Rockefeller was the financier; Brzezinski was the academic.
That was the ideology that David Rockefeller, in particular, embraced in order to essentially take the world's
resources out of the hands of nation-states and the people.
The Trilateral Commission has been largely inactive—at least in the public eye—for 45 years, but now they are
speaking out again to, so to speak, reap the rewards.
They have established a monetary system; they have set up their scientific dictatorship using AI and the entire modern
surveillance infrastructure that has been installed worldwide.
So they're ready to strike—especially with all these data centers being built all over our country.
This is about controlling the entire world.
Today I am joined by a renowned author who has been educating the public for decades about the
Trilateral Commission and the coming technocracy.
You've been a guest on Kla.tv several times before, and I'm very happy to have you back with us, Patrick Wood.
Thank you for having me back.
It's been a long time.
That’s right, and a lot has happened in the meantime—one of which is that you published this book, *The Last Betrayal: A Cautionary
Tale—How Technocracy Destroyed America*. You’re a co-author.
There are two authors, right? You and Courtenay Turner.
And you just published it recently—I think at the beginning of the year?
It was released on November 4, so it's only been on the market for two or three months.
Wonderful.
Yes, it's a really good read.
It's nice that it's so short and to the point.
Essentially, it summarizes what happened during Trump's first year in office and provides insight into the
historical origins and ideologies behind current developments here in the United States.
So the first question I'd like to ask you is:
This book deals with the Trilateral Commission, Zbigniew Brzezinski's book *The Technotronic Era*, and related topics.
Who founded the Trilateral Commission, and what was or is its main goal?
Those were Zbigniew Brzeziński and David Rockefeller.
Rockefeller was the financier.
Brzezinski was the academic.
It's kind of like "Beauty and the Beast," so to speak.
And Brzezinski wrote this book while he was a professor of political science at Columbia University.
The title of his book was "Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technotronic Age."
He basically used the word "technotronic" instead of "technocratic."
So, in this context, I would consider both terms to be synonyms.
But that was the ideology that David Rockefeller, in particular, embraced in order to essentially take the world's
resources out of the hands of nation-states and the people.
It has been a very long campaign—obviously 50 years or more—but we are seeing a consolidation, a massive pooling of resources
from around the world into stronger hands, so to speak, no longer in the hands of states, nation-states, or individuals.
Hmm, that's interesting.
And when we talk about this consolidation , this whole situation we're seeing right now—with the U.S. government going after
Venezuela's oil, the threats to take over Greenland and Canada…
Is this moving in the direction set by the Trilateral Commission?
Or how would you categorize that?
Yes, in fact, the pursuit of the North American Technat dates back to 1932, when Columbia
University embraced the Technocracy movement.
Basically, they wanted to create a new economic system—a resource-based economic system.
And back then, they decided what the North American Technat should look like.
Basically, they had a map; they never said how they were going to do it.
And yet they had this map, which included Greenland, Canada, the United States, Mexico, all of Central America, as
well as Colombia and Venezuela at the tip of South America.
That's a crazy plan, but that's what they said.
Well, this is the natural geographical makeup of this continent.
However, it did not cover all of South America.
Nevertheless, they published this map.
And it simply went unnoticed for years—even decades—until recently, when Trump set his sights on Greenland.
And Panama was another destination as well.
And now Mexico and Canada are in the spotlight.
So this seems to be the modern fulfillment of that early image.
Yes, and it seems that not only is Trump in the know, but so is Mark Carney, the Prime Minister of Canada.
I mean, he's always saying, "If you're not sitting at the table, you're on the menu."
He's referring to Canada and other "medium-sized nations," as he calls them, which, it seems, are on the
menu—that is, they'll probably be devoured soon, I guess.
Oh, yeah. You know, that's interesting.
The Trilateral Commission was, at least in the public eye, largely inactive for 45 years.
But now they're speaking up again, so to speak, to bring in the harvest.
Mark Carney is a member of the Trilateral Commission, number one.
Well, look at that.
Keir Starmer in the United Kingdom is also a member of the Trilateral Commission.
And there are also other members all over the world who, so to speak, take their place.
And then, of course, you have all those hardcore technocrats in Washington, D.C.—who, by the way, are all billionaires.
People like Kratsios, Lutnik, the Minister of Trade, David Sachs, and so on—and, of course, Elon Musk.
These are the world's top technocrats.
And they are rising up alongside members of the Trilateral Commission all over the world.
Just imagine: This seems, so to speak, to be the end of the “technotronic era” that Brzezinski spoke of in 1970.
That's interesting.
And the entire political order seems to be changing—I mean, the existing order seems to be shifting.
Would you agree with this:
A lot of people say that Trump is the wrecking ball for the old system—and not just Trump, but
politicians throughout the Western world right now.
Would you say that's the right way to think about it?
I think so.
You know, I have to say that this isn't about politics; it never was.
It was always about the economy, which isn't obvious to most people.
We are, so to speak, political beings.
We want to discuss things.
We want to analyze what is happening in Washington or elsewhere.
And so, over the past 50 years, the economic system has continued to evolve in full view of everyone.
We see some crazy things coming out of the political system, but all of that is also rooted in the economy:
For example, the United Nations’ “Agenda 21” and “Agenda 2030” programs:
It all began with doctrines originally developed by the Trilateral Commission.
But you see, we have agreements—global warming, you know, climate change agreements—that turn into
political issues, and people are scratching their heads.
What are they thinking?
From the very beginning, it was all about business.
And so we see how the world is currently moving toward this economic system at an incredible pace.
But it took a long time for us to reach this point.
For example, when the Trilateral Commission took over the Carter administration under President Jimmy Carter in 1976,
they explicitly stated that they had no interest in politics.
We thought she was crazy for saying that, you know, that she wasn't being sincere.
But they were really serious about it; they had set their sights on the world's economic powerhouse, namely the United States.
So if they could use that as a springboard to introduce their new economic system: That worked very well when they passed
it on to the United Nations to spread it throughout the world.
Now we're dealing with a global technocracy, not just in America.
That's right. So when you talk about this new economic system, how would you describe it?
I mean, what's the point of it all? What makes it special?
As far as we're concerned, it will probably amount to a scientific dictatorship for people all over the world.
In a sense, this will replace the current political system.
As early as 1932, the technocrats wanted to get rid of all politicians in the world.
And that's crazy.
But they said, well, we have the science, we have the technical capabilities, and we have the know-how to make this happen.
There's nothing to discuss.
We'll just tell you what we figure out using our slide rules or whatever.
And you just obey.
So they thought that people didn't need to discuss science because science is unambiguous.
So there is no need for interpretation.
And that's crazy.
People ultimately rejected it, but the same philosophy—or, if you will, the same approach—of the technocrats can
currently be observed in Washington, D.C., where they are effectively dismantling our government right before our eyes.
And that means that politicians will eventually leave office.
They are currently being reduced to a minimum.
The power they may have had as recently as 10 years ago has been taken away from them.
And they're still passing laws.
They're still arguing about things.
But they don't see this other monster coming—this economic monster that, at that point,
will essentially take over the entire world.
That's right. I spoke with my colleague yesterday, and part of the conversation was about how Trump, with all his crazy
behavior and his reckless demeanor—which many people find quite provocative—is drawing all this attention to himself.
And that he's losing support because of it.
And the question is, a lot of people think he makes a lot of mistakes, you know, but is that even a mistake, or is that the
actual plan—or part of the plan—to make politics seem so ridiculous, so wrong, and basically pave the way for the
system that comes after all of this—basically, after politics?
That's it. That's a good observation.
I think that's probably true.
All the forces that have essentially torn Western society apart over time—mass immigration,
multiculturalism, the Marxist element, and the red-green axis with Islam —are also part of the picture.
All these other forces in the world tend to destroy society.
And Trump, of course, is no Marxist, but he has, so to speak, joined the demolition crew tearing down the old world order.
But what comes next? That's what we need to focus on now.
It's not about what happened before, but about what will happen next.
And you see these hardcore technocrats in Washington, D.C.
They seem to have a plan for everything.
You have set up a currency system.
They have established their scientific dictatorship using AI and the entire modern surveillance
infrastructure that has been installed worldwide.
So they're ready to strike, especially with all these data centers being built all over our country.
It's unbelievable—not just in our country, but also in the Middle East, Europe, and China.
Right now, everyone is busy building data centers.
Why do we need all this computing power for AI development?
It's not just about being able to have a chatbot as a friend.
That's not what it's meant for.
This is about controlling the entire world—all financial transactions.
Imagine if the stock market were to feed this “Beast” system—the Internet of Things, if you
will—with data from sensors in cities all over the world.
And now we even have tracking and surveillance of everyone in the world—especially in our
own countries; we’re not immune to it either.
So you see, the superstructure has already been created to control whatever emerges from the chaos.
Yes, that's true.
And in this book, you mentioned all the AI development plans and laws that were introduced just
last year, during Trump's first year in office.
What concerns you the most, or what do you think we should pay special attention to?
The ideology behind many of these “tech bros,” as they’re called in Washington, D.C.—people like the “David Sacks of
the world” and the “Peter Thiels of the world”—is currently guided by a philosopher named Curtis Yarvin.
I have to say, he's not a philosopher, but he pretends to be one.
And he has created a modern philosophy or ideology based primarily on technocracy.
But you can see many similarities.
He created this philosophy that all tech bros are currently following.
For one thing, he wants to establish a monarchy, abolish the presidency, and establish a monarchy.
All state power is to be transferred to a person who is essentially a dictator.
That means there would no longer be a need for a political system.
Under such a system, Congress would be powerless.
There might be a parliament, similar to the British one, but it wouldn't be very effective at getting things done.
And he wants to transform all private property in the United States into a sovereign corporation, which he calls “SovCorp” .
And SovCorp will own everything, and you won't own anything anymore.
This is roughly in line with what the World Economic Forum said a few years ago:
“After 2030, you won’t own anything anymore.”
By the way, that wasn't just some empty speculation that someone threw out there at the World Economic Forum.
But that was the plan from the very beginning: to take all private wealth out of the hands
of the people and put it into their own hands.
That's really, that's crazy.
What happened after Trump took office wasn't just a matter of broken promises.
In the past, promises have always been broken .
Every politician does that, right?
It's clear to everyone that there will always be broken promises.
But we're talking about something else here.
What happened after the inauguration was that people—especially the populist movement—were swept up in this nonsense, by the Dark
Enlightenment , by Peter Thiel, Curtis Yarvin, Elon Musk, and all these people who have taken over Washington,
D.C., to introduce this completely alien system that had nothing to do with “Make America Great Again.”
That was a complete betrayal of the populist movement.
And on top of that, all the other Americans who held different views—perhaps even socialism or communism, who knows—were
also deceived, because they, too, failed to see it coming.
And no one asked them; no one tried to consult the American people or seek their approval on whether this would be a good thing.
Right, and I have a lot more follow-up questions, but to get back to what you said about assets: They want to take
everything away from us so that we own nothing anymore and, as the World Economic Forum put it, are supposed to be happy.
What role does the tokenization of assets play in this?
I mean, what is a tokenized asset compared to regular ownership?
Well, this is a mechanism they can currently use to extract value from the world's assets.
For example, from your home, real estate, timber, mineral rights, and the like.
Tokenization—let me take a step back for a moment.
We know that central banks around the world have created digital central bank currencies.
They were all involved, and it was spearheaded by the BIS .
Immediately after taking office, Trump issued an executive order exempting the Fed from
conducting any research on digital currencies.
Well, that has paved the way for the privatization of a monetary system created by people like Michael Kratsios, particularly
David Sacks—the AI and crypto czar—and others in Washington.
They have created a financial system that includes the payment side.
That used to be the central bank's responsibility.
But now they have created a parallel track to digitize assets—not debt, but assets.
This so-called tokenization could, for example, lead to U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick coveting the 680
million acres of land that belong to the United States, which is owned by the federal government in America.
By the way, that's over 30% of our country.
They shouldn't have it, but they do.
He coveted all the land that could, so to speak, be tokenized and converted into a tradable asset that
could be sold worldwide to anyone who wanted to buy it.
And the property is shattered into a thousand pieces.
Someone will have to control this property, but it won't be you and me.
Larry Fink, the CEO of BlackRock, recently said at the WEF meeting: "Everything that can be tokenized will be tokenized."
All the world’s assets—the rainforest, the land of the United States, your property, the houses, and other
assets—have been amassed by the BlackRocks of this world.
This allows them to create a tradable asset that is divided into one thousand million parts—essentially like shares of stock.
And where will these shares end up?
Well, they could be in the hands of a sheikh in Saudi Arabia, a dictator in Russia, or some
other sovereign wealth fund somewhere in the world.
Does anyone know where they're sold?
Maybe BlackRock will end up with all these tokens itself.
I don't know.
But the point is that neither you nor I will have access to it, nor will we have any way of controlling the property at all.
So whoever has control over the property—after all, the property doesn't move, does it?
It's just there.
A forest. It simply exists in space and time.
So if someone has sold the entire value and it's scattered all over the world, then someone has to come along
and say, "Well, we're going to harvest this wood now."
They'll get the trees— be cut down and turned into lumber or whatever.
Or this mine will be developed, and we'll extract silver—or whatever—from it.
Who will that be at that point?
Well, at the local level, there obviously isn't anyone who can do that.
It has to be the people at the top who control all these shares in the first place.
Right. And let's say I own a house and a car. I bought them with my own money and everything.
Can this be tokenized, since we have national debt and I'm a citizen who has to pay for it?
Or aren't we ready yet?
What do you think about that?
We're not quite there yet, but I think we'll see when...
It is likely that the United States will eventually file for bankruptcy.
I don't know what that will look like, but it's foreseeable.
Countries can file for bankruptcy.
They've done that before, so it wouldn't be a big deal for us.
But the idea would be to remove the debt from the balance sheet.
For the country, for the United States, and for all the people in our country who are in debt, these debts must also be paid off.
In other words: All debts will eventually be paid off.
All that remains, then, are the assets.
One could imagine, for example, that the 680 million acres in our country would be tokenized and then held by
BlackRock, which would then handle the public distribution.
Imagine you own a house worth $500,000, have $250,000 in debt on it, and have $250,000 in equity.
Here's my offer:
I will buy back your equity at double its value in the form of tokens derived from the other tokenized assets.
You will receive these tokens, and we will forgive your debts.
We'll waive the entire amount for you.
And at that point, you can rent the house back from us.
And you can stay there and make your own improvements if you'd like, with a long-term lease if that's what you want.
And we'll own the property; you'll live in it, pay us rent, and, for example, maybe have $500,000 in tokens in your pocket.
And you might think that's a good deal.
For many people, this will be a good deal.
In fact, there are many people who cannot leave their homes right now.
Because even if they have equity, they can't move because they would then have to pay another mortgage or rent that
would be much higher than what they're currently paying.
You can see that the decision would be an easy one for you:
"Oh, I'll get these tokens , then I'll rent a place, and life will be great."
At that moment, you would be happy.
But at this point, you have your digital currency, and you're under control.
The problem is that this means you forfeit the chance to ever own property again.
At some point, you'll run out of tokens.
That's just the way life is.
They'll use it up.
At some point, you'll run out of them.
Hopefully, of course, you'll have a job.
And will you be able to replace that equity with your job at that point?
No, you won't, because you won't have enough income to save enough money to start a business, carry out another project,
build another house, or whatever else you might want to do.
In principle, the elimination of debt might seem appealing to some people.
However, the price for this would be the elimination of private property.
That was a very, very good illustration. Thank you very much.
And since we're on the subject of being out of a job:
That is the reality for hundreds of thousands of people who have been laid off in recent years.
This year alone, tens of thousands of people have already been laid off from the Big Tech industry and
from all sorts of other sectors of the job market.
And in your book, you quote Curtis Yarvin, that thought leader, that political theorist.
And he writes: "In short, our goal is a humane alternative to genocide."
This is the ideal solution, one that achieves the same result as mass murder.
This means, then, the removal of undesirable elements from society, but without moral stigmatization.
"And the best alternative I can think of is the virtualization of those under our care, which means that a virtualized person is
kept in constant solitary confinement in a cell equipped with an immersive virtual reality interface
that allows them to lead a rich, fulfilling life."
Isn't that crazy?
Who would even listen to this guy?
And I'm curious to know who's listening to him.
And while we're on the subject of this theory: What's the plan for all these unemployed people, whose numbers keep rising?
Well, you know, old Curtis got hooked on that movie, *The Matrix*.
Basically, that was exactly what the movie *The Matrix* was about.
People who were in a cell without knowing they were in a cell.
And they were led to believe in an imaginary world where they could pretend, I suppose.
And the plot was definitely a crazy premise.
It had many gaps.
It shouldn't be possible, but you can still see that Curtis Yarvins' thinking was influenced by a movie like "The Matrix."
I think there were three *Matrix* movies in the end, but the first one probably showed what it was talking about.
Exactly.
You're right.
Who wants to listen to a weirdo like that?
Aside from the concept of virtualization, when he talks about the humane alternative to genocide.
He says that this is the ideal solution, one that leads to the same results as mass murder.
That's right.
So he equates this with mass murder.
And, in parentheses, “the elimination of undesirable elements from society.”
Who does he refer to as undesirable elements of society?
Maybe everyone who is unemployed?
He doesn't say that.
The useless class, as Mr. Harari would say.
I know.
And then he continues: "but without the moral stigma."
So there is a moral conflict that he simply brushes aside:
"It's like murder, but we don't have to worry about the moral stigma."
"Because we're not really going to kill him.
"We'll just drive him crazy, lock him up in a cell, and give him a wonderful life."
The idea that anyone could think this guy should speak for the entire tech industry is just crazy.
And I have to say that, above all, these “tech bros” in Washington, D.C., are all following his philosophy right now.
While there are many people in Silicon Valley who disagree with Curtis Yarvin, they are not in power.
That's the problem.
So we can't say that all the tech bros in Washington or Silicon Valley believe Curtis Yarvin. Because they don't.
But the people who have made it to the top—all of whom, by the way, are billionaires—I don't know a single one among
them who isn't a billionaire, like Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, Michael Kratsios, all those people—they're billionaires.
They are the crème de la crème, and that is their philosophy.
That's crazy.
Speaking of billionaires' philosophies:
In your book, you have a chapter on Peter Thiel in which you outline these 10 points of his
philosophy. And one of them is: “Monopolize everything!”
That's his motto!
So my question for you is: To what extent is Big Tech currently monopolized?
In your opinion, how big is this monopoly?
Do you have any practical examples of how this plays out?
Absolutely.
Take Palantir, for example.
That's the company he founded together with Alex Karp.
By the way, both are members of the Bilderberg Group's steering committee.
That's, of course, enormous.
But basically, that means they're also master globalists.
Speaking of Palantir—Palantir is taking the world by storm.
There's no one who can even come close to holding a candle to what they're doing all over
the world with their surveillance software.
They've just taken over the United Kingdom. And the United Kingdom is completely thrown off track right now
because Palantir has taken over all of its intelligence work.
And in the United States, they’re doing the same thing: They’re not just collecting the data in Washington,
D.C., that came to light through the “DOGE” operation .
All data has been moved to the cloud. All of these different data silos have been moved to the cloud.
And then Trump tasked Palantir with taking all that data and turning it into actionable intelligence.
Then they were in the military, too.
They are currently the driving force behind AI in the military sector.
Let's take a look at that.
There's the civilian side, and there's the military side. What else is there?
Well, the intelligence agencies have them, too.
And we mustn't forget that Palantir was originally founded as a CIA company.
When it was originally founded, its purpose was essentially to outsource intelligence activities in order to
create a comprehensive information system covering everything and every citizen in the country.
That was TIA , a program for comprehensive information collection.
It was rejected by Congress.
The CIA wanted to do it, but Congress said, “No, you’re not going to do that!”
So they stopped it.
And then came Peter Thiel, who founded Palantir to wrest responsibility—or the
torch—from the government and privatize everything.
So their first client was the CIA for several years, while they perfected their software according to the
specifications the CIA wanted to incorporate into it.
So, at the moment, it does indeed have a monopoly.
There's no one who can compete with him.
There is no one who could take his place.
And that is the essence of a monopoly.
Yes, and the critical point for me is that as soon as all this data—collected from all these people—is linked
to your identity, they really know everything about you.
They know where you are—in real time.
And my question for you: How close are we to that already?
Are we there yet, or what's the status?
I see that we're already that far along in terms of infrastructure.
Not everything is activated yet, but I think the infrastructure has been set up.
Now, one might argue that there may be a limit to these massive AI data centers.
Or maybe they have 2,000 right now and say, “We need to have 3,000 before we can implement this plan.”
I don't know what the threshold would be—but right now they're building these things like crazy.
They're investing more money in her than she has.
Your money also comes from the Middle East, from Islamic sources, to build our data centers, along with other
equity capital provided by all these other billionaires to build this infrastructure.
This is undoubtedly a control system capable of managing all information in society.
And the purpose of collecting all this data in the first place and feeding it into AI software is to be able to
manipulate the object from which it was originally collected.
That's the nature of data, isn't it?
You don't collect data just to store it in a shoebox.
Right, sure. You want to influence that person.
You want to get to know this person better than they know themselves, create a personality profile, and
manipulate the public without their consent, don't you?
Yes, exactly.
That's interesting.
And now we’re seeing how the whole situation in Gaza is unfolding, and interestingly, people are openly talking about
establishing a technocracy there, and many people see this as a kind of... well, the whole situation in Gaza since the start of
the war—since October 7, and even before that—has long been an open-air prison with massive surveillance—and they
see it somewhat as a trial run for the rest of the world.
What do you think?
Is this whole situation in Gaza some kind of local testing ground?
Everywhere there were conflicts. And that wasn't just the case in Gaza. Ukraine, too, was and remains a huge testing ground.
That's right.
But wherever there is a conflict—a major military conflict, especially one that drags on… There are
certain hotspots around the world, such as Nigeria.
For example, you can see that Palantir is testing or rolling out its software because combat
conditions are necessary to test the software. You know...
And now they're testing it at ICE , aren't they?
I've heard that ICE uses Palantir's software and facial recognition.
Absolutely. Definitely.
That's just a trial balloon, right?
Yeah, yeah. I know. They use it for identification, for targeting, and for back-end access to other systems.
I recently heard a story about a woman who was protesting against the ICE. Her photo had been taken
with a smartphone equipped with special software.
In other words, the ICE agent took a photo of her—a headshot—and she thought that was the end of it.
A month later, she found out that she had been removed from the "Clear" program—the program that allows her to board a
plane without having to go through the regular security check.
You know, there's a program. I think it's called "Clear." And you have to apply for it.
So you provide all the information, including your biometric data and so on.
And then you can board the plane just by quickly showing your face.
Well, she was kicked out of that program.
So, how could that have happened?
Well, there was a connection between the time the ICE officer took her photo and the time she was removed from the program.
Wow.
See, that has quite a lot of implications, doesn't it?
The TSA is completely different from ICE, but still,
So they're connected to each other, right?
Yes, exactly.
My goodness. That's a crazy story.
And I wonder how much more of this is still going on.
Do you have these facial recognition cameras in Arizona now, too?
Oh, yeah.
There are a lot of cameras.
Of course, not all of them use facial recognition.
That's right.
For example, there are plenty of these license plate readers in Arizona.
Oh, yeah.
They identify your car by taking a “fingerprint” of it, so to speak—not just the license plate, but also the dents and
the stickers on the bumper—basically everything on your car.
You can combine all this information.
Oh, that's interesting.
Then they'll know: “You drive a 2012 Hyundai sports car with, let's say, pro-life stickers on the back or something like that.”
And they can give your vehicle an imprint—a fingerprint, so to speak—that can be recognized elsewhere.
Yes.
This is the kind of surveillance system that can track your whereabouts wherever you go.
It doesn't matter where you go, even across national borders.
So... these systems are currently being installed everywhere.
Wow.
Well, Patrick, we have to wrap things up soon, but I have two more questions—maybe the second-to-last one.
At the end of your book, you'll find this list of technocrats.
It's just a short chapter with names.
What struck me was that four of these individuals are actually executives at Anduril and
are now in the government or very close to it.
What do you see coming our way?
And what does this mean for the future of warfare and for the future of a state's executive power?
Anduril is exactly that—a company that manufactures autonomous killing machines.
I know. Isn't it strange that they're leading this group?
Yes, Anduril and Palantir are really very similar.
And what can I say—basically, this is a monopoly.
And they march in step.
There is a close connection between the two companies, not only in terms of management but also in
terms of the interoperability of their software.
Well, yes. That's really, really troubling.
Yes.
Wow. You often talk about the term "omni-war," meaning a war on all fronts.
And when I watch the daily news, that term always comes to mind, because I think that's exactly what we're being shown, isn't it?
Attacks and crazy developments coming from all sides.
If you had to tell our audience or the general public what we should be focusing on right now, what
do you think should be addressed or prioritized?
We certainly won't be able to stop it at the national level, but it has trickled down to the local level.
Yes.
But you have the power to influence things at the local level.
At least, that's how it should be.
There is a city council whose members live in your neighborhood and are accessible to you. You can contact them directly.
You can talk to them and convince them not to let that trash into our city.
For example, you can block crime prevention software, facial recognition cameras, and data centers.
Oh yeah.
All of these things can be rejected by your city council or, if you don't live in a city, by your county authorities.
And that is exactly what we should focus on now:
to build a protective wall around our community.
Don't let all this AI stuff get to you.
Companies such as OpenAI and Grok have all developed special versions of their AI programs for government agencies.
That's right.
I'm trying to remember what it's called. I think it's called Open AI, simply "OpenAI for Government Agencies" . I believe G-O-V .
Yeah, and "Grok for Government," I think.
Well, they're selling it to the federal government.
Yes.
You're basically covering the entire federal government with that.
But originally, they said in their press release that they would also market it to the states.
Oh, okay.
That means they'll eventually take it to the city level.
Under no circumstances do they want their city to have anything to do with, for example, OpenAI Gov or Grok Gov.
This can be blocked at the local level.
Will the government do it?
Most likely not.
And you know they'll say, "Oh, that's wonderful."
We can be more efficient, blah, blah, blah.
Sure.
But you can take a stand now and counter that.
As they say in old Western movies: “Intercept them at the pass.”
So that's what we should focus on now.
Yes, that's a good point.
And I think the most important argument—and I see this at the company where I work, too—is that people accept AI because it
helps them and saves them time when completing tasks and so on.
What—what are the arguments against all of this?
There are so many benefits that people see when they say, “Hey, we need this AI for our city hall.”
Do you have any points we can share with people?
Well, aside from what we're discussing right now, there's so much information.
I mean, even if you only have this information here, you still have something to talk about.
But there are so many aspects to this. AI is simply permeating every area of society and
is now also being used in the business world.
People have no idea what's going on.
For example, if your auto or home insurance policy is canceled, it's probably due to AI.
And you'll never get an explanation as to why your insurance was canceled.
But she's realized that you're a risk they no longer want to take.
And you'll get kicked out and have to pay more somewhere else.
At the hospital, your surgery will likely be approved by an AI—not by a human, but by an AI program.
And if it says you don't need this procedure or test, you won't have it.
But no one will ever tell you, "Well, the AI made that decision for you."
Basically, it's simply time to resist.
Time to resist. Exactly.
With all our might—but not with us!
Okay. Yes, I highly recommend this book to everyone.
I mean, it's frightening, but it's the reality, and these are the people we're dealing with.
And I really liked your message about confronting our local authorities with reality and with the people behind it.
And that's probably the most powerful weapon we have right now.
We just have to show up and go out there, right?
Yes, that's exactly right.
Yes, don't be afraid to appear on their cameras if you show your face.
That's right.
They already know who you are.
Don't worry!
If you want to protest, just go out and do it—they'll find you one way or another.
They already know who you are.
They know. They have a profile of you everywhere.
So don't think that anyone can hide by not showing their face.
Right. Wonderful.
Well, Patrick, thank you very much for this wonderful interview.
And finally, one more question: Where can people find your free work, and where can they buy your book?
Yes, of course. Technocracy.news
The books are available there.
But you can also buy individual books on Amazon.
And the audiobook, too. It's very popular right now.
And the Kindle version is also available on Amazon.
So if you want those, go to Amazon.
You can only get the books themselves at technocracy.news.
If you are outside the United States, you should not do this, as international shipping costs
are currently higher than the price of the book.
So you can go to Amazon and order the book in Australia, Europe, the United Kingdom,
and Canada through your local Amazon website.
Wonderful, Patrick Wood, thank you very much for joining us again on Kla.TV!
Thank you.
Dr. Paul Brandenburg – Physician & Educator: “Real life isn’t online; real life is analog.”
"So getting together, talking to people, sitting across from them—that's absolutely important and essential."
Connect with your local Kla.TV team!
www.kla.tv/vernetzung