---
SUMMARY
In this intense discussion, Hobbitfollower, the head moderator of Destiny’s subreddit, confronts Destiny regarding the escalating violent rhetoric and "school shooter vibes" within the DGG community. Hobbitfollower expresses deep concern that the community is moving past "joking" into genuine radicalization, fueled by a lack of effective real-world activism and a sense of political hopelessness. Destiny acknowledges the shift but argues that the left lacks the unity and leadership seen on the right, noting that prominent left-wing influencers are often more interested in infighting than in organized civil disobedience. The conversation explores the failures of the modern activist class, the necessity of concrete political asks, and the moderation challenges of managing a community that feels it has exhausted all traditional democratic options.

TRANSCRIPT
[00:00] HOBBITFOLLOWER: I want to address a couple of different things, and I feel like I have two main things I want to talk about. I feel like they're going to overlap multiple times. So, I feel like we should just lay out a couple of things that we agree on and then we'll go from there.

[00:15] DESTINY: Okay.

[00:16] HOBBITFOLLOWER: Actually, can we agree that the issues that are in the subreddit aren't just happening in the subreddit; they're also happening in the Discord?

[00:24] DESTINY: Can you tell everybody what the issues are? 

[00:26] HOBBITFOLLOWER: Yeah. So, yesterday I think Destiny referred to it as kind of "school shooter vibes" going on as far as how people are talking. It makes people think that it's not just radical—and I'm so tired of people saying, "Well, Trump did radicalize me. You should be radical under Trump." I'm talking about radical as in going to cause violence in a way that isn't what everybody thinks it is. When I hear radical, I'm thinking of somebody who is out of their mind and just going after people in a violent way.

[01:03] DESTINY: Okay.

[01:04] HOBBITFOLLOWER: And I'm worried that is what is happening—that we are having people become radicalized in a way that isn't good. In the subreddit, I've noticed it more, but I also see it in DGG chat. A lot of times they say the "vote.org" thing, which I think is one of the memes right now around a way to get around that kind of stuff.

[01:25] DESTINY: A way to say that phrase again?

[01:27] HOBBITFOLLOWER: To get around to waiting, like... the vote.org thing is a current meme in the DGG chat.

[01:35] DESTINY: Okay, that's not good. Sorry. Yeah, go ahead. I understand what you mean, though.

[01:40] HOBBITFOLLOWER: See, so my thing is—and I've worded this a couple of times—I think that we are in a "misogyny arc-esque" thing where things are becoming... they started as jokes, and now there's a whole lot of it, and I'm not sure if it's jokes anymore. The more that I talk to people, the more I think it is not jokes. So, that's the main thing I want to talk about: the violent rhetoric.

[02:04] HOBBITFOLLOWER: It's happening in a way that I don't feel is how sane people, like yourself, are taking it. My other thing is that I just disagree with a lot of your approaches on how you think things should happen, and that's where I think we're going to overlap. But the main thing is the violent rhetoric that's going on across all of DGG.

[02:25] DESTINY: Okay.

[02:26] HOBBITFOLLOWER: Do you think that there is violent rhetoric at an increasing amount within DGG?

[02:31] DESTINY: Yeah, probably.

[02:33] HOBBITFOLLOWER: Do you think that it's something that is acceptable?

[02:36] DESTINY: Probably not. I don't think I would want a shooter or whatever coming from my community for a variety of reasons. 

[02:44] HOBBITFOLLOWER: Yeah. And do you think that you do things that make it to where people think that you may possibly agree with that sentiment?

[02:53] DESTINY: Um, probably right now. Yeah.

[03:07] HOBBITFOLLOWER: So, when you talk about things like—Hutch says "in Minecraft" or whatever—but you basically said, "Oh, it's fed-posting time." You do draw those lines to where people think that if a line is crossed (and I feel like that line changes sometimes based on what you're talking about), you are incentivizing more people to run with your talking points.

[03:32] DESTINY: Sure.

[03:33] HOBBITFOLLOWER: Do you think that people run with your talking points in a way that accurately reflects what you want them to be running with, or do they probably take things to an extreme that you're not comfortable with and that you would never advocate for? 

[03:48] DESTINY: I mean, they probably take them in pretty predictable directions.

[03:53] HOBBITFOLLOWER: Here's a question that I'll just kind of start to dive into, regarding what I've been seeing and the conversations I've had with people. It's pretty clear that we are probably going to win the House in 2026. Whether or not you think that's going to push us in a positive direction, that is a pretty clear thing that's probably going to happen. But you would admit that there's a chance that we don't, right?

[04:08] DESTINY: I mean, I guess there's a chance, but things are going to be really fucked if we lose them.

[04:15] HOBBITFOLLOWER: So, let's say all of a sudden ten murders happen by some illegal immigrant and Trump is able to find a "Day One" excuse or something like that.

[04:25] DESTINY: Yeah, for sure.

[04:26] HOBBITFOLLOWER: Yeah. So, I make a joke that we're like one 12-year-old white girl away from being raped and murdered from losing the midterms. Okay? And I think that's a pretty solid way to put it. So, I've asked people the question: if we knew 100% that the midterms were legitimate, but we didn't take the House, do you think at that point there are calls for that "extreme stuff"? I'm going to try not to talk in a way that's bad for the channel.

[05:10] HOBBITFOLLOWER: But I think that my having to do that furthers my argument in how serious of an issue it is—that I can't even speak about it in most places. I know your argument is that people like Trump can say this stuff openly, and I completely understand that. My argument is that people aren't taking this seriously. And if they are taking it seriously and they mean the words they're saying and they're not joking, that is the problem.

[05:40] DESTINY: Okay.

[05:41] HOBBITFOLLOWER: But everyone's joking, though.

[05:43] DESTINY: But everybody's not joking, though. My concern is that we are vastly approaching a point of no return in our own rhetoric within the community, and I think it is being furthered by us not addressing it. So, I really want to address the fact that in the subreddit, we're going to crack down on not just explicit calls for violence, but also the "jokes." 

[06:12] HOBBITFOLLOWER: Because the jokes have been growing, and it's only a matter of time before those jokes become things that get removed in general. It's becoming an issue where I'm worried the subreddit is going to get nuked because people are not taking it seriously. I know that it's like a "cucked" position to be in, but we get treated in this community a lot differently than other communities. People don't understand that. There's a reason why certain words are banned in the subreddit, even if they aren't an auto-removal on the platform. When I talked to the admins about the use of certain slurs, they said it's not a specifically banned word on the platform unless it's used in a derogatory fashion.

[07:15] HOBBITFOLLOWER: And I don't know anybody in this community that uses those terms without it being a derogatory way of putting somebody down. I'm having a hard time putting this all together because it's been happening more and more, and it's hard for me to stress how much violent rhetoric is happening just in the subreddit alone. I'm not talking about the jokes. I'm talking about people just openly talking about needing to hurt people.

[07:45] DESTINY: Mhm.

[07:46] HOBBITFOLLOWER: It's just being said out there about hangings and all these types of things. I understand that a lot of people do it in a way that is meant to blow off steam, but this isn't your journal. Every intrusive thought that comes into your mind isn't something that needs to be shared on platforms. One thing I want to warn people about is that Reddit has been cited to be turning information over to the government for things that they're not even subpoenaing. They're just openly working with the government on things that they ask for. 

[08:16] HOBBITFOLLOWER: As much as you might think that you're safe behind your anonymous username, they are turning that information over. That alone is a reason for people to think about couching their language. Now, another thing that we're going to start cracking down on: anybody who does not live in the United States, if you start saying things that make it sound like you are in the US—using the term "we," as in "we have tried this" or "we have tried that"—you are going to be nuked off the platform for not saying that you're Canadian, Israeli, or from the EU. 

[09:17] HOBBITFOLLOWER: You are going to get nuked off the subreddit because I'm so tired of people speaking about things that they can't actually participate in. You can have an opinion in the subreddit as somebody who lives anywhere in the world, but stop representing yourself as an American. Say, "As a [nationality] person, you guys should be doing this." I'm so sick of it. I had a whole conversation with somebody talking about how "we" haven't done enough, "we've" already protested, and then you go into their user profile and they're a fucking Canadian. This shit is just going to get nuked and you're never going to come back because you might as well be a Russian trying to interfere in our shit. 

[10:17] HOBBITFOLLOWER: My other contention is that, yourself included, people that are talking about these "next steps" they want to do are not doing as much as they could be doing. You're doing a lot more than most people are, so you're the least of my worry. But a lot of the worry I have is that people are literally doing absolutely nothing and only talking about what happens when things "pop off." I think that's a crazy state to be in—acting as if things have already been protested. In your conversation with Hutch yesterday, you talked about there needing to be more protesting and people doing civil disobedience. That's my point.

[11:17] DESTINY: Mhm. I think that should be more of a focus when we're talking about these things—talking about the things that we're not doing right now. You would admit that right now there should be hundreds or thousands of times more protests than there currently are, right? It's hard to take a position of "there should be less protests," but nine out of ten of the largest protests in US history have happened under this administration. I feel like we've protested quite a bit.

[11:45] HOBBITFOLLOWER: Yeah, like a single day. That's the thing. I wouldn't disagree with you in principle. I feel like people just need to find a more effective way. I like the idea of doing targeted industry strikes and then mutual aid to support the people who end up not working.

[12:05] DESTINY: What do you mean by targeted industry strikes?

[12:07] HOBBITFOLLOWER: Like, I think it would be interesting to do a giant GoFundMe for every single person that works at an airport and then have the entirety of the airport industry strike indefinitely until some condition is met. You raise enough money to try to compensate these people while they sustain it so they don't have to just be waited out by the Trump admin. But it would have to be in exchange for some kind of direct ask.

[12:35] DESTINY: Aren't those specific people forced to work because they're federal employees or whatever?

[12:39] HOBBITFOLLOWER: Not federal employees. I do think there are some industries where it's illegal to strike, but who cares? Fuck it. I understand. I agree that large protests have happened. One of the things you've said multiple times is that all a protest gets you is back to a neutral position. Like in Minnesota, all of this shit happens, they protest, and ICE leaves Minnesota, but you're still only fighting back to your neutral position at best. You're never going past that.

[13:19] DESTINY: I try to be careful in this position because I think the Minnesotans did a really great job in getting ICE to leave, but I think it's sad that basically the feds showed up to your state, murdered two citizens, you protested, and then they left. And it's like, Jesus, that's the victory? "We won." That's very sad.

[14:20] HOBBITFOLLOWER: But you would agree that was obviously a super effective way to stem what is happening. If people hadn't protested, it would have probably continued, right?

[14:30] DESTINY: Yeah, probably. But two people at least were murdered by feds that were then covered for by the federal government and shipped out of the state to safety. So when we say an "effective way to stop that," is it?

[14:45] HOBBITFOLLOWER: Although two people dying is tragic, you would think that there would be more protests and more things happening in the current climate. Take the example of all the court orders that people are denying. We were reading about the lady who was like, "If you just hold me in contempt, I'll get 24 hours of sleep." People should be protesting the facilities that these people are being shipped off to. In Texas, there are multiple areas they're shipping people to. Why are there not mass protests?

[15:21] DESTINY: Realistically, people aren't necessarily aware of every single thing going on, and it's hard for the average American to be protesting every single thing. Like I said, nine of the ten largest protests in US history happened under this administration. I feel like Americans are doing a decent job when it comes to showing up civilly right now.

[15:40] HOBBITFOLLOWER: I just want to address what you just said about people having to work. One of the things I have an issue with is people being so gung-ho to talk about insane steps to take, and then they're like, "But we can't do anything right now because I have bills to pay." You think that if shit pops off, the bills you're worried about right now are going to be your biggest worry? Right now, you should take a little bit of a financial hit to avoid the insane issue. I think it's a cop-out when people say that, but they're literally just plotting for the time to "pop off" instead of doing the infinite amount of things they could do before that.

[16:21] DESTINY: Yeah, but I think we're all still indexed on it being a pretty low chance of it actually getting to that point.

[16:25] HOBBITFOLLOWER: No, you are wrong then. That's not the sentiment in the community. People in the community believe it's an inevitability that there will be violence.

[16:35] DESTINY: Sure. I'm saying that the people claiming they can't protest because of work-related stuff... I don't know if those people are the same ones saying the chance of violence is super high. That feels like a younger online opinion than a real-life "I can't stop working" opinion. Also, that's a really high burden to place on somebody—that they need to make material sacrifices for an outcome where they don't even know how much support they're going to get nationally. 

[17:05] HOBBITFOLLOWER: Do you think our leaders are failing us? I feel like bigger people could be out there leading huge movements, like Trump did for January 6th. I'm not calling for a January 6th, but they should be meeting at these places.

[17:21] DESTINY: I mean, they have kind of been doing this, though. We saw the "No Kings" protest. We saw a federal senator arrested in California for showing up at that press conference. We saw Texas lawmakers literally flee the state to avoid that quorum requirement. Once they came back, some of them were literally locked in the state assembly room until they could vote.

[18:05] HOBBITFOLLOWER: Yeah, that's nice, but I don't think it's incentivizing the average person to come out with them and getting huge crowds. The average person doesn't know what to do right now and they have to wait around for the next "No Kings" protest.

[18:23] DESTINY: This is the difficult thing. We don't have a mental template for this. In every movie, when you think about an uprising against a vicious authoritarian, it's usually "us versus them," and "us" is the smaller guy who vastly outnumbers them. But the problem is that this administration is there by popular support of half the country. It makes things so different. When we complain that our leaders are weak, well, they shouldn't be able to do anything. They don't have a majority in either half of Congress, we don't have the Supreme Court, and the President won the popular vote. Why would we expect our leaders to be able to do anything? The American public granted them the authority to do whatever they wanted, basically.

[19:15] HOBBITFOLLOWER: I'm not asking them to do anything congressionally; I understand we don't have the power for that. I'm asking them to start setting up rallies.

[19:24] DESTINY: Here's the thing: I firmly believe one of the biggest mistakes we've made over the past three decades is that we just don't have a concrete ask. That's why these things fall apart and feel so hopeless. For Occupy Wall Street, what was the ask? It was vague.

[19:45] HOBBITFOLLOWER: I think the ICE one is easy. Your ask could be: "We need to abolish ICE and rework it."

[19:55] DESTINY: You could make that ask, but I don't know if the average person jumps on it. The messaging on that already got fucked by lefties four years ago. Even in the strongest version of that argument, I'm not sure you get enough support nationally to decide elections. If you could have a clear demand, like in Minnesota where they wanted ICE to leave their state, they were energized because it was a clear demand and they got them out. But for "No Kings," what was the point? It was historically huge, but there was no concrete demand.

[21:05] HOBBITFOLLOWER: Why was Walz not out there leading the movement? The governor or the mayor should have been out there on the forefront, getting a march going.

[21:26] DESTINY: It might also be that our politicians on the left feel that politicians and activists are very separate, whereas Republicans have merged those things. Maybe we need to get our politicians more on board with protesting.

[22:27] HOBBITFOLLOWER: What if we just got our activists to actually do stuff? I had a conversation with Hutch while you were gone. One of the things I think is wrong is that we have a lot of liberal commentators and political people online—yourself, Brian Tyler Cohen, Josiah, Hutch, even Pisco—who are pointing at incidents and informing people, but do you not think there's a duty for those on the online left to put themselves out there? Not in the way Hasan is doing—Hasan is a fucking LARPer. 

[23:27] HOBBITFOLLOWER: Why would a streamer with a certain amount of viewers not go to a facility, live stream it, and live stream themselves being arrested or doing civil disobedience? They can afford the consequences and draw more eyes to it. Nobody is really doing that.

[24:28] DESTINY: I feel like one of the big issues is that there's no unity on the left. It's hard to get anybody on board. If you think about J6, how many knowable Republican figures were out there unified? You had Nick Fuentes, Alex Jones, Infowars guys, and senators. It was a huge collaboration from the top down. Meanwhile, no collective group of left-leaning streamers can even work together. Hasan goes out and starts shitting on Democrats. Vaush says he never wants to leave the house. If I go out and do anything, I have to give 50 million hedges because if anyone is seen with me, people will say they're a "rape collaborator." There's no unity.

[25:29] DESTINY: What you're saying is my wet dream fantasy. Theoretically, it would be amazing to have Hasan, Vaush, Destiny, and other large creators call for a huge protest at a specific place. You could easily get a thousand-plus people just from fans. If you collaborate with local organizers, you'd get tons of people and media coverage. But we are totally incapable of doing that right now. We just don't have that unity, which is really annoying.

[26:29] HOBBITFOLLOWER: I feel like on the left, specifically in Congress, it feels like a lot of them are streamers who just don't want to interact with their community. When I think back to history, MLK was leading people through marches. We shouldn't be looking towards our elected representatives to be activists, but we don't even have anyone leading the charge on the activist side. We just have people looking at the problem and talking about it over and over.

[27:29] DESTINY: Nobody's looking for people to step up because there's not even agreement on what the problem is. This is why I'm irritated by the Epstein stuff—everyone who is bought into it just "both-sides" it. The more you get into the activist group, the further you get from the broad electorate. On the right, the politicians are connected to the activist class. Charlie Kirk talks to Trump every few days. When you have that support, your marches are supported politically and you have the ears of the voters. On the left, our most activist people don't even support the Democratic Party at all. It's just infighting.

[29:32] HOBBITFOLLOWER: I would think that multiple people with clout and influence should be out there on the front lines making content out of what used to be something written in the paper.

[29:45] DESTINY: I don't know. Josiah is probably still scared of doing content with me. I don't know if BTC will go anywhere near me publicly as long as I'm still in court. But let me ask: if I went out and live-streamed myself getting arrested over something, do you think those people are just going to ignore it?

[30:33] DESTINY: My YouTube channel made over a million dollars a year and it got demonetized because of a clip that went live on Jesse Watters and was rebroadcasted by the President's son. Nobody even mentioned it. One of the largest potential cash infusion sources for the online left was wiped away, and nobody gave a shit. So do I think people would care if I got arrested? They might make a five-minute segment, but otherwise, probably not. They'd probably laugh at me.

[31:15] DESTINY: If I go out and die, Hasan and Mike from PA are going to make a stream about how they "can't believe they killed one of their own" while calling me a "Gusano" who got wasted by the administration I supposedly stood for. Look at how much my canvassing gets dunked on by these guys saying I only do it for clout. Look at how people shit on Dylan Burns and call him a "war tourist." There's no support on the left for people who actually go out and do stuff.

[32:35] HOBBITFOLLOWER: I'm not saying you're doing something wrong, but the idea that we should not be pushing to do more things is what I'm fighting.

[32:45] DESTINY: I never said we shouldn't be pushing to do more things. But for instance, me and Vaush could be making content together very easily. I tried to do that one event with him and Emma Vigeland, and even there, the conversations were awkward. Emma Vigeland was saying online content creators don't matter anyway. Nobody in this space wants to actually do anything in real-life advocacy. There's no appetite for it.

[33:35] DESTINY: People attack me when I suggest Lauren Southern or Nick Fuentes deserve credit for their effectiveness, but these are people with much smaller budgets who were inspirational enough to get people to actually do things. Meanwhile, you have Hasan doing nothing except posting pathetic emo clips on Twitter begging Gavin Newsom for an interview, and Vaush who says he's too autistic to leave his house. The liberal media guys exist now, but they don't collaborate in the real world.

[34:36] HOBBITFOLLOWER: That's what I was saying—it's a failing on their part. My main contention is that not enough is being done. People aren't doing enough right now, and all that's being talked about is the extreme ends of what's happening. At the beginning of the Trump administration, people were calling for general strikes, but it was just LARPing because there was no goal.

[35:55] HOBBITFOLLOWER: You would agree that you would go for a general strike before you would go for anybody taking up arms against the country, right? That should always be the very last stop.

[36:15] DESTINY: Yeah, of course.

[36:17] HOBBITFOLLOWER: A lot of people believe we are already past that. When I interact with people and they say, "Well, we've tried protesting and look at what's happened," they feel it's not working. But we are so far back from where people believe we are. We haven't actually exhausted those options. It's unfortunate that people have died in protests, but it's nowhere near the level where people should be frothing at the mouth for the "next step" of civil war.

[40:45] DESTINY: I don't disagree. But there has to be an answer besides, "Well, let's just pretend everything is cool and chill." We have an activist class that, if it exists at all, is captured by far-lefties who hate the Democratic Party. The center-left is too politically illiterate to understand the moment we're in. I don't know what the solution is.

[41:47] HOBBITFOLLOWER: I think the best thing to do... [End of provided text]
---

--- [continued] ---

---
SUMMARY
In this concluding segment of a long-form discussion, Destiny and his head subreddit moderator, Hobbitfollower, grapple with the rising tide of radicalization within the DGG community. Hobbitfollower expresses deep concern over the normalization of violent rhetoric and the potential for the subreddit to be banned, while Destiny argues that his "tit-for-tat" approach is a necessary response to a Republican party that has abandoned all limiting principles. They debate the efficacy of institutional "business as usual" tactics versus more extreme measures of accountability, such as "show trials" or aggressive congressional investigations. The conversation also touches on the difficulty of left-wing political organizing, the "radioactivity" of Destiny’s brand due to harassment from other leftist influencers like Hasan Piker, and the necessity of maintaining strict moderation standards to prevent the community from spiraling into genuine political violence.

TRANSCRIPT
[42:15] HOBBITFOLLOWER: And it’s—you might laugh, but genuinely, it would be to get a community to email a certain congressman or woman to lead a movement for something. We would have to figure out what we want to change, what is easy to understand, and then get someone who's actually in political power to lead said movement.

DESTINY: I don't think that's necessarily—

HOBBITFOLLOWER: Can I address something real quick that just keeps getting said in chat?

DESTINY: Sure.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: By Gables. I don't know who it is, but—

DESTINY: One guy.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: Yeah, I am getting "one-guyed." They assume that all of my positions on this are because my dad is a Republican, and that's not the case. They think that everything I hinge my entire beliefs on is the fact that I don't want my dad to get hurt. I think that's just a stupid way to go about things. This is my issue: every time I try to address something, people think that I have some ulterior motive. And that's just not the case. I think it's wrong that so many people are talking about violence in a way that is insane. If you're okay with talking about violence in the amount that you are, there's something wrong with you.

DESTINY: Okay.

[43:16] HOBBITFOLLOWER: And it's not people that are joking. I don't know how to say this without it sounding "soy," and I have to couch my language because of the platform that we're on. But I think people believe that because they are of sane mind, the people I'm talking about are also of sane mind. They’re not. I've talked to many people now that truly believe the only way we're going to get out of this is if people die.

DESTINY: Sure. And can we just admit that that's not the only way we can get out of this? In fact, we should try to avoid that.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: Yeah, but people believe that Destiny thinks that's what—

DESTINY: It depends. I think that we can change our political system without mass violence. I'm not going to say more people won't die; they're dying every day from old age. I'm sorry, but I mean—I understand that for—no, that’s me. I’m not going to say that. I know that you care about other people, but the USA is gone. There are millions of lives gone. The joking about the murdering of Venezuelans out in boats—I'm pretty sure unless Congress changed their position on this, the administration never showed compelling evidence that these people were involved in any kind of actual illegal drug trade. Even if that was the case, that wouldn't give you the right to just murder them for a country that you're not at war with. You've got Prey and you've got Renee, but you've also got people that have been deported from this country who either will never come back or should have never been deported, whose lives are being harmed. These are all things that are happening. When you say, "Well, we can get there without any violence," what you mean to say—and I'll clarify, I'm not trying to bad faith you—is that we can get back ideally without there being any kind of organized violence on our side. I think that is true. I agree with that. But don't say "without violence at all," because the current administration is fully engaged in violent activity on a daily basis against us and other countries. They thrive in it. They love it. They revel in it.

[45:17] HOBBITFOLLOWER: But you've been talking about a "tit-for-tat" strategy non-stop. You could see how, if that is your general point, people would just brush that across the board. So when you're saying Alex, Prey, and Renee were killed and that's violence, they are seeing a "tit-for-tat" where something needs to happen in turn because of that.

DESTINY: I'm not saying that they're taking from it—I don't want that to be the case. I do clarify: I don't want this country to head in the direction of political violence. One of the reasons why—and you brought this to my attention, it made me think about it more because I probably wouldn't have said anything otherwise—is that I think of everything from the perspective of a streamer. If I'm making a decision, I'm thinking, "How would my chat react if this happened?" When I'm thinking about political violence, if a shooter came from my community, would I be like, "That's awesome and based," or would I be horrified that a shooter came from my community to kill an ICE agent or something? I think I would be more on the horrified side right now. So, I'm like, "Okay, well, we probably need to curb the sub and the rhetoric." I don't think I would want this coming from my community.

[46:18] DESTINY: But here's the thing—I just don't know how to put this into words. If Alex or Renee was somebody that I knew or a family member, and somebody told me that we're moving on to the next administration and the two officers involved will never even be investigated, let alone charged with a crime, and that's just something you're going to have to live with? That's an unfathomable position to me. I don't know how you get that person to engage with democratic society anymore. That's just beyond the pale.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: That's the radicalizing part, though, right? When you're basically saying if somebody is a certain amount of closeness, it's hard to turn them away from that. I agree with that. My issue is that people are not next to that. Every time I try to talk about this, people think I'm not taking it seriously. I communicated to the mod team and the manager in DGG that I had to watch that video 55 times because of moderating. When people would post something, I would have to watch the video to make sure it was a legitimate thing and not some AI post. I understand why people feel like they're being radicalized, but I just keep circling back to this: I don't think people understand how radicalized people are getting.

[48:20] HOBBITFOLLOWER: I've had conversations with people that say the only way this is going to be better is if people hang. That's just a crazy way to go through this. That's why I disagree with a lot of the stuff you're talking about with Hutch. I think Hutch has a bad way of communicating his stuff where it just seems like "business as usual." Maybe we can pivot to that. It should be very serious that we are not talking about hurting people, no matter how much we hate them. One of the things Hutch was talking to you about yesterday was congressional committees and investigations. You said that was a "business as usual" thing. At one point, you said we need to make them into "Hunter Bidens."

DESTINY: Mhm.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: Do you think congressional investigations in general aren't sufficient, or do you think the symmetry is the problem?

DESTINY: Do you think the Republican Congress was investigating Hunter Biden as much as they were because they legitimately thought there were crimes there to be investigated?

HOBBITFOLLOWER: Because his name was Biden?

DESTINY: Yes.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: No, I understand that. But why do you think we need to make stuff up? Why can't we just use what they are actually doing? Most of what they're doing is probably wrong.

DESTINY: No, we do, because most of what they're doing is strictly speaking probably not illegal.

[50:26] HOBBITFOLLOWER: Defying court orders and things like that aren't illegal? We can't find information about them?

DESTINY: You can't retroactively—it's not enforced. You can't retroactively arrest somebody for defying a court order if the court didn't issue a warrant or decide to hold somebody in contempt.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: Yeah, but Congress can go pretty deep into people and find things. If things get pardoned, Congress can start to subpoena people and hold them accountable in ways that get past the pardon without having to take extrajudicial means, which I think is where you believe is the only way we can do things.

DESTINY: I think we're going to loop on this conversation. I think we just fundamentally disagree here. I think the other side still believes that Republicans are just working with Congress, and if we just work with Congress and do all the things Congress is supposed to do, it’s the same thing. I have failed at communicating the extent of the norm-violating that the other side has engaged in for years and years.

[51:27] HOBBITFOLLOWER: I understand that stuff. You were talking to Connor earlier, and you said—

DESTINY: Hold on. You understand that for the investigations into Hunter Biden, that was not done in a good-faith adherence to the law?

HOBBITFOLLOWER: I completely understand that.

DESTINY: Okay. So if we wanted to do something similar to what they do with Hunter Biden, we would have to act in a way that is not in good-faith adherence to the law.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: Sure. But the reason they had to do that with Hunter Biden is because Hunter Biden didn't do anything wrong. Whereas these people *are* doing things that are wrong. So we don't need to fabricate something.

DESTINY: You can't arrest somebody or subpoena somebody for defying a court order. That's up to the court to enforce. You can't investigate somebody because they defied a court order. That's a hearing in court where a judge decides on contempt.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: But Congress has broad authority to subpoena people. All you have to say is that you're subpoenaing them for a legislative purpose. You could say, "We're wondering if there should be a law that DHS can't do this," and then subpoena Kristi Noem and everyone underneath her. They can basically do whatever they want after that because the legislative purpose is met.

DESTINY: Well, sure, but then you are doing the "Hunter Biden thing" to them, which was my position. So I don't know where we disagree.

[53:28] HOBBITFOLLOWER: But they are doing things that are wrong. I feel like you are trying to figure out what we need to do out of the bounds of what the norms are.

DESTINY: That's not a norm. The norm is not to fabricate. What you're talking about is "pretextual." If we're using a violation of a court order to go on a fishing expedition, that's not a good-faith adherence to the law. I agree we should do it, but it's not good faith. I don't want Congress to normally go on fishing expeditions for everybody because they happened to violate a court order.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: Well, I think that's where these judges are starting to write things in their rulings. The judiciary should be calling in those people. But then we're just leaning on the judiciary over and over, and that's the issue we're in right now.

[54:28] HOBBITFOLLOWER: You talked about anti-hero stuff. Congress is the perfect person to be your anti-hero. It is the norm now for political theater to happen in Congress. You just read that big long email full of things the Trump administration isn't doing—that person cited things as if the Trump administration is doing them already, but they kind of aren't. It’s like how the Trump administration says Democrats have been doing this for years when they really haven't. I feel like you're taking things even further than they're taking them. I think we can just take them to the steps they're taking, and that's far enough. Why do we need to jail people without bringing up a trial?

DESTINY: Well, because I think they kind of are, for all of the immigration stuff.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: Yeah, but the immigration stuff is an immigration law thing that we're doing incorrectly, other than the US citizen part.

DESTINY: They are doing it with some US citizens, which is the issue. But we're going to loop on this. You think they're adhering to a rule set that I don't think they're adhering to.

[56:29] HOBBITFOLLOWER: But what you just said was playing within the confines of what they've stretched. You're like, "Why would we arrest people without charges?" and I'm like, "Well, they kind of already are related to immigration." You're talking about doing "video game stuff" to Pam Bondi. That's just not something that's happening.

DESTINY: Well, Donald Trump talked about executing prior officials.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: He talked about it; he didn't do it.

DESTINY: You shouldn't talk about it. I would argue that talking about it is almost as bad as doing it. But we're so brainwashed as Americans that we don't see the difference. The President of the United States talking about executing political opponents? At the very least, that should be an instantaneous impeachment. That's insane.

[57:30] DESTINY: If you want to impress upon me that something really good will come from the current path, you have to give me a good reason why I should believe Republicans will try to act this way in 2028 or 2032. I haven't heard a single thing that is remotely convincing on that yet.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: But you would also admit that your way of doing things isn't foolproof.

DESTINY: I don't think anything is guaranteed, but I do think my path—which is not just running around and killing people—of being way more extreme does have a better outcome. The idea is that in the future, when people know this exists, nobody behaves this way anymore because it’s obviously not worth it. We all have to be good stewards of the law because we don't want some crazy shit to happen. In your world, you're just setting yourself up for future harms because people say, "Oh, we waived this in the past, why wouldn't we do it again?" There’s always going to be another side willing to return to norms while the other side figures out how much they can rape the government again.

[58:30] HOBBITFOLLOWER: They could also just do that same thing after you do all the stuff you're doing and just say, "Oh, well, we're just never going to give the government back now."

DESTINY: I disagree for two reasons. One, I don't think there is a limiting factor on them right now. Every single person has brought this up, so either nobody agrees with me or I haven't communicated it well. You speak as though they have a limiting principle based on what Democrats have done. That's not true. The limiting principle is just based on what they think they can get away with. It’s whatever their constituency has an appetite for. Number two, I think a big reason why they do the shit they do now is because they feel like there's no punishment. If you were a conservative right now, why would you not lie, cheat, and defame when you know there are no serious repercussions and the rewards are numerous? They'll probably get a pardon, too.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: One trillion percent.

[60:31] HOBBITFOLLOWER: By the way, I think pardons should not be able to happen on trials that have not concluded yet. I don't think somebody should be able to be pardoned until they are found guilty or not guilty in a crime.

DESTINY: I don't necessarily disagree with that. Or at the very least, if somebody accepts a pardon, they have to publicly admit in front of a court, "I am guilty of doing these things."

HOBBITFOLLOWER: Technically, if you accept a pardon, you're kind of accepting the guilt, and you lose your right to invoke the Fifth Amendment because you cannot be prosecuted. That's not a super hardcore tested theory, but I've heard it.

[61:32] HOBBITFOLLOWER: I think that should be something we push. In my world, I believe most people are going to be pardoned by Trump. That's where we should be going after people. We should start legally testing the pardon power and someone's ability to stay silent. It would be equally as good to do show trials in Congress with all of these people, asking them questions they can't Fifth Amendment out of. One of the main issues with the January 6th committee is that they did almost every deposition behind closed doors. We should be having show trials in Congress over and over.

DESTINY: Sure, but you have to have the media working with you as well. There was a huge presentation on the J6 stuff, but at the end of the day, most Americans just don't give a shit.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: But the Epstein stuff—one of the reasons why it continues to be a big deal is because it's an ongoing thing that's not being addressed.

DESTINY: The Epstein stuff reinforces my point. The reason it was such a big deal is because it was a Republican messaging point. I remember Dan Bongino screaming on podcasts about it. Pam Bondi—remember what I said about politicians working with influencers? How many influencers did Pam Bondi bring to the building where she handed them all the binders? It’s a Republican talking point.

[63:36] HOBBITFOLLOWER: Yeah, the Dems suck at messaging.

DESTINY: It's not that they suck; it's that the Dems are politicians doing political things, and the Republicans have transformed completely into a political party of influencers. You can't compete in that environment.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: Are you planning on watching the Bill Clinton deposition or the Hillary Clinton deposition?

DESTINY: Maybe.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: You should watch the Bill Clinton one. Having the President of the United States do a deposition in front of Congress is something we should build off of. Hillary talks about how she fought to have her depositions in public because she believes that's the right thing to do. When Congress moves forward after 2026, they need to say, "We want to do all this in public." If people don't comply with subpoenas, our candidate in 2028 needs to run on the idea that Congress is an equal branch of government that needs to be listened to.

[65:37] HOBBITFOLLOWER: Can you tell me a way I can put together my thoughts on the violence stuff to convince people it's a larger deal? I feel like it's just seen as a joke.

DESTINY: I agree it's a joke, but this is what I got demonetized for. I said conservatives should be afraid of violence when they're talking openly about how sexy and awesome a civil war would be. People romanticize civil war violence too much, but it's happening constantly on the right while their administration enacts violence against us. Then we're supposed to take an "uber principled" stance. There's going to be a breaking point.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: We should exhaust every other avenue first. We're past due to start working on exhausting those other avenues, but the construction of the left right now—it's just not there. People say they don't know what they should be doing. I'm trying to figure out something with the political action guys. There are weekend protests near me with 20 to 30 people holding signs. You can do that, and I support it, but—

[67:39] DESTINY: On one side, you've got "join a protest on a street corner with 20 people," and on the other side, it's "here's $50,000 to join ICE and beat the shit out of brown people that you're allowed to legally racially profile now." And if you kill a US citizen, we'll ship you to another state to avoid scrutiny and you'll probably get a pardon. I understand what you're saying, but the motivation on the left to engage in polite society is a really hard sell. I'll do my job to message a little bit less radically; I don't want a shooter coming out of my community. But you can get radicalized by the other side as well. The entire right—the reason why 160 schoolgirls died in some Iranian school is because people on the right 11 years ago got triggered by pronouns in Twitter bios. They got so triggered they supported one of the most authoritarian regimes in US history. But "you guys" can't get triggered by them murdering US citizens in the street or bombing other countries because that would be "bad politics" and we need to protest on street corners instead? There's a lot of understandable grievance.

[68:40] HOBBITFOLLOWER: The left "woke scolds" too much. The left is like, "We need to play within the bounds of the law," but the right doesn't give a shit. They got "giga-in-power" and now we have children being bombed. It's disgusting. I understand why people are angry and want to "fed-post."

DESTINY: I do as well. If I could say what I want to say, I would. But I can't. People need to stop doing that because they can't either. We're going to have to start holding hands and making people understand they can't do that.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: Why do you think so many people hate Hutch for his position when IRI (I'm Really Important) has a way more extreme position—that they're all going to walk and we need to move on?

[70:43] DESTINY: IRI just doesn't engage in it as much. And my community is incapable of having small disagreements. If there's even a minor disagreement, people blow their brains out trying to express how much they hate the person I'm talking to. The response to Hutch is often unhinged, but it's because Hutch engages with the topic more. Hutch is also a bit more provocative, like I am. If IRI gives a position you disagree with, you're less likely to hate him because of his demeanor.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: I think IRI should come in more often to put things in perspective. I don't think Trump's ever going to be held accountable because he's just an old dude; he's going to die before anything happens.

DESTINY: Do you think he *should* be held accountable?

HOBBITFOLLOWER: Yeah, absolutely. I think he should be jailed.

DESTINY: What if he pardons himself and everyone in his administration?

HOBBITFOLLOWER: That's what I was saying—we should push the limits of the pardon power.

DESTINY: But it's already done. You can't change it retroactively.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: You bring those people in for questioning.

DESTINY: To jail?

HOBBITFOLLOWER: Correct.

DESTINY: Okay, so you still want the status quo to continue and then you would just fix it in the future.

[72:48] HOBBITFOLLOWER: I personally am not subscribed to the "jail people for no reason" part. I think Hutch thinks everything can be solved by just letting things play out.

DESTINY: Hutch has an aggressive position; he just doesn't want to stray outside of legality.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: No, Hutch said explicitly that the person running in 2028 should not communicate that they want to use the DOJ to go after political opponents. He believes we should stick to the norm of keeping the DOJ independent.

DESTINY: Okay, maybe he says that. I just want to represent his view fairly.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: I watch Hutch just as much as I watch you. I think it's weird that people like IRI but attack Hutch. I told Hutch, "As much as you continue to read the subreddit for unhinged people, I'm going to allow people to post unhinged shit about you because you're farming the community." He's actively engaging with it for hours.

[75:51] HOBBITFOLLOWER: People in the subreddit say, "Destiny does it, so good luck trying to get the community to stop." They see you as using the extreme language I'm talking about.

DESTINY: Yeah, I agree with that.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: You said you wouldn't do that as much.

DESTINY: Yeah.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: Also, international DGGers: you are not American. Do not post as an American on the subreddit. You will be destroyed if I find out you are a non-American posting as if you are.

DESTINY: I'm grateful. Are you ready to go?

HOBBITFOLLOWER: I'll figure out a better way to say this behind the scenes. Chat doesn't seem to take it seriously. To me, it's serious—if you're talking about hurting people, you should take those threats seriously.

[77:53] DESTINY: I agree, but be careful with your phrasing. You make it sound like the only way you could have thoughts like this is if you're not taking it seriously. But for the people who *are* taking it seriously, these are the thoughts they've arrived at. That's a fundamentally different conversation.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: What I'm saying they should take seriously is the fact that they are arriving at that position and feeling as if there's nothing else they can do. That's what radicalizes people.

DESTINY: If you want to be violent, all of your energy should be fixated on exhausting all the steps along the way—activism, protests, strikes—to force political hands. Those are the steps you need to exhaust first.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: Would you ever want to lead stuff like that?

DESTINY: In a perfect world, sure, but I'm radioactive. Everybody is radioactive to everybody on the left, but I'm especially radioactive. It's literally impossible for me to collaborate. Hutch is already getting shit from anti-fan communities because he talked to me yesterday. Hasan almost destroyed Lonerbox's entire streaming career just because he was tangentially related to me.

[79:55] HOBBITFOLLOWER: I hear what you're saying, but the right literally memes about the lady whose husband got hit with a hammer, or people getting shot on the left. It's really hard to give a shit.

DESTINY: And then all the "violent memes" on our side are actually just tankies memeing about Jews in Israel. I understand the community should tone it down, but man, is it fucking hard.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: It would really fucking suck if we got nuked because Reddit said a meme posted 7,000 times is against the rules. If I could speak openly, I would, but I can't because of Terms of Service. I'm not trying to downplay what's happening; I'm trying to figure out how people can know it's serious but also that we shouldn't do that.

[81:56] DESTINY: Somebody just linked this—"Leftist Blondie" and Mike from PA tweeting that I'm a "fan girl" who helped create Nick Fuentes's career and admitted to possessing child porn. And Hasan is jumping on these tweets. And I'm supposed to go lead protests? It's impossible. You have Lauren Boebert snapping photos of Hillary Clinton in a closed-door deposition and shipping them to Benny Johnson. This world sucks. That's why we have *Abiotic Factor* and *Mewgenics*.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: Where are you going to move if the country goes to shit?

DESTINY: To Hawaii? Okay, anything else?

HOBBITFOLLOWER: I just wanted to give people a warning. You don't have any issue with me banning international people acting as if they're Americans to rile up the subreddit?

DESTINY: Yeah, I agree with that.

HOBBITFOLLOWER: Okay. I love everybody in the subreddit and DGG chat. It's really fucking bad right now, and I'm just trying to keep us all safe. If you guys disagree with me, you can keep yourself safe. Have a good day, everybody.
---