340. Dutch Farmers: Canaries in the Globalist Coal Mine | Michael Yon & Eva Vlaardingerbroek - Transcripts

March 16, 2023

  • Favorite
  • Share
Dr. Jordan B. Peterson, Michael Yon, and Eva Vlaardingerbroek discuss recent events encircling the Dutch farmers protest, how their anti-globalist movement mirrors the Canadian Freedom Convoy, and how their message has resonated across the world despite best efforts to silence their voices. At age 19, Michael Yon completed Green Beret training. His Green Beret experience taught him the art of observing and surviving in the most dangerous environments on earth. Combining his skills as a writer and a photographer, and with the encouragement of fellow veterans, Michael began his correspondent career by traveling to Iraq in December of 2004. That was the first step in his nearly 20-year journey—traveling the globe to report on world events firsthand. He has traveled to more than 80 countries including China, India, Bhutan, and Vietnam studying issues from cannibalism, information warfare, insurgency, protests, migration wars, and more. His most recent journey has taken him from Asia to Europe, America, and Central and South America to study the conditions for global famine. Eva Vlaardingerbroek is a Dutch journalist and host of the “Let’s Talk About It” program on the YouTube channel Riks. Vlaardingerbroek has published opinion articles in newspapers such as the Dutch weekly and Elsevier Weekblad. She has also appeared on programs like Tucker Carlson's show on Fox News. She advocates for a cultural return to faith, a rejection of the WEF manifested, globalist ideology.


Hello everyone, I'm pleased today to have the opportunity to have a discussion with Michael Yawn, who's one of the world's great roving journalists. He's been in all the hellholes around the world, maybe not all of them, but a good proportion of them over the last few decades, and he's written for many of the major news outlets across the world. The moment he's in the Netherlands covering the Dutch farmers protest, among other things, he's accompanied by Eva Vlardinger-Bruch, who is a political figure in Europe, in the Netherlands, and they've been both attending the Dutch farmer protests, and I wanted to get them together today to talk about why anyone should care about the fact that Dutch farmers are protesting. How many of them are protesting? What it means, and what the broader issues are at stake, because what's happening in the Netherlands is a reflection of a socio-political struggle that's going on at a very deep level between worldviews that are truly in opposition, and the Dutch farmer protest in my estimation is a, what would you say, it's a microcosm of a much larger battle that's raging and will continue to rage for the next while, rage for the next while. So Michael, maybe let's start with you. How long have you been in the Netherlands now, in this span of time?

Well, during this trip in particular, I've been back for about one week. As you know, we were together, you and I were together here last year, and I came on your podcast last year. I was down in Mexico watching the migration, if you want to call it that, into Texas, and then I saw that the Dutch farmers were blocking the streets in the Netherlands, and having lived in Europe for more than six years, I realized that was significant. So I jumped on an airplane, I left Mexico, came straight here to the Netherlands, and went out to the first farmers I could find blocking streets, and I said, why are you blocking the streets? And so, because in every country that I go to around the world, I've spent more than half of my life traveling around the world to places like Afghanistan and Iraq and India, and I go straight to the farmers, because that's where you get one of the pulses, right? And I said, what's going wrong here, and they started telling me and giving me an earful, and I realized we have a significant problem. And as you know, I've written three books on, unfortunately, they're only in Japanese language. I wrote them in English, but they're about information war, right? So I study information war. As you know, information war is the PhD level of warfare. All the kinetics, which I did for years, and various wars, Iraq, Afghanistan, whatever, that's certainly very important, especially when you're in it. But the PhD level of warfare is information war.

And I realized that the Dutch were at an epicenter of the information war, as are the Japanese. That's why I wrote those three books, warning the Japanese that they are being targeted by the CCP, the Chinese Communist Party, in an information campaign that's designed to split the Koreans and the Japanese and the Americans apart. I started writing those books in 2014, and in 2019 and 20, that actually the split was

relatively complete with the Japanese and the Koreans, all based on information war. I'll turn back to the information war issue, the legacy media coverage of what's happening on the Dutch farmer protest front, because that's relevant to the information war. But let's turn to Eva for a moment. Eva, do you want to just explain to people who you are and what you do and how long you've been doing it, and then why you're interested in the Dutch farmer's protest and how you got tangled up with such a nefarious character as Michael?

Well, I'm Dutch, so let's start there. I was born and raised here, and that's partly why I'm so interested in the cause of the Dutch farmers. I've been able to follow what has been happening to them for years now, because it's important for people to know that even though the protests of last summer and the protests that are happening now are being televised quite widely, this is a fight that has been going on for years. Our government is really fighting a war of attrition against our farmers. That is one. Personally, I have a background in law. I'm a legal philosopher, and my academic time wasn't that long. My university decided to kick me out of my PhD program, basically, because I was deemed too controversial, politically speaking. So I decided to turn the other way, and I have been focusing on international media and making videos and putting out my content in English mostly and in German now. So I'm mostly focused on the international market. I'm a conservative commentator, I could say. And I've met Michael.

We met in person yesterday, actually, for the first time, but I've seen Michael's work online, and I admire him immensely. So I'm very happy to meet him now, finally, and talk to him.

Jordan, Eva was leading the way yesterday, and there was some fear for some people attending the protests. In fact, one of the opposition parties, the BB Better Party, Build Back Better, it's the, how do you say it in Dutch, Borung. Borung Befokurung Beveigung, right? The farmer citizens. Berkeur Bureveigung, yeah.

Berkeur Bureveigung, yeah.

It's supposed to mean citizen farmers movement. The leader of that, Caroline Van Der Plas, she was afraid to attend the protest yesterday, afraid for her safety, she said. So what did Eva do? She took the front tractor and was the first one to arrive in a tractor yesterday. So that was pretty good leadership on your part.

It got everybody psyched up. Eva, are you, are you, you're primarily focusing on political commentary. Do you have any official or traditional political position, or are you functioning primarily as a investigative journalist and commentator?

No, I function independently from any political party at the very moment, at this very moment. I have been involved in Dutch politics briefly, in parliamentary politics, but that really wasn't for me. I don't want to be in that system again, and I really enjoy my newfound freedom of being able to say exactly what I think and what I want to say to the world. So I'm planning on keeping it this way.

Okay, so do you want to outline for the people who are watching what? You said that the battle, so to speak, between the Dutch farmers and the Dutch government has been going on for quite a long time. Now, is it reasonable to construe it as a battle between the Dutch farmers and the Dutch government or is it a faction of farmers and a faction of the government like I'd like to know how widespread the discontent among Dutch farmers is and whether there is a fracture within the farming community itself and then the same thing obtains obviously at the political level these things are seldom monolithic so what's let's start with the farmers what what what percentage of

farmers are upset what percentage are complaining and why are they upset. Okay yeah I think that there is not one Dutch farmer right now that is not that is happy with the Dutch government the current Dutch cabinet. So that's important to note it is definitely a fight from the Dutch farmers against the government or the other way around I should rather say. Everybody is upset and of course there are differences within the farmers there are people I would say the most the most important split between the farmers that exist right now is to the group of farmers that is willing to compromise, that is willing to talk to the government and say, okay we'll still negotiate and the group that is completely done with that. So I think the most important split between those two groups, is the group that accepts the narrative of the idea that there is a nitrogen crisis so to say and the group that says no there isn't, there is no nitrogen crisis. We have done everything that you have asked for the past, I don't know, about at least three years now in terms of reorganizing our businesses, doing everything that you asked of us, and you are still coming after us and we are done. So I think that is probably ideologically also the most important question in this war that the government is waging against our farmers. Do you still believe the narrative that the government presents you with or do you not?

Okay, so let's go in two directions there. You talked about a nitrogen crisis, so we should outline what constitutes the government narrative on the nitrogen crisis side, and you also mentioned that a substantial proportion of the farmers are now done with negotiating. They feel that they've been pushed to the wall, that they've done everything they possibly could, and that there's nothing left but the opportunity to say no. I mean, one of the things that struck me about the Dutch farmers protest immediately was that I know farmers, and I know that modern farmers are very sophisticated and they're also very hardworking, and they don't have time to muck around. And the machinery, for example, that they're using the tractors and so forth to bring to the protests is extremely expensive machinery and it's not generally within the easy means of a farmer to put their machinery to any other use than productive use on the farm. And I know Dutch farmers are hyper-productive, maybe the best in the world or certainly among the best. And so my sense was that if the Dutch farmers are upset, a substantial proportion of them, they're like a canary in the coal mine, there's probably something to be upset about. But what percentage of the Dutch farmers do you think are in a situation where they're seriously done with negotiation? And then what does it mean for people in a peaceful polity to be done with negotiation?

Right. Well, let's talk about what our government wants to do. So with this nitrogen crisis that they say we now have, they're saying that they need to reduce nitrogen emissions. And what that comes down to is that 50% of the Dutch farmers will have to go by the year of 2030. Those are their goals. So imagine, if 50% of the farmers have to go, then hopefully you'd think that 50% of all those farmers in our country are done with our government. I think that would be a fair estimate, so to say. And that means that at least 30% of the livestock will have to be abolished as well. And our government has been, like I said, it's been a wharf attrition. They've been doing negotiations for all these years, going back and forth, and in the last, over the last couple of months, even more so. But what you can really see is the strategy of our government is always the same. They say, oh, we'll negotiate with you.

They sit down with a group of farmers that is maybe a bit more moderate group, rather than the people that go out to these rallies, for example, that we were at yesterday. And then they go back to the boardroom. They take a couple of extra months. Nobody knows really what's going on. And then they come back with a new report. And it says exactly the same thing, but with different words and usually phrased a little bit nicer. But if you really read what it says, nothing ever changes. Actually, the last report that came out was a report that doubled down. So in the last report, what they said, they used words that confuse the population. They used a word saying that the peak polluters have to go. So 600 peak polluters, which would include some other businesses, not just farmers, but some other businesses as well, predominantly farmers, though, 600 of them will have to go in the next year. See?

So we go from cutting 50% by 2030 to now, oh, by the way, 600 peak polluters have to be gone in the next year. And we're not doing that with expropriation. No, it all has to be on a voluntary basis. But the reality of the matter is that nothing about this is voluntary. It's a war of attrition. They've been pushing these farmers to despair. We've had so many cases of farmers who've committed suicide already. These people are being tormented by our government. And then if they end up selling at the very end because their license isn't renewed, for example, then our government can still say that it was voluntary. But we all know that nothing about this, in fact,

is voluntary, so to say. Okay, okay, yeah, yeah, right. So my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong, is that part of the reason that the Dutch government is down the next, on the next, let's say, of the farmers is because environmentalist activists have taken the Dutch government to court to force them to comply with European Union top-down environmental apocalypse-oriented European Union regulations that are aimed at reducing, let's say, carbon output, but also reducing other forms of pollution. And now nitrogen pollution can be a problem if excess fertilizer enters waterways and so forth. It can cause algal blooms, and obviously it's the case that we want to pollute the least amount possible while growing food. So, but why do you think, like, first of all, have I got that story right? Have the Dutch, has the Dutch government itself been cornered by the courts

and is that a consequence of European Union pressure? I think that they are very happy that that happened though, and they go further than what the European Union has told them to do. So, the Dutch government isn't innocent in this case. You know, they're not completely just cornered by the courts. They have gone further than what Brussels has told them to do. So I think that is very important because it shows you their true intent. And I think that the true intent that the government has is to get rid of our farmers. They want the land because they need the land. I'm sure we'll get to that in a bit, but it's definitely, I would say that there's definitely intent here

and it goes further than just being cornered by courts. They've been cornered by the courts, but they're perfectly happy with that cornering and they're willing to take it farther. So why does the EU and the courts and the environmentalists and the government have their panties in the knot, so to speak, about nitrogen per se? Like what's the problem exactly that they're trying to address here and why do they think that demolishing the farming industry is gonna solve that problem? What's their goal? Like if you had to frame it positively,

what would their goal be? Well, the story is that they want to preserve nature. So there are designated areas in the Netherlands that are natural reserves, so to say, and they have decided it's a political decision that that landscape cannot change. So it has to remain the same. It has to remain the same as it was, for example, 25 years ago. So that means that certain sand dunes, for example, can't have vegetation or certain plants can't grow there, it needs to look exactly the same. So, they say that that is to protect nature, but it's a political choice of how you want your country to look, how you want, you know, the landscape, the country's side to look. So, to me, that shows you that kind of.

shows you. Okay, so at the start of this is a real, Yeah, well, so they're pushing the pristine nature narrative. Yes. Fundamentally. How many farmers do you think are protesting at the moment,

actively protesting in terms of absolute numbers? I would think that's hard to say. I will look at Michael for that as well. Cause we, like I said, we have 50,000 farms and it's definitely not, I wouldn't say it's the majority because a lot of people have already lost a fair bit of hope. So what do you think, Michael?

How many farmers do you think are currently protesting? Physically protesting, keeping in mind, I do these things around the world. So most of the people will be the support base that never go to a protest. So your support base is always difficult to measure actually. But everybody, all the farmers that I speak with, now Ava just mentioned sort of apathy may have set in or resignation that they may not be able to defeat this government. Actually, if we're talking about nitrogen, we're talking about the wrong level, by the way. Or if we're talking about the details of this, we're already losing because this is not about Stichthof, as they call it here, nitrogen, this is about taking those farms and making tri-state city. Tri-state city is this giant city, you can see the maps. You and I have talked about it before when you were here, Jordan, tri-state city is called tri-state city because it will take most or all of the Netherlands, part of Belgium and part of Germany into this mega smart city. Basically a control city. And it happens to end at Rotterdam which is at the end of the rail head all the way from Shanghai. So the railway all the way from Shanghai, China, all the way across Asia, will go right through the middle of Tri-State City and we'll be sitting in Tri-State City right now.

So you've got to take that farmland. If we go back in history and we look what Stalin did and the Ukraine, 32 and 33 and the Holodomor, one of the things, the main people that he targeted were the Kulaks, the farmers, right? So he did an information campaign. This is all about information war. Targeted the Kulaks, labeled the Kulaks. Labeling somebody a Kulak was like, in a sense, labeling them Jewish or Polish in different eras, right? Or similar, same area actually. But labeling people Kulaks, then using the information war, convinced people that all their problems were the result of the Kulaks. And if you just take their farms, your problems will go away. So basically did a replacement strategy, right? And so people came in, killed the Kulaks and took their farms and had a massive famine, right? Because the ability to farm, I talked with a fisherman yesterday at the protest.

His family has been fishing since the 1400s, as far back as he can track it, right? This is, they, fishing and farming is what they know how to do, right? So when you do these replacement strategies, for instance, the Mao did, of course, Mao studied Stalin, you've got to get rid of the farmers. So it's not about, it's not just about, it has nothing to do with nitrogen. That's completely irrelevant. Again, if we're talking nitrogen, we're losing. Now, on a bigger picture, you know that I studied migration deeply. HOP, the Human Osmotic Pressure. The HOP, the Human Osmotic Pressure is the push and pull of the migration. I just left Darien, I just left the Darien gap between Panama and Colombia again. That's why I dress in these funny clothes. And so I was just down there watching Chinese come through in large numbers, mostly military age males.

The Darien gap is that area between Colombia and South America, between Colombia and Panama, where people can, it's an hourglass from Africa and Asia, and South America through Panama up to the United States. So we have about a thousand people a day coming through there right now, from about 140 countries. Now back to work, let's bring this back to the Netherlands. There's a clear replacement strategy going on. That's what Stalin did with a lot of more, right? Replacing the Cul That's what Mao did, that's what Pol Pot did. That's what so many other people, that's what they're working on now in South Africa and have done in other African countries, right? They're doing, right now, people are coming in from about 140 countries just through the Darien Gap here in Netherlands, or let's go over to Luxembourg, a neighbor of Netherlands. I was there last year, and approximately half of the country now is actually migrants. You can see that on their official website. Now, the migrants who are coming in are not monocultural. It's not just Afghans or Pakistanis or Yemenis or something like that.

So the divide and conquer is already done in that regard. For instance, one pig farmer that I was with in Netherlands last week, I asked if he's hiring any migrants. He said, yes, he had a bunch of Afghans who were great workers, he said, but then they suddenly got their residence cards to live in Netherlands, and now they're getting paid to stay here so they had to quit their work, right? He grows pigs in pairs and Christmas trees. So then he hired some other people from Africa and other countries, Ukraine and other places, but he hires people from different countries that are migrants, right? But now they're already prepping, and Eva can talk more about this, they're prepping the Dutch mind and they're doing the same in Finland and other places to start taking in migrants into your homes. They're not doing it yet. They're not ordering it, but Eva can talk more about this. There is a law in the Dutch books that in a case of emergency you'll have to take people into your homes, right? And they're prepping this now in the news cycles. Like, you know, they're not doing it, but just to put that in the back of your mind, one lady that lives in a big farmhouse after her family is gone and her husband has died. She doesn't need that big farmhouse.

She can bring in some Somalis to live with her, right? They're prepping a replacement strategy. It's right in your face. It's right in your grill. I was down in Morocco last year, watching the Moroccan government push people to Ceuta and Melilla, which are two Spanish cities that are in Morocco. And I was down in Greece watching the Turks push them over the border into Greece. I was up in Lithuania watching Belarus. That's when I started warning that something was about to happen. We saw the Belarusians pushing migrants. They tried to push them into Poland. Poland did not allow it of course. And then Lithuania allowed some in.

I was up there for five weeks. The Lithuanians gave me complete access to their camps because I know people in the Lithuanian army because I was with them in Afghanistan. So they gave me complete access to the camps and to the border and to their intelligence people and their army and whatnot. This was a clear weaponization of migration. It's weaponization of migration. This has gone on since forever.

Again, that's what's going on. What's the goal? Okay, so Michael, now you've opened up like 15 different cans of worms. So let me walk through a couple of them. I have a specific question for you and for Eva. First of all, if the Dutch government manages to eliminate 50% of farmers and 30% of livestock by 2030, which is pretty much tomorrow, why do they think that the entire infrastructure that supports the agricultural industry in the Netherlands will survive? Because there's obviously a whole supply chain that's dependent on the Dutch farmer production and they're gonna be running on very tight margins and that would include grocery stores and food processing plants and all of that. And if they lose 50% of their inputs, well, they're gonna collapse. There's not gonna be half of them left. There's gonna be zero of them left. And so is that being taken into account in the government plans? And then what does the Dutch government make of the fact that well, Dutch people need food and maybe they need local food and there's every bit of evidence to assume that the Dutch farmers can provide food much more efficiently and with much less pollution than farmers anywhere else because food's going to have to be imported.

Like, is there a vision at all on the government side for what's going to happen when the entire food supply infrastructure is stressed and threatened by the lack of the farmers in the lack of the livestock And are they giving no credence whatsoever to the necessity for food security? It's very weird in Holland since it had a bloody famine just after World War II. So what's going on in the food provision front? Eva, maybe you could take it up for a second

and then I'll return to some of Michael's comments. Yeah, I don't think they care about that and that's exactly the problem. So it shows you what their true agenda behind all of this is. And as Michael said, that is an agenda of control. So I think the Dutch farmers are being targeted for two reasons. One of them being that our farmers, like you said, they're so effective. You know, they're such good. We're the second largest exporter of agricultural products and we're such a tiny country. You would think that this sector is celebrated by our government. The fact that it's not, the fact that it's under attack is to a rational mind, just completely insane, really. You know, it's insane. And so you have to start thinking, what is the real reason that they're doing this then?

Why would you start coming after farmers in a time of food scarcity? And that's where you come to the question of intent. And I know that people find that to be a scary question. I understand that people are like, oh, well, this is, you know, we live in a liberal democracy. We're in the Western world. Our government would never want us to be hungry. Our government would never want us to starve. Well, I think that that is plain wrong. I think if you control the food supply, you control the people, and our government knows that just as well as China does. That is not something that has left the modern mind, so to say, of the people who rule us. And our farmers are, quite frankly, the only people with the courage and the manpower to stand up to our government. They are an independent group.

They function freely, without help of the government oftentimes. They are hardworking. They are Christian. They represent the Dutch spirit. More than just an agricultural sector, they represent, I would say, our culture as a nation. They are a very, very important group. Oftentimes, these businesses have been in Dutch families for centuries on end. It is the backbone of our society. So I think that that is one of the main reasons why they want them gone. Really, it's an attack on our identity.

So now, okay, now Michael made a complex case for intent, and I'm gonna return to that, but I wanna make a simpler case for intent, and then I want to discuss the idea of the Tri-City, for example, and the theft of land from the farmers and what might be behind that. So when I look at what's happening on the woke environmentalist front, what I fundamentally see are venal politicians who are not very competent at anything except attempting to look competent in a narcissistic way that manipulate opinion polls and public opinion in general so that they can appear as though they're providing people with what they want. Now, I saw this on the COVID front. So for example, in Canada, I talked to senior advisors of even conservative governments in Canada who told me flat out and to their own great shame that all the COVID policy lockdowns were driven 100% by opinion polls, 100% and then justified with science post hoc. And I found that out with a reporter friend of mine who's a brilliant political analyst and who's been doing it for decades. And I gotta tell you that that was shocking to both of us, that it had actually got to that extreme. And so what I see happening on the political front is, as I said, there's politicians who really have no long-term vision. They're trying to cling to power in one way or another. They can cotton on to this environmentalist ethos where they're protecting the virginal planet. They're looking like heroes. It doesn't take any effort on their part. They can tell other people what to do.

And they look like they're actually making progress towards some desired end. And then they can frighten people with idiot apocalyptic narratives. And because people are frightened, they consider any environmental movement forward as positive. And of course, people like parks and nature and that sort of thing. So it's not that hard to sell. It isn't obvious to me that it's necessary to dig for deeper motives in the way that Michael is digging. And we'll turn to that because I'm obviously going to give him full reign to justify his apprehensions. When you're looking at deeper intent, like you're alluding to the idea that there's some plot to, let's say, to destroy core Dutch identity, what do you think is behind this other than ignorance and narcissistic venality? And what do you think of the Tri-City hypothesis, for example, and the notion that this is actually a planned program to depopulate the farm areas so that the land can be turned over to, well, to whoever it is that's interested

in getting control of it? Well, I think there is definitely nothing conspiratorial about the idea that our government, you know, caters to the interests of globalists rather than to the people. You know, if they were to listen to what the Vox Popeli says, they wouldn't do this. I would say that the majority of Dutch people, although you will never hear that in the mainstream media, do not agree with this. You know, they don't think that expropriation is a good thing. But they are being indoctrinated from all sides that this in fact will help nature, that this in fact will help the climate. And so the fact that all the models that our government is using to calculate these nitrogen minimishes, that they are faulty, that they are wrong, which I think does show you, you know, that they are aware of the fact that this is a premise, that this is not actually their actual agenda. You know, I think that that shows you that they don't have our best interests at heart. So I think that is, it's very safe to say that that is not a conspiracy in any way, shape or form. Then the financial and political gain that they will get when they are able to seize these farmers' land. Our country is a small country, but 80% of it is made up out of farmland. So imagine what the state could do with that land, what type of benefits that would bring them.

And of course, they're happy to push this agenda of virtue, like, oh, look at us protecting nature. And that is something that the mainstream media will also push.

So that is almost a self-fulfilling prophecy in a way. Right, absolutely. Well, okay, so in Canada, I believe it's clearly the case that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Deputy Prime Minister Freeland, and also the socialist, hypothetically, Jagmeet Singh, who's propping up the Trudeau government are aficionados of the WEF, of the World Economic Forum. That's absolutely crystal clear. And Trudeau has put forth a set of policies, just transition recently, that are essentially aimed at eviscerating the Canadian energy industry, demolishing the forestry industry, and doing exactly the same thing to the Canadian farmers that the Dutch government is doing to the Dutch farmers. They've called for a 35% reduction in fertilizer use across the board, independent of how much fertilizer any given farmer uses per unit of food, not knowing at all that the farmers have strived diligently for the last six decades to be so hyper-efficient with fertilizer use, because it's expensive, not least, that it beggars description. I mean, they use satellite technology in the machines that distribute the fertilizer to make sure that it's never overused, and they're unbelievably productive. But all of that's going by the wayside, and it is definitely because, as far as I can tell, because Trudeau and Freeland and Singh are trying to please their globalist masters, and they don't give a damn about Canada as a nation, because, as my own prime minister has said, the whole idea of the nation-state is archaic and anachronistic and also dangerous. And so you think the same thing is happening on the Dutch side? And so what do you think is,

characterize the globalist agenda for me? Well, let's first say that Trudeau and Margaret, our prime minister, I would say almost basically the same person in terms of their political agenda, their political ideas. They've been seen holding hands and hugging during the pandemic when they told everybody else to stay at least a meter and a half apart from each other, and they were cracking down on our constitutional rights. So Canada and the Netherlands are both pilot countries for the WEF. We are both pilot countries for the globalist agenda. But I think that the Netherlands is maybe even an easier target, because we are already part, in a way, of a supranational organization, which is the EU. All of these policies come from the European Union, and they obviously base their policies again on the sustainable development goals that come from the United Nations and the World Economic Forum adopts those as well. So when I hear you talk about Trudeau, it's as if I hear you talk about Margaret. They're quite literally the same person when it comes to ideology. So that is really important to know. And these people cater to that globalist ideal, which I think they are able to sell again to the population with this fake idea of virtue. So if you look, for example, at the sustainable development goals of the United Nations, you know, there are 30 of them, or 17, I think, 17 sustainable development goals.

All of them, if you look at them, sound wonderful. You know, you would think, oh, this is perfect. Of course I don't want anybody to be hungry. Of course we want to abolish poverty worldwide. Of course we want the sexes to have equal opportunities. But the answer is always a crackdown

on actually your freedom. And on being Dutch. Can you tell, back to the killing your identity, can you tell Jordan about how the Dutch government

does not even want you to use the word Holland anymore? Absolutely, yeah, no. I mean, our prime minister will not stop, I think, until we don't have a border anymore. I mean, technically, you know, our border doesn't mean anything already with all the mass migration that we have coming in, which Michael did make a fair point about. For example, last year we broke a migration record again. 400,000 people came into our tiny little piece of land that is already so incredibly densely populated. The majority of the Dutch people have been against- How many people are there in Holland altogether? We have about 18 million people.

How many people are there in Holland altogether? What's the population?

18 million, 18 million, and we are about half the size of the American state of Indiana.

Okay, 18 million. To the point of the borders and stealing national identity. Just yesterday, that the protest, where you led the way, where some people chickened out, but you took the lead truck, excellent. While that protest was going on, the Extinction Rebellion tried to interrupt the protest that we were at, which was very peaceful. And a very happy event, actually, the one that we were at with 5,000 or 10,000 people. I don't even know how many were there. The Extinction Rebellion was blocking A-12, right? Highway A-12. And so the German, the Dutch police, actually asked the German polizze to send water cannons over, which they did. They sent water cannon trucks from Germany. Polizze were driving in, you know, polizze trucks, and they started spraying down Dutch protesters.

This is amazing to think about. You would never have thought that 80 years ago that we would join forces again, in a military sense, with the Germans.

But now we have. And one of the trucks, in a spate of just irony, it was Hun 2, Hun 2, you know, basically the Huns are in Netherlands. Oh, wow, wow, wow. You can't even make up this stuff. I think I sent it to you, Jordan.

So they took the side of Extinction Rebellion, essentially,

which is as radical an environment as groupists. No, no, no, no, they were spraying extinction. They were spraying Extinction Rebellion. But the funny thing is, is that the German police

were in Netherlands using their water cannon yesterday. So even from like a legal perspective, most of what is important, I think, to know for a country like mine, and any country in the European Union, is that a lot of our laws already aren't made in our country. You know, they come from the European Union. So that democratically leaves a huge gap between the citizen and the laws that come in. And then in my country specifically, any international law has more legal power than the national law. How is that for democracy, right? So just that mere fact shows you, I think, that we can no longer speak of a really strong

national identity and democracy in that sense. Well, you know, I was in the Netherlands about five years ago, talking to a group of Dutch intellectuals, comedians, artists, and so forth. And one of the things they told me was that they were having very grave doubts about the integrity of the Dutch identity. And that really came as a shock to me because as a Canadian, I come from this little town in Northern Alberta, which is only about 50 years old. And Canada, especially Western Canada, is a very, very new country. And so when I come to a place like Holland and I hear the Dutch people, especially the intellectuals and the artistic leaders, express doubts about the integrity of their culture, it's just absolutely shocking to me because when I come in as an outsider, I think Holland is one of the great cultures, has one of the great cultures of the world, technologically, because your society runs so smoothly. It's an absolute bloody miracle, especially because you should be underwater. And then culturally as well, I mean, Amsterdam is an absolutely beautiful city. It has a rich artistic tradition, a rich religious tradition. And if you, if you Dutch are starting to doubt the validity of your own identity, there's no hope for, well, let's say for Canadians. And of course, our prime minister has already famously announced that Canada has no core identity and that we're the first post-national state. And so, but how do you read the fundamental motivation of the globalists?

I mean, you talked about the sustainable development goals and I have to admit or also pronounce that I helped write the original sustainable goal document and that was probably 10 years ago. And in my defence, I can tell you that the drafts that were produced before the team that I was working on rewrote them were a hell of a lot more vicious and troublesome than the drafts that we ended up with. We took a lot of idiotic Cold War pro-socialist pros out of the descriptions and tried to make sense out of it. I came out of that with a sense that I was extraordinarily confused at the multitude of the goals because there was no prioritization and also about the potential danger of precisely the top-down machinations that you're describing. But as you said, if you look at the sustainable development goals one by one, it's very difficult to take issue with them. They'd all look positive. The problem is that they're converted into top-down policy that's implemented by force. And you pointed out something else that's extraordinarily troublesome, which is that as we move toward international governance, which is obviously necessary at some to some degree because nations have to communicate, we're moving the distance between people at the local level like the Dutch farmers and those who putatively govern them. We're putting in such a distance between them in terms of communication that there is no communication. There's just top-down edict. And that's a real Tower of Babel situation. And the reason I think the Dutch farmers are bellwethers or canaries in the coal mine is because they are so-called ordinary competent people, hyper competent people.

And they're shaking their fist in the air saying, look, you're demolishing our livelihoods here. While you're pursuing your virtue signaling self-aggrandizing hyper moral goals. And not only are you not accomplishing those goals, you're actually working at counter purposes to them like the German government has managed on the energy front. And so we're seeing a danger of a very intrusive form of global governance. And that's, as you said, is taking priority over all national, local and individual concerns. And that's a huge danger. And I don't think people are cognizant of that at all yet. Lost as they are in this delusion that we're doing something like serving the environment. It was a very, very simple narrative. But so what do you see though? You made a bit of a case there for the beneficial motives of some of the globalists at least in relationship to these goals. But there's a nefarious element to what's going on.

What do you think the fundamental intent is? Like I worry about statements like the planet has too many people on it and we've exceeded the carrying capacity of the biosphere, et cetera, et cetera. Which sound to me like implicitly murderous. It's essentially murderous sentiment or suicidal. But what do you think the intent of the globalists

is if you had to give the devil is due? Yes, okay. So globalists, I mean, obviously they're people. So the flaws that are in our human souls, the want for power and money lives inside of them as well. And they wanna do it on a global scale. So the biggest evil, I would say imaginable gets its chance if you let the globalists take rule. So what do you wanna do if you are a globalist who wants to open up all borders, have essentially the biggest consumer base in the world, which is the entire world, right? Well, then things like Christianity, national identity, cultural identity are just things that stand in your way. If you want to create the perfect consumer, then you want somebody who doesn't know who he is, who doesn't know what he stands for. You know, a devout Christian, for example, who wants nothing more than to start a family and work hard and live for God is not going to be the perfect consumer that sits on its couch, watches Netflix all day, orders his food from Uber Eats, you know, and does nothing more than just consume. So I think that for me, at least, it's hard not to see, again, the question of intent, you know, of trying to uproot people so that they are confused and aimless souls that will buy what these globalists offer and do as they say. And I think that that is exactly what we are witnessing today.

Most of us are turning into perfect consumers

without a higher purpose. Oh, well, you sound, when you talk like that, you sound more like Joe Rogan or Russell Brand, which maybe even Bernie Sanders, you know, these people on the left who are still genuine leftists in some sense who are hyper concerned about corporate gigantism, which I think is a genuine element of concern. And what you're seeing expressing is an unholy and I would say truly fascist level of collusion between corporate giants who are essentially motivated by very little else than a kind of self-serving greed and maybe which might work at a local level when there's lots of competition, but when they're large enough to engage in regulatory capture and to engage in collusion with government and media, that poses another one of these Tower of Babel threats to all of us. And so that ties back into Michael, what Michael had brought up earlier, all the snakes that he'd, what would you say, exposed underneath the carpet. So Michael, I made the case to Eva that you could argue that you could attribute intent to the globalists merely as a consequence of their desire to mask their incompetence with virtue signaling to the masses. And then you could say corrupted by their unrecognized greed on the corporate front and all the dark motivations that that puts in place for government corporate collusion. But you're pointing to something that's more nefarious. And as they say in the scientific community, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So I don't know anything except for what we've talked about briefly about this Tri-City hypothesis. And that seems to be, like I wouldn't wanna wander down that rabbit hole unless it was absolutely necessary, given that there's already alternatives. It's not a hypothesis. You're very, well, this is, that's what I want you to make a case for that

and tell people why you- Just web search Tri-State City and you'll see the map instantly. They've got it mapped out. We will be sitting right in the middle of it right here. The map is mapped out. They're doing research to make it now. And when I see Trump talking about beautiful cities, I mean, it sounds like Tri-State City, which is a smart city, which is meant for complete control. I mean, they're already doing Brainport City, their experiment, I've been to Brainport City over there looking at, look, we can have the same, I'm going to Japan again next week. Again, I've written three books that are only in Japanese about the subject. And I'm going there again next week. We could have this exact same discussion if we take this to the orbital view, the exact same discussion in Japan and the details would sound almost like they do here. Little details, they don't talk about stitch to stuff nitrogen, but they talk about other things. For instance, Eva could be Masako Gadaha and she'll be saying the exact same things, except with little details.

Okay, so in Canada, Google attempted, okay, in Canada, Google attempted to collude with the Ontario government to make the new port development in Toronto into a smart city. And a person I know well who knows more about technological issues and issues of potential technological control probably than anybody I've ever talked to in the world more or less fought that to a standstill so that Google didn't get their hands on the port development in Canada. And his primary concern was that what Google essentially wanted was all the data that would be generated as a consequence of constant monitoring of absolutely everything that went on in the smart city because that data is part of the extended digital self and has tremendous commercial value. Because if I can track you in all your purchases and where are you going and where you are, I can target you for marketing in a way that's been unheard of up until now. And so that's a huge can of worms. And in any case, that didn't happen in Canada. But now it's reminiscent to me as well of what's happening in the UK, most particularly in Oxford and Cambridge in relationship to the 15-minute cities. Now, the 15-minute cities are put forward as a solution to the problem of undue distance to travel. And so the idea is that wouldn't it be lovely if we had walkable neighborhoods where everything you needed was within easy reach? And I have some sympathy for that because I've gone to monoculture suburbs, let's say, that are nothing but row upon row upon row of identical houses with no churches and no bars and no community centers. And the shopping center's at a distance. And that doesn't look like an optimal urban model.

But I looked into the C40 websites. The C40 is the consortium of municipalities that have signed on to the 15-minute city plan. And I read in their own documentation, this is relevant to the tri-state city idea, that their goals are to reduce caloric consumption to 2,500 calories a day by force, essentially within the next 15 years, to ensure that the peasant class, which is everybody but the elitists, can't fly more than one time every three years to not merely shift private car ownership from fossil fuel to electric, which is fundamentally impossible because the grid can't handle it, but to eliminate 90% of private car ownership so that people are forced to take unbelievably expensive in terms of time utilization and non-existent public transportation systems and to limit the amount of travel that people can do outside of their neighborhoods. And then I watched the legacy media claim that pointing that out is something akin to a right-wing conspiracy, which it most certainly isn't because you can just find the bloody documentation online. And then I look at places like China, which have taken this to an extreme, 600 million closed-circuit TV cameras in China, one for every one and a half persons watching the Chinese all the time, able to monitor them 100% by face and also to identify them by gate and to limit their ability to do absolutely anything, to buy, to sell, to travel, to move, to leave their neighborhood with this top-down surveillance system that perversely and consciously, some of the Chinese engineers have actually named Skynet. And in a conscious attempt to produce a positive version of the absolutely catastrophic apocalyptic artificial intelligence that was in the bloody Arnold Schwarzenegger movies. And you can't even talk about this stuff without sounding like a raving conspiratorialist, but there it is. Now, tell me more about the tri-state city. So what have you seen? Because I don't know anything about it, neither does anybody else watching, I presume, except for those who've gone down the rabbit hole with you.

Yeah, in Canada, I love to read voraciously on pandemic because I'm a war correspondent. In pandemic, famine and war, they go together, right? They are co-sanguinated. And I was reading a book about cholera a couple of years ago. I think it was called Ghost Map. And interestingly, towards the end of the book, the author in an otherwise excellent book started talking about these smart cities where basically everything, we don't have to worry about any disease anymore, that sort of thing. Last time I was in China, I got kicked out of Hong Kong in 2020. I was a bad boy. I was watching the protest and they finally kicked me out after seven months, but that was Hong Kong. But last time I was in mainland China, I was actually researching information war. I was in places like Nanjing and Shanghai and that sort of thing. But I was in Southern China, where the Uyghurs are for part of that trip.

And I was talking with restaurant owners and farmers and that sort of thing. And various restaurant owners told me that when a Uyghur comes in, they are mandated by law to call the police immediately. The police immediately come to check. So the smart city goes beyond mere optics. you're installing those cameras all over Hong Kong. They were doing that when I left. That's in Hong Kong. But over in mainland China, it's not just the cameras everywhere. It's also, you know, you're mandated to call. When I was in Hong Kong, by the way, in the protest, the protestors would take their lasers and shine them in the cameras and burn out the sensors. Actually, my camera got a little damaged by it. And, but, you know, that's not a long-term solution, obviously.

But what I'm getting to is these smart cities are clearly coming and they're already here to some degree. Every time we use our cards and that sort of thing. But they're clearly taking it to a higher level of complete control. And again, they, this isn't conspiratorial. They say they're going to do it. And when you talk about Mark Ruta, the prime minister of Netherlands, you can see Klaus Schwab going, where do you find such prime ministers as Mark Ruta? You know, did you see him say, I watch your Twitter, Jordan, and I watch a lot of your podcast. I know you know what's going on because you talk about it all the time. You attack Trudeau, it seems like every two hours, right? I mean, you know exactly what's happening. This is a-

That's because I don't have enough time to do it more. Yeah, well, digital currency front. I mean, well, one of the things we should point out to everybody who's watching and listening is that we're already three quarters of the way down the digital currency pipeline. Because there isn't really much difference between a credit card or a bank card and digital currency. And the reason I say there's not much difference is because when you use a credit card or a bank card to make a transaction, there's a digital record of the transaction and then that digital record can be brokered. And so far, mostly it's brokered to other corporations, which isn't as totalitarian as it might be because so far, most corporations just want your money so they can sell you things. Now, that can be problematic because you can have things pushed on you by what you call corporations that are going a little bit farther than they should that you don't really need or want, but at least you get something out of the bargain. But once we're fully digital in our currency, that'll mean the government would be able to track absolutely every bloody thing you ever do. And also be able to do things like they're already doing in China. So the Chinese government has put expiry dates on some digital currency. So if they need to have the population spend more, let's say because there is a recession, they could just put in an edict that would make sure that your money depreciated by 2% every month, so that that would be an impetus to spending. And they could do the reverse if they wanted you to save.

And so it means in potential, the emergence of a system for comprehensive control that's so complete that we can barely imagine it. And we might say, well, isn't that paranoid? And I would say, look, we still think we were in a COVID epidemic. What we were really in was an epidemic of imitating the Chinese communists. And we ran to imitate them as fast as we possibly could. And that Chinese communist regime, they just reelected Xi Jinping the other day with a 2,952 to zero margin for the next five years, the probability that he's president for life is extraordinarily high. And so we are in danger of using the Chinese Communist Party and its vaunted efficiencies on the energy and environment front as a model for totalitarian governance across the world. You know, we thought when we integrated China into the world economy, that the Chinese would turn into a Western democracy. But what's happening instead, I would say, is that because we've invited the Chinese to the table, we're turning into the CCP. Yeah, and people are certainly not. And we're doing it under the guise of this idiot, protect the virginal planet environmentalism that's all motivated by this, what would you say, fear-mongering apocalypse?


Yeah, well, I know it. That's probably the fundamental question of our time. So that's why we have to say no to all of these things. We have to say no to CBDCs. We have to say no to digital identity. We have to say no to 15-minute cities because they're all the same thing. But it's problematic. It's hard in Western society, in the mind of modern men nowadays, to tell them that those nice little pretexts that they use to sell this to us are not actually the truth. We need a return to real ethical debate about where we want to go as a civilization. And that's why it's so important. I think what you are trying to do also with an alternative to something like the World Economic Forum, because those discussions are not being held. We are being sold lies.

We are being sold false premises, pretexts, and we are forced to debate within that circle of lies, oftentimes, and it's the exact same thing with the Dutch farmers. That's why all these subjects are related to each other because they're all a matter of, are we going to give up our freedom for a bit of convenience or for those nice words that they try to sell us? And I think the answer should be absolutely not,

but it's hard. Yeah, yeah. Well, and then on the digital currency front, and Eve, I'll turn to this alternative that you described in a minute. On the digital currency front, I think something like a digital currency is inevitable because we're already three-quarters of the way there. And the only real alternative, I can see to the top down centralized digital currency that's being offered by the government's inclusion, let's say with the WEF is going to be something like a decentralized system. And it looks to me like the best decentralized system that's in place for currency at the moment is Bitcoin. And I don't know if Bitcoin's the solution, but I don't think any of the other electronic coins, digital currencies, have the same advantages or the same genuine radical decentralization as Bitcoin. And then, Eva, you mentioned this alternative to the WEF that has been generated in the UK. So I'm going to release the statement of vision for that enterprise on my YouTube channel tomorrow. That's March 13th. I'm not sure when this will air. You know, and one of the things we're working through is what the story that might unite us might be.

And the story that we're being presented right now is that human activity, especially at the industrial level, is intrinsically destructive in relationship to pristine nature and has to be limited by force, if necessary, because there's a apocalyptic emergency at hand. And I do not believe for a moment that there is a single apocalyptic emergency at hand. There may be a multitude of them in many different directions, but to assume that it's a mere consequence, let's say, of nitrogen overproduction or carbon overproduction is a radical oversimplification of pathological magnitude. And I also don't believe the idea that limits to growth that are opposed from the top down are the only way that human beings can manage, what would you say, harmonious relationships with the broader biosphere. I think instead that if we got our structures of governance put in place properly, like they generally are in free Western countries, that people could cooperate well enough so that everyone could be rich, including the absolutely poor around the world, and that rich people who have opportunity and a certain degree of security would start to attend to local environmental concerns in a manner that would make the planet greener and more sustainable. I think, so I think we could have our cake and eat it too. And this enterprise you described, which is the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship is gonna have its inaugural conference October 31st, November 1st, and November 2nd. I hope you too can attend. And with a big public event right in the middle of it that we hope to bring 20,000, approximately 20,000 people to, but we're trying to put forward a vision of abundance and freedom and let's say, environmental stewardship. So mature, mature relationship. And so that's definitely underway. And we have a lot of people, a lot of public, a lot of the public have already clambered on board.

I've got a mailing list of about 40,000 people. And we have a large number of well-positioned cultural, artistic, business and political leaders on board as well. We're trying not to make it an elitist enterprise for the reasons that we've already described. And I think everybody who's part of the core group really is afraid of elitist enterprises. And also concerned that any attempts on the international level are likely to turn into nothing but an elitist enterprise. But we're at least gonna try to put forward a vision that's much more voluntary and decentralized and positive than this bloody top-down tower of babels, centralized apocalypse narrative

that everybody's being force-fed now. It's so funny to me always how they attack the minds of our people really, especially young minds from both ways. It's on the one hand, this apocalyptic, the whole world is going to come to an end, a really alarmist story. And then on the other hand, on the individual level, it's an anything-goes story. Everything is relative. There's just, there's your truth, there's my truth, there's nothing such as an absolute truth. There's no God, there's no real morality, everything goes. And that combination is so incredibly deadly. And that's why I think it's so important

what you're doing with this and we need to counter it. Well, it's absolutely right, Eva. Well, you get the worst of, so look, the most intense and totalitarian tyranny will necessarily emerge in the midst of the most fragmented and individualized population. And so, and you see this on the identity front, because the radicals claim now is that your identity is nothing at all other than what you feel it to be at this moment, which is as hedonistic and whim-driven an identity as you can possibly imagine. And the consequence of that isn't freedom except the freedom of idiot whim. The consequence is that you will 100% hand over all the responsibility that you've abdicated to top-down tyrants and they will control every element of your life. You can't have a tyranny without fractionated individuals. And it is a perverse marriage, right, of that intense subjective so-called freedom with this insane top-down international distant tyranny. And we're definitely drifting in that direction super fast.

Go ahead, Michael. That weaponized migration, again, with massive people coming from massive numbers of countries into places like the United States and all across the EU, that creates that fracture, not at the personal level in one mind, but in the whole population. Nobody's gonna be able to come together. You're not gonna have Dutch farmers in Netherlands are gonna be able to stand up because they're gonna be replaced, right? And then you're gonna have a bunch of people from Somalia and other places that are all mixed together. They won't have any centralized ability to organize. Perfect slaves. I mean, this is very easy.

This is what they say they're gonna do. You've spent a lot of time in poverty-stricken and war-torn countries. And my suspicions are, I don't wanna put words in your mouth, that you've developed a certain degree of, what would you say, understanding of and empathy for the world's poor and dispossessed. And I suppose the globalists who are anti-border would make a case that the poor people around the world should have the opportunity to come to the West and flourish. And so, and when you speak of the danger of migration, then it's easy to paint you as someone who's, you know, anti-third world and anti-ethnic minority. But there is a real problem of poverty around the world. And so what's your sense about how that poverty could be properly ameliorated around the world without that poverty, without us falling into this like homogenized globalist utopian

fractionated individual trap? Well, keep in mind, I've spent more than half of my life overseas, outside of the United States. More than half of my life in about 90 countries, right? So I understand that some fish just don't mix well in the same aquariums, right? I mean, there's some, you know, if you had the aquarium fish chart, there are some fish like, let's say, Filipinos that are green, green, green, green, yellow. They don't get along with Filipinos as well, but green, Filipinos get along with everybody, right? They just, they're like the universal donor in blood. And then there's Chechens, red, red, red, red, red, red, red. Some don't get along very well with each other. For instance, when I was in the migrant camps in Lithuania, I asked specifically, do you have any Chechens? And they said, yes, we keep them separately. I said, what's the critical mass?

In other words, how many, they said, actually we have a critical mass. We never have more than six Chechens together. If you have seven Chechens or more, it's kind of a joke, but it's not, they go super critical, right? They become a gang, right? A lot of, something that a lot of people don't understand is that you're not importing individuals. You're importing like Somali tribes or Nigerian tribes. When you meet a Nigerian, like I was with a Nigerian a few months ago in Ireland, and I asked him what people he was from, was it the Igbo or whatever, you know what I was asking. There was different groups over there. And, the Nigerians don't come and get together with Nigerians. They come and get together with people from their tribe, right? So when you have Kurdish people come in, I love the Kurds, I'm out with Kurds a lot when I'm over in that part of the world. Or Yazidis, I've spent a lot of time with Yazidis up in Nineveh province in Iraq.

And I met some Yazidis in the camps over in Lithuania, for instance, and one's still there. He messages me, he's stuck in a camp. Actually, he doesn't even speak English. He speaks German, so we have to communicate in German. He lived in Germany before. The point is, some of these people get along very well. Others come in as gangs or they become gangs later, right? And this is designed to split us apart. Now, of course, we can always take migrants in, and we should, but we should take them in in the amount that can actually sort of dissolve within our, or at least become time to digest, let's say, but this is weaponized, the integrate. This is weaponized, that's what Stalin did in the Holodomor in 1932, 33, and well, actually before and after that as well. That's what Mao did, always trying to get rid of these base groups that have some cultural identity, the farmers. I keep telling Dutch farmers, because I'm looking at this from the orbital view, because I go from country to country, and I'm looking for patterns.

And they're very, like I said, we could go to Japan, and you would hear the same conversation. Only the little details would change. And they're trying to prepare the Japanese, actually, to bring in migrants. And the Japanese are, some are falling for it.

For instance, if you go to Okinawa. Well, they have a demographic collapse in Japan. So the Japanese haven't managed to reproduce enough to keep their young population at a sufficient number likely to support their industrial enterprise across time. And China has exactly the same problem. I mean, do you think Japan has any option other than to open itself up to a certain degree

of immigration? Certainly. I mean, encourage the kids to have more babies, I mean, to get married and have, you know what I'm saying.

Yeah, well, you know what I'm saying. Yeah, well, very few countries have managed that. Hungary has tried that quite assiduously, and they've managed to stop the decline in birth rate and raise it slightly. But it's proved very difficult for Western countries to encourage young people to reproduce enough to, you know, surpass that replacement barrier. That's another problem we're trying to address with this Alliance for Responsible Citizenship.

I was there last year checking it out in Hungary.

I mean, it's a clear problem. It's absolutely true that it's a very, very hard question to solve. But the answer can never be a solution that doesn't work. I mean, the mass migration of radically different cultures, especially to Europe, has proven to be very, very unsuccessful. And something that the majority, at least of Western, well, most Western countries are actually against, but they are never heard. Their questions are never answered. So democracy in that sense already does not function. We don't have borders, they are not protected. And the consequences have been quite, I would say quite detrimental for any major European city. And the answer to poverty in other parts of the world, I don't think can ever be, let's have all the young, you know, capable men move abroad, you know, or move continent even. How are they going to build those countries up themselves? So I don't think that it's a solution for Europe,

nor is it, for example, for Africa. And also we're setting, we're just, you know, there's this demographic demise. Of course, it's happening with Russia as well in many countries, right? Not in the United States, but in some countries, it's obviously a problem. But does that mean it's the end of Japan? No, it doesn't mean that. You know, it's non sequitur to think, hey, they don't have a sufficient replenishment rate, so therefore we should bring in a bunch of Somalis. I mean, they're just like, where are they? That's like, I have a headache, so let me pour gas on myself, right? It just doesn't work.

So Michael, let's turn to this tri-state city again, because I'm still unclear as to its function and purpose. And so tell me in some detail what the tri-state city is. And then let's turn to more practical considerations again on the farmer protest front, if you don't mind.

So tell me a bit more about the tri-state city plan. Tri-state city is a, they've already mapped it out. They're starting to build it now. They have to take out your farmers for multiple reasons. One is that also undermines the entire culture of Netherlands. The Dutch will cease to exist, other than in museums, right? And so, like the Kulaks in Ukraine, right? And so that, then you can take their land. The Dutch arguably own, or the farmers arguably about 62% of the land. I'm not sure this number is a moving number. And I'm not sure what the true numbers are. Is that about right?

Yeah, even a little bit higher.

Maybe, okay, maybe, okay. So anyway, say 60 to 70%, the highest number I've seen is 70. So you need that land to make tri-state city, because most of Netherlands is obviously a farm. And so, but as you pointed out before, Jordan, you've said this last year. Why would you replace the most efficient farmers in the world, or arguably among the most efficient farmers in the world to start? There's gonna be a nitrogen problem, all right? But it's not a Stichstoff gift, or poison gift is a German word for poison. It's not a poison problem. There's not gonna be enough nitrogenous fertilizers. We talked about that in regard to BASF fertilizer plant over in Ludwigshaf in Germany, where I went to twice last year. Last week, they announced reducing 2,600 more workers. You and I talked about this at length last year, and they just announced it last week, and they're cutting off one of their ammonia plants.

And so this is a, there's definitely gonna be a nitrogen problem. There's not gonna be enough nitrogenous fertilizers. For instance, a pig farmer I was at here in Netherlands last week, he was happy that he said his system is circular. He takes the pig poop and he fertilizes the Christmas trees and the pear trees with it. I think, or maybe just the pear trees. But he said it's circular, so it's quite good. And I said, where do you get your pig feed? He gets it from Brazil. Where does Brazil get their nitrogenous fertilizers? You remember the gentleman we had dinner with last year, an old CEO of a Dutch chemical plant, DSM. He said, Brazil gets their fertilizers from Europe. And Brazil, he told us at dinner, they're not gonna have enough fertilizer this year.

And as you know, the United States gets a lot of our protein from Brazil. So, and India's got the same problem. You know, after you and I met in Netherlands, I flew over to Ireland and talked with Mary Lou McDonald, the leader of Sinn Féin. And all she wanted to talk about was equity and bringing in migrants, you know. And I didn't wanna talk about food or energy. So I flew over to London and I heard the same story again. I flew to Thailand and I was having coffee with the next prime minister, Abhissit. I know him from old days. You can see me and him flying around back during the fighting days. And I have an office in Thailand. And I said, you know, you've got problems. You're gonna have problems.

You import 92% if you're nitrogenous fertilizers. You only create 8%. And that's 5 million metric tons that you may not be able to get sometime in 2023. May not, it's unknown. And if you can't, he said, oh, Michael, you know, we export X amount of rice. And I'm like, I'm well aware of that, how much rice you export. However, rice is basically a nitrogen vacuum. It sucks out the nitrogen into the rice and you export that nitrogen. Thai soil is very poor in nitrogen. You have to have that nitrogenous fertilizer. Where are you gonna get it from? He said, we'll get it from China.

I'm like, check it out. You're not getting it from China right now and you're not gonna get it from Russia or at least it's very seriously in doubt if you can get it from Russia. You're not gonna get it from Europe. Where are you gonna get it from? You're gonna be bidding against Japan. Japan needs it, too. Malaysia, cut off the natural gas, I mean, this is a big, And I'm looking at this from the orbital view. From the orbital view,

we've talked about food issues before. You're no more optimistic. You're no more optimistic on the fertilizer side than you were a year ago when we spoke. I mean, the winter hasn't been as catastrophic as we had bandied back and forth for a variety of different reasons. And the energy crisis didn't come to, well, hey, fair enough. But you're still convinced that a fertilizer shortage, so radical increase in fertilizer prices at the minimum is in the offing sometime in the next, what, year or two years? And why are you still convinced of that, Michael?

Well, as you know, food prices are non-elastic. I was meeting with a Dutch farmer just the other day at his, yes, 17 acres of greenhouses. It's obviously massive. And I asked him about that. And he said, yes. I didn't ask him about actually about famine. I asked him what he thought, how does the future look with food? And he said, he talked about a hunger's note, which in Dutch is famine, right? And so he talked about this famine. And I said, what's the time window? And he said, probably four to five years. And this guy has actually started selling electricity.

He just bought a generator from France, a diesel generator. And he's a farmer, but he saw that the windmills and the solar that is all over the place here, solar, what months does that actually work in? What starts in maybe May, I'm not even sure. But I mean, there's solar, you've seen them, Jordan. There's a massive amount of solar panels in a place. I mean, if this was Florida, it'd make complete sense. But you know, the windmills outside of his office, when I just met him, were not spinning. So I said, when do you sell electricity back to the grid? I mean, I see those windmills aren't spinning. He said, well, I look out my window and those windmills are not spinning and it's cloudy. I'm making money. So he talked about, he was renting a generator for $75,000 a month.

He said he's making a couple of hundred thousand dollars a month off of it at that point. He just returned that generator, just bought two more. And he just bought a third one, this one from France, which he's about to install. So he has these computer screens, which he allows-

Is he contributing to the grid? Is he contributing directly to the grid? How is he selling the electricity?

Oh, he has these computer screens. He let me video on me. It was okay with him. You know, if I publish the video, which I haven't done yet, but I can send it to you. But he's got these basically two screens in particular, and it shows the price of the, every minute it updates. So at any minute, he might start selling electricity. So as soon as it goes below this one line, which the line is moving, based on how much is diesel cost and how much the electricity costs at that minute. As soon as it goes below that line, he dumps his one megawatt hour, or I think it was a one megawatt, actually electrical engineers help me out, battery, which that huge battery dumps out in 20 minutes, but while that battery is dumping out, he's starting his generators. And as soon as the price goes above that line, he turns them off, recharges the battery. And so multiple times a day, he's turning on the generators and turning them back off, and he's making a fortune. He told me that that generator that he's about to pay, or he just paid 450,000 euros, about $475,000. He said he should get a full return on investment in four months.

He said three to four months. So let's say four months, you know? And so he's already stopped growing some of the goods and-

Right, so he's concerned about energy, reliability, and also about fertilizer availability. Oh yeah. Right, right, got it, got it. So I wanna know a little bit more about the farmers. So you guys indicated that there's somewhere between five and 10,000 farmers protesting. Can you tell us the nature of those protests? Like how many tractors are involved? What cities are they in? What are they doing to, what effect is this having on Dutch society practically

and metaphysically, and what are the farmers' plans? Well, so last summer, there were massive protests going on that were quite, I would say for Dutch standards, quite radical, quote unquote. And I don't mean that in a negative sense of the word, but just the fact that they went out in such fast numbers was something that we don't often see in our country. So for example, the word folder culture is very telling for who we are as a nation. That sort of signifies something like, we're a nation of compromise. We're a nation of dialogue. One of our favorite sayings is like, oh, just behave normally, then you're already acting crazy enough. That is really typical for the Dutch. So to have all these Dutch farmers in the summer go out in protest, take their tractors onto the highway, for example, block the highway, block distribution centers, even go towards the airport and basically show our government who is boss, because that is really what they did. Within a day, we saw food shortages in the supermarket. So it really reminded people of the fact that farmers produce our food. They're not just businessmen, they produce our everyday nutrition for us.

And they were really successful with those protests, a bit too successful. And then what happened was the Dutch state intervened. So they sent police forces, they sent actually the military to those protests. And at a certain point, they even started using violence and shot at a 16 year old boy that was driving away from the protest. And mind you, these protests are completely peaceful. So we don't have,

you know, obviously in the Netherlands we don't have, we don't have- That shooting was on video from multiple angles.

That boy didn't do anything or anything. That boy didn't do anything. He was 16 years old. He was on a tractor and he was driving away. That should not happen in a free Western country. And the fact that it did happen, and the fact that we don't have a first amendment and we definitely don't have a second amendment, became very, very apparent to me. What do you do in that type of situation when you are dealing with a government that thinks that it can take away everything that you have ever worked for, everything that you have ever done in your entire life just like this, because they create a crisis out of thin air and they say, you have to give up your rice, you have to give up your property and we're just going to take your land because mind you our farmers are not free to sell their lands to the market. It has to go to the state. So again, that shows you, I think,

the state's true intent.

Okay, so I didn't know that, so tell me that again. Yeah, so no, all these nitrogen policies, the consequence of those are always either voluntary selling, which like we just discussed is never really actually voluntary. You could be pointing a gun at me from that room and then I could say, oh yeah, here's my property. Is that voluntary? No, of course not. That's basically a metaphor for what is happening with the farmers right now. And otherwise it's going to be expropriation, forceful buyouts. If they don't say yes now, it will become forced later on during the next couple of years. So just that fact alone that they are not allowed to sell their farms to the market for maybe even potentially a better price should tell you all that you need to know.

Right, right, right. Okay, so what effect are the farmers protests having on Dutch society practically and conceptually? Are the Dutch people, you claimed earlier that the Dutch people are on the side of the farmers, which begs the question, then why do you have the government that you have? You know, if that's so clearly the case. And is there a backlash against the farmers protests and what are they doing to Dutch society? Like are they shutting, what are they shutting down? What's the effect on food production

and on public confidence, et cetera? Well, after those protests in the summer where they shot at the boy and the protests became more and more heated, the mainstream media did exactly what our government wants it to do and they started vilifying our farmers. And they are trying to test the people's patience. So when things go on for too long, especially in the Netherlands, people get tired of it. The news cycle, they're like, oh, these farmers again. The government starts saying, we need to renegotiate. Like I said, the renegotiations never lead to anything. They just changed the tune. But their aim is, their hope is that people will get tired of it. And sadly, that was the case. So for a couple of months, after the Dutch farmers were worldwide news during the summer, we didn't hear anything from our farmers for the longest time. And there are a lot of farmers that are still, because usually that is a good Dutch mindset, open to dialogue, open to negotiations.

They were willing to sit around the table with our government again. And then when the new report came out and nothing changed, the mainstream media again started ramping it up. And I think a lot of people got afraid. They got fearful of a lot of farmers that they had lost the support of the people. Because if they read what the mainstream papers write about them, then if I were them, I would also think that I had no support from the Dutch people anymore. But I think inherently, the opposite is true. I think if you ask most people on the street in Holland, do you think that this is right? They will say, no, I don't think that that is right. But they don't quite make the next step where they translate that into this government is actually, what they're doing is actually criminal. I don't wanna do that. They're still stuck in that lie of, well, if there's really a crisis, then maybe we should do something. Maybe we should negotiate a little bit.

Whereas I personally have made it my mission to say, none of this is real. It's a political decision. We should not negotiate with people who are driving our farmers to, well, to despair, and who want to take away their lands. They're thieves. If a thief comes into my house, I will not go and negotiate with them and say, well, please don't take my laptop, but you can take the TV. Are we good now? Of course you would never do that. But with the government, people expect our farmers to do it. And I think that is the strategy. Like I said, a war of attrition.

They did try to drag it out so long. Well, so if you can't negotiate in good faith because your partners aren't negotiating in good faith, what alternative is left for the Dutch farmers and what's the plan? I mean, they're bringing their tractors on mosques to what cities?

Where are the protests taking place right now? Well, they were all over the country really during the summer. And now we had a rally yesterday that was at the Hague. And that was because the Hague is where our parliament resides. And we have elections coming up in a couple of days. Those are regional elections, but they are important because they dictate what our Senate looks like. So if our Senate changes in composition, and if the cabinet, the current cabinet loses its majority, then obviously new legislation will not pass. So it is incredibly important that this happens right now. But the farmers were very afraid leading up to this rally that we had yesterday, this protest that we had yesterday to even take their tractors. Because the mayor of the Hague said, you cannot bring your tractors. Which I think is a massive violation of our right to protest because tractors are not weapons,

but they symbolize who the farmers are. You have to stop asking for permission. Freedom is not granted. Freedom is taken. I agree. By any means necessary, the, by any means necessary. That sounds familiar these days. The Dutch farmers have to go full French. What happens when you push French farmers, you know? The French government is terrified of their farmers. I used to think the French farmers were wrong to protest every little thing. Like, you know, when I go to France and you know, the farmers will give you an earful.

And, but now I realize the wisdom of their ways. Oh yeah, absolutely. You've got to go full French. And if you play defense, you're absolutely going to lose. And you cannot compromise with this. It's like you said, it's like compromising with a robber. You have to go full on and be offensive. And I don't mean kill people, but I mean do it the way the French do it. The French farmers aren't out killing people, but they'll sure block the roads and terrify the government. They'll terrify them at the election polls and it works. Yeah, I'm going to go back to France

and learn some more of their tricks. So this is, you know, my last hope with the farmers is that they will start to see this. So obviously we're now going to wait and see what happens during the elections. But I personally don't have much hope because sadly, a lot of people don't realize, you know, that our governing party, the VVD Marc Ruttice party, they say that they are right wing. You know, they're the typical neoliberal globalists of this world. And a lot of people who don't read any alternative media will still think that that's true. And they think that that's a fair party to vote for. So I'm not hopeful that this time around, you know, that they will lose their majority actually. So then the next question is, what will they do? What will the farmers do? Are they going to stay afraid of the demonization and the vilification that is going on in the mainstream media? Or will they say enough is enough?

We don't want to negotiate anymore. And we will indeed bring our government to its knees because they have the manpower to do it. They are just afraid to use it. If they do it again, I will, I honestly, I think that if the Dutch farmers were, for example, to block the roads to the port in Rotterdam, our haven there. And if the fishermen will come from the other side and the dock workers will say, we stopped working within a week, Mark Rotter will be brought to his knees. I'm 100% convinced of that because then they'll start

to feel it. Okay, so that's starting to get, you know, that's starting to, those options are starting to become quite radical. And I'm not saying anything positive or negative about that at the moment, just pointing that out. I do have a question though, is that if the Dutch government is bringing the police and the military to bear on the farmers, why are the police and the military cooperating? Because my sense for example, in Canada, was that among the military and the police, there was a tremendous amount of support for the Canadian truckers fundamentally, you know, because they're the same people all things considered. And nonetheless, the military and the police did their betters bidding, which is of course what should happen in a state that's still functioning properly. But in Holland, to what degree are the police and the military, as far as you can tell, aligned with the government, compared to what degree are they aligned in a more true sense with the farmers

and the fishermen and the dock workers? So on a lower level, what I've noticed yesterday, for example, at the protest as well, the police officers that we have encountered were all incredibly friendly, and you could just tell that they loved what we were doing. I think that that is, sadly, the reality of our police forces. The officer on the street supports the farmers, but the top level listens to the establishment. And obviously, those are the people that call the shots. And so younger generation police officers are afraid to lose their job if they stand up against it. And obviously, you only need a couple of really brave and courageous souls to make some good shots in those cases with the protest. But sadly, I think the majority just listens to whomever gives them orders. And the top layer of the police forces is in the pocket of the state.

Okay, so what would you suggest that people who are watching and listening in the Netherlands, what is it that they could do to make their concerns known, and how could they express support for the Dutch farmers, and the same thing applies on a broader scale. There's gonna be people all over the world watching this podcast. What would you recommend to people who are watching and listening so that they can stay properly apprised of what's actually going on in the Netherlands, given that the legacy media is corrupt beyond comprehension. Like how do people inform themselves properly and what would the Dutch farmers want to see and need to see in terms of support

from people around the world? So I think that the international support has been incredibly important to the Dutch farmers because they've seen that the world is watching and that they understand that this is something that will eventually not just stay a Dutch issue, but will spread and could affect others, other nations, other people around the world. So that support has been incredibly vital. What the Dutch people can do, first of all, they can go and vote, vote the current parties out of at least the Senate.

That would be incredibly important, of course. In favor of who?

In favor of who? Well, true opposition parties. There are a few left. I will not sit here and tell people who to vote for, but I would say if any of these parties are in favor of negotiating about the nitrogen crisis and or expropriating our farmers, you shouldn't vote for them. That's very simple. And I think- That's a losing strategy to negotiate. The power of symbolism is very, very important, very strong. It doesn't take much to take your Dutch flag, put it on your window and turn it upside down. Signify that you are a nation in distress. It's become the symbol for the Dutch farmers' protest. In Canada, too, on the trucker's side. Exactly.

I think for farmers to see that, you know, that's a silent sign of support. I think will make them feel like they're not alone. Can I say something in that regard?

I think that's important. Yeah, of course.

That's a losing strategy to negotiate.

…in Canada, too, on the trucker's side. Can I say something in that regard? I think that's important. Yeah. Of course. The Canadian farmers, the Dutch farmers, Canadian truckers, Dutch farmers keep bringing them up, they did yesterday again. the guys onstage and whatnot. The Canadian farmer example then spread to America, which I went with our American truckers, all the way from California to DC. I rode all the way across the country with them. And now the Dutch farmers talk about the Canadians. That spark was important. Very.

I'll leave it at that. I'll leave it at that. Courage is contagious. So that's really what we need right now.

Canadians led the way on that one.

And it was really an important spark. There were a lot of Canadian flags yesterday at the rally too. There were, there were. Absolutely, because they understand

that we're all in the same boat. There were.

There were. Yeah, absolutely. You know the world's upside down when Dutch farmers are protesting and Canadian truckers take the political lead. I mean, something seriously gone astray. Well, first of all, when Canada is even interesting and, you know, on the political scene, and I would say the same thing in some sense about Holland. I mean, there are a few countries I've ever visited that are more deeply civilized in the most positive, possible sense than Holland. It's an absolutely amazing country. An incredible balance of beauty and freedom and order, you know, and that's so difficult to attain and broad public trust and all within that great acceptance of wide difference and wide range of individual potential for action. It's an amazing thing that you people have accomplished as people like I.N. Hersey Ali have been at pains to point out, and the same can be said on a somewhat lesser scale of Canada. But then when you see the people who are in fact the competent, hardworking backbone on the manual labor and productivity side, the truckers and the farmers rise up and say, you know, government has become so intolerable that we can no longer do our job. Then everyone who's awake in the least, whether they're on the right or the left, should wake up and think, oh my God, you know, the people who normally do nothing but put their nose to the grindstone are complaining, perhaps something seriously wrong.

Well, there is something seriously wrong. And if the Dutch farmers lose, man, there's gonna be hell to pay because they're courageous in the extreme, competent in the extreme and true canaries in the coal mine. And I think the most likely outcome at the moment, sad to say, is that the Dutch government will keep grinding away in its incremental fashion and it will pick them off one by one, and they'll reduce the damn Dutch farmer population to 50%, and devastate the agricultural sector. And that'll produce shock waves of dismay across the western world among those who might otherwise object. And it'll also produce a terrible catastrophe on the food and tyranny front.

So this is a watershed moment, as far as I'm concerned. If this were a lost war, I would not even be here. They can definitely win, but they have to go offensive. They will absolutely lose if they stay defensive. And you talked about the polter cultur, which is the culture of negotiation, and which the anthropologists who specialize in information war, they will find these weaknesses in the culture, like the polter cultur, which is fine compromise. That's the same in Japan, that's the same with Canadians. The strongest part of the Canadian culture and the Dutch culture and the Japanese culture is it's highly civilized. That makes you highly vulnerable to savages.

Well, Michael, there are simulations of this sort of thing that have been played out by biologists on large scale, trying to account for the persistence of narcissism and psychopathy, Machiavellianism and so forth, that manipulative attitude and often manipulative people. And what happens is if you produce a population of people who do nothing but cooperate, they can cooperate like mad and that can be extraordinarily productive. But if you drop a single shark into the tank, a tank full of cooperators, the shark takes everything. And so on the one hand, that willingness to negotiate and agree can be the driver of civil society. But the problem is that it opens up a niche for the manipulative psychopaths to play a winner take all game. And they do do that precisely by exploiting the weak part of cooperation.

Go ahead. That's why I don't mind in this day and age, where evil is so prevalent to be called a radical. I don't mind to be called a radical in the fight against evil and I think that is really the fight that we're fighting right now. So to be moderate in the face of evil, it means that evil will win. And our country, thank you for your kind words about my country because I completely full heartedly agree with you. We have such a rich history. We're such a beautiful nation. And yesterday at the rally when I was giving my speech, I said this as well, The fact that we have a government that has launched an attack on its own people, that has turned on its own people, to me is some of the worst kinds of injustice that you can find, like imaginable.

And so we really need to put up a fight against that. It's a captured government, as is Trudeau. He's rooted as boy. Marco Ruta here, the Prime Minister of- Your laptops, yeah. Of Netherlands. This is a captured country, the government is captured. It cannot exist with this government. I mean, this government is captured by the, they call it the WEF here, right? And the WEF and the CCP are co-sanguinated. I used to look at them as cooperating, but it's very clear that they're so entwined that they're one at this point. Later they'll fight each other. But yeah, it's very important to, it's time to put your game faces on.

You know what I mean? It's time to stop negotiating. It's time to stop being polite. It's time to say you out, and that's it. I mean, you're going out one way or the other, or it's gonna, are you gonna lose?

And you're gonna be slaves.

Your laptops, yeah. All right, well, that's probably a high note, so to speak, to end on. Very dismal and dark conversation in many ways, but it's an extension of the sorts of conversations we've had in the past, Michael. And I do wish the Dutch farmers well. I mean, I really can't think of a more reliable substrata of a more reliable population in the world. And so when they're upset enough to take their tractors to the Hague, something rotten is going on that's deep and pervasive, and I think people around the world should wake up and smell the coffee, so to speak, before there's no coffee to smell. And we're closer to that than people realize. And so thank you very much for your time and attention and contributions today, and for all the things that you're doing around the world. Michael and in Netherlands, the same to you, Eva. Appreciate you talking to me today. For all you watching and listening, you know, keep your ears to the ground and your eyes peeled, because you should know what the hell's going on in Europe in places like Holland, especially with regards to this protest, because there's something brewing there that's a microcosm of a much larger struggle, that's for sure. And so we're gonna turn now to the Dailyware Plus side of the platform.

I'm gonna talk to Eva and Michael for another half an hour, delve a bit more into their autobiographical history so I can get to know them better. Thanks to the Dailyware Plus people for facilitating this conversation and also for helping send Michael to the Netherlands, which was very helpful, obviously in relationship to this conversation. And those of you who are watching might consider popping over to the Dailyware Plus platform to catch the last half an hour of our interaction. And all right, so thank you. To all who are watching listening, I'm in Puebla, Mexico at the moment. Thank you to the film crew here for facilitating this. That's much appreciated. And to all those of you watching, listening, ciao, and we'll see you on the next podcast. And then we'll turn over to the next half hour. Thanks very much, Michael and Eva. Hello, everyone. I would encourage you to continue listening to my conversation with my guest on dailywireplus.com.