 1: get a handle. It's the same thing that that gets
Speaker 1: done with like Islamic terrorism, right where it's like, yes,
Speaker 1: since nine eleven, actually not that many acts of Islamic
Speaker 1: terrorism in the United States extremely fucking uncommon, much less
Speaker 1: common than right wing terrorism like homegrown terrorism, but the
Speaker 1: media doesn't really cover one of those kinds of terrorism
Speaker 1: and loves to cover the other. So you get people
Speaker 1: periodically tricked into thinking that they're under direct threat from
Speaker 1: the Islamic State or whatever. The right well, and I
Speaker 1: think it's you know, I think going to that point right,
Speaker 1: like it's almost u I mean, it's a reality filter, right, so,
Speaker 1: like it's a way to selectively filter out things that
Speaker 1: would counter the narrative that you're trying to overall push.
Speaker 1: And I think that that's something that's what's interesting me
Speaker 1: about this in a lot of ways is that we're
Speaker 1: seeing a filter being set up that only allows people
Speaker 1: into one lane of this thought. And we've seen what
Speaker 1: the end result of that is with radicalization and things
Speaker 1: that come along with these kind of conspiracies. But it's
Speaker 1: really it's been very wild to watch since the you know,
Speaker 1: the nineteen April till now where we're seeing it. You know,
Speaker 1: Serovich is doing it, every any one of the guys
Speaker 1: you can think of doing it, Yeah, exactly. Tucker ran
Speaker 1: a couple of things on this and kind of interspersed
Speaker 1: it with his you know, white male virility ship. It's
Speaker 1: the we're we're we're in a weird place where these
Speaker 1: are starting to be able to be played with and
Speaker 1: on each other, and that kind of filtering, you know,
Speaker 1: starts to get people onboarded from a conspiracy into you know,
Speaker 1: what we're seeing now is kind of the white nationalist
Speaker 1: Christian nationalist movement. That's that's become that that thing. And
Speaker 1: you know, for me, that's where my interest stems from
Speaker 1: because of this idea of weaponizing on reality, seeing what
Speaker 1: happened in Russia when that happened, and seeing this kind
Speaker 1: of thing which is so similar to that filtering and
Speaker 1: that narrative shift and building that goes on in that world.
Speaker 1: It's it's been you know, staring into a void feels bad.
Speaker 1: Sometimes this is just one where it's like, oh this
Speaker 1: is terrible, and it's just the beginning of it. Every
Speaker 1: once in a while, the void stares back and you're like,
Speaker 1: oh boy, oh yeah no, and that's exactly I mean,
Speaker 1: that's uh, that's the problem is sometimes it just stares
Speaker 1: you right in the eyes and tells you, yeah, I'm here,
Speaker 1: and that's a bad feeling. Yeah. Well, I think that's
Speaker 1: more or less we needed to talk. That would be like,
Speaker 1: you know, like one of the one of the ways
Speaker 1: to combat this, if you can, is honestly, creating your
Speaker 1: own memetic graphs is really useful because these things spread
Speaker 1: so fast when they're in images. Images of of dates
Speaker 1: and instances spread like wildfire. Um So, if you can
Speaker 1: make your own which compares it to previous years, say hey,
Speaker 1: this actually isn't a new pattern, that's something that's been
Speaker 1: this is this is just what happens in industrial farming.
Speaker 1: I think spreading it via memetic images is one of
Speaker 1: the if there is a way to combat it, that's
Speaker 1: probably one of the core ways to go about it,
Speaker 1: just to get how fast those things spread. And again
Speaker 1: you can see I've seen some useful people have been
Speaker 1: trying to push back against you know, this idea that
Speaker 1: there's been this like massive crime surge in San Francisco
Speaker 1: and stuff, and they it's uses the same tactics, right, yeah. Absolutely.
Speaker 1: You have like a couple of videos of people shoplifting
Speaker 1: or something, and then you make and and is there
Speaker 1: is that kind of crime actually up? Well no, it
Speaker 1: really isn't. But like it doesn't matter because um or
Speaker 1: is it any higher there than it is in someplace
Speaker 1: like Duluth where no videos are coming out like no,
Speaker 1: it's not, but um, it's uh. If you have to
Speaker 1: be aware, the first thing you have to be aware
Speaker 1: of is the phenomena is like the way in which
Speaker 1: they're taking advantage of you. And then you have to
Speaker 1: you have to kind of deter and you have to
Speaker 1: use the tactics they're using against them. And one of
Speaker 1: the things that is effective is these these graphs with
Speaker 1: kind of like numbers and dates and ship on them.
Speaker 1: People love to feel like they're looking at research. But yeah,
Speaker 1: at the same time though not to not to be like,
Speaker 1: I don't know negative about this at all, but in
Speaker 1: my mind, this is like a modern day version of
Speaker 1: someone starting your religion and make people like making the
Speaker 1: sheep of this like following and then having them turn
Speaker 1: into like whatever it is, whether it's Christian nationalism or whatever.
Speaker 1: But just like in religion, if people are presented with science,
Speaker 1: they don't care, you know what I mean, You'll present
Speaker 1: them with like, I don't know's there's some people that
Speaker 1: it's it's it's not science. It's about everyone wants to
Speaker 1: have access to special, secretive, secret knowledge. Everyone wants to
Speaker 1: have esoteric knowledge that no one else has so these
Speaker 1: graphs are still compelling in the first place because you're like, oh,
Speaker 1: no one else knows all of these things. No one
Speaker 1: else has laid it out in this manner. So if
Speaker 1: you could present your information in that same style, say hey,
Speaker 1: no one knows that this is actually part of this
Speaker 1: overall thing that's been going on for years and it's
Speaker 1: about industrial farming, then you hope that that will spread.
Speaker 1: That Then that spreads because because it infects the same
Speaker 1: point in someone's brain. Right, want to we want to
Speaker 1: feel smart, we want to feel unique, we want to
Speaker 1: have like esoteric knowledge. So if you can, if you
Speaker 1: can frame it to to fit that same mold, then
Speaker 1: it's not science. It's just playing with the same tactics
Speaker 1: that got them convinced of this in the first place. Exactly.
Speaker 1: People that's different. Yeah, I think I think it's true that, like,
Speaker 1: if somebody is a committed believer in in whatever, like
Speaker 1: like Mike Sernovitch or something, you're not convincing them. The
Speaker 1: danger The thing that they're doing that's dangerous is there.
Speaker 1: They're quote unquote pilling a lot of like random people
Speaker 1: into the problem that scares those people. And when those
Speaker 1: people get scared, they're willing to accept ship they wouldn't
Speaker 1: otherwise scare. And I think those people you can push
Speaker 1: get to step down from the ledge because one thing
Speaker 1: we do want this is also a problem. But like
Speaker 1: you think about like climate change, right, and how much
Speaker 1: of the denial of climate change is not based around
Speaker 1: getting people to reject the idea entirely, but getting like
Speaker 1: when people bring up a specific problem being like, well,
Speaker 1: but look at this weird new piece of technology that
Speaker 1: some kid developed, and like, this is going to fix it,
Speaker 1: and then you get to not worry about it. Right,
Speaker 1: So if somebody suddenly starts freaking out about agricultural fires
Speaker 1: for the first time and you're like, actually, they're lower
Speaker 1: than they are in normal years, this isn't a problem,
Speaker 1: then maybe their brain, maybe you can get their brain
Speaker 1: to go like, Okay, that I won't worry about that
Speaker 1: because I don't want more things to worry about. I
Speaker 1: just have been given them. Um, that's targeting the ledge people.
Speaker 1: We're talking. Yeah, you're not getting to true believers. You're
Speaker 1: not getting to true believers at this point of any
Speaker 1: of this stuff. For the most part, you know that
Speaker 1: takes a wholly different level of work. I mean, that's
Speaker 1: that's in the ballpark in my mind of the radicalization, right,
Speaker 1: like you're you're in a wholly different ballpark. And if
Speaker 1: you can target the people who are thinking about jumping
Speaker 1: into the pool too, they tend to if you do
Speaker 1: change their mind, they become some of the biggest proponents
Speaker 1: of trying to get other people off the ledge that
Speaker 1: they might know. And that's something well, it's something, yeah,
Speaker 1: it's it's it's it's very similar, and it's something I've
Speaker 1: seen even in my friends circles, you know, talking to
Speaker 1: people who five years ago, we're fully you know, in
Speaker 1: the all let's do Donald Trump for the lulls thing.
Speaker 1: You know. Now those are the same people who are
Speaker 1: telling their friends, oh shit, we have a Christian nationalist
Speaker 1: movement that's trying to overthrow democracy. And that's a huge
Speaker 1: you know, like that's a huge help, um to everyone. Right.
Speaker 1: You want more people saying the truth to people who
Speaker 1: might not hear it from someone like us um and
Speaker 1: can internalize it and infiltrate. There's you know, the truth
Speaker 1: takes a lot more work than fiction, unfortunately, but once
Speaker 1: it starts to work, it's a compounding thing. And the
Speaker 1: truth tends to really set people free. As corny as
Speaker 1: that is. If people find out they've been lied to,
Speaker 1: they get they want to know why it worked, and
Speaker 1: that works in our favor and the truth's favor, and
Speaker 1: reality is the thing we you know, we gotta protect
Speaker 1: this at all costs because we're getting tidle weight by
Speaker 1: unreality and that's a problem for all of us for
Speaker 1: different reasons. That's the more uplifting note I think than
Speaker 1: a couple of minutes ago. Yeah, all right, well there
Speaker 1: there we go. Um go, I don't know, fix it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: go fix things. Yeah, go fix things. Don't go swimming
Speaker 1: in grain silos, and uh, avoid grain silos. Always avoid
Speaker 1: grain silos. Hey, we'll be back Monday with more episodes
Speaker 1: every week from now until the heat death of the Universe.
Speaker 1: It Could Happen Here is a production of cool Zone Media.
Speaker 1: For more podcasts from cool Zone Media, visit our website
Speaker 1: cool zone media dot com, or check us out on
Speaker 1: the I Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you
Speaker 1: listen to podcasts. You can find sources for It Could
Speaker 1: Happen Here, updated monthly at cool zone media dot com
Speaker 1: slash sources. Thanks for listening,