YOU can help SHAPE the WORLD | Kevin Howard

So much of how we think has been influenced by how the world is presented to us, and then build your life based on that truth until we woke up into this American nightmare, you know? It is an indictment to American corporations saying that they have lost touch, they have lost control, whether it's Fox News or MSNBC or CNN or whatever. They're all doing it from a particular perspective, surfing power. Any cursory view of history shows that the threat between Europe and Russia always comes from Europe. Who is the aggressor in Ukraine? If you want to talk about banana republic, the fix is in, in naked deployment of public sight, there it is. That says, let's play 1984 fiction again.

Kevin Howard, welcome to the Book Thinkers Life-Changing Books Podcast, round 2. How are you feeling today?

I am feeling great. So good to see you, Nick, and you, Luke. You know, I enjoyed our conversation so much, you had to have another. It was like a Lay's potato chip.

You are speaking my language. Yeah, you can't just have one. And in fact, maybe we will have many more. We'll see. So for those that didn't have a chance to listen or watch the first episode, obviously we encourage them to go back and check that out, but I'd I'd like to have you set the stage, sort of reintroduce yourself for everybody. Clean slate, pretend they don't know you. Who is Kevin Howard and why did he write this book, Onward at Last?

Yeah, thank you so much for that question, Nick. Yeah, so yes, my name is Kevin Howard and I am your prototypical American, born and raised in the United States, built a career in banking, you know, thought I had built the perfect idyllic middle-class American life, and then had this crisis moment where I was like, okay, I'm here, I'm in the house, I got the toys, I got the wife, I got the kids. And I felt empty. It felt like it didn't— what did I do this for? And it sent me down a 10-year path of rediscovering who I am. And I realized that I had built that whole thing largely based on social expectations, based on the virtues that define our lives as Americans. And so I wrote Onward at Last based on what I learned when I rediscovered myself, what I learned in that process. And I wanted to write a clarion call to other Americans because basically, for the most part, it does seem most people I've ever met, regardless of age, you know, just no matter— and regardless of their level of success, they just don't feel the fulfillment that you would think is commensurate. with, with, with the privilege that we have as Americans, you know, relative to the rest of the world. And so this, this is— Onward at Last is a clarion call to, to reconsider these virtues that define our lives, because that's where I found my problem was: freedom, independence, self-interest, and competition. And, and there's nothing inherently wrong with these virtues, but something has been going on over the last 50 years that have pushed these virtues to an extreme that no longer serve us. And so for the context of this conversation, I'd like to use an analogy, the RPMs in your car. So you're driving down the street, and as you accelerate through your gears, your RPMs might bounce between 3,000 and 4,000 RPMs, which are deep in the black. The car is functioning the way it's supposed to. But way at the top of the register, around 7,000, 8,000, is where you see the red zone. And what has happened in America, particularly to these 4 primary American virtues, is our economics has tightened, which has affected our politics, which has affected our social discourse, you know, and created the polarization we experience today. And each one of these purposeful events have pushed the RPMs deeper and deeper up the red register until they are secure deep in the red. And that's where we are today. Nothing is functioning the way it was intended. American democracy is not functioning the way it's intended. American economics is not functioning the way it's intended. And, and as was— and, and so how do you unwind that? That's what today's conversation is about.

I've got goosebumps ready to go. How do you unwind that? I mean, it's such a big question, and you're totally right. Luke and I, I think we're also representations of the average American, and The average American sits somewhere in the middle compared to what we see on news. Like, there's this political division between the extreme right and the extreme left, and everybody's yelling at each other, and it just seems to get worse and worse and more separate and divided and polarized. And the vast majority of people sit somewhere in the middle, closer to the center of the aisle, and they look both ways, left, right, and they go, what is happening in this country? And so, yeah. What's step number 1? What do we start the conversation with?

Well, we need to look at how we got here in order to figure out where we need to go. So bear with me, a little bit of a history lesson, but an interactive history lesson, because this really just started. It started about 50 years ago. So leading it, so 50 years ago, let's say 1970, right? So what's happening in 1970? Okay, we are 20 years, 25 years after World War II. We're at, you know, the New Deal was established in the '30s in response to the Great Depression, you know, massive unemployment, massive wealth and income inequality. Okay, so Roosevelt comes in and establishes a huge safety, safety net, you know, puts, you know, millions of Americans back to work building American infrastructure or whatever. It leads us into World War II. We, we, we, we act, which activates American productivity for the war movement or whatever. We fight the war, we come home. We, you know, Truman and Eisenhower extend the New Deal into home, expanded homeownership, expanded access to university-level education. Right. And, and what it does, it produces from 1950 to 1970 is a period where the American middle class and the American working class expanded up the socioeconomic class, you know, to where they could actually access the American dream. You know, in 1970, the typical working class, non-college educated working class person was, you know, Hollywood always has a way of showing the expression. Archie Bunker was that person, right? I mean, so here was the American working class, age between 40 and 50, you know, 40 and 55, you know, union, you know, but he can afford to own his own house and send his daughter Gloria to college, you know, and, you know, for on his salary, right? Okay, so this was, this was where the American working class was, and where, where the middle class, the middle class had grown to the biggest in modern history and across the country. And the average CEO pay Was about 30 times the average worker's pay. Okay. But we had— but there was a price to be paid. There was an expression to be paid because what— but by 1970, because the '60s were turbulent for a reason. So what had this empowered working class done? This empowered middle class done? They established the civil rights movement. They established the equal rights movement. They established the anti-war movement. They populated a media that was in the process of bringing down a sitting president. So what that shared prosperity had done was empowered people to speak truth to power. And the universities were a hotbed for Critical thinking and challenging the establishment, right? Music was vivid and vibrant and transcendent, quite frankly. Okay, then comes 1971, and a gentleman named Lewis Powell, who was a very famous lawyer at the time, writes a document called the Powell Memorandum, and he writes it to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in 1971. And it is, it is an indictment to, to American corporations saying that they have lost touch, they have lost control of American economics and society, you know, and that in order for them to regain control, they need to invest more money than they have ever invested to influence The media, the university system, and our government, both the political branch and the legal, right, to the interests of the American corporation. So he wrote this letter to the Chamber of Commerce, very extensive, very scholarly. You know, it doesn't sound like it's inciting anything, right? But it laid out the roadmap. And then in 1972, Richard Nixon appoints him to the U.S. Supreme Court. where he becomes very quietly one of the most pro-corporate jurists on that court. Right? Okay. All right. So he goes on, and the chamber and business leaders start executing the plan. And the proof of the pudding as to how they— how completely they executed that plan is if you look at— if you look at what has happened since 1970, the early '70s, To each one of those institutions. You know, in terms of media, right, the news media, Walter Cronkite and all that, literally the way it was organized then through the '60s and the '50s, all the way back to the '40s, was these were— these— the news divisions were not self-sufficient. They were supported. They were public service supported by the entertainment divisions.

Right.

Okay. And so since it's starting in the 1980s with the creation of CNN and other, other, you know, media and stuff like that, wealth, American corporations flooded the zone and converted a system of media that was for profit. So for profit media, right, which, which shifted basically by paying these, these talking heads, by paying these broadcasters, making them millionaires. Right. It co-opted their ability to be independent. Right. And all of a sudden they start telling the news based on who was writing those checks. Right. And you see progressively what we have. We have the creation in the '90s of, okay, we have Fox doing the conservative media. We have, you know, pick a choice, CNN, you know, MSNBC doing the liberal media. And we have now the echo chamber from a media perspective has been created. Okay, all right, but, but how did it happen? Money flooding the zone. Okay, look at the university system. Okay, progressively, these university systems have been starved of their tax base by the states, and in their place, American corporations have invested more money than they've ever spent. And how? By encouraging the best and the brightest of the professors to do research and development To do, you know, you know, for the benefit of multi— of these multinational corporations, taking them out of the classroom where they were, where they were shaping creative minds, where they were teaching and encouraging students to think and challenge. Okay, the best and the brightest, where they were going to make their money was on the research side, was on the publishing side. Okay, fast forward to how did we develop, how did the pharmaceutical industry develop? The vaccines for COVID, right? Publicly sourced university research, the mRNA technology, we paid for it, right? But somehow, somehow pharmaceutical companies had proprietary rights to it so that they could profit from it exclusively. Okay. Yeah, this is, this was how the university systems got co-opted by flooding billions of dollars into the system, taking the source of their money from the— from taxation, laying the burden on tuition on the students, which ran up student debt and everything else, robbing the students of the best and the brightest teachers because they were getting all this money over here to produce, you know, to do research and development on behalf of these corporations. Okay, so that's the university system. Right? I mean, government. I mean, while, well, from a legal standpoint, Roe v. Wade seemed to define the focus of the demarcation between left and right arguments, but that's the COVID story. What was really going on for most of those years, right, is the emergence of the corporation as a human. Nothing got expanded persistently in the '70s and the '80s and the '90s but the rights of the American corporation. And now, as a matter of law, there are superhuman. Because unlike you and I, whose individual contributions I think are capped at $2,500, you know, into any particular campaign, these corporations can put as much money as they want into any campaign. And they do. They absolutely do. Once again, they flooded the zone of politics and they own our politicians, right? They literally, they've raised the stakes in terms of what it costs To run for election, that the politicians have to go to them for the money, and they do. And and and now the courts have given them the right to give as much money as they want. It's just legal bribery. Okay, so this is so through the courts and through the funding of campaigns, the government is now owned. You got a recent Harvard University study that says the American electorate has no influence on public policy. None. I mean. 80% of the country supports raising the minimum federal minimum wage. Dead on arrival. You know, 70% of NRA people support, you know, you know, reasonable background checks, closing the gun show loophole. Dead on arrival. Right? So the American public has no— okay. So that's how the government got co-opted. And so my basic point is, when this document the Powell memo started us down a path where wealth basically said the cost of shared prosperity is too high because we lost control of the American people. So we got to fix this by breaking the back of shared prosperity. But our predecessors learned a wicked lesson, which is Gilded Age, Roaring '20s, you consolidate too much money in few hands, you create these great depressions, and wealth gets crushed along the way. All those people jumping out of the window for the stock market crash, right? Okay. So how can we— they said about we need to do this. We can't have broad-based prosperity, but how can we prevent us from getting crushed with the necessary depression that comes from it? And they devised this strategy. You know, you know, privatize profits. Public, you know, socialized losses, right? And they set about through the through the Federal Reserve and through the politicians they owned to curate an economics that as we go into a business cycle decline, right? They're protected, and the rest of us get crushed, right? And the the the the the practice session was Alan Greenspan in 1996. who exercised the first soft landing in US history. What that is, is we had then, we had like a $14 trillion economy. When you're that big and you start declining, historically, it goes from positive growth into negative growth because you can't turn the momentum of that massive ship without it going negative before then it hits rock bottom and turns back up. Well, Alan Greenspan did figure out in 1996 how to use, with very aggressive federal monetary policy, how to turn that ship before it went negative, which gave Bill Clinton his double period of economic growth. Okay. But the problem is that didn't solve that. That protected it. While that would protect wealth from getting hurt, it also didn't hurt the average person. The average person. So it didn't. achieved the idea of breaking the back of shared prosperity. So that wasn't going to be the solution. They found the solution in 2008. This is where we demonstrate what privatizing profits and socializing losses is, is TARP and unpacking the Federal Reserve to cover Wall Street's losses while millions of Americans get devastated. So That's just the top layer. I just wanted to show you the demarcation point was the Powell Memorandum. And then, then wealth set about to co-opt the media, the university system, and our government in order to consolidate wealth to themselves, break the back of, of, of broad prosperity so people can't hold them to account, right? And, and create the toxicity we have today.

Whoo. You said just top layer. And I'm over here, I'm chuckling a little bit because I'm like, holy smokes, this is just the top layer.

Well, yeah, that's— I tried to talk 20 minutes, you know, no, that's because I want to penetrate it. Yeah, it is. I can tell you, as I realized this, I mean, I had 10 years where I was deeply Depressed, angry, like all the, all the things you go through, like with a death where you're bitter, you're angry, you, you wanna, you wanna go attack the, the, the, you know, you wanna be one of the January 6th. I mean, you know, you go through these frustrations because it's causing a magnitude of pain, right? And, and these people, and these people are just counting coins and stacking. Well, well, well, more and more people are, you know, you know, one nostril, then both nostrils are underneath the water, you know. So, so, I mean, I, you know, but I wanna stop because I want you guys to dive in there with some questions. And then we can kind of penetrate, you know, for our listeners.

Yeah. Well, I want to back up just a little bit because I'm curious. Number one, how did you get so interested in all of these things? Because you're obviously, you've delved deep into all these topics and you've delved into the history of it and everything. So just backing up a little bit, how did you yourself get into this?

Yeah, well, interesting. I always, I wanted to be a banker. You know, and so when I went to college, I didn't want to be your run-of-the-mill banker. I didn't want to get a finance degree and then go get my MBA. To me, that was the beaten path. I wanted a different lens to analyze risk. And so I got a Bachelor of Science degree in economics and I went and got my law degree. And so I have used applied economics and the law to examine credit risk, to examine investment risk as I've been a banker. And my primary focus was to help young entrepreneurs grow their businesses, to customize the kind of financial services they needed in order to make their dreams come true, right? That was my passion and I, and I loved it. So through that lens is when I started the law, which is the politics, which is the courts, and economics is where I started seeing Why is it, you know, and this career was occurring during the '90s into the 2000s. And it used to be so much easier for a person to save up a little money and start a business, right? And then, and then, and then, and then to build something, right? And I watched progressively over 20 years how that became nearly impossible. And, you know, you know, and it's why it's because progressively leaders were tightening the screws on who gets paid for what they do, right? And therefore, and if you can't build savings, you can't start a business, which is why new business formation has collapsed in America relative to where it had been, you know. And so that's how I got interested in it. I noticed it while I was trying to help these entrepreneurs and customize financial services down through the years. And then it became a source for, well, why am I so disillusioned? You know, you know, as I thought I had achieved my American dream. And, you know, so it gave me the information I needed.

It can feel so hopeless. I was gonna say hopeless for people listening today. And I'm wondering, do you, do you have any— I don't know, what's the, what's the positive? What's the positive outlook? Is there any positive outlook? Or are we all just screwed?

No, no, it is total Positive outlook, Luke. Here's here's the joy: it's still it's still a democracy. You know what? You do you know why it costs so much to run for election? Is because each of us have been convinced that our vote doesn't matter. Do putting some effort into figuring it out doesn't matter because you know you know so therefore therefore in order for us to even know who's running, they have to spoon feed. They have to pay for advertising and this and that. We're all this is as sophisticated as your. Generation is on the internet. Seriously, less than an hour in any election, you could find out everyone who's running, what they did, what's their background, what they stand. No one has to spend a dollar to get you that information, right? It's because people have been convinced not to spend that hour that they don't do it and therefore elect people who actually serve them, right? Okay. So, so the answer is, yes, we can reclaim our sovereignty. We can take— we could take back our democracy. We could have the government actually serve the people by remembering that we are so much more than what society has convinced us we are. We are— we are so much more. We are so much more powerful, you know, you know, and that in fact, once we remember who we are, that we are individual members of one interdependent human family. Once we remember that power, all of a sudden, my gosh, man, we can then decide, okay, all right, I'm not going to listen to their prevailing narrative. I'm not going to listen to the stories that have been convincing me through manufactured consent, right, to, oh, the problem is those people over there. And the problem is Putin. No, no, that's all the story to distract us from where all the money is going.

Right.

Right? If you start saying, I am capable of actually— I'm not going to listen to that, and I'm going to see what can I find out is actually true, right? Spend the hour on the internet, right? All of a sudden, you're empowering yourself with the information to hold power accountable, right? And as soon as a critical mass of us simply do that, right, all of a sudden they have to listen. They have to take note, or they're just going to get run out. Right. And so yeah, the good news is, is the secret sauce is simply us remembering who we are. We made this country. We still send them to office, right? You know, they serve us. And until we recognize that we do not rely on them for who we are, that we can actually assess what is true or not true and build our lives on that basis. Oh, that, you know, then once again, then we will be running things. And so this is what this book is all about, to get people to silence the white noise of manufactured consent, reject the prevailing narrative. So let's talk about a few prevailing narratives. I mean, I have a commentary called—

Well, Kevin, can I, can I stop you for just a quick minute?

So a couple of comments.

No, no, no. I just— you have so many interesting subjects. I want to make a couple of comments. Number one, I don't think I mentioned this on our last episode. Maybe I did, but stop me if I did. I visited Rome last year and we got a tour of the Colosseum. And one of the things that our guide told us was the Colosseum was originally constructed by the Roman elites as a distraction. There were entertainment shows every single day of the week, and it was free admission so that poor people and slaves could attend these shows and get wrapped up in the entertainment to forget that everybody who actually matters is over here, like you said, just stacking coins all day long, right? So that's what these political sort of like these things that get thrown in our face all day on the news that are literally manufactured to generate animosity and get us angry and yell at each other. It's all a distraction. So I wanted to mention that. I also, before we move on, I wanted to get your thoughts on if you saw it, Robert Kennedy Jr.'s speech the other day, because he talked about like breaking that bond between corporate America and the government. So I thought that was pretty cool.

Oh no, he's amazing. And once again, he's talking about— he specifically talks about breaking the prevailing narrative, showing how much of a lie and how much of a manipulation. I mean, I saw an interview with him recently similar to the speech where he was talking. It goes all the way back to, okay, how we've made Iran an enemy, right? How we Overthrew their democratically elected government in the '50s and installed the government to the Shah so we could get cheap oil in the United States, and and and why and why that ultimately led when the Shah was going to die of dying of cancer in the '70s, and he needed protection. We we we arranged for his protection to leave the country, and why the first thing that weakened country did was attack the U.S. embassy. No one gave us gave us the explanation, but we make these enemies. And and so no, Robert Kennedy Jr., he is huge, and I'm I. I fully am supportive of him only because, again, he's speaking empowerment and he's speaking truth, you know, to power, and, and they don't like it.

You're not wrong, they don't like it. All right, sorry, I had to jump in there and, and add the Coliseum comment, and I wanted to get your thoughts on, uh, RKJ over there. But yeah, back, back to what, uh, what did you want to bring up next?

Well, yeah, I, I just— so the process of discovering who we are is, is, is to break away. I mean, so much of how we think has been, has been influenced by how the world is presented to us, how the labels that are given to us, you know, who, who has been scapegoated, right? As soon as the average person recognizes that, okay, this, this person who has been totally vilified, Right, is that it's not actually true, right? They will do that just like any lot. All of a sudden, they will start asking questions. They will start believing that, okay, even from their trusted source, because that's the thing, whether it's Fox News or MSNBC or CNN or whatever, they're all doing it from a particular perspective, serving power, right? Okay, so let's take the current most vilified person like Putin. How about Putin? Okay. All right. So the prevailing narrative is that an aggressive and, you know, the new Hitler has arrived in Russia and he has engaged in a naked attack, unprovoked attack against Ukraine, and that everyone needs to rush to Ukraine's support and help. Okay. So what is okay? And so that's and and so we we gave Russia the the economic death penalty. We seized their their U.S. dollars everywhere. We banned trade with them universally, right? We cut off their central bank from the international trading system, right? This has never been happened to a country that's in the G20. No, never happened to any country in the world. Okay, and we did this because of this naked aggression against Ukraine. But what is the story behind what's going on between Ukraine and Russia? Okay, well, we could, you know, just all we have to do is start going backwards a little bit. Okay. All right. So the Ukraine was given their independence by the former Soviet Union in the early '90s, right? And Gorbachev was negotiating with George H.W. Bush, first Ronald Reagan, but then George H.W.

Bush.

And, and, and basically the idea was this: the Soviet Union was agreeing to dismantle their empire, and their hope was that we would integrate them the way we did to Germany and Japan after World War II, right? So they, so, so they said, we will dismantle, allow to be independent all the satellite states that we control. We will bring the nukes back to Russia safely so that they would not get in the hands of any terrorists or whatever. They went as far as saying they will support the reunification of Germany and support a reunified Germany joining NATO. The condition is that NATO would agree never to expand east of Germany. There were 13, 14 Warsaw Pact nations that were a security buffer between Europe and Russia. Now, any cursory view of history shows that the threat between Europe and Russia always comes from Europe. It's not from Russia to Europe. So you could look at who— how many deaths were in the Napoleonic Wars, how many deaths were in World War I, how many deaths were in World War II. I mean, rightfully, we speak of the 8 million Jews, rightfully horrible, heinous, unthinkable. But 20s, up to 27 million Russians died in World War II. Okay, so the former Soviet Union had a security buffer very much like the United States has the Monroe Doctrine. The entire Western Hemisphere is the security buffer of the United States, which is why we escalated in the Cuban Missile Crisis, because the Soviet Union was violating our security buffer by putting intercontinental ballistic missiles in Cuba. So here, here, The Soviet Union said, we're going to dismantle, and we're asking you to respect that security buffer. All of them will be independent. All those countries, including the Ukraine, a condition of their independence was that they would not join NATO. They would be neutral like Switzerland. Okay. All right. So this was happening. And since that agreement, that was, was a private assurance. And by the way, private assurances is how the Soviet Union and the United States dealt with each other to solve the Cuban Missile Crisis. So they, these are serious things. That leaders do, right? Okay. So, so after that private assurance, we accelerated the expansion of NATO East. I mean, we, we have Poland is in NATO, and Poland has intercontinental ballistic missiles on the border of Russia. Okay. But what really broke the back of Russia, and they complained bitterly as we entered all these countries in at the United Nations. Okay. Is when we overthrew, when we, you know, always black ops, overthrew a pro-Russian Ukrainian government and installed an anti-Russian government in Ukraine in 2013, who then turned around and killed tens of thousands of Russian Ukrainians, right? And Changed the Ukrainian constitution that allowed them to join NATO, and then by the time Zelensky got elected, right, they actually start talking about joining NATO, which is when he pushed the troops to the border of Ukraine. So the question actually based on history is: Who is the aggressor in Ukraine? I mean, what is NATO's interest? You know, in moving destroying the security buffer. For Russia, other than to instigate, you know, what are they supposed to do? What would we do? What did we do? Right? I mean, all you have to do is ask yourself, if Canada signs a nuclear security treaty with China, and China endeavors to put nuclear weapons in Canada, we are all going to find out how sovereign Canada is. Right? Okay. So. Right, right, right. Okay, so this is the story. This is the truth about what's happening in Ukraine. And guess what? The rest of the world knows it. The global south— Brazil is making a laughingstock. They will refuse to buy into the narrative, and they're negotiating for peace, right? I mean, the Russians and Ukrainians would have had a peace deal if the United States didn't get the British prime minister to go there and squash it. The idea is— so this is, this is an example of how the prevailing narratives Is not true. Is designed to invoke hatred and take our attention, suck the oxygen out of the room to push us in one direction or another. And it's been going on for I mean progressively. I mean so in my in my commentary, um, in my commentary, an open letter regarding the war in Ukraine, I just lay out everyone from you know Osama bin Laden. You know, in our relationship with him and the Mujahideen back in the 1980s, how we trained the Mujahideen to defeat the Russians in Afghanistan, you know, and on and on. I mean, all these people, whether it's Noriega in Panama, you know, they were working for us, you know, you know, you know, you know. And so that's all these people we've been convinced to hate. It's a part of the manufactured consent. And I lay these things out as a former veteran, former FEMA disaster assistance officer, loving our country, to empower our fellow Americans to say, stop listening to this nonsense. Stop being defined by this. Challenge it, find out what's true. Right. And then build your life on that basis. Right. You know, and so I will stop there. But so, yes, that's my first effort. Let's, let's dispel the prevailing narrative.

Was 1984 actually fiction? That's the question. So I'll kick it over to Luke.

Guys, I almost wore a shirt. I got it. I got a shirt that says, let's make 1984 fiction again. But I said, you know, you know, we don't have to throw the bombs out there yet.

You talk about this, this concept, manufactured consent. And I think like you've dispelled it pretty well. But do you think you could maybe try to describe it to our listeners in a few, like in a few words, in a couple sentences, what exactly that is and how it affects Their daily lives?

Well, first and foremost, no idea is original, but that, that term is Noam Chomsky. And I forgot the other writer who wrote a legendary book on that subject, right? And Chomsky is amazing, right? So, but again, you know, it is what the principle, the idea is, is to create a narrative that frames Frames what you think is happening in such a way to induce you to make choices in alignment with that narrative, you know, and, you know, even though other things are actually going on, and the net effect of that is, is to— how do you get a person to vote against their own interests, right? You convince them that they're voting for X, Y, and Z. And and and and the people that they're actually voting for betray them and betray them and betray them. And I can show you, and I have commentaries to show you how each of the for example each of the last four presidents have absolutely betrayed the electorate that elected them. And this is ultimately what led to Trump, right? You know, you know, and and and and and and why why it's so sad that we don't understand why seventy million people voted for. Trump in 2020, more than in 2016, that we just want to put him under the rubric of misogynist and put whatever label you want to give him when a lot of those people voted for Obama and a lot of those people would've voted for Sanders, but they voted for Trump because the last thing most of the American electorate wants to do is support either establishment party. I mean, there was a recent poll that said, and this is the first time in US history, 23% of Americans identify as Democrat, 21% identify as Republican. A huge plurality, you know, a majority almost, you know, identify as independent, right? But who are we giving them to choose from? And candidly speaking, the Democratic Party is the absolutely most undemocratic of the 2 establishment parties. Let me give you an example of what I'm talking about. Again, this is besides left, right, and center. It's just what is the party doing? In 2020, I mean, 2016 was bad, was bad, and we could talk about how the Clintons cut the deal to raise money for the superdelegates. But in 2020, for the first time in our democracy, One candidate either won or tied the first three elections. Bernie Sanders and Buttigieg tied Iowa essentially in terms of number of delegates coming out of the Iowa caucus. Bernie won New Hampshire and crushed the field in in in in Nevada. Okay, then you had two weeks for Super Tuesday, and the Democratic establishment was scared, scared. So they pulled out all the stops. No, no. Put on your memory caps and tell me, and for the audience, the last time you heard something like this happen. In that two-week period, Pete Buttigieg, who who who was right behind Bernie, and Elizabeth Warren, who was right behind Bernie Buttigieg, who were legitimate candidates for the nomination, drop out of the election and throw their support to Biden, who's like number five.

Right.

Okay. If you want to talk about banana republic, the fix is in, in naked republics, like there it is, right? There is no way anyone who would, who would announce for the presidency and build their career to get to that point, and they are actually competitive, right?

Right.

Only 3 contests in, would drop out to throw their support to someone behind them. Just stop. That's just okay. But that's what they did to get Biden. Right. Okay. And what all I'm saying is, all I'm saying is, is the American electorate is trying to get non-establishment people to lead. Right. And the Democratic Party is hell-bent on preventing that. And look what they're doing now. No debates. It don't matter that Robert Kennedy Jr. is 19% and Marianne Williamson is, you know, 8 to 10% and stuff like that. Totally legitimate. They have the kind of support that the governor of Florida has on the Republican side. And yet we can't even get on the stage. It's ridiculous to even talk. No, that is what the establishment is doing to try to stop our electorate, our people from having their point of view heard. And so, but see, they're forgetting the lesson of our forefathers. I mean, if you prevent the peaceful means of exercising power, you create January 6th. You're giving— you're radicalizing folks because you're destroying their faith in the democratic process, right? So I don't know where the endgame in the Democratic Party is, but the bottom line is we are empowered to take it back. But it starts by dismissing the narrative. Start checking the facts. Don't trust any mainstream media. Right? Because they're all in on the game. They're all making the money. They're all getting paid by the same sources. You know, we need to reclaim our sovereignty.

Kevin, are you interested in getting involved in politics at any level?

No, no, no. See, okay, everyone has their lane in terms of what they can do for effectiveness. You know, my lane, my lane for effectiveness, my particular skill is I, I happen to be the person who, who just because I'm as an analyst, I tend to connect dots from different areas, and, and I see a trend that makes sense in this context. I see as my highest purpose, given the, the kernel of information to, to our fellow Americans, right? To say, okay, here, here's the glitch in the narrative, so that you can do what comes natural. Start asking questions, start penetrating, start, you know, and you start seeing. And then, you know, because part of that, if I can do that, this is what changes this country. I mean, when Thomas Jefferson said, you know, you know, we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal. No country in the world felt that way. No country. That was not, you know, it wasn't onto a critical mass. I'm trying to be that seed to people to say, if you could simply get back in touch with who you are, if you could get back in touch with what works in your life and not what everyone has told you and not these, these manipulative influences on the outside, you will discover, one, that you're powerful, that you can make a difference, that you can transform your life. that you could find fulfillment, and that we can build the society that we thought we were all going to be a part of until we woke up into this American nightmare. So that's the best use of my time.

I wonder what the best way to amplify a voice like yours might be. I mean, you see that the establishment, I mean, they just shut down Tucker, right? So there goes a voice that starts to speak out and think a little bit differently and look back on past decision-making. And understand where influence came from and stuff like that. One of our past podcast guests, Patrick Bet-David, just offered Tucker $100 million over the next 5 years to join his team at Valuetainment. So we'll see how that goes. But yeah, what do you think the next step is for amplifying a voice like yours? I mean, obviously, the more people that you reach, the bigger of an impact you'll have. You'll help people wake up to some of these types of things with your commentaries.

Well, first and foremost, I think it's a good thing for Tucker because exactly right. Where is the trend? Those who have the courage to speak truth to power, notwithstanding agreeing with what everyone says, are moving independent, listener-sponsored media and stuff like that. And the traditional model is crumbling. Look what happened to Fox's ratings since they showed Tucker the door. I mean, that's okay. It's a good thing. He's fine. His voice is not going to be silenced again. The electorate wants this. The people want this. So wherever he goes, he'll be like Rogan, you know, here's the $100 million, you know, you know, and, and he will be above them now. He will be, you know, independent of them. They will not be able to— and, and I look forward to hearing what he has to say. But as for Kevin Howard, so I am— there are 2 other authors who were recently published, um, who— and yeah, gosh, I didn't get— yeah, yeah. I want to get the names right. Deborah Kitchen. She's a PhD out of Tennessee. And Eric Oberon is a former prosecutor out of Baltimore. And both of them are amazing people. Both of them just recently published books. Deborah is— she has her PhD in criminal justice, and she teaches at one of the major Tennessee universities. And so she wrote a book From a criminal justice perspective. And Eric wrote a book on problems. His perspective was that our expectations of the legal system to provide justice are misplaced. The legal system actually just executes the laws. So our target to improve the legal system is to improve our laws. That's right. And so he's written, you know, the problems with the legal system from the legal system's perspective. And so we each represent a different take on what's a problem in America that we can fix. I'm talking to the individual about individual empowerment and reclaiming sovereignty, you know, and each of them are talking about different aspects of the system, institutions that make America America. And so we're planning to do a national college discussion tour. And we're working on it. And it's— and the tour is called What the Hell Is Wrong with America? You know, and we want to do it leading into the national presidential elections next year. Because, you know, starting in January, you're going to have all the primaries and all that stuff. So that's going to be the whole thing next year. So in October, we're planning the first event. And, and we want to do it in Tennessee, home of where, you know, this awful event occurred. At first it was a mass murder, and then the kids protested, and the Tennessee legislature expelled the 2 Black legislators, now who've been reinstated. Okay, we're going to do it at one of the major Tennessee universities because Deborah is already established. She's a college professor, stuff like that. So, and, and get one or both of those legislators to attend to bring some visibility. And, and, and the point of these events, you know, we, we will read excerpts from our books, we're engaged in a conversation of how— of, of like we're discussing here, and then we will engage the audience. And we're hoping to catch fire in terms of catch the attention of the nation when they're looking in, in the direction of who should be our next president, and to say, okay, but let's do it in a context where we're reclaiming our power in a context where they can't buy it. You know, you know, by challenging the narrative, you know, holding your whole truth to power. And maybe we can actually inspire a third party. Maybe we could actually inspire, you know, like I said, I mean, I'm a big supporter, left, right, center, you know, we need independent voices who are not simply serving wealth.

And the things—

I have nothing against wealth. I have nothing against wealth. But let's be clear, uber wealth has waged war on everyone else. And the impact of that is the boomer generation is the last generation where they did better than their parents. Generation X did not do better than the boomers. The millennials did not do better than X, and I'm an X, right? And Gen Z is not even going to do better than the millennials, right? I mean, everyone— I mean, Broadly speaking, there's always exceptions. But my point is, how'd that happen? Right? And so we really, really, really need to talk, have this conversation. And then maybe we can get a president who can actually make a difference. Because as far as I'm concerned, it ain't Biden. And if the choice is Trump, I mean, shoot me. No, I mean, and again, I understand why people vote for him. But the sad thing about the manufactured consent is he's not going to solve the problem that people are voting for. He is the establishment. He's the billionaire establishment. He owns the politicians. He's the— Okay. So when— do you know the comedian? Oh, But he's— I'll think of his name. He does a skit about, you know, the Trump voters, you know, Pharrell? Pharrell?

No.

Well, I'll think of it if it comes to me. But yeah, I'm hoping— we're hoping to use the tour to start the conversation that maybe we can get a third-party thing going.

Well, if you make it up in the Boston area, I'm there. That's for sure.

Are you kidding? We are definitely coming. I mean, you talk about a wonderful Place. I mean, I love Boston. I'm originally from New York, you know. So hey, forgive me, you know. But I love Boston. You know, you—I mean—you have so many great universities. So we will—if we can—our thought process would start in Tennessee because of Deborah's influence there, and and it happened to be a hotbed. We'll go to—we'll go to Baltimore, where Eric comes from, you know, and and maybe the University of Maryland or somewhere in that area where he is where he was. prosecutor. Then we'll go out west, but eventually we will swing back. Of course, we gotta go to Boston.

You know, I love it. I am— I just— I have a few more minutes, so Luke, you can cut this part out. But Luke, I feel like I hogged most of the questions here, so I want to give you a chance to ask a few before we wrap up. And oh man, it's all good.

There's so much to unpack, I feel like, and, um, just so many questions, so many things I want to ask about, like What, what can Gen X do? I mean, what can the— yeah, Gen X do? What can the boomer— what can the boomers do? What can Gen Z do? Like all the, all these different generations, how can we all like come together, work together to, to fix all these, these problems? Like you called, you said the, the American nightmare, because I feel like that is, that's where we are and we need to, to start to change these things. So I guess maybe that's what we can wrap it up with. Um, because I know you need to go, Nick, but, uh, maybe we can wrap it up with what is something that an individual can do today to start reclaiming their sovereignty and also to start helping change the establishment as it stands today?

Great question, Luke, and I appreciate you asking it. And, you know, it's gonna sound trite because it's not, you know, it's, it's, it's not like it's a secret, but it's something we're not doing. It's so important to silence the external noise and take a good sober look in the mirror and get to understand how that person thinks, how that person that you're looking at, what do you value, not what society expects you to value. You know, what about your actual lived experience shows you what actually works and what doesn't? As opposed to what you are told works and what doesn't. Because the more you get in touch with that person, the more you will realize what is true, the more you will realize how the external is so much lies and manipulation, and that— and how you can dispel it like that by recognizing, oh, okay, it's been The Truman Show. And now I see the— I see that— I see that the sky is actually closed. Okay? And nothing will ever be the same. That will just start a journey of conversation, of question, of, of, you know, and one of those things, one of the— and, and the starting point for that discovery, because I know that sounds very theoretical, just focus in on how you survive each day. Get back in touch with that, because we, we, we literally have forgotten that we don't— we've had that conversation. We don't produce the food we eat. We don't produce the clothes we wear. We don't produce the car we drive. In order for us to have a good day, so many other people have to do what they do well. And when we have a bad day, it's not just because we made a mistake, it's because someone else made a mistake and it affected us. When you start realizing that's who you are, that you are a part of an interdependent symbiotic relationship with, with the broader society, it will change your perspective on not only who you are, but who the stranger is. It's not stranger danger. That person is doing something that's contributing to your well-being. If you close yourself off from them, you're closing yourself off from a very important part of how you get by. If you could just switch that filter from this independent filter, thinking about myself first, to thinking about us, it opens up a whole range of possibilities that you never considered based on the fact that you've been convinced that the only way you're going to get by is fend for yourself. Well, that's actually not how you live, you know. So that's what I mean. Start in the mirror. Get to know this person. Get to know how you function each day, and then build your life based on that truth and judge everything else by that.

I have such a hard time not jumping in. I need to use more restraint, like a triple unmute button. But Kevin, I wanted to add that over the last couple of years, I've been fortunate enough to travel to about 20 different countries. And what you realize all over this world is people generally want the same thing. They want to provide security to their families. They want to enjoy what they do. And that's about it. Nobody's out to get you. And places like New York City where There are so many people that it's simply an inconvenience to walk from A to B. Like, we need to adjust how we're living in certain places so that other people are not seen as an inconvenience and they're seen as, you know, part of a bigger whole like you're talking about. All right, I'll back— I'm back on mute.

No, Nick, I think that's a great— I think that's a great point. But I will point out that even in— particularly when you travel abroad and you go to a place you know, places like Mexico City, and there's lots of places with high population density. It is, and yet they still have much more harmony. They still perceive each other much more from a community standpoint. You don't lose your independence, your individual characteristics, because you recognize that you actually live symbiotically. You gain the benefit of understanding that, that you are part of something bigger. Right? And, and it really does empower you to, to co-create a reality that's more in line with how you live. You know, we, most of us suffer from cognitive dissonance because society has convinced us to believe certain things that are in direct conflict with how we survive each day. Nothing in nature lives independently. And, and that's not a bad thing. It really is not a bad thing. You know, so that's my, my takeaway message to everyone.

Yeah. Well, Kevin, I love it. I appreciate your time so much. Man, I feel like we could just stay here for hours just listening to you talk. So I'm excited. I can't wait to hear more about you touring the country and starting in Tennessee because yeah, I'll, if you're close to me, wherever I'm at in October, whenever you start, like I will be coming to listen for sure. So with that, But no, go for it.

No, no, no, go ahead, Luke. No, no, please go ahead.

No, no, I was just gonna— I was just going to, um, just for us to wrap it up, I was just gonna say, um, for people who are listening that want to learn more about your work, what you do, and, uh, get more involved, where can they go and what can they do?

Well, they can, they can, um, get more information about my book Onward at Last from, uh, www.onwardatlast.com. They could purchase the book, which is in hardcover. It's on an audiobook on iTunes, and it's a Kindle ebook on barnesandnoble.com, on Amazon, on, you know, because it is distributed through Ingram. So anyone's online bookseller will have it, you know. So please do that, including Target. I was surprised. And Powell Books in Portland. You know, so please go and look for Onward at Last and take a look. Um, if you can't afford the book, and I totally get it, this is about the message. If you go to my website and go to the, to the blog page on my website, all the commentaries are available for free. The point is, is for you to get the message that you matter, you are important, you are powerful, more powerful than these people would want you to know. And, and, and, and so that's how you get in touch And leave comments, please. And, you know, because I want to hear your thoughts. Because this is an interaction, interactive discussion.

That always makes me, you know, it gives me goosebumps when somebody sits there and they say, you matter, you have power, because it's so true. And I try to tell people that all the time. So thank you for spreading that message. Thank you for spreading your word. I tell you what, it is something that more people need to listen to and hear. So can't wait to share this and continue. sharing your book with our community. And yeah, I can't wait to keep following along as well.

Hey, thank you so much, guys. And once we get that, once we get the tour going, maybe we could circle back around for another podcast interview. And we'll bring Deborah and we'll bring Eric on and, you know, and it'll be a great, another great conversation. But thank you so much for having me.