UnSpun 087 – Bill Joslin & Jacob Duellman: “Sheepdog Democracy: A New Beginning”

Live on Tuesdays at 5pm Pacific time – UnSpun #087: Bill Joslin and Jacob Duellman are back!

This is going to be one of the most mind blowing episodes we've ever done. You won't want to miss this one. What is Sheepdog democracy? Bill Joslin and Jacob Duellman join the show to take us on a journey into the deepest recesses of the past into Natural Law, Tartary, what happened, and how we got here. Tune in for this for this tour de force.

Please support the show: https://www.gnosticmedia.com/donate/

Send Bitcoin donations for this episode to:

Please follow and like us:

  9 comments for “UnSpun 087 – Bill Joslin & Jacob Duellman: “Sheepdog Democracy: A New Beginning”

  1. Manson Manson
    September 28, 2017 at 6:44 am

    Enlightening and empowering for sure. Common parlance brought vivid and squeezable! For the greatest good, friends, preach.
    “Though some sensitivity in your treatment toward those who you see as duped, please. Queers, trans, etc – even intricate sutures in the collective logic perceiving divergent relationships with gender deserves the kindness of our tongues. To those we deem as falling short below us, but striving toward ends converging with our own, let us be thorough and kind. Social justice, for example, contains worthy aims; rather than strike left or right of a binary political (community) division because its propagator is running MK Ultra lineage programming, a not of compassion can inspire us to unite in the face of grotesque shadows at hand in the world today.
    Thanking again for drawing us ever into focus!

  2. Jeremy K
    September 30, 2017 at 1:03 pm

    Great great set gentlemen. The thing is about property, is that the argument premise then is: should recognition and respect be externally enforced by a 3rd person agent, OR, should it be an INNER respect for other people’s return for their energy/time? Among white people, we could not create the great innovations and advancements we have done and continue to do, if we were robbing each other every moment. I think it becomes a question of: do we need an external agent to police our own social behaviour because we cannot trust ourselves to respect other people’s achievements, and require a ubiquitous avuncular daddy to make sure we tow the line.

    It is actually a backwards movement to externalise regulating entities upon ourselves. It is like when people leave a box of fruit or vegetables, with a sign saying “$1 for a sack of potatoes” and leaves a cup for the money, and trusts that if you take one you will have the decency to deposit a payment or, come back later with one. This is the kind of attitude that was prevalent among white nations, and the social climate of honesty and trust that came with it.

    There is no reason why sober and adult people with cognitive function, work things out among themselves without resorting to swinging on the ballsack of a State to come in and start wagging fingers on their behalf. Although I do believe in some minimal state structure, to ensure our prosperity and to have some kind of hierarchy to tie our people together, especially when it comes to defending ourselves against the other races and (((money masters))).

    • Manson Manson
      October 1, 2017 at 6:47 pm

      Covert overt racism, ‘Among white people’, and telltale anti-Semitic (((parentheses))). I understand inquiries into Judaism are layered, but a paranoid covert (((parentheses))) idiom Is fukt

      • Roger Grigsby
        October 4, 2017 at 10:03 am

        “Anti-semitic” is just another anti-White social construct. Get over it.

        • Jeremy K
          October 15, 2017 at 11:49 am

          That is correct. Or an anti Bobby Fischer term too LeL!

      • October 7, 2017 at 11:04 am

        That’s so stupid. Please explain how a religion is a race? Please explain how Khazars are Semites – Arabs? LOL… That whole lie wasn’t even invented until the 1700s. See my interview with Shlomo Sand and get your facts straight.

        • Jeremy K
          October 15, 2017 at 11:48 am

          (((They))) simply duck and dive. It is no secret that they have blood identification and trace their bloodline through the mother (because the mother is the child bearer). Their religion is a structure of politics, abstraction and robbery (of non jews) in the euphemism of “business” which is a jew thing. Business is a method of jew conquest because they are too cowardly and hideous to enter into physical conflict over resources. Why do you think they want everyone disarmed? The whole anti gun move is totally jew.

          Religion is just what someone says it is, it isn’t really that much of a set in stone thing. Ultimately, they are the Chosen ones, by G**d itself. There is no REAL EVIDENCE except THEIR word. So I suppose they must be correct.

      • Jeremy K
        October 15, 2017 at 11:43 am

        Oh lordy, a mechanical pre-programmed response from a trained flesh response bot.

        How is “among white people” in any way “racist”? ( I am deliberately at this juncture taking the definition of the word for granted but will refer back to this point later if necessary). Why is it that if any reference to white people in any way that is not either: slanderous, demeaning, accusing, is RAAAAAAAACYSISSSSTTTTT!!!?? For starters “racist” is a nonsense term invented by (((Trotsky))) I bet if I said “among black people” you would be parading around your room covered in boot polish lauding the black man and commending me on my empowerment of the blacks and even doing a rap with an afro wig.

        What has happened is that I have referred to whites specifically and collectively as their own entity, and in a positive and empowering way, and your (((mainstream))) programming has just sparked off, and you are now lying of the floor convulsing and foaming at the mouth because everyone has been trained to both hate the white man at every and any cost and turn.

        As for antisemitic I have no problem with Arabs so your, yet again smart ass attempt to undercut the thrust of my premise has failed, again.

        ((())) is not paranoid or covert, nor “fukt”. Saying “fukt” not “fucked” is fucked. it is handy shorthand, and yes I do have to exercise caution given the situation. Tactics in war are still tactics and if I have to use parenthesis then so be it. You know what I meant by it, so it serves it’s purpose.

        Anyway, given that it is evident you have a dog in the fight, it was quite handy to draw out the worms and see who stands where with the (((issue))).

  3. John Cokos
    October 8, 2017 at 6:24 am

    Jan: You’ve morphed into a Shabbes goy. Welcome to the Tribe……LOL

Leave a Reply