On August 12th, 2025, journalist Derrick Broze appeared on The Kim Iversen Show to discuss the conclusion to his 17 part docuseries, The Pyramid of Power.
You don’t dismiss? I wish it were true, look how you treat Christians in the comments, calling the bible fantasy when we know so much of it is historical. I have a ton of respect for you otherwise, fyi
There is a connection between flat earthers and Bible believers. The FEs want the Bible to be true because they think it proves flat earth (the firmament) and vice versa.
Talking to me in the comments is different from the time I put into my articles, documentaries and books. I dont have patience for people online.
I am no labels and I do not care for any organized religion or spiritual groups- I have had my share, but there is a history of Christianity being attacked and the vaccine is to disconnect people from a higher power, from faith, from spiritual armor.
There is a reason for the attack on Christianity I believe.
I have been called a witch by some Christians and told I have demons by some Catholics. And new age people told me I am not working hard enough spiritually. I have heard it ALL!
I have my own personal faith and beliefs. my own spiritual armor, that has to do more with not my words but shine through with my actions, toward myself, toward others and toward nature.
It may be, patience can be difficult but still necessary, especially if you want to maintain credibility because if we speak out of both sides of our mouths we lose our audience. I’m not interested in you losing your audience- quite the opposite.
I don't think disagreeing with people effects my credibility. And to anyone who thinks so, I honestly don't care. I am brutally honest with people if they come on my pages with bullshit or try to start arguments etc. I call it out.
People should judge me based on my articles, my books, my talks, my docuseries, my interviews etc, not my trash talking on social media.
Ok, but we’re not talking about disagreeing with people as much as how credibility is affected when one gives two diametrically opposed messages to their audience- saying they never dismiss people but then they actually do dismiss people. People judge us on our character wherever they find it.
There’s a difference between being honest with people and insulting them and there’s a difference between starting an argument and just having a discussion.
I know you talk about getting mired in unproductive conversations online and ya, you can be brutally honest to a troll or- better- just ignore any unfounded attacks, especially since you’re becoming more of a locus of public attention. That’s not what I’m talking about though. I’m talking about you publicly denigrating people’s religion online in general while saying you don’t dismiss unusual perspectives- this is incongruent (and hurtful)
You’re of course free to behave as you will, I’m just giving you a perspective that it looks like you’re missing only because I like you and your work and would like to see you do well and be a good influence with all that influence.
Right on. Religion can be a double edged sword- does a lot of good, does a lot of bad. Mostly I guess because flawed humans are in the mix. Thank you for your outstanding reporting with an open mind, authenticity, and moral leadership and caring- I’m sure you inspire more people than you know :)
"one gives two diametrically opposed messages to their audience- saying they never dismiss people but then they actually do dismiss people. "
For me, there's a difference between dialoguing with people I know directly or meet face to face, and the many, many people I interact with online. I have less patience and tend to respect people more once I meet them in person.
There's a difference between me saying I dont dismiss flat earthers - while thinking of a very specific friend - and dismissing people online because I think they are incorrect.
no and I am not interested in a debate or a discussion on it. If you want to share links I will do my best to check them out but I've got so many other things going on this is not something I have an interest or really time for.
That's not what most anarchists believe. We simply state that the vast majority of the population did not consent to the constitution so it cannot be legit for people 100s of years later, even if it was an advance in human liberty.
I encourage you to read Lysander Spooner's The Constitution of No Authority.
Yes! It’s all connected! I know from life experiences and observations.
Sounds good! Serving the truth with solutions. All dark truth is not good, weaken the spirit, the soul.
We meet to not feed the monsters breakfast lunch and dinner with the low voltage, vibes, frequency of our emotions, thoughts, feelings.
Doing a good job Derrick. Keep up the good work.
Again, Derrick, always informative information! I’m excited and looking forward to the next chapter of your series!
You don’t dismiss? I wish it were true, look how you treat Christians in the comments, calling the bible fantasy when we know so much of it is historical. I have a ton of respect for you otherwise, fyi
There is a connection between flat earthers and Bible believers. The FEs want the Bible to be true because they think it proves flat earth (the firmament) and vice versa.
Talking to me in the comments is different from the time I put into my articles, documentaries and books. I dont have patience for people online.
I am no labels and I do not care for any organized religion or spiritual groups- I have had my share, but there is a history of Christianity being attacked and the vaccine is to disconnect people from a higher power, from faith, from spiritual armor.
There is a reason for the attack on Christianity I believe.
https://youtu.be/spw5nmUrpWA?feature=shared
I have been called a witch by some Christians and told I have demons by some Catholics. And new age people told me I am not working hard enough spiritually. I have heard it ALL!
I have my own personal faith and beliefs. my own spiritual armor, that has to do more with not my words but shine through with my actions, toward myself, toward others and toward nature.
It may be, patience can be difficult but still necessary, especially if you want to maintain credibility because if we speak out of both sides of our mouths we lose our audience. I’m not interested in you losing your audience- quite the opposite.
I don't think disagreeing with people effects my credibility. And to anyone who thinks so, I honestly don't care. I am brutally honest with people if they come on my pages with bullshit or try to start arguments etc. I call it out.
People should judge me based on my articles, my books, my talks, my docuseries, my interviews etc, not my trash talking on social media.
Ok, but we’re not talking about disagreeing with people as much as how credibility is affected when one gives two diametrically opposed messages to their audience- saying they never dismiss people but then they actually do dismiss people. People judge us on our character wherever they find it.
There’s a difference between being honest with people and insulting them and there’s a difference between starting an argument and just having a discussion.
I know you talk about getting mired in unproductive conversations online and ya, you can be brutally honest to a troll or- better- just ignore any unfounded attacks, especially since you’re becoming more of a locus of public attention. That’s not what I’m talking about though. I’m talking about you publicly denigrating people’s religion online in general while saying you don’t dismiss unusual perspectives- this is incongruent (and hurtful)
You’re of course free to behave as you will, I’m just giving you a perspective that it looks like you’re missing only because I like you and your work and would like to see you do well and be a good influence with all that influence.
Thanks. I hear you and I will continue to speak against what I see as detrimental to humanity - religion and government.
Thanks for the food for thought.
Right on. Religion can be a double edged sword- does a lot of good, does a lot of bad. Mostly I guess because flawed humans are in the mix. Thank you for your outstanding reporting with an open mind, authenticity, and moral leadership and caring- I’m sure you inspire more people than you know :)
"one gives two diametrically opposed messages to their audience- saying they never dismiss people but then they actually do dismiss people. "
For me, there's a difference between dialoguing with people I know directly or meet face to face, and the many, many people I interact with online. I have less patience and tend to respect people more once I meet them in person.
There's a difference between me saying I dont dismiss flat earthers - while thinking of a very specific friend - and dismissing people online because I think they are incorrect.
I love Kim
I dont really see the point
no and I am not interested in a debate or a discussion on it. If you want to share links I will do my best to check them out but I've got so many other things going on this is not something I have an interest or really time for.
That's not what most anarchists believe. We simply state that the vast majority of the population did not consent to the constitution so it cannot be legit for people 100s of years later, even if it was an advance in human liberty.
I encourage you to read Lysander Spooner's The Constitution of No Authority.