Marc Malone, Opting Out of The Great Reset |537|


Marc Malone alerts politicians to local Great Reset laws already in place.



Listen Now:



[one_third]Subscribe to Skeptiko with iTunes[/one_third] [one_third]email-subscribe[/one_third] [one_third_last]Subscribe to Skeptiko with YouTube[/one_third_last]  skeptiko-Join-the-Discussion-3

Click here for Marc Malone’s website

Click here for forum Discussion



let’s start with a clip from one of my favorite political documentaries.

(clip) An American ingenuity and hard work. Unlike my friend here, cam Brady, who believes that everyone should live in rainbow land? Yeah. There’s I like to say one thing. I’m an American too, and I have no idea what he’s referring to as Brainbow lane. Okay. I’m referring to a 13 page. Written by Camden Brady called rainbow land.

That’s something I wrote in the second grade.

I do not want. And rainbow in and you

Alex Tsakiris: that’s a good one from the movie campaigns, Zach Galifianakis, and will Ferrell. I was kidding about it being a political documentary, but I can. Maybe not. And it’s particularly relevant to today’s interview with the very excellent Mark Malone. And I have to say, this is one of those interviews. That I really, really enjoy. Because it changed my perspective, which is a nice way of saying it showed me where I was wrong.

So mark, as you’ll hear in this interview is all about political activism and political change around this issue of agenda 21. If you’ve ever heard of that or agenda 2030. If you’ve ever heard of that or the great reset if you’ve ever heard of that. Which I have to say to me always sounded a little bit like rainbow land Just whipping people up for something that’s never really going to happen.


[00:01:44] Marc Malone: And what I mean by that is most of the implementation of agenda 21 has been happening, but most people haven’t really noticed it happening. , so when 2030 came out in 2015, they’ve really started moving the train more quickly and started implementing in most major cities across the world, you think? Okay, what does that mean? I mean, most things are pretty much still the same.

Alex Tsakiris: Exactly more you in yada yada new world order. Yada yada. This stuff isn’t really gonna happen. Right.

[00:02:14] Marc Malone: That’s may seem the case on the high level, but when you go to the local cities, when you go to London, when you go to Los Angeles and you go to San Francisco, it’s not the case at all. So in give you an example, I launched this project in Montana. I did the presentation with them and I explained how it is implemented in Missoula. So the county of Montana on the west side,

you have what is called a non-governmental organization like United cities and local governor. They work with two American organizations, branches of the federal government called councils of governments and metropolitan planning organizations. Right? So basically you have this hierarchy that comes all the way from the UN all the way down to this.

These local organizations, councils of governments will say to your city council, your county council, , if you don’t adopt climate regulation, we won’t be able to give you the federal funds. They get those federal funds from the highway commission and some cases, even the department of Homeland security.


Alex Tsakiris: Okay. At this point, I have to tell you I was getting a little bit scared. I try not to let people push my fear button, but I still have a fear button.

And Mark’s very matter of fact, we are presenting what he’s found happening on the streets of Missoula, Montana. I did push my fear button. So I decided I better do a little bit of research. And try and find out what this agenda 21. Great reset officially. It really is all about what. Is the UN pushing here and what have so many countries , including the United States signed off on. So let me take a look. Okay. You too. Agenda 21. Okay, here we go from the world economic forum, 1.4 million views, Davos agenda 21. This looks official.


Clip: The pandemic has radically changed the world as we know it. And the actions we take today as we work to recover will define our generation.

Alex Tsakiris: Of course, obviously. No. Wait. Wait a minute. No. , it hasn’t changed the world. I mean, at this point in this game, the things we can kind of be most sure of as one is that some very wacky messed up people slash governments created this COVID bio weapon. And the other thing we know is that. It didn’t really change the world at the end of the day. It winds up looking. More and more like a really bad flu. So why are they so insistent on the fact that this is the major turning point event.


. We can see rays of hope in the form of a vaccine, but there is no vaccine for the planet. Don’t want to go. Status quo that you had before, simply because it was the status quo with everything falling apart, we can reshape the world in ways we couldn’t before

and that’s why so many are calling for a great reset.


Alex Tsakiris: Wait a minute now I’m starting to think. I really am in rainbow land. I’m starting to think this is some kind of conspiracy. There’s no other word for it.


(clip) And it’s not surprising that people who’ve been disenfranchised by broken system and pushed even further by the pandemic will suspect global leaders of conspiracy.

Alex Tsakiris: All right. So they’re saying it does sound like a conspiracy. So that must mean it’s not a conspiracy, right?

(clip) with climate change set to off the damage caused by the pandemic, the message from 2020 should be

Alex Tsakiris: Whoa. Whoa, whoa, slow down. Wait a minute. The climate change, global warming thing never panned out. It’s not true. I mean, all the islands, they said we’re going to disappear. They still are there. . They said the ice was going to melt and an article in our satellites show that there’s more ice than there was before. So don’t we have to recalibrate, that’s the sensible thing to do. Isn’t it?

(clip) the message from 2020 should be abundant capitalism. As we know it is dead. . So if you want to be a part of the change, then tune in, turn on and get involved. Follow the devil’s agenda right here, online on YouTube.

Alex Tsakiris: Oh, my. They really are trying to get away with this. And even though I’m not a political person, this is certainly an issue I can get behind. I don’t care what party you’re from. Tell me you’re going to do everything within your power to stop this craziness and you have my vote.

[00:06:46] Marc Malone: The approach that I’m trying to take via negativa is look the incentive. Basically very straightforward. Like I have to go back to Montana and I have three county governments sponsoring my plan now, by the way, which is great because six months ago I was just a random dude on the incident.

Then six months later, I have three counts of governments back in the plan, which is great. And we also had the governor of Montana drop climate membership and ban mandatory vaccination. So you can do a lot in a short time.


. You can do a lot. In a short period of time. Oh, it’s like those people in Montana.

. And I like them all whole lot more nowadays.

Stick around for my interview with Mark Malone and let’s figure out how we gum up this crazy machine a little bit.


[00:07:32] Alex Tsakiris: welcome to skip to co where we explore countries, heal science and spirituality with leading researchers, thinkers and their critics. I’m your host, Alex secures. And today we welcome Mark Malone to skeptical. Mark is us super impressive guy, Oxford trained philosopher, as well as entrepreneur political activist and founder of America, 21, which he’s here to tell us about, , mark.

Welcome to skeptical. We’ve already had a good little chat. We’re going to have a lot to talk about, but welcome. Thanks so much for joining.

[00:08:08] Marc Malone: Yeah, it was a pleasure to chat Ghana, Alex, I think last time was union of the unwanted.

[00:08:14] Alex Tsakiris: Yeah. Yes. Which you never get to chat a lot with each other about, but you know, it makes these connections, which is so wonderful.

I really love what they’re doing. So, uh, it’s great. So tell folks about America 21. I’m sure you get this question a lot. Number one question. What’s this guy with this British accent doing, talking about America 21 and saving America from global governance. Hey, you Brett,

[00:08:45] Marc Malone: did I get it? EV like I did a interview on mainstream radio statewide radio Montana.

Cause that’s where we launched this project. , because they asked me to, and we can get stuff. Uh, so, uh, in the foot, that’s basically what he asked me. He was like, so why do you even, like, what are you doing? Why do you even care? And I was like, well, because it’s my home now. I mean, I mean, I moved to. Four years ago.

My wife’s from here, my wife’s from Minnesota. That’s why I moved here. We have obviously two babies. So, you know, that’s the primary reason, but you know, th the other thing that I kind of mentioned tongue in cheek is like, don’t forget that half your founding fathers were also English born like me. Let’s not forget that.

Let’s not forget that many of the people that founded this country, women like me who are essentially English Republicans, which is what I am, you know? So, uh, we can’t forget our roots. I’m not saying we should be lost in that because we, you know, they carved out a new identity and I’m all for that, you know?

Um, but I am part of that history by default anyway. So, uh, here I am, but you know, I say this to people all the time and I really do love America. And despite its many faults, I do think it is still the best country in the world, but I would be doing this work in any country. If I lived in Thailand, I’d be doing it.

You know, if I lived in France, I’d be doing it. Cause it’s, it’s about freedom. It’s about.

[00:10:00] Alex Tsakiris: You know, I I’m with you on that. The way I always put it sometimes is, uh, the ideal is certainly our best chance. , I used to love the, the Navy ads that they used to run before they changed them, but it was showed this big, huge aircraft carrier trudging through the water.

And it said a force for good. And isn’t that what we want America to be now the interesting, the dark side is they’ve changed that ad it’s more or less the same, but you know what? The new tagline is a global force for. Good, of course. They’ll go tell, tell us about America 21 and what that.

[00:10:48] Marc Malone: Yeah. So I founded it as a organization to undo UN initiatives.

, so essentially what we’re trying to do at the most high level 30,000 foot overview is to repeal United nations initiatives, separate ourselves from global governance before it happens. You know, there is obviously agenda 21 and 2030, which we can talk about. I focus on what is quantifiable, what is provable?

I do have a lot of books from the global elite. You know, I have David Rockefeller’s memoirs. I’ve spoken to present ski who’s national security advisor for Jimmy Carter and a big mentor to Barack Obama. I have that books. Right. But we, we do have to be cautious not to equate correlation with causation rates.

So we do have to be, we have to be sure, right? Yes. Speaking of presents, he definitely wants it. A global governing structure. Rockefeller did Klaus Farb does as well, but we do have to be cautious. Right. We can make a lot of assumptions in that process and saying, well, because these guys are in positions of power and they want this, it must be the case.

And that’s of course not technically true. Right. So. I focused on the 20, 30 and 21 because they are provable. They are quantifiable. And with the 2030 legislation in particular, it is implemented in law, in this country, in every country, in the world, pretty much in most major cities.

[00:12:00] Alex Tsakiris: We got to run that down for folks.

A ton of folks will know what you’re talking about, but some folks won’t. So really dig into that. And what you mean when you say that it’s law, because what a lot of people will kind of skate and say, well, you know, that’s not really gonna happen and this might happen. That might happen. So dig into that.

[00:12:25] Marc Malone: Sure. So, um, just to kind of do high level of view again from the beginning agenda 21 was launched in 1992, by 179 nations, including this one, George H w Bush. Many people might remember the famous YouTube clip of them saying, you know, when we’re successful with this new old daughter and we will be, you know, the United nations can retain its peacekeeping role, right, as a leader of the world.

Well, he said that in 92, just prior, just after signing agenda 21. So the idea was we need to expand, uh, resource control, uh, for the sake of saving the world from climate change. That was the point. And in the document, it basically talks about three core composites. So land, water, and air, and the justification of course is, look, if we’re going to save the world from climate change, we need better regulation and control over land ports, Rita.

And again, I’m not sure. Pro environmentalist and I’m just not pro climate change industry. So the surface, it sounds pretty good. Right? I want to look out for the land and the water. I don’t want to pollute. I totally understand all that. I’m definitely not a major corporate kind of guy who says, Hey, as long as we’re making money, we can destroy things.

I’m not a guy at all, but we also have to be street smart about it and understand, you know, what that really means. And as you dig through the document, you know, it talks about everything from livestock. So page three 50 of the UN’s biodiversity tree assessment report states that’s right. That livestock food farmland, these things will have to be reduced if not eliminated completely.

Right? So the idea here is anything that’s petrol fuel rights that gives you, cause that goes traveling planes that goes farm land essentially is the restriction of any autonomy. And this is all documented in, you know, signed off by 179 nations, 2030. It comes in in 2015. Which a lot of people think is a replacement.

[00:14:11] Alex Tsakiris: . So hold on. Let’s pause there for a second because pushback potential white Knight saving the day is climate science, global warming science, which has completely crapped on all that nonsense from 1990. Right. And there’s actually been some progress in that. So climate gate shows that the science is corrupt and they’re making it up.

, many activists have come forward. Scientists have come forward and said, look, just go outside. And all those islands that they set are going to disappear. They’re still there. Go look at the satellite images of Antarctica. There was more ice than there was before. Go look at the Amazon. There’s more green re th they’re cutting down the forest, but that damn forest is growing up.

Just as fast as they’re cutting it down again. I’m not all about destroying the world so that we can jam more people in here. But I would have to say the, the time capsule of 1992. Is gone too. And we can’t go back and pretend we’re back there. They’re still pushing the global warming thing. And every time you turn around, but I think it has a different, a different tone to it.

Now when they play that music, not as many people are dancing and more and more people are going like, wait a minute. That’s done. I just remember last, last winter, man, I was skiing the whole freaking winter. It snowed from beginning to end. So do we have less to worry about with the failure? That was a global warming because it’s so in your face, you just live the fact that there is no global warming.

[00:15:51] Marc Malone: Well, you know, so often people will site B 97% of scientists all agree that climate changes is human caused. And this is based on 11,944 papers from John Cook university, uh, in Australia and Queensland, right? So they take in basically close to 12,000 scientific papers and said, Hey, 97% of scientists agree.

That’s not true because when you actually dig into those papers, 33%, only 33% agree. And that’s 33%. Only 0.5% say it’s totally caused by humans of the 33%. They say it’s partially caused by humans. And two thirds of the night, E 7% don’t actually have an opinion either way they don’t know. So that 97% figure is thrown around a lot as if that’s what they all agree on when no, that’s actually just what the papers are stating an opinion on.

There’s a study from Yale university that basically stated we’re at about 400 parts per million right now of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Right? So at 400 PPM, if we were to go down to as low as 150 parts per million plant life would start to become extinct. Right? So if we were to basically drop just over half where we are now, they say plant life would struggle to even exist.

We could go up. They said that we could go up to 2000 parts per million. So we could five X, what we are now and be comfortable. And in parts of history, I’m assuming they didn’t say when, but I’m assuming the industrial revolution launch, we were as high as 4,000 parts per million. So thousand percent.

Then the carbon dioxide levels right now. So we’re a very, so there’s all sorts of science that you can take either direction, but there’s plenty of very, very esteemed scientists and universities that have put out literature on this and said, no, the carbon dioxide levels are nowhere near dangerous. So we have to take that as well.

But even if you were to take the premise that it is real to some degree, which I find hard by the things you’ve said, right? There’ve been so many predictions that have never happened, never even close to happened. And in some cases have reversed. Why would your solution be agenda 21 global governance, right?

Why would that have to be the solution? Why would the solution have to be regionalization of, of nations, right. W and why not just use nuclear energy? You know, there’s all sorts of holes in the narrative. When you start to look at it, even if it is.

[00:18:10] Alex Tsakiris: Well, absolutely. So where I’m kind of was trying to take you and I re I’m know, you have a lot of ideas on this.

So I want to hear it is we’re in this kind of wrestling match, judo match. And so bushes standing up there in 92 and saying all this ridiculous shit, because the science doesn’t support it, or the science has it backed it up, which again, resonates with this thing that I’ve heard from Miguel Conner, from Anne byte radio, which I interviewed recently, and he was quoting somebody else, but he goes evil, always winds up, being stupid, you know, and I think that plays here.

Global warming is stupid. Anyone who looks into it even a little bit like goes to the science, you’re talking about Judith Curry, Georgia tech university climatologists. I love what she did on the cook thing. You know, the 97% just destroys it just completely utterly destroys it. And not only destroys the stat 97%, but more importantly shows how rigged the methodology was, how fundamentally rigged the science was, because if we are going to stand on science, we need good science.

I’m digressing a little bit. But the point is Bush looks like a, a pawn, an idiot for saying stuff that could so easily be reversed. I kind of, so that’s what I want you to play with a little bit is. Yeah, uh, agenda 21, total, total rigging accelerated tech dock receipt, but it didn’t work. It was a sigh up that kind of didn’t work.

And that doesn’t mean we let our guard down cause this next one might work, but I want you to play with that space that we’re in. And maybe you totally disagree with that. But

[00:20:08] Marc Malone: yeah, so it, it, I think it was a lot better than we think, uh, the issue is, is that because most of it goes on the tech, that’s it.

And what I mean by that is most of the implementation of agenda 21 has been happening, but most people haven’t really noticed it happening. Um, so when 2030 came out in 2015, they’ve really started moving the train more quickly and started implementing in most major cities across the world, 2030 legislation.

So essentially you could look at that as a milestone of the 21st century goals, right? Gen 21 is the 21st centuries is what they want to achieve over this. Century really by 2050. So 2030 comes in and they say, look, we want to have most of this in place by 2030, you think? Okay, what does that mean? I mean, most things are pretty much still the same.

That’s may seem the case on the high level, but when you go to the local cities, when you go to London, when you go to Los Angeles and you go to San Francisco, it’s not the case at all. So in give you an example, I launched this project in Montana. I did a presentation for the Republican party at that convention.

, but I was asked to, so I was like, okay, great. If I work with anyone who wants to do the work, right. I would work with the Democrats if they were up for it too. Um, don’t expect that to happen though. So in this case, I did the presentation with them and I explained how it is implemented in Missoula. So the county of Montana on the west side, now you can apply this to any county in pretty much any state and pretty much anywhere in the world.

You have what is called a non-governmental organization like United cities and local governor. They work with two American organizations, branches of the federal government called councils of governments and metropolitan planning organizations. Right? So basically you have this hierarchy that comes all the way from the UN all the way down to this.

These local organizations, councils of governments will say to your city council, your county council, uh, if you don’t adopt climate regulation, we won’t be able to give you the federal funds. They get those federal funds from the highway commission and some cases, even the department of Homeland security.

So they hold the money. They go, Hey, you want this federal money? You need to have the climate regulation, metropolitan planning organizations do it in the business sense. So they say, look, if you want to operate in our city, you have to adopt these stringent rules. They also break up the zones to try to make cities incense, more circular, more isolated.

The whole idea of this is to create city like states like the Roman empire and go into that more if you’d like, but long story short, as you’re looking at a city state structure, Basically controlled by the United nations, as opposed to Westminster, as opposed to DC, that’s generally the idea and they do it by implementing it locally.

So they bypass the nation that can be wrong. There are national, um, directives, but the vast majority of this goes straight from top to bottom. So straight from the United nations through the NGOs right down to the county level. And it’s implemented, you know, I use the example of Montana because I was there.

But as I say, it’s everywhere, they have implemented 20, 30 into county law. It’s in the law now. So by 2030, no fuel, no cars, most independent businesses would be ruined, no travel, et cetera, farmland restricted, everything. It’s.

[00:23:16] Alex Tsakiris: You’re bringing so much to the table that I’m sure people haven’t heard about and need to dig into your excellent website. Your blog posts are terrific. Well-written and then you do some great media appearances. So people can find all that. That’s not my job here. My job here is to be kind of skeptical.

Let me play you a clip. This is from an interview. Actually the years are piling up, but it’s with, , Dr. Alexander went from Ohio state university and James Corbett. Everybody knows James Corbett. And even though he hasn’t tuned into the spiritual connection and the consciousness connection and is staying kind of grounded, he still has provided an unbelievable eyeopening service to all of us.

But here’s the thing. Alexander Wendt is frilly. Pretty fantastic guy, even though he’s an academic and he’s super, highly respected in his field . So he comes out and he says one world state. Yeah, well that’s, that’s probably in inevitable.

And game just looking at it at a kind of global basis. You start with all of these tribes, you start with all these villages and hollering over the holler to talk to your neighbors down there, and then it becomes bigger and bigger and you consolidate control and power in particular. Now your army and stuff like that.

And he goes, yeah, one world state that is where kind of the game ends. He says. So let’s kind of flip the script a little bit. And instead of pushing back and denying, you know, that these guys are going to be successful. Okay. What this is really about is maintaining our rights, our freedoms in a OneWorld state.

How do we make sure that a one world state democracy works? So with that, I’m not asking anyone to agree with that, but I’ll play . The clip. Now between Dr. Alexander went and James Corbett, where they kind of, I hadn’t both on a tow it to with this James didn’t didn’t like that too much. Here goes on this episode of skeptic.

There is the, you know, the deep

[00:25:26] Clip: state idea that behind all this, there would be

some more, almost criminal

elements that would be, you know, dealing with dissenters and that kind of thing.

And, um, and I guess that is a worry. , but it

seems to me there’s much in what you were just saying is exactly how I would put it actually, which is that there’s a much better chance of dealing with that

element, that problem

in a single global structure where you have sort of a global democracy, then there is in a world of 190 separate sovereignties where nobody’s in charge.

There is no pretense


democracy. There’s no pretense of global law, um, and where the strong can

basically do whatever they want.

500,000 Reiki. Children had died as a result of the sanctions on Iraq. When asked, is it worth it? Is it worth it? And Madeline Albright said, well, yes, I think it is worth it to kill 500,000 Iraqi children.

I think that’s the mentality of these people. That human life really does not mean anything to them. And to hand them the power and control over the entirety of the globe is something that is, should strike fear into the hearts of anyone who understands what is really at stake here, especially given the technocratic control grid that we’re moving into,

[00:26:41] Alex Tsakiris: Okay, mark, what thank you.

[00:26:44] Marc Malone: Uh, yeah, so I’ve heard this one before I actually addressed this in my thesis on site. So people should read that or listen to the audio book version, which is on the. Because I address this issue, which is that, how do we protect individuals sovereignty? Is that let’s say that’s the primary function.

Right? Well, the problem that we see with a OneWorld state outcome is there’s no, who is the guarantee? Of the protection of that individual sovereignty. Let me give you an example. So in America we have somewhat a similar premise of ideas, right? Like in this country, unlike pretty much anyone else, we think guns are one of those important things, right?

Like you should have a right to protect yourself and if necessary to protect yourself from, the tyrannism of, of the state. Well, most people don’t share that ideal. So how exactly who’s going to be the guarantor of my individual rights in this one world state outcome, when most of the world don’t agree with that, that very fundamental ideal that we have.

We can also apply that to other things, right. We can apply that to freedom of religion. Uh, we could apply that to freedom of speech, but, but the gun one is really obvious because pretty much no other country does have that constitutional law. Right? I mean, Switzerland, they’re the only other country in the Western world that have guns.

And even then you have to go through like mandatory military, uh, mandatory military training, et cetera, et cetera. So. What I would say is that who’s going to be the guarantor because the burden of proof is on you. Right. This is your proposition. I don’t think that’s why I’m fighting against it. Not you, Alex.

I mean, the person making a right. So, uh, you have to tell me who’s going to be the guarantor of my rights when most of the people in the world don’t agree with my

[00:28:18] Alex Tsakiris: rights. Well, I think , what went is pointing out quite beautifully is you’re just kind of kicking the can down the road and we’re living that, right?

So ISIS is an app, okay. To is an app. , you’re, you’re not really securing freedom by having all these different kinds of things. So he’s saying ultimately what you want is what you’re talking about. Mark. We want a kind of moralistic, agreed upon set of constitutional rights, freedoms, life, Liberty pursuit of happiness.

And we want that. To be global and what he’s pointing out, which is the trick here is we need that to be global. Otherwise we’re always going to be being played as we have throughout history, by these shenanigans of, you know, oh, the terrorists are coming, oh, the whoever are the Huns or merchant over the Hills guys, it’s us against them.

You know, this is the judge. This is a just war

[00:29:25] Marc Malone: I would say. Yeah. So I guess this is an interesting thing because, , when I think of this type conversation, I’m thinking that more immediate, I think if we were to transport ourselves into the future, that would be a good thing to see. Right? The, the. The less friction we could create between the humans family, the better, , the more freedom we can create for the whole human population, the better.

Um, but I kind of look at this project of say, let’s call it, um, sovereign. I just call it sovereignty. Right? So this idea of retaining sovereignty and, or retaining our sovereignty, it’s a little bit like, look, I’m on, I’m on my way to Vegas. Uh, but I have to stop for fuel. And people are like, well, if you stop for fuel, you’re no longer on your way to Vegas anymore.

I’m like, no, I’m still on my way for Vegas. But if we don’t stop for fuel, we’re not going to make it a Vegas. Right. So I look at sovereignty in this fashion, right? So it let’s say we, we rescue America from, from this impending technocratic dystopia. Well then we can hopefully expand that and do that for everybody else.

Right. But until we do it for ourselves, we can’t do it for anybody else. We can not let these psychopaths have the control of the gavel of, of global governance. If it would’ve happened at all, I guess would be the.

[00:30:33] Alex Tsakiris: Let me throw this cause political activism, it just, it just doesn’t, it doesn’t sit well with me.

It seems like a giant, how do we get there from here? Kind of problem. And let me pull up something on the screen and I’ll read it

(–) , this is the problem I have with , political activism. It’s not that the last election was rigged. It’s that? It was so obviously in your face, rigged 105% voter turnout in this county, in Wisconsin, just complete in your face.

Like we, we don’t even care. What are you going to do about it? But the problem with that is we still have all these Trumpsters out there who believe that, you know, the Messiah is going to save it. This is like recent. This is like the last couple of days, CNN politics, , forgive the source, but here’s, here’s Donald Trump today.

Here’s the quote, Joe Biden keeps talking about how good a job he’s doing on the distribution, the vaccine. Hmm, that was developed by operation warp speed or put quite simply the Trump administration. And then they point out that this is a statement he’s just released from his save America pack. So he’s obviously gearing up.

Everyone thinks they’re going to select him as the next president again. So here’s returning to Trump’s quote, he’s not doing well at all. He’s way behind schedule and people are refusing to take the vaccine because they don’t trust his administration. And that he goes on to add, they don’t trust the Electra results and they certainly don’t trust fake news, which is refusing to tell the truth.

So you got a process that in a lot of different ways, but one of the ways that you have to process it

, this guy wants to put us. Back on schedule, if that isn’t code speak for , 20, 30, , I don’t know what it is,

[00:32:40] Marc Malone: right. I, you know, I’ve always been very suspicious of Trump because of the company he keeps, , the people that supported him in the beginning, don’t get me wrong.

I agree with a lot of these sovereignty ideas. Of course, I just never trusted him to implement them. , you know, and if we look at this, uh, Wilbur Ross, Ross, child, financial banker, uh, who we had as the secretary of commerce, I mean, and Alex CSR, you know, pharmaceutical ads, it just goes on. But, , I would say we have to look at politics a little bit more like funding of the country at this point, you know, and this is kind of why I, in the thesis on this.

I try to tap into that a lot more. And I don’t look at this anymore. Um, and I never really did as a leftover rights or Trump or Biden, Republican Democrat issue. It’s, there’s a sovereignty versus globalism issue that we’re in. And I think that we have to really start to think more like what the founders of the country thought like, and I’m not saying everything, I’m not saying we’re trying to reenact what they do.

I’m just talking about the premise of, of what the idea is, right? It’s not about a person, right? It’s not about an idea it’s not about, and it’s not about a person’s bounce an idea, right? It’s not about whether Donald Trump says the truth. It’s about truth itself. Right. And we have to kind of move it from this cult of personality.

Even with people in this movement. We’re talking about like, I love David. I know his family, I know his crew. Um, but he’s just a guy like we can’t have cultish personality things. It’s about the subjects about the matter itself, right? It’s about, um, it’s about us creating freedom for our children primarily.

And if something. Taking us off that path, whether it’s Trump or anybody else. And Trump obviously it’s, you know, then, uh, we have to discard that we can’t be cult, like when we approach this thing. Right. So we should, we should apply that to any kind of belief system we have or any kind of thing that we care about.

[00:34:30] Alex Tsakiris: Yeah. I think that’s really good stuff. And I think it, in a way it might relate back to the kind of pre-interview discussion we had, which I will paste right in here. And then that will allow me to kind of transition to this next question that I have about following truth about not following the call, not following the social engineering, which you are kind of an expert at deconstructing, both in your, , academic training, but also in your, your work.

And maybe you want to talk about that, but. One of the problems we have here is wherever we go. When we try to organize, we wind up with the strange bedfellows kind of situation and, , advocating some kind of process of sorting through that. You know, the, I run into the flat earthers, you know, not run into them and I’m like, you are killing us here.

You’re absolutely killing us. This is clearly a PSYOP to divide and rule because if you put somebody in the category of flat earth or all the normies that I talk to, all the scientists that I talk to, it can immediately just out of hand dismiss it because it’s so silly the same with the Holohoax hoaxers, you know, just interviewed a guy the other day.

Brilliant guy love his books, but they’re buried in the book is the. Nazi 6 million, you know, hold a hoaxer thing. He’s also a civil war revisionist, you know, like slavery thing, you know, it’s not under his ticket. There’s all these strange bedfellows that have been drawn to this truth movement. And I look to science a lot of times as a way to kind of cleanse that system a little bit,

how do we help bring people

[00:36:22] Marc Malone: towards. How do we shepherd, , the rest of the group into, , out of the Abbott’s wall, out of the slaughter house? Well, you know, there’s a couple of different things when it comes to science, you know, it, we have to look at that there’s varying methods, right?

Induction reduction deduction. For example, we have to approach things like certain things have to be approached in some ways, some things are best approached with induction, some of best approach with deductions, some with reductions. So what that basically means is induction is like small to big, um, and deduction is like big to small.

So you have like a observation to theory, theory, observation, for example, and both of those kinds of methods have really important and we have to apply them differently depending on what the subject matter is. Like you can’t apply, you can’t apply induction to. Really, I mean, uh, maybe a little bit more recently because we, we have the tools, right?

So you kind of have to take you where we need training. Firstly, we need people in this movement who, um, we, it’s not like we have so many geniuses, we don’t know what to do with them. Right. So w what I’m trying to do is like, I’m trying to do what I can, and no one is great at everything. We all have our skills.

So I’m trying to do as kind of rank it in, in, um, rank it and anchor it in logic, in philosophy of science principles, right? To just go look, there are a lot of the things you guys are saying, make perfect sense, but because they’re not properly anchored, a lot of people are kind of running away with the wind, but there’s another, I was writing a piece which is going to be my next thesis, which I’ll be putting out next year on this very point, this hodgepodge of people we have in our group.

Right. I just to give you one example, the two most unvaccinated groups in the country are white evangelical Christians. And blacks in the inner city of like New York and places like that. So you have what would seem like two very opposing groups who are now really the same group as far as the, the oligarchs are concerned.

So then what I’ve been thinking about is how is it that we can get these various groups to work together? Because generally what we have in this kind of Pareto distribution situation, like an 80, 20, 70, 30 rule, let’s say with 30% of the population, people like us who are not pro technocracy not pro, uh, charity, et cetera.

Um, we have so much in fighting and so many, uh, different justifications, which is an important philosophical epistemic claim. So histology being knowledge, justification is an important part of knowledge, how we justified behavior like, uh, should I really be drinking? Should I be eating this kind of food?

Uh, all the way up to God and all the way up to consciousness and all these things as well. Um, justification is important, but we’re letting that one epistemic source. Destroy everything in, in, uh, groups, because basically what’s happening. Is this you, I let’s grab a, I dunno, a Muslim let’s grab an atheist and we’ll all go together.

And because we have different justifications for why we want freedom, you may justify it by consciousness. I may justify it by God. Although I believe in consciousness too, from all the research I’ve done, but let’s just say, keep it simple that we have different versions. And then you bring in all these other people and some that you have 10 people all fighting about the justification.

They’re all saying. Yeah, but you want freedom because of, because of, uh, Yahweh, you want freedom because of, uh, George Washington, I think he was a slave on it. Write about it. And then suddenly what happens is that you’ve forgotten about the freedom because people are fighting over the justification for what they want.

So what I wanted to do in the next piece that I write, um, is to try to break that down. Why we should not be fighting over justification. Look, you may justify, uh, sovereignty for, because of P let’s call P. Americanism. And that’s called cue Christianity and let’s call ex uh, consciousness. It doesn’t matter.

The important thing is we want the same result here. We want free from tyranny. We want to work together to be free of that. So it’s the justifications that are, that are killing us out there that we’re fighting over.

[00:40:19] Alex Tsakiris: Love it. But is that really how the game is fought? And is that how the battle is won? If we look at the force that we are against and we look at the plays in their playbook, which they reveal to us all the time, one of them is to take advantage of exactly what you just said, right?

And this is the co-opting, and we’ve seen this historically in every community that rises up. you get any traction at all, you will be co-opted, you will be turned against yourself. You will be divided. How do you.

[00:40:56] Marc Malone: I think it’s all about, you know, it depends which layer we want to look at this, but there’s so there’s like this via negative, but as via positive, but right. So there’s, so there’s, we, we approach it from the negative, which is basically the negative incentives. Cause everything really works upon incentives.

You know, whether that’s incentives for spiritual growth or that’s incentives for financial growth or social status, like it doesn’t really matter. We, we generally follow incentives. So the approach that I’m trying to take via negativa is look the incentive. Basically very straightforward. Like I have to go back to Montana and I have three county governments sponsoring my plan now, by the way, which is great because six months ago I was just a random dude on the incident.

Then six months later, I have three counts of governments back in the plan, which is great. And we also had the governor of Montana drop climate membership and ban mandatory vaccination. So you can do a lot in a short time.

[00:41:45] Alex Tsakiris: Full stop right there. Tell us the whole story, mark. Awesome.

[00:41:49] Marc Malone: So, , yeah, so basically it’s about incentives and the, the method I’ve been using in Montana, which is what I want to replicate in other states.

Like it’s obviously not just Montana, I’m starting now because, , chairman of Yellowstone county Republicans. So the chairman of the county reached out to me and actually asked me to help. So that was what gave birth to this whole project. I had no idea I was going to do this. Like I go to, it’s funny enough.

I had a conversation with my, with God, with my highest self, depending on which language you want to use, , on December 30th last year. And I was like, can you just tell me what I need to do? Like, and then in the voice. Uh, just begin and the rest will come to you. And so, okay. So what I did is I started writing some notes of what I think could work.

This is January 2nd, this year. And then the day after this guy reaches out to me from Montana, he’s like, Hey, can you help me politically? I was like, isn’t that funny? I started. And that we are, it almost like it was cold to it, but incentives of basically how we get people moving. And in Montana, the tactic I’ve used is look by 2030, your pickup trucks are gone.

You, most of your independent business has gone. Your travel has gone. Most of your water resources are going to be controlled. Your farmland is going to be gone in centralized. It’s an easy incentive via negativa right. Do you want to get rid of this negative thing? That’s going to destroy what you enjoy on a daily basis.

Provably, look, here’s the legislation. I had a right here, Montana county. No conspiracy theory here. This is all proven. This is all true. Right? So that was what got things. So I did the presentation at the GOP convention on June 18th this year. , there were a bunch of different people that I honestly don’t know.

You know, there were congressmen, the governor, the Senator, chairman, uh, all these types of people, but I didn’t know who any of them were. , but there were a lot that listened to my talk and the governor wasn’t at the top of the Senate, it wasn’t taught, but a lot of the other guys were, so I’m imagining some congressmen and chairman, et cetera, directors, they then took this to the governor.

And three weeks later he dropped Montana’s climate membership, which was great. So that was just three weeks after

[00:43:45] Alex Tsakiris: how many states , are in the climate membership. How many have dropped?

[00:43:49] Marc Malone: , that’s the only one that I know of so far, but it’s, , over half the states in the country that are in it.

And this in particular, this in particular one was on the, you know, how you have the ninth court circuit, which is the, basically all the west of America. So west coast and the mountain region, it’s basically that region. , but the good news is. You know, we know this. If, if success works, it’s scalable, right?

So we know if we can make this work in one state, we can make it work in 10 or 20. , I’m not under any illusions that we can make it work everywhere, but we don’t really need to make it work everywhere. We just need to make it work enough to gain enough ground. So that was cool. And then, , I’m in conversation with these guys and the governor actually banned mandatory vaccination.

So even private businesses, can’t Monday vaccines in Montana. That was a few weeks after again. So now by this point, so December, 2021, I had a conference call with them about three weeks ago and I have three county governments now backing my plan for repealing agenda 2030. Um, which is great because it said six months ago was not even born yet.

So what can we do with. Five years. I think we can do a lot. And if we can just achieve this at a sort of state level, which is what I’m aiming for, because it’s about efficiency, you know, I want to be effective as much as I, you know, people often cite to me like, uh, Rosa, Corey, , who used to do a lot of agenda 21 stuff.

And Rosa was amazing, you know, , she, she shined the Latin a lot, but it was, uh, you can’t really go to San Francisco and fight illegal battles, something that they really want. So what ended up happening is they, she and her organization did like a three year legal battle with, uh, with the implementation of this and San Francisco.

And all that happened was that they just changed the name. So it went from, you went from one bay area to plan bay area, and then the cold case was dropped because they would have had to start all over again. That’s how these people work. So what I’m doing is taking what I think is a much more effective and efficient approach.

Go straight to the politicians that are incentivized locally. Yeah, the ones locally and regionally a far more trustworthy generally than the ones, of course, at a national level. So look, they’re incentivized, not just for that to keep that job, but for their own community to even keep business and keep a job with what is going to come with this legislation.

So, uh, I just follow the incentives, go to the people that most need this to be gone.

[00:46:10] Alex Tsakiris: Well, I love the idea of disrupting the system because I think that is ultimately how this thing happens. You know, it’s not like you change the system, you just throw enough gum in the gears and it kind of grinds down and then something happens.

What are some of the other targets? Are there? Montana sounds perfect. Idaho would seem to be a good target. God, can we get Texas in there? , what, where, where, where else can we.

[00:46:40] Marc Malone: Well, I think that the hope for us is obviously to go to all of the middle of the country and, you know, if New York or California, I used to live in, we used to live in California, which my son was born in, uh, California.

, if they invite me to go, I’d happily go. Right? But the thing is, I’m not going to be able to go and fight for something in an area where they’ll probably just like throw balls, piss at me for going. So what I’m trying to do is build a stronger network. I look at this like a building, a name for a band.

You can see the list. Let’s pull in the background here used to be a touring musician. And when I was building up a, a band, what I would do is I would like tall, like out in a circle like this. So you would kind of go, you would hit the major city, you ran and then you’d go a little bit out of it. And then a little bit further out again.

And eventually what you do is you’re, you’re going nationally, but you built out. And by doing that, what you’re doing is retaining a. Every time you building out rather than picking up a few people here and a few people here and a few people here. So I’m approaching this the same way we try to grow up from the middle, get a really strong core.

If we can get, say 10 middle states, which I would say would see as Montana and North Dakota, all the way down to Texas and Arizona, if we could kind of get this, Arizona is where I live now, by the way. , so if we could get this kind of middle region, then we, even if the coasts didn’t come with us, which I hope they do, and that would be the next step.

But even if they didn’t, we would have a free country still, we would still have a free land in the middle. And to go back to the chapter, you were mentioning earlier about the one world stay outcome, even if that treaty were to come to pass and it was inevitable, we would still be free from it because over the course of this decade, we’ve already repealed it before it begun.

, so that’s my hope. And I think that it’s achievable.

[00:48:25] Alex Tsakiris: , it certainly is a, a Ray of hope. th the part that I think is really kind of intriguing is. The absurdity that is being perpetrated here when it is exposed to people and they are given an option, it’s not a difficult choice to make. I mean, I think that’s really what’s if the battle is being tilted on the Upland demic thing, it’s tilted because of the epidemiological data.

If you will, if just the, the data data that you’re talking about, Hey, I saw these people at the football game, 70,000 people, not in war we’re wearing masks. Look at, look at the county data and see if there’s a big spike in CA well, there isn’t, let’s look at the state that has mass, that doesn’t have mass that is vaccinated.

Isn’t wait. I don’t see any difference. So I think the same thing can happen in. Montana or North Dakota or South Dakota where people go, wait a minute. There is another way that mark is showing us and they’re okay. They don’t seem to be crawling back into the, into the caves it’s working. And I think that’s a really important part of what you’re doing.

Do you want to speak to

[00:49:42] Marc Malone: that? Yeah, I think that, , there’s a few parts of the country that almost don’t need my help. Like South Dakota, South Dakota never even had a lockdown, never had at any point any COVID mandates. So it really is like the land of the free, I mean, South Dakota is really the only place in the us because I mean, Sweden even had some restrictions, South Dakota didn’t it was all really up to the people.

And of course Sweden’s halfway to a technocracy. So, I mean, the EU is talk about globalization. I mean, as part of the United Kingdom, I lived under the EU and I can tell you that centralization of power diff does definitely not lead to more individual freedom. At least not in any experience that I had living in under a 28 state controlled bureaucratic system.

But, , I would say South Dakota is a great example, Texas is a great example. Montana is now a great example. So we have these examples where they have really scaled back this stuff. And of course we know that the results. Particularly bad, but we also know we have treatments treatments that are 99.9% effective that are cheap and easy to get.

[00:50:44] Alex Tsakiris: But hold on I’m cause I don’t want to get too far into the COVID thing. Cause I’m taking it out of the COVID thing. I’m taking it back to, you know, agenda 21, 20 30 kind of stuff, which you’re laying the groundwork for where I th I sense that that’s, we’re going to have a similar situation where people are going to point to your states and what people have done politically and said, Hey, wait a minute.

They were able to back out of this craziness because otherwise you don’t have the contrast. You can’t say, well, everyone does that. You go, no, there’s some pretty sharp people in Montana who actually looked at it and said, fuck, no, we’re not doing that. And that got slipped in while we weren’t, while we were asleep at the switch while we’re awake.

Now it’s auditing. Somebody has to show that that is possible. I think that’s awesome that, that, that you’re doing that. I can’t believe it.

[00:51:38] Marc Malone: Well, yeah, sorry. Cause when you were talking about the Texas stadiums, I didn’t realize that we were using that as a, like a symmetry.

Yeah. So I think the one thing that we can really look forward to is when we’re successful with this in Montana, and then we can go to the next few neighboring states in there so we can continue to grow out or people will notice as that. We don’t have to be worried anymore. That five years from now, our businesses are going to be shut down because we don’t meet climate regulations and our cars are going to be taken from us now.

And our ability to fly on a plane is going to be taken from us. And our ability to even travel outside of the city state could be taken from us if it were to go to its conclusion. So I think that’s the exciting thing. Knowing that we still hold our own future in our own hands. And now we get to decide what we do with that.

[00:52:29] Alex Tsakiris: And I think if, if what we’re going through right now has taught us anything it’s that , the, doomsday scenario that you’re talking about, I think is easily dismissed by a lot of people. They go, come on, mark. They’re not gonna take my property away. They’re not going to take my pickup truck away, come on.

That isn’t really going to happen. And then you said, well, it’s right here in the law. It’s already in the law. And I go, yeah, but they can reverse that law at any time. What I think you’re doing, which is really powerful is you’re kind of taking that to the natural conclusion of saying, okay, great. We’re in agreement.

So let’s reverse the fucking law right now. If there’s no reason for it to be on the books, then certainly you don’t object to us reversing it right now. And. I don’t know if there is any legitimacy to political activism. I don’t know if there is, but that’s a Ray of hope, man. Ray hope

[00:53:21] Marc Malone: I’m not a big activist myself.

You know? , my work has, obviously I’m trying to hit it at a higher level than, than the usual activism, but I think activism is important and I laid out a, an activism PDF on the website, just a few steps that people can follow. And I think the reason that’s important is because in a lot of areas across the country and really across the world, uh, they want to keep that jobs, these local representatives, you know, they want to keep a job.

So if you have a thousand people sending in less. , putting the pressure on them we’ll then they may really feel that pressure because I have, um, I had a guy reach out to me from the south coast of England and he said he had already done this. So he takes, he took the template in England and started to apply it.

And he said he has doctors and lawyers on his side now, already. So they’re sending letters to the, you know, city county council and trying to get this repealed. And I think that there is a, again, it’s all about those incentives. The incentive, the person at the seat is to keep that job. And initially the power was obviously the person giving them the funding and America’s case councils, governments, metropolitan planning organizations, but that power shifts wants people in the town know what the hell’s going on because they really, the ones that are accountable in this constitutional.

And we still have a constitutional system, despite the fact that the county council is right at the bottom of that long hierarchy. I outlined there’s still the ones that hold the constitutional power, not any of the organizations that are above. So it is really all in your hands and it’s about what you do, where you live.

But I would say you have nothing better to do so often people say, why should I do it? I’m like, because you have nothing bad to do. That’s why,

[00:55:02] Alex Tsakiris: what do you mean by that? You have nothing better

[00:55:04] Marc Malone: to do. Well, you know, often people will say, ah, like I don’t really want to do that because you know, it, , it might not work.

People are too stupid and I’m like, yeah, but you have to try. And then people will say why I’m like, because you have nothing bad to, cause this is the most important thing that you should be doing outside of, you know, looking after your family, of course, and the basics in life. , you don’t have anything bad to do then.

[00:55:26] Alex Tsakiris: Okay. I won’t even touch that one. So, you know, as we wrap things up here and this is a fantastic discussion and any, there isn’t anyone who can do anything other than just applaud what you’re doing. And it’s fantastic. The moral imperative part of this is interwoven throughout, and we haven’t talked about it much.

We haven’t talked about Gnosticism and evil and all that other stuff that I care about a lot. And I particularly care about it being brought into these kinds of conversations. Not that it can be wrestled to the ground one way or another, but, you know, The guys in charge don’t have any problem with partnering with Michael

Uh, the guys who is the convicted Satanist pedophile way back in the day, but I mean, Colonel in the army and had all the connections kind of thing, , or Allister Croley if you really want to go way back in the day, you know, am I six, had no problem partnering on some level of, if government’s ultimate job is to protect. Collectively from the Hahn’s marching over the Hills, which is a real concern.

It’s been that way throughout history. Then maybe we want them to do whatever. Maybe we want them to not have the same kind of, uh, moral compass that, that we have, maybe they, we want them to have the directive of whatever it takes to win kind of thing. Anything there you want to pull out and talk about?

[00:57:03] Marc Malone: Well, when implies that there’s a presupposition of knowing what winning really means. Right? So cause often, , and I did this too, before I really dug into philosophy and science. , I made all sorts of assumptions about life that I’d never really thought through. And we always say these words like when good, but we, we, we don’t really clarify what our assumptions mean.

Like what does winning. Because winning implies that you’re at one destination going to another destination. Right. So I’m here and I’m going to go here. Well, where is it that you’re trying to go? What are you trying to win? Right. So I want to know what the destination is that you’re aiming for to know what winning really means.

Like, is it, uh, is it militarization of the world? Is that what winning is? And if that’s the case, then why, and I’m betting the wrong. I’m definitely not an imperialist, but I a hundred percent understand that it a vacuum in nature, abhors a vacuum, right? So if America isn’t in that vacuum, someone else won’t be a, and it will be China.

It will be Russia. And it was Britain before, and it was Rome before and they’ll always be a vacuum. So I totally understand now, so I understand there’s a need for pragmatism, but I think that we just have to clarify what we really mean by, by winning and good, as far as evil, the way that I would determine evil is solipsism.

This is kind of what . Learned and been able to understand it. Uh, less phone is essentially the philosophy that I am God, right. That I can be God, that I am. Okay. Yeah, right. That, I’m my own that I, my own universe, that I am my own world. And it’s solipsism, philosophically, the idea that your reality is your own and you so evil to me begins at that point.

That’s really, when you believe that your reality is the reality and no one else is really as,

[00:58:50] Alex Tsakiris: but mark free choice, freewill all the things that we value most also begin at that point. And that’s the tricky thing about the Gnosticism and create better than the creator gods and create your own myth. Is.

You know, Christianity is a cult that was imposed on us as a social engineering project and the direct connection we have with spirit with the divine, which is very real, doesn’t need an intermediary. And that’s the other way of spinning the positive way of spinning what the Gnostics are saying is don’t let that fucking guy be your intermediary to divine.

You have a direct connection to the divine. Don’t let someone tell you they have the book, they have the manual that you have to follow. So it’s not, it’s it’s tricky, right? Or no.

[00:59:41] Marc Malone: Yes. Yes. But we also have to be very practical about the fact that we live in a real world that has, you know, that requires bridges to be built.

That requires hospitals to be run that requires food to be created. And if you look at so, I mean, we I’d love to have another conversation about the spiritual stuff. Cause I think we could get into some really interesting stuff, but we don’t have the time to dive deep on it. But I would just look at the new Testament as it’s a guide book, right.

For, for managing these sorts of expectations socially, culturally. Right. And it’s a guide book that a lot of us civilization was built on now is also built on a lot of our soul is also built on a lot of Play-Doh. Wasn’t just built on that. So we have these guidebooks that have. Aiming us towards a certain direction to us society throughout our history.

And we have to be cautious because while there are, I agree with you totally, that you don’t need a middleman to be connected to your spirit and God. Right. Totally agree. And I don’t agree that there’s any one full Lance to read though. The way that I look at it is that you have to think of it more like a coherence spectrum.

So you have, let’s say very coherent and in very incoherent and it’s a spectrum, right? And there’s a gradient. And some, like for example, Christ could be really high on the coherent too. Like that’s very coherent God, but y’all wait, could be really incoherent to, to God. Right? So you, what I’m saying is I’m not totalitarian.

I look at these things as a coherent spectrum and I actually, after to Christ would look at our soul is more coherent than most. Which most Christians would like to burn me at the stake for, but, uh, but that’s how I view it because I look at it as how does it match up to the reality that I see. And if I look at say some of the teachings from Jesus, they match up very much to the reality that I see.

Right. But so do they from Aristotle to, so they from Plato. So, so what I’m saying is that we do need these guides. We have a society, we have a structure that we need to keep working and we need to keep an order. And if we’re going to replace one, we have to be damn sure that it, it can work. And we have to really understand how it’s going to work for everybody as a society.

But as far as institutions, as far as people playing God, as far as people thinking that the voice of God, I completely agree. Yeah. And I think with evil though, it’s really begins at that place that you are where you really don’t see the other people as a reality like yours. Right. You know, that’s kind of the idea that I’m God, right.

This is my reality. I can do whatever I want with it. I think evil kind of has to start there, right. Because it’s almost like if you don’t believe that you’re not really capable of doing evil, otherwise you’d have too much compassion or empathy

[01:02:15] Alex Tsakiris: much to talk about and round too. So that’s, that’s great stuff.

And we’ll get into we’ll we’ll do this again. Cause it was so terrific and uh, blown away, blown away by, , Montana. I didn’t know. It was as far along

[01:02:31] Marc Malone: as it is my fault, because I need to do a better job of like screaming the winds on the website.

So I’m going to start doing that. I think I have to put them somewhere front and center. , because I am already shouted. Like they’re probably buried somewhere at the bottom of some article, so I’ll

[01:02:45] Alex Tsakiris: have to update that. , my fault, not yours. Check out America, 21st , Mark’s done a number of other media appearances that are more straightforward probably than this one in terms of what he’s done, but we’ve actually did a great summation of what you have there too. And we will come back for the spiritual discussion. Cause that’s one of the things that’s really cool about this guy.

As you can tell, he’s an extremely deep thinker, but he also has a broad number of interests that do come together for going to try and tackle this. Mark. What, what is coming up for you? You’ve hinted at a couple of papers, major blog posts that are coming up. Is there a book in your future here at your sounds like there ought to be?

[01:03:30] Marc Malone: Yeah. Yeah. I want to do a book next year. I’m going to try to compile all these separate pieces and make it into one coherent body of. , I just, honestly, haven’t had the time, uh, to, to do that, but that will be a 20, hopefully this time next year we’ll have a book. I also have, I’m doing a conference in Montana again, which is the three county government sponsoring it, , on February 18th, , which will be a live event.

There’ll be 250 people there. So, um, if you’re in that area, feel free to

[01:04:01] Alex Tsakiris: come along. Will it be a broadcast or anything like that, or is that possibility?

[01:04:06] Marc Malone: I’m going to try to get it broadcast yet because I’m going to be doing, , uh, essentially a two hour presentation. So I will try to get it if not broadcast, at least recorded, you know, so we can look back on it.

So that’s going to be my priority for the next like two months. , we need to kind of get that thing through the door and get that done so we can move on to, to reclaiming more of our territory. I’ve come back as the reincarnated spirit of the English Republicans than coming to take territory by territory by.


[01:04:35] Alex Tsakiris: get my blood pumping, Mark Malone America, 21st century. Thank you so much for joining me, mark.

[01:04:43] Marc Malone: I appreciate it, Alex. You didn’t grow up, man.


thanks again to mark. Polandra joining me today on

One question I tee up from this interview and it’s kind of the hidden level three question.

How can anyone who thinks that the plan DEMEC was something other than a plan DEMEC reconciled the fact that they already have an agenda in place legislation in place laws down at the Missoula Montana level in place. . That dovetails perfectly with said pandemic. How would that be?

If it was not in fact. A plan. DEMEC rhetorical question. Take a stab at it. Loved to know what you think. Till next time, take care. Bye for now.

(music: Improvisation 2 Spectre Folk)
(music: Tomie’s Bubbles Candlegravity). [box]

  • More From Skeptiko

  • [/box]