21st AZK – Patrick Wood: The Race to Artificial Super-Intelligence

Sendungstext
herunterladen

PDF (.pdf)

Word (.docx)

13.09.2025 | www.kla.tv/38643

Dan: Patrick, so nice of you to join us. Patrick Wood: It‘s really an honor. Dan: Okay, is the AZK: Anti-Censor Koalition, Anti-Censor Conference ready? It is. Okay. Good, well then let‘s begin. Well, Patrick, I‘m very happy you‘re here and I‘m happy we‘re sharing this with an international audience, but I‘m going to start on quite a serious note. Here‘s the question: Are we on the cusp of our total digital enslavement? Patrick Wood: It seems that way, at this point. Now, I can speak for America. I can't speak for any other country. Well, China, maybe, and Europe has its own troubles as well. But in America, we're… we’re on the cusp of digital slavery. And it's interesting that our, recently the HHS director, RFK Jr., just went on national TV and said he wants, in four years, everybody in America to have a wearable health device on collecting all of your information and sending it to your iPhone, whoever, and then to the cloud. This is very disturbing things, you know. We see this kind of stuff all over the place at this point. So, yes, we're really close to digital enslavement. Dan: Yes. You know, one of the quotes I wrote down for this interview was from your website, from just what RFK Jr. said, quote, We think that wearables are a key to the Make America Healthy Again agenda, end quote. My very first interview for KLA.TV was with RFK Jr. in December of 2019. And if anything, that guy appeared like a populist bulldog fighter against the establishment, ready to take down the pharmaceuticals and ready to work for us. When did they get to him? Patrick Wood: It's hard to say. You know, people go to Washington, D. C., and I liken it like a cloud comes over their head, you know. Dan: Yes. Patrick Wood: And they just change their demeanor. They change their positions. It might not be abrupt, but you see this with almost any politician we've sent to Washington, D. C. in at least the last 50 years. So good people go to Washington, they come back not so good. Dan: You know, when you say demeanor… you know, I think of some of the characters that we consider deep state. And so, like, you look at a, well, let's just take an Elon Musk or a Klaus Schwab or even a Donald Trump. These guys seem to be enjoying what they're doing. They're playing a role or they have a big part in it. But Trump seems to be really enjoying it. But look at the demeanor of RFK Jr… I don't know how many still pictures I've seen of him next to the beaming Trump or someone else, and he looks like he is suffering. Patrick Wood: Yeah. Yeah. I've seen that as well. Yeah. Dan: Yeah. So you are the technocracy expert and you've written different books on the topic. Patrick Wood: Yes, indeed. Dan: Now, we've discussed this before, but we got a lot of new listeners here from around the world. Our French audience is growing. Our Russian audience is growing. They might not be familiar with the word. I know it's hard to put it into a nutshell. But can you give the newcomer to this topic your elevator pitch? What is technocracy? What are its goals? And why is it important to know about it? Patrick Wood: Well, it's almost 100 years old at this point. It was originally invented, if you will, at Columbia University in New York City. That was a seat of progressive thought at the time. It still is, actually. But the engineers and scientists at that university decided that they were going to make a new economic system from scratch. And they set themselves to do it. They called it a resource -based economic system. It was going to be regulated by energy, the distribution and consumption of energy. And we've seen this over the years under another name, perhaps, like Agenda 21. The Trilateral Commission called it the New Economic Order, International Order, Agenda 2030. And so on. We have smart growth in America. These are the same words, same concept for technocracy, historic technocracy. And we see economic resources at the center and energy is always in the center as well. So the disturbing part, that's not the disturbing part. The disturbing part is they led with the definition in 1932 of… They were all about the science of social engineering. That was their first statement out of the box: The science of social engineering. What could that possibly mean? It has significance today, obviously, because this is what… we see this all over the place. People being manipulated now by AI, for instance. And, with political systems doing nudging, for instance. Remember in England they had the nudge unit, right? That was trying to get people to change their mind about stuff. This is the science of social engineering. So this is endemic today, I think, everywhere. And this will be the thing that really messes with your mind. Dan: Yeah. Speaking of nudging and social engineering, maybe it's no surprise that our most prestigious journalism school is also at Columbia. Patrick Wood: That's right. Dan: What did Zbigniew Brzezinski and his trilateral commission have to do, if anything, in forming this technocratic era we're now living in? What were their goals? And ultimately, fundamentally, what is their aim? Patrick Wood: Number one, in that day, it was to get the resources of the world into their pocket and away from us, basically. Away from the nation state, away from personal people. And Brzezinski, you have to understand, when he wrote his book: „Between Two Ages“ – subtitled America's Role in the Technotronic Era, that was a knockoff word for technocracy. But you have to remember that Brzezinski was at Columbia University when he wrote that book as a professor. He was… I don't know if he was tenured at that point, but he was an up -and -coming professor of political science, and he wrote about technocracy. So obviously there was a link between 1930’s technocracy and what Brzezinski heard in the halls of Columbia University. When Rockefeller got a hold of the concept, he realized that this would be a way for him to get the resources of the world into his pocket. And his problem at that time, as the chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank, was money eventually is going to run out of steam. And if the monetary system folds, what do you do for encore? How can you maintain your wealth? Well, you have to have the resources under your control. If you have the resources, it doesn't matter what monetary system you have at that point, because everybody wants the resources in order to live. You can extract any kind of use from anybody at that point. So, it was game on for resource accumulation at that point. We've seen this over the years, and it's all over the world, not just in America, for sure. There's been a decidedly huge, huge effort to twist the resources of the world away from nation states, put them in sort of a global common trust, if you will: only accessed by those giant companies to make goods and services for us to consume. And you have to remember too, Klaus Schwab a few years ago, when he was still chairman of the World Economic Forum, he said famously that by 2030, you'll own nothing and be happy. Most people have seen this along the way. And what does he mean? You're going to own nothing. Well, this plays into the whole concept. They don't want you to own anything. They didn't want you to own anything in the first place. Even when technocracy was formed in 1932, and we see the same thing with Agenda 21, property rights were on the chopping block, and now it's come full circle, and people like Klaus Schwab are warning us, we're not going to have anything at some point. But he says we're going to be happy. Don't worry, be happy. Dan: You're talking about a global common trust. And what I want to know is, are there any countries, prime ministers, governments, presidents that truly are out of this system? I mean, in the news, they're going to paint Russia, China, and Iran as this axis of evil that are actually our enemies. But I mean, consider the resources in those three countries alone. You could almost run a world economy on the resources of those three countries. If they were truly outside of it, maybe someone might be able to conclude, well, they're not going to get their way because we have these, you know, East Asia and Central Asia over here will battle against us. But, are they on board too? Patrick Wood: You have to say yes, because when Agenda 21 was created in 1992, almost all of the nations of the world signed on at that point. They all wanted a piece of it for whatever reason. And, at that point, I'm sure most of them didn't understand what the end would be for them. But nevertheless, they bought into it, and they allowed the transformation to take place at that point. So organizations like mostly the NGOs, like ICLEI, for instance, they went into the countries to the cities directly to transform them into being sustainable cities. They brought in smart growth policies, the Internet of Things. The NGO system, the ecosystem of the United Nations spread around the world, went directly to cities and towns around the country and the world to establish the policies of Agenda 21. Then from there, it percolated up to the national level. So they got saturated in it. And somebody suggested here, well, President Trump wants to get us out, for instance, of the WHO, or maybe out of the United Nations altogether. Well, that's fine to say, but all the policies have been embedded, pressed down into America everywhere. Dan: Yes. Patrick Wood: They're in every single city, even the city we're in right now, has a climate action plan based on UN dogma. So the world has been saturated with this stuff from the top down, and they did it without mandates. They did it as a voluntary program. That was just stunning, too. They said, well, you don't have to do this, but if you do, you know, you'll be happy, or whatever. Dan: Right. Patrick Wood: And people say, oh, it sounds good to be. Let's just go for that. Dan: Yes, I don't think these programs were organic. I think they came from somewhere. Patrick Wood: Oh, totally, totally. Dan: There was definitely probably some incentivizing and arm-twisting there. Patrick Wood: Totally. Whenever a city sees, usually two by two, consultants come in in a pinstripe suit from a consultant organization like a sustainable development whatever organization, you know you should just shut the door. Don't even let them in the door. Dan: Yeah. Patrick Wood: But when they get in the door, if you let them talk to you, they'll give you 50 reasons on why you should take their consulting services to embed Agenda 21 and sustainable development into your community. And some of them are really mean-spirited as well. But this is how they've twisted the social fabric of our country and probably other countries around the world. Dan: Yes, yes. We should be so skeptical of outsiders. Patrick Wood: Correct. Dan: When we form some community organization, some movement that is to our benefit, the minute an outsider comes in, red flags should go up. Patrick Wood: Oh, yes. Dan: You know what I think of? I think of like the Roman world where local policing, say in Britannia, was probably done by a bunch of Latins because they'd follow the orders. They had no connection with the local people. And I also think about police forces around the country. Why is it that the Seattle police force, for example, has to have a guy come in from Philadelphia and then Chicago and then New York and then L. A.? They do not want local governance, true local governance. Patrick Wood: Yes, you're exactly right. We see this, well, this is a pattern, put it that way, all over the country, probably all over the world. Dan: Yup, yup. Patrick Wood: Use resources from other places to twist whatever you want to do on this locale. Use other resources to do it so they don't have any alarm that somebody's messing with them. Dan: And how in the world have local countries, local communities agreed to let their resources be owned by some international conglomerate? And here's an example: Japan. The town I live in, or I lived in for 20 years, unbelievably, they signed off their water rights to some French company. That makes no sense at all. But it's part of the whole plan, is it not? Patrick Wood: It is. Yeah, exactly. Sometimes, well, I say the citizens of the country, like in that country, in that case, they probably didn't have a clue what happened. Dan: Yes, right. Patrick Wood: And they woke up one day, who's charging more for our water now, for instance, or why isn't it the same as it was before? And then they realized somebody sold them down the river. Dan: Do you remember when, I don't know if this is still the law, that when some new project, big building project, was going to take place, this zoning laws came into effect, and they had to put up a big sign, you're walking along in the woods somewhere, and some project is going to take place. Whoever wanted to build something there had to put a big sign out, let everybody in the public know that this is going to be going on, and there's going to be public debate on it, and you better say something now. But stuff like this water example… No, they don't want to announce it to anybody until it's over. Patrick Wood: Exactly. It's interesting that certain things have been passed down from the United Nations into the local communities as part of the package, if you will, for all of this sustainable stuff. One thing that came in was the international building codes. These were not local codes. They were based on international standards, and they were totally odious to the people in the communities. Dan: Yes. Patrick Wood: Nevertheless, they just adopted them. Said that's it, end of subject, you're going to have this standard, you have to build your houses and your buildings, et cetera, according to these standards now. It drove everybody crazy because you couldn't get through the red tape. You know, say, well, you just have this one little thing over here that you can't, if you have to, you fix this, then we'll let you have occupancy. And just nickeled and dimed people together, all together, and it drove them crazy. So, this is an example where outside influence has been pressed into all these communities around America and all over the world to adopt these new building standards. Dan: Yes. You know, if you could encapsulate or represent this outside influence in an icon, I would say it's that circular rainbow thing that represents the, what, 23 sustainable goals. I've seen people in business, government, schools, school districts, administration, wearing these rainbow pins. And back to Japan, construction sites, private construction sites even, will often have that rainbow thing on it and then all the goals listed underneath that. And I think those probably, like you say, they come with some restrictions and… Patrick Wood: Oh, gosh, totally. Yeah. Totally, yeah. You have to read each one individually to find out what it's all about. It doesn't give you the true definition in the first sentence, but when you read down the text, you get into the fine print and you go, holy mackerel! It's just absolutely oppressive at that point. So, you know, their agenda is kind of there, but you have to get down in the text to see where it is. Dan: Yes. On your website, you compare, Trump's big, beautiful bill with the post 9 -11 Patriot Act. How do they compare? Patrick Wood: Well, there were billions of dollars allocated for surveillance systems in this new bill. And this is not being talked about much in America. It should be, but you're going to see new programs rolled out to consolidate all the information from our government into AI databases and to be analyzed and, you know… Dan: Consolidated, analyzed by Palantir. Patrick Wood: Consolidated, yeah, by AI. And then Palantir is going to be a major player in this already. So, DOGE, under the. . . Under the leadership of Elon Musk, that wasn't about saving money at all, but it was basically to get the data flows of the agencies into AI in the first place. Dan: Yes. Patrick Wood: Now, as it turns out, that's been achieved. All the major agencies have a data flow going into AI, but there's now an overarching system that's being put together by Palantir to consolidate the whole thing into one big, beautiful surveillance system. Dan: Yes. And, now… Patrick Wood: This will put to shame the Patriot Act at that point. It'll make it look like a piker operation. Dan: Yes. And talking about saving money, I have conservative friends, Trump fan friends, who come in, and after the latest news of something they cut, or they're wiping out this program, and isn't it great? But they're not going after the super expensive stuff. I don't think they're cutting the military budget at all. Patrick Wood: No. Dan: And I don't think they're really looking at entitlements much either. No. I mean, social security, Medicare, Medicaid, and the bombs we build will still roll along. Patrick Wood: Yes… I said from the beginning, when first DOGE was suggested that it was not about saving money at all. It would never be about saving money. Dan: Yep. Patrick Wood: It would not be about slicing or getting rid of agencies per se, but it would be about hooking up AI to run our government, period. And this is exactly what's happened. Dan: Yes. Patrick Wood: And it's still going on. Dan: Yep, yep. Yep. Continuing with the idea of this phony saving money, I was just listening to NPR, and they were quoting Marco Rubio, and Rubio was upset at people who were criticizing the government for cutting all these programs, and one of the programs had something to do with international, I don't know. We have agencies around the world that are involved in information gathering and determining whether there are certain, certain dangers here and there, and it was being cut, and Rubio came out and said, look, this was just, this was just about cutting fat and waste and getting rid of that. And at the same time, they are upping the ICE budget from 15 billion to 150 or 170 billion? What kind of cutting is that? Patrick Wood: That's right. There's no cutting at all. Yeah, how long, how much have we heard this for the last 50 years? Every president, there's been installed or elected since at least 1970, they've said the same thing. We're going to cut all the waste, we're gonna make government more efficient, and we're gonna save money based on the scale of whatever, and they've all failed to do it. Now, that, to me, that indicates that they had no intent to do that in the first place. Dan: Right. Patrick Wood: But, that was an easy sell to the public that that was a reason to elect them going for the next triad, you know? So, nobody has succeeded, and they're not gonna succeed right now either, because that was never the intent in the first place. The intent was always to install AI into the operation of our government. This is a huge deal, and don't underestimate it. How many, how many humongous data centers with these AI power-sucking, colossus type of data centers have been established around the country? We have several right here in Mesa, Arizona, where you'll see Facebook, Google, Amazon with these huge, huge data centers. Well, these are, these are being established all over the country. Texas has a big one. Memphis has a big one. You have in Washington, D. C. area, Arlington area, you have a proliferation of data centers. What are those data centers for? They're not just to, to enable you to have your favorite chat bot, you know, to answer questions for you. It's not about that at all. It's about capturing the data in the first place, and the massive, massive amounts of data that comes off the government websites and all the agencies. You just can't imagine, and then put on top of that, all of the financial data as well that comes off the Wall Street, etc. All this data is being sucked into AI. And the purpose of all these data centers at this point, with the development of the software itself, like, from OpenAI and Grok and so on, and X.AI… These programs are ready and waiting and already actually, they're engaged actively right now in sucking the data out of our government and society in general. Dan: Yes Yeah. Yeah. When you say data centers, I'm also reminded of detention centers. Patrick Wood: Sort of. Dan: Because. . .. And I mentioned, I mentioned this increase of 15 billion to 150 or 170 billion of the ICE. I heard them talk about where that money was going to be spent. AI data, of course, will be used. Then, they're going to be, they're going to use that for, I think, 170,000 ICE officers will be scouring the country. And you'll be, you'll see them at the supermarket and in schools and in parks and playgrounds, government buildings. This was according to an NPR report. And get this, the reporter on NPR himself says, they're creating a digital police state. That shocked me. Why are, why is NPR of all places, which is usually a government mouthpiece, telling us how it is? Patrick Wood: You're right. You can see the tension between the old system and the new system, everywhere. When, when Klaus Schwab talks about the great reset. This is, this implies that whatever was, whatever is being reset, that's the old system. Dan: Right. Patrick Wood: There's a new system coming, however, that's going to be worse than the other one. But, you see, the old system is being swept out, swept away by people like Donald Trump. Dan: Yep. Patrick Wood: And the, the old programs and the other, the vestiges of the old system, they're just like DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) and the, the cultural Marxism, all that stuff, that's just gone away. Now, the new system is based on this technocratic idea. Dan Yes. Patrick Wood: Of controlling everything from the top down. To every conceivable aspect of life. By AI. Dan: Yes. Patrick Wood: And, so, this is the new system. Dan: Part of Trump's big, beautiful bill allocates 6 billion… By the way, big, beautiful bill. Have you ever, have you seen where they, they… instead of a B, they put a six in there. Patrick Wood: I've seen that. That's good. Dan: And there's three of them. Yeah. This on the tails of, what was it during Biden's time during the, the, the build back better. Patrick Wood: Build back better. Yeah. Dan: Three B's small case, right! Anyway, Trump's big, beautiful bill allocates $6 billion for border control tech. Then the EU parliament has just voted in favor of a biometric border control for, for all visitors entering the EU. Then this massive spending I mentioned about ICE. How is this migration crisis, the pretext for advancing the surveillance state? Patrick Wood: It's, it's interesting that this whole, this whole migration issue in the first place was started mostly by the encouragement of a trilateral commission member in the first place by the name of Peter, Peter Sutherland. From, from Scotland or Ireland, I think. And he was a mucky muck on the trilateral commission. He became the special envoy to the United Nations for migration issues. Dan: Yes. Patrick Wood: He went out to, he went around all the countries originally. This is several years ago. He went to all countries, countries in Europe and got them to establish quotas that they would be willing to, to import into the, into the country. And then all of a sudden, then the migration started. And all these countries who thought, well, we're just signing something, whoever, you know, no big deal to sign a quota. But then they… the, the migration started into these countries and then the United Nations held them accountable to their treaties that they signed along the way. And then they focused on America next, with our southern border being wide open for all these immigrants to come in. And it was amazing to me that, that Peter Sutherland just died a few years ago, by the way. But this was so aggravating to me. He, he had the audacity to go around when things really got hot and heavy, especially like in Sweden and the UK. He, he went around and bullied those same nations. Don't you go, go back on your quotas. You can't do that. You signed a treaty. You have to, have to honor your commitments. And, unfortunately, they accepted the bullying and basically, they just continued the policy. Now look, now look where Europe is at this point. Well, the same thing's happening here. It was a trilateral policy from the get -go, pushed by somebody like Peter, Peter Sutherland. Dan: Right. And when you say they accepted the bullying: they accepted a situation that was contrary to their, to the interests of their country, to the interests of the voters, to the interests of mankind, really. And I don't know if I would, if I would use the word accepted. I would say, were pressured into, and these people way up high that are easily pressured into these decisions. I think they've been blackmailed. I think the system has the goods on them. Patrick Wood: Yeah. Dan: And on that note, do you have anything to say about the recent, should I say disappearance? Should I say the recent push to eliminate any more thinking about the Epstein files? That's yesterday's news. It's all, it's finished. Patrick Wood: It really is. It was, it was gone from the get-go probably. But who has, I hate, I hate to, I hate to beat the dead horse here. Well, the Trilateral Commission isn't dead. It's still alive and just, just working fine. Dan: Right. Patrick Wood: But you have to remember that Jeff… Jeffrey Epstein was a member of the Trilateral Commission. First and foremost, he was their charge. He's their problem to get rid of. So who has the, the long arm to reach into, into government entities like the Department of Justice or the Homeland Security or any, any other agency? Who has the long arm of pressure to insert to make sure that this doesn't happen? I will suggest that somewhere along the way, the Trilateral Commission was the, was the one that had that pressure. That was their problem in the first place. And nobody can ever, could ever understand why Epstein was in a member of the Trilateral Commission in the first place, because he didn't really bring anything to the table. They had always, they had some media moguls. They had highfalutin legal firms, high, high ranking politicians, chairmen of boards of companies around the world. You know, all the really mucky mucks. I'm sorry, but Jeff Epstein never had that kind of clout. He, he had a lot of money. He got money along the way, but he basically was a black, blackmail artist. That's the only, that's the only thing that he brought to the table from the Trilateral Commission point of view. And he was a master of it. Undoubtedly. There's no dispute there. So will we ever see, see this information come up? No way. It's not going to happen. Not the, the Trilateral Commission and other people who were in, maybe in the movies in the first place. They're not going to let it happen. Dan: Okay. So we're not going to get satisfaction in that area in terms of a divulging of the information that we want to see who was on that list, etc. But we can conclude this: People. If, if this doesn't make you distrust your government, if this doesn't make you frustrated, if this doesn't make you finally say, okay, they're not on our side, what in the world will, right? We should at least be, we should at least be pushed into this sort of thinking. Patrick Wood: Yes. Dan: Okay. Patrick Wood: Yep. Dan: Um, you were speaking in front of a church going audience. I saw your, um, I saw a video. It was in front of a Christian audience. And, uh, you were, uh, um, quoting from revelation. And you said that the, this isn't the quote, but you said, uh, that the antichrist will come as something appealing and attractive. And, and I started thinking about AI and I thought about, uh, we have a Saturday breakfast followed by a Bible study at my local church. And, um, one of the guys is, is a computer expert and he, he comes in weekly and he says, listen to what you can do with AI and it's amazing stuff. Um, he told, I remember he was talking to my son who's thinking about a career and he says, uh, oh yeah, don't, don't go to a coding school because those are becoming obsolete. Um, if anything, coding is going to just be done by AI, you know, so no more expensive one-year intensive coding programs. And one of the things we did with his ability to use AI was there was a case where a man, uh, I won't go into details, but he had a tough criminal case against him. He was looking at time, long time in jail. And this expert in our group, he found a way for AI to develop basically a legal brief to defend this guy. And, and he did this. It was a great brief. And then also we asked AI to, uh, Hey, could you write up letters that we could write to the court on behalf of the public? And AI wrote up all the letters under different categories and subjects. All we had to do was sign them. And the guy walked. Uh, so in other words, wow, what an appealing and attractive thing that AI did for us. So, and, and the word you used is speaking in front of these people. It's, it's a perfect word because the word you used was captivate. This is a quote from you. You say… you said, quote, “AI will be used to captivate the whole world”, used by the antichrist to captivate the whole world. And, and I liked that the, the choice of that word, because we can use it in the modern sense of captivate. And in sort of the literal original sense, the modern sense, um, to captivate, to attract and hold the interest of, to charm, but the literal original sense to capture, to take captive. That's what's happening with AI, correct? Patrick Wood: It really is. And there's another aspect of this. Um, AI has so many different splinters that you could explore. And one of them, however, is definitely religious in nature. Um, and that's this new concept of AI God. This is really interesting. And in times past, uh, like in the old Testament, even in now, uh, the idols that people have raised up for themselves, they've consisted of carved images and, uh, stone figures and stuff like that, statues. And, uh, all these things didn't speak. In fact, uh, God made a complaint against the idols of the, the Old Testament. Well, you, you don't have eyes that can see. You can't, you can't, don't have ears that can hear, etc. Well, all of a sudden now there's an idol in AI, AI God. That's a religious system now, where AI is going to be increasingly considered to be God. And it's saying it's God at this point. This is stunning. So, the concept is, uh, if, if you just think about it for a minute, this idol is, for the first time in history… That's a long time! This idol can speak, it can hear, it can see, and it can say, say languages… say, say anything in any language in the world at the same time, if it wants to. Dan: Yes. Patrick Wood: And this is a different form of an idol. We've never seen anything like this before. This is going to be sweeping the world. I think in the next few, few, few years, it's going to be a really huge, huge thing. And it's going to be a, a snare for men's souls. Dan: It goes deep. It goes spiritual. Um, Patrick, I've, this is our third interview, and I've asked you this, I'm… talking about beating a dead horse. I've asked you this question at the end of each interview. So I'll, I'll put a little twist on it and I'll give you a quote after I asked the question and then I'll get your response. So the question, of course, and this comes from my, my editor management team in Germany and Switzerland too. And it is, of course, what can the ordinary citizen practically do against technocracy? And I... I found a quote, I don't know where it came from. Um, but I, it was in my, my quotes box and it says, “the antidote to authoritarian, technocratic, global governance must surely be localized non-compliance and the abandonment of any technology capable of enslaving us”. Would you agree with that? Patrick Wood: Probably so. I, I don't think I said that. I said something like that along the way for sure. The action has to be local - not national, not a state level. Your, your only, uh, action should be in your own community, to relate to your neighbors first and then, to your, your leaders in your city. Dan: Yup. Patrick Wood: They're the only people above you that can offer any, uh, protection if you will. Dan: Yes. Patrick Wood: Against this. Unfortunately, like I said before, the cities of the, of the world have been co -opted already by this nonsense. Dan: Yes. Patrick Wood: But that doesn't mean you can't convince them. Dan: Yup. Patrick Wood: Nobody, doesn't want to… nobody wants to do that. But, uh, you, you can confront these people and convince them, they need to take care of you where you live. Dan: Yup. Patrick Wood: And if, if they do that, there's so many things they could do. Um, but the citizens have to be in the, in, at the forefoot of that, you know. Dan: Right, right. I, just this very morning… I told my tech man, my soundman, I said, you know, kind of wistfully, I said, yeah, it's a great quote. And then I picked up and showed him my smartphone. And I talked about some other technology we're using, which can be used against us. But I liked his answer. He said, AI is okay, to the extent that only we use it for its own destruction. Patrick Wood: I agree with that as well. Dan: Good, good. Okay. Well, Patrick, um, how can our audience find out more about you? What's your website, etc? Patrick Wood: technocracy.news. That's where everything is. I have all my books there. I have, uh, my, uh, my bootcamp, uh, is there, and so many articles that you can tap into. It's just amazing. I've been at, at this now for almost 18 years, and I have a wealth of information on technocracy. I wish more people would come and, you know, drink to… drink from the fountain. But… Dan: Okay. Patrick Wood: Oh, well. Dan: Well, with this conference, with this conference, I think we can be, uh, I hope… I think we can be positive about this. Patrick Wood: I hope so. Dan: It was great to have you come. And, uh, how about everybody get a big hand for Patrick Wood, from Technocracy News. Thank you very much. Patrick Wood: Thank you.

from -

Sources/Links: Creative Commons Lizenzen https://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/