Education Archives - Tree of Liberty Society

TRANSCRIPT

There’s a couple of different things—mindsets—that you hear a lot, excusing either themselves or others for doing something that is really not appropriate, not good. It’s unprincipled. And, you know, you’ll see officer excuses, either for themselves or for others, about officers—“they’re just following orders.”

And this was actually, you know, it’s—I don’t know, ironic might be the wrong word—but I find it interesting when I hear people use this for excusing police and other government officials for doing something wrong. The excuse that they were given was that they were just following orders, when that was the exact excuse that was given during the Nuremberg trials for the Nazi soldiers. And it was said that that’s not an acceptable excuse to do something wrong.

And so that’s something that I still hear on a regular basis for why people do things that are wrong. We heard this at our meeting that we reported on a few weeks ago, where the cop was talking about himself—or he was talking about a different officer—where they had to take the vaccine or they had to enforce something they knew was wrong to protect their job, so that they could provide for their family.

Or the other ones that I’ve heard before are that, you know, “If I didn’t do that thing, it didn’t matter because someone else would do it anyway.” So why—you know—it wouldn’t make a difference anyway. “Why put my neck out there? Why bother if it’s not going to make a difference anyways?”

And so this is kind of the mindset that I find to be very cowardly and helps to perpetuate the situation that we’re in. And we need to—if there’s any part of us that has this mindset—you know, I’m hoping that, you know, of course, if we’re here, that the majority of our mindset is outside of this. But if there’s any of that, you know, hidden away somewhere, I’m hoping to purge any of that that we might have left in our minds, because it’s wrong. And it helps to make things worse. And we need to really show ourselves as being principled and standing for what’s right no matter what.

Founding fathers—

Can I make one brief comment there?

Yeah, go ahead.

I was just going to say, it’s so interesting because I work with other professionals, right? So if you have, say, an electrician come to your home—like, I am not your boss. You are at my home. You will wire it this way, right? And what does the electrician say? “You’re an idiot. I can’t do it that way. And I won’t do it that way. Goodbye.” No.

And literally any other profession—you know, whether it’s a mechanic, electrician, you name it—other than government-run institutions, who will just flat deny anything—someone else’s orders on top of their own. And it doesn’t matter. Right?

People will come that I’ve worked with, and you’ll get a bid for one thing. The person will show up to actually do it. They’ll look at it and say, “Well, I don’t care what my supervisor said or what the guy giving you the bid said. That does not work.”

And so it’s strange to me that there is that, you know, that disconnect. That with government, that is absolutely 100% good. And in fact, it’s a badge of honor to just go along with what someone else is telling you to do. But, you know, then with every other profession we interact with, they’d never let that happen.

Yeah.

Even at Chick-fil-A—you go there, you forget your wallet—what do the people say? “Oh hey, just pay us next time.” It’s just—every other profession other than government allows individuals to use their moral free agency and their professional training to make decisions.

So anyway, I just thought that was interesting as I’ve compared and contrasted this. And I don’t know what the cognitive dissonance or the disconnect is in all of us, you know—and especially those officers perpetrating this, you know—and, you know, like Dan McKay when he, you know, had the guy gagged and thrown out of the Utah Capitol for wearing a “We the People” shirt. “Oh, this is just going along with what the other guys told me to do.”

But I think you make a good point too, Nate, that it’s only acceptable in certain criteria. We only let certain professions get away with that. You mentioned electricians, right? I mean, there’s just different things out there that—they’re just going to not do it because it’s wrong. And the fact that other people—

All of a sudden you’re in government, and you don’t have to follow your conscience anymore. It’s bizarre.

I appreciate you chiming in. The Founding Fathers at the end of the Declaration of Independence—they stated that:

“We mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.”

So they were putting their sacred honor—their reputations—on the line. Their fortunes—they were willing to put their resources on the line to get the job done. They were willing to put their lives on the line.

So was this just a platitude? Was this just a, you know, a figure of speech? Or did they actually implement this? Did they show in their daily lives after they signed the Declaration of Independence that that’s what they would actually do?

And I say that yes—they actually proved that they did pledge their lives—their actual lives, their actual fortunes, and their actual honor to get the job done.

So I just want to kind of go over some of the examples of that. There were five of the signers that were captured by the British during the war, and they were brutally tortured. So they were willing to be tortured for the cause.

Nine of them fought in the war, and they died from their wounds or from hardships because of it.

Four of them had their sons captured or even killed. So not only—you know, sometimes we’re like, “Yeah, okay, I’m willing to sacrifice for myself, but you involve my kids in this thing…” That’s a whole other story. You know, I’m not—you know…

These guys were willing to put their own children on the line for the cause. Not in a cowardly way, where they’re like pushing their kids in the forefront so they didn’t have to suffer—but no, there was this actual sacrifice. And I think that that’s—you know, sometimes children and families are used as a leverage against people to do the wrong things, to violate their conscience. But these men said, “No, I’m willing to do that.”

Yeah.

Twelve or more had their homes destroyed due to their efforts—their farms, their lands—destroyed because of their involvement in the Declaration of Independence.

All of them gave up hundreds of thousands of what would be dollars today—it wasn’t the money they used back then—but what would be hundreds of thousands of dollars to the cause. They were giving up their riches to be able to support what was needed, to provide the support that was needed in the field to get the job done.

And they had their businesses destroyed. There were shipping companies—they were owners of shipping companies—that had their ships confiscated and destroyed and their businesses.

They didn’t say, “Oh, you know, if I stand up for this, it might hurt my business.” They were willing to sacrifice their very livelihood. So not just giving up their money—meaning “Here is some money, get this done”—but they sacrificed their ability to provide for their families to make sure that the cause was supported.

And so we can see that these are people that put their money where their mouth is, so to say. That there was nothing—there was no part of their life—that they weren’t willing to put on the line. There was no excuse of, “Oh, I’ve got to support my family,” or “I don’t want to lose my job,” or “I don’t…” You know—whatever it was. “Oh, yes, I’m willing to sacrifice my life, but not my kids.” There was no part of their life that they weren’t willing to put on the line to consecrate to the cause of liberty.

Right.

And this isn’t just the Founding Fathers. But we go throughout time—those that understand these principles. These are the principles I’m going to go over and show—how what we’re talking about right here and what we do at Tree of Liberty is the cause of Christ.

And so I want to show what the early Christian leaders—what did they do? What did they sacrifice for the cause?

You had Zacharias, who was the father of John the Baptist. He was killed in the temple for not disclosing his son’s hiding place. John the Baptist—he was in hiding, and they wanted to know where he was, and Zacharias didn’t tell them. And so they killed him for it.

You had the apostle Paul—he was beheaded. Peter was hung upside down. Andrew himself was crucified. Thomas was killed by the spears of four Roman soldiers. Philip was tortured to death. James was stoned and clubbed to death.

And then later on—even so, it wasn’t just the Christians right around the time of Christ—but even a couple of hundred years after the time of Christ, you had St. Lawrence, who was grilled to death, because Christianity was deemed by the Roman government “the hatred of the human race.” So it wasn’t just like, “Oh, it was your religion.” It was—Christianity was deemed just a threat to humanity in general.

And so they grilled him—they barbecued him to death—because of that. And he was willing to put his life and be tortured in that way to support the cause of Christ.

The post Would You Risk Everything For Liberty? appeared first on Tree of Liberty Society.

Two Cannot Walk Together Except They Be Agreed

Rod Klingler — Sun, 06 Jul 2025 03:00:49 +0000

What is the proper course to take when a group of citizens can no longer peacefully coexist with other citizens? Hint: This same course has been taken by various groups throughout the world’s history!

This is an excerpt from “Independence Month,” which you can watch in full, for FREE, here: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/cujwjd97pkst6amgyafa0/july-25-2022-independence-month.mp4?rlkey=175ddlkr446hgf0yjedcrjw8m&st=tc0dl2yd&dl=0

Help support ad-free content with a one time donation or becoming a member today.

Thank you to our sponsors

TRANSCRIPT

We go from the 1870s to the 1930s and ’40s, and we have a certain group of people—Latter-day Saints in the American West—that were being trodden down as well by government, as well as mobs, abused, falsely imprisoned to such a point where even people that weren’t a part of their faith said that they were being abused and they wouldn’t stand up for them, like Alexander Doniphan.

And so, to be able to defend themselves and to be able to defend their rights—their God-given rights. I’ve talked about this a lot: are we begging for our rights? Are we saying that our rights come from a president, a governor, a legislator, a congressman, a judge? Or are we going to say, no, God already gave us our rights, and so I’m going to claim them?

Joseph knew that that’s what he had to do. And so he explained here—he says:

“I organized into a special council to take into consideration the best policy for this people to adopt to obtain their rights from the nation and secure protection for themselves and children and to secure a resting place in the mountains or some uninhabited region where we can enjoy the liberty of conscience guaranteed to us by the Constitution of our country.”

He recognized that they could not enjoy the liberty of conscience if they continued to live amongst people that they were not united in. It’s impossible. It leads to the strife that they saw. He recognizes we have to separate ourselves. That’s the only way we are going to be able to guarantee our rights.

And Brigham Young explained the same principle. He says:

“You all know and have doubtless felt for years the necessity of a removal, provided the government should not be sufficiently protective to allow us to worship God according to the dictates of our own consciences and of the omnipotent voice of eternal truth.”

Two cannot walk together except they be agreed. That’s that same principle that Pufendorf was talking about. You’re going to have these two people that aren’t on the same page, and there’s going to be strife. You can be friends with people, right? You can be friends. You’re like, hey, we have different views, and we have different ideas of what government should do. And you go over there—you over there in France—you can do your thing. And we’re over here in America, and we’re going to do our thing. But we’re not going to be together in governing ourselves. And so, to walk together, we have to be agreed.

And Orson Spencer, talking about this—this was after when the Saints were looking for a place outside of the United States again, out of Illinois, trying to figure out what are we going to do?—and he, in a memorial to Congress, said:

“And we will lay down the following principle, which the friends to national union may do well to consider.”

Okay, just like we talked about before, people say—people that are naysayers, people that want to support the status quo of giving the government more power—will say that nullification leads to strife and leads to rebellion and leads to the dissolving of a country. Well, the Founding Fathers said no—nullification is what will keep us together, because that’s enforcing the Constitution. So he says this is a principle that will actually do well to consider, that does not lead to strife, but actually helps to keep people friends. The principle is this:

“That men of congenial interest should separate themselves from those of adverse interests and pair off each to each. The promiscuous intermixture of heterogeneous bodies for the purpose of unity and strength is alike distant both from pure religion and sound philosophy.”

He says this principle is based not only in what people have been able to observe, but it’s what the scriptures have taught throughout time—that people of similar interests need to be able to be together. And so that’s what was happening.

We celebrate what’s traditionally called Pioneer Day—which I think, and I will show you, there’s a better name for it. The time must come when there will be a separation between this kingdom and the kingdoms of this world, even in every point of view. The time must come when this kingdom must be free and independent from all other kingdoms.

Are you prepared to have the thread cut today? The people in Utah, they said, no—we’re going to leave. You guys aren’t on the same page as us. We have to come out here. We’re declaring independence. We’re cutting the thread.

Heber C. Kimball explained:

“We shall eventually be a free people—an independent people. And I will tell you, the day of our separation has come, and we are a free and an independent people.”

That’s what their goal was. They were separating themselves from those that they could not walk in agreement with.

Brigham Young said:

“I say, as the Lord lives, we are bound to become a sovereign state in the Union or an independent nation by ourselves.”

He understood that they were not going to allow us to be a sovereign state—that they were going to be over us. Just like we can see that in the Utah State Constitution, that we are merely a subsidiary of the federal government, that the state of Utah is not a sovereign state. And so, if they’re not going to give us our sovereignty, we have to be an independent nation by ourselves.

“It is the duty of the true minister of Christ to teach them by precept and example how to become an independent nation—not global citizens.”

These are principles that are over time. This wasn’t something that just Brigham Young taught. This wasn’t something that the Founding Fathers taught. This is something that we’ve gone over. You can see it in the Old Testament. You can see the New Testament. You can see it in the natural law philosophers of Europe. You can see it in what the Founding Fathers taught, and you can see it in what these men taught.

And the conspiracy has done a job to help us to forget—to make us forget. Because if we forget these principles, then we will continue to whimper and beg for our rights like dogs. We will say that they are the author of our liberty and not God. And we will continue to work in this process of all the things we talk about in Liberty Boot Camp—of all of the different traditional solutions that are actually designed to give the government power. Following these traditional solutions is what has put us into the situation that we’re in.

We need to remember—right?—the Founding Fathers, they looked at history. They said, “Okay, look throughout time—what kind of government was able to preserve liberty? What provided liberty to the people?”

But before that, they said—and what we’re showing here is—if you’re in a situation where you are not in a free government, how do you make a free government? And so this is what we need to do.

This is why we talk so much about the importance of ruining these Satanists’ legitimacy—because the more that people understand that they’re illegitimate, the less that they will be listened to, and the more that we can start to have the liberty that God has promised us.

And so instead of calling it Pioneer Day, I like to call it Deseret Independence Day, because it gives a clearer idea of what was going on. As a kid, I always thought that the pioneer stories were boring. They were just a bunch of people just in covered wagons walking across the plains. What for? I mean, it didn’t make any sense. It was more than just, you know, simple “Hey, we need to separate ourselves because we’re being attacked.” There were solid principles on this. And we weren’t just pioneers—we weren’t explorers discovering a new land. There was an actual idea and a principle behind it, and something that was trying to be done.

And the conspiracy has worked to destroy our understanding of that—on the whole with America and the War for Independence, as well as in the West and what we’ve done—what was being done to build independence here.

So it’s my hope that we will bring about those things to our remembrance, and we will start to implement those things individually. And as we get stronger, that we can do it on a much broader scale.

The post Two Cannot Walk Together Except They Be Agreed appeared first on Tree of Liberty Society.

Independence Now and Independence FOREVER!

Rod Klingler — Fri, 04 Jul 2025 03:45:03 +0000

Do we have the same complaints the Founding Fathers had when they felt drove to rebel against England? No. We have MORE!

Help support ad-free content with a one time donation or becoming a member today.

Thank you to our sponsors

TRANSCRIPT

So what were some key points that were laid out in the Declaration of Independence about why they dissolved their union with the colonies of Great Britain? Because in the Declaration of Independence, they said that these things shouldn’t be done for light and transient purposes. That you can’t just be like, “Oh, you’re mean to me.” It’s got to be something serious. It’s got to be something that—not just because you’re angry—but there’s a real legitimate principled reason for the dissolving.

So they said that the king has erected a multitude of new offices and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people and eat out their substance. So now, is that something that we see today? Pulling up new offices, sending out the officers of those offices to harass the people and to take away—to bother the people—and then to take away the things that they have, their substance. I mean, not just going in there and grabbing their food out of their plate, but their ability to be able to provide for their families. This is absolutely—we see the same thing going on today.

Right now, there are at least 345 agencies, government corporations, quasi-official agencies, boards, commissions, etc., which claim authority to write rules for individuals and businesses. None of these people are elected. None of these people are accountable. And in fact, the government doesn’t even know how many employees are a part of this system. They don’t even know. And so we have the same thing here—maybe even more so. I don’t know if the king had 345 different of these agencies out there. We’ve been able to find new ways to harass people.

And then we have examples of this. The feds come in and they arrest a family using the Commerce Clause of the vile… of the Constitution, saying, “Hey, you’re not allowed to sell raw milk.” So the federal government came into a local community and threw them in prison—just simply because—and ruined their ability to feed their families simply because they had the audacity to sell milk that still has vitamins in it.

We have OSHA. This is just last year—or this year, I’m sorry, January of this year—is fining workplaces over $13,500 for every infraction to accommodate President Biden’s vaccine mandate. So that never came to fruition, but that was something that they were prepared and ready to do. And it’s something that there’s a version of that’s happening all of the time to different businesses throughout the country. So yeah, they are—just like—they are eating out our substance.

Four companies accused of violating COVID-19 health protocols are fined by OSHA. So because they didn’t enforce mask mandates, they were fined by OSHA. So they’re eating out our substance. We’re seeing the same thing.

So another one: the king has affected to render the military independent and superior to the civil power. Okay, so meaning—he took it away from the Parliament even—and their ability to be able to dispatch the military—and took it to himself, as an individual, to be able to decide when the military is used.

So in the Constitution, the military is supposed to be under the civil power—meaning you have a Congress that has to declare war for the executive branch to be able to direct the military for a space of two years. And beyond—even closer to the civil power—the local people, you have the National Guard, and it should be the militias (that don’t exist right now, unconstitutionally). Your local governors were the ones that were supposed to be the ones that sent them out. And they could nullify—they could say, “No, this is an unjust war. This is improper,” and they wouldn’t send them out. So that’s what we have now.

But just like the king did during the 1700s, we have the president sending out 10,000 troops to Afghanistan as Taliban forces… So instead of Congress doing this, we have the executive branch doing it. He says Biden is boosting U.S. troops in Europe because of Russia’s war in Ukraine. So instead of Congress declaring a war and our local leaders sending out the local militia to fight these foreign battles, the president is rendering the military independent and superior to the civil power. This has happened over and over again. You have other presidents—they called up the National Guard and directed them to the Middle East under the direction of the presidency and the United Nations, and not under the civil power.

Our military has been sent up to Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, Bosnia, Yugoslavia, Ukraine, Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Nicaragua—tons and tons of different places. Our military has been sent out under the direction of what would be the equivalent of the king or president, instead of the civil power.

So: “He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution and unacknowledged by our laws, giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation.” So now our government has signed us up to over—almost—90 different foreign institutions, subjecting us to their laws—making it… well, their pretend legislation—making us obey, making us assent to the United Nations, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the G20, the NAFTA, the new version, USMCA, NATO, and dozens upon dozens of other international bodies that are telling us what to do and making rules for individual businesses and families to obey.

So the family would obey it—but not directly. They’re not realizing that they’re getting a directive from the United Nations or the World Bank. But their loaning system, the regulations on why their house was built, for example—these are all done under international regulations. And so we are being forced to assent to these organizations’ pretend legislation.

So now, another thing that was a claim against the crown was transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses. So we have U.S. citizens who are being held prisoner in Guantanamo Bay and other foreign prisons without due process. And there are other prisons that we have and we’ll be talking about.

So Christie asked, when was the last time our country went to war legally? That was during World War II—it was the last time war was declared by Congress. So it’s been a while.

“He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us.” Just the most recent example of this—this has happened throughout the years though—is: I did a video, I did a report exposing how I could prove that the government was behind the riots that we had in 2020. They are exciting—the government is stirring up and directing and organizing insurrections among those terrorist attacks amongst us.

So how do we come to a dissolving again? Amongst those which join together to form a government in a country, it is absolutely requisite that there be a perfect consent and agreement concerning the use of the means of government. If they do not agree, they will clash. Right? This is what we’re seeing today. This is a clear parallel that we see going on, that we can see. You don’t have to be a prophet. You don’t have to be able to see into the future. You just have these things that people have noticed. Right? Isaac Newton didn’t invent prophecy—gravity—he discovered it. He was able to explain it.

And so the same thing here. What we’re saying is that, well, you know, it’s come to a point in the United States that it’s not even like, “Hey, this is going to happen.” This is happening right now. Everything that we’re seeing is happening. It’s leading to these clashes that were talked about.

And so John Adams—it was something that they understood. And so what did he say when he saw these things happening? We had all of those things that the Founding Fathers listed as their grievances against the crown, listed in the Declaration of Independence. I encourage everyone to go back and read that if they haven’t.

He gave a talk—and this was what’s interesting—this was before the Declaration of Independence. Okay, a lot of times people think that the war started after the Declaration of Independence. But the Founding Fathers recognized that even though a war hadn’t been declared, that the crown had declared war on them through his actions.

And I mentioned this before, just the last couple of weeks—we need to start to realize that the war on us has already begun. We just have to recognize it. It’s already started.

“If we postpone independence, do we mean to carry on or to give up the war? Do we mean to submit to the measures of Parliament, Boston Port Bill and all?” Are we going to postpone? Are we going to give this up? Are we going to say, “Oh, we’re going to get hopium and say that this is going to get better later on?” “Do we mean to submit and consent that we ourselves shall be ground to powder and our country and its rights trodden down in the dust?”

“The war, then, must go on.” Because they’re not going to do that. “We must fight it through. And if the war must go on, why put off longer the Declaration of Independence?” That measure will strengthen us.

So he was selling the idea of having a Declaration of Independence. And he says, this isn’t going to cause more problems for us. These problems are already here. And that’s what we see a lot of times today is, “Hey, you calling out the conspirators, you saying what they’re doing is bad, is going to cause more problems.” No, the problems are already here. We need to stop the gaslighting of saying, “Hey, we’re just going to try to make nice with these people.” They’ve already declared war on us. Calling it for what it is—it’s only going to strengthen us.

“It is my living sentiment, and by the blessing of God, it shall be my dying sentiment: Independence now and independence forever.”

And it was this talk—amongst others—that was able to help build support for what needed to happen. There was no reconciliation. There was nothing that could be done to bring the colonies back under British rule. The people had recognized what was going on, and the king was just getting more and more tyrannical. And the only thing to do was to be trodden down or to leave.

The post Independence Now and Independence FOREVER! appeared first on Tree of Liberty Society.

Revolution Starts Between the Ears

Ben McClintock — Thu, 03 Jul 2025 18:05:13 +0000

As we step into this week and prepare to commemorate July 4th, we would do well to pause the fireworks and festivities long enough to remember what this date actually demands of us. Not in the shallow, commercial sense, but in the revolutionary one. Because if we’re honest, Independence Day has been diluted into sentimental pageantry, detached from the raw courage and principled resistance that birthed it. That’s what we must reclaim—not just the history, but the mindset.

🧠 The Real Revolution Happened First in the Mind
As John Adams aptly pointed out in correspondence with Thomas Jefferson and others, the Revolution wasn’t the war. The war was merely the consequence. The Revolution began in the minds of men, sparked years before a single shot was fired at Lexington. It took place through pamphlets, newspapers, letters to the editor, and sermons. These were not idle words—they were tools that informed and emboldened the public to resist illegitimate authority. Understanding came before action, because action without understanding leads to chaos, not liberty.

📜 From Pamphlets to Proclamations: Tools of Transformation
Samuel Adams, writing under pen names, understood the power of anonymity in dangerous times—not for cowardice, but for strategy. His writings defended natural rights and warned against the flattering tongues of tyrants. Likewise, pastors like Andrew Eliot proclaimed submission to tyranny as not just a misstep, but a crime against God, neighbor, and society. These were bold voices, not echo chambers.
Revolutionaries laid the groundwork deliberately, shifting hearts and minds before rallying them to action. They didn’t wake up one day and say “these taxes are lame—let’s build a country.” They cultivated conviction over time, using speech, print, and organizing against specific acts of injustice. They weren’t reactionaries; they were architects.

🕵️‍♂️ Conspiracies vs. Coincidences
The founders were not naive. They called out tyranny for what it was: a coordinated conspiracy against liberty. The accumulated offenses weren’t random—they revealed a system of oppression. But the establishment dismissed these concerns as paranoia, attributing grievances to “human frailty” or mere accident. Sound familiar?
Whether by fear, flattery, or distraction, the opposition sought to divide, pacify, and sedate the public. Offers of comfort in exchange for silence? That tactic didn’t die in 1776—it simply changed packaging.

⚔️ The Offense: Righteous Defiance
Far from playing defense, the founders went on the offense. They exposed not only the injustice of their oppressors but the cowardice of appeasers—those who would say “I sympathize, but you’re going too far.” False patriots abounded then, as they do now. Samuel Adams warned of wolves in sheep’s clothing whose real mission was to prevent effective resistance.
Even the British Crown recognized the threat—not of armed conflict, but of awakened minds. When they excluded only Adams and Hancock from an offer of pardon, it wasn’t for violence—it was for their ideas.

💡 Modern Application: Liberty Is Not a Spectator Sport
This isn’t just a history lesson. It’s a blueprint. The same tactics used in 1776 to pacify the people are alive and well today. That’s why understanding history with spiritual discernment is vital—not to romanticize it, but to re-weaponize its principles.

Public speaking, organizing, writing—these tools haven’t disappeared. They’ve evolved. We have technology. We have platforms. What we lack is the principled boldness to use them effectively.

This Independence Day, reflect deeper than barbecue and fireworks. Ask yourself: will you just feel good, or will you live well? Because liberty is not preserved by sentiment—it’s preserved by sacrifice, vigilance, and truth unapologetically proclaimed.

Ready to reclaim that mindset? Let’s get to work. Join the Tree of Liberty Society today!

The post Revolution Starts Between the Ears appeared first on Tree of Liberty Society.

What If The Government Decides What You Believe?

Rod Klingler — Sat, 28 Jun 2025 03:00:17 +0000

How does the government attempt to control how you think and feel about world events? Is there anything you can do about it? Find out! This is an excerpt from “UN & Corporate Media Declare Information War,” which you can watch in full, for FREE, here: https://treeoflibertysociety.com/un-corporate-media-declare-information-war/

Help support ad-free content with a one time donation or becoming a member today.

Thank you to our sponsors

TRANSCRIPT

We go to the United Nations website and their new program to stop conspiracy theories. They need to stop the spread of conspiracy, right? And they’ve got this whole hashtag campaign: #ThinkBeforeSharing. It says the COVID pandemic has sparked a worrying rise in disinformation and conspiracy theories.

“Conspiracy theories can be dangerous.” So it’s not even about free speech, because of course we can’t allow certain speech—because certain speech is dangerous. They often target and discriminate against vulnerable groups, ignore specific evidence, and polarize society with serious consequences. This needs to stop.

And so on this website, they put together some videos and some infographics to be able to help you better understand how to fight this conspiracy disinformation. I think that we should do it soon. I think that’s a good idea. Thank you.

There are several things in there that are important for us to focus on, right? Because they are linking questioning the COVID narrative with science denying.

So the term science denier, right? That is a charged term that is used on purpose because in people’s minds, it triggers the idea of being a Holocaust denier. If you’re a science denier, that’s the same as a Holocaust denier. And if you’re a Holocaust denier, that means you think that Hitler is great and that you want to kill the Jews.

So that’s one part of it—this disinformation campaign to get people to stick with the narrative because they don’t want to be considered to be anti-Semites and they don’t want to be thought of as people that like Hitler. So that’s one part of it, right?

And then also, linking the hate. It talks about at the end, especially—it says, don’t spread hate. So if you are helping people to understand what’s going on with the fake pandemic, you are engaged in hate—whether it’s against ethnicities, whether it’s against religions, whether it’s against sodomites. It’s all connected.

That’s another way that they want to protect the narrative, by linking it to these other ideas.

Hey Ben.
Yeah?
I find it ironic that they’re asking you to do exactly what you really should do. I mean, check the facts. Check the author. Find out—dig deeper. And that’s exactly what people are doing. They’re actually uncovering the conspiracy.
But that’s what they’re telling you to do—right? Thinking that you’re not going to really do that.
Right. Because then if you question the narrative, you’re like, “Oh, what I’m studying is making me question the narrative. That must mean I hate Jews. Therefore, I can’t question the narrative.”

The last time that they said how to spot fake news or whatever, they had this video release, and it was basically just like:
“Did the mainstream media say it?
Well then that means it’s not fake.
Government or mainstream media—it’s not fake.
It’s automatically good.”

And they put together these infographics because you’re too stupid to understand. That’s actually one of the things they talk about—is to be as simple as possible.

So I want to break down these things because we need to understand the messaging—because I’m going to show you in a minute how it’s being used. Just like with those other examples, the media is doing as they’re told.

So: conspiracy theories are dangerous. So he’s got a match, right? He is going to cause harm. So this is no longer about free speech. If you are questioning the narrative, you are dangerous. Just questioning the narrative is dangerous.

Be warned:
The COVID-19 pandemic has seen a rise in harmful and misleading conspiracy theories.
It may be difficult to recognize them or know how best to deal with them…

Because, you know, when you deal with facts, it’s hard to debunk them. And so it’s hard to recognize when you’re dealing with a conspiracy or not.

So: conspiracy theories often target or discriminate against an entire group perceived as the enemy behind a real or imagined threat. Again, they’re trying to pigeonhole you. They polarize society and fuel violent extremism.

If you question the narrative, you are fueling violent extremism.

While most people who spread conspiracy theories genuinely believe them, others deploy them cynically to achieve these effects. So if you’re believing them, you’re just a sucker falling for people that are purposely, knowingly lying to you. That’s the idea that they’re trying to put in your head.

And so, how do I identify? How do I identify?

And of course they call it a conspiracy theory because they want to associate these things with things that—they’re all ours. It can’t be proven. It’s just a theory—as opposed to the idea that it can be… it’s a fact.

They identify an enemy and a secret plot that threatens people’s lives or beliefs and spark a defense mechanism, which can fuel discrimination, justify hate crimes, and can be exploited by violent extremist groups.

They spread mistrust in public institutions, which can lead to political apathy or radicalization.

So this is what we’ve been talking about for the past several weeks especially—that they are obsessed with their own legitimacy. We have to think of them as legitimate people. Because if we don’t think of them as legitimate, they lose their power. And so they’re telling you—they’re telling you that you cannot question their legitimacy. Otherwise: X, Y, Z.

They spread mistrust in scientific and medical information, which can have serious consequences. So, you know, if you don’t trust the medical industry, you’re killing other people. So watch out.

Perceived outgroups of society are especially prone to be targets of conspiracy theories, hate speech and disinformation campaigns. This includes people of different origin—I don’t know what that means. Different origin. They’re probably meaning national origin.

“Don’t you know everyone is born of the same woman? Oh no. What if you came from a different origin?”
“What if nonsense came out of your mouth?”

Religion or sexual orientation—right? So question the COVID narrative means, yeah, it’s all linked together.

In the context of COVID-19, specific groups were frequently falsely blamed for the spread of the virus in Europe, including people of assumed Asian origin, Jews, Muslims, Roma—I don’t know what that is—and people who identify as sodomites.

I don’t know why the Jews and Muslims in Italy were blamed for the pandemic. The only thing I heard about was the Asian hate. Remember that whole thing that they were saying: stop Asian hate?

I only heard stop Asian hate. I never witnessed Asian hate. But the media was pushing it down your throat.

The post What If The Government Decides What You Believe? appeared first on Tree of Liberty Society.

What Happens When Rules Aren’t the Same for Everyone?

Rod Klingler — Fri, 20 Jun 2025 03:00:42 +0000

Are you free to associate with whomever you choose without the government getting involved? Should the government force others to associate with you? Should they force you to associate with others?

This is an excerpt from “Discrimination Is Actually Good,” which you can watch in full, for FREE, here: https://treeoflibertysociety.com/how-dilbert-taught-us-discrimination-is-good/

Help support ad-free content with a one time donation or becoming a member today.

Thank you to our sponsors