← Simon Dixon Hard Talk
Simon Dixon Hard Talk
Weaponizing Crisis: The Asset-Stripping Phase | Simon Dixon Hard Talk LIVE (Full Episode)
03:52:50
Loading summary
Transcript214 lines
- [00:00]
Simon Dixon
This week we're going to cover four
- [00:02]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
big things that happened this week.
- [00:05]
Simon Dixon
We had a tech crash and no one's talking about it in the right way. We've got to look and read between the lines. We also had a massive escalation in Lebanon that people think is going to lead to a civil war. And I'm going to tell you exactly why I think they're wrong. On the other side, we're getting a lot of narrative around the problems with immigration and demographic issues. I want you to understand how this is used as a weapon and a tool and how weaponizing immigration is something you absolutely must understand or you're just
- [00:42]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
going to be part of the psyop
- [00:44]
Simon Dixon
in an algorithmic way, radicalized into being a useful tool for power and talking about power. This week we had the reversal of the bitcoin buying strategy from Michael Saylor. We're going to be tying it all together and we're going to be showing exactly how these are related. This week on Simon Dixon Hard Talk Life. Let's jump right in right now. Hey, hey, sovereign wealth builders. Simon Dixon here. And welcome to another episode of Simon
- [01:22]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Dixon Hard Talk Live.
- [01:23]
Simon Dixon
Today, we're going to dive deep into everything that happened this week, as well as some overarching subjects. And one of those is the whole concept of weaponizing crisis. Why is crisis an opportunity for the concentration of wealth? And really what I call the asset stripping phase. We're going to be diving into that in two parts today.
- [01:48]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
As always.
- [01:49]
Simon Dixon
On part one, I'm going to be covering a topic that people I think are really confused by. Can't really sort through what is actually happening, why it happens, and really what to do about it. And, and that's the subject of immigration. Now, I don't really want to discuss your views on immigration, whether it's a
- [02:13]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
good thing or a bad thing.
- [02:14]
Simon Dixon
It's more around why it happens, what it means and how it's weaponized and how crisis is manufactured and the implications of what you need to know to not be fooled by what they want
- [02:30]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
you to focus on.
- [02:32]
Simon Dixon
And we're going to highlight that as well by going through a bit more of an update on the, the Lebanon conflict and what that means. And really in the broader context of where we are going on a journey. And this week we had a bit of a tech crash and really it's not showing in the index because we're having this massive concentration of wealth phase which is distorting the numbers. And so we're going to go through all of that today and highlight it
- [03:01]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
with the events of this week.
- [03:03]
Simon Dixon
And then in part two, we're going to zoom out from the events that
- [03:07]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
happen this week and we're going to
- [03:09]
Simon Dixon
specifically go into the asset stripping phase. And this will be an interview that I did this week for Gold Republic Global, a YouTube channel. And I sat down with Alex Jordanov and we did an interview together. It was approximately, just under two hours, where we went through the specifics of the asset stripping phase, how it's happening in uk, how it's happening in Netherlands,
- [03:37]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
how it's happening in America.
- [03:39]
Simon Dixon
And we went through the kind of asset stripping operations that you need to be aware of. So that when you hear things like a wealth tax or you start to think our politicians are going crazy, or you see a regime change like we covered last week in the case of the uk, you know what the signals
- [03:59]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
are and where it likely is that we're going next.
- [04:02]
Simon Dixon
So the themes of this week's show that we're going to be covering is I'm going to dive into what I mean by the tech crash and beneath the surface and the markets and how to interpret it. Then we're going to be going through the immigration and demographic decline and why it is something that you need to be aware of so that you don't
- [04:23]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
get fooled into the traditional narrative.
- [04:26]
Simon Dixon
We've had some acceleration and some developments on this central bank, digital currency and stablecoin, part of the police and surveillance state, and how Lebanon and what it means and how it's changing the Middle east and what to look for next. Now we're kind of past the Iran phase. And then we're going to close off again with the latest updates in Bitcoin strategy and just digital assets in general, like this tokenized, you will own nothing
- [04:57]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
and be happy where the custodian owns
- [05:00]
Simon Dixon
the asset and you own the token. And we got some disclosures from the Trump family which confirmed what would be no surprise to any of my listeners. We've been following the money for years
- [05:12]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
in terms of his trades. But the central question that we're going
- [05:16]
Simon Dixon
to be answering is really that crisis is they don't just happen, they become tools. Now, depending on where you sit on the spectrum, I believe that many of them are manufactured, but even when they're not manufactured, the environment is created to make it happen. And then they become a tool and a weapon. And then what you have to do in order to unearth it and follow the money is ask yourself, who benefits, rather than simply what happened? Because every crisis benefits Somebody and some have the opportunity to manufacture that crisis. And then you can look at the macro, the markets and the economy in order to really figure out what might be the implications and where is this taking us. So let's start with the tech crash. And by crash I mean that we are actually one of the biggest stories this week was really not in the headlines. And the reason for that is because most people think in terms of indexes, the S&P 500, the magnificent seven big tech. And really the S P 500 is making significant weaknesses when you read beneath the surface, because the politicians will say stock markets are at new all time highs. But what is the real story behind that? And if you actually look at many of the former AI and tech leaders, they're already in a deep bear market relative to their all time highs. And yes, we had a correction and yes, I don't think this is systemically going to change anything. But what does it mean? It means that we are having every weakness in these markets. You get a higher degree of weakness in the smaller companies in that portfolio and more concentration towards the larger ones. Because the reason that SpaceX wanted to IPO is at the $2 trillion, 1.75 trillion was so that you can have money printing at the securities equity level.
- [07:30]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
It's called an atm.
- [07:32]
Simon Dixon
And an ATM means that you print some securities that are valued at $2 trillion. So that when a company like Cursor, which SpaceX immediately acquired using its equity, becomes worth less, then you can purchase it using SpaceX Equity and it dilutes the shareholders and it's a cheap currency because it adds more value into the company and it becomes like money printing itself. And so these large multinational corporations are able to concentrate more wealth by weakening the smaller tech companies and then using their stocks in order to make mergers and acquisitions. It's an old trick. That's what I used to do at the investment bank when I worked in corporate finance. But tech stocks are essentially way off their record highs. If you look at underneath it. Now, if you remember, I was a very early seed investor or series A investor in a later round in Coinbase and I invested in all many of the different Bitcoin companies, pulled it together
- [08:41]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
at bank to the Future with other
- [08:43]
Simon Dixon
investors and we kind of inadvertently became the BlackRock or Bitcoin now the broker that we built in order to work with the us we ended up selling to Coinbase and now Coinbase is taking meetings with Larry Fink and coordinating on Clarity act and they want to tokenize security. So it's very, you know, this is why, you know, I talk about this
- [09:07]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
business as a subordination vehicle and when
- [09:11]
Simon Dixon
it goes in the wrong direction, you end up working for the financial industrial complex.
- [09:16]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
A debate I have with many people
- [09:18]
Simon Dixon
about strategy today, and we'll return to
- [09:20]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
that when we write at the end.
- [09:22]
Simon Dixon
But if you look at Coinbase, from its all time high, so we invested
- [09:27]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
when it was a very low valuation
- [09:28]
Simon Dixon
as private equity, we held it for years, we made secondary markets on it. You can buy and sell, but eventually it goes public and it went public at $100 billion. Now, from its relative to its all time high, Coinbase is down 69, 70%. What about Oracle, the backbone of much of this surveillance structure? It's down 57 from its high. What about Salesforce? 57% too. What about ServiceNow? Another 56%. Netflix? 48%. So half the value of its high. Palantir, the beneficiary of the police and surveillance state. And we had some very unhinged comments from Alex Cop this week, the CEO of Palantir, but they're off 48 from their previous high. And he's complaining about the AI infrastructure being too expensive, that he's having to pay for these tokens from Anthropic. And because these tokens are, you know, hard to manage costs and they're getting more expensive with the increase in energy, Palantir was effectively saying, you know, the, the, the, the AI companies or the other companies are giving their data to the infrastructure companies. They're making the models more beneficial while they're paying for it and they're paying more than ever and the higher energy costs are more than ever as well. And so this week even Trump was talking about whether 5% of OpenAI while anthropic and Claude were kind of fighting against the government. And then the government said we got more regulations in order to decide which models are appropriate for consumption. And we had Anthropic's latest model coming offline and then potentially coming back online once it's signed off from the government. Open AI said, why don't we give the government a 5% position in open AI? And so this whole conversation went front. But remember what I said, you got to think about the incentives and who benefits, because regulations are how you prevent competition from coming in. It's a moat for the large ones
- [11:47]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
that control the, you know, moat.
- [11:49]
Simon Dixon
And Peter Till was famous for saying he likes monopolies. So this isn't free market capitalism. This is creating moats for centralizing and creating these Large monopolies. And by partnering with the US government, you get to engage in crony capitalism as well. And this is in direct conflict with what's happening in China. Who's meant to be, you know, fun, you know, the one that is blamed for all this stuff, they're open sourcing more. And so with these increased expenses in the US model, people are going for building their own open source infrastructure. And that's a very important thing that we will have to continue as a theme as you use more AI because there's no getting away from it. I've been drafting my next book. I was going to be writing that in 2020. Now using AI, I can do that where it can pull in all of my content and I can try and get that book out there because I
- [12:49]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
failed before and that was when I
- [12:51]
Simon Dixon
got dragged into the Celsius bankruptcy and various other things. But anyway, you know, there's no not using AI. You're going to have to lean into that. But as we think about our spectrum of sovereignty, we've got to keep thinking about how we do that in a more decentralized way, a more open source way, how we build our own infrastructure. Anyway, companies like Palantir are starting to do that now. Isn't it interesting if they start using the open source Chinese model while building
- [13:23]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
the technical grid and we get this
- [13:26]
Simon Dixon
narrative of an AI pump and dump and bubble cycle and we know that China can structurally rug pull that because of their model, but then Palantir is integrating with these open source models. This is the one global governance structure. So in everything you see, think about who benefits. Why are they doing this right now and what is the overarching trend? Well, when you get these tech stocks like palantir correcting 48% and you get this immediate push towards, you know, the problems with the model and therefore you get a push towards open source and then you get the US government saying we'll take a stake and then you get the Chinese government meeting with the tech executives like they did in Beijing. Then you can see that this is the technological industrial complex tick trend I've been talking about with the global surveillance control grid. And underneath that you have a multipolar world which is the financial industrial complex and they're using the military industrial complex. The MIC fic. MICTIC FIC is using MYC in order
- [14:38]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
to transition to a global control grid
- [14:40]
Simon Dixon
with TIC with multipolar financial centers on the FIC side. So anyway, Microsoft was down 37% Meta down 32% from all time High Arm holdings in the semiconductor 27% Broadcom down 26% Marvel Technologies down 20% Nvidia down 19% Amazon down 19% Alphabet Google down 17% CrowdStrike 15% Apple 14% Taiwan Semiconductors TSMC down 12% so what's the key takeaway? Well, you can see that concentration at the very top down 12% off all time high. At the very bottom down 70% off all time high. That means that we're getting more concentration into the larger companies within the S P. So the takeaway is that the s and P500 and the stock market at all time highs. And then coming back, it doesn't tell us the full stop. The story it's the market breadth continues to weaken. It's that we're starting to capital is becoming increasingly more concentrated and with 92% of stocks owned by 10% of institutions and individuals, we're getting this K shaped economy within the indexes as well. And this is an important signal for the macro outlook. And this is really in line with this broader macro trends that we've been talking about. And so that brings us into what does this mean? Well, a few weeks back when I was traveling and by the way, I never say where I am when I'm traveling. I was in Morocco, I come back now and I can say that. And within these broader trends you can see that. You need a few things in order to make this transition that we've been talking about. When you zoom out, one is you need to manufacture civil unrest so that
- [16:56]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
your technology can be the solution.
- [17:00]
Simon Dixon
And we're going to use the example of immigration, how to weaponize and manufacture these crises. But you also need to think about the real demographics. You've got a pension crisis and you've got demographical issues where the replacement rate is below what it needs to be. And really civilizations are moving towards extinction. And this is never more prevalent in the west and Asian countries connected with the west as well. And then of course you got the China one child policy. But these demographic issues means that you've got a lot less people paying taxes that need to support an aging population in a pension crisis. Now how do you solve that? You either get more and more people
- [17:53]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
in that are going to pay the
- [17:54]
Simon Dixon
tax or you get less and less people. They're going to be retiring on a pension. Think of COVID think of vaccines, less and less people retiring on a pension. Think of immigration, more and more people in order to increase the tax base. But also what about structural unemployment? If artificial intelligence and robotics are replacing those jobs, then who's going to consume the product? If everyone's on a universal basic income and doesn't have a job, is it just the ultra wealthy? Well, no, you look to the places where the demographics are still okay. You look and you see Africa, you see Middle east, you see Southeast Asia, and then you say, well, they're going to have to consume the product. And so if you're BlackRock and you're managing a portfolio, and if you're China and you're looking at your Belt and Road initiative, and if you're sovereign wealth funds and you're looking at where to invest, you start to build up the countries that still have the birth rates and you start to build the AI and robotics in the countries that have the declining birth rates. And then you manufacture a narrative to get everyone that creates this police and surveillance state so that you can have everybody that's on the universal basic income, you know, not owning anything, asset price inflation and being happy. I've got a universal basic income and I don't need to work. And that is the broader World Economic Forum agenda. And so what do you need to do in that transition? Well, to justify the police and surveillance state, you need to create fear, you need to create civil unrest. You need to take the techniques that the military industrial complex had always done in the Middle east and all the war zones and in Central and South America and across Asia, and you need to bring it home. And that's what we're witnessing. This is the 10 year trend you need to be aware of and you need to be preparing for. So why are you being fed a radicalized version of what immigration is through your feeds, through your algorithms? Well, the answer is, is because there are genuine real demographic changes. But the civil unrest campaign is what's weaponizing it. Now, if you're going to push all capital, look at the case of the uk Imagine you are able to have massive immigration, but you tax the wealthy. So now you get the millionaires and
- [20:40]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
billionaires all going to UAE and leaving
- [20:43]
Simon Dixon
the country and you take the immigrants that may have been a victim of
- [20:49]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
either war in the case of, you
- [20:52]
Simon Dixon
know, in some cases, or they were seeking better economic opportunity because you created a war zone in their country and you take them out of the country that you're building and developing and into the country that your asset stripping, which we'll be covering in part two. And really that is the case of what's happened in the uae. Then you implement tax policy that encourages that behavior and then it manufactures A crisis so that nobody owns their assets and you concentrate all the wealth upwards. This is what you'd come up with if you were ruthless, inhumane, and just thinking in terms of realpolitik and a spreadsheet and portfolio management, which is what the asset management industry does when it's able to control the flows of capital. So let's look at immigration, demographics and the economic consequences. This isn't, in reality a story about immigration. You just need to look on YouTube or in your algorithm to get that, and they'll give you that story. And what do they frame it as? They frame it as you're either on the radical left or you're on the far right. And so they put you in a box and then they feed you the story. If you're on the far right, you're anti immigration. If you're on the radical left, then you look at the war zones, you look at colonialism, and you say, we need to give this a chance. And then you also create narrative that really makes this, this, this type of radicalized version of you. So this isn't really a story about immigration. It's actually a story about incentives and birth rates across the developed world are remain significantly below their replacement level. That means that they're going extinct. And so, you know, for some people, that's a thing that's a problem. For other people, that's not a problem. I mean, I subscribe to humankind, you know, and I can see the weapons and the tools.
- [23:09]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
And I think that, you know, humanity is humanity.
- [23:13]
Simon Dixon
And the further away I can go from these, you know, devices, types of issues, the more I can respect humans
- [23:23]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
for what they actually are.
- [23:24]
Simon Dixon
And I also know it was a technique manufactured by war zones for divide and conquer. You know, this wasn't always a thing. This was a wartime technique, just like religion was weaponized in order to justify war in order to recruit armies. So politics, it's basically the political response that we're witnessing. If you just, you know, log into the alternative or traditional media that is manufacturing. The radicalized version of you is that all your problems are the immigrants problems. And you have agents like Tommy Robbins
- [24:04]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
that are paid by, you know, Mossad
- [24:06]
Simon Dixon
or Israel in order to highlight those things. And their job is to do that. And then who are they sponsored by and who supports them? Tick nodes like Elon Musk, which came from South Africa and the apartheid system. And so you can look back and see how these tools and weapons and class and everything is used now. You can also make it real by IMMIGRATING prisoners by highlighting racial tensions, by even supporting covert operations and then connecting crimes to religious or racial issues. And we see that more and more and more. And then when you're on the far right, if you highlight these things, you then get called racist and all this stuff. And if you're on the, on the left, you're called woke or whatever it may be. But you can see how everyone is always focused on the other. And when you're focused on the other, you get someone that power can blame because power doesn't want you blaming who's actually in charge, you know, and that's the power dynamics that we focus on. And so the economic reality of this is much, much deeper. The, you know, why is family formation collapsing? Why are we getting a collapse of family values? Why are we getting a collapse of, you know, creating a family, having children, getting married? Well, it's collapsed because there was a deliberate operation by the financial industrial complex to favor financialization over civilization. So what actually happened that led us to this extreme circumstance that we're in right now where humanity's going extinct and there's only certain countries that have birth rates above replacement rate. Well, housing became financialized. Everybody turned their house into an asset that they could try and hold in order to have value that increased greater than inflation. Because the banks create money as debt and housing became their mechanism for lending money in a Ponzi scheme where the central bank guarantees the system, socializing losses and privatizing gains. And so by financializing housing, homes effectively become an investment asset instead of a place to raise a family. And that is a slow trend. A slow trend. You'll notice that there's a bit of a trend in the bitcoin community headed by Dr. Jack Cruz, around Fabianism and these different types of operations to slowly make changes that people don't notice. We'll get back into that with the bitcoin side, but this was one of those. And so as a result of that, having a debt based Ponzi scheme, a monetary system where the house became an investment rather than a place for bringing up a family, wages decoupled from productivity and so people moved into the speculative market more. And if you were relying more upon your labor and had a job, then you were getting further and further into the wrong side of this. Now if you were speculating on assets, then you were either getting bad investment where you went down the ladder, or you were able to beat the cycle because you were dollar cost averaging, you investing, you were increasing the amount of assets that you hold every Month, you weren't saving in a bank, and various other things. And so what happened there is that the gains went to the house owner and the asset owner, and wages never kept up with productivity. So the person could have become more and more productive, but wages didn't catch up with that. And AI is the perfect reflection of that as well. And so when wages decouple from productivity, you don't get paid more for your increase in productivity. And therefore this cycle, again, decouples. Healthcare became financialized as well. And so privatizing the healthcare system, having it where it was subsidized through private means. Healthcare became a tool where you could sponsor the university system in order to get the research you needed. And then you could have the solution, which is a subscription model where you want people continually purchasing drugs. So you manufacture a health crisis, you manufacture events that lead to lots of drugs, vaccines, therapy, whatever it may be. But you financialize and securitize and tokenize healthcare. Education becomes a, you know, basically just a debt finance mechanism. So you have record student debts. They start as a collateralized debt obligation. You get your student credit card and you get your student loan, then you go out and get a job, and then productivity is not catching up with wages. And then you financialize your house and you use your house as your primary vehicle, which means you are now a collateralized debt obligation for 25 years. Child care became unaffordable, so it no longer became, you know, think about all these trends together. And so family formation basically became economically irrational. And so if somebody is looking and calculating and imagine that they end up marrying the wrong person, end up in a divorce, that takes them back financially. And so when you have all of these different trends together, you get wealth inequality, you get lower birth rates, and you get the situation that we're in today. And so how do you try and factor that into the equation when you also have a pension crisis, people are retiring, and there's not enough tax base? Well, you try and supplement the tax base with immigrants, and then you also make it where you think that it's the immigrant that creates this problem, because it's the thing you can see, and the reality is that the immigrant didn't take any of these problems. They were in their country and they were economically destroyed by the micro. Their country was financialized by the FIC and they ended up in a police and surveillance state by the tick where they needed to migrate either to escape a war zone or look for economic opportunity by design. And so the countries that were built on immigrants Suddenly we get these change in demographics which increases the numbers and then you get media narrative that will weaponize that in order to point at the other at the same time as fic mic and tick, making your life worse and worse and worse through financialization. Unless you gave your money to them and they managed your assets and that's how they ended up controlling the capital flows. And so it was asset inflation that caused this ridiculous situation where civilizations are going extinct and housing policy was the mechanism for making sure that happened and monetary policy was the mechanism for ensuring that that happened. Wage suppression ensured that it happened. So you get that K shaped economy. But immigration becomes the political distinction, the thing that you can point to and then you can use that in order to get your politician in charge. Nigel Farage in the case of uk we covered this last week in the regime change or whether it be Rupert Lowe. And you create a populist narrative and you look all around you and say, my people are not doing well, we can't afford them as well, they can't afford me. You know, and that's the police and surveillance state that you need. And most people fall for it, hit hook, line and sinker. And so really you get anger directed to that way or that way or sideways or you look upwards to the politicians, but who are the politicians bought by? They're bought by the lobby. And so rather than seeing actually who's in charge in the fake democracy, you point upwards towards the government and sideways towards your fellow humans and immigrants becomes the one that's obvious and visible rather than actually recognizing that these are systemic trends. And you need to make sure that you play the game of money better and get on the right side of these trends. And so workers fight each other and they become more ruthless for the job. The financial structure completely remains largely unquestioned. People are, you know, complaining, shouting, regime changing, blaming the politicians, the ideology, it's communism, it's capitalism, it's socialism, it's immigration is, you know, it's the, we're, we're, you know, the women, the men, all these different things, but really it's just that you're looking for an other because you haven't figured out how to beat the game. And those in charge are largely unquestioned to a big degree. And if they are questioned, you kind of put it in a communistic socialist radical left, when really what system do we have in the West? Well, we have socialism for the wealthy and the largest multinational financial institutions through socializing losses and privatizing gains. And capitalism with a Rigged game and rigged monetary system for the poor or everyone else, which pushes out the middle class into the extremes. You either get corrupted by the system and start preserving, which is where many of the boomers are in right now and defending the system, or you become increasingly more radicalized, pushed out of the system, more in debt, more subordinate. And that's the spectrum. Now what we talk about in being sovereign is making sure you're the person that beats the system but in a sovereign way. So you can still speak out against the system, which is what I'm trying to do here. But the long term consequences is that you have falling birth rates. This is predictable, this is inevitable, this is in fact guaranteed in this financialization and monetary structure. And then that leads to labor shortages because people are on benefits. Without that you have the AI side, then you have pension pressures as we said, as an aging population now need to be looked after on their pension. And then you have larger tax burdens. When you have larger tax burdens you end up in the situation that Europe's in right now, the situation that UK is in right now, the situation at Canada, Australia. Look around you and what do you have as a solution? You have increased surveillance leading to a stablecoin and CBDC standard integrated with pre crime social credit scores and artificial intelligence in order to build out a police and surveillance state. This was very, very predictable. You can just follow the flows and understand that and that leads to expanded state control. But don't stop there. Who is the state controlled by? In the case of China it's the top of the chain. In the west it's the MCFIC tick. So it's the financial industrial complex. But you get plausible deniability by blaming the government there, which is the piggy bank and battering ram. You know, their job is to print the money and concentrate it over. Their job is to take the blame.
- [36:46]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
But then you have a shadow leadership
- [36:48]
Simon Dixon
and anybody that points it out, like me, you get called a conspiracy theorist because I'm in pointing actually factually, who's in charge and the structures by which it happens. And then you get people that are not point, you know, and then you get, if somebody points it out, you give them a name. Communism, socialist, radical left, woke, anti capitalist
- [37:08]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
whatever it may be.
- [37:10]
Simon Dixon
And this is the psyop and we're all contributing to it to some degree. I contributed it before I understood the system, before I had the breathing space to follow the money, escape the system and figure out how this stuff actually works. And I'm still learning and I Share it with you. But crisis becomes the justification for more centralization, and we're now hitting peak centralization. And then this is when you realize that your ideology was in fact manufactured. And then you question, where did I get that ideology from? Did I inherit it? Was it manufactured for me? Or did I actually consciously think about that? Was I radicalized into it? Is that really what I think? Or am I just parroting a narrative that was indoctrinated into me and I've lost all my ability to critically think? And I would argue that most people are in that position, that most of what you believe in is. Is not actually. It was downloaded like an operating system and installed into you through this system in order to turn you into this collateralized debt obligation. And our job is to break the cycle, to break the narrative. So in conclusion, we don't want to think about immigrants in terms of the narrative that turns you into at all. For the police and surveillance state, which is where most people are, immigration is one of the most effective political weapons because it redirects attention away from the structural cause of the demographical crisis and it makes you blame the political system rather than understanding who owns the political system. And so the question shouldn't be how do we stop immigration? Because that's the symptoms. They want you changing from left to right open borders to close borders, far left narrative, you know, far right narrative to woke left radical. They want you doing that. They want you to change that because that creates the environment that leads to the technocratic police and surveillance state that they already drafted the legislation for. They just need to manufacture the crisis in order to make it a thing. And the question should be, why is the economic system made difficult for the people to build families, if families are required? And in answering that question, you'll get inevitably back to the types of structures that we cover on Simon Dixon hard talk. And then you realize civil unrest is the product, not what they're trying to prevent. Because surveillance and the police state and the global control rails is what they actually want. And that is monetized by Tick, who is a subordinate to fic. And they can control Mick in order to do that. And so what tools do we need? Well, C. CBDCs, central bank, digital currencies, privatized version stablecoins. And you change the future of money. And that's exactly what we're going through and what we've been covering over the years. And in fact, what I wrote about in my book in 2011, bank to the future, Protect your future before governments go bust it is monetary reform that is driving the culture and it is the culture and ideology that is manufactured because people aren't selecting their own, they're just downloading the operating system. And so what's happening in the CBDC versus Stablecoin side this week? Well remember the long term narrative that we've been sharing and by following the money that you've got the privatized system in the US and you've got the central bank system in Europe that's following the system that was integrated in China. And so that US versus Europe narrative is the strategic tension. Read books like Operation Gladio by Paul Williams or to understand strategic tension, Divide and conquer. And so then you have a US capitalist narrative versus a European socialist narrative. You build both systems into the same control grid which go back into the bank for International Settlements on the CBDC side and then via the Fed into the stablecoin side via Genius Act. And the Fed is one of the nodes or the largest shareholder in the bank for International Settlement system. So they all come home to the same system which is working with the system that they can't co opt, which is the pboc, you know, nationalized central banking system. So those integrations is what we've been covering, but never more. If you want to concentrate everything up into the US stock market and the US tick, then you use Europe as a tool, you asset strip it like we'll be covering in part two. And so US and Europe are kind of split on this CBDC versus Stablecoin narrative. The United States basically moved to block the government issued digital dollar or it's not a government issued digital dollar, it's actually issued by a central bank and the central bank is owned by the banks. So that's a privatized central bank, digital currency. And you know, so that's an obfuscation in itself because it points back to the privatized system. So when you have already in America Fed now, which is a CBDC at the wholesale level and you give a narrative that you're banning CBDCs at the retail level, but you increase, you introduce a legislation that allows you to do it later, you're just delaying the adoption through stablecoins to rug pull it into a CBDC later. But it's the same thing, it's the same system. Genius act pulled it all together and Europe is moving in the complete opposite direction. They're just covertly saying we'll do the cbdc. So the ECB continues to develop the digital euro. The European Central bank is a shareholder in the bank for International Settlements and European Union was a project or bis which is the World Economic Forum, United nations, various agenda. You will own nothing and be happy slowly over time. So the legislation is expected this year. They were meant to beta test in October last year, which they did. Then you get the legislation this year. And the pilot is expected on the retail side in 2027. So the political launch and the actual penetrated launch all around or compulsory side of it is is expected in 2029. That's the complete roadmap. The bigger picture is that the US isn't rejecting digital money. The US is choosing the private digital dollar and they're trying to concentrate it upwards. And so they're choosing who the winners and the losers will be. And we got a massive development in open transactions that we'll be covering as well. But Europe is choosing the public digital money via the European Central Bank. And these are two very different monetary models, but they all are emerging and point back to the same thing. And so stablecoins wins. In the case of digital stablecoins, the dollar at the Moment there's approximately $317 billion in stablecoins but in the case of Euros there's only about a billion dollars. So they're worlds apart in terms of adoption and penetration. And the reason why this matters is because the US is exporting digital dollars via private markets now. They are. You know what is. So this is where the important part. So the privatized dollar system is on a stablecoin standard. Now across in the multipolar world. What did they do? Well, BIS launched Enbridge and Enbridge is a network of CBDCs. Now a CBDC works outside of Swift. So you have Europe being controlled and subordinated via the ECB into BIS and the Fed system which then socializes the losses and privatizes the gains into the US stablecoin. But it doesn't get global adoption into multipolarity because countries have their own CBDC network tied together via Enbridge. And so you get as much dollar stablecoin adoption to build the privatized stablecoin mainly and most likely across Central and South America using mic, you vassalize Europe into the ECB and the European Union and then you centralize that control grid across the US private interest and try and partner with the CCP in China in that integration. So Europe is trying to preserve central bank control while stablecoins are becoming global dollar infrastructure. And BIS comes out and made a warning this week. So what was the BIS warning? It was warning against the digital dollar so central banks warned that stablecoins are helping the dollar win basically. And so BIS's view is pushing for CBDC adoption. The Fed system tries to make everything in stablecoins programmatic and you have good cop, bad cop strategic tension in order to manufacture the civil unrest to get the crisis. And remember, we've got this AI bubble which is funded by private credit which goes into banking which is the too big to fail.
- [47:39]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Socialize the losses, privatize the gains, move
- [47:42]
Simon Dixon
into QE on a national security narrative of AI for national security because China might win. And so we got that driving the bubble with the too big to fail narrative that socialized losses privatized against so the Fed could rug pull the whole system when they want. And that is for BIS. And BIS is driving the adoption into CBDCs. So the CBDC view or the BIS view is that stable coins are now replacing fiat currency and that you need to worry about dollar adoptions. And the dollar is, you know, stable coins are accelerating dollar adoption because the ECB has a billion dollars of stable coins and America has $317 billion. And Genius act allowed the $3 trillion of reserves to held at the Fed to be used as collateral by those that have banking licenses in the Fed now system which is the wholesale cbdc. So during financial stress the BIS is saying that households will flee into the dollar and stable coins make that easy. And so USDT issued by Tether, which I ended up, you know, for full disclosure, Bitfinex, when I was investing early, it's the partner company of Tether and I sold my position in Circle now because it went public. But I was an early investor in Circle when both of these Bitfinex and Circle were just bitcoin companies but slowly got captured by FIC and then went public. So I was able to sell my shares and try and resist against those movements, but they're making that process the infrastructure. And so do you want Tether and Circle to be the leaders there or is there an alternative plan? And that's where Genius act comes in. And so the implications are that the BIS is stating is that stablecoins reinforce dollar dominance and that is something that the BS is warning people against. So dollarization is becoming easier and emerging market currencies are becoming more and more vulnerable. But that's where the CBDC infrastructure comes in. And so you're playing both sides here. The BIS warns that the dependency could last for years and it will last for years in the dollar. But at the same time the FIC is doing that dollar Weakening operation, the Iran war strengthened it. I expect it to return. And so what comes out at the same time as the BIS this week or the BIS warning, we got a new announcement of a stablecoin infrastructure in the US called Open stablecoin Standards. And so this open stablecoin standard had a bunch of members that have all got together and said we need to support this standard. And it was Visa, MasterCard, Stripe, BlackRock, Coinbase and more than 140 companies to create a new stable coin called oh, USD Open USD Open Source. See the shenanigans that are being played here and who wasn't invited? Tether and circle. And so there was a big correction
- [51:04]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
in the circle share price.
- [51:07]
Simon Dixon
Now we'll see what's coming. And this is a very interesting story to watch, but allegedly they're opening an open stablecoin standard where all of the members are plugged into it. And here's the interesting thing. If a business uses it for payments as a merchant processor, the business can receive a part of the earnings. There was nothing around whether the customer receives it, which is how stablecoins were potentially if it wasn't for Genius act and Clarity act. But now the businesses can receive a part of the earnings, a part of the debt, a part of the Treasuries. And so stablecoins are increasingly becoming payment infrastructure if this open OUSD becomes the thing. And so the bigger picture is that stablecoins are kind of moving from crypto products and now digital financial infrastructure into programmable Rails programmable money at the same time as the beta test of the CBDC happening in China, at the same time as the resistance movement against the dollar and swift being done via CBDCs
- [52:19]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
in the Enbridge product.
- [52:21]
Simon Dixon
And so that's all I wanted to cover on on that side. Now let's take a little bit of a look at what China's doing right now. So remember you have IMF dollarization, which is the legacy system that's being decolonized into a multipolar world. And China's Belt and Road initiative is decolonizing and unwinding the post world Bretton Wood system by World bank and imf. So we had announcement this week with China and Sudan. And China, sorry, Sudan's one of the war zones of the mic. Now it is being, you know, held up by golf deciding what's going to happen with Sudan. And China decided that it's going to be canceling approximately $15 million of Sudan's debt. And so this is effectively a write off of four interest Free loans. So there were four interest reloads and China's deciding to write them off. Now China doesn't do that for Nothing. This was 200 million yuan in New grants. And what happens with those grants? Well, they'll be invested in energy infrastructure dependency, water infrastructure and agricultural infrastructure. And you know, this is
- [53:45]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
the, you
- [53:46]
Simon Dixon
know, why these types of things happen. Now so far, China hasn't been using MYC as a subordination vehicle. It has been using FIC or its own internal financial infrastructure. And Sudan has the gold trade route with the uae. And you have this UAE funding one side of the civil unrest after America destabilized it with Egypt and Saudi on the other side. And my thesis has been, is that once you get past the Iran war, then you get into Lebanon, then you get into Gaza, then you get into Sudan and Syria and everything will resolve itself into the multipolar world order to get that MIC exit from the region. And so we're seeing this restructuring Chinese investments and the Chinese nationalists, the CMPCC is going to have more and more operations across the region. And so this is really the bigger picture. China is continuing to expand its influence through finance rather than military intervention, which is why we're getting these changes right now, which is why we got the, what I call the theorized closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the theatrical war in order to regime change across the region and manage this transition that
- [55:10]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
I've been covering for a long time.
- [55:12]
Simon Dixon
But anyway, China's getting into more and more debt restructuring and this means more influence over infrastructure, more influence over investment and more long term geopolitical influence alongside the Gulf countries and the sovereign wealth funds which is the intermediary between the FIC in the west and China in the East. And this is the transition, the transitional, be it geopolitics that we're witnessing right now, where monetary in the region that America doesn't dominate is increasingly being replaced, replacing the military forces with financial integration and regional stability. The places where America dominates still can have the civil unrest, that's internal civil unrest, war in Europe with Russia, and more and more covert operations in Central and South America. So capital is replacing proxy warfare with the exception of the West. So Lebanon is one of the ones that we need to keep an eye on right now because it is one of the clearest examples of this shift. So you know, let's have a little look at what actually happened this week in terms of Lebanon. But before we do that, understand the structure in Lebanon. So Lebanon was manufactured into a civil War. And then it had the IMF takeover in disaster. That led to the destruction of dollar reserves, which led to the money printing of the Lebanese currency, which led to the shutdown of banks where all the Lebanese were shut out of their savings. That created an alternative resistance system within Lebanon where you could take your assets, gold and jewelry, you could put them
- [57:06]
Alex Adornov
in
- [57:08]
Simon Dixon
an alternative banking system which was the security was enforced via Hezbollah and you could get an interest free Islamic compliant loan by using your gold and jewelry as assets. And this circumvented the Central bank of Lebanon and the IMF debt dependency. And so the Lebanese government and Lebanese army was taken over by the American system, the IMF system and USAID infrastructure. We then had the alternative invasion by Israel in 1982, which led to Iran backing Hezbollah, which was a resistance against the Israeli invasion. And so Lebanon in a proxy war, in a civil war, ended up stuck between US and Iran with various forces, Israel being funded by US and Hezbollah being funded by Iran. And so you ended up where Hezbollah with the support of Iran became more powerful than the US army that was funded by 250 million of us. And so you ended up in this proxy war between US and Iran with Lebanon. Now what is Lebanon important for? The legacy drug trafficking routes as well the strategic ports that came from the old systems when the Shah was in charge of Iran, that was disrupted by the revolution. And remember in Afghanistan, the Taliban was a resistance against the drug trafficking routes. And then the Taliban, via the afghan war or 20 year war of Mick, which was very profitable for fic, ended up with a Taliban that would support the drug trafficking and the opium, which led back to the original opium wars of the British Empire in Hong Kong through Indian roots. And so you start to see how this stuff all comes together. So bringing it back, let's have a look at what happened this week. So I'll give a quick recap of the Iran situation. Why you don't need to follow all the details anymore because I think nothing stops this train. We've already analyzed where I think this goes and why Lebanon becomes important. And then we'll tie this together into the updates. And so where are we right now? Well, the Strait of Hormuzzi is open, but severely more around Iran exporting to China as the main shipments. And so the headlines, what are we getting right now? That the US and Iran have agreed to start firing across the Strait of Hormuz.
- [59:55]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
That was the first thing that was announced.
- [59:57]
Simon Dixon
Then we had commercial shipping resuming and so that crashed the price of oil Back down, markets got back to usual. We had the off ramps narrative, then we had that talks are happening in Doha, in Qatar. Then we had a framework that follows the June 16th memorum event understanding and a 14 part plan and agreement that led to the signing of the mou. Now what happened next was, well, allegedly we had Iran which projected on one of the cargo ships. And so people were speculating is the MOU over? Does the agreement follow? I was saying yes, nothing stops this train. It was happening before the war, during the war and it will continue after the war. The US responds with basically a bunch of, you know, strikes that were either coordinated or not. Iran fires on U. S Bases, but there was no meaningful damage. And so you start to get more bases or destruction and then everything moved over. Everything continues. But Israel and Lebanon sign a framework in the midst of all of that. And so you got the, the heightening up of, of narratives between Israel and America, the good cop, bad cop process. You got the same with Iran signing a deal that started with Israel starting the war, but America signing the MoU without Israel and so Israel escalates with Lebanon. This was all part of the projections that we said Hezbollah and Israel can continue to strategically weaken each other and then Hezbollah. So we were told that the Lebanese government has signed an agreement with Israel and another 14 point plan. And then Hezbollah rejects it. And so Israel strikes Hezbollah again and we get more which has never really stopped. But also they pushing out their civilian targets to try and get the reaction as Israel always does. But the market's verdict throughout this whole thing is ignore the headlines because if you were looking at the markets and remember throughout this whole war, I was saying every taco from Trump happens when the 30 year yield gets to 5%, the 10 year yield on US bonds gets to 4.5%. And then oil was always in this bounded theater as soon as it gets above, you know, $115 but then the higher price of the actual physical rather than just the futures, then you get taco and coordinated taco across both Iran factions of power and Israeli factions, sorry and American factions of power. So oil is the telltale in this. And so Brent right Now is around $71 the market. Those in the real know that are trading this oil, that they know that this is leading to an agreement and WTI, so you had Brent crude is around $71, WTI is under $70. That's down roughly, you know, 13 to 15% over the last two weeks alone. So that means that things are holding and what's happening with gold. Gold is lower. If this was going to be a war then gold would be moving higher, higher significantly. And oil would be as well if the market believed it. So you know, volatility is kind of subdued as well. It's nothing like the volatility that we had. And why it matters is because, you know, the market believes that if, sorry, if the market believed that Hormuz was closing then oil would be above that 90 mark. And so the oil does not believe it, the oil market does not believe it, the market doesn't believe it. And so that's what you need, what's we, what we've been following. And then that allows you to say, well do I need to fall for every detail? Because you can see where we're moving directionally, markets are pricing de escalation and that this deal will move to a radically different market. You even started to see the dollar come off its all time highs and you started, you know, in DXY there was a bit more weakness. It's still above the $100 mark, not down to the 96 mark. It was prior to the war,
- [64:36]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
but
- [64:36]
Simon Dixon
we started to see that coming down. And so it's capital that tells us the truth when the politicians are lying. And that's how we can look at a bit of coordinated theater. Whether we get the diagnosis correct or right, we can see directionally where this is happening. So the reason that I think that this will hold, why it hasn't in the past, is because this is not a MC dominated model where Israel has the Greater Israel Project in order to agitate the region. We are moving towards that regional stability because the order has changed because of China, because of everything we've covered over the years. So nobody wants a regional war. Let's look at the United States. What does the United States want here? Well they want stability because their focus on the stock market, fiscal dominance, they want shipping lanes to open up because the own nothing and be happy. The pricing event, that's done. You know, we're going to start to see more of the supply chain issues come through. But I believe this was bounded escalation. So I originally thought this would be a 12 day war, two weeks like before. Instead it was a four week war.
- [65:45]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
So two weeks extra.
- [65:46]
Simon Dixon
Then we had 60 days of on off and craziness where he was saying a deal would be done. We got to a deal being done or an MOU then we got a 60 day process to lead to an actual deal. But you know, US needs to focus elsewhere at this side as well. And so does MCFIC and TICK because they were bounded escalation throughout the whole thing. They've negotiated their deals and they're resetting the order and negotiating the fixed side within the next 60 days. Next, what does Iran want? Well, Iran wants sanction relief. That's why the resistance was funded in the first place, because that gives you leverage in order to negotiate sanctions relief. If you're buying into just the ideological argument, which is what recruits all the army and the ideology that allows it to happen, then you'll be getting the wrong side of the story right now because this was leverage for sanction relief. As we always covered, they now need reconstruction investment. That comes from China and that comes from the 300 billion Gulf most likely we'll see. And so FIC wants to try and get as much of it as it can and so it needs reconstruction right now because that's the purpose of this integration again. And then we move to the toll model with the straight of Hamus which then sets the order for all the strategic choke points in line with multipolarity. And so Iran at this stage doesn't prolong from conflict. It's only those that benefit from the MIC in Iran, in Israel and in America that may have some holdout power, but I believe most of it's gone. And so we're at the negotiation and the fixed stage. What does the GCC want? Well, the GCC wants stability. They want to open up the Strait of a Moose and they want to deploy their capital, they want to use their capital to get what they want. And so they want to invest in reconstruction. There's a lot of reconstruction. There's Gaza, there's Lebanon, there's Iran, there's the entire Levant, there's Syria. And so rather than investing that in the west via the petrodollar, you invest it in the region. Then UAE comes out of opec, you get the FX swap line, you break the petrodollar, Japan goes eastwards and Europe starts to, you know, the relationship between Europe via stable coins and CBDCS changes the euro dollar. That changes that world order that we're transitioning to in multipolarity. Now what do China and India want? The two largest economies with the, the, the, you know, in, in the, in the Asia region. Both members of brics, they need uninterrupted energy flows and they want to deploy capital into their Belt and Roads initiative and they want to benefit from regional stability. They want Iran and IS and Saudi normalized. They don't want anyone with all the power they want to, they don't want world reserve currency because they, they've got gold to make sure that because they want a weaker currency for their exports. So their currency is strengthened by holding gold, weakened by the deliberately to try and manage the exports. And so they don't want to do what America did, where you strengthen your currency, become world reserve currency and then you have to export debt and you have to become an import and you have to have a fiscal deficit and you have to have a trade deficit and then private sector takes over and financializer securitized go through the whole same thing. You know, China doesn't want that. And so they want regional stability but they want their partners, uae, Saudi, Qatar, Iran to have parts of the petro Yuan and petro dollar so that they can manage those flows. And so does the Middle east people want Gulf countries in Iran and, and that's why they signed the security pact
- [69:45]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
that we've been talking about with Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt and financed by Saudi Arabia.
- [69:52]
Simon Dixon
And so China will benefit from regional stability as this. So the conclusion is, is that the escalation remains, you know, controlled. As disgusting as that is, when I put my humanitarian hat on following the money in geopolitics I can talk like that. Humanitarian. These are crimes against humanity that the mick is trying to make up for the lost profits, get their final parts before they make up for the lost profits in Europe.
- [70:21]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Civil unrest internally and Central and South America.
- [70:25]
Simon Dixon
But the pressure continues. And so the, the reason that I don't follow every detail right now is because full scale war doesn't really benefit anybody body. And so Lebanon is kind of the last part. And so the bigger picture that we just need to look at and we need to follow is what happened. You know, well, basically let's look at what people see. So people see something that looks like carnage, something that looks like Israel ruling the world, something that looks like the Greater Israel Project, something that looks like Israel controlling us Old empire world. Okay, most people either see that or they see it clearly. But they see that Hezbollah has rejected the agreement, Israel remains inside Lebanon. And so you've got that Greater Israel Project narrative and you've got the Iran narrative with Hezbollah still there. Now what most people are focusing on is that this is going to break out into civil war. So you get the media covering civil war warnings, you've got the narrative from every side saying we're going to go into civil war. Why? Because Lebanon was in civil war under the US covert operations that I covered earlier under the IMF and usaid. And so everyone's focused on regional escalation. But what I think is actually happening is that Lebanon is effectively at the governmental level terminating from any type of policies that involve Hezbollah as a militia into integration into the state. And so we're moving from militia politics to state politics. That's what we saw in Yemen. That's what we've seen every everywhere across the region. And the reason it works is because the strategic tension between us and Iran as the Mick narrative is no longer there. And so a lot of the attention has been on the Prime Minister. Sorry, I forget where this President or Prime Minister Ayoun in Lebanon. And so Ayoun is basically building the state here. And this was covered by Co State Capital. A great article by Evan and summarizing some of the thoughts in terms of where this actually goes, in terms of what people think versus where it seems to be going is that Ayun is actually building back the state because Hezbollah is gradually, in a way that doesn't create a civil war, losing its military role. So at the highest level there'll be Iran that has agreed to that and Hezbollah will go on their own track in order to try and manage their future. And then lower down, you can't have this leading into a civil war. Now what is happening here effectively is that Iranian capital, which funded Hezbollah and US Capital, which funded the Lebanese government, is being replaced by the Gulf regional order as well. And so this is military insurance by the Gulf. And they want to invest financial capital afterwards, but they don't want to invest financial capital into something that's going to go back into war. And so this is all the financial integration replacing proxy warfare. But it takes time because you can't have civil unrest or civil war. And so this is the transition that I think is kind of like what happened in Syria. It's very difficult to manage. But everyone was thinking, based upon old thinking, that something else is going to happen. So Aun the president basically signed that agreement with Israel.
- [74:17]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Now that's a horrible agreement.
- [74:18]
Simon Dixon
Who wants to sign an agreement with Israel? And so, you know, but this is what I interpret the transition to that state. And so this is, you know, not in the agreement, they didn't surrender territory, but they signed a framework instead. And we know how Israel negotiates. They take territory, they kill civilians, they try and spike a response and then they negotiate with that territory. But this effectively this agreement creates a pathway into that track. And remember what I was projecting, that the Iran one would sign an mou, then you would Have a holdout negotiation that would take to a new negotiation track. This represents that negotiation track. And when it's ready to hold, like it can hold in Iran, you just get international guarantees and you get diplomatic leverage, which is what I think is
- [75:09]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
being negotiated right here.
- [75:12]
Simon Dixon
Now there was a conditional Israeli withdrawal built into the agreement. That sets the architecture. There is, you know, no agreement that is completely permanent occupation. And so this looks like an anti resistance agreement. And so people were thinking Iran will resist against that, then Hezbollah will resist against that, and then you create strategic tension and you go to civil war. But what this does is it puts in a continual economic collapse, which is the lever points that allow for the outside players to make it happen. But if there was no agreement, you would get significant economic collapse, civil war, no diplomatic process. And then that would vassalize Lebanon deeper and deeper into the imf with Hezbollah and Iran going deeper and deeper and deeper. And so what I think is happening is the change here, and this represents a change and it's very hard because there was built into the agreement a recovery territory. And this recovery territory looks like giving up territory to Israel. And maybe in the end a little part of the territory will go back to Israel, which looks like the great Israel project. But this is statehood. This is expelling Israel, expelling Iranian
- [76:48]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
financial
- [76:48]
Simon Dixon
forces, explaining Israel military forces, and then expelling U S financial forces and replacing it with golf. So the recovered territory is basically being negotiated through diplomacy. This is a change in model. And this is really, I think, regional integration. And that's what I think is happening. They're negotiating Syria, they're negotiating Gaza, they're negotiating Lebanon, and they're doing it all at the same time into one architecture. So it's not another unwinnable war that leads to civil unrest, that leads to more IMF and more of the same. I think this is differently and this is Hezbollah basically doing a public rejection. But there is a quiet adoption. And that's been happening over time already. You've got a political side of Hezbollah and a military side of Hezbollah. And Hezbollah were already started to be
- [77:46]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
integrated into the government.
- [77:48]
Simon Dixon
And this represents that negotiation and basically the terms of what an integration into Hezbollah, into the army and the regional process actually looks like. And so in order for Hezbollah to have as much negotiation leverage, they need to continue protecting their political relevance. And so it will look messy and it will get messy, but this is a bigger shift, which is, I believe we're seeing Iran reducing its proxy strategy. This is Hezbollah gradually becoming political rather than military and this is the Lebanese army becoming sovereign authority with a stronger army by integrating with Hezbollah rather than being funded by us, this then leads to reconstruction capital which will be replacing the military funding. And that takes time and that's the final, these are the final parts of who's got all the leverage in this. And we'll see that by the end. So this is Iran's strategic shift. This is why they funded resistance in order to get sanction relief. And this is why the Iran deal leads to sanction relief to open up the market. That then requires the reconstruction investment, that requires the expulsion of the US which required the taking out of the territory in the Gulf countries. So my long term thesis is that Iran is exiting the proxy model. This is in line with Evans predictions at cold state capital. Regional integration is replacing, is being replaced by basically reconstruction which replaces resistance. And that requires GCC investment and BRICS integration. And so that is the economic normalization that I think we're listening, we're witnessing and kind of Lebanon is the final test of this model is held up everywhere else. It's holding and then it needs the, the investment model to prevail. And so we've got Hamas has been weakened, Syria has been completely changed. Iraq militias basically institutionalized into this model. The Houthis have been contained and signed agreements with Saudi and Hezbollah becomes kind of the final transition and the hardest one and the strongest one. And so that's why it's going to take a bit more time. But what are they doing simultaneously? Well, they're building up, they don't want this to become sectarian and like you know, the Shia community is represented by Hezbollah. And so we're starting to see a narrative and alternative Shia communities that are against Hezbollah being built up. Now most people interpreting that as civil war. I think there's a slight important distinction here. This is not an anti Shia movement. This I believe is a mechanism for creating a group so that when Hezbollah integrates it's not interpreted as an anti
- [80:56]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Shia civil unrest proxy campaign.
- [81:00]
Simon Dixon
It's just a host hesper. It's a post Hezbollah and it gives an off ramp for those that want to join the alternative Shia army integration and political integration, which is what I believe is emerging right now. And you know this means that if, that if the Iran funding is pulling and the American funding is being pulled via usaid, then you need alternative funding investing in order to take all of those people that because it was a genuine resistance, it's Lebanese people, it was just funded and supported by Iran and it was Genuinely against the Israel invasion of Lebanon. But you need to replace all these people with jobs, reconstruction contracts, services, state institutions, state infrastructure. And so this is the alternative political Shia movement that I think is an attempting to be in built here. And I expect that Hezbollah remains politically active. The Lebanese army becomes expanded gradually and more powerful gradually. And I don't think this is going to go to a civil war and this will be low level. You know, Israeli strikes will probably continue but eventually it will lead to thick dominance rather than the mick radicalized faction of Israel dominance as well. And then as I said, the end game is that when golf starts financing the reconstruction, that's when you know that we get there. This will then lead to the currency being stabilized so that the alternative financial system can be built and the economy can then slowly recover with those alternative financial rails. Now what's interesting is during the war with Israel and Lebanon, remember I talked about the alternative banking system where you could build, you could take your gold, take your jewelry and get an interest free loan against it. That became the funding source for the millions of civilians. And when Israel launched a war on Lebanon, they started destroying that infrastructure, that alternative financial system. So this implies a new financial rails. And what was it that gave that sovereign ability for the institutions to get freedom from the Lebanese central bank and the imf? It was those alternative financial system that was effectively destroyed, used by 3 million Lebanese and that was a civilian target. And that's how you know the financial rails are being rebuilt here just as they did in Gaza as well. So I think Iran stays out from here. I don't think Iran gets involved. I think the Saudi normalization, you know, requirements to never normalize with Israel unless there is a Palestinian state and a genuine path becomes the important holdout structure. And Lebanon is not an isolated story. I think that this happens across the region. I think this is just the final stage of dismantling the regional proxy system and the proxy wars and military influence is basically giving away to financial influence, MIC is giving away to FIC as we've always said. And reconstruction capital is reshaping and being replaced with rebuild capital. Regional integration is replacing perpetual war, the forever war model. And we still have a little bit of what happens to Iraq next. It's very institutionalized. We started to get a US exit and we will see. This is really the test of the hypothesis because it was Iran dominated. They're going through significant economic weakness right now. The closure of the Strait of Famous impacted Iraq more than anyone else as well as India. And so that's the thing that we need to see. So I think in order to Lebanon, then Iraq, then Gaza, that will then lead to Sudan and that will lead to Libya. And that's really, you know the, the resistance against the manufactured crisis and the different models that can be followed. You know, this is mcfic tick in full force. This is transition from Mick forever war to FIC regional stability where you have the FIC has to give more war in other parts of the region. So with all of that in mind, let's go to the final section. And the final section is the surprise really that throughout all of this carnage through the tech crash, through the problems that we've been highlighting with microstrategy coming to surface exactly as we've been covering over the years with all these problems with even us leading to our next internal battle with soft forks and hard forks within Bitcoin. Bitcoin is holding up incredibly well. And so we went below that 60,000 mark. At the moment we're around about 62,000. I was getting people to say dollar cost average into weakness and I believe that there's extended weakness coming. But really how it's been holding up has been pretty impressive. It's resilience. Given everything that's happening would have thought it would have been a bit more weaker, which is a shame for most people because the weaker it gets, the more fiat currency that month, that week, that day, whatever.
- [86:48]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
However you dollar cost average you get
- [86:51]
Simon Dixon
to buy with your, with your bit, you know, you get the more bitcoin you get to buy with your fiat currency. So despite the weakness in technology stocks that we covered right at the beginning, despite the pressure across risk assets, despite Kevin Walsh's regime change and talking about rate hikes and also hinting at inflation and inflation potentially coming under control now the straight of Hormuz is open all of that uncertainty business, you know, Bitcoin continues to hold that, that this level and at the same time strategies influence is becoming obvious and we're going through the nice cleansing process for that right now. And so strategy effectively. MSTR was the largest purchaser of Bitcoin. I always framed it as an arbitrage vehicle that can use financial industrial complex financial weapons of mass destruction in order to centralize as much Bitcoin and short term control the price of Bitcoin and create these weapons for the FIC to control the short term price of Bitcoin. But because there's bitcoin in self custody, you can't control the long term price. And so the next test is Whether Bitcoin can demonstrate its demand beyond the one corporate buyer. Because we had a big announcement from Strategy. I thought that the Strategy would start buying back some of STRC in order to remain confident. But what it did instead is it announced that it can have, it can sell and get approved an amount of Bitcoin, a few billion dollars of Bitcoin in order to buy back stocks, strengthen up its dollar reserves, meet its dividend requirement and its requirement and sell Bitcoin in order to do that and have this authorized. So now it's got authorization for all of the different tools. And we didn't get the announcement that Strategy is buying Bitcoin. Now this helped stretch get closer to 100 and it created a little bit of recovery in the MSTR share price. But this I believe is good for Bitcoin because now we've got all those mechanisms for the short term price manipulation that you don't need to fall for, but we get to test it beyond this one corporate buyer. And so at the same time we got that happening with Strategy. Now we started to ratchet up the narrative into the next phase of understanding the Bitcoin code. And we've got more and more attention towards bit 100 which is an alternative implementation of Bitcoin that takes away the changes that allowed for a lot of the spam. I don't want to get too technical, we've covered this previously. You can look at my blog. But Core, the developers of Bitcoin opened up the amount of data that can be put into an op return from 80 megabytes to 100,000 megabytes. And so that was. And then they changed the parameters, which has led to a lot more people creating things on Bitcoin and that is considered spam. And now it creates more pressure on those running nodes because they have to
- [90:22]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
download more data and it can get more expensive.
- [90:25]
Simon Dixon
You know, we're back to those old debates around preserving the decentralized nature of nodes, the decentralized nature of bitcoin mining and the decentralization of
- [90:39]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
developers.
- [90:41]
Simon Dixon
Now we're testing all those assumptions again, which is a very healthy and good thing. Now in August there's going to be the next soft fork between bit 100, those that were signaling on their node, whether they're supporting not or Core. And now we have this V30 version of Bitcoin that we currently have and then we have this alternative implementation, BIP 110. We get to test all the parameters. Now my node has been signaling 4 knots and maybe we can do more on V30 versus I've always thought it's very healthy that we create competition within core and we test the assumptions. We have this debate, we understand what a software look like and how that is, what that leads to. And then the way the soft fork was built is you have one year and then you have the reversing and then you have this process where miners can do a reversed soft fork and hard fork structure. All of that needs to be tested because the one we had in 2017, that led to the block size debate prior to that, that was a different structure. So I think it's very healthy. So while we've got the unwinding of this strategy structure, we've got the reversal of and the implementation of this new softwalk hard fork structure, these are very good things for Bitcoin long term, but bad for short term optics. And so I'm continuing to believe that we get extended weakness even though it's holding up here, which allows you to get more bitcoin in self custody as you're earning your fiat currency. And so, you know, we've got this one year learning process that we're going to go through and we'll be covering it all the way through. We'll understand the bigger picture, but the bigger picture here is that Bitcoin needs to prove that the market is deeper than just one corporate balance sheet and one FIC vehicle that can be penetrated by fic. And we need to know that Bitcoin core has competing teams and when we need to regime change, we regime change and we question the financing mechanisms and we question those that were involved in compromise operations. And this is the healthiest bitcoin has ever been in terms of questioning those things. But if you're kind of new to it, you just see carnage. And so that's really good thing for the long term. As I said, the long term adoption requires more broad ownership. Now it's not proof of stake, it's proof of work. So fine. But the less Bitcoin that was centralized in Fig, the less short term price manipulation. And I've covered in my blog how Jane street does this and various other things. You can go back to those old episodes. But the most important thing with bitcoin, the thing that makes it different, is its decentralization spectrum. And you know, that happens in different areas. It happens with lots of people running nodes and those nodes enforcing the code against any developers that want to change a code. It has competing implementations and a decentralized developer infrastructure with competing funding sources and competing IDEOLOGIES that's we're moving more to that than developer. We were very centralized in the core structure and more decentralized innovation in mining. So the more AI companies in America that are moving from bitcoin mining to AI infrastructure and we had one of the companies like Ionic Digital which I'm a shareholder in from the Celsius bankruptcy where that's now going public and it fired this S1 filing and it's no longer a bitcoin mining company other than having bitcoin on its reserve as an asset and mining bitcoin with the what's left. But it's pivoted to AI infrastructure. So the more public companies and a lot of the companies that are public bitcoin miners have pivoted to that. We get a correction in the difficulty rate. But bitcoin mining difficult rate is still at very high rates, very, very secure, more secure than everything. But more is pivoted over to AI which then decentralizes that 40% of mining infrastructure that was happening via FIC public companies in America while accelerating into multipolarity with other countries revealing their bitcoin strategies like Iran with its nuclear bitcoin mining and the largest and UAE as well with its new things. So this is very, very positive while we get the innovation through alternative implementations of Bitcoin to have more control over self mining, home mining parameters for integrating into the bitcoin mining pools. All of that is progressing. But we've got to get through this debate over the next year and it will look like a bit of carnage and a bit of an open source boardroom. So have a strategy. And I don't mean strategy, I mean your strategy. The problem is MSTR co opted that word. And so I've argued for a long term that strategy is a arbitrage vehicle,
- [96:13]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
not a bitcoin accumulation vehicle.
- [96:16]
Simon Dixon
It centralizes bitcoin and it creates arbitrage thick vehicles. And the lesson that I was, you know, the whole lesson here is never really about one company. People always wanted me to focus on Michael Saylor. Now if you look back at some of the contracts, you know, strategy was a long term public company. It pivoted here. Michael Saylor did rise to fame very quickly. He was providing service and intelligence software. Some of those customers were governments and they were linked to contracts that linked to intelligence agencies. But that's just the structural part of it. I never focused on Michael Saylor as a person, despite everyone trying to make me go down that route because I was more focused on the lessons, the structure the architecture, subordination and Michael Saylor's fiduciary duties to his shareholders. So I'm always watching the incentives rather than the personalities. And so the, you know, the, the lesson was understanding these incentives and following them, which is the lessons that I like to teach you. You know, strategy has now accumulated approximately 847,000 bitcoin. I think it wants to own more than the Satoshi Wallets, which is over a million Bitcoin. Now it was financed through preference shares, it was financed through debt structures and it was financed through, you know, equity issuance and preference shares and more structured products. These were all structured with the FIC and still has all has investments with the fic. And so while the premium existed, that allowed this to happen. That allowed them to issue shares and buy bitcoin at a discount with a premium M Nav and then they could buy bitcoin. This was, you know, sometimes increase the net asset value, but dilute the M Nav and then they could repeat this, repeat this, repeat this and keep going. Today that premium doesn't exist. And so they're now reversing it, getting authority to sell Bitcoin so that they can pull the levers in the other way and then they can compress that ability. So it's not buying Bitcoin anymore, which I think is very, very healthy. And strategy, it's financing is becoming more and more difficult. It could never buy bitcoin or never sell bitcoin. It may need to go, it may not get to the over 1 million side. And so I will keep watching it. But it's the architecture is the incentives and Bitcoin, you know, basically what the bitcoin that they have right now sits below the average price that they purchased. And so, you know, there's not really an option to sell at a discount unless you want to fire up. And I always said the risk is not chapter 11. With all the other treasury companies, chapter 11 is the risk. But with strategy, why would they kill the vehicle? It's a much more useful vehicle too, the fig. And so I always thought that it would continue and stay there. And so we have to deal with it and understand it. So capital is becoming more and more expensive for strategy anyway. Up to $1.25 billion Bitcoin sales have now been authorized. It increased its USD reserve so it can hold out for longer in terms of the dividends without selling Bitcoin and it can now pay those preference dividends
- [99:52]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
for a longer time.
- [99:54]
Simon Dixon
It can pay its debt servicing, if any, when that Debt becomes mature and it can do more share buybacks if it chooses, which is not a bitcoin purchase strategy. So this is all healthy strc. It increased its dividend from 11 and a half percent to 12% to try and incentivize people to arbitrage it and buy more of it and it's built a bigger cash reserve and that was
- [100:19]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
all announced this week.
- [100:22]
Simon Dixon
So the market has questioned its sustainability. Many people have stopped the idea idol worshiping. Many people now understand the structure, we understand the incentives, we understand the vehicle. And there is now bigger lessons which makes Bitcoin stronger and hopefully that drives more and more people into Bitcoin and self custody rather than Bitcoin wrapped in Michael Saylor and Vic who can change thing at any time and just change the game on you. And that's what Bitcoin can't do. As long as we preserve decentralized mining, people running nodes, people holding in self custody and more decentralized developer infrastructure which right now is moving towards more powerful structures, more lessons as well. So strategy, somewhere along the way, whether it was the strategy from the beginning, whether it was a covert op, whether it was co opted, whatever it needed to pivot, whether it made good decisions, bad decisions, strategy stopped, you know, behaving like a bitcoin holder and somebody that was always going to buy Bitcoin and it became a credit issuer and a credit issuer. Matt Michael Saylor tweeted that he met with Goldman Sachs because that's who you meet when you're a credit issuer and credit issuers must service their liabilities and those liabilities are normally liabilities to FIC with some retail shareholders. So that's the subordination vehicle that I've always talked about. Bitcoin holders don't have to do this, they don't have to answer to their liabilities unless they have fiat liabilities. But in the bitcoin side they don't. And so that's the bigger lesson. Owning Bitcoin self custody and building financial products are very, very different things. Building bitcoin around, building financial products around Bitcoin, as I've always said, is not Bitcoin. Bitcoin ETF is not Bitcoin. Bitcoin IOU treasury companies is not Bitcoin. Bitcoin perpetual futures are not Bitcoin. Bitcoin shitcoins wrapped in Ethereum are not Bitcoin. The two are completely different businesses and completely different models. And the first basically is a FIC model and we still dominate in self custody and we need to continue to watch that. So what was launched this week in order to try and make sure that more of it is centralized? Well, the FIC launched a new tool and that is the organization that created the global financial crisis that led in 2008 to Satoshi releasing the white paper and led to the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns. And a product that was created by Larry Fink who worked there that then ended up creating BlackRock and was the net beneficiary of Barclays ETF department that gave it this asset management control and got a contract with the Federal Reserve to use this BlackRock Aladdin technology. That led to packaging up and putting on the Fed balance sheet these mortgage backed securities and toxic assets that Larry Fink invented that Blythe Masters from JP Morgan created the credit default swap in order to ensure it so that that could then be dumped on pensioners through the asset management industry. That then required a too big to fail structure and a bailout. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have now decided that you can now use your Bitcoin in order to get a mortgage and you can use your Bitcoin as collateral. And so we had the first Michigan home purchase using a mortgage issued by Fannie Mae using your Bitcoin as collateral. And when the Bitcoin is pledged as collateral, what does it mean? It means it's held in custody, which means that it is another centralizing vehicle. So you have the Bitcoin's treasury company strategy, you have the ETFs and now you have Bitcoin back mortgages via Fannie Mae. And you know this means, and it's attractive that if you agree to take your Bitcoin out of self custody and hold it in custody, then you don't have to sell it. But if the price of Bitcoin goes down and is manipulated down fast, you need to either put more Bitcoin so that you can have all of your Bitcoin in custody backing this loan, or they margin call you if there's not enough collateral. And you end up losing all of your Bitcoin, which of course was the structure of the global financial crisis, which is the structure of the private credit financing of the AI infrastructure. Build out into an AI bubble while centralizing as much Bitcoin and leveraging people up. And so while you get no capital gains are triggered and you don't have to sell it. And so there's no margin call until this actually goes below the value. You can also settle in what you can use USDC Stablecoins are accepted to do this as well. And so this is part of the nationwide rollout plan for Stablecoin surveillance money with bitcoin in custody in order to back and take out a mortgage so that you can mine some fiat currency via Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And they're targeting $250 million of initial volume, which isn't too much anyway. But this is all at the same time bringing it all around where we started at the beginning as launching the Open Stablecoin Standard, which is 140 institutions from FIC across the spectrum in order to launch this open stablecoin standard. And what would they be doing with that? As I said earlier, they'll be serving, they'll be sharing their reserves of investing it in treasuries with the businesses that adopt it. And so stablecoin is becoming the infrastructure that we talked about. Private digital money continues to expand within the US sphere of influence. And we had that CBDC standard globally. Now I want to cover one more
- [107:08]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
thing and then we'll wrap all of
- [107:09]
Simon Dixon
this up that we got more disclosures on Trump's crypto scams and Trump's blackmail operations and Trump's quid pro quo deals. No surprise, we covered them all along. But Trump reported more than a billion and a half dollars in crypto related revenue. Now that wasn't bitcoin that was launching meme coins and selling them and dumping them onto the his fans that wanted to buy them. Any idiots that did that, they're on
- [107:42]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
the wrong side of that trade.
- [107:43]
Simon Dixon
It was meme coin royalties from things that he'd launched. It was. The creation of World Liberty Financial that we've covered many times. The stable coins within it that was in partnership with Steve Whitcoy for the Envoy to the Middle east and now took investment from the UAE sovereign wealth fund. And you get those quid pro grow transactions that I've talked about. It was from selling tokens. He launched his wife's meme coin, his meme coin and lots of other NFTs. And then it was exposure to bitcoin mining via his friends infrastructure with the Hot 8 people and the different AI infrastructure was some of his other stuff as well. So that was significantly more than he made anywhere else. And so that tells you how this crypto capital, what it is actually for and what it will actually do. It is the police and surveillance state. It is to centralize as much bitcoin as possible and it is to allow for these quid pro quo deals via stablecoin issuance to roll over the debt. It is the continuation of empowering the swamp for McFic and Tick. And then the quid pro quo deals with the Gulf infrastructure that invested in affinity capital partners.
- [109:19]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Trump's family office sovereign wealth fund.
- [109:23]
Simon Dixon
Not sovereign wealth, so family office funds. Okay, so let's pile this together into the final thoughts. The common thread across all of this, whether it's the technology, whether it's immigration, whether it's digital money, whether it's the Lebanon war, whether it's stablecoins, whether it's Bitcoin. On the surface they all look completely different and unrelated. But at Simon Dixon Hard Talk Live, we don't think like that. We try and follow the money and we see whether there is commonality in the big things and what we can learn from it. And so they are all connected in some way and they are expressions of the same transition. One transition one where effectively financial and technology power increasingly replace military power while the military power becomes AI and robotics and cybersecurity capital and surveillance are increasingly replacing human led conflict and war. Digital infrastructure is increasingly replacing the legacy institutions and they're being redefined and rebuilt into multipolarity and a global control grid. The question isn't really simply what happened this week, as I always cover, it's what system is being built. That's why we want to cover and look at the systemic level and, and follow the money for the incentives. Because once you can recognize that the headlines become just irrelevant and you don't get caught up in all the fake news and where they want you to go and everything makes a lot more sense and you can de radicalize yourself from the psyops. And this really helps me transition to part two because in part two that's really what we want to cover. And it covers at least perfectly into the featured interview that I did earlier this week. And so I, I was joined and I was invited onto a YouTube channel by Alexi Joseph and that is the gold republic global YouTube channel. What we basically went through and I described is the asset stripping phase. So how when you manufacture these crisis, how you can take these into weapons and the specific asset stripping ones, how you turn that into asset strips. And so rather than looking at the individual events and being a part of the psyop and the algorithm, you can step back and you can we basically went through the incentives and we went to, into the actual transition itself. So here's what we're going to do. I'd like you, we're going to be premiering that video on my YouTube channel shortly it will redirect you. The link will be below and it will be premiering shortly after this. But we're going to be jumping into the interview. But just before we do, I'd like you to do a few things to me. Firstly, check whether you are subscribed to this channel and if you are subscribed, make sure it's on all so you get notifications. We're at 175,000 YouTube subscribers. I'd like to get to 210,000 in commemoration of 21 million Bitcoin and I'd like you to help me get there. So if you're not subscribed, I will keep giving this content and I will make sure that it's got no ads, no monetization, no sponsorship and I'm not upselling you into some kind of business model. I will continue to do that. But I notice way more people are watching this than are subscribed. So if everyone that watched this subscribed, then we can keep doing this content and you can keep enjoying this as well and we get the message out to more people. The other thing I'd like you to do in case I ever get taken down, head over to Rumble and look me up and follow me over there. That's our backup channel. I stream over there. But if I get taken off, YouTube will be streaming over there. I also do it on X where I give real time analysis. If you're not following me on X at Simon Dixon Twit, please follow me and please put the notifications on so that you get those, those notifications. If you need to watch this on the move and you prefer to download it and watch it in parts, then we've got Spotify and Apple Podcasts. Please look me up over there and make sure you follow me. We need to get more followers because the YouTube numbers are much higher. So please, if you use Apple Podcasts and use Spotify, please help out over there. Finally, make sure you have a login, a free login@simondixon.com in case everything gets shut down. We've created our own environment and the only way, in case I get completely cancelled that I can notify you and we can continue. This is if I have my own environment for hosting webinars completely free, no sponsorship, no upsell, no monetization. And if you've got a free login@Simon Dixon.com As a reward, you can get a free copy of my last book. I'm going to be writing my next one and that will Be our environment. And I've got content there and archives that you can't get anywhere else. So create a login for yourself@simondixon.com Become a Member and other community members all talk and they discuss what they're doing for their sovereign strategies. You can talk amongst other community members within that and that's everything that I'm gonna ask. So if you are, once you've got that login, then all I'll do is I'll email you each week so I can notify you. So always remember, you are alive in one of the most interesting and exciting times in financial history. Some are going to get wrecked, others are going to do very well. I want you to be on the right side of that change and I want more in my community.
- [115:33]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
They're on the right side of that
- [115:34]
Simon Dixon
change that can see above the psyops so that maybe we, at least us in our community can transition with a bit more peace, love and unity. And so this is everything that I'm going to be covering on Simon Dixon Hard Talk Live Part 1. We covered immigration as a weapon, we covered Lebanon as a weapon, we covered the tech crash and then we went through some of the updates this week and in Bitcoin. Now head over to part two. Enjoy the interview that I did on the asset stripping phase and I will see you this time next week.
- [116:11]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Peace.
- [116:19]
Simon Dixon
Some are completely subordinate debt slaves.
- [116:22]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
That's what the financial industrial complex wanted to create, which is make you a collateralized debt obligation where you earn just
- [116:29]
Simon Dixon
enough and you work your whole life
- [116:32]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
just to pay the interest. And as you progress, you take on more debt and pay more interest and you do that forever. That's the, that's the slavery. And this is the game of investment banking. You build all the products around it to subordinate governments, companies and individuals. That's the asset stripping phase. Europe is being systemically asset stripped. And that's why the war with Russia and Ukraine will continue probably for another three years. The end game here is if you look at what Larry Fink will tell you, you will own nothing and be happy. How do you achieve that? And then when you manufacture crisis, each crisis leads to concentrating wealth upwards.
- [117:13]
Simon Dixon
And then they want to make you happy.
- [117:14]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
How are they going to make you happy? They can do that by giving you on a universal basic income. And so you reset the world order into multipolarity and build a global control grid. Every capital flow in the world is telling me that that's what's happening when you follow the money. People want an easy Conspiracy theory of, you know, 300 people sat in a room in an organized cabal, there's no such thing as a democracy. Democracies are captured. Almost every government is subordinate to that capital structure. And so they created an operation called operation choke point 2.0, where they created companies that you could destroy to remove credibility, manufacture a crisis, take out all the banks that were servicing the crypto companies and replace them with Wall Street.
- [118:00]
Simon Dixon
No personal attack against Michael Saylor.
- [118:03]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
He works for his shareholders. Strategy is doing what it was designed to do, which is create an arbitrage vehicle for manipulating the short term price of Bitcoin, for trying to centralize as
- [118:15]
Simon Dixon
much Bitcoin as possible.
- [118:19]
Alex Adornov
Welcome to the Macroscopic Podcast. My name is Alex Adornov and today I have the honor of welcoming Simon Dixon. Today is the 25th of June, 2026. Welcome to the podcast, Simon.
- [118:31]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Thank you so much for having me. Excited to be here.
- [118:34]
Alex Adornov
So, Simon, first, since you're also, for the first time appearing on our podcast, I would like to dig a bit deeper into your way of thinking, your philosophy, the way you see and perceive the world, so that our audience gets a better understanding on also your main ideas and main takes. So one of the first questions that I was actually wondering is a bit more personal. It's about, let's say, the episode where your father's pension was wiped out in the dot com crash. What did this teach you in that moment about the system we live in?
- [119:07]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Yeah, so I got into this game of following the money because my father, who was born in 33, so he lived through the Great Depression and World War II, and he kind of made himself from complete rags to clawing up to becoming a millionaire through blagging. And then he lost it all at his retirement age in the dot com boom and bust. So he went through that whole cycle, and I remember what an event it was. He was looking back at his whole life saying, you know, I came from nothing. My father was a bus driver. There were seven of us, you know, seven of us lived off a bus driver salary. And I pulled my way out of it, and now where is the money? And he asked me to answer that question because he just didn't understand it. He saw it as a digital entry on his stock brokerage account and then it was gone. And he was like, well, where is that money? Who made that money? What went wrong? You know, he didn't understand how markets fundamentally work. And that was 26 years ago. And I've obsessed over the topic of trying to answer that Question. I think I've reached an answer, but I still obsess over it. And that kind of took me to academically doing economics up to master's level, realizing they don't give you the answer. And what I discovered is that the university curriculum is sponsored by those that have vested interests in deviating your attention away from the system. The same what I call financial industrial complex. So then I kind of went into not for profit work and started teaching people about how the banking system, you know, works. But this was after working in the banking system. So I got a job as a stockbroker, realized that my job was just to sell, say whatever you need to say in order to sell stocks. Then I decided how the markets work. So I worked as a market maker where my job was to manipulate the price of stocks in order to fulfill institutional, you know, investment banking orders. Then I kind of went into corporate finance, which was helping companies go public, and understood the whole game of how taking companies public is actually a vehicle for subordinating entrepreneurs and and installing boards so that you can control businesses in order to maximize returns. After that game, I kind of got in for the not for profit world, realized that all politicians are owned by the same financial industrial complex. And so I was asking, this was around the 2008 financial crisis. I was asking bank politicians to change the system, but realize the people that were investigating the system were ex bankers that were sponsored by bankers. And so they ain't going to change it. So then I went around trying to create a bank. So I wanted to create a non fractional reserve bank called bank to the Future. And the bank of England told me that I could only build it on top of a bank that already was, you know, doing fractional reserve. So you couldn't have a model where you didn't leverage up client assets. So then eventually I found Bitcoin and then started investing in over a hundred of the different bitcoin companies. And then one by one they all became owned by fic because companies like Coinbase went from a small idea to help people get Bitcoin to floating on the stock market for $100 billion. And one by one I realized all of the companies I'd invested in were subordinate to the same financial interest. And so, you know, that's kind of. So then I just started creating content, sold my businesses and started working or becoming as sovereign as possible and trying to help people understand how to sit outside the system so that this financial industrial complex can be not get any of your energy and you can boycott the System, you can sit outside the system and try and become more sovereign. So that's my. That brings me up to my 26 year journey of trying to answer the question of where did my father's money go? One thing that was very fortunate is that I got into Bitcoin at $3 and I was teaching people own more Bitcoin every month. Self custody, it run a node. And that obviously took my father out of, you know, dependency and I was able to give him the best life possible until he sadly passed away shortly after. Covid.
- [124:02]
Alex Adornov
Oh, my sincere, well, condolences about that. And it's beautiful, it's a beautiful circle of life as well that you've been able to kind of tie back. He lost everything. You lost also quite a lot too, from what I understood during that bank to the Future episode, I think was a quarter of a million pounds, if I'm not mistaken, and unable to raise from your ashes. So you said one thing about the time that you had as a stock broker was about manipulating stocks or at least having an influence on the price. How did that exactly work?
- [124:41]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Yeah, so I was a market maker for small cap stocks on the London Stock Exchange and a market called the Alternative Investment Market. And my job as a, well, when I was a stockbroker it was just to sell stocks, but you used to ring through to the market makers and try and get them to fulfill an order. So interestingly, the broker I worked for was the one my dad lost all his money in. So I managed to get a job there. But you know, my job would be someone would call, they'd want an order, I'd have to find the stock for them. So I'd call the market makers in London and they would have to give me a bid and an offer, which meant that they were obligated to always give me a price. Now when I worked as a market maker, I realized that there's meant to be these things called Chinese walls in the investment bank. And that is, you know, when, when you work in corporate finance, you're doing mergers, acquisitions, takeover deals. And the, the traders are not meant to know about that. The market makers, because they can build a position, manipulate the market knowing that a deal's going ahead. But every market maker knew about every deal. The Chinese wall failed. But also on the other side of that, there's what's known as a sales trader. So when Goldman Sachs needs to fulfill an order, because they're investing at such size, they need it to be a secret order that is fulfilled over time. And so the sales trader would contact me as a market maker and if I would take on at risk a bunch of the stock that he was trying to buy, then my job was just to push prices up and down until we could get people to sell their stock. And so you would create all these things that look like candlestick charts that people are analyzing. But the lower liquid stocks we were dealing with, where we could basically control the whole market with a few other market makers. And often those market, the Goldman Sachs would leave orders with me and three other market makers and then you can see what they're doing. And you know, there's these unwritten rules that, you know, that you can push up a price at a psychological level where everyone will have their sell orders. You can pick up a bunch of stocks and you can crash it down, hit their stop orders, and you would. This is the process of trying to get lots and lots of retail investors to sell their stock so that you can then give it to the institutional investor. And then the institutional investor could then publish research later, would then make it way to the media. And then the media would then be where the stockbrokers kind of fulfill orders for retail investors. So there's always. Institutions are always ahead of retail, and market makers are able to play that game in order to get the stock for the institutions.
- [127:34]
Alex Adornov
So I'm curious before we go into the deeper side of it, because you've also mentioned about IPOs. How would you analyze then what we've seen as probably one of the biggest IPOs ever, the SpaceX IPO and what interest it served. And how do you, from an insider perspective, see what exactly happened in the background?
- [127:54]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Yeah, so an IPO is kind of a mechanism of subordinating a company to the financial industrial complex. What you're doing is you're taking a business and you're turning it into a product. And that product is a share. And so those shares are privately held, but now they're going to be publicly held. And what that means is that it will float on a stock market. And our job would initially be to underwrite that offering, which is where we would get discounted stock. And then we would guarantee a certain amount of stock we had to purchase. And then we would go out to our network of institutional investors and try and sell it to them. But with it, we would construct lots of rights. And the more we could sell, the more rights we would have in the company and the more we would sell. We would then have a vehicle for managing that, that if we got sold enough, we would then Get a board seat. And when you've got a board seat, it means the executives that are managing the company have to answer to a board. Those boards represent the shareholders and the shareholders have the voting rights. And so the game of investment banking is to turn as many businesses into products, get as many board seats as you can, and get as many voting rights as you can. And the best investment banks have the most board seats, the most voting rights, and are productizing as many of those companies as possible. Once you do that, you then own a piece of the business or proxies for institutional investors, and you have a board that fulfills your goals. And so the executives then work for you. And that's kind of the first thing. Then what you do is you load them up with debt. What you want to do is make it where the company has a bunch of debt, because once you can use the debt capital markets and the equity capital markets, you can subordinate them further. Then what you want to do is you want to load the entrepreneurs and the executives up with options so that they are rewarded to follow the behavior that you'd want them to follow in order to get paid when those options become shares. And then what you do is you load them up with collateralized loans, you give them a loan against their stock that they personally own. Once you've done that, they are fully subordinate to the financial industrial complex and they can no longer speak freely. They have fiduciary duties to their shareholders and their wealth is dependent upon compliance with these these levers in the kind of more larger companies that are connected to military contracts like SpaceX, where they depend upon Pentagon budgets and government contracts that kind of goes into the deep state at that stage. And the deep state is where you have these blackmail operations like Jeffrey Epstein and MI6, CIA, Mossad operations, in order to make sure that everyone is subordinate to your power structure. And then those companies, those deep state, they kind of happen via military companies. And those military companies are also subordinated to the same financial industrial complex as are technical companies. Now technology is becoming the new lever of power. Who owns the data, who can control the chips, who can send, who owns the control flows, what countries are sovereign and how do we co op them in order to allow for this flow. And so that is the game of investment banking. And if anyone goes against your agenda, then you have a network of short sellers, hedge funds and derivatives contracts that can destroy your value if you get off track. And so if Elon goes too far off track, you can destroy the value of his trillion dollar net Worth because it is not, it's not a trillion dollars of gold that he can send anywhere without government permission. It's not a trillion dollars of Bitcoin that you can just send. It is a trillion dollars of net worth that is dependent upon compliance with the financial industrial complex. And this is the game of investment banking. You build all the products around it to subordinate governments, companies and individuals. And that is the complex that I call the fic, the financial industrial complex.
- [132:31]
Alex Adornov
So let's break it down a little bit and also make it a bit more concrete. I'm also interested in to do how you perceive the evolution now, where, where this, where did this, this fig started, this financial industrial complex started? Who are the biggest actors and what are their interests at the end of the day?
- [132:49]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Well, it started where, where you're from the Dutch Empire. And so the Dutch Empire created the three pillars of this, which is the central banking system, the private limited liability company. And then you have the government, which is the piggy bank. So you use the bond market and the equity market to tokenize or securitize every company. You then use the government in order to subordinate them to bondholders through the debt capital market markets. And then you control the money printer that creates all the money. The central banking system, which effectively is owned by the banks. And those banks create currency every time they issue a loan. Now the Dutch Empire created that. And so the mechanism is to tran is to leave all the people with the debt through the debt markets where they pay the yield. And then you transfer the government's value over to the private corporate interest, which was the Dutch East India Company. And then you use their military and their naval fleets in order to steal resources from the world. And you do that by having the strongest fiat currency and inflating away other people's currencies. So you destroy the country through currency wars. And the gold standard was a mechanism for making sure that the Dutch guilder had the strongest currency while you invade other countries through the strongest naval fleet to steal their resources and put them over into the Dutch East India Company. Now what happened with that is that the Dutch Empire started to outsource the labor to the British because they were the cheap labor. And then the British learned from the Dutch and then they created the bank of England, the British East India Company, the largest naval fleet in the world. And then they bankrupted the UK government. Once they fully bankrupted the UK government, World War I happened, which needed the Federal Reserve. So then we transferred all the value over to the American Empire, the Federal Reserve was created and then you had the private interest was the military industrial complex.
- [135:08]
Alex Adornov
Sorry, why did they, why did they? The Fed was a product of then the World War I. Why did they need the Fed specifically? The Fed? I mean the US was not even that important back then. Why the Fed specifically?
- [135:20]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
So central banking is a mechanism for bankrupting governments, transferring all the value over to private public partnerships. And the best mechanism for doing that is war. And so if you can, if you can manufacture war, then you have the ability to fund both sides of the war. And then the winner is the one that accumulates the assets from the loser. And so if you look at World War I, you basically had the Federal Reserve was created in 1913. Then Wall street set about funding different ideologies. During World War I, Wall street funded the Bolshevik revolution in Russia which overthrew the Russian Tsar and replace it with the Western Marxist ideology called Communism. So the Soviet Union was born out of a revolution and that was funded by the same forces that created fake capitalism in America through a debt based Ponzi scheme called the Federal Reserve System. And so those are, if you look back at it, the German central bank, Rice bank was also the governor, was one of the brothers of the Warburg family, which was the same person that was the governor of the Federal Reserve. And so what came after World War I is that you created communism. You created the capitalist model that transferred from the British Empire to the American empire. And then you engineered after, during that war, you then had, remember the Balfour Declaration, which is where the war the Rothchilds declared Israel. You know, basically what became Israel. And the Rothchild families got from the British government the commitment to create a Jewish state. And that Jewish state happened in 1917, the same year as the Bolshevik Revolution, in order to acquire the resources on oil from the Middle east and from Russia. And so the resources they needed was to fund continue the industrial revolution with oil. So they installed communism in Russia and they used Israel to create a militia group to destabilize the Middle east so that they can steal all the oil that was needed and partner with Middle Eastern countries. That was World War I in a nutshell. Then you had a pump and dump cycle where you get everyone to lever their assets leading up to the 20s and then the Federal Reserve rug pulls the system and you create a great depression. You confiscate all the gold which was 1933, and then you fund fascism. And so Wall street funded Hitler. And so what happened actually if you look at it, it was very interesting when Hitler invaded a Country like Czechoslovakia. He would call up the Rice bank, the Rice bank would call up the bank for International Settlements. The bank for International Settlements didn't store any gold. It used the Swiss Central bank, the bank of England and the Federal Reserve to store its actual gold. So then the Reichsbank would call the bis, the BIS would then call the bank of England and say, hey, that gold is now owned by Nazi Germany. And so the bank of England would store the gold for Nazi Germany while fighting a war with Nazi Germany. So that kind of tells you the craziness of it. And then it was that gold that propped up the system that funded the further expansion of the wars. Um, and, and so, you know, and then, you know, who was the war? It was basically Russia and Germany rush. Russia lost 20 million people. And, and then you fund basically the next order. And so as a result of that, if you look at the reason I covered that story is because the bank for International Settlements was set up for one purpose. It was to take Germany's debt and manage the reparations that Germany needed to pay from World War I. It was signed in the Versailles palace, exactly where Trump signed the MOU with Iran right now. And the debt was priced in gold. So Germany needed to repay gold. And the only way to repay gold was to print the currency that they controlled at the German central bank. That created hyperinflation, it created the degeneracy of the Volmar Republic. And then that led to an uprising where Hitler arrested the Rothschilds and launched his own central banking system and a labor backed currency that kind of paid. That was a resistance against the Western banking system. But then Wall street managed to fund it and then infiltrate it with the bank for International Settlements and basically confiscate the gold. That then led to World War II. And then the winners of the war rewrite history, make it out like it's something different. And then we set the next world order. And that world order was imf, World bank persuading every country to stop converting that currency into gold and instead convert it into dollars via the imf. And then the imf. And then the promise was that if you did that, you'd get a loan from the World bank denominated in dollars, which would then destroy the currencies of everyone that took those loans, because then you'd launch a currency war. And then, and then, but the promise was that the dollar will always be backed by gold. So then they launched the Cold War, the Vietnamese War, the Korean War, the Vietnamese War bankrupted the US Government they came off the gold standard, assassinated King Faisal of Saudi Arabia, then went into the petrodollar, forced them to price in dollars. But the difference was that they had to reinvest it in US Debt. And then the yield in the Federal Reserve System would purchase equipment from the military, and then America would set up a base there. And that set up the petrodollar and opec. And now we're at the final stage of the bankruptcy of the petrodollar. And so we closed the Strait of Hormuz, and in order to reset the world order and break the petrodollar and move to the next order, which is what the FIC is repositioning for right
- [141:59]
Alex Adornov
now, you also argued that the power shifted as well at some point from a military industrial complex to the financial one. When did that, in your opinion, what you just mentioned really occur? And who were the most important actors?
- [142:14]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
So really complete dominance happened around 71 with the coming off of the gold standard. That's when the FIC financialized, securitized and privatized everything to a massive, a really big degree. But really the FIC were always in charge through the central banking system because they got to create the fiat currency to steal resources. In a Ponzi scheme, there's never enough interest to pay off the debt. So you're always rolling over the debt until the government's bankrupt. That's the game. And you do it slowly so people don't notice it. But really, with the creation of the bank for International Settlements, the International Monetary Fund and the World bank, that created the construct of transnational capital that sits above governments. And so governments were subordinate to transnational capital through bondholders, companies were subordinate through the equity capital markets, and people were subordinate through borrowing to create fiat currency through the banks. Now, what was really interesting is the bit that defined that was having the strongest currency backed by gold so that others would destroy their currency and you could weaponize currency wars. Now, what happened in 71 is it came off the gold standard because everyone wanted their gold instead of dollars. They wanted to exchange their dollars for gold. And so America defaulted on that promise. And from that moment, we entered into needing to engineer a covert war to make sure that there was constant demand for U.S. debt and U.S. treasuries, and that was the creation of the petrodollar. That's why you needed the regime change in Saudi Arabia. And George Bush set up a covert operation called Safari Club. And Safari Club groomed people like Osama bin Laden that led to 9, 11, and various other CIA assets that would create all the wars in the Middle east. That would then lead to the forever war model and everything that we're kind of resolving and reversing today. But the idea was that if you price oil in dollars, you then need to reinvest it in government debt. That government debt would fuel the military industrial complex. But by having the most stable currency, everyone would need to lend it to the US Government while they launch wars against your currency country. And then you would be forced to spend those dollars back in the American stock market. And then that would be tied loans that would lead to military bases being set up in your country because you either get regime change subordinated, a dictator installed, or you're able to negotiate and do what Saudi did. Set up something like the petrodollar. Now this all functions as long as the dollar is going up in value. Once people stop having faith in U.S. treasuries and the banking system stops using U.S. treasuries as collateral, then that weakens the dollar and reverses all the change. And so people end up going into gold or the central banks because they don't want to hold Treasuries. You end up having wars that lead to reasons like confiscation of Treasuries like happened to Russia. And then the whole trend reverses. And this is normally engineered by the FIC because they control the mec. But what actually really created transnational capital dominance to the hyper concentrated degree we have today, it was the coming off of the gold standard. And then that led to the financialization and securitization of every company. And then from that the FIC was able to think of the world in terms of global rather than nationalistic. And so they then built up China, built the world's largest manufacturing base and through globalization built China's wealth, which is actually national wealth, because China's actually controlled by the government, one of the only countries in the world that's controlled by the government. And so they can't penetrate China. And so as China grew, the order changed. And now that brings us to where we are now, where the military can't, even the American military can't produce a weapon without China. And so, you know, we end up in a changing order at that stage.
- [147:01]
Alex Adornov
I'm not sure if you've ever came across this book of David Graeber, depth to last 5,000 years. You probably have read it. What's it called, sorry, the last 5,000 years from David Graebner.
- [147:13]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Also, I haven't actually read that one yet. It's on my reading list I would
- [147:16]
Alex Adornov
highly recommend, because in this chapter there's something that I think would really also tie in a lot of what you're talking about. And this is what he called the military coinage slavery complex. And he used this example with Alexander the Great, who through his conquest would require I think a half a ton of silver daily to pay his army. And funnily enough as well, I didn't notice, but the world soldier itself actually is derived from solidus, which is the gold coin used to pay the troops. So then the idea was that he funded this like the cost of conquering, let's say Persia. So the Persian mines then forcing enslaved war captives to actually then mine and extract those precious metals, to then mint then those billions into coins. And wherever those coins then would be used by the soldiers, they would create economies locally. And this would be like the self reinforcing cycle which today, if you would make a parallel to this in a much more sophisticated way could be said about the dollar, right? And about what you just said about the debt slavery process of tying people, if it's executives or if it's entrepreneurs or if it's countries on the nation state level. And also now through the digital sphere with the stable coins, which we haven't talked about yet, but which would be maybe the next iteration of a much more sophisticated global scale. But today I also want to maybe make it more practical. The fic, the financial natural complex, is governed by which players today? Is it BlackRock and the other big three or is it much more complex than this? How would you describe this?
- [148:59]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Yeah, a lot more complex. So the central banking system, the western central banking system has its own jurisdiction in Davos and so the bank for International Settlements, depending on the GDP of your country, you become a larger shareholder in BIS through your central bank. So the largest shareholder in BIS is the Federal Reserve. But as you manage capital outflows, you can change the GDP of a country. So America has gone from like 70% of global GDP to about 25%. And so the Federal Reserve is becoming less and less powerful in the BIZ system over time. Then you have different types of systems. So I mentioned China. So China is a member of bis, but it is a nationalized central bank that is owned by the government and it has state banking, mini banks, community banks. And so there's thousands of community banks in China, which is a fully nationalized banking system. So the control PBoC and the banking system is fully nationalized in America. On the extreme, the Federal Reserve is owned by the Banks and the banks are private companies that are all public. Those public companies receive constant flows of capital via passive investments. Those passive Investments are mainly ETFs, pension funds, endowment funds and foreign capital. And so the owners of those banks as public companies is managed now by ETFs and asset managers because now 50% of the stock market is ETF Investments Exchange Traded Funds. So who manages those ETFs? Well, the largest managers of ETFs is BlackRock, State street and Vanguard. Collectively they manage approximately $25 trillion of assets. BlackRock about $14 trillion of assets. Now they then partner with countries that were able to maintain their own resources. And so a country like Saudi Arabia, uae, Qatar, Norway, Singapore and China, they all have the largest sovereign wealth funds in the world. And so they get a seat at the table co investing with the financial industrial complex. But they represent their own because Saudis and absolute monarchy and in an absolute monarchy that owns its own resources, it has the money is, is owned for, you know, for the benefit of the country. It's not private like the Federal Reserve system, it's not CCP nationalists like the Chinese system. And so when you look at those systems, the financial industrial complex has partnered with sovereign wealth funds. And then the central banking system is the mechanism for trying to get more resources and change those games. So every war is we're in a constant state of fluid capital that's changing power. Right now Middle Eastern power is on the rise significantly as a result of the closure of the Strait of Hormis. Even though it appears that it's declining, it's actually growing significantly as a result of this. And so it's fluid capital in a ruthless game that always tries to have people that are trying to gain more power. And so the FIC changes over time. An example is with the rise of the petrodollar in Saudi Arabia, the partnership with China where China became the largest purchaser America go into an energy exporter that completely changed the petrodollar dynamics. And so, you know, and therefore Saudi got more power. And then what did they do? They floated, remember through the investment bank part of Saudi Aramco, 1 to 2% of Saudi oil production. Then that gave them leverage with the investment banks in order to get a board seat on BlackRock. So the CEO of Saudi Aramco became the CEO of BlackRock, sorry became a board member on BlackRock. So now he can represent Saudi interest. So now the company BlackRock that manages has 20,000 board seats on every major company and can manage a portfolio of where the war is when the war goes or not through managing technology like Aladdin. Technology is their AI technology that sovereign wealth funds use, treasury departments use, central banks use, pension funds use. You can scenario plan with BlackRock's technology. If the Strait of Hormuz is going to close and Iran retaliates and these central banks start buying gold, what's the ideal portfolio and capital allocation? And so capital is plugged into the same system that then coordinates via ETFs and capital investments, capital flows. And those flows is where you try and get leverage. How do I get more power over capital flows? And that's the game and that's a constant state. Attention. People want an easy conspiracy theory of 300 people sat in a room in an organized cabal. To a certain degree there are powerful people, but that changes all the time. So you know, this is the flow of capital. But almost every government is subordinate to that capital structure. And so people think that they control the system by focusing on the government, when in reality the government and the politicians are owned by lobbies and those lobbies are different powers within the capital structure, whether it be finance, military, technical or other type of big pharma lobby interest. And so people are just distracted, constantly thinking change a politician, change a game. No, they work for the same power structures that have funded both sides, all sides.
- [155:42]
Alex Adornov
So I mean there's so much I want peak in terms of direction now. But if we now look at the situation more precisely in the UK with Keir Starmer resigning a few days ago, a lot of things happened actually that week, last week, almost on a daily basis. How would you say that this changed in anything? Because you just mentioned that. Well, the players change, but the system kind of does its thing. Anything in the case of the UK in general like where it's headed?
- [156:16]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Okay, so let's pull over some of those concepts and then bring them into the particular case study the UK at the moment. So firstly, there's no such thing as a democracy. Democracies are captured. They are politicians that say they work for the people when they work for the lobbies. And the lobby system is a pay to play system. You know, you auction off tasks to politicians and if they fulfill lobby tasks, then they get more money. And when they get more money, they become more compromised. As they become more compromised, they rise to power more. So Keir Starmer was a node for the military industrial complex. He used, he, he rose to fame as a lawyer. And as a lawyer he worked with military and deep state actors to try and take down Julian Assange. Julian Assange was creating a portal where they could leak government documents. And those government documents exposed the military industrial complex for the million civilians that they killed in Iraq and all the children they murdered and all the crimes against humanity that they committed. And Julian Assange allowed people, insiders, to whistleblow and share what was really happening in these wars. That's a problem. And so Keir Starmer was part of an operation to claim that Julian Assange was a serial rapist. And then they tried to take him out and put him in prison so that they could get the keys that would then take down WikiLeaks. So he proved his value to military contractors in that process. That it was only recently that Julian Assange managed to get free. But by that time, he had already risen to power. That's an example. When you look at his networks now, it's best to think of governments the way people describe Iran regimes. These are regimes. They're not governments, they're not democracies. The media is fully captured as well. The media is there to perpetuate the narrative that the power that pays for all the advertising needs to be portrayed. And they're owned by the FIC as well. And so media is a mechanism for projecting power, for manipulating people into an alternative reality. We all experienced that, right? We were in Covid and we were watching the tv, and every day we were being paralyzed into not leaving our house because we were being told that we would be a grandma killer if we left our house and didn't wear a mask and didn't do social distancing. And every day we had a clock that was saying how many people we were killing. And it is our fault unless we get a vaccine. And if we leave our house, then it's our fault. That was the highest degree of media manipulation. And then we were showing death in, you know, deaths all around the world. And that we would kill our grandma if we leave our house. That was to traumatize the people into compliance with an operation that was funded by the CIA. Even Tulsi Gabbard said that this was funded via leaks to, you know, to Fauci. And Fauci was funding the lab in Wuhan and building bioweapons. And so, you know, that's an example. But one day, just one day, the death counter stopped. I remember the day incredibly well. And suddenly social distancing didn't matter. There were protests around the world, and suddenly protests were okay. And we were told, oh, by the way, yes, everyone's vaccinated. Covid is not a problem anymore. That day was the day that Russia invaded Ukraine and all of a sudden the media machine switched. No death counter, no social distancing, no problem with COVID nothing. And suddenly we were all told that we need to defend democracy and we are the defenders of democracy against the next Hitler, which was Putin. And so the media machine comes into Ford tilt kilt and there's regime changes that happen. If you look at the uk, we had Boris Johnson, we had Rishi Sunak and then we had Keir starmer. We've had seven different regime change over the last 10 years in UK. I don't live in UK anymore, I left UK. But there were seven different regime changes over that 10 year period and each one of them served a purpose. Boris Johnson was your lockdown guy and you can follow the money and see the allegiances that he was tied to in terms of big pharma. Rishi Sunak was one of the largest investors via his family trust in vaccines and Mederva that the, the company that benefited from the vaccines. And then when we needed to regime change and he was an ex Goldman Sachs guy. And so when you need to regime change, you basically take their compromise and you expose it. And so you ex, you, they're all blackmailed. You know, that's how they come into power, that's how they were selected, not elected. And then the media machine makes you think that you voted them in and then every time they don't serve power to the next agenda, they get regime change so that people know your regime change happens if you don't service power. So then we had Keir Starmer. And Keir Starmer was a node of the military industrial complex. His job was to make sure that we believed that we need to send all our money while the country is being destroyed. Homelessness is at record highs, suicide rates are at record highs, drug addictions are at record highs. Inflation and wealth inequality are incomparable in terms of recent matters. But we need to send all our money to defend democracy in Ukraine. And so billions is printed. We had Liz Truss regime change by the bank of England. In between that destroyed the bond market and the bondholders put in Kerma. We just had another one of those. But Kerma's job was to play into the Ukrainian narrative, which is a money laundering mechanism for printing money at the bank of England, printing money at the European Central bank, allocating it across to these war zones in Ukraine and then recycling up to prop up military industrial complex cells and stock market valuations and then that is, you know, and then there's corruption in between that pays off people. And then they use the media in order to paint Putin as Hitler for as long as they can. Because what did he, what did Putin do? Peter? Putin arrested the oligarchs that wanted to nationalize all the resources of Russia. Sorry, they wanted to privatize all the resources of Russia. He arrested them and nationalized the energy and therefore he needed to become the next Hitler in the eyes of the west through the media. And so they make.
- [163:33]
Simon Dixon
What you'll get is probably another three
- [163:35]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
years because there's another trillion dollars to be made. They'll fight to the last death of the last Ukrainian and then eventually Ukraine will be given to Russia. And BlackRock. And who was the number one funder through IMF collateralized loans? The bank of England. And so the bank of England ends up with the land, the resources, as will the imf, as will blackrock, and as will Russia. And so they just carve it up, get some of the, negotiate the rare earth minerals into the technical industrial complex. And as long as you believe the media narrative that you're fighting democracy, then they'll keep, they'll keep going until the last Ukrainian is dead.
- [164:17]
Alex Adornov
And so now like if we look at then the EU as a construct. Yeah, you want to say something additionally or.
- [164:24]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Sorry, I forgot. Yeah. So we just had the regime change today. Now what were the operations that were happening behind the scenes? Well, the big next agenda is. So we had military industrial complex, then financial industrial complex. The next one is the technical industrial complex, the Tick mcfic tick. So tick are the controllers of algorithms, the controllers of AI. The controllers social credit scores, the controllers of programmable money through stablecoins as well as the technocratic rebuild of the central banking system through central bank digital currencies. It's all about data. It's all about ensuring that you've built your social credit score by continually talking so that they can put you in a, in an algorithm and then they can radicalize you into the most extreme version of you. And so whether it's a white nationalist movement, whether it's an anti immigration movement, whether it's a pro Palestinian movement, whether it's Jewish rights and Zionism, whether it's extreme left identity politics, whether it's far right identity politics, they need to put you in a box and feed you with constant content that turns you in to the most hateful and radicalized version of you that looks to an other, while they simultaneously manufacture civil unrest. And they do this mainly with Racial tensions, immigration tensions and you know, policies that make you always look at. All I need to do is change the politician because this is their fault or the reason that I'm broke right now is because of those immigrants taking my job.
- [166:13]
Simon Dixon
Now this is a business model of
- [166:16]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
war, rebuild demographic change, mix up, shake up and monetize strategic tensions. This is what has always happened. Remember, this is why you fund communism, capitalism, fascism, have a cold war profit from war. Now the military is turning into a technocratic state. There's a battle between legacy military and neotechnical cybersecurity, drone, artificial intelligence warfare, AI powered, you know, weapons. And so that is controlled by, by Pentagon rather than funding the legacy Lockheed Martin, General Dynamic Raytheon, Google, Apple, Facebook, XAI, SpaceX, you know, Nvidia. And so these are the new, the new tools.
- [167:10]
Simon Dixon
And so what is ke Starma Kia
- [167:13]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Starmer's job was to create extreme dissatisfaction so that we can then have a white nationalist uprising into something like Reform party or Nigel Farage or Rupert Lowe. And they then say they speak to, they're funded all by the same power structures, but they then speak to the dissatisfied, broke homeless white nationalists that think if only those pesky Muslims weren't in our country then everything would be fine. So then they vote for them. In the meanwhile, they're stirring up civil unrest through algorithm and the solutions already built. It's the Palantir pre crime police and surveillance state with pre crime arrest based upon social media scraping integrated into a digital ID and central bank digital currency that siphons value back up to the Tick, the mic and the fic and transnational capital again. And transnational capital all mate in Beijing with Trump as their representative, where Xi Jinping, you know, was basically meeting with the executives of Tick and FIC in order to set this global technocratic Orwellian social credit score. Central bank digital currency, stablecoin artificial intelligence powered global control grid.
- [168:46]
Simon Dixon
And what do you do?
- [168:47]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
You divide and conquer. So what does the FIC do? They asset strip America and send the world into multipolarity. And that's what we're witnessing right now. Global financial centers, multipolar financial centers with a global control grid over it. Tick fic and then you have MIC that goes out and you can rent transnational capital, can rent the US military and say go get me that Venezuelan oil. That's how the world really works.
- [169:17]
Alex Adornov
And so if you look at the developments also like now more precisely in the UK with the Online Safety act, for example, that bans the access of social media we had also early on, like I think a proposal from denmark within the EU to scrap actually WhatsApp messages and encrypted messages to quote unquote flag against pedophilia and these kind of things. Those are all the narratives that are, I guess, if I follow your reasoning and logic, actually going to serve this tick, the technological industrial complex and to from one side the fic then stripping you just mentioned, then assets from people where they become the asset, as you I think mentioned a few times before when your previous interviews and this is maybe the part I want to get into and perhaps take then the Bitcoin example as your Bitcoin as well, one of the OGs and kind of explain how did this financial industrial complex was able to capture Bitcoin throughout the last years and what mechanisms did they use to do so? And where is Bitcoin actually headed as an asset then if it's already been captured?
- [170:30]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Yeah. So to close off the whole UK thing. So UK has been manufactured for civil unrest. The technology they're deploying in the UK was already beta tested in Gaza. And so what they're looking to build in Gaza as a technocratic surveillance state nightmare is the most extreme version of what they're bringing back home. Now then they beta test it on UK and Europe and then it comes to America and then they privatize it through America because everything is private corporate structure through private public partnerships.
- [171:07]
Alex Adornov
And that would have been Palantir in that case or which company?
- [171:10]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Yeah. So Palantir was funded by DARPA and the CIA venture capital arm and it's been building for decades in order to build this. Now it tested genocide as a service in Gaza, it tested occupation as a service in west bank, it tested pre crime arrests integrated with healthcare data and Department of Defense data. In UK it did the ICE Integrated border Open border Closed border policy from Biden to Trump in US and much of the European Union targeting and in Iran it was used in order to determine and in Gaza who to kill effectively. It was integrated with drones in Ukraine and it is the personification of digital technology for killing people and managing civil unrest and arresting people before they commit their crime based upon pooling together all the data feeds is why the Department of Government Efficiency was set up to get all that data into Palantir. And Xai is why Elon Musk always focuses on Israeli funded Tommy Robinson and the white nationalist uprising in uk. It's why he funds those types of things. Because Elon is a tick node. He works for tick power and he's subordinated to FIC and he requires mick government contracts and he's levered to the kilt in his net worth so he gets to play trillionaire if he complies. And so yeah, getting back to uk. Yeah. So that's the next is civil unrest. Digital ID testing. Let's use social media. They'll, they'll, they create, they create ops. And I'll go through two ones because one that relates back to where we started, Netherlands, where this whole thing started, Dutch Empire. You know you are in the asset stripping phase by fic. When you get tax policy that doesn't make sense. So if you, for the life of you can't figure out, what you do is you make extreme wealth inequality where the majority of people become more socialist and communist. You then have kind of demographic changes that then create extreme tension with the natives in a time when they're trying to blame someone for their extreme wealth inequality because the FIC has taken, you know, concentrated wealth upwards. And, and then what you do is you asset strip the country for its key assets. The way to do that is you create a tax system where people have to sell their assets in order to pay their tax. Now it makes zero sense because what happens is all the millionaires and billionaires let leave. So most of the millionaires and billionaires there was a match of exodus from the UK over to UAE and then they set up corporate structures where they can own their assets exempt from those tax policies as they leave the country. So when you're trying to asset strip a country, what they do is they, they, they lobby the power. The, the narrative appeases to the more socialist communist ideology of it's unfair, we need to tax the billionaires. They then think that's going to lead to tax increases, but it reduces tax revenue. Then you have the justification for IMF interception, austerity, lowering of benefits, increasing of taxes because your tax is reduced while having stagflation, where you're having inflation at the same time as growth that's going down and down and down. So you decrease the growth, you increase the inflation, you increase the taxes on the people that remain. You send the millionaires and billionaires into another jurisdiction and then the corporates are exempt from that tax structure by using elaborate tax structuring where corporations are exempt through organizations like BlackRock and you contributing to your pension. That is how you crash the market for distressed acquisition by private equity in the uk. That's what's happening right now. And then you use the bank of England to roll over the debt for as long as you can. Debt to GDP goes up and up and up and up and up. The debt remains on the people, the FIC receive the yield on it. And then you pump that into the stock market. It's why the UK stock market is at highs as is as it is in Europe and various others. At the same time as being in one of the worst economic positions in the multipolar world that we've seen. That's asset stripping. The same is happening. And so what, when you do things like tax on your assets, you then make it where everyone has to sell their assets in order to pay their tax or borrow against their assets, which makes them a collateralized debt obligation for the fic. That's the asset stripping phase. Europe is being systemically asset stripped. And that's why the war with Russia and Ukraine will continue probably for another three years. Because that's how you justify reallocating all of that investment not into productive infrastructure, but dependency, energy dependency and then military. And you're seeing like Volkswagen in Germany is now becoming a military industrial complex. You know, all of the factories are being repurposed while they're forced into LNG contracts with American private corporate interest. And they're being told that they need to sanction the only country that can help them, which is Russia, that can give them cheap lng, while simultaneously they're buying renewable energy inputs from China and America's now selling them the energy. So this is systemic portfolio management where you hedge your bets, you use derivatives to profit from both sides and then you use your portfolio of companies in order to manufacture the narrative that is needed. This is a classic divide and conquer operation. And that's why Europe has the stocks are doing well, the debt is going up, but eventually it will lead to austerity, removal of benefits and the distressed acquisition. And in your case in Netherlands, you have one of the key nodes of AI infrastructure which they want, they want to acquire it. That's a very important part of the whole AI chip manufacturing, ASML part of that structure. I think you wanted to talk about Bitcoin.
- [178:40]
Simon Dixon
Sure.
- [178:40]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
What was the question again?
- [178:41]
Alex Adornov
But then maybe if we are already on this topic, because it's also tying in what you said, it was also what Funderlein brought up, I think almost a year ago about the savings and investments union siu, which would actually then be a way to funnel the European savers money into different programs and different funding schemes, one of them being the funding EU defense and the rearm Europe 2030 program. And that kind of really then goes hand in hand with what you just described, tying that to the Dutch situation. And I think that's what you're referring is what the parliament for the first time now issuing what in Europe would be the first ever and dumbest maybe policies of all, which is the 36% tax on unrealized gains. I think you also had something similar now that has been introduced in the UK with not unrealized gains, but taxes on retirement funds and stocks. So we see that those bricks that are being laid down slowly and as you mentioned is more and more what also some of the guests at Interview Francis Hunt is mentioning as. Yeah, like governments going into scavenging mode for your hard earned money and building this Panopticon type of infrastructure to actually keep control over what flows in and out of that system through this digital idea as well.
- [180:13]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Absolutely. And so to close that one, the end game here is if you look at what Larry Fink will tell you who's the interim CEO of the World Economic Forum and the CEO of BlackRock is that you will own nothing and be happy. Is that famous thing, right? How do you achieve that you will own nothing? By inflating the cost of living crisis where anyone that's got assets has to sell them to live. Anybody that's got assets is managing them through the financial industrial complex and blackrock. You tokenize them all so that you end up with a token and they end up with the asset in custody. And then when you manufacture crisis, each crisis leads to concentrating wealth upwards. If you manage to get on the right, right side of that. They want to manage your assets for you so they get the voting rights through the ETFs and then they want to make you happy. How are they going to make you happy? Well, they can do that by giving you on a universal basic income. And so they'll sell Elon saying universal high income, you don't need to work. We'll give you AI that will get the costs of everything down. But if there's no jobs, we'll put you on a universal basic income and you can live in a utopia and you can rent everything from us and you will just pay. You will be given enough universal basic income to pay the interest on the debt to make sure you can buy the products we want you to buy. But it also needs to be programmable so that we can penalize you for spending money in the wrong direction or spending money and reward you for spending money in the right direction. And we can manage monetary policy by making it where you don't own a house. You have to buy Elon Musk's $7,000 electric house. And you don't own a diesel car. You own an electric car vehicle where if you don't comply, we can shut down your car. And so everything is about controlling the choke points to ensure compliance. Because when you're creating this level of wealth inequality, you know that the biggest risk to you is, is the people uprising in a communistic socialist movement that takes away private power over to those that think communism and socialism is a good idea. And that then needs to be where you either wait for it to happen or you manufacture civil unrest in a controlled environment and build the control grids. So that's how you will own nothing and be happy if they achieve their plan. Now that ties nicely into bitcoin. And I know that people are very mixed around bitcoin. The reason is, is because it's digital. And because it's digital, it plays into those control grids. And so those that love, that realize you need to exit the system. If you want to hold an asset, you've only got a few ways of doing it. One of them is cash. What's the problem with cash? It gets devalued over time, so you lose your purchasing power. But it's nice for short term expenses if you happen to not lose all your value in the time before you spend it. The other is gold. Gold has preserved its value for 5,000 years. Its suppliers only increase at an average of 1.5% to 2% historically. But most people, when they need to store it at scale, end up giving it to BlackRock and they end up with paper gold instead. Or they end up with a tokenized version of gold, which is you will own nothing and we will hold the gold for you.
- [184:07]
Alex Adornov
Or you buy a physical gold, that gold republic, and we store it for you on your behalf.
- [184:13]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Correct. So then you need to come up with a mechanism for storing your own gold. Or you come up with the best type of custodian, where you think they'll give you your gold under the set of legal protection and all sorts of stuff. But it's still difficult. And most people end up storing their gold with someone else under the best set of circumstances, where they think they may be able to get that gold in case they need it, and that's the best you can do. Or you have a safe in your house, you own your own gold and you're autonomous. The downside of that is at scale, it's a big risk. And most people can't do it. And then you don't have to pay the fees to store the gold so you don't lose value there. Right. So bitcoin then basically said you can own your own value, but it's digital. You can send it to whoever you want as long as you self custody it. And the monetary policy is enforced by a decentralized network of miners and nodes that can never change it. And so therefore, you know, there'll Only ever be 21 million Bitcoin people lose it over time when they lose access to the keys. And so effectively 20 million bitcoins have already been mined. There's only another million to be mined. And so you can plan out the monetary policy anytime into the future and know that more and more people will probably lose those bitcoin because they lost the key or died or didn't plan how to pass it on. And so it is a fixed supply.
- [185:47]
Simon Dixon
Now where did bitcoin come from?
- [185:50]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
You know, what, what is the construct? Well, it is open source code, which is an anonymous developer released a white paper called Satoshi Nakamoto and a bunch of developers came around and started being involved in coding it. The early developers were people like Hal Finney and Gavin Andreessen and various others. And anyone can mine those bitcoins which is geographically distributed around the world now with countries that hate each other. Iran is the largest sovereign bitcoin miner with nuclear energy, mining. Bitcoin UAE is another big bitcoin miner. Russia is America has about 20 different public companies that collectively manage 40% of the hash rate. China has 21% of the hash rate by companies in China. And then it's geographically diversified all around the world, so that network can never be taken down. And it is now the largest distributed supercomputer that exists in the world today. It is also the rules are enforced by anybody that wants to run a node. And it's cheap to run a node. As long as you self custody your bitcoin, you can connect it to a node and then you can verify your own transactions and you can store the entire history and you can contribute to enforcing the rules whenever any of the coders try to change it or the miners want to push and signal a new change. And there's 25,000 of those nodes around the world run by anyone that wants to run one very, very cheaply. And that's 25,000 sovereign people that can control their own value, send their own value and know that the monetary policy will never change. But it is digital. It does rely upon energy and so there are choke points. And people look at choke points and say, okay, so Satoshi Nakamoto, this anonymous person, created bitcoin.
- [187:53]
Simon Dixon
Why?
- [187:54]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
And you can theorize, I don't know. I've got my own theory of why. But if you go back to that time, there was a movement to try and create digital currencies from the cypherpunk movement. One of those attempts was digicash. Digicash was created by a guy called David Chom. And David Chom was in Netherlands teaching at a university. Two other cypherpunk cryptographers, one was called Len Sasserman. Len Sasserman was assassinated. What? Sorry, let me correct that. He killed himself and allegedly committed suicide.
- [188:33]
Alex Adornov
He got suicided.
- [188:35]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Well, again, my belief, I want to be respectful of the dead and his family, but he allegedly committed suicide. One month after the developer that Satoshi Nakamoto handed the project over to, Gavin Andreessen, met with the CIA one month after Len Sasserman lost his life. And so did Hal Finney, the first one to ever mine a bitcoin and contribute to that. Gavin Andreessen is still alive today, but he went off into another project. He forked off bitcoin and tried to create an alternative version of Bitcoin and left the. Left the bitcoin community. But the point is, I personally believe that Satoshi Nakamoto was Len Sasserman. There's significant evidence to that effect, and I believe that it was created from his mentorship by David Chaum in Netherlands. And Hal Finney was the one that most likely was involved in the coding. While Len Sasserman probably released the white paper. Len Sasserman and Hal Finney are no longer with us today. But what was David Chom do? David Chom and Digicash was shut down because they tried to create private transactions on top of the banking system. And because the banks could shut off the choke point, they were able to disappear that project. And I personally believe that they set about iterating through Central Intelligence, stablecoins and central bank digital currencies as digital currencies. And I believe that Len Sasserman may have been involved in that project. And he released the white paper as a breakaway movement from those digital currencies and digital fiat currencies that are now stablecoins and CBDCs and released the white paper as a rogue agent from that project, because otherwise he was. I don't think it was meant to be open source code on a decentralized network with node operators where anyone can run a node and that's the antithesis to the digital currencies that are currently being confiscated like Iran's stablecoins you can call tether and have them frozen. And Scott Besant did it. And so I believe it was a breakaway movement with many, many infiltration attempts to try and bring the project closer to centralization. And because I was involved in 2011 when Bitcoin was $3 and got to meet many of those developers and was invited to many of the early squats where Bitcoin coders were working on the code, I've seen many, many of the infiltration attempts by central intelligence to try and infiltrate the network. And still those exist to this day. But Bitcoin I believe has maintained and preserved its resistance against those and still is open source code with a distributed supercomputer, the largest in the world. That the, the rules and the are enforced by anyone that wants to run a node. And now anyone can own their own value still today in self custody, send it to anyone they want without a government, without a bank. And the money supply I still believe will never ever change.
- [192:25]
Alex Adornov
What about the privacy though? Because Bitcoin is pseudo anonymous and we've just talked length like over a long period of time about how the financial industrial complex is also operating in nodes and choke points and exchanges being one of those. And you've just mentioned you've invested in dozens of these companies that have been over financialized, captured by also Wall Street. We'll talk about this in a bit but I want to get your perspective on exactly this particular aspect. The fact that people hold Bitcoin, I hold Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the reason why I got into finance, but a part of holding it and all the features that you just described, there's for now not much more I can do because it's locked either in a wallet or if in some cases an exchange which is not recommended, but it doesn't really move and it can be traced through KYC AML procedures. People can kind of know okay, who owns what on the chain, which shouldn't be really like the original idea was that it's kind of an open garden where people only see wallets, but they don't see who are behind the wallets. So what is your then conclusion to that? Is there like maybe another layer on top of Bitcoin that will solve this or is this not a problem to you at all?
- [193:40]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Yeah, so the on ramps and off ramps mean that whenever you engage in fiat currency you have to play fiat games, which is kyc AML and all that stuff. But I can send my Bitcoin to anyone I want to and no one can stop that now. Law enforcement exists. I still need to play within the confines of the law. And if I break the law, I break the law. And I need to face all the consequences of that. If somebody wants to steal my physical value, they can try and steal it. You know, that law still exists within these confines. But part of the benefits of self custody is that there's a couple of other features that you get where you can run a node. You can also use a coinjoin, and that's completely legal. And one of the first bits of technology that the developers worked on was coinjoins, which is combining transactions with millions of other transactions so that you can have private transactions. And then the next was to set up layer two where you can take the value that you want to spend rather than save and you can transact in a layer two network like lightning. And this is the path that the open source community has taken us down. And if you want to obfuscate your transactions in coinjoins, as long as it's legal in your country, you can do that. And at the moment it is completely legal to do that. So it doesn't circumvent the law. It allows you to control your rails within the legal system that you decide to live in and operate in. And you can't change that. Remember, sovereign, I often talk about there is complete subordination on one side of a spectrum and there is complete sovereignty on the other side of a spectrum. My life has been going from complete subordination to as much sovereignty as I can get. I still live on an island which still has a government and we have a community. And I need to play within the rules of that community of social behavior and social consensus. And I need to pay the tax and my contribution in the community that I live in. And if I don't play within the confines of the rules of this country, I have to accept the full consequences of the jurisdiction and the legal system by which I live in. I'm still subordinate to the social contract with my wife. I still may have a business that has shareholders. I still may have some money in fiat currency, which means that part of my wealth is subordinate to the bank. And I fully expect them to give me all sorts of problems every time I try and spend it at scale. These are all subordination vehicles. And my. And your job. And my job is to wake up every week and say if I take that action, am I More subordinate or more sovereign? And who am I subordinate to? And how do I move towards sovereign in that aspect of my life? And that's the job. And.
- [196:53]
Simon Dixon
But nobody is fully sovereignty.
- [196:56]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
If you believe in God, then you are subordinate to the rules at which God governs the world, whatever it is. If you are atheist, you are still subordinate to those structures of what you think you know, the rules are of the world. And so all I'm saying is that we are all subordinate to something or someone, but some are completely subordinate. Debt slaves. That's what the financial industrial complex wanted to create. The concept of debt was originally a mechanism for getting somebody using their labor to repay the debt. And so you actually could use them as slaves and they could work off their debt. It wasn't what we ended up creating a slavery in the west where we actually took Africans from their island, destroyed their currency, shipped them in chains over to here and say, you are mine. Originally slavery was the concept of you took out a debt and you couldn't repay that debt. So you were able to work off that debt through your labor and your body. And originally it led to industries like prostitution and all sorts of stuff because women use their bodies in order to pay off debts. But it was working towards a debt of becoming free from your slave master. It was only the Europeans and the Americans that created a version of slavery where you literally just take people in chains and say, you're mine, with no possibility to work it off. You're owned by me. That was a different version of slavery. And so they replaced that. When slavery became illegal in most countries, they replaced it with debt subordination, which is make you a collateralized debt obligation where you earn just enough to pay off the interest and you work your whole life just to pay the interest. And as you progress, you take on more debt and pay more interest and you do that forever. That's the slavery that they created to replace the European and American version of slavery that they did to the Africans.
- [199:10]
Alex Adornov
So I want to bring it back to Bitcoin so if I resume it properly, that the sense of privacy in that sense that you have through Bitcoin is not as important as the, let's say, ability to transact between other addresses or like from. From me to you or from anyone. And thereby it makes me like, gives me a vehicle to operate within different systems where I will be subordinate, subordinated through a system of choice. Is that, is that correct?
- [199:45]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
If I'm willing to remove all my subordination vehicles, I. E. Not hold my Bitcoin With a custodian not hold it in the exchange self custody it run my own node and use a coinjoin wallet connected to a node in self custody. I've got fully private transactions and I can send that to a lightning wallet and spend it in complete privacy within a layer two network. I know that's a lot of geeky things there, but if you want to be, if you want to be sovereign, then bitcoin offers it. If you want to have paper bitcoin in a BlackRock ETF where Coinbase custody is it and leverages it up and creates more paper bitcoin than bitcoin than actual Bitcoin and you want to be subordinate to BlackRock, Coinbase Fidelity and you want to give Larry Fink power, then you can be fully subordinate and own bitcoin. But the minute you want it private in self custody where you can send it to anyone that all exists but
- [200:49]
Alex Adornov
you will still be flagged if you mix it even with coin joints, they will see it will be marked. It will be marked as a yes.
- [200:56]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
So when you go back to the fiat currency world, you have to pay fiat currency gains. And so if you want to spend that as fiat currency, then you're back to the same rules where whatever you spend in convert to fiat currency, they'll want to know how you achieve that wealth and whether you achieved it legitimately. And so when you off board into fiat currency spending, then you need your documentation because you're in fiat currency world. But when you want to stay out of fiat currency world, you stay out of fiat currency world. If you use a coinjoin and you can prove that you received that value completely legitimately in the fiat currency world, then you can spend it.
- [201:41]
Alex Adornov
Hotel California. Sorry, Hotel California.
- [201:47]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Yeah. And remember this is about building sovereign wealth outside the system where you don't have to answer to DTC, BlackRock, any, anyone, any custodian. And then when you want to spend it, if you've got significant value because of the fixed supply and you've had a long enough time frame to play out that theses, I can't guarantee it will happen. No financial advice. But you can go wherever you want. You can go to the country because the value comes with you. Whereas they want you to have subordinated wealth, wealth and a job that is connected to geographical boundaries. And therefore you're stuck in that country and subordinate to their system. With a physical business, a physical job in the physical world, with physical debt in that structure, this goes wherever you want it to go.
- [202:48]
Alex Adornov
Talking about this so this is a sovereign bitcoin. And then there's the Wall street bitcoin, which is Michael Saylor Treasure Companies. And maybe perhaps like a bit of context about also how the ficc, the financial industrial complex then is trying at least to reign in this sovereign bitcoin that we just described. How would you then like paint this picture?
- [203:13]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Okay, so the FIC doesn't mind two types of people, but they don't want the third type. The first type of person that they don't mind is broke people in debt with freedom of speech. They don't care. You can yap away, you can talk about Epstein, you can say whatever you want. Some countries you can't, others you can, you can complain about everything. You can say that Trump's a pedophile in Epstein network, whatever you want to say. They don't mind as long as you're broken in debt, you keep yapping away. Freedom of speech is no threat to their power. The second type they don't mind is wealthy people that are captured by the system. Elon Musk, you know, is a extreme example. People where they've got collateralized wealth in DTCC owned custody structures
- [204:15]
Simon Dixon
where they're.
- [204:16]
Alex Adornov
Well, what is DTCC is the, is
- [204:20]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
basically you don't own your shares. So if you own a share, you own basically a claim from the broker that you own that share. That broker has a claim against dtcc which is the central clearing, which is owned by the brokers. So it's all promise that you own that share. But in the bankruptcy process, in the breaking of the system, DTCC owns the share which the broker then owns a claim against DCCC and you own a claim against the broker. So your layers removed from your share, but you don't own them. You just log in and it looks like you own it. Same with gold in custody. You log in and it looks like you own it. But what legal ways do you have to get it? And that's the contract, right? So it's subject to the contract that exists. Same with bitcoin in custody. Any of these custodians, so they don't mind you having all your wealth in custody with collateral, using it as collateral so that you're leveraged with lots of equity that they control and debt and very powerful and very high net worth so that they manage your net worth for you. They don't mind as many of those as possible and they'll capture as many of them where you're on the same team either through shared interest, leverage or blackmail, whatever they need to do depending on how powerful you are and what game you're playing in. So they don't mind those types of people. What they don't want is people that are free to speak with wealth outside the system, that are willing to speak against the system and reallocate capital and actually drive people to taking capital either away from here or galvanizing these people. Those are the people that they don't want. And so wherever they were, the biggest uprising in those came from the gold community, the cash community and the Bitcoin community. So they said about eliminating the cash community by making everything digital banking, centralizing all the gold through central banking. And now they want to do the same to Bitcoin. And so they created an operation called operation choke point 2.0 where they created companies that you could destroy to remove credibility, manufacturer crisis, take out all the banks that were servicing the crypto companies and replace them with Wall Street. So then you got the birth of the finance. The FIC players like Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, creating options markets, derivatives markets, perpetual markets. Silicon Valley invested in all the companies. The companies that were willing to be co opted became public and subordinate. They took a bunch of the Bitcoin miners and tried to make them public companies. They then took key people and co opted them. They took a model like Michael Saylor and Bitcoin treasury company to create vehicles for using financialization, arbitrage and securitization to centralize as much Bitcoin as possible. Larry Fink and all the others created ETFs where they hold the Bitcoin and you get a paper version of Bitcoin.
- [208:04]
Simon Dixon
And then they started to create subordination
- [208:07]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
vehicles through Cantor Fitzgerald by creating Bitcoin backed loans. So you have to custody your Bitcoin with them and then they give you some fiat currency so that you don't sell your Bitcoin but they hold it for you. And then they created companies that did that. So they went around and took key bitcoiners and said hey, why don't you put your Bitcoin in a company, well then take the company public and then you can take all your businesses and reverse merge them into this public offering. They did that with David Bailey, with Adam back, with Jack Mallows. And then you could take key parts of the infrastructure and get them within the FIC control grids. And then they would try and make it where you own a Bitcoin ETF instead of Bitcoin. You would then be incentivized to borrow against your Bitcoin. So you were leveraged to them and you hold it in custody. You would buy a bitcoin treasury company instead of bitcoin and, and then they can build out their hedge fund network, derivative network and use strategy as an arbitrage vehicle for trying to create an environment of controlling the short term price of bitcoin using paper bitcoin just like they did with gold. Now in the long term they can't hold that resistance because it costs a lot and cause systemic risk because eventually people want their physical gold, physical Bitcoin or cash out of the bank. And that creates a run structure on the custodians, the leverage institutions and the banks. And so you just need a long term game. So what don't they want?
- [209:49]
Simon Dixon
They don't want you being a long
- [209:50]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
term investor where you own more bitcoin in self custody every month. Instead they want you speculating on alternatives. They want you engaging in perpetual futures. They want to turn you into a degenerate gambler. So Silicon Valley funded all the alternatives to bitcoin and created foundations and created alternatives, models like proof of stake rather than proof of work where they can control it based upon staking. They created the degeneracy industry of meme coins. NFTs alternatives to Bitcoin, Bitcoin hard forks. They infiltrated developers to say let's create divide and conquer within the bitcoin community. You create one that's optimized for cash. They create one that store a value. We'll create a fake version of, we'll create a fake version of Satoshi Nakamoto called Dr. Craig Wright. And then we'll get Epstein operatives like Brock Pierce in order to try and infiltrate and invest in company. They did everything they could because they want you wealthy, under their control or with no bitcoin, a degenerate gambler. But they don't want you bitcoin in self custody running nodes through coinjoins where you take some of your fiat currency every month and take it out the system. And you build wealth outside the system with a 10 year, 20 year, 30 year plan in order to be sovereign and the exact type of person they don't want. And so they attacked them and many people fell for it. And so right now They've got approximately 3 to 4 million bitcoin in FIC vehicles and the rest of it is still in self custody. And fortunately bitcoin was designed as proof of work, which means owning the coins doesn't allow you to control the network. You can leverage them to control the price. In the short term you can't control it in the long term, but you can, you know, you can try and use it to leverage price short term to get people to sell their Bitcoin so that they end up with as much Bitcoin as possible. And that's exactly what they're doing today. They're using financial engineering to get as much Bitcoin as possible, suppress the price so that you get impatient and you sell it and they end up with the Bitcoin or you get margin called and they end up with the Bitcoin or you end up with a Wall street wrapper instead of Bitcoin.
- [212:19]
Alex Adornov
So now in the case of Michael Celia and Strategy, what is now the situation exactly? Because a lot of the speculating, oh, this model is now falling apart, the house of card is collapsing. There will be forced to sell Bitcoin and so on and so forth. What is your then view on what's going to happen next on that question particularly?
- [212:44]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Yeah, I think most people have this one wrong. I'm not a shareholder in Strategy and I never will be and if I ever change that, I'll disclose it publicly and none of the other ancillary financial vehicles around the company as well. Strategy is doing what it was designed to do, which is create an arbitrage vehicle for manipulating the short term price of Bitcoin for the hedges and Jane Streets and appointed representatives into the Bitcoin etf. And the goal is to issue as much debt, as much equity and as much structured products to centralize as much Bitcoin as possible. And strategy is doing that. And it has convertible debt, it has preference share and equity and it has a structured product and a number of structured products that allows you to arbitrage and centralize as much Bitcoin as possible for the fic. Now most people are focusing on the wrong thing. They think it's going to go bankrupt into chapter 11 and go into a death spiral. Why would FIC want to do that? They got the perfect vehicle for trying to capture as much Bitcoin in there as they can. And strategy is perfect for it. Whenever stretch trades at a discount, you can increase the yield and you can manufacture a narrative that they're going to sell the Bitcoin. You can sell some bitcoin and crash the price and then buy it back cheaper. You can dilute shareholders by selling more equity and buying more bitcoin and decreasing their bitcoin per share when it's trading at a discount or increase their bitcoin per share when the equity is trading at a premium. You've got the perfect arbitrage vehicle for trying to centralize as much bitcoin as possible. If I were fic, I'd keep that going for as long as possible. And I try and get as much of the debt, as much of the preference and as much as the equity within an etf. So I'd use the ratings agencies to try and get Saylor to say, you do as we say and you'll be included in the S&P 500. You don't do as we say and we'll subordinate your net worth. And then you have to change your behavior in order to change the levers so that you eventually, when the price of bitcoin comes back up, you're including in the S&P 500. And then we'll give you access to the passive flows so that BlackRock becomes the largest shareholder, which Jane street was. It's hook, line and sinker strategy. I would keep that alive for as long as possible. And if you look back again, no personal attack against Michael Saylor. He works for his shareholders. His shareholders have board members. He has to do. He has to maximize by fiduciary duty the value of the company for his shareholders. And public companies are subordination vehicles. So he works for fic and FIC can destroy the value or increase the value in order to change his behavior, to centralize as much Bitcoin as possible. It's the perfect vehicle. And you resist by not buying it, by not participating. This is the beauty. We get to boycott the system. You boycott the Federal Reserve system by owning bitcoin or gold. You boycott the custodians and BlackRock by
- [216:23]
Simon Dixon
owning it in self custody.
- [216:25]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
You boycott the banks by not borrowing against it. You boycott Silicon Valley by investing direct into localized businesses that build decentralized structures that fight against their centralized structures. You boycott this centralizing agenda by working on more community structures, more decentralization and building wealth outside the system.
- [216:51]
Simon Dixon
So what is it?
- [216:52]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
In the end, it's a boycott vehicle. And it doesn't matter what the price is because the lower the price, the more fiat currency allows you to buy more bitcoin. So you measure your wealth in bitcoin, measure your wealth in gold. As the price goes down, you get more of the gold or fiat or bitcoin for your fiat currency. As the price goes up, your power within the fiat currency wealth, net worth increases, which allows you to exert more influence from without, from outside the system.
- [217:26]
Alex Adornov
And how does the stablecoins tie into that? Because until recently, the genius act was actually solidifying certain regulations and laws around this. Also a lot of people celebrated the MENA regulations in Europe and all that. But eventually what it does, it's kind of like how I see it is kind of a CBDC disguised under a dollar or just put a different shape to it, but it is de facto vehicle as well. That could enable then those power dynamics to actually get hold on the dollar, which is a synthetic dollar actually on a global basis, where countries that do not have, well, let's say better currencies than the US dollar, which is the case of many countries that are underdeveloped, would then also be then this grid of control and influence that the dollar can expand on globally. How would you analyze this development?
- [218:30]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Yeah, exactly. The stablecoins are just a privatized cbdc. Different rules, different beneficiary, but plays into the same fit control grid. So the CBDCs play into the central banking biz system and they're building a network of CBDCs that connects UAE, China, Hong Kong, Saudi Arabia and Thailand via the Enbridge project, which was created from the bank for International Settlements that circumvents Swift. The Swift system is a CBDC that the Fed has already created for wholesale settlement called FedNow on a blockchain with nodes on top called stablecoins. And so stablecoins will then be integrated with CBDCs so that you can create divide and conquer as you transition away from the dollar dominated world. You have two control grids, you have the network of CBDCs and you have the dollar programized stablecoin. So while Enbridge was building the network of CBDCs from the bank for International Settlements, the Fed and the FIC and the tick were building stablecoins via Silicon Valley. And if you look back at where did stablecoins come from? It came from a Jeffrey Epstein connected guy called Brock Pierce, who was in 2014 infiltrated the Bitcoin foundation, sent it bankrupt, was the chair and then handed over power to the Bitcoin innovation, sorry, the blockchain innovation lab called bil, which was part of MIT that later was headed up by Gary Gensler, the head of the SEC, who was under the SEC during Operation Choke Point 2.0, where the only person he met from our industry was Sam Bankman Fried. But he created a stablecoin that later was rebranded as Tether in 2014 and sold to a company called Bitfinex. And Bitfinex then built out this network of stablecoins that later Alameda Research and FTX under Sam Bankman Fried connected Silicon Valley Bank, Silvergate bank and Signature bank via an alternative payment rail. Stablecoin who took down Silicon Valley Bank? Peter Thiel. Peter Thiel came up on a space and said I'm withdrawing my $19 billion of deposit and every startup should do as well. Peter Thiel was the one that was connected with Jeffrey Epstein communicating via email on how to destabilize the Bitcoin community. Split them up into store of value, median of exchange and unit of account. Divide and conquer. Peter Thiel was the one that invested in Blockchain Capital which was Blockchain which was Brock Pierce VC Fund that later then invested in Coinbase and Blockstream and various other companies. Peter Thiel is the one that took down Silicon Valley Bank. Peter Thiel is the key node in the technical industrial complex. Peter Thiel, Jeffrey David Sachs and Elon Musk were the PayPal mafia. The PayPal mafia that were connected to the founder of LinkedIn, Reid Hoffman and the Digital Garage that were trying to invest via Founders Fund in many of the bitcoin companies that later became controlled by the fic. Peter Thiel has now launched his own bank after Silicon Valley bank that uses blockchain technology.
- [222:38]
Simon Dixon
The Stablecoin was always the goal.
- [222:40]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Len Sassman was the resistance against that project that released the Bitcoin white paper and open sourced Bitcoin in a decentralized network run enforced by nodes. Because what was digicash private Stablecoins that depended upon ban. Stablecoins depend upon banks that then buy Treasuries and those treasuries are lent back to the government much like the Petrodollar. It's a mechanism for enforcing the treasury backed system. So what did the FIC do? They co opted the Trump administration said that America will become crypto valley and crypto center of the world and created Genius Act. What did Genius act do? Genius act gave any bank that has reserves at the Fed the ability to use those reserves as collateral to issue a stablecoin. The largest reserves are J.P. morgan, then J.P. morgan, bank of America and Citigroup lobbied as well as Coinbase being co opted by Larry Fink.
- [223:57]
Simon Dixon
And
- [223:59]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
the company that I created, bank to the Future ended up being sold to Coinbase which then created tokenized securities which is now lobbying for the Clarity Act. Clarity act and Genius act combined give an advantage to banks to issue yield. So then one of the companies I invested in called Kraken in the early days has now got a banking license so that they can issue Stablecoins and they're now part of fic. And that's what those operations were. To centralize and create a digital dollar that is privatized and programmable, integrated into Palantir's artificial intelligence and Elon Musk's social credit score. That the FIC allowed Elon to borrow against his Tesla stock to buy X gave everyone freedom of speech, but not freedom of reach so that we could all talk and be radicalized into the version of ourself that the algorithms control and set our social credit score. And they were all Peter Thiel. Davis. David Sachs became the SAR of the Trump administration for pushing forward the AI and crypto policy
- [225:15]
Alex Adornov
back then. What about Cambridge Analytica? Because it's kind of like what you described as well during the Brexit. Is that in the same ties or like what's the story behind that?
- [225:25]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Cambridge Analytica was an AI tool for manipulating media to control using the tick in order to control political outcomes. That was used by Facebook. And what was Facebook? Facebook coded a project called Library, which was a StableCoin. And that stablecoin was then sold to Silvergate bank that created that network that connected Signature Bank, Silicon Valley bank and Silvergate bank into FTX and Alameda Research. The board members of FTX were Sullivan and Cromwell. The bankruptcy Chapter 11 lawyers were Sullivan and Cromwell. Sullivan and Cromwell were the main lawyers throughout history for the CIA, Mossad and MI6. And FTX was used to launder money via this network to Ukraine for the corrupt part of it. And Scott Besant, when he wanted to target the Iranians, he launched a currency war to destroy the value of Iranian's currency and then confiscated the stable coins. But Iran ended up with the Bitcoin but not the stable coins starting to make sense. Stablecoins and CBDCS was always the goal. And Bitcoin was the breakaway open source movement for those that wanted to resist against the digital control grid. That Elon Musk paid $250 million to the Trump administration to Cray. And who did? Who groomed JD Vance, Palantir and Peter Thiel? JD Vance is not his name. He was magnificently given a VC capital of 50 million by Peter Thiel and was politically funded 15 million by Peter Thiel. And we're being told that he's creating peace in Iran because he's being groomed for the next president because we've moved from MIC to TVIC to TIC and all of Trump's policies, Department of Government Efficiency, give all the data to tick tariff policy, split the world up into multipolar world and support China Epstein files crash the dollar in terms of its credibility and all the mechanisms that propped up the dollar in the deep state. Closure of Strait of Hormuz and war with Iran reset the world order into multipolarity and what happened right before that? All the executives of Tick and FIC meet in Beijing with Xi Jinping and Xi Jinping said, yes, Elon, you will be able to get access to your rare earth minerals provided you play ball. Yes Tim Cook, you will be able to manufacture your iPhones in China provided you play ball. Yes, These are a MasterCard. As the CBDC network takes away control from the Swift network, we will allow you to charge fees by integrating into the SIPS network. Yes, Nvidia, we won't buy your chips, but we will continue to create our own version via Huawei that does it 10 times cheaper at 90% of the efficiency. And yes Trump, we won't sell our Treasuries to destroy your bonds and lead you into quantitative easing and having to purchase yields again. Yes Trump, we know that you've got derivative contracts that far supersede the amount of gold and all the gold is in Shanghai. Yes Trump,
- [229:39]
Simon Dixon
we won't
- [229:41]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
engineer or burst the bubble of the AI capex that you're currently overspending into and release another deep seek moment that destroys the valuations
- [229:52]
Simon Dixon
until you've managed to get all the
- [229:54]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
money you need to build out the AI data centers and build the control grid. And yes, the second we want to rug pull that, the Fed and pboc can do it in a second. We control the market. PBoC and the Fed and the BIS control the market and they're splitting up the world and they can rug pull it the second that they want. So they're engineering via ETFs, capital outflows into emerging markets and the the moment to reset the world order, close the Strait of Hormuz, which required cooperation from America, Iran and Lloyds of London in order to close it. Because in order to get the insurance to get a shipment through, you need guarantee by the IRGC they won't target you and you need guarantee by America that they won't target you. On the other side of the blockade, Lloyds of London control the game and so will you reset the world order into multipolarity and build a global control grid. Every capital flow in the world is telling me that that's what's happening when you follow the money.
- [231:04]
Alex Adornov
Well, it was a lot to process, Simon, but I'm glad that you laid this out and I think it's crystal clear. So I think in the coming conversations that we will have, we'll be able to dig deeper into some of those pockets. I want to thank you for your time, for your knowledge, for. Yeah, for all your explanations and being able to put it so clearly as you did. You also have a YouTube channel that I advise people to follow. You're also very active on X Twitter. Is there anything that you want to share to the audience as a final thought?
- [231:45]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Yeah, I try to go with real time analysis on X imondixon Twit and I commit to once a week going live on and following the monetary flows and trying to make predictions or analyze what I got wrong every week in terms of, you know, under this model. And sometimes that takes like two to four hours. So then on my blog, SimonDixon.com, i plug it all, you know, into AI and my team creates five minute videos, 20 minute videos, and text summaries and documents under, you know, completely free. All of this. There's no sponsorship, no. No business agenda, no upsell, no monetization. I just want more and more people to be sovereign. So I created that within SimonDixon.com for those that don't have the time to go through these really long rants. And then I also upload any interviews I do, like this 1 on Simon Dixon, 21 on YouTube.
- [232:43]
Alex Adornov
Again, thanks a lot, Simon. And I hope to be able to follow up with future interviews with you very soon as well.
- [232:50]
Interviewer / Podcast Host
Okay, thanks for having me.