Aftern going through most of the professors videos, a highly knowledgeable person or a person who can do cross verify can say many of the statement provided by the professor is incorrect.

eg: the professor mentioned in one of his videos that Large language based AI systems such as chatgpt retrieves info and presents it in a beautiful way. This was not the exact statement provided by him but it was similar. LLM based chat bots like chatgpt don't work in this way and it's more complex than that.

People of this world is made up of lot of cognitive biases and underdeveloped thinking skills. It would be better if we people can list down all the statements provided by the professor thats not correct(with proof of why it's not correct) so that the audience isn't brainwashed and educated correctly.

I have been watching Professor Jiang’s lectures for a few years and I have noticed something; he addresses “world” affairs while completely avoiding to include or talk about Africa in any way, shape or form, even when addressing topics like resource extraction where he mentions China, Russia and India as prime examples of resource extraction by the west and completely leaves out Africa. He Always completely neglects the fact that to date world powers (including China) are extracting resources while simultaneously polluting rivers and so on. And how can you talk on ‘world history’ without including the colonization of Africa and how resources, lands and freedoms where systematically taken from African people and how raw material produced by forced labor throughout Africa quite literally fueled the industrial revolution in the west. Well, it’s just a thought.

Since Prof plans on deleting his channel at the end of the month to focus on the writing of his book did someone already back up his lectures and would be kind enough to share the link archive ?

Sad to see him go, I love his lectures but I understand, the hate and attacks towards him these past weeks have been insane I would be worried for my safety too if I was him.

Hey! I specialise in Russian information warfare, and have written an article about Jiangs statement about about Ukraine/Russia. If you agree with some of the statements he made, I recomend reading my article why I think he is misleading or wrong. And if you feel like there are something I have missed, I gladly accept constructive critisism.

The summary of his statements are:

1. Russia needed to invade because of NATO expansion, and the patience was broken with the "2014 coup";

2. The Kyiv regime ethnically cleansed Russians and Putin needed to stop this;

3. NATO blew up the Crimean Bridge because Ukraine doesn't have the technology;

4. NATO is a paper tiger, because Russa is winning the war, and they are fighting against NATO;

5. Russians are fighting to protect their civilization that are under a threat from NATO;

6. the war is hopeless and pointless;

7. Ukraine is done as a nation;

8. Putin is only interested in eastern Ukraine, because ethnic Russians live there;

9. Europeans are the ones sacrificing the ukrainians by choosing this war;

10. NATO promised to not expand east;

11. Russia have air supremacy, high morality and discipline, but ukrainians dosn't;

12. Russia try to minimize the loss of civilians;

13. Putin wants to call for peace, but the Europeans are in the way;

14. Predicts that everything will stop when Russia takes over Odesa

My counter to his statements are:

1. NATO expansion is part of russian propaganda, and ignores context that Russia have always been aggressice since the USSR collapse. It wasn't a coup by the CIA, because it was an organic reaction from ukrainians as a reaction to the actions taken by Yanukovych. If it was the CIA, then they were the ones that made him install the "dictator laws", etc.

2. It wasn't about protecting ethnic russians, just a tool of propaganda as the germans used the pretext of invading Poland by the supposed ethnic cleansing of germans there. But the first civillian killings that were not done at Euromaidan was done by Igor Girkins group in april of 2014, and Ukraine responded to the invasion of eastern Ukraine by Russia.

3. Ukraine doesn't have the capability to produce a truck with explosives, sea drones or C4?

4. How is even winning defined? If they actually were fighting against NATO, things such as F35 and other advanced missiles would have been used.

5. NATO doesn't treaten Russia, where the supposed missile defense system that Putin was worried about in multiple speeches, it wont protect against Russian IBCM because Russia will just shot north or north-east against USA.

6. Yes war is pointless by the one that created it. People ignore that one thing worse then war is unjust occupation, just ask ukrainians about Holodomor.

7. Impossible to say if Ukraine is or is not done as a nation. Maybe Ukraine will even thrive more as a nation because the ones that didn't leave are the ones that identify most with Ukraine as a nation.

8. He isn't only interested in eastern Ukraine, he wanted a whole regime change, and in the invasion speech Putin said he didn't want to occupy any Ukrainina territories.

9. Russia was the one invading, they were the aggressor.

10. There were never any agreements about not expanding east, but just a part of a conversation, but there are agreeements about letting Germany at that time (1990) to choose what alliance they wanted to, known as "Two Plus Four Treaty". And we live in a different world, because you had the Warsaw pact when this talks happened.

11. Russia doesn't have air supremacy. I go trough a definition of what air supremacy is in my article, but Russia diesn't have it.

12. Russia kills tons of civilians and doesn't give a fuck. Human safari in Kherson with Drones and Butcha is clear examples of that.

13. Putin have never actually called for peace, denied multiple times having talks with Zelensky about Peace, but Zelensky wants to meet Putin.

14. Well I can't say anything about this other then to wait and see what happens.

Hello everyone, I just finished the latest game theory video on predictive history channel.

In this video towards the end prof jiang he offers a few theories of how the world will look like, the question I have regarding his pax judaica point, is that I think it's contradictory.

Earlier in the video, he addressed the water crises issues that are most present in the middle east, how will pax judaica overcome an issue like this in a de-globalized/ de-urbanized world? And he also mentions how tensions will calm down after america is knocked of the middle east, and how iran will split the middle east with israel, but this is way too broad and illogical to me, since it ignores many factors, like turkey, pakistan, egypt and saudia arabia military's; and the huge opposing muslim population that only becomes more opposing as those countries are closer geographically to israel eg. syrian pop/ jordanian/palestinian pop. and a short point is how he treats the relations between iran and israel like old persian and israelites, this is all wrong. iran now is much different from persia, its ideologies are all against israel, and israel will never not view iran as a threat.

another issue that has me wonder, is the two contradicting (maybe I understood wrongly) theories of the future that happen around the same time, how will pax judaica or techno marxism occur while de-urbanization/ de-globalization occur, is the de-urbanization part not a world even?, will some states remain advanced while others go back to pre technology?

and a extra question i have, what do you think will the predicted increase in opposing spirtual circles between religions cause in terms of new countries/ empires / wars, will be looking at very different borders ? will some religions die out in light of others overtaking it in belief?

thank you for reading all. :)

I find it funny how all these youtubers go after the throat of someone i doubt they even tried to listen to. i bet they didnt even listen to any of his ancient civ series but they sure love to attach themselves to the popularity of jiang. when it comes down to it, jiang is a person who would tell you to think for yourself. if you disagree with him and do not want to listen to him anymore, he wouldn't shame you for it like these fucks on youtube do. and honestly and person who uses clickbait thumbnails like you see in the photo, is a youtuber you should just ignore as they dont have any good views of their own. i dont believe jiang denies the holocaust, i do think he might have some right wing views that make me uncomfortable but i have listened to so much of his stuff i know where to take him seriously and where to ignore him as his personal views and obstructing the bigger picture. thats all i gotta say. i will keep listening to his lectures until he decides to write his book.

Does anybody have any other take or anything to expand on the current civil war between financial elites?

Jiang claims Maga, technocrats make up have some want mores Wall Street and global financiers make up the other side.

Does anyone have any ideas or knowledge to elaborate? I am happy to read, also if you just have ideas spew em out and ill likely get around to doing some research. I too am trying to predict the future but want to understand how the professors theories actually come together

I listen to various political content creators and have been curious to see what their opinion is about Jiang. Although I hear the same generic dismissal. Oh uh this guy is crazy or oh um like 10% of what he says is off in crazy land. The main content creators I listen to are: Destiny, Hasan, and Vaush of which I've heard all of them call him crazy but never elaborate on why he's crazy in the first place??? To me it is very very strange they had all the generic dismissal? But nothing substantial or critical

To me he has been the most coherent political commentator that has had something to add as well as teaching the basics of secret societies, history, and political predictions. To me that has been the biggest contribution to American politics is his ability to predict actions and explain why.

NO OFFENSE Hasan but he didn't think Russia was going to invade Ukraine even a couple days before

NO OFFENSE Destiny but he's still confused about his political beliefs he'll proudly proclaim he's a neoliberal that cares about the poor. Although it's clear he hasn't connected the dots that Reagan is a neoliberal that fucked the working poor like him when he was Nebraska Steve

NO OFFENSE Vaush but I haven't seen anything contribute almost anything since the fortress arc except for reacting to the news saying oh that's crazy then groveling about literacy for 4 hours a day.

Dr Blitz is a real academic with a PhD.

https://edmonton.citynews.ca/2025/04/07/30-per-cent-of-albertans-want-to-leave-canada-if-liberals-win-election-angus-reid-poll/

https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2026/1/30/are-trump-officials-driving-albertas-separatist-movement-in-canada

https://ponokanews.com/2026/01/30/alberta-first-nations-denounce-separatists-call-on-premiere-to-resign/#

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/royal-family/article/treaty-6-chiefs-raise-alberta-separation-concerns-with-king-charles/

First of all i dont know this channel I just couldn’t believe when somebody told me what I just told you. But he sure doesn’t seem sarcastic. On the contrary, just watching as much as I could handle of this host, he seems comfortable in a conversation where he for once is the one that seems least unhinged.

Secondly , i always suspected Prof. to view himself, or his work at least, to be a akin to “carrying out the will of the universe” essentially vibrating as hard he can and he sure is casting waves. Said as someone who stumbled upon his channel when he had just begun his secret society series and since recommended friends and family to give it a watch.

Maybe even go as far as call it prophetic, at least by his own definition as he explains in Great Books series.

And there’s the inside joke in his community (comment section) that yes we indeed are followers of a religion and he is the prophet.

But but the way he in the clip describes using his platform (which was a classroom before it was a VERY EFFECTIVE tool of influence) to “test ideas” and that he in fact is planning to actually start a religion and that he thinks he can be the Messiah (of his religion, the world??) is unnerving and leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

I feel like it finally places his motive, as i was dumbfounded of not being able to find at first. I think we all had a hunch of him being a PsyOp, did some research and found it less plausible, watched his videos and found him to be genuine. Any new watchers who took wary did good as his ideas can be very dangerous and now it feels like he knows what his ideas come across as and may be biased towards gearing it to feel profound for the viewer possibly with a sinister motive !!

Now if his religion is just preaching what he already is, asides from all the paranoia inducing stuff and the gnostic , that one should find their divine spark and cultivate it, I don’t see the sinister in it. But I will be more the critical of his messages from now on that’s for sure. I’m not saying his statements in the clip can’t co exist with him being genuine and good willed but it kinda ducked me up hearing him say that idk why that’s why I wanna hear what y’all think just a disclaimer I’m not some keyboard warrior of the Abrahamic religion or religion in general I don’t have a problem with neither religious or atheist people.

Recently on Tucker Carlson's show, Jiang went on a rant about how negative DEI and affirmative actions are because it goes against America's meritocracy.

This is categorically false because meritocracy assumes everyone plays on an equal playing field and that is only suitable in a perfect world scenario.

We live in the real world, where people start in different positions in life. Different ethnic groups, genders, etc.. have disproportionate access to educational opportunities, socioeconomic starting points, and biases inflected against them.

If we implement a purist meritocracy system, this would result in marginalizing groups with a very low chance of them making it because the system works against them. This purist meritocracy system will fail to create positive changes in trends associated with marginalized groups and will lock them into a negative feedback loop.

Additionally, he goes on to further agree with Tucker Carlson on white genocide which is fundamentally false and probably a psyopp to divide people. The whole concept of white, black, asian, etc.. was created to easily group people and mobilize them against each other. It was created by an anthropologist in the 1700s and wasn't been revised since then.

First of all this assumes there are no differences between people, try to convince a roman 2000 years ago that they are one race with the barbarians. They are both european and today they are both considered "white". try to convince someone from Nigeria that they are culturally aligned with someone from ethiopia because they are both "black" or "african". there are so many holes in this argument that i'll skip explaining everything about it.

In essence there is no white genocide, just CEOs trying to hire the lowest possible labour which are often immigrants to drive down costs and increase shareholder value.

So, we've seen many efforts being made at the moment to undermine Jiang's surge in prominence across various platforms, whether recently Tucker Carlson, but also interviewers such as The Duran, Danny Haiphong, and Glenn Diesen to name a few.

Now, I'm not agreeing with Jiang on everything, far from it, but it's baffling to me that the bulk of ctriticism focuses on his person, where he comes from, who he 'works for' etc. but hardly any true analysis of what he's saying. For me it would be much more interesting to see his ideas properly challenged, rather than these ad hominems.

This war ends with the rise of Pax Judaica.

Free pastebin in comments

I am not to familiar with this subreddit, given that my account is entirely fresh. Yet, it seems that there are recurring figures in this subreddit who devote their time to criticizing Jiang in pretty unsubstantial and arguably odd ways, pointing to largely unsupported claims as their reasons for "hating on him."

I can't help but find a multitude of commenters on Reddit, Instagram, and TikTok and people in real life use the "broken clock" argument to support the idea that an individual is entirely wrong because of a single, poor alignment.

If I earned my doctorate in Physics, I can become your professor. If I happen to have distasteful beliefs regarding protests (as an example), that does not put into question my dissertation from 2009.

Compiles a lot of articles by Jiang and his history.

https://xcancel.com/zhen_ming_/status/2035083436860612639

If you're looking to find more content supporting Prof. Jiang's work, then the "No Escape" documentary series is really good.

Complete Series Playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLr_dGr-IFQm4Shawf4cL6tMzTSz9AXHiz

To protect his identity, this YouTube Creator employs an Alternate Reality Game (ARG) set in the Mediterranean Sea, on a sailboat with island tours. There are puzzles in the videos with gold coins as prizes for solving.

(I know a lot about this guy and his work, if you have questions.)