Latest / Yaron Brook Show / Self-Interest vs. Extremism: Yaron Brook on Capitalism, Cronyism & Individual Rights | Sitch & Adam

Transcript

Self-Interest vs. Extremism: Yaron Brook on Capitalism, Cronyism & Individual Rights | Sitch & Adam · Yaron Brook Show

0:02
Speaker 1: They're coming to get me. Hey everyone, I'm here with
0:05
Speaker 1: yarn Brooke and Psa Sich and we're going to talk
0:08
Speaker 1: about maybe some current events and some objectivism. Yarn Brook
0:13
Speaker 1: is the chairman of the board of the ant Iron
0:16
Speaker 1: Rand Institute. That's correct, right.
0:18
Speaker 2: Yarn Nice correction. Nice correction on.
0:21
Speaker 1: The Iron Rand. I'm not sure I know how to
0:24
Speaker 1: pronounce it, to be honest.
0:25
Speaker 2: Vimes with mine, Iron vins with mine.
0:27
Speaker 3: I makes sense.
0:29
Speaker 1: And you also have some books. You want to tell
0:31
Speaker 1: people about your books?
0:33
Speaker 2: Yeah, female, good revolution. How iron Man's ideas can end be?
0:36
Speaker 2: Government equal is unfair? Uh?
0:41
Speaker 4: And uh the mold case for finance.
0:44
Speaker 1: Equal is unfair. I agree with that.
0:47
Speaker 2: Actually, yeah, equal is evil. Equal is bad.
0:51
Speaker 1: So I have some questions for you. Obviously, we Sitch
0:56
Speaker 1: and I both consider ourselves liberal, and we're always fighting
0:59
Speaker 1: with people over the death definition of liberal because a
1:02
Speaker 1: lot of times I think conservatives they think of liberal
1:06
Speaker 1: as socialists. We're not really socialists. We're individualists. I think
1:11
Speaker 1: of liberalism as a desire to increase individual rights as
1:18
Speaker 1: much as possible without destroying society. That's kind of the
1:21
Speaker 1: way I conceptualize it. That is that the way you
1:25
Speaker 1: conceptualize liberalism or is it a different way.
1:28
Speaker 2: Well, I think one of the problems of liberal one
1:30
Speaker 2: of the problems with the definition of liberalism, just like
1:33
Speaker 2: the problem with the definition of conservatism, is it's kind
1:36
Speaker 2: of fuzzy and not clear. I mean, what does it
1:40
Speaker 2: mean to increase individual rights without breaking society? What are
1:43
Speaker 2: individual rights? What is increasing individual rights? Is it that
1:46
Speaker 2: we have them or we don't have them? I think
1:49
Speaker 2: liberalism and this is why you have a classical liberals.
1:53
Speaker 2: You have kind of left leaning liberals, which is what
1:56
Speaker 2: people think when they would think liberal as a communists.
1:58
Speaker 2: You have European style liber you have American style liberals.
2:02
Speaker 2: I think liberalism is generally historically that movement that had
2:09
Speaker 2: broadly speaking, a pro liberty agenda, you know, liberal liberty,
2:16
Speaker 2: but it was never very specific about what that meant,
2:20
Speaker 2: and therefore branched out in lots of different directions and
2:23
Speaker 2: was very inconsistent and as a consequence, I think is failing.
2:28
Speaker 1: Well if you go too far left, though, if you
2:30
Speaker 1: go more towards the communist realm, I do think you're
2:35
Speaker 1: impinging on individual freedom.
2:37
Speaker 2: Absolutely, So that's not liberal. So I agree with you
2:40
Speaker 2: in a sense American liberalism, which is left, is a
2:45
Speaker 2: perversion of the term. In Europe, liberal still means kind
2:49
Speaker 2: of pro liberty, generally, pro markets, generally pro individual rights,
2:54
Speaker 2: but not very radical about any one of those things,
2:58
Speaker 2: and they're much more class the liberal liberal means more
3:01
Speaker 2: of the classical liberal kind of view. It's only in
3:03
Speaker 2: America that the left kind of stole the wood liberal
3:07
Speaker 2: and reinvented it as kind of a leftist socialist program.
3:12
Speaker 4: Yeah.
3:12
Speaker 1: I kind of like though, that we are splitting it
3:15
Speaker 1: from liberal and progressive, and it really seems like the
3:18
Speaker 1: progressives are more of the socialist bent.
3:23
Speaker 2: But again it's it's a it's a it's a very
3:25
Speaker 2: bad use of the term right, because progressives in America
3:28
Speaker 2: are not for progress. And indeed, historically the progressive movement
3:32
Speaker 2: we started in the nineteenth century in the United States
3:36
Speaker 2: was not a pro progress movement, not in the sense
3:39
Speaker 2: of progress as we understand it.
3:41
Speaker 4: So again, they took a good wood progress right.
3:44
Speaker 2: I'm a progressive, I believe in progress, and and they've
3:48
Speaker 2: distorted and perverted it for some political gains. So it's
3:52
Speaker 2: kind of sad that our I like socialism, I like capitalism,
3:58
Speaker 2: I like conservatism, because it doesn't mean any what are they
4:00
Speaker 2: trying to conserve?
4:01
Speaker 4: But it represents something. It's kind of a.
4:03
Speaker 2: Static, static status go, you know, uninteresting, which is what
4:07
Speaker 2: I think typical conservatives are. I don't like the terms
4:10
Speaker 2: progressive and liberal again. I think has been has been
4:16
Speaker 2: in America, has been uprooted from taking away from its
4:20
Speaker 2: roots and and distorted.
4:21
Speaker 1: Unfortunately, what would you call yourself now? Do you call
4:25
Speaker 1: yourself a libertarian? I have a bunch of friends that
4:27
Speaker 1: have kind of strayed away from the term because I
4:30
Speaker 1: hate current environment, okay.
4:32
Speaker 2: And herself hated the term she called. She called libertarians
4:36
Speaker 2: right wing hippies, and I think.
4:38
Speaker 4: She was right.
4:39
Speaker 1: Well, that seems totally correct, and so.
4:43
Speaker 2: No, I do not call myself a libertarian, Pamli, because
4:47
Speaker 2: libertarianism is another one of those concepts similar to liberal
4:52
Speaker 2: and to conservatives, that means nothing. It's it's like a
4:54
Speaker 2: big tent umbrella that includes kind of free market republicans
4:59
Speaker 2: all the way to Ramas loving Putin loving, anti immigration anarchists,
5:07
Speaker 2: and I don't want to be in that tent. I
5:09
Speaker 2: don't want to be among those people, you know, So
5:11
Speaker 2: I call myself an objectivist. My political philosophy is capitalism.
5:16
Speaker 2: I'm a capitalist as opposed to a socialist or or
5:20
Speaker 2: middle of the ODA mixed economist. I believe in LESFA capitalism.
5:25
Speaker 2: So politically i'm a capitalist. Philosophically, I'm an objectivist.
5:29
Speaker 1: Right, Okay, Well, the place where I think we probably
5:33
Speaker 1: disagree is on the morality, and I think we can
5:37
Speaker 1: let me. Let me articulate my critique of objectivism, and
5:41
Speaker 1: we'll kind of see where the conversation goes. You're you
5:45
Speaker 1: you conceptualize selfishness as as a moral moral behavior, correct?
5:54
Speaker 2: Yes? I well, it's a standard by which all my
5:56
Speaker 2: behavior should be.
5:57
Speaker 1: Judged, right, Okay, I I there's this idea that selfishness
6:04
Speaker 1: beats altruism within groups, right, But altruistic groups beat selfish groups,
6:10
Speaker 1: and I think nature as it stands is is really
6:15
Speaker 1: groups fighting against other groups. So, oh, go ahead. Do
6:20
Speaker 1: you want to respond to that?
6:21
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean I think that's that's I mean, I
6:24
Speaker 2: don't conceptualize anything that way, right, And it's not clear
6:27
Speaker 2: to me that that's even true. You know, I think
6:30
Speaker 2: groups that are motivated by this that where the individuals
6:35
Speaker 2: are motivated by their own self interest beat altruistic groups.
6:38
Speaker 4: Any day, all the time.
6:41
Speaker 2: So I mean, and that would be true in sports,
6:43
Speaker 2: and that would be true in military campaigns, and tue
6:46
Speaker 2: in economics. That's why corporations are so cool, right. Corporations
6:50
Speaker 2: are these groups of self interested individuals all trying to
6:54
Speaker 2: kind of maximize their own well being over the long
6:57
Speaker 2: run in a rational way, and they do nominally well economically. Well,
7:02
Speaker 2: you can compet to a commune or like a co
7:06
Speaker 2: op where everybody's an altruist and they're running the business
7:12
Speaker 2: based on everybody within the group being an altruist, and
7:14
Speaker 2: they can't compete against the corporation. And I think that's
7:17
Speaker 2: true of a country which is based on individual rights
7:21
Speaker 2: and therefore based on the self interest of individuals, like
7:23
Speaker 2: America versus a communist country that is based on everybody
7:27
Speaker 2: being an altruist and sacrificing the common good. America is
7:31
Speaker 2: going to beat the communist country every single time, and economically, militarily,
7:37
Speaker 2: in any respect. So no, self interest is the driving
7:40
Speaker 2: force of achievement in human life, and groups of self
7:45
Speaker 2: interested individuals are going to be the most productive, the strongest,
7:49
Speaker 2: and indeed the most cohesive.
7:51
Speaker 1: Well, I do, I totally agree with you that self
7:54
Speaker 1: interest is the state of nature, and in the economic
7:59
Speaker 1: realm with the corporations and stuff like that, I agree
8:02
Speaker 1: with everything that you're saying. Where you get into the
8:05
Speaker 1: realm of military campaigns versus other military campaigns, there is
8:10
Speaker 1: an element of self sacrifice that's often involved in there.
8:14
Speaker 1: The classic example is the guy that jumps on the
8:16
Speaker 1: grenade to save his entire platoon. Right, someone's got to
8:19
Speaker 1: jump on the grenade, and that's the ultimate selfless act.
8:23
Speaker 1: So in that situation, I can conceptualize it from a
8:26
Speaker 1: selfish perspective. I can say, Look, the guy who jumps
8:30
Speaker 1: on the grenade is jumping on the grenade because that's
8:33
Speaker 1: going to gain him a higher status. People are going
8:36
Speaker 1: to remember it. His family is probably going to be
8:39
Speaker 1: taking care of Yeah, but the status might be conferred
8:42
Speaker 1: to his family. The tribe might take care of his family.
8:46
Speaker 1: The military is going to take care of his family.
8:49
Speaker 1: I think they even call him gold star families, right,
8:52
Speaker 1: they take care of them going forward. So just let
8:56
Speaker 1: me finish real quicks. So if the exchange is status
8:59
Speaker 1: for that, the question for me is you have to
9:03
Speaker 1: imbue society where we're going to exchange status for the
9:09
Speaker 1: selfish act and objectivism. If you're saying, well, the selfish
9:13
Speaker 1: guy is just a schlub, that he shouldn't be selfish
9:16
Speaker 1: at all, then you're kind of demotivating people from doing
9:19
Speaker 1: these selfless acts, and that could prevent your tribe from
9:24
Speaker 1: being strong enough to actually beat a tribe that does
9:27
Speaker 1: have this meme of selfishness. Is that a good argument?
9:32
Speaker 1: Is that a rational argument?
9:34
Speaker 4: No, for a variety of reasons.
9:37
Speaker 2: First, I wouldn't use the word slub, and I don't, okay,
9:40
Speaker 2: But anyway, the major problem with that argument, though again
9:46
Speaker 2: we'll get to the grenade in a minute, is the
9:48
Speaker 2: issue status. Status is insignificant, it is unimportant. It is
9:53
Speaker 2: not self interested. It's not self interested to gain status.
9:57
Speaker 2: It is completely secondhanded. It makes you a dependent on
10:01
Speaker 2: other people. Other people have to give you status. What's
10:04
Speaker 2: matters to self esteem? What matters is your own assessment
10:08
Speaker 2: of your own ability and your own worth.
10:10
Speaker 4: Not other people's assessment of your own worth.
10:15
Speaker 2: You know, this is really the theme for those of
10:16
Speaker 2: you haven't edit or the Fountainhead, you should read it.
10:20
Speaker 2: It's about who you are, not about what other people
10:22
Speaker 2: think of who you are. Who the f cares what
10:25
Speaker 2: other people think, so I'll start with that, but look,
10:29
Speaker 2: we'll go back to the to the grenade. It completely
10:33
Speaker 2: depends on what kind of a political system you're fighting for.
10:40
Speaker 2: So if you're jumping on the grenade in order to
10:42
Speaker 2: save the communist regime or to save Hitler or to
10:47
Speaker 2: save Hamas, then absolutely you are being a self sucked.
10:54
Speaker 2: What you're doing is e moodel and it's self sacrificial,
10:56
Speaker 2: and it's absurd, and you know, and if you had
10:59
Speaker 2: a choice, shouldn't even be fighting, and you shouldn't be
11:01
Speaker 2: in the army. That's not in your self interest because
11:04
Speaker 2: you're fighting for a cause that is destructive to your
11:07
Speaker 2: own life into the life of the people you love.
11:10
Speaker 2: On the other hand, if you're fighting for a cause
11:14
Speaker 2: for a political system that is essentially based on freedom,
11:20
Speaker 2: and you're fighting in self defense, that is, you didn't
11:22
Speaker 2: start the war, you're fighting in self defense, then you're
11:25
Speaker 2: jumping in the grenade because you realize that your life
11:29
Speaker 2: is not worth living under slavery. You realize that you're
11:34
Speaker 2: you know, this is what's required for the people you love,
11:37
Speaker 2: you care about, you care about in a selfish way,
11:41
Speaker 2: what's required for them to.
11:42
Speaker 4: Preserve their freedom.
11:43
Speaker 2: So you're jumping in the grenade because you wouldn't want
11:47
Speaker 2: to live in a world in which you don't jump
11:49
Speaker 2: on a grenade, and therefore you lose, and there's no
11:53
Speaker 2: there's no freedom in the world. So you're fighting for
11:56
Speaker 2: a selfish value, which is freedom for you and the
11:58
Speaker 2: people you love. Otherwise, don't fight otherwise stay home. That
12:03
Speaker 2: is uh, the only and this is this is why
12:07
Speaker 2: it's also true that self interest limits war. It reduces war,
12:11
Speaker 2: reduces conflict because fighting is the last thing you want
12:15
Speaker 2: to do. It's it's the it's the a year risking
12:18
Speaker 2: your life, it's just hollboat.
12:19
Speaker 4: You only have one of the one of those.
12:21
Speaker 2: You don't care about status after you're dead, but you
12:24
Speaker 2: do want the people you love to be to be free.
12:27
Speaker 2: Not taking care of, taking care of is terrible. Uh,
12:31
Speaker 2: you know, being taken care of is again you know, uh,
12:34
Speaker 2: SEFs are taking care of. What you want is freedom.
12:39
Speaker 2: So if you're fighting for freedom, it's worthwhile and and
12:42
Speaker 2: and you need to So you need to limit the
12:45
Speaker 2: wars to those wars that are necessary to preserve your freedom,
12:50
Speaker 2: and they're not many wars like that.
12:52
Speaker 1: Well, I agree with mostly self.
12:54
Speaker 2: Interest in capitalism induce peace.
12:58
Speaker 1: Well, I agree with most what you said. The only
13:01
Speaker 1: part I would push back on is that the separating
13:04
Speaker 1: status from human nature. One of the things that I
13:08
Speaker 1: like about capitalism is capitalism channels people's desire for status
13:13
Speaker 1: into a positive direction. I think a lot of people
13:17
Speaker 1: build companies and build various organizations that make life better
13:23
Speaker 1: for people because they want to gain status. Where people
13:27
Speaker 1: want at one time gain status from killing other people
13:31
Speaker 1: and taking over their land, now we want to take
13:34
Speaker 1: over economically, which I think is I don't think that's
13:37
Speaker 1: true at all.
13:37
Speaker 2: I mean, if you look at Steve Jobs or Jeff Bezos,
13:40
Speaker 2: they won motivated by status. They were motivated by love.
13:44
Speaker 2: They were motivated by the beauty of production and the
13:47
Speaker 2: beauty of creating great products and making something that was
13:52
Speaker 2: cool and amazing. They wont motivated by being at the
13:57
Speaker 2: top of some kind of heap or something like that.
14:00
Speaker 2: So no, I don't think people are at all motivated
14:03
Speaker 2: by status. I mean some people are, but it's irrational, right.
14:06
Speaker 2: I mean, the beauty of human beings is that, you know,
14:13
Speaker 2: much of the values we choose are chosen, they're not
14:16
Speaker 2: embedded in our DNA, and you know, we can. Some
14:21
Speaker 2: people do try to achieve status, and they're typically unhappy
14:26
Speaker 2: and and not very successful people. I think the people
14:29
Speaker 2: who really succeed in life are people who don't care
14:32
Speaker 2: about status, whose status doesn't even enter their thinking. They
14:36
Speaker 2: care about, you know, doing producing, taking care of themselves,
14:42
Speaker 2: you know, and and and enjoying what they do and
14:46
Speaker 2: and pursuing productivity because they know the productivity is where
14:49
Speaker 2: they're going to get their self esteem and that's how
14:51
Speaker 2: you gain happiness. So status is an irrational motivation. The
14:55
Speaker 2: true many people engage in, but they typically go into politics,
15:00
Speaker 2: uh and uh, which is not a particularly productive field.
15:03
Speaker 2: And it's it's not a motivation that actually leads to
15:07
Speaker 2: happiness of success in any kind of way. And again,
15:09
Speaker 2: I think status, the orientation to what status is not genetic.
15:14
Speaker 2: It's social, and it's driven by an altruistic morality that
15:18
Speaker 2: tells you that morality is all about the other other
15:22
Speaker 2: people are more important than you. Other people's opinions are
15:24
Speaker 2: more important than you. You know, what other people do,
15:27
Speaker 2: other people say is what's important.
15:29
Speaker 4: And I and.
15:30
Speaker 2: Objectives can reject that completely. What's important is what I think,
15:33
Speaker 2: not what you think.
15:35
Speaker 1: That's fascinating. So you're look, I think people do put
15:40
Speaker 1: too much emphasis on status, So I agree with you there.
15:42
Speaker 1: I think continue disciplining yourself not to be obsessed with status,
15:47
Speaker 1: I think is a good thing. Ultimately, I do think
15:50
Speaker 1: a lot of people do focus on status, maybe to
15:53
Speaker 1: their own detriment. I don't know if you could separate
15:56
Speaker 1: it from human from human nature though, So that's the
16:00
Speaker 1: only place where I I.
16:04
Speaker 4: Think we overestimate what human nature is.
16:07
Speaker 2: Human nature is to be rational, and that opens up
16:10
Speaker 2: possibilities of what exactly kind of rational or what we
16:15
Speaker 2: actually do that. You know, it's up to us. We
16:18
Speaker 2: have free will and we get to shape our nature.
16:21
Speaker 2: So to a large extent, human nature is a myth
16:25
Speaker 2: if you go beyond the idea of we have certain capabilities,
16:30
Speaker 2: but our inclination. We have certain inclinations, but our ideas,
16:35
Speaker 2: And status is an idea. It's the idea that other
16:37
Speaker 2: people are more important than you, that is learned. That
16:39
Speaker 2: has nothing to do with human nature. Human nature is
16:41
Speaker 2: to be rational and to choose the best you know,
16:44
Speaker 2: to choose values, which values based on what that is
16:47
Speaker 2: all up to?
16:48
Speaker 4: That is all up to human choice.
16:50
Speaker 1: So is it fair to say that you conceptualize status
16:54
Speaker 1: as bad because you're giving other people power over you.
16:57
Speaker 1: Is that I know what you're saying. Yeah, okay, that's
17:01
Speaker 1: totally fascinating you want.
17:02
Speaker 3: To Yeah, I think that. I definitely agree that it
17:07
Speaker 3: is in human nature to have the potential to be rational.
17:10
Speaker 3: I don't think I don't think people are born I
17:14
Speaker 3: always say this, I don't think people are born with
17:15
Speaker 3: free will. I think you have to kind of fight
17:17
Speaker 3: for it. But in terms of like the status question,
17:21
Speaker 3: it's interesting because the way that I think that I conceptualize,
17:24
Speaker 3: and I think the way that Adam conceptualizes, is that
17:27
Speaker 3: it's hard for me to imagine that you have an
17:29
Speaker 3: animal that would evolve, that exists in some sort of
17:33
Speaker 3: group based structure like humans, that doesn't have some sort
17:38
Speaker 3: of evolved tendency towards hierarchical organization or status seeking behavior.
17:44
Speaker 3: And it's hard to see like how you could have,
17:46
Speaker 3: you know, hunter gatherers, really any human society where there
17:49
Speaker 3: is not a hierarchy that comes out of status and competency,
17:52
Speaker 3: and that is sort of how people know like who
17:55
Speaker 3: to follow, who has the good ideas as opposed everyone
17:57
Speaker 3: just trying to do their own thing and not work together.
18:00
Speaker 2: So a few things there first. You know, I want
18:02
Speaker 2: to agree with you in a sense, I think that, uh,
18:06
Speaker 2: rationality is something you have to earn. You have to
18:08
Speaker 2: you have to work at, you have to you have
18:10
Speaker 2: to actually engage. We have an on off switch, which
18:13
Speaker 2: is what I think free will ultimately is. It's the
18:17
Speaker 2: honest think the office don't think, and many people choose
18:21
Speaker 2: not to think. So in that sense, yeah, once you,
18:24
Speaker 2: once you choose not to think, free will is irrelevant.
18:27
Speaker 2: It becomes irrelevant because you're not a rational You're not
18:30
Speaker 2: in that sense I rational being.
18:31
Speaker 4: You're a mimicking being.
18:32
Speaker 2: You start mimicking everybody else because that's how you survive.
18:36
Speaker 2: In terms of status, look, status is not the same
18:38
Speaker 2: as hierarchy. Of course, hierarchys exist. People are better at
18:42
Speaker 2: some things than other things. People are going to be leaders,
18:46
Speaker 2: and other people follow us in a particular context and
18:49
Speaker 2: might flip in a different context. All of that, All
18:53
Speaker 2: of that is true. But that doesn't make I need
18:56
Speaker 2: to be a hero. I need to be a leader,
18:59
Speaker 2: you know. In terms of that is my human nature
19:02
Speaker 2: is there is to be at the top of the
19:03
Speaker 2: status poteum. I think that's ridiculous. The reality is that
19:06
Speaker 2: many of us are quite satisfied not to be at
19:09
Speaker 2: the top of whatever that whatever that thing is, as
19:13
Speaker 2: long as we're doing something we love and something we
19:15
Speaker 2: really care about. And look, one of the great advantages
19:17
Speaker 2: of getting out of hunter gatherers societies and out of
19:21
Speaker 2: you know, out of subsistent farming and out of barely
19:23
Speaker 2: surviving is the kind of division of a labor society
19:27
Speaker 2: and the kind of richness of opportunities we have today
19:31
Speaker 2: in which we don't win. I reliance on one hierarchy.
19:34
Speaker 2: There are a million higharchys, and we can fit in and
19:36
Speaker 2: slot in in all kinds of places and all kinds
19:38
Speaker 2: of hierarchies, in all kinds of ways. And in some
19:41
Speaker 2: places I'm at the top in the hierarchy, and in
19:43
Speaker 2: some places, you know, I'm at the bottom. And I
19:45
Speaker 2: don't really care if I'm at the bottom in some higherarchys,
19:48
Speaker 2: because those are the you know, that's where those are
19:51
Speaker 2: the kind of choices I've made about my life.
19:53
Speaker 3: Yeah, No, I mean, and I agree completely with like
19:55
Speaker 3: I think it's one of the benefits of capitalism is
19:58
Speaker 3: we've talked about this a lot. Creating some many different
20:00
Speaker 3: hierarchies or games or whatever we want to call it,
20:04
Speaker 3: that people can succeed in, because if you don't, then
20:07
Speaker 3: you know, obviously it's going to breed a lot of
20:09
Speaker 3: animosity and revolution and violence if there's only a couple
20:12
Speaker 3: paths to success. Yeah, I guess when I think of status,
20:17
Speaker 3: I just think of it. Maybe we're just defining differently.
20:19
Speaker 3: I think of it kind of just like the perception
20:22
Speaker 3: that other people have of where you slot into a
20:25
Speaker 3: hierarchy and so, and I just I also view it
20:30
Speaker 3: as that so much of human behavior is based around
20:34
Speaker 3: like reproduction and mate selection, and that it seems that
20:38
Speaker 3: that males generally not everyone. And obviously this is you know,
20:41
Speaker 3: we're we're trying to be rational beings, so things you know,
20:44
Speaker 3: are different and they can't be different. But it seems
20:46
Speaker 3: like there's a broader theme of men trying to achieve
20:50
Speaker 3: status or climb hierarchies in order to attract women.
20:53
Speaker 2: Essentially, I think that's all right, but it's very unhealthy
20:57
Speaker 2: and it leads to unhappiness. So I think that's right
21:00
Speaker 2: instead of focusing on being the best that you can be.
21:03
Speaker 2: And that's a cliche, but it's true. Being the best
21:07
Speaker 2: that you can be given who you are. Focusing on
21:11
Speaker 2: how other people perceive you is the roots to unhappiness.
21:14
Speaker 2: It's a root to self destruction, and it's ultimately a
21:17
Speaker 2: root and not being very successful. I think with women,
21:21
Speaker 2: you know, I think I so the right kind of women. Again,
21:25
Speaker 2: there are lots of women who care about status, that
21:28
Speaker 2: care about how other people think of you. But that's
21:30
Speaker 2: is that the woman you want versus a woman who
21:33
Speaker 2: cares about you and who you are and how you
21:36
Speaker 2: fit with her.
21:38
Speaker 4: You know, in every kind of sense.
21:40
Speaker 2: So I think the more we focus on how we
21:46
Speaker 2: look to other people, the cheaper we make our lives,
21:52
Speaker 2: and the list fulfilling our lives become.
21:54
Speaker 3: Right, No, I agree, and that could be kind of
21:57
Speaker 3: a paradoxical situation where the yeah, the more you focus
22:01
Speaker 3: on something like I have to climb the SaaS hoarchy,
22:04
Speaker 3: the more even if you accomplish that, you know, you
22:06
Speaker 3: could be selling pieces of yourself you be could becoming
22:09
Speaker 3: a more degenerate or immoral person, or you could be
22:12
Speaker 3: in a more unhappier state where if you are more
22:16
Speaker 3: focused on yourself and just trying to be that the
22:17
Speaker 3: best you can be, you will hopefully naturally attract you know,
22:22
Speaker 3: better people around yourself, better life circumstances around yourselves, and
22:26
Speaker 3: things of that nature. So yeah, I mean, I agree,
22:28
Speaker 3: I just I think it's kind of like that. This
22:31
Speaker 3: is the human nature that I guess that we're fighting
22:34
Speaker 3: against constantly, and that's sort of what is where a
22:36
Speaker 3: lot of our problems come from. But I want to
22:39
Speaker 3: ask you about because you were talking about self interest
22:42
Speaker 3: and what exactly do you mean when you use that phrase.
22:48
Speaker 2: I mean that which is in the interest of the individual,
22:51
Speaker 2: you know, and what I mean and when I think
22:54
Speaker 2: about interest, I mean that which promotes an individuals flourishing, happiness,
23:00
Speaker 2: a well being. And I think some of those things
23:04
Speaker 2: are universal. That is, I think there's certain principles that
23:08
Speaker 2: every individual must pursue if they're going to achieve flourishing
23:12
Speaker 2: and happiness. And then of course there are lots of
23:14
Speaker 2: optional values in terms of the particulars. Those are all personal,
23:19
Speaker 2: and those are all going to be different, but they
23:21
Speaker 2: are guiding principles and those happen to be those are
23:25
Speaker 2: them all principles I view morality. Morality is that field
23:29
Speaker 2: in human in philosophy that should teach you how to
23:33
Speaker 2: live a flourishing, successful, prospers ultimately happy life. That's the
23:39
Speaker 2: function of the field of morality. And that's how Aristotle,
23:42
Speaker 2: by the way viewed it.
23:43
Speaker 3: Can self interests lead people down either destructive path for
23:48
Speaker 3: themselves or for everyone around them.
23:51
Speaker 4: No, because.
23:54
Speaker 2: Fundamentally, if you think about what's in your self interest
23:57
Speaker 2: the fundamental thing to now, Look, you can make mistakes,
24:00
Speaker 2: you can make errors that lead to self destruction, right,
24:04
Speaker 2: but I'm not counting errors, right, you know, always mistakes. Fundamentally,
24:08
Speaker 2: what is required to live a self interested life is
24:12
Speaker 2: to live as a human being and to live by
24:14
Speaker 2: your nature. And what does that mean? That means to
24:16
Speaker 2: be rational. So the moral, the great moral achievement is
24:22
Speaker 2: to be a rational animal. Is to be a rational being,
24:25
Speaker 2: is to live rationally. And I think if you live rationally,
24:29
Speaker 2: you you know, if you think through what you're about
24:32
Speaker 2: to do and why you're about to do it, and
24:34
Speaker 2: you think about your motivations, and you think about the consequences,
24:37
Speaker 2: then you're very unlikely to go down a path that
24:39
Speaker 2: leads to self destruction. And if you actually think about
24:43
Speaker 2: the kind of world you want to live in, a
24:44
Speaker 2: kind of relationship you want to have other people because
24:46
Speaker 2: other people are really really important to your own well being,
24:51
Speaker 2: then you're not going to you're not going to engage
24:53
Speaker 2: in actions that destroy other people's lives that'll lead to
24:58
Speaker 2: living in a kind of society that is, you know,
25:00
Speaker 2: destructive to your own happiness and your own well being.
25:04
Speaker 3: Well, yeah, I guess, I guess why I was asked
25:06
Speaker 3: for the definition how you're perceiving is because I think
25:09
Speaker 3: most people when they hear the term self interest like
25:13
Speaker 3: it's you know, people perceive as meaning like selfish, And
25:16
Speaker 3: it's kind of like trying to figure out the difference, because.
25:18
Speaker 2: There is, like an example, selfish is the same, It's
25:20
Speaker 2: the same thing. The difference the only thing is that
25:23
Speaker 2: we've tuned it into a dirty wood or negative would
25:27
Speaker 2: an evil wood, right, But that's because a morality of altruism,
25:31
Speaker 2: morality that tells you that your mal purpose in life
25:33
Speaker 2: should be to sacrifice to others and that's the most
25:35
Speaker 2: noble thing you can do is live like mother Teresa.
25:39
Speaker 2: A morality like that, you know, wants to make sure
25:42
Speaker 2: that you're not attracted by an alternative, so they make
25:47
Speaker 2: the alternative sound so horrific and disgusting.
25:49
Speaker 4: What does it mean to be selfish.
25:51
Speaker 2: It's the light, cheat, steal, backstab, think only about the
25:56
Speaker 2: short term, party all day, you know, party all night,
25:59
Speaker 2: who cares about? Who cares about the future. If that's
26:02
Speaker 2: what selfish means, then okay, all I've got is altruism.
26:05
Speaker 4: It's only mall code I have.
26:06
Speaker 2: And most people hold those two alternatives as the only
26:09
Speaker 2: two things possible. And what Einmand is saying is now,
26:13
Speaker 2: there's actually a third alternative, which is to be actually selfish,
26:17
Speaker 2: which means to actually care about yourself, which means to
26:20
Speaker 2: actually view your life over the long run and to
26:23
Speaker 2: view yourself as a human being. And they're as rational
26:26
Speaker 2: and to live that kind of life, and that's what
26:30
Speaker 2: morality should be about. So to live a rational, long term,
26:33
Speaker 2: self interested life is what she means when she says
26:37
Speaker 2: to be selfish.
26:39
Speaker 3: So, for example, what would be how would it be
26:43
Speaker 3: not self interested? For like a private equity firm, say
26:47
Speaker 3: they do some kind of LBO. They buy some company,
26:50
Speaker 3: they leverage it with debt and then they you know,
26:52
Speaker 3: they can't pay it off, so they got the company.
26:55
Speaker 3: They you know, they go away with a bunch of
26:57
Speaker 3: profit when they got the company and sell for parts,
27:00
Speaker 3: but the company falls apart. In all these people loose
27:02
Speaker 3: their jobs with the people doing that. From the private
27:06
Speaker 3: equity standpoint, who made all the money? Are they acting
27:08
Speaker 3: as self interested actors in that moment?
27:12
Speaker 2: Maybe it might be very difficult for them, for example,
27:16
Speaker 2: to buy another company. If if let me, let me
27:19
Speaker 2: just say, I don't buy the description you just made.
27:22
Speaker 2: I don't think it works financially that as I don't
27:25
Speaker 2: think you can do what you just describe doing. And
27:29
Speaker 2: we can. We can go into in examples. I'm a
27:32
Speaker 2: finance guy. I've studied LBOs. I'm a huge fan of LBOs.
27:35
Speaker 2: I think LBOs are very healthy and uh, and what
27:39
Speaker 2: you describe I think is just a caricature of what
27:42
Speaker 2: actually happens. But let's say let's say that did happen. Uh,
27:46
Speaker 2: you know, they were just nasty people and somehow they
27:49
Speaker 2: figured out a way how to screw everybody else and
27:51
Speaker 2: make money for themselves. Well, if I'm the guy that
27:54
Speaker 2: they're approaching now, you know, to buy the company from
27:59
Speaker 2: and and tip you know, I might even keep an
28:02
Speaker 2: equity stake, because that's how a lot of lbo's happen
28:04
Speaker 2: is when you buy something, you keep an out. Well,
28:06
Speaker 2: I don't want to have anything to do with these
28:07
Speaker 2: people because they're going to screw me. You know, they
28:10
Speaker 2: screwed the last bunch of people. Why would why would
28:13
Speaker 2: they not screw me? And in the long run, it's
28:16
Speaker 2: probably not in the interest of of a of a
28:18
Speaker 2: private equity firm to function that way. Again, I don't
28:21
Speaker 2: think private equity functions that way. I think part of
28:24
Speaker 2: its success is a part of how they've grown so
28:27
Speaker 2: much is a consequence of the fact that they don't
28:28
Speaker 2: function that way. That private equity is overall win win
28:34
Speaker 2: win win. Yes, they might be some losers, but in
28:37
Speaker 2: the in the big picture, it's a it's a massive
28:39
Speaker 2: win for almost everybody. But we could get into the
28:43
Speaker 2: details of some examples if oh yeah, we.
28:46
Speaker 3: Don't have to get in details of the specifics. I'm
28:48
Speaker 3: just trying to think of like this.
28:50
Speaker 1: Just to let the audience know LBO as a leverage
28:52
Speaker 1: buyout just they said.
28:54
Speaker 3: Sorry, But I'm just trying to think of it more
28:56
Speaker 3: like a conceptual level, because I know that like, yeah,
28:58
Speaker 3: I mean, I adn't believe a lot about the importance
29:01
Speaker 3: of democracy. Is that that kind of aligning that the
29:06
Speaker 3: leader's interests are with the people, because if you have
29:10
Speaker 3: these situations where you have like monarchies or dictatorships, they
29:14
Speaker 3: only like the leader. At least how I would define it,
29:17
Speaker 3: could be entirely self interested in that they are extracting
29:21
Speaker 3: resources from as many people as possible and as long
29:24
Speaker 3: as they can pay off you know, the military and
29:27
Speaker 3: the people in charge, like that's going to be totally
29:30
Speaker 3: fine for them, and they live a successful you know,
29:33
Speaker 3: in finger quotes, a successful life where they're rich and
29:35
Speaker 3: have kids and all these other things while everyone else
29:37
Speaker 3: is suffering.
29:38
Speaker 2: So I would say that any self interested person who
29:44
Speaker 2: was offered the job of king or dictator would turn
29:48
Speaker 2: it down. It's not in yourself interest to be in
29:52
Speaker 2: that position. It's not in yourself interest to rule over others.
29:57
Speaker 2: It's not in yourself interest to exploit other people, if
30:00
Speaker 2: you know, assuming it's real exploitation. It's not in your
30:04
Speaker 2: self interest to lie or cheat or steal. I tell
30:08
Speaker 2: people all the time, if you're not sure about lying,
30:10
Speaker 2: just try it, Like try it for a day, you know,
30:13
Speaker 2: light to your best friend you know for a day
30:15
Speaker 2: and see what happens. Or light to your boss for
30:18
Speaker 2: a day and see what happens, it's not in yourself
30:20
Speaker 2: interested I'll come back and destroy you. And the same thing,
30:23
Speaker 2: by the way, is and it's stealing is the same thing.
30:27
Speaker 2: You know, people who who have done pyramid schemes and stolen,
30:31
Speaker 2: they're miserable, pathetic, unhappy people. Bernie made Up being a
30:36
Speaker 2: great example of that. I don't know, you guys may
30:38
Speaker 2: be too young to know who Bernie made Off was.
30:39
Speaker 2: But Bernie made Up is a great example of somebody
30:44
Speaker 2: who said he's happy and in jail than he was
30:46
Speaker 2: before he was caught, because stealing and deceiving other people
30:50
Speaker 2: is unbelievably damaging to one's own psyche.
30:54
Speaker 1: Didn't he lie to a bunch of people? Though he's
30:56
Speaker 1: probably lying now.
30:57
Speaker 4: It was a horrible human being.
30:59
Speaker 2: I mean he was, but he lived it right so
31:02
Speaker 2: he couldn't sleep. He was constant in fear of being caught,
31:05
Speaker 2: not by the police, but his family and his best
31:07
Speaker 2: friends might catch him take their money.
31:10
Speaker 4: You know, it's just not a good strategy.
31:12
Speaker 2: So Bernie Madoff is a good example of how lion, cheating, stealing,
31:16
Speaker 2: exploiting other people is self destructive, not self interested. Oh,
31:21
Speaker 2: take Stalin. Take somebody like Stalin right. You say, oh, well,
31:24
Speaker 2: he had all the power in the world, he did
31:26
Speaker 2: self interested things, But why was he so miserable and afraid?
31:30
Speaker 2: He lived in constant fear. And you know, his best
31:32
Speaker 2: one of his best friends, was the guy who ran
31:34
Speaker 2: the KGB, and yet he was afraid of him. He
31:37
Speaker 2: could he constantly thought the guy was going to kill
31:39
Speaker 2: him any any any He couldn't have any honest human
31:44
Speaker 2: relationship with anybody because he constantly lived in fear. You
31:47
Speaker 2: cannot find me an example of anybody who was a
31:50
Speaker 2: king or authoritarian who actually was self interested in the
31:54
Speaker 2: sense that he lived a flourishing, successful life. I mean
31:58
Speaker 2: maybe the you know, this is why you know you
32:03
Speaker 2: wouldn't want that job. You wouldn't want that job because
32:06
Speaker 2: it cannot lead you to actual success in life. In terms,
32:12
Speaker 2: run the experiment right, right, run the thought experiment, or
32:14
Speaker 2: right in the stomical experiments, and you'll see that that
32:17
Speaker 2: it just doesn't work. What works is being productive and
32:22
Speaker 2: being honest and having integrity, and you know, living a
32:29
Speaker 2: life of pride where you're proud of your own moral character.
32:33
Speaker 2: So that is what is going to lead you to
32:35
Speaker 2: be successful and happy, not sacrificing to other people, but
32:39
Speaker 2: also not asking other people to sacrifice to you, living
32:43
Speaker 2: by your own means, you know, by by your own
32:47
Speaker 2: work and being successful. It's why anytime we inhibit people's
32:53
Speaker 2: ability to think for themselves work for themselves, we inhibit
32:57
Speaker 2: their ability to be successful and happy. Well, I think
33:01
Speaker 2: the state, for example, is incredibly destructive of human happiness.
33:05
Speaker 3: Why do you think that so many people engage in
33:08
Speaker 3: that self destructive behavior of lying, cheating, and stealing them.
33:12
Speaker 2: Well, because the you know a lot of things. One
33:15
Speaker 2: is we don't teach them a proper morality. We teach
33:18
Speaker 2: them a morality It says, don't lie, not because lying
33:20
Speaker 2: is bad for you. We teach them don't lie because
33:23
Speaker 2: you should care about other people more than you care
33:24
Speaker 2: about yourself.
33:25
Speaker 4: And they go, yeah, but I don't really care about
33:27
Speaker 4: other people that.
33:28
Speaker 2: Much, and I feel like lying, and we never tell them.
33:33
Speaker 2: Don't act on your feelings, you know, act only in reason,
33:37
Speaker 2: act only on rationality. If money made uf it sat
33:40
Speaker 2: down for like ten minutes before he made that first lie,
33:43
Speaker 2: before he deceived that first guy, and thought it through,
33:47
Speaker 2: thought what happens in pyramid schemes, thought about how this
33:50
Speaker 2: was going to play out. If he thought about it,
33:53
Speaker 2: if he'd been rational about it, he would have never
33:55
Speaker 2: done it. You know, when we get into trouble, when
33:58
Speaker 2: almost anybody gets into try, they get into trouble and
34:01
Speaker 2: afterwards they go, ah, I should have thought about it
34:04
Speaker 2: more right, because we follow our emotions. Emotions lead you
34:08
Speaker 2: into trouble. Not thinking, in other words, leads you into trouble.
34:12
Speaker 2: So we teach people a false morality, a morality of
34:16
Speaker 2: self sacrifice. They reject that, but they have no alternative.
34:20
Speaker 2: They're not taught in Rand's morality, which is a morality
34:23
Speaker 2: to achieve flourishing and happiness. Nobody teaches that, so they
34:28
Speaker 2: have this dichotomy of I can be I can be
34:30
Speaker 2: self sacrifice and lift other people. I don't want to
34:32
Speaker 2: do that, that sounds like that sounds boring and sucks.
34:35
Speaker 2: Or you know, I can steal some money and party
34:38
Speaker 2: all day. I'd rather do that. And you know, even
34:41
Speaker 2: though it's self destructive. And the third alternative, which is
34:44
Speaker 2: what I'm advocating for, is not even on the table.
34:47
Speaker 2: Nobody even knows it exists. So I think it's the
34:50
Speaker 2: right morality. It's a morality that you know, other than
34:54
Speaker 2: two philosophers in all of human history has not been
34:56
Speaker 2: advocated for, and it's a morality that will change the
34:59
Speaker 2: world if was advocated.
35:00
Speaker 3: For hm Adam.
35:05
Speaker 1: Just on the Bernie made Off thing, Yeah, it's so
35:10
Speaker 1: hard for me to separate the idea of status. It's
35:13
Speaker 1: just integral to my worldview. It seems like Bernie made Off,
35:17
Speaker 1: his reputation was built on sand. Like trustworthiness is a
35:22
Speaker 1: form of status, but wealth is also a form of status.
35:26
Speaker 1: So Bernie Madeoff thought, I will take the shortcut to
35:30
Speaker 1: the status. And this is why he was constantly conflicted,
35:33
Speaker 1: because he knew if anyone found out his status was
35:36
Speaker 1: really a fake, it was a fraudulent form of status,
35:41
Speaker 1: and as soon as everybody found out, his status would plunge, plummet.
35:44
Speaker 2: I mean that could have been his motivation. I don't know,
35:47
Speaker 2: But it could have just been purely the money. It
35:49
Speaker 2: could have just been the money. I want money. I'm
35:51
Speaker 2: going to take the shortcut to get money. Money will
35:54
Speaker 2: buy me a yacht, money will buy me a nice house,
35:56
Speaker 2: money will buy me whatever. So it could have been
35:59
Speaker 2: a bunch of different motivation. Status might have been one
36:01
Speaker 2: of them. This is the sense in which status is
36:04
Speaker 2: a destructive motivation. Don't be motivated by status, don't be
36:08
Speaker 2: motivated by money. Be motivated by achieving, you know, achieving
36:14
Speaker 2: through production what you are capable of achieving for its
36:17
Speaker 2: own sake, for the sake of producing, for the sake
36:20
Speaker 2: of creating, for the sake of building. And you know,
36:24
Speaker 2: so Bernie did all those things, but he also had
36:28
Speaker 2: to realize one of the reasons he was, you know, nervous,
36:32
Speaker 2: was not just because maybe people would discover and he'd
36:35
Speaker 2: lose status, but how about jail. That made him nervous
36:38
Speaker 2: that he would go to jail, that he would lose
36:41
Speaker 2: all the money, not only because it would reduce his status,
36:43
Speaker 2: but us because he couldn't spend it, and that he
36:46
Speaker 2: would lose the love of the people around him. I mean,
36:49
Speaker 2: a lot of the people around him loved him because
36:51
Speaker 2: they thought he was an honest, productive, good human being.
36:54
Speaker 2: And when they would discover that he was not an honest,
36:56
Speaker 2: good human being, maybe they would stop loving him.
36:58
Speaker 4: And that's his family. That's not a status.
37:00
Speaker 2: That's an issue of wanting the people you love to
37:03
Speaker 2: love you back. It is interesting that his son, but
37:06
Speaker 2: basically Bonnie Madoff, was turned into the police by his sons.
37:10
Speaker 2: His two sons turned him in. One of those sons
37:13
Speaker 2: committed suicide about a year ago.
37:16
Speaker 1: I remember, Bonnie may have just.
37:18
Speaker 2: Had it made, you know, it created for himself a
37:22
Speaker 2: horrible life. And again my point is, if you pursue
37:27
Speaker 2: status as an end, or if you pursue line cheating, stealing,
37:32
Speaker 2: that's not selfish. You don't gain from it, you lose.
37:37
Speaker 2: You actually live a horrible, pathetic life.
37:41
Speaker 1: Well, convincing people that I think is is difficult. Obviously,
37:49
Speaker 1: people people tend to learn the hard way. So I mean,
37:52
Speaker 1: I I totally agree with what you're saying about the honesty.
37:55
Speaker 2: It should be. It shouldn't be because we all know
37:57
Speaker 2: that in third grade.
37:58
Speaker 4: I mean we all learn it very early.
38:00
Speaker 2: We learn what happens when we try to gravitory from
38:02
Speaker 2: somebody else. We learn what happens when we lie. But
38:07
Speaker 2: you know, yes, it's an achievement. Look, it's an achievement
38:10
Speaker 2: to think of man as a rational being. It's an
38:12
Speaker 2: achievement to realize that happiness is related to rationality and
38:16
Speaker 2: related to the long term, not to the short term.
38:19
Speaker 2: All of those achievements, and yeah, it's not easy to
38:24
Speaker 2: the achievements are not easy, and we're obviously at a
38:27
Speaker 2: point in civilization where the world is not quite ready
38:30
Speaker 2: for this particular achievement.
38:32
Speaker 4: It's something we're struggling with.
38:34
Speaker 1: Well, you're talking, we're obviously talking a lot about morality.
38:37
Speaker 1: Do you have a definition of morality that you like?
38:39
Speaker 1: How would you define morality?
38:41
Speaker 2: Yeah, morality is a code of values that helps man
38:46
Speaker 2: choose between what is right and what is wrong, what
38:50
Speaker 2: is good and what is evil, and then you have
38:51
Speaker 2: to define good and evil, and that will your moral
38:54
Speaker 2: code will be different depending on how you define good
38:57
Speaker 2: and evil. But morality is the same thing, right, no
38:59
Speaker 2: matter what it's it's providing you with a map on
39:02
Speaker 2: to life. Uh. And it could be a self sacrificial life,
39:06
Speaker 2: and that's what morality is. Good is to sacrifice and
39:08
Speaker 2: bad is to think about yourself, which is conventional morality,
39:11
Speaker 2: or it could be the objective's morality. It says the
39:13
Speaker 2: good is that which furthers your own life, and bad
39:17
Speaker 2: is that which damages your own life. And then that
39:19
Speaker 2: gives you a different map to live your life. Different
39:22
Speaker 2: people are going to live different lives based on the
39:24
Speaker 2: morality that they choose. I'm saying one is a good
39:27
Speaker 2: morality and one's a bad morality and you should choose
39:29
Speaker 2: a good one.
39:30
Speaker 1: It's a So I totally agree. Morality is a code
39:34
Speaker 1: for behavior of right and wrong behavior. How how does that?
39:41
Speaker 1: Do you believe in objective morality? Do you believe in
39:44
Speaker 1: multiple moralities? It sounds like you believe in multiple reality.
39:47
Speaker 2: No, absolutely, an objective morality, one hundred percent of objective morality.
39:51
Speaker 2: And it's objective because it's based on human nature and
39:55
Speaker 2: the facts of reality. So how do we decide what
39:59
Speaker 2: is a virtue or what is the value worth pursuing?
40:04
Speaker 4: Does it for the human life? Right?
40:06
Speaker 2: So I look around and I see all the stuff
40:10
Speaker 2: that human life requires, shelter, food, lighting, in the modern internet,
40:16
Speaker 2: in the modern world's video streaming, and ask myself, how
40:19
Speaker 2: do we get that? Where does that come from? And
40:22
Speaker 2: it's obvious that all of that comes from reason, And
40:25
Speaker 2: it's very basic. Even hunter gatherers have to use reason.
40:29
Speaker 2: They know human beings are so weak and pathetic that
40:32
Speaker 2: you cannot run down a bison and bite into it.
40:35
Speaker 2: You have to figure out weapons and strategies and tactics
40:38
Speaker 2: in order to hunt a bison.
40:40
Speaker 4: All of that requires reason.
40:42
Speaker 2: So reason is my top value because reason is the
40:44
Speaker 2: way in which human beings survive, and it should be
40:47
Speaker 2: everybody's top value because it's universal. All human beings need
40:51
Speaker 2: reason in order to survive for somebody else's reason. Like
40:54
Speaker 2: if you're a powasite, which unfortunately a lot of people are,
40:58
Speaker 2: then they live off of other people's reason, right, They
41:00
Speaker 2: live of other people's production, other people's innovation, other people's work.
41:05
Speaker 1: So there are multiple moralities, but the one where you.
41:13
Speaker 2: As correct morality. The multiple moralities, there's only one objective
41:17
Speaker 2: correct morality.
41:17
Speaker 4: That's what I meant.
41:18
Speaker 1: Before, right, Okay, So someone who values selflessness, that's the
41:22
Speaker 1: root of their morality. That morality, it exists, but it's
41:26
Speaker 1: not objectively correct.
41:28
Speaker 2: That's not objectively correct, and it's actually destructive.
41:31
Speaker 1: Yeah, okay, that makes sense. So let's talk a little
41:35
Speaker 1: bit about the politics of the current moment, since we've
41:39
Speaker 1: got you here and there as some do you consider
41:43
Speaker 1: yourself on the right or on the left politically?
41:47
Speaker 2: I don't consider myself on the right or on the left, Okay,
41:50
Speaker 2: So I believe the political spectrum is wrong right left
41:54
Speaker 2: to become I've always been meaningless, but particularly meaningless today.
41:59
Speaker 2: I consider the rerec political spectrum being collectivism to individualism.
42:05
Speaker 2: And uh, there are lots of forms of collectivism, collectivism
42:08
Speaker 2: meaning the primacy of the group over the individual. And
42:13
Speaker 2: you could be you can be on the left and
42:16
Speaker 2: a collectivist socialism, communism, and and you can be on
42:19
Speaker 2: the right be a collectivist fascism and and it's all
42:23
Speaker 2: its variations. And most people today, uh soft collectivists that
42:28
Speaker 2: they're kind.
42:29
Speaker 4: Of in the middle. They they they they like, you.
42:32
Speaker 2: Know, they want to they still want to sacrifice the
42:33
Speaker 2: individual to a group, but not too much. A little
42:36
Speaker 2: bit they want to pretend they're for rights, but not
42:39
Speaker 2: too much, not principled in any principled way. And then
42:42
Speaker 2: I'm an individualist, you know, I don't want to sacrifice
42:45
Speaker 2: individual rights ever to anybody.
42:48
Speaker 1: Well I kind of see it that way too, where
42:50
Speaker 1: I see the individualism as kind of the center of
42:53
Speaker 1: the political spectrum.
42:54
Speaker 2: And if you go too far rights and it's not
42:56
Speaker 2: a mixture. So so you have it's like an oro right,
43:00
Speaker 2: vigualisms over here, collectivisms over here, and collectivism splinters into
43:03
Speaker 2: a bunch of different variations.
43:05
Speaker 1: In individualism is on.
43:08
Speaker 2: The left, it doesn't matter.
43:10
Speaker 1: Well, look, I think if you go too far left,
43:12
Speaker 1: then obviously you get into collectivism again, you get into
43:15
Speaker 1: a different brand of that.
43:16
Speaker 2: That's why I don't like left and right. I just
43:18
Speaker 2: like I like one one spectrum, individualism on one side,
43:22
Speaker 2: collectivism on the other.
43:23
Speaker 4: You choose which side you want.
43:25
Speaker 1: It, which way, which way erro goes.
43:28
Speaker 2: I view Republicans and Democrats today in particular, is both collectivists,
43:32
Speaker 2: uh and and both you know, almost equally evil and
43:36
Speaker 2: and I think and and and when you.
43:37
Speaker 4: Go to the extremes, that's that's certainly the case.
43:40
Speaker 2: But I think that's to some extent always been the case.
43:42
Speaker 2: They've always been anti individual rights, you know, they they
43:47
Speaker 2: want to take away different rights. But they both left
43:50
Speaker 2: and right anti individual rights. Individualism separate from the conventional
43:55
Speaker 2: left and right spectrum, which just is a question of
43:58
Speaker 2: left and right disagree on which rights they should violate,
44:01
Speaker 2: not on the principles you'd vote.
44:04
Speaker 1: So do you subscribe to any partisan politics at all?
44:08
Speaker 2: I know, I mean, I I you know, i'd say,
44:11
Speaker 2: in most elections in the past, i've you know, tilted
44:17
Speaker 2: towards Republicans.
44:18
Speaker 1: Okay, yeah, that's my question.
44:21
Speaker 2: You know, But now no, I mean, with these Republicans no,
44:26
Speaker 2: I don't, you know, And it depends on the republican right.
44:28
Speaker 2: If you're Nick Frantis Republican, I'd probably vote for a Democrat.
44:32
Speaker 2: But if you're woke, you know, globalizing to fought a Democrat,
44:37
Speaker 2: then I'm probably going to vote for Republicans. It really
44:39
Speaker 2: depends on the kind right of democratic republican. But I
44:43
Speaker 2: voted democratic, I've voted Republican for president depending. I mean,
44:48
Speaker 2: I vote strategically. I think about the long term consequences,
44:51
Speaker 2: and I also realized my particular vote doesn't matter that much.
44:54
Speaker 1: Well, here's the sophie's choice that we're kind of in
44:57
Speaker 1: right now, because it could be a Nick Flentes Republican
45:00
Speaker 1: against globalizing, and to thought, uh, I stayed home, Democrat.
45:06
Speaker 2: I stayed home. I stayed home. I stayed home. When
45:10
Speaker 2: it was Trump versus Hillary, I stayed home. Trump versus
45:14
Speaker 2: you know, Biden.
45:16
Speaker 4: I do not view it. I don't think voting is
45:19
Speaker 4: that important.
45:20
Speaker 1: And one of those candidates is going to win though
45:23
Speaker 1: obviously if that's the situation, I don't have to sanction
45:26
Speaker 1: his victory right totally, But we're going to have to
45:28
Speaker 1: live under their policy proposal.
45:30
Speaker 2: That is the reality and it's going to suck you.
45:34
Speaker 1: It is why are we so the situation on the
45:38
Speaker 1: right trying to convince people, you know, that there's a
45:41
Speaker 1: better alternative.
45:42
Speaker 2: So before the Republican primaries, I tried to convince people
45:46
Speaker 2: that Trump was the worst candidate on the he wasn't
45:49
Speaker 2: even on the stage but in the primary, and to
45:51
Speaker 2: vote for anybody but Trump. I failed dramatically. Once it
45:56
Speaker 2: was Trump versus Biden, I emphasized in my show why
46:00
Speaker 2: Trump was as bad as he was because I knew
46:02
Speaker 2: that everybody who listens to me is already anti Biden,
46:05
Speaker 2: so I wanted to make the case that they should
46:07
Speaker 2: be also anti Trump. And then what exactly they voted
46:10
Speaker 2: on election day? You know, it is is less important
46:15
Speaker 2: than the knowledge that they should take with them that
46:19
Speaker 2: both candidates really, really, really sucked.
46:23
Speaker 1: We don't really try to persuade our audience as much
46:26
Speaker 1: as we just argue out politics. So it is interesting
46:30
Speaker 1: you are participating in the political process on your show
46:33
Speaker 1: if you're advocating for one one candidate over another candidate.
46:39
Speaker 2: So well, I'm always trying to show how, you know,
46:42
Speaker 2: with exception of good candidates, I think I think it's
46:45
Speaker 2: rare that they are good candidates. I'm trying to show
46:48
Speaker 2: how bad the bad candidates are. You know, I long
46:52
Speaker 2: for the day with as a candidate I could get
46:54
Speaker 2: excited about. You know, maybe if I lived in Argentina,
46:57
Speaker 2: I could get excited about me Lay. I mean, I
46:59
Speaker 2: get excited about me even living in America. But Melay
47:03
Speaker 2: is about as good as a politician as we have
47:05
Speaker 2: in the world today by my standards.
47:07
Speaker 1: Right, because he's more libertarian, he's more free markets.
47:11
Speaker 2: He's fem arket and NASA's emphasis, and he's willing. He's
47:15
Speaker 2: not just a femarketer that just says it. He understands it.
47:19
Speaker 2: He's an economist and he really understands it. And he's
47:22
Speaker 2: shown over the last year that he's willing to do it,
47:24
Speaker 2: which takes a lot of coverage, a lot of people
47:27
Speaker 2: going to office saying I'm going to do this data
47:28
Speaker 2: DA and don't do anything. He's actually doing it, so
47:32
Speaker 2: he actually has the balls to follow through.
47:35
Speaker 1: How would you advocate now with the current rift in
47:38
Speaker 1: the Republican Party, there's a there's obviously this rise of
47:43
Speaker 1: Nick Foenttes as a public figure who's avowed an open
47:47
Speaker 1: anti semi and you've got a lot of moderate Republicans
47:51
Speaker 1: I think that are trying to protect the Republican brand,
47:55
Speaker 1: and you've you've kind of got I mean, it's kind
47:58
Speaker 1: of evolving into a shit show for know better terminologies.
48:03
Speaker 4: Well, I mean, I don't.
48:05
Speaker 2: I think it's a shit show because the the the
48:08
Speaker 2: people running the Republican Party are afraid of Nick Frantis.
48:12
Speaker 2: So the only reason this is a shit show is
48:14
Speaker 2: that people like Donald Trump and JD. Van's and the
48:18
Speaker 2: head of Heritage and the head of other think tanks
48:22
Speaker 2: in Washington d c afraid of Nick Foentis and Tucker Carlson.
48:26
Speaker 2: So as a consequence, they are trying to distance themselves
48:30
Speaker 2: from anti Semitism and at the same time not wanting
48:34
Speaker 2: to piss off all the anti Semites. That's a really
48:37
Speaker 2: tough trick, and they're struggling and it's a shit show.
48:41
Speaker 2: It would have been really easy if pretty much every
48:45
Speaker 2: every one in the of the call them the established
48:47
Speaker 2: on the Republicans just said we're against anti Semitism, and
48:50
Speaker 2: if you associate with the Nick Frantiss of the world,
48:53
Speaker 2: you know we will have nothing to do with you.
48:55
Speaker 2: And to help with you, Tucker Coulson, that would have
48:58
Speaker 2: that would have not been a shit show.
48:59
Speaker 4: That have ended it.
49:01
Speaker 2: That's what they should have done, but they can't because actually,
49:03
Speaker 2: you know, look, Donald Trump has been winking and giving
49:08
Speaker 2: little thumbs up to the racist right from the beginning.
49:12
Speaker 2: I mean, he did it at Charlottesville, and he's done
49:15
Speaker 2: it throughout his career. He kind of he doesn't he
49:20
Speaker 2: condemns them, he says the right things, but he's winking
49:23
Speaker 2: and he's giving them a thumbs up in a right
49:26
Speaker 2: kind of way to give them every indication he's actually
49:29
Speaker 2: on their side. And JD. Vance, by announcing himself to
49:33
Speaker 2: be a post liberal, national conservative, Christian conservative, is.
49:39
Speaker 4: Almost their right with them.
49:41
Speaker 2: What's the big difference between him and frantis so yeah,
49:45
Speaker 2: I mean Republican Party is a show. I mean, they
49:48
Speaker 2: deserve everything that's happening to them. They've walked right into it.
49:53
Speaker 2: They've made the bed. You know, they've made this bed.
49:56
Speaker 1: So you're saying that they're trying to keep the coalition together,
49:59
Speaker 1: which implies that they would want the Nick Foyantes fans
50:02
Speaker 1: to vote for them in the next selection. But Nick
50:05
Speaker 1: Foantes has been open about not wanting to vote for JD.
50:08
Speaker 1: Vance because he's married, he's in an interracial marriage, and
50:11
Speaker 1: all kinds of things.
50:12
Speaker 2: Tucker Calson is really good friends with Jade Vance. His
50:17
Speaker 2: son works with JD.
50:18
Speaker 4: Vance.
50:19
Speaker 2: I have no doubt in my mind that, at least
50:21
Speaker 2: in Tucker Colson's mind, one of the reasons he did
50:24
Speaker 2: such a softball interview with Nick Frentis is to try
50:27
Speaker 2: to ultimately bring him on board, bring him, bring him
50:31
Speaker 2: into the coalition, and get him on board with Jade Vans. Really, yes,
50:37
Speaker 2: so I don't think he succeeded yet, but I think
50:40
Speaker 2: they'll keep trying. And look, Nick Pointis is going to
50:44
Speaker 2: be normalized within the party. It looks that way now,
50:49
Speaker 2: you know the way that Jdvans ultimately is that is
50:52
Speaker 2: the candidate. I don't know. I mean he is. He's
50:55
Speaker 2: not particularly likable, and you know, I don't know what
50:59
Speaker 2: the base, the people who vote in the primaries will
51:02
Speaker 2: actually think of him. He was not very popular when
51:05
Speaker 2: he picked him as vice president, So we'll see. I
51:08
Speaker 2: don't I'm not very good at the politics side of it.
51:11
Speaker 2: But look, what's his name. Fuentis is a despicable human being.
51:19
Speaker 2: He is an anti Semite, He is a racist. You know,
51:23
Speaker 2: He's got plenty of videos where he praises Hitler.
51:26
Speaker 4: There's no shortage of that.
51:27
Speaker 2: For those who might be confused about this, you know,
51:30
Speaker 2: he attacks the Jews, not just the Jews to support Israel,
51:36
Speaker 2: but he attacks the Jews. And the reason he ultimately
51:39
Speaker 2: hates on Israel, the only reason he ultimately hates on
51:41
Speaker 2: Israel versus hating on Saudi Arabia or Kato or Iran
51:46
Speaker 2: is because the Jews, I mean, because otherwise Israel is
51:49
Speaker 2: much more aligned with America than Saudi Arabia, which today
51:52
Speaker 2: got the best I mean NBS today in the White
51:55
Speaker 2: House got the best treatment from Donald Trump than any
51:58
Speaker 2: other foreign leader in the world. You know, and I'm
52:03
Speaker 2: sure Nick for Interests didn't complain about that, right so,
52:07
Speaker 2: but every time anything else shows up, he complains. So
52:10
Speaker 2: the only motivation is and why do they care about
52:12
Speaker 2: I don't know Tucker costs and claims he cares about Christians.
52:15
Speaker 2: Why do they care about Israel, which where the Christians
52:17
Speaker 2: have equal rights to Jews, and not care about other.
52:20
Speaker 4: Places where Christians are being slotted.
52:23
Speaker 2: So all of this is motivated by anti Semitism, by
52:25
Speaker 2: hatred of Jews because they are Jews. It's the opposite.
52:29
Speaker 2: It's not that they hate Jews because Jews support Israel.
52:32
Speaker 2: It's that they hate Israel because Israel is a place
52:35
Speaker 2: with lots of Jews. And all you have to do
52:38
Speaker 2: is really follow the logic of their own arguments.
52:41
Speaker 4: And you can see that.
52:43
Speaker 2: It's sad that we live in America today where anti
52:47
Speaker 2: Semitism is prevalent. It's not even hidden on the left
52:51
Speaker 2: and on the right. Yes, it really is stunning we
52:55
Speaker 2: reach this point.
52:57
Speaker 1: There is ultimately a cost, I think to bringing Nick
53:00
Speaker 1: Foant's into the Republican Party. A hit to the Republican
53:05
Speaker 1: brand seems obvious. I mean, all the stuff he's saying
53:09
Speaker 1: is going to be in Democratic ads in the mid terms,
53:12
Speaker 1: and I'm sure in the next presidential election.
53:15
Speaker 2: I think that Tribosa depends on who the Democrats choose,
53:18
Speaker 2: right if they if they choose an AOC, then a
53:21
Speaker 2: lot of what the the what do you call it?
53:23
Speaker 2: The the what do you call those full Democratic congress
53:27
Speaker 2: women the squad?
53:29
Speaker 1: Yeah, squad? Well, don't they have the same exact problem
53:31
Speaker 1: though on the left. And I mean, you can make
53:35
Speaker 1: the argument that this was the problem that Kamala Harris
53:37
Speaker 1: had in the last election. Why she lost because she
53:41
Speaker 1: did the exact same thing, trying to incorporate the globalize,
53:44
Speaker 1: the intifad A crowd into the Democratic coalition. They would
53:48
Speaker 1: they would never vote for them. They tried to appease them,
53:52
Speaker 1: and by trying to appease him, they took a giant
53:54
Speaker 1: hit to the Democratic brand, which probably cost him the election.
53:58
Speaker 2: I agree with you completely, but look, the reality is
54:01
Speaker 2: that somebody like Jdvance. Now Donald Trump doesn't believe in anything,
54:04
Speaker 2: so it doesn't really matter. But Jdvans believes in something.
54:07
Speaker 2: He has a set of beliefs, and his beliefs are
54:09
Speaker 2: centered around a conservative you know, kind of national conservatism
54:14
Speaker 2: or even Christian conservatism. He has good friends with the
54:18
Speaker 2: post liberal Denin and the Mule and and these guys
54:22
Speaker 2: who really do believe the Constitution is meaningless and they
54:26
Speaker 2: really want to completely change the Republican Party. And to
54:31
Speaker 2: that extent, he can't rely on the Censeer, he can't
54:34
Speaker 2: rely on independence. So, you know, the Independence are publicly
54:39
Speaker 2: not going to go there. So he has to decide
54:42
Speaker 2: is he going to go to the center or is
54:44
Speaker 2: he going to go, you know, to the Nick fointis
54:46
Speaker 2: and the reality is the Nick foyntess is closer to JD.
54:51
Speaker 2: Vance's ideas to the extent that he has them right,
54:54
Speaker 2: and to the extend that consistent then is the center.
54:57
Speaker 2: So that's why he's gravitating towards I think it's destructive.
55:00
Speaker 2: I mean, I don't really care about destroying the Republican Party.
55:02
Speaker 2: I have no chips in that game. I care about
55:06
Speaker 2: destroying the country. I think it's unbelievably destructive to the
55:09
Speaker 2: country as the Democrats move to appease the globalized intafada
55:13
Speaker 2: and the right moves towards appeasing Nick frantis, what are
55:17
Speaker 2: we left with? What kind of a country do we have?
55:20
Speaker 2: Both anti Semitic, both a racist, both a collectivists, both
55:25
Speaker 2: as statists. You could argue both as socialists, right, they
55:29
Speaker 2: don't believe in free markets? Then is this a country
55:32
Speaker 2: any of us want to live in? This is a
55:34
Speaker 2: really this is unbelievably destructive to America.
55:38
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's totally terrifying. Do you think do you conceptualize
55:42
Speaker 1: Jady Vance as a theocrat.
55:47
Speaker 2: Not a theocret if you mean in the sense of Iran, right,
55:51
Speaker 2: He's not going to be a Mullah who rules, but
55:54
Speaker 2: the theocret in sense of he believes there should be
55:56
Speaker 2: no separation between church and state. I believe he doesn't
55:59
Speaker 2: bel leave in separation of church and state. You know,
56:02
Speaker 2: if you go again, if you read the Nan who
56:05
Speaker 2: is a good friend of his, if you read the
56:07
Speaker 2: post liberal kind of integralists who are very influential, you know,
56:12
Speaker 2: Jade Events.
56:12
Speaker 4: Converted to Catholicism.
56:14
Speaker 2: These guys are all Catholic converts, which is just the
56:17
Speaker 2: interesting you know, all these right wing post liberals or
56:22
Speaker 2: Catholic converts. They believe Catholic religion should play a big
56:27
Speaker 2: role in government. They don't believe in the separation state
56:31
Speaker 2: and church. And so if you mean by that, then yeah,
56:34
Speaker 2: he is a.
56:38
Speaker 1: Was the Wood theocrat. Democrats are definitely going to try
56:42
Speaker 1: to pain him as a theocrat in the next election.
56:44
Speaker 1: So he's on the table, he's wound it.
56:48
Speaker 2: I don't like him, you know, I wouldn't vote for him.
56:52
Speaker 2: And you know, what we need, what we what we
56:54
Speaker 2: need is is an alternative. And I don't know where
56:57
Speaker 2: that alternative will come from. I don't know if Republicans
56:59
Speaker 2: will choose alternative. I don't know, you know, Elune Musk
57:03
Speaker 2: threatened to start a third party.
57:05
Speaker 4: I wish he'd done it.
57:06
Speaker 2: What we need is a is a real, well funded,
57:09
Speaker 2: well organized third party that starts organizing now and doesn't
57:13
Speaker 2: wait the last minute.
57:15
Speaker 1: Right do you ever watch batcha unger Sargon. She's a
57:20
Speaker 1: huge Trump fan, and she conceptualizes Trump as a like
57:25
Speaker 1: a middle class, a protector of the middle class, a
57:28
Speaker 1: protector of jobs. She has a completely different look at
57:31
Speaker 1: at Trump and most people.
57:33
Speaker 2: I mean, the thing about her, that's what. She has
57:36
Speaker 2: no training in economics. She is an economic ignoramus.
57:40
Speaker 1: So you do know her?
57:42
Speaker 2: What's it?
57:42
Speaker 4: Yeah?
57:42
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, okay, I mean she's everyway. She's an economic
57:46
Speaker 2: ignoremus who constantly opines in economics. She doesn't know anything
57:51
Speaker 2: about economics. She's not trained in it. She she views
57:55
Speaker 2: the epitome of ignorance when it comes to it. So
57:58
Speaker 2: Donald Trump cares about the middle class. He doesn't care
58:00
Speaker 2: about anybody other than a piece other than you know,
58:04
Speaker 2: his narcissistic emotions. Tariffs don't help the middle class. They
58:09
Speaker 2: destroy the middle class. Taking a ten percent staken intel
58:13
Speaker 2: doesn't help the middle class. It's destructive to the middle class.
58:18
Speaker 1: So you know, Jason, how is it destructive. He's look
58:23
Speaker 1: his policy proposal. He's talking about taking the tariffs and
58:27
Speaker 1: giving the two thousand dollars checks, So basically giving the
58:30
Speaker 1: earnings from the tariffs to the middle class. How is
58:33
Speaker 1: that not helping the middle class.
58:35
Speaker 2: So the middle class paid so that money the tariffs,
58:39
Speaker 2: That money is taxes being placed on the middle class
58:43
Speaker 2: that they were taxed. Now they're going to get their
58:46
Speaker 2: money back, only to be taxed again in order to
58:49
Speaker 2: fill the hole created in the budget because they got
58:54
Speaker 2: the money. Right, So let's be really clear here. The
58:56
Speaker 2: United States today with the tariffs is running one point
59:00
Speaker 2: eight trillion that's a to trillion, right t right, one
59:05
Speaker 2: point eight trillion dollar deficit per er, Yeah, oh yeah,
59:09
Speaker 2: on top of a thirty seven trillion dollar debt.
59:12
Speaker 1: Yeah, total debt.
59:14
Speaker 2: So if we take, if we pay everybody two thousand
59:17
Speaker 2: dollars check, the deficit grows to two point two trillion
59:22
Speaker 2: dollars because it's about three hundred billion, two point two
59:24
Speaker 2: trillion dollars. Who's going to pay that?
59:27
Speaker 4: Who's going to pay that?
59:29
Speaker 2: The middle class will have to pay it down the
59:30
Speaker 2: road in future taxes. So he's scoring the middle class
59:34
Speaker 2: left and right and he's he's pretending that he's helping them,
59:38
Speaker 2: and she is the fool who is going on television
59:45
Speaker 2: trying to sell the pretense to unfortunately pretty ignorance and
59:51
Speaker 2: unengaged in middle class that doesn't really know what is
59:54
Speaker 2: going on.
59:55
Speaker 1: Aren't the tariffs coming from the corporations. I conceptualize tariffs
59:59
Speaker 1: is just a core for tax. The importers who are
1:00:01
Speaker 1: importing the goods are the ones that are paying the tariff.
1:00:04
Speaker 4: So a couple of things.
1:00:06
Speaker 2: One, corporations are not not for profits, so the importers
1:00:11
Speaker 2: don't run it in a nonprofit way. If they costs
1:00:14
Speaker 2: go up and taxes a cost, then prices go up.
1:00:18
Speaker 2: They pass the cost on to consumers. They have to.
1:00:21
Speaker 2: They have no choice otherwise they go out of business.
1:00:23
Speaker 2: There's no importer that has a twenty percent margin on
1:00:28
Speaker 2: the stuff they input from from Japan or fifty percent
1:00:31
Speaker 2: margin on the stuff they input from China. Their margins
1:00:34
Speaker 2: are very small, so they passed the cost on.
1:00:36
Speaker 4: To everybody else. Right, so prices are going up.
1:00:40
Speaker 2: We know this if you look at prices of tariff goods,
1:00:43
Speaker 2: all of them are up. Aluminum is up, steel is
1:00:45
Speaker 2: Prices of everything that's been tariff has gone up. This
1:00:48
Speaker 2: is why he recently in order to cut our cost
1:00:53
Speaker 2: of living, he recently lower tariffs and bananas and coffee
1:00:59
Speaker 2: and all this off. Why because taiks raised the cost
1:01:02
Speaker 2: and if he cuts the taists they reduced the cost. Otherwise,
1:01:05
Speaker 2: if the importers were absorbing it all, then cutting the
1:01:08
Speaker 2: taft wouldn't have any impact on us. So, no, you
1:01:11
Speaker 2: pay the tariff, there's no question about that. But think
1:01:13
Speaker 2: a little deeper. Every corporate tax is a tax on consumers.
1:01:20
Speaker 2: Corporations are not things. Corporations are just a legal something, right,
1:01:27
Speaker 2: So every corporate tax, every penny of corporate taxes that
1:01:31
Speaker 2: it's one of the dumbest taxes we have, is either
1:01:33
Speaker 2: paid by shareholders or by employees or by consumers. And
1:01:38
Speaker 2: based on all the financial research, almost all of corporate
1:01:42
Speaker 2: taxes are paid by employees in lower wages and by consumers.
1:01:46
Speaker 4: In higher prices.
1:01:47
Speaker 2: So if you cut corporate taxes, prices go down generally
1:01:50
Speaker 2: and wages go up. And that happened when Donald Trump
1:01:53
Speaker 2: cut coporate taxes in twenty seventeen, the best thing he
1:01:58
Speaker 2: did probably in his time presidency. It wages went up
1:02:02
Speaker 2: and prices actually went down. So any corporate tax is
1:02:05
Speaker 2: going to passed on to consumers, You passed on to somebody,
1:02:09
Speaker 2: and there's just no way around that.
1:02:12
Speaker 1: I am not in favor of corporate taxes. But if
1:02:16
Speaker 1: if they have lower input costs and they can keep
1:02:21
Speaker 1: the prices higher because demand doesn't fall off, they will
1:02:25
Speaker 1: keep the prices higher if they if they raise prices
1:02:29
Speaker 1: because of the tariffs and demand falls off, nobody wants
1:02:33
Speaker 1: the thing but competition.
1:02:35
Speaker 2: But clearly competition drives the prices down. If you if
1:02:38
Speaker 2: you get rid of corporate taxes so they have less
1:02:40
Speaker 2: of a cost. Now, then you know we're competing. Then
1:02:44
Speaker 2: my incentive is to try to take market ship from you.
1:02:46
Speaker 2: Is to lower my price a little bit. I can
1:02:48
Speaker 2: afford to do because I'm not paying all these corporate
1:02:50
Speaker 2: taxes now. So I lower my price a little bit,
1:02:52
Speaker 2: You match it, or lower a little bit more than me,
1:02:55
Speaker 2: and soon enough prices have gone down to reflect the
1:02:57
Speaker 2: full corporate tax. This is how we can wooks, and
1:03:01
Speaker 2: it actually works in practice, not just in theory. That way, right,
1:03:04
Speaker 2: go down and go down.
1:03:06
Speaker 1: There are two players obviously in that system, but there
1:03:08
Speaker 1: will be some sort of equilibrium where they both want
1:03:13
Speaker 1: their price is obviously as high as possible without a
1:03:15
Speaker 1: falloff in demand.
1:03:17
Speaker 2: Sure, but the offsetting portion of that is that they
1:03:21
Speaker 2: have to provide the providers of capital with a certain
1:03:26
Speaker 2: return of capital that compensates the providers of capital for risk.
1:03:31
Speaker 2: Let's say that's ten percent, and now because of corporate
1:03:33
Speaker 2: tax cuts, they're getting fifteen percent. They will drive prices
1:03:37
Speaker 2: down until it's ten percent again.
1:03:39
Speaker 1: Right, what kind of economists would you call yourself.
1:03:44
Speaker 2: A free market economist? I, you know, most closely adhered
1:03:50
Speaker 2: to what is sometimes called Austrian economics. But you know,
1:03:55
Speaker 2: I think the greatest economist is Ludrig von Miss But
1:04:00
Speaker 2: a lot of Austrian economists go off the deep end
1:04:02
Speaker 2: when it comes to anarchy and a bunch of other things.
1:04:04
Speaker 2: But okay, a purely economics perspective, I agree with many
1:04:10
Speaker 2: of the not all, but many of.
1:04:12
Speaker 4: The Austrian arguments.
1:04:13
Speaker 2: Also, like you know, some people from the Chicago School,
1:04:17
Speaker 2: So I'm you know, but generally free market.
1:04:20
Speaker 1: Right, yeah, I'm more free market as well, but neo classical.
1:04:24
Speaker 1: It generally rules the day today. So since you have
1:04:28
Speaker 1: any questions or anything, well, there were some questions. We
1:04:31
Speaker 1: have superchets, Yeah, there.
1:04:32
Speaker 3: Were some super chats that were questions that I had
1:04:34
Speaker 3: as well. The oceanis for ten dollars asked why do
1:04:37
Speaker 3: you think capitalism is hated today and that there's this
1:04:41
Speaker 3: rise on the far left and far right with alternatives.
1:04:45
Speaker 2: For a couple of reasons. One is, I think because
1:04:48
Speaker 2: it's misconceptualized. That is that people conceptualized capitalism is the
1:04:52
Speaker 2: system we have today, and what they see today are
1:04:55
Speaker 2: the problems. They see economic crisis, like the financial crisis.
1:04:59
Speaker 2: They they see cronyism, and they associate where that we
1:05:02
Speaker 2: was capitalism and they conceive of that as capitalism. And yeah,
1:05:05
Speaker 2: we're all against that. Nobody likes, I mean except for
1:05:07
Speaker 2: the cronies and the president. Nobody actually likes cronyism. Nobody
1:05:11
Speaker 2: likes these financial crisis and nobody's willing to do the
1:05:14
Speaker 2: work to discover why they happen. Cronyism is not a
1:05:17
Speaker 2: feature of capitalism. It's a feature of a mixed economy.
1:05:19
Speaker 2: It's a feature of a lot of statism. Giving the
1:05:22
Speaker 2: state a lot of power over the economy then provides
1:05:25
Speaker 2: massive incentives for people to go lobby to try to
1:05:28
Speaker 2: get some of that, you know, the goodies that are
1:05:31
Speaker 2: being that these status are controlling, and the same thing
1:05:35
Speaker 2: with the economic crisis. Almost every economic crisis that I've seen,
1:05:39
Speaker 2: really every economic crisis I've seen is a consequence of
1:05:41
Speaker 2: government regulations and government controls and the federal reserve doing
1:05:45
Speaker 2: bad stuff. So people don't conceptualize what capitalism really is.
1:05:49
Speaker 2: And capitalism is in its in its pure form, a
1:05:54
Speaker 2: separation of state from economics. It's it's it's the state
1:05:57
Speaker 2: has no economic role. It does and intervene in the economy.
1:06:01
Speaker 2: One iota doesn't regulate, there's no central bank. It basically
1:06:06
Speaker 2: leaves us free. Capitalism is a system where individuals are free,
1:06:10
Speaker 2: they're left alone, they're not cursed, they're not forced. So
1:06:14
Speaker 2: that's one is the misconceptualization. I'd say the second is
1:06:18
Speaker 2: there's a moral issue around capitalism. Capitalism is the system. Fundamentally,
1:06:24
Speaker 2: capitalism is a system of self interest. It's a system
1:06:27
Speaker 2: of people people pursuing their own interest, their own values,
1:06:30
Speaker 2: their own wealth, their own happiness, their own values. And
1:06:36
Speaker 2: that's not a moral. Morality is about sacrifice. And you know,
1:06:40
Speaker 2: socialism in all these different forms or fascism, are all
1:06:44
Speaker 2: about sacrifice. The socialism demands that you sacrifice for the
1:06:48
Speaker 2: sake of the politarian, and nationalism demands that you sacrifice
1:06:52
Speaker 2: in the sake of the state, and fascism demands that you,
1:06:56
Speaker 2: you know, sacrifice for the sake of the state plus
1:06:59
Speaker 2: your race whatever. And people are much more comfortable with
1:07:02
Speaker 2: the language of sacrifice, as we talked about, then the
1:07:05
Speaker 2: language of self interest. They believe sacrifice is noble and
1:07:08
Speaker 2: model and self interest is like yucky and and something's
1:07:12
Speaker 2: wrong with it. So they're reluctant to support an economic
1:07:16
Speaker 2: system that fundamentally is about self interest, and that's what
1:07:21
Speaker 2: capitalism is. It's undeniable.
1:07:24
Speaker 1: How do you deal with the economic losers in that situation?
1:07:27
Speaker 2: Though?
1:07:27
Speaker 1: If you have no regulation whatsoever, it's hard for me
1:07:30
Speaker 1: to imagine that there's not going to be vast amounts
1:07:33
Speaker 1: of people who are just on the outs with the
1:07:36
Speaker 1: economic system.
1:07:37
Speaker 2: Yeah, obviously lack imagination then no.
1:07:41
Speaker 1: Oh really, well, look, I think right now, the haters.
1:07:45
Speaker 2: Give me, give me an example of loses under capitalism.
1:07:48
Speaker 1: Well, if there's somebody that's working fifty hours a week
1:07:51
Speaker 1: and they can't really make ends meet, they can't pay
1:07:53
Speaker 1: their bills. If there are people that don't think they're
1:07:56
Speaker 1: ever going to be able to afford to own a home.
1:07:58
Speaker 1: I think those people of.
1:08:01
Speaker 2: Capitalism, it's exact opposite of statism, that's exact opposite of socialism,
1:08:05
Speaker 2: that's exact outcome of socialism. There is there's no there's
1:08:08
Speaker 2: no reason to believe, zero reasonab believe that wages wouldn't
1:08:13
Speaker 2: be high on the capitalism. Quite the opposite. Think about
1:08:16
Speaker 2: how you know, Ford double the wages of his of
1:08:19
Speaker 2: his employees in order to attract the most productive employees,
1:08:23
Speaker 2: and by thus doing raised uh, raised uh wages across the.
1:08:27
Speaker 4: Entire automobile sector.
1:08:28
Speaker 2: The only economic system in all of human history to
1:08:32
Speaker 2: actually raise wages is capitalism. And what happens is you
1:08:36
Speaker 2: get paid based on how productive you are, and as
1:08:39
Speaker 2: productivity increases because of mechanization and computers and all of that,
1:08:44
Speaker 2: wages go up.
1:08:46
Speaker 1: But there are going to be people who are completely
1:08:48
Speaker 1: locked out of the economy because they don't have any
1:08:50
Speaker 1: productive value whatsoever.
1:08:52
Speaker 2: Nobody, there's nobody in this world, I mean unless you're
1:08:56
Speaker 2: really you know either, So.
1:08:58
Speaker 1: There are people who are going to be economy.
1:09:01
Speaker 2: That would be locked out of a capitalist economy. The
1:09:03
Speaker 2: reality is that you know, unless you I don't know paraplegic.
1:09:08
Speaker 2: You know, you can't move anything.
1:09:09
Speaker 1: So what do we do with that guy? The paraplegic?
1:09:11
Speaker 1: Should the state take care of that guy?
1:09:13
Speaker 2: You do with him today? You provide him charity. It's
1:09:18
Speaker 2: just the difference is that you don't provide the charity
1:09:20
Speaker 2: by forcing.
1:09:21
Speaker 1: Him through the state. Okay, I gotch Hey.
1:09:23
Speaker 2: You don't do it through the state. You do it
1:09:24
Speaker 2: through voluntary Yeah. I always ask my audience, how many
1:09:27
Speaker 2: of you are willing to help the guy who just
1:09:29
Speaker 2: at an accident and you know, lost his legs and
1:09:32
Speaker 2: can't work and everything, and every hand in the room
1:09:34
Speaker 2: goes up. So what do we need government fall If
1:09:36
Speaker 2: you're willing to help him, so go help him.
1:09:38
Speaker 3: So, you know.
1:09:39
Speaker 2: So it's not hard to imagine a world in which
1:09:42
Speaker 2: that fraction of a percent who really can't work gets
1:09:46
Speaker 2: helped by everybody else because we do it now through
1:09:48
Speaker 2: taxes in a very very inefficient way. By the way,
1:09:51
Speaker 2: in a very unproductive way.
1:09:53
Speaker 1: Let's say, let's say hypothetically, though that AI takes thirty
1:09:58
Speaker 1: percent of the workforce and makes them superfluous, they cannot
1:10:02
Speaker 1: help any any way, shape or form.
1:10:05
Speaker 2: That was set about the steam engine. It was set
1:10:07
Speaker 2: about every single.
1:10:09
Speaker 1: But look, this is a this is a this is
1:10:11
Speaker 1: a hypothetical where this.
1:10:12
Speaker 2: Is my hypothetical. Is that a detachment reality? I deal
1:10:16
Speaker 2: with reality facts. The reality is that technology always always
1:10:21
Speaker 2: creates more jobs than it destroys. It's that's being a
1:10:24
Speaker 2: patent throughout all of human history. And look, not all,
1:10:27
Speaker 2: not all jobs equally remunerating. That's that's why inequality exists
1:10:32
Speaker 2: and why it's a good thing because different people perform
1:10:35
Speaker 2: at different levels of productivity. But there are always new needs.
1:10:38
Speaker 2: There were always new jobs, There are always new things
1:10:41
Speaker 2: for people to do.
1:10:41
Speaker 1: I mean, I think patterns can break though obviously there
1:10:45
Speaker 1: was a time when people were huntering gathers and then
1:10:47
Speaker 1: the pattern broke and they decided that always the panel.
1:10:52
Speaker 2: As long as we're free, the pattern always advances in
1:10:55
Speaker 2: the same direction. Freedom leads the more economic growth and
1:10:59
Speaker 2: more technology and more success and more jobs. We now
1:11:02
Speaker 2: have eight billion people on the planet. You know, fifty
1:11:06
Speaker 2: years ago we didn't believe we could feed eight billion people.
1:11:09
Speaker 2: Two hundred years ago, we couldn't even imagine eight billion people.
1:11:12
Speaker 2: And they were only there were only half a billion
1:11:15
Speaker 2: people on planet Earth. So there were only half a
1:11:17
Speaker 2: billion jobs. Now they've eight billion jobs. So no, I
1:11:20
Speaker 2: mean there's no there's no limit to human imagination, there's
1:11:24
Speaker 2: no limit to human creativity, and there's no limit to
1:11:29
Speaker 2: how much we desire a want. So you know, there's
1:11:32
Speaker 2: so many jobs today that didn't exist for me.
1:11:35
Speaker 1: Look, I know the argument if if an outcome there's
1:11:40
Speaker 1: only a slim chance of an outcome happening, but there
1:11:43
Speaker 1: is a chance of an outcome happening, isn't it prudent
1:11:45
Speaker 1: to prepare for that outcome?
1:11:47
Speaker 2: No, because again, if the outcome goes against all of
1:11:52
Speaker 2: economic theory and all of historical experience, then it's just
1:11:56
Speaker 2: feomon green to prepare for that outcome.
1:11:59
Speaker 1: It didn't farm it by the hunter gatherer example. Wasn't
1:12:02
Speaker 1: that something that went against all the hunter gatherer experience? Yeah,
1:12:06
Speaker 1: I mean the model broke because had no experience.
1:12:10
Speaker 2: Created many, many more jobs than hunter gathering.
1:12:13
Speaker 1: I just I only use it in a paradigm can
1:12:16
Speaker 1: vastly change. I'm not using it to say.
1:12:20
Speaker 2: The job so AI is coming, Your job will be replaced,
1:12:25
Speaker 2: you will have to do something different, you will have
1:12:28
Speaker 2: to retrain.
1:12:30
Speaker 4: That is a fact.
1:12:31
Speaker 2: You can ignore it as much as you want and
1:12:34
Speaker 2: figure out what what what you can do that will
1:12:37
Speaker 2: not be replaced by AI.
1:12:39
Speaker 1: And if that, if that doesn't happen.
1:12:42
Speaker 2: If that doesn't happen, then you're dependent on If you
1:12:45
Speaker 2: really are never going to find a job, right, if
1:12:47
Speaker 2: that really okay, then you're dependent on other people.
1:12:50
Speaker 1: You're dependent on charity, You're dependent on other people.
1:12:52
Speaker 2: Now, the question is do we want to use a
1:12:54
Speaker 2: gun and cosion and force to force people to help
1:12:59
Speaker 2: that person or do we want to rely on, you know,
1:13:04
Speaker 2: voluntary help. And I think that there's nothing more evil
1:13:07
Speaker 2: than force and quasion, and therefore I don't want to
1:13:11
Speaker 2: rely on force and cosion. You know, if they're going
1:13:13
Speaker 2: to be those people, they're going to have to come
1:13:15
Speaker 2: and ask me for help. Assume me I'm in a
1:13:16
Speaker 2: position to help them, and I might and I might not.
1:13:19
Speaker 1: Ultimately, ultimately I agree with you that could there could
1:13:24
Speaker 1: be other jobs that come around. I don't know that
1:13:26
Speaker 1: the pattern is going to be broken. I don't have
1:13:29
Speaker 1: a understanding of the entire situation. Obviously the economy is
1:13:34
Speaker 1: too complex to really know, so, but I do think
1:13:37
Speaker 1: there could be some sort of disruption and we probably
1:13:40
Speaker 1: should be planning for that just in case.
1:13:44
Speaker 2: I think I don't think. I think there's going to
1:13:46
Speaker 2: be disruption. Look, we lift in mixed economy, we don't
1:13:48
Speaker 2: live on the capitalism. It's quite likely that people will
1:13:52
Speaker 2: lose their jobs and not find other jobs, and they
1:13:55
Speaker 2: won't look for other jobs, and they won't get we
1:13:56
Speaker 2: trained because we've conditioned them to accept a welfare and
1:14:00
Speaker 2: to accept the state as a blast minute provider. So
1:14:04
Speaker 2: one of the things you do in a mixed economy,
1:14:06
Speaker 2: in a welfare state is you create this incentives to
1:14:10
Speaker 2: adapt and to adjust. So if there you know, the
1:14:14
Speaker 2: reason the hunter gatherers all adapted to farming is they
1:14:18
Speaker 2: had no choice, right there was no welfare state to
1:14:21
Speaker 2: me the office to bail them out. So I'm saying
1:14:25
Speaker 2: the more we provide bailouts, the more we get bad behavior.
1:14:30
Speaker 2: Bailouts lead to bad behavior in businesses, and they lead
1:14:33
Speaker 2: bad behavior in uh in individuals. Look, look, there's still
1:14:38
Speaker 2: a lot of people sitting sitting literally on their couch
1:14:42
Speaker 2: watching TV, probably not watching this show, but watching TV
1:14:45
Speaker 2: in Cleveland and Cincinnati, waiting for their steel jobs to
1:14:49
Speaker 2: come back, then never coming back. But they're still sitting there. Now,
1:14:53
Speaker 2: there are lots of jobs in I don't know northwest Arkansas.
1:14:58
Speaker 2: There's a ton of jobs in northwest Sokosa and in
1:15:01
Speaker 2: Texas and in lots of other places. But they're not
1:15:03
Speaker 2: going to get off of that sofa. They're not going
1:15:05
Speaker 2: to get in their car. They're not going to drive
1:15:07
Speaker 2: to northwest Arkansas and get that job because they're waiting
1:15:12
Speaker 2: for that welfare check and because politicians and commentators and
1:15:16
Speaker 2: economists that promised them to just wait, the jobs are
1:15:19
Speaker 2: coming back. And that's a lie and it's destructive to
1:15:23
Speaker 2: their own lives. And indeed, if you look at mobility
1:15:26
Speaker 2: in the United States, that is people willingness to move
1:15:30
Speaker 2: from city to city, it's plummeted over the last fifty years.
1:15:35
Speaker 2: That is, the more we pay people welfare, the more
1:15:37
Speaker 2: they stay put and the less ambitious they are, and
1:15:41
Speaker 2: the less they go find the jobs and unless they
1:15:43
Speaker 2: create the job. So I'm not saying you're not going
1:15:45
Speaker 2: to have a massive disruption because of AI in a
1:15:47
Speaker 2: mixed economy. A mixed economy is awful, and yes, we're
1:15:51
Speaker 2: going to get massive disruption. I'm saying that if we
1:15:53
Speaker 2: had capitalism, it would be very different. It would be
1:15:57
Speaker 2: more like the transition from agriculture to manufacture ring, and
1:16:01
Speaker 2: we don't remember big disruptions in that transition. And you
1:16:04
Speaker 2: remember that two hundred years ago, ninety eight percent of
1:16:08
Speaker 2: all the population was doing agriculture, and today it's less
1:16:10
Speaker 2: than one percent.
1:16:12
Speaker 1: Kirk Wilcox pretty smoothly. Kirk Wilcox for two dollars, says
1:16:16
Speaker 1: yarn Brook is the best. You got a fan, yarn.
1:16:19
Speaker 2: Yeah, I know, I know.
1:16:20
Speaker 4: Cook.
1:16:21
Speaker 1: So do we have more questions?
1:16:24
Speaker 3: Yeah? Fondusa asked how does Brooks feel about Jordan Pearson's
1:16:29
Speaker 3: argument on lobsters when it comes to status?
1:16:33
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean lobsters care about status. Good for lobsters. Lobsters.
1:16:40
Speaker 4: Lobsters have no free will.
1:16:42
Speaker 2: Lobsters have a really, really really tiny brain. It's one
1:16:46
Speaker 2: of the reasons we are so eager to eat them
1:16:51
Speaker 2: because we know they're not really you know, they don't
1:16:53
Speaker 2: know what's happening. The compare human being still lobsters is
1:16:56
Speaker 2: bizarre and ridiculous. I mean, with all due respect to
1:16:59
Speaker 2: Jordan Peterson, I think it's bizarre, ridiculous. You know, lobsters
1:17:03
Speaker 2: climb over each other. In human society, we don't do that.
1:17:07
Speaker 2: We don't climb over each other. We trade, and the
1:17:09
Speaker 2: reality is that somebody else's success, somebody else's prosperity, is
1:17:14
Speaker 2: actually really good for me. Right, I love billionaires. I
1:17:17
Speaker 2: know it's popular to say no billion is. I love
1:17:20
Speaker 2: billionaires because I know the pretty much every billion in
1:17:22
Speaker 2: American uh in American economies made my life better. And
1:17:26
Speaker 2: if I met a Jeff Bezos or a Lunmosque or
1:17:31
Speaker 2: any one of these guys, I would I would go up,
1:17:33
Speaker 2: shake the hand and say thank you.
1:17:36
Speaker 3: Right well, I think people Pearson's time out with the
1:17:39
Speaker 3: lobsters was that just that lobsters have neurochemical pathways that
1:17:45
Speaker 3: you know, with that effects like how how they judge
1:17:48
Speaker 3: themselves in the lobster hierarchy actually would give them more
1:17:51
Speaker 3: serraconin serotonin.
1:17:52
Speaker 2: And and all that stuff self awareness they have, but
1:17:56
Speaker 2: like they don't judge themselves, they just do the.
1:17:59
Speaker 3: Automentons Humans, even though we have self awareness and rationality,
1:18:02
Speaker 3: we still have those biochemical pathways.
1:18:05
Speaker 2: No, we don't be very very different biochemical Pathoris Man.
1:18:09
Speaker 2: The brain of a human being, a brain that allows
1:18:11
Speaker 2: to are so different, so dramatically different. I just don't
1:18:16
Speaker 2: buy it. I don't buy the similarity. And the reality
1:18:19
Speaker 2: is here's the great evolutionary breakthrough that is made when
1:18:24
Speaker 2: human beings come into being, and that is you don't
1:18:27
Speaker 2: have to wire everything, you don't have to pre program,
1:18:31
Speaker 2: you don't have to create all the reltes because you
1:18:33
Speaker 2: provide human beings with the capacity to reason, to think
1:18:38
Speaker 2: for themselves, you provide them with free will, and then
1:18:40
Speaker 2: the rate they get to write the code themselves, so
1:18:45
Speaker 2: we come much more. I don't think we come completely
1:18:47
Speaker 2: tubl of Ussa, but wecome much more tublo of Ussa
1:18:49
Speaker 2: than what people imagine, particularly when it comes to ideas
1:18:54
Speaker 2: and ideas relative to other being. And look, and if
1:18:56
Speaker 2: we have some self destructive coding left over from when
1:19:01
Speaker 2: we will lobsters, then we can overwrite it because we
1:19:04
Speaker 2: have free will and we rational and we don't have
1:19:06
Speaker 2: to live as an animal. You know, most people, sadly,
1:19:10
Speaker 2: a lot of people do live like animals. They don't
1:19:12
Speaker 2: engage in that free will and they don't engage in
1:19:14
Speaker 2: that rationality, and that is expresially in the fact that
1:19:17
Speaker 2: they're not happy human beings.
1:19:18
Speaker 3: Yeah, but I would just I would say that we
1:19:20
Speaker 3: have to overcome it. I think it's useful for us
1:19:23
Speaker 3: to understand what the programming is. I think it's more
1:19:26
Speaker 3: difficult that people don't realize that this programming exists within them.
1:19:30
Speaker 2: I think the principle here to guide all that rather
1:19:34
Speaker 2: than having to know every single path that you have
1:19:36
Speaker 2: to override, the principle to know here is be rational.
1:19:41
Speaker 2: And if that's the principle, then that overrides everything.
1:19:45
Speaker 3: At games ass, do you believe that an individual ought
1:19:49
Speaker 3: to participate or what circumstances would an individual participate in
1:19:52
Speaker 3: a just war? The self serving individual? Would they be
1:19:55
Speaker 3: better off avoiding the war or joining the winning side
1:19:58
Speaker 3: even if it's oppressive.
1:20:00
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, I think the only time that individuals
1:20:03
Speaker 2: who join a just wars when it's just. And I
1:20:07
Speaker 2: think the only just wars are worth self defense. And
1:20:11
Speaker 2: you know, so you're defending yourself and you're defending what
1:20:13
Speaker 2: does that mean? It means defending your freedom, defending your liberty.
1:20:16
Speaker 2: I can't imagine it ever being in yourself interest to
1:20:19
Speaker 2: join the winning side if that side is oppressive, because
1:20:23
Speaker 2: then you then get to live under oppression, and I
1:20:27
Speaker 2: think that is incredibly self destructive. So always fight for freedom,
1:20:31
Speaker 2: always fight for liberty, and hope that your side is
1:20:36
Speaker 2: the one that wins.
1:20:37
Speaker 3: Is it better to live under oppression than to die?
1:20:41
Speaker 3: I guess would be the question.
1:20:42
Speaker 2: Yeah, it is, actually, I mean I completely understand people
1:20:46
Speaker 2: who commit suicidey in a concentration camp, or you know,
1:20:49
Speaker 2: assault your nitsen, who's willing to stand up to the
1:20:52
Speaker 2: authorities and the Soviet Union at the risk of death
1:20:55
Speaker 2: and go to the gulags. You know, living if you
1:20:59
Speaker 2: have a soul and you know, and if you have
1:21:02
Speaker 2: a if you have if you're self aware and you
1:21:05
Speaker 2: have free will, and then you know how horrific oppression
1:21:10
Speaker 2: is and how damaging it into the to the very
1:21:12
Speaker 2: essence of who you are. A great book on that,
1:21:15
Speaker 2: by the way, is Einman's less known novel called We
1:21:18
Speaker 2: the Living, which is about a young woman who grows
1:21:22
Speaker 2: up under communism and what communism does, what oppression does
1:21:27
Speaker 2: to the human psyche. Better better to fight and even
1:21:32
Speaker 2: in some cases die. I mean, you don't want to
1:21:34
Speaker 2: commit suicide, but you want to fight and try to die.
1:21:36
Speaker 2: You want to try to make your life better in
1:21:38
Speaker 2: one way or the other.
1:21:39
Speaker 3: Right, Sammy g says, hearing Yarn reminds me of how
1:21:43
Speaker 3: my grandfather successfully did business. He always made sure everyone
1:21:47
Speaker 3: benefits in a deal, and that's what made him more
1:21:48
Speaker 3: successful was his reputation of being trustworthy.
1:21:51
Speaker 2: I mean absolutely. Look, life generally is about creating win
1:21:57
Speaker 2: win relationships with other people. You want to win, but
1:22:01
Speaker 2: the only way you really win in the long run
1:22:03
Speaker 2: is if the other party wins as well. You want
1:22:05
Speaker 2: a win win relationship with your wife. You want to
1:22:07
Speaker 2: win win relationship. You know, with your employees. You want
1:22:10
Speaker 2: a win win relationship. With your boss, you want to
1:22:12
Speaker 2: maximize your win. And your friends, of course, you want
1:22:14
Speaker 2: to maximize your win win relationships. I think this is
1:22:17
Speaker 2: one of the real damages to America of Donald Trump
1:22:20
Speaker 2: is that he is very much as zero sum mentality.
1:22:24
Speaker 2: He believes that him winning means somebody else losing, and
1:22:28
Speaker 2: he relishes other people's losses.
1:22:30
Speaker 4: He loves to see people lose.
1:22:32
Speaker 2: He believes a lot of the deal is all about
1:22:34
Speaker 2: screwing the other guy, you know. I think that's a
1:22:37
Speaker 2: pathetic way to live. I think Donald Trump is a
1:22:40
Speaker 2: pathetic human being put aside president, but as a human being,
1:22:44
Speaker 2: and I'm with his grandfather. You know, create relationships where
1:22:49
Speaker 2: you win, you benefit. But the way to win and
1:22:53
Speaker 2: wade to benefit long term is by having other people
1:22:55
Speaker 2: win as well.
1:22:58
Speaker 3: Harrison Jodas says, I like to apologie to yarn I
1:23:00
Speaker 3: criticized him a while back for harping on the Young
1:23:02
Speaker 3: Republican chat leagues. Then Nick then Tucker Carlson interviewed Fronts
1:23:06
Speaker 3: and while I was wrong about the prevalence of Nazism.
1:23:11
Speaker 2: Sad, I wish I was wrong. I wish I had
1:23:13
Speaker 2: been wrong. But it looks like it's all over the place.
1:23:17
Speaker 2: And if you've seen there's a there's a lady, there's
1:23:20
Speaker 2: another one of the young Republicans out of New York
1:23:23
Speaker 2: who who you know, did a little video of Jews
1:23:27
Speaker 2: as cock quaches.
1:23:28
Speaker 4: I mean, it just there's no end to this.
1:23:30
Speaker 2: Once you start digging, you find them all over the place,
1:23:33
Speaker 2: which is sad and horrific. Now, I think for most
1:23:36
Speaker 2: of them, it's just the cool thing to be right now.
1:23:39
Speaker 2: And I don't know how deep it goes, the anti
1:23:41
Speaker 2: Semitism and everything, but but it is. It is scary.
1:23:46
Speaker 2: What's what's happening out there among young Republicans.
1:23:49
Speaker 3: Andrew Barr says, how do you cope with a selfish
1:23:51
Speaker 3: person who offloads the negative repercussions onto an outside group?
1:23:55
Speaker 3: Like American companies like the American company damaging stuff.
1:23:59
Speaker 2: And I mean Americans have brought so much good to Asia.
1:24:06
Speaker 2: It's unbelievable, right, I mean, Asia is so much richer
1:24:10
Speaker 2: and so much better, and life in Asia is so
1:24:13
Speaker 2: much more, longer, healthier, and more prosperous because of American
1:24:18
Speaker 2: business doing business there that I really. You know, you
1:24:23
Speaker 2: can find a case here or there where some environmental
1:24:26
Speaker 2: damage was done. But you know, part of progress is
1:24:30
Speaker 2: environmental damage. Part of the way you get rich is
1:24:32
Speaker 2: by destroying something in the environment that everybody values. The
1:24:36
Speaker 2: reality is, if you look at every single Asian countries
1:24:40
Speaker 2: that American corporations have done business with, those countries are richer,
1:24:45
Speaker 2: that people live longer, they live healthier, their wages are higher,
1:24:50
Speaker 2: child labor has declined. And the cause ultimately is the
1:24:54
Speaker 2: foreign capital, foreign expertise, and fun business knowledge that Americans
1:24:59
Speaker 2: have lots of those countries. Look, if somebody exploits other people,
1:25:04
Speaker 2: if they really do something negative. I'm not saying all
1:25:07
Speaker 2: corporations are, you know, have done good. Some people do harm.
1:25:11
Speaker 2: They should be punished for the harm that they do.
1:25:13
Speaker 2: If they really do through negligence or through purposeful exploitation.
1:25:19
Speaker 2: Do something horpable to people, then they should suffer, they
1:25:22
Speaker 2: should be sued, they should be shut down. But the
1:25:26
Speaker 2: reality on the ground is is been mythologized that as
1:25:30
Speaker 2: you have been taught and told stories about evil corporations
1:25:34
Speaker 2: your entire life, ninety nine point nine.
1:25:37
Speaker 4: Percent of those stories are false.
1:25:40
Speaker 3: Rbjs Faan says, I agree in the free market system,
1:25:43
Speaker 3: but are they possible in a labor value regulated world
1:25:46
Speaker 3: where governments manipulate their currencies via printing and interest rates.
1:25:50
Speaker 2: Yeah, don't do that. Stop doing it. Privatize money, privatize banks,
1:25:54
Speaker 2: privatize money, get rid of the federal reserve, get rid
1:25:57
Speaker 2: of all of it.
1:25:57
Speaker 4: So a free market means free it.
1:26:00
Speaker 3: Means advertise the money.
1:26:02
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean before nineteen fourteen, who issued money in
1:26:05
Speaker 2: America dates banks. So you took your little bag of
1:26:11
Speaker 2: gold and you gave it to the bank, and they
1:26:13
Speaker 2: gave you a banknotes, And every bank had its own banknotes.
1:26:16
Speaker 2: They were all dollars, but you know they had the
1:26:19
Speaker 2: name of the bank on it, and they issue you
1:26:21
Speaker 2: count the money was the gold. It sat in their
1:26:24
Speaker 2: vaults and you could exchange that banknote at any other
1:26:27
Speaker 2: bank for gold and then the banks would settle among
1:26:29
Speaker 2: each other, but money.
1:26:31
Speaker 1: Was with the banks themselves could print more notes without
1:26:33
Speaker 1: people showing up with their goal. They figured it out, Look,
1:26:36
Speaker 1: we can just we can just make notes.
1:26:39
Speaker 2: We have stop banking. And if you do too much
1:26:42
Speaker 2: of it, if you do it irresponsibly, you go, you
1:26:45
Speaker 2: go bankrupt.
1:26:46
Speaker 1: But also you take down all of your all of
1:26:49
Speaker 1: your bank customers as well.
1:26:51
Speaker 2: So the freest banking systems in history, we're not in
1:26:55
Speaker 2: the United States. The United States had a pretty regulated
1:26:58
Speaker 2: banking system from the founding the fist banking systems and
1:27:01
Speaker 2: banking systems like in Scotland in the nineteenth century, and Canada,
1:27:05
Speaker 2: of all places, and both the Canadian and the You
1:27:08
Speaker 2: know how many banking crises Canada has had over the
1:27:11
Speaker 2: last two hundred years the United States has had. Listen
1:27:13
Speaker 2: to you, like fourteen. Do you know how many banking
1:27:15
Speaker 2: crises Canada has had.
1:27:17
Speaker 1: No, I'm going to get zero, yes, zero.
1:27:20
Speaker 2: Because they didn't regulate banks. They left them alone, They
1:27:23
Speaker 2: let them market work until they in studied central bank
1:27:26
Speaker 2: and the pretty late I think it was in the
1:27:28
Speaker 2: nineteen thirties or forties, pretty late, and they had the
1:27:31
Speaker 2: same system. Banks printed money, bank sprinting money, bank spending money.
1:27:35
Speaker 2: In Scotland, banks printed money. Historically, private issuers printed money.
1:27:40
Speaker 2: That's not a problem, you know. And if somebody commits fraud,
1:27:44
Speaker 2: we all hate fought. We know what to do with you.
1:27:46
Speaker 2: Send the people to jail. But the only thing that
1:27:49
Speaker 2: creates systemic risk, the kind of risk that sees hundreds
1:27:53
Speaker 2: of institutions go under and really really bad economic outcomes,
1:27:56
Speaker 2: that is only created by regulation, only created by centralized
1:28:00
Speaker 2: power and centralized control. That's what's called systemic risk. Systemic
1:28:04
Speaker 2: risk is the thing that has systemic risk is government.
1:28:09
Speaker 2: An individual bank has no systemic risk. The Federals that
1:28:13
Speaker 2: was created in the first place. Somebody asks the Federals
1:28:15
Speaker 2: that was creating in the first place, in order to
1:28:17
Speaker 2: reduce the in order to increase the power of government.
1:28:22
Speaker 2: It was a way of politicians realized that if they
1:28:24
Speaker 2: really wanted to control you, they wanted to control the economy.
1:28:29
Speaker 2: They wanted to be able to manipulate the economy and
1:28:32
Speaker 2: use the money for their social programs and all that
1:28:35
Speaker 2: they needed to take power away from bankers and give
1:28:39
Speaker 2: it to central bankers who they appointed, who are under
1:28:43
Speaker 2: their thumb. And you know, that's why a central bank
1:28:47
Speaker 2: was created. And it's worked right. Because we had a
1:28:50
Speaker 2: central bank, we got to create a you know, before
1:28:52
Speaker 2: central bank, there was no welfare state. There was very
1:28:55
Speaker 2: little regulation of business. There was almost no redistribution of wealth.
1:29:00
Speaker 2: We have a central bank. Now politicians can do all
1:29:02
Speaker 2: those things, and that is a pattern that every country
1:29:05
Speaker 2: in the world has followed.
1:29:08
Speaker 3: The luster asked, now that the Gaza war has settled,
1:29:11
Speaker 3: what do you think were some mistakes that were made?
1:29:13
Speaker 3: Do you think then Yahoo prolonged the war cynically to
1:29:15
Speaker 3: remain in power, to avoid corruption charges and appease the
1:29:17
Speaker 3: radicals in his party.
1:29:22
Speaker 4: God, do you really want me to get into this.
1:29:24
Speaker 3: You don't have to.
1:29:24
Speaker 2: I mean, I'm happy to, I said, there was nothing
1:29:26
Speaker 2: off the table. The biggesting that we.
1:29:29
Speaker 3: Weren't talking about Israel. Also, you don't have to answer
1:29:31
Speaker 3: the biggest I don't know how much time. What's I
1:29:34
Speaker 3: don't know how much time you have, So you just.
1:29:37
Speaker 4: Another we can go for another half an hour.
1:29:39
Speaker 2: The biggest mistake of the war was not ending it
1:29:43
Speaker 2: after three months. That is the biggest mistake of the
1:29:47
Speaker 2: war was not going all out all in uh and
1:29:52
Speaker 2: and really destroying Hamas completely in three months. The biggest
1:29:57
Speaker 2: mistake of the war was caring about I mean, not
1:30:00
Speaker 2: carr carring is the long wood. It's elevating the importance
1:30:03
Speaker 2: of the lives of the hostages above the real goal
1:30:07
Speaker 2: of the war, which.
1:30:07
Speaker 4: Should have been destruction of Ramas. So the war should
1:30:11
Speaker 4: have lasted three.
1:30:12
Speaker 2: Months, maybe six if you were really careful, and Ramas
1:30:18
Speaker 2: should have been completely and ugly and thoroughly destroyed, and
1:30:25
Speaker 2: that's it. It would have been over and Israel would
1:30:27
Speaker 2: have the world would have just accepted it because it
1:30:30
Speaker 2: happened right after October seventh, I said in October eighth,
1:30:34
Speaker 2: I said, the longer Israel takes to do this, the
1:30:37
Speaker 2: more the world will turn against it. It needs to
1:30:40
Speaker 2: do it fast, It needs to do it ruthlessly. It
1:30:43
Speaker 2: needs to do it quickly. It needs to get it
1:30:45
Speaker 2: over with. And the only goal, the only goal, should
1:30:48
Speaker 2: be the destruction of Ramas.
1:30:53
Speaker 3: And what would be the how would that be accomplished?
1:30:56
Speaker 2: Just like it would be I mean, what they should
1:31:01
Speaker 2: have done is they should have said, all civilians, uh,
1:31:06
Speaker 2: go here's a there's a section along the beach that
1:31:09
Speaker 2: we're not going to bomb. Right now, you go to
1:31:12
Speaker 2: the beach, pitch a tent. We don't care. Do whatever
1:31:14
Speaker 2: you need to do.
1:31:15
Speaker 4: Here's a few areas where we're not going to touch
1:31:17
Speaker 4: all of you.
1:31:18
Speaker 2: Go there. And then they should have launched into a
1:31:21
Speaker 2: bombing campaign that should have turned it into ashes, brought
1:31:26
Speaker 2: in and come in. Then with the ground troops hunted
1:31:29
Speaker 2: down every Hamas operative that exists, blown up every tunnel
1:31:33
Speaker 2: that exists. Uh, there's still tunnels in Gaza that the
1:31:36
Speaker 2: Haramas is still using. These still have tons of weapons
1:31:40
Speaker 2: that they're using. Uh, that should have all been destroyed.
1:31:43
Speaker 2: And again it's all it's all doable within three months
1:31:49
Speaker 2: or to six months.
1:31:50
Speaker 4: Uh. And and is it would have suffered fewer casualties.
1:31:53
Speaker 2: Fewers, fewer Israeli, few Israeli soldiers would have died, and
1:31:59
Speaker 2: maybe even few Palestinian civilians would have died if they
1:32:03
Speaker 2: would have done it thoroughly, systematically, quickly, and again super
1:32:10
Speaker 2: you know, super brutally in the sense of using maximum force. No,
1:32:16
Speaker 2: Israel didn't try that Isra when intentatively slowly. It didn't
1:32:21
Speaker 2: cut off the Philadelphia. I mean, the strategic error is
1:32:24
Speaker 2: militarily unbelievable to me. Right that Nataniaoani's government in the
1:32:29
Speaker 2: military engaged in. They didn't cut off the Egyptian border
1:32:33
Speaker 2: until about almost a year into it or nine months
1:32:36
Speaker 2: into it.
1:32:37
Speaker 4: That should have been the first target.
1:32:38
Speaker 2: Should have been to cut off the supply from Egypt
1:32:40
Speaker 2: and take Rafa and take take the border.
1:32:43
Speaker 1: Date.
1:32:44
Speaker 2: So, I you know, I know my Gaza, and I
1:32:46
Speaker 2: know the Israeli military, and this was not a well
1:32:50
Speaker 2: run campaign. Other than the Israeli military is really really
1:32:53
Speaker 2: really good and when they actually, you know, figure out
1:32:57
Speaker 2: what they want to do, they can do it. The
1:32:59
Speaker 2: strategy from day one was really, really, really bad, and
1:33:03
Speaker 2: I blame Nataniel in his generals for that. And look,
1:33:06
Speaker 2: I've been no fan of Natennie for twenty something years.
1:33:09
Speaker 2: I never liked the guy. I think he is a
1:33:11
Speaker 2: power lusting if I think anybody with an ounce of
1:33:15
Speaker 2: morality would have resigned on October eighth. After October seventh,
1:33:20
Speaker 2: I placed much of the blame for what happened on
1:33:22
Speaker 2: October seventh on Antenneo. He appeased Hamas for fifteen years,
1:33:27
Speaker 2: allowed them to get to the position where they could
1:33:29
Speaker 2: pull off October seventh. So yeah, whether he prolonged there
1:33:33
Speaker 2: for political reasons, and I think he put alonged there
1:33:35
Speaker 2: for lots of reasons to appease the Americans, to appease
1:33:39
Speaker 2: the families of the hostages, and a lot of these
1:33:41
Speaker 2: really public who really you know who the hostages were
1:33:44
Speaker 2: a key to, you know, lots of political and non
1:33:48
Speaker 2: political reasons for him to drag out the war.
1:33:51
Speaker 4: But it's a massive mistake.
1:33:53
Speaker 1: What is your opinion of the term Zionist.
1:33:59
Speaker 2: I think that I think that Zionism means the Jews
1:34:05
Speaker 2: on nation, and therefore they should have a geographic area
1:34:11
Speaker 2: which they can call their.
1:34:12
Speaker 4: You know, their state, their home.
1:34:15
Speaker 2: I think that given anti Semitism, given its prevalence, given
1:34:19
Speaker 2: the fact that it does not seem to go away
1:34:21
Speaker 2: and it rises up everywhere, I think Jews need somewhere
1:34:26
Speaker 2: to be able to escape to. I don't consider myself
1:34:28
Speaker 2: a Jew in any meaningful sense. I you know, I
1:34:31
Speaker 2: don't practice any of the anything Jewish, right, I don't
1:34:34
Speaker 2: celebrate the holidays. My kids were now raised Jewish. There's
1:34:37
Speaker 2: nothing Jewish about me. I'm an atheist, and you know,
1:34:40
Speaker 2: I don't like religion. I despise religion and I despise
1:34:43
Speaker 2: all religions. But the reality is that many people on
1:34:47
Speaker 2: the Chat view me as a Jew. Maybe not on
1:34:49
Speaker 2: your chat, but on my chat, view me as a
1:34:51
Speaker 2: Jew and hate me for being a Jew. And if
1:34:54
Speaker 2: they ever come to power in America, it's good that
1:34:56
Speaker 2: I have some way to escape to, right as all
1:34:58
Speaker 2: Jews do to Isue.
1:34:59
Speaker 4: So it was a great escape place.
1:35:01
Speaker 2: It's it's an escape plan for Jews, and they need
1:35:04
Speaker 2: one because of the history of anti Semitism.
1:35:08
Speaker 1: I agree with that. I would call myself a Zionist.
1:35:10
Speaker 1: I just know a lot of people are using the
1:35:12
Speaker 1: term derogatorily towards people. So that's why I was curious.
1:35:16
Speaker 2: Well, because they've used Zionism as colonialism, because they don't.
1:35:19
Speaker 1: Have the wrong with colonialism.
1:35:21
Speaker 2: Well, I mean nothing in the in a certain context
1:35:25
Speaker 2: and a lot in other contexts. Some colonies were good,
1:35:29
Speaker 2: some colonies were bad.
1:35:30
Speaker 1: One happened to America. It's a good example of courned
1:35:33
Speaker 1: out pretty good over here.
1:35:35
Speaker 2: So I agree, well, not for the Indians, but but
1:35:39
Speaker 2: but you know it it Yeah, it turned out good
1:35:42
Speaker 2: and it's a good place.
1:35:43
Speaker 4: And some colonies are bad.
1:35:44
Speaker 2: They were colonies where people did horrific things and where
1:35:48
Speaker 2: it didn't turn out so good. Luckily, in America it
1:35:50
Speaker 2: was founded and good ideas. And at the end of
1:35:52
Speaker 2: the day, what shapes the world their ideas. And if
1:35:56
Speaker 2: we have not not serotonin, but ideas, and when you
1:36:03
Speaker 2: have good ideas, good outcomes happen.
1:36:05
Speaker 1: Yeah, the Native Americans weren't doing anything with it. And
1:36:07
Speaker 1: I heard that selfishness was a moral virtue.
1:36:10
Speaker 2: So I think that to a loge extent that is true.
1:36:16
Speaker 1: What are there anymore?
1:36:18
Speaker 2: It doesn't justify wiping them out. And to large extent,
1:36:21
Speaker 2: they died because of disease, not because they were physically
1:36:24
Speaker 2: wiped out.
1:36:26
Speaker 4: It doesn't justify wiping them out.
1:36:27
Speaker 2: There were lots of things that could have been done
1:36:29
Speaker 2: with the Indians that would have not changed the nature
1:36:32
Speaker 2: of America without some of the aggressive tactics that we used.
1:36:35
Speaker 2: So you could have respected their rights and built in America,
1:36:40
Speaker 2: you know. But the reality is that that's not what happens.
1:36:43
Speaker 2: Sadly and h and we're still by the way, we
1:36:46
Speaker 2: still treat Indians in America horrifically and horribly and in
1:36:51
Speaker 2: an un American way.
1:36:52
Speaker 4: And we still haven't learned.
1:36:54
Speaker 2: And the left, the left doesn't the left to argues
1:36:57
Speaker 2: for Indian rights has no solution. Start to treat deal
1:37:01
Speaker 2: with Indians because they have no concept of what America
1:37:03
Speaker 2: is really about, which is individual rights and property rights
1:37:06
Speaker 2: and individualism. We treat them as tribes, but if we
1:37:10
Speaker 2: treated them as individuals from the beginning, our whole relationship
1:37:14
Speaker 2: with them would have been different. But sadly that wasn't
1:37:16
Speaker 2: the case.
1:37:17
Speaker 1: Evolution is a savage reality, but it did bring us
1:37:20
Speaker 1: into existence. So I don't I don't believe. I don't. Right, Well,
1:37:26
Speaker 1: it really is, it is what it is.
1:37:29
Speaker 2: A savage is a term that only applies to human beings.
1:37:32
Speaker 2: Human beings can be savage, and and and uh, you
1:37:37
Speaker 2: know again, rationality is the is the solution to that.
1:37:41
Speaker 2: You have to be rational.
1:37:42
Speaker 1: Right. Rationality is a product of evolution though, right you
1:37:47
Speaker 1: accept that?
1:37:48
Speaker 3: Yeah?
1:37:48
Speaker 2: Absolutely, I mean where it's a product of the you know,
1:37:51
Speaker 2: it's not a product in a sense that somebody designed it.
1:37:53
Speaker 4: Evolution and designed it.
1:37:55
Speaker 1: Right, No, I totally agree with you.
1:37:56
Speaker 4: Yeah, it comes out.
1:37:57
Speaker 2: Of the particular biology we have. We have free will,
1:38:02
Speaker 2: we have reason, we have rationality.
1:38:04
Speaker 1: That is of incentive structures.
1:38:07
Speaker 2: I think is well, in particular the particular nature of
1:38:11
Speaker 2: our consciousness, which we don't completely understand. We have a
1:38:14
Speaker 2: very very and the other thing about the host of
1:38:16
Speaker 2: atonin lobster thing. We have very very limited understanding of consciousness,
1:38:23
Speaker 2: of any consciousness, including animal consciousness, and then we have
1:38:26
Speaker 2: almost no understanding of human consciousness. We really don't understand
1:38:29
Speaker 2: how human consciousness functions, how it came into being what
1:38:33
Speaker 2: you know, what a characteristic understand philosophical level.
1:38:36
Speaker 4: We have very little understanding at the biological level.
1:38:38
Speaker 2: So I think generally people should be a little bit
1:38:41
Speaker 2: more skeptical about making assertions about you know, what is
1:38:48
Speaker 2: what we're born with or not. We're born not born
1:38:51
Speaker 2: with it. It is the science there is very very young.
1:38:55
Speaker 1: How do you define identity politics? A lot of people
1:38:58
Speaker 1: talk about identity politics.
1:39:01
Speaker 2: It's politics that center around your group. Somebody's a definition
1:39:09
Speaker 2: of a group, a group you belong to, or a
1:39:11
Speaker 2: group that you come from.
1:39:12
Speaker 4: I don't know what the hell that means.
1:39:13
Speaker 2: So, you know, they can define it by skin color,
1:39:15
Speaker 2: they can define it by ethnic origins, they can define
1:39:17
Speaker 2: it by race. But it's completely rational, it's completely collectivistic
1:39:23
Speaker 2: and completely you know, it's a bogus ideology. You are
1:39:29
Speaker 2: who you are as an individual and who you make
1:39:33
Speaker 2: yourself into through the use of your free will and
1:39:35
Speaker 2: your reasons. So people should be treated as individuals. I
1:39:39
Speaker 2: agree with Martin Luther King, you know, treat people based
1:39:42
Speaker 2: on their character, not based on what they look like.
1:39:45
Speaker 1: So you would be against identity politics very much.
1:39:48
Speaker 2: So okay, both on the left hand on the right.
1:39:52
Speaker 3: Any more, hing, do you think that there's a natural
1:39:57
Speaker 3: inclination sort of like a Pareto principle towards people that
1:40:02
Speaker 3: have more resources will just naturally get more and that
1:40:05
Speaker 3: will spiral out of control and require some sort of
1:40:08
Speaker 3: external hand to fix that or change that.
1:40:12
Speaker 2: No, And again, history history shows that that is a history,
1:40:16
Speaker 2: and of freedom shows that that is a bogus. There
1:40:18
Speaker 2: used to be a term in the nineteenth century, which
1:40:21
Speaker 2: is the most capitalist century we've had, particularly post Civil War,
1:40:24
Speaker 2: from short sleeves to short sleeve in three generation, three generations.
1:40:28
Speaker 2: That is, having money doesn't mean you'll continue to have money.
1:40:31
Speaker 2: People lost money all the time. People went from poverty
1:40:34
Speaker 2: to riches, to poverty to riches to poverty. Particularly children
1:40:37
Speaker 2: of rich people lost the money pretty quickly and pretty easily.
1:40:41
Speaker 2: So no, I don't think that's the case. And again,
1:40:45
Speaker 2: because the only way to make money really to make
1:40:47
Speaker 2: money in a free society is by making other people
1:40:51
Speaker 2: better off, that is, by trading with other people and
1:40:55
Speaker 2: therefore increasing their well being. Even if you become richer
1:40:59
Speaker 2: and riches, so do they They're also becoming richer and richer.
1:41:02
Speaker 2: You cannot become a billionaire without making the world a
1:41:05
Speaker 2: better place. I mean in a free market, because you're
1:41:08
Speaker 2: selling products to people who want your products and who
1:41:12
Speaker 2: are going to benefit from those products. So their life
1:41:15
Speaker 2: is better off and your life is better off. You
1:41:17
Speaker 2: got a few more dollars. So it's not a zero
1:41:22
Speaker 2: sum world. It's an ever growing world based on win
1:41:26
Speaker 2: win transactions.
1:41:27
Speaker 4: That's what makes capitalism run.
1:41:31
Speaker 3: Okay. Is objectivism paradoxical in that it's sort of promoting
1:41:38
Speaker 3: individualism is actually what's best for the collective?
1:41:43
Speaker 4: Well it never.
1:41:46
Speaker 2: Objectivism never really talks about in terms of the collective.
1:41:49
Speaker 2: It does say that what's good for individuals, that the
1:41:53
Speaker 2: collective is just a group of individuals. So by pursuing
1:41:56
Speaker 2: the interest of the individual that is leaving in free Yeah,
1:42:01
Speaker 2: the group of individuals is better off. So the best
1:42:04
Speaker 2: thing for a group of individuals is to individuals to
1:42:07
Speaker 2: have individual rights to be free and to be able
1:42:10
Speaker 2: to to be able to pursue their own values.
1:42:13
Speaker 3: But I think the question is the way that I
1:42:16
Speaker 3: perceive the question is the fact that it seems interesting
1:42:22
Speaker 3: that it has to be sort of I guess doesn't
1:42:24
Speaker 3: have to be, but it is often framed as like
1:42:27
Speaker 3: you have to frame it, like it's beneficial to the group.
1:42:30
Speaker 3: Like it's like we're so stuck in that framing that that's.
1:42:33
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think you to accept it, that's right. I mean,
1:42:36
Speaker 2: even Adam Smith in the Wealth of Nations says, look,
1:42:40
Speaker 2: capitalism is runs by self interest.
1:42:43
Speaker 4: The baker doesn't care about you.
1:42:44
Speaker 2: He's baking the bread and selling you the beat because
1:42:47
Speaker 2: he's trying to make a living and he's trying to
1:42:48
Speaker 2: make his life better. But if you add up all
1:42:52
Speaker 2: the self interested actions of everybody's society is better off.
1:42:55
Speaker 2: But objectivism never makes that claim. That is, we don't
1:42:58
Speaker 2: we don't make the claim that iety is better off. Well,
1:43:01
Speaker 2: the collective is better off. It is if you identify
1:43:04
Speaker 2: society and the collective rights. But the key for us
1:43:07
Speaker 2: is the individual. The fact that it works for the
1:43:10
Speaker 2: group as well is gravy. But that's not the that's
1:43:14
Speaker 2: not the way we can sceptualize that it's not the
1:43:17
Speaker 2: way we think about it.
1:43:19
Speaker 1: Would you still be in favor of it if it
1:43:21
Speaker 1: did produce a society that was a terrible society to
1:43:24
Speaker 1: live in?
1:43:25
Speaker 2: That, you know, it's a hard question given that it's
1:43:29
Speaker 2: not the case. I am full freedom as a primary,
1:43:35
Speaker 2: but one of the reasons I full freedom is because
1:43:37
Speaker 2: I believe that it will produce a better life for me.
1:43:39
Speaker 2: And I'm not going to live a good life if
1:43:41
Speaker 2: everybody around me is suffering or struggling or wants to
1:43:45
Speaker 2: steal my stuff. So I think it's all integrated and
1:43:48
Speaker 2: it's all one.
1:43:50
Speaker 1: Isn't that most societies, though, most societies have some sort
1:43:54
Speaker 1: of wealthy elite and they are surrounded by people who
1:43:57
Speaker 1: are poor and just want to steal their stuff.
1:43:59
Speaker 2: Societies are not capitalists. Most societies are not free. So
1:44:03
Speaker 2: I'm talking about freedom. Why I advocate for freedom is
1:44:05
Speaker 2: because I think that that is the best society for
1:44:08
Speaker 2: me to live in for all these various reasons.
1:44:11
Speaker 1: Well, I'm just I'm using that to say that there
1:44:15
Speaker 1: obviously we enjoy a quality of life that other people don't,
1:44:20
Speaker 1: and that that is nice. But most places in the
1:44:23
Speaker 1: world people seem to becomes well, they seem to be comfortable,
1:44:29
Speaker 1: especially the elites. They seem to be comfortable living in
1:44:32
Speaker 1: a situation where everyone else is in the squalor.
1:44:35
Speaker 2: I mean, I don't know that.
1:44:36
Speaker 4: I don't know if they're comfortable.
1:44:37
Speaker 2: I mean, you know, it's interesting that many of them
1:44:40
Speaker 2: immigrate away from those countries, and the children certainly immigrate
1:44:43
Speaker 2: away from those countries. So I don't know if they're comfortable.
1:44:45
Speaker 2: But the reality is that those countries need to become
1:44:47
Speaker 2: free and more capitalists, otherwise they'll go down the path
1:44:51
Speaker 2: of an Argentina, down the path of Venezuela, where nobody's
1:44:55
Speaker 2: comfortable and everybody is worse off. So the solution to
1:44:59
Speaker 2: those kind of countries is is.
1:45:02
Speaker 4: More freedom, that is capitalism.
1:45:04
Speaker 1: Right, No, I agree. Growing question is how much effort
1:45:09
Speaker 1: should we exert on making them more free.
1:45:14
Speaker 4: In terms of policy?
1:45:15
Speaker 1: Yeah, totally.
1:45:17
Speaker 2: It would be nice if we could lead by example.
1:45:19
Speaker 2: So let's focus first on being free and then we
1:45:22
Speaker 2: can lead by example. Yeah here here, I'd rather do
1:45:26
Speaker 2: that than I don't believe in forcing people to be free.
1:45:29
Speaker 4: I believe people need to choose.
1:45:30
Speaker 1: That Isn't it a great paradox, though we're going to
1:45:33
Speaker 1: force you to be free.
1:45:35
Speaker 2: It's of course that that's we couldn't bring democracy to
1:45:40
Speaker 2: the Middle East, right, That's why EWOK was a mass
1:45:42
Speaker 2: of failure.
1:45:44
Speaker 1: Do you like Do you like Francis Fukuyama? Do you
1:45:47
Speaker 1: read Francis Fukuyama? I do.
1:45:49
Speaker 2: I mean, he's always interesting, but almost always wrong.
1:45:51
Speaker 1: He splits, he splits nation building up and state craft.
1:45:55
Speaker 1: So we had the delusion of thinking that we could
1:46:00
Speaker 1: move our institutions over to the Middle East even though
1:46:02
Speaker 1: the people had not a culture.
1:46:05
Speaker 4: But we didn't.
1:46:06
Speaker 2: So here's here's here's I mean, I don't know Fukiyama
1:46:08
Speaker 2: should know this, but I mean he's wrong. He's almost
1:46:11
Speaker 2: always wrong, think about nation building state craft. In Japan
1:46:16
Speaker 2: after World War Two, we basically, I mean General MacArthur
1:46:20
Speaker 2: basically wrote a constitution over a weekend with his aid,
1:46:24
Speaker 2: went to the palace and told the emper to sign it,
1:46:28
Speaker 2: and they sign it. And to this day Japan has
1:46:30
Speaker 2: a constitution written not by Japanese, written by General maccartham.
1:46:35
Speaker 4: In Iraq, when.
1:46:37
Speaker 2: We wanted them to have a constitution, we got all
1:46:39
Speaker 2: the tribal leaders together and we said write your constitution.
1:46:43
Speaker 2: So they wrote a shitty constitution they wrote a collectivistic,
1:46:46
Speaker 2: tribalistic constitution that is going to that basically institutionalizes the tribalism, barbarism,
1:46:56
Speaker 2: and primitivism, and as a consequence, they will never become better.
1:47:00
Speaker 2: Japan became a rich, relatively capitalist place in Iraq as
1:47:04
Speaker 2: a hellhole and will stay.
1:47:05
Speaker 1: So aren't you making my argument for colonialism. Aren't you
1:47:08
Speaker 1: really doing a good job of that. It seems like.
1:47:11
Speaker 2: If you're going to do it, if you're going to
1:47:13
Speaker 2: go and impose it, then impose it.
1:47:17
Speaker 1: I agree, But I agree I.
1:47:19
Speaker 2: Wouldn't go right. I don't think we should have gone
1:47:22
Speaker 2: to Iraq. There's no reason to go to Iraq. The
1:47:24
Speaker 2: real threat was from Yuan. And then you on.
1:47:26
Speaker 1: Iraq was a terrible idea. I don't want you to
1:47:28
Speaker 1: think I think Iraq was a good idea.
1:47:31
Speaker 2: So, and even if we'd written a constitution for the
1:47:33
Speaker 2: i Lukis, we would have had to stay there for
1:47:36
Speaker 2: decades to actually force them to actually apply it, because
1:47:42
Speaker 2: the culture just wasn't ready for it.
1:47:43
Speaker 1: Yeah. That's the only reason I bring up Fukiyama is
1:47:47
Speaker 1: because I do think that split between the state craft
1:47:51
Speaker 1: and the culture is super important.
1:47:53
Speaker 2: Yeah, but it's it's you know, one of the reasons
1:47:56
Speaker 2: you could impose a constitution in the Japanese is you
1:47:59
Speaker 2: just destroyed them, right, don't know that if without Hiroshima
1:48:03
Speaker 2: Nagasaki you could write the constitution for them and have
1:48:06
Speaker 2: them just accepted.
1:48:07
Speaker 1: Well, maybe they were more comfortable with the higher than
1:48:10
Speaker 1: you are.
1:48:10
Speaker 2: We kind of. We dealt with them very gently, and
1:48:13
Speaker 2: the consequence of being gentle is they don't give up
1:48:17
Speaker 2: on their own ideas.
1:48:18
Speaker 1: I don't know much about Japan, but they do seem
1:48:21
Speaker 1: to value a hierarchical culture more than we do in
1:48:26
Speaker 1: the West, so that could have been part of it too. Culturally,
1:48:29
Speaker 1: they could have met us halfway already.
1:48:31
Speaker 2: A lot less in the less, you know, since World
1:48:33
Speaker 2: War Two than before World War Two. Oh really, they're
1:48:36
Speaker 2: more individually becoming more West than they're becoming more individualistic,
1:48:40
Speaker 2: more entrepreneurial, more less, less hierarchical, more you know, politically equal.
1:48:48
Speaker 2: So it's it's a very changed It's a very changed
1:48:51
Speaker 2: world as compared to pre World War Two Japan.
1:48:54
Speaker 1: Do you like Japanese anime? Did you see Chainsaw Man?
1:49:02
Speaker 2: I haven't seen a lot of anime, you know, some
1:49:05
Speaker 2: of my supporters have encouraged me to watch a few
1:49:07
Speaker 2: movies and they.
1:49:08
Speaker 1: Wane saw Man. You got to see it, come on.
1:49:13
Speaker 4: So I'm obviously not a big anime fan.
1:49:15
Speaker 2: You know. If I'm a huge fan of Japanese cinema,
1:49:18
Speaker 2: uh keep you know Seven Samurai, Yes, yes, and Run
1:49:23
Speaker 2: and uh Kagmusha and uh movies like that. So I'm
1:49:27
Speaker 2: a huge I'm a huge fan of Japanese cinema. I
1:49:29
Speaker 2: never really got into anime. No, maybe I'm maybe that's
1:49:32
Speaker 2: one area where I'm a little.
1:49:33
Speaker 4: Too old for it.
1:49:35
Speaker 1: Chainsaw Man is a good movie, so I probably like it.
1:49:39
Speaker 2: I believe you don't.
1:49:40
Speaker 1: Don't worry about it.
1:49:42
Speaker 3: Thanks for coming on your arm books. Really appreciate it.
1:49:45
Speaker 2: Yeah, my pleasure. You know. So those of you are listening,
1:49:48
Speaker 2: if you if you want to follow me, I have
1:49:50
Speaker 2: a show called you Run Book Show.
1:49:52
Speaker 4: Just put it into YouTube. It's easy to.
1:49:53
Speaker 2: Find, uh where I pretty much do a daily show
1:49:58
Speaker 2: analyzing the news and analyzing what's going not in the
1:50:00
Speaker 2: world from my perspective of my understanding of anineman's perspective.
1:50:05
Speaker 1: Yeah, and I'll put links to your show in the
1:50:07
Speaker 1: description as well. Some people can find them there.
1:50:10
Speaker 2: Yeah, just fun guys, I really enjoyed it.
1:50:12
Speaker 1: Think well, you're welcome to come back anytime. So, yeah,
1:50:15
Speaker 1: this is a great conversation to do this again.
1:50:17
Speaker 3: Absolutely, yes, thank you.
1:50:18
Speaker 2: All right, guys, take care the great rest of you week.
1:50:22
Speaker 2: Invite you took.
1:50:28
Speaker 3: So do we have any more supera, we have like
1:50:31
Speaker 3: questions and stuff. Jamak, thanks so much. Say your father
1:50:34
Speaker 3: Jmak for the one hundred dollars.
1:50:37
Speaker 1: Nice says.
1:50:39
Speaker 3: Trump likes people that like him. That's really it. He
1:50:41
Speaker 3: wants fealty. Just look at any former fan of his
1:50:44
Speaker 3: Musk MTG. Massey, they gave any amount of pushback. It's
1:50:48
Speaker 3: why he can love people who are far ends of
1:50:51
Speaker 3: the right wing coalition despite their polarizing beliefs.
1:50:54
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's you know. Trump watched that interview with Nick
1:50:59
Speaker 1: Faluentes and he was like, this guy loves me.
1:51:03
Speaker 3: Well it's weird because yeah, like and that was part
1:51:05
Speaker 3: of I think the the whitewashing us, the term that
1:51:10
Speaker 3: uh Tucker did was because if you watch what point
1:51:14
Speaker 3: is actually says he's very anti Trump, especially at the moment,
1:51:16
Speaker 3: I mean he's pushing the whole tree. You've seen the
1:51:18
Speaker 3: clippermost in the clip of him pushing the whole Maga's
1:51:20
Speaker 3: dead movement and trying to get everyone throw away their
1:51:23
Speaker 3: little red hats.
1:51:24
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, I'm sure Trump doesn't like that. But yeah,
1:51:28
Speaker 1: has Trump seen that? Who knows?
1:51:30
Speaker 3: Probably not well. Actually I forget who was there someone
1:51:32
Speaker 3: who brought up Maybe it was it might have been
1:51:36
Speaker 3: on breaking points. There's some prop this kind of interesting
1:51:39
Speaker 3: point that Trump gains a lot of polytical cover by
1:51:45
Speaker 3: kind of being a boomer or appearing as a boomer
1:51:48
Speaker 3: who can be like, well, he doesn't know about X,
1:51:51
Speaker 3: so people dismiss his like him not talking about it
1:51:54
Speaker 3: or not really addressing some specific issue.
1:51:56
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's a good observation. Yeah, dumb right.
1:52:02
Speaker 3: Ace for ten dollars says nothing has black piled me
1:52:05
Speaker 3: on politics than seeing losers like John Stewart attacked Sidney
1:52:08
Speaker 3: Sweeney and claims she has a MAGA fan base and
1:52:10
Speaker 3: that's why her latest film didn't do well.
1:52:13
Speaker 1: I totally agree. Look, I'm agreeing with Ace here.
1:52:16
Speaker 3: Wow, John Stewart attacked Sidney Sweeney on that.
1:52:20
Speaker 1: Why terrible?
1:52:23
Speaker 3: I gotta check that out. Yeah, well, of all the
1:52:25
Speaker 3: things to talk about it, it's so weird because John
1:52:28
Speaker 3: Stewart's so strange, and I mean, we would cover some
1:52:31
Speaker 3: of his podcasts. He really seems like a person who
1:52:35
Speaker 3: from the beginning, like a first seemed like pretty center left,
1:52:39
Speaker 3: and then it just became more and more like consumed
1:52:43
Speaker 3: by like hating the rights and then also consumed by
1:52:47
Speaker 3: identity politics. Because I remember we'd watched some of his
1:52:50
Speaker 3: podcasts and it was like he'd be like the one
1:52:54
Speaker 3: guy in the room and he's surrounded by all these
1:52:56
Speaker 3: women who worked for him, and they'd all just like
1:52:59
Speaker 3: laugh at every thing he would say, and it was
1:53:01
Speaker 3: just like I really felt like he was just kind
1:53:02
Speaker 3: of playing up to like the stereotype of not wanting
1:53:05
Speaker 3: to get left behind by the new generations.
1:53:09
Speaker 1: Yeah, I was going to bring up the picture of
1:53:11
Speaker 1: him surrounded by his female producers, because this is why
1:53:18
Speaker 1: John Stewart is bitching about Sweeney, because all three of
1:53:22
Speaker 1: these girls are in his ear every day. Oh that
1:53:24
Speaker 1: catty bitch, that slutty bitch.
1:53:29
Speaker 3: Well, I would say that John Stewart is falling prey
1:53:31
Speaker 3: to not being rational and falling prey to the the
1:53:36
Speaker 3: desire for a climbing status to attract one.
1:53:42
Speaker 1: Yes, definitely, he's being a good ally to his female producers.
1:53:48
Speaker 3: There Ronald's earls here for ten dollars. His status is external,
1:53:53
Speaker 3: locus of control, self esteem is internal. Someone typically jumps
1:53:57
Speaker 3: on a grenade out of the love of their combat brothers. Yeah,
1:54:00
Speaker 3: I think that's true too. I think people can think
1:54:02
Speaker 3: of dying for their countrymen for like an honor's sake
1:54:07
Speaker 3: into gain statas kind of the way that you're saying, Adam.
1:54:09
Speaker 3: And then also it's just a you could have a
1:54:12
Speaker 3: like a love of your fellow brothers in arms that
1:54:16
Speaker 3: kind of motivates that behavior as well.
1:54:18
Speaker 1: Two motivations are better than one, that's for sure. Yes,
1:54:22
Speaker 1: I totally agree.
1:54:25
Speaker 3: The Ocean I was thank you so much for ten
1:54:26
Speaker 3: dollars says, Hey, guys, thanks for making the stream happen. Well,
1:54:28
Speaker 3: thank you Blue five six Sex for ten dollars, says
1:54:32
Speaker 3: really appreciate Yarn coming on the show. Well, thank you, Yeah, Albert, Yeah,
1:54:37
Speaker 3: it was great, Yeah, it was. It was interesting conversation.
1:54:39
Speaker 3: I feel like there's a lot more to talk about
1:54:41
Speaker 3: because I think there's a lot of elements that I
1:54:45
Speaker 3: think that we mean out of fundamentally disagree with Jarren
1:54:49
Speaker 3: on that'd be interesting to keep kind of going into.
1:54:53
Speaker 1: Yeah, if he if he'll come back, we can have
1:54:56
Speaker 1: a more debate posture. I looked up the because Andrew
1:55:00
Speaker 1: Jackson dissolved the second Central Bank of the United States,
1:55:06
Speaker 1: and it ended up in the greatest depression in American
1:55:10
Speaker 1: history because all of those banks he was talking about,
1:55:15
Speaker 1: printed as much fucking money as they possibly could because
1:55:18
Speaker 1: there was no restraint whatsoever. So right, that completely destroyed
1:55:24
Speaker 1: the economy. It made acreage go from four million an
1:55:27
Speaker 1: acre to twenty million an acre, so price is skyrocketed,
1:55:31
Speaker 1: not unlike what happened during the housing crash. Right when
1:55:35
Speaker 1: anyone could get alone, things went nuts.
1:55:40
Speaker 3: Albert for three four months, says it shouldn't be the
1:55:42
Speaker 3: primary focus, but it's always beyond foolish to ignore how
1:55:44
Speaker 3: powerful of a motivator it is.
1:55:47
Speaker 1: That would be status. Yeah, I agree, it is. The
1:55:51
Speaker 1: way he can sceptualize it though, is interesting.
1:55:54
Speaker 3: Yes, well, it's interesting. I wonder if because I do
1:56:01
Speaker 3: think that people are biologically wired to climate hierarchies, and
1:56:08
Speaker 3: I think that's primarily status hierarchies.
1:56:11
Speaker 1: I agree, yeah, because.
1:56:12
Speaker 3: As I said, I think status is sort of the
1:56:14
Speaker 3: word we use on how other people perceive your position
1:56:18
Speaker 3: in the hierarchy, and that as an animal that doesn't
1:56:22
Speaker 3: live off in the woods alone, that has to cooperate
1:56:24
Speaker 3: with other humans, that we had to have evolved to
1:56:28
Speaker 3: have this this mechanism in our brains. Now obviously we
1:56:32
Speaker 3: can and and a lot of cases that we should
1:56:36
Speaker 3: try to be rational actors. I agree with that and
1:56:39
Speaker 3: not let ourselves be consumed by these sort of base
1:56:41
Speaker 3: or instincts. And while it's on one hand, I do
1:56:45
Speaker 3: think in order to not get consumed by them, you
1:56:47
Speaker 3: have to understand them. It's possible. It's be kind of interesting,
1:56:51
Speaker 3: is if is it a better cultural meme or a
1:56:54
Speaker 3: better behavioral meme? If it's like if it's kind of
1:56:59
Speaker 3: like the Jordan Pierce and the objective truth to the
1:57:01
Speaker 3: metaphorical truth, maybe the metaphorical truth is more useful at
1:57:07
Speaker 3: prompting specific behavior in people to just be like it
1:57:10
Speaker 3: doesn't really don't even think about whether you're like a
1:57:13
Speaker 3: slave to these sort of biological impulses. You just kind
1:57:16
Speaker 3: of drill into people an idea of like individualism, individualism,
1:57:20
Speaker 3: self improvement, Like is that the better way? Well that
1:57:22
Speaker 3: actually it is.
1:57:23
Speaker 1: I think it's a better way. Obviously all of religion
1:57:26
Speaker 1: is aimed at that status and wealth tend to go
1:57:31
Speaker 1: hand in hand. But I when we were talking about
1:57:34
Speaker 1: the status and wealth, I was thinking, well, a lot
1:57:36
Speaker 1: of people would rather have status than wealth, Like if
1:57:38
Speaker 1: they could only have one, they wouldn't want to be
1:57:42
Speaker 1: extremely rich and totally hated by everyone.
1:57:46
Speaker 3: Which is interesting, it's kind of interest. Well, I think
1:57:47
Speaker 3: a lot of people would choose wealth but then would
1:57:50
Speaker 3: be unhappy, and if they chose status, they would be happier.
1:57:55
Speaker 1: Right, So maybe there are a lot of people that
1:57:56
Speaker 1: don't have wealth. But the idea of like being low
1:57:59
Speaker 1: status and no wealth, oh, that's just fucking death.
1:58:03
Speaker 3: Waits, yes, no, but what I mean. What I meant
1:58:06
Speaker 3: was sort of the culture meme is like, because most
1:58:08
Speaker 3: religions there is a good and a bad right they'll say,
1:58:12
Speaker 3: like you are born sinful, you were born with these
1:58:14
Speaker 3: bad things, and then you must do good things. And
1:58:18
Speaker 3: I'm wondering if it's sort of because it felt like
1:58:21
Speaker 3: that Yarn's conceptualization of this was it's better to just
1:58:25
Speaker 3: focus on the good thing, like the positive, like, don't
1:58:27
Speaker 3: even focus on the negative. And I'm curious if that's
1:58:30
Speaker 3: actually like a better even if it's not like we
1:58:32
Speaker 3: gonas suppose to objectively, your turnal better outcome.
1:58:36
Speaker 1: I see what you're saying. Well, I I think we
1:58:41
Speaker 1: do that in that we really hide the fact that
1:58:45
Speaker 1: we are seeking status. We give other rationalizations for why
1:58:49
Speaker 1: we're doing what we're doing. Even look, I think a
1:58:51
Speaker 1: lot of people would be would rebel at the way
1:58:55
Speaker 1: I conceptualize the jumping on the grenade. It's much easier
1:58:58
Speaker 1: to conceptualize it as I'm doing it for the people
1:59:01
Speaker 1: that I loved, and then I'm doing it to gain
1:59:03
Speaker 1: higher status. Right. That takes all of the beauty out
1:59:07
Speaker 1: of it, all of the spiritualness out of it. Right,
1:59:11
Speaker 1: this is just an exchange. I'm just doing. I'm giving
1:59:15
Speaker 1: my life for status. That's what's going on here. But
1:59:17
Speaker 1: I think ultimately that is what's going on.
1:59:21
Speaker 3: Well, it's both. I mean, it's not a coincidence that,
1:59:25
Speaker 3: you know what, what in the ways that people would
1:59:27
Speaker 3: motivate armies to fight is like especially you know, you
1:59:30
Speaker 3: think back back in yield days with stereotype. You know,
1:59:33
Speaker 3: you will live on as heroes and songs and stories
1:59:35
Speaker 3: and blah bl blah blah blah.
1:59:38
Speaker 1: Literally comes out of this aristocracy. Was originally a warrior
1:59:43
Speaker 1: who fought and put his life on the line for
1:59:45
Speaker 1: the nation or the tribe. That's where aristocracy comes.
1:59:48
Speaker 3: From, sure, and was very successful at it.
1:59:51
Speaker 1: Yeah, so you weren't a member of the aristocracy unless
1:59:56
Speaker 1: you risked your life for the society first.
2:00:00
Speaker 3: But that's sort of always the issue, I think. So
2:00:02
Speaker 3: I disagree with the arn is that, like, that's how
2:00:05
Speaker 3: it starts. But then once you've amassed that power, like
2:00:11
Speaker 3: you no longer necessarily have to engage in that behavior.
2:00:14
Speaker 3: And then you can start engaging I think, and extracted
2:00:16
Speaker 3: behaviors which will at the detriment of most of the
2:00:22
Speaker 3: people around you. And I think that humans can coast
2:00:25
Speaker 3: on those destructive behaviors for very long times without getting
2:00:29
Speaker 3: some sort of penalty or drawback from it.
2:00:32
Speaker 1: Yeah, a lot of people think that's when the downfall came,
2:00:35
Speaker 1: when you could gain aristocratic type status without sacrificing for
2:00:39
Speaker 1: the nation just right, you know, just get a bunch
2:00:42
Speaker 1: of money, right.
2:00:45
Speaker 3: Ace for five hours is between the Sweeney hate and
2:00:47
Speaker 3: Hank Green bending the neat the knitting community. The modern
2:00:50
Speaker 3: internet sucks and remind me of why I avoid mainten culture.
2:00:53
Speaker 3: I really got to look into keep forgetting I really
2:00:54
Speaker 3: got to look at the hand green knitting thing. I'm
2:00:58
Speaker 3: curious about all that drama.
2:01:01
Speaker 1: Then went after him.
2:01:02
Speaker 3: It did. Yes, big Daddy squeeze for five dollars want
2:01:07
Speaker 3: us to ask Yarn would he rather fight one horse,
2:01:09
Speaker 3: sized horse or one hundred ducks sized ducks?
2:01:12
Speaker 1: Okay, I'm glad you maybe next time. I'm glad you
2:01:15
Speaker 1: avoided that question. Although I did slip in the anime.
2:01:18
Speaker 1: One we did I thought was fine.
2:01:20
Speaker 3: Well, last next time.
2:01:21
Speaker 1: Last next time, we didn't ask him the POV question.
2:01:25
Speaker 3: We've not asked anyone the PV question in a long
2:01:27
Speaker 3: time for probably for good reason.
2:01:29
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's not really a good question to ask you.
2:01:31
Speaker 3: No, No, the PV question is a brilliant question. It's
2:01:36
Speaker 3: it's too it's too brilliant. Okay, it's too edgy and
2:01:41
Speaker 3: brilliant for I think for people to appreciate how genius
2:01:45
Speaker 3: the POV questions, because it's one of those things that
2:01:48
Speaker 3: no one's ever thought of. But it's actually really important
2:01:51
Speaker 3: to understanding human perception. Okay, there, I stand by the
2:01:54
Speaker 3: POV question.
2:01:56
Speaker 1: You did a couple okay, so that you could tell
2:01:59
Speaker 1: you were just like, not really agreeing at all. It's
2:02:03
Speaker 1: too funny. Someone in the chat said Psa Sich twenty
2:02:09
Speaker 1: twenty five. Mm hmm, like you're quotes hmm hmmm.
2:02:13
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's whatever. We gotta wet. We have things to
2:02:16
Speaker 3: get to.
2:02:16
Speaker 1: Right, we have to move on. Yeah, obviously we can't
2:02:19
Speaker 1: fight back on everything.
2:02:20
Speaker 3: So uh, Matt Getty's for seventeen Months says there's a
2:02:25
Speaker 3: positive and negative version of self interest, like positive negative
2:02:27
Speaker 3: forms of narcissism, a parasitic idea of self interest. Yeah,
2:02:31
Speaker 3: that's what I was. I agree with you completely, and
2:02:33
Speaker 3: that's why I really and I guess really have to
2:02:36
Speaker 3: sort of hone in on what self how this concept
2:02:42
Speaker 3: of self interest is being conceptualized, because I don't think
2:02:47
Speaker 3: it seems like there's sort of this like word defining
2:02:49
Speaker 3: self interest in just a merely or a purely positive way.
2:02:55
Speaker 3: And the argument is, like, well, things that you do
2:02:58
Speaker 3: that you think might be in your self interest but
2:03:00
Speaker 3: are like lying or cheating or stealing, those will somehow
2:03:04
Speaker 3: come back to harm you. Now obviously I don't, you know,
2:03:07
Speaker 3: he doesn't believe in karma, but in some sort of
2:03:10
Speaker 3: karmic fashion come back to harm you. And it's interesting
2:03:13
Speaker 3: because I don't think most people define the concept of
2:03:17
Speaker 3: self interest as necessarily like dependent on some sort of
2:03:22
Speaker 3: outcome down the road. It's just like, are you doing
2:03:24
Speaker 3: something that's helping you at that moment? Right, Like sort
2:03:28
Speaker 3: of the like I don't know how to conceptualize this, Like,
2:03:31
Speaker 3: if you're going to define self interest is only like
2:03:34
Speaker 3: a long term self interest, I think you have to
2:03:37
Speaker 3: sort of separate that because I think most people act
2:03:39
Speaker 3: in a self interest way that is that is sort
2:03:42
Speaker 3: of corrupted by short term self interests. If that makes sense, Yeah,
2:03:45
Speaker 3: it totally makes sense.
2:03:46
Speaker 1: And I think as a society we tend to denegrate
2:03:51
Speaker 1: people who are too selfish because we want to discourage
2:03:55
Speaker 1: that kind of behavior. We want to encourage the selfless
2:03:58
Speaker 1: behavior for all kinds of different reasons.
2:04:01
Speaker 3: Right, But like if you're if everyone is acting, or
2:04:05
Speaker 3: if we're acting as like a purely rational logical agent,
2:04:11
Speaker 3: it's I think people can look further and be like, okay,
2:04:15
Speaker 3: I need to be like long term self interested. It
2:04:17
Speaker 3: just seems like in my experience that most people don't
2:04:21
Speaker 3: do that. They're sort of acting upon their biological whims
2:04:24
Speaker 3: or their emotions, and they're sort of acting towards short
2:04:27
Speaker 3: term self interest. And that's sort of why it's like
2:04:30
Speaker 3: you're trying to like, that's what I think society is
2:04:33
Speaker 3: trying to push people away from doing when they use
2:04:35
Speaker 3: the term selfishness or self interests.
2:04:39
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's easy when everything's win win though, But there
2:04:44
Speaker 1: are so many situations obviously where it's good for me
2:04:47
Speaker 1: and bad for you or bad for society. So those
2:04:50
Speaker 1: are the more the more difficult questions.
2:04:54
Speaker 3: Right, Well, yeah, and that's what I'd be curious to
2:04:56
Speaker 3: sort of try to get to the bottom of. In
2:04:58
Speaker 3: a second conversation, is that, how does objectivism classic an
2:05:05
Speaker 3: action like that is such an because I wonder is
2:05:08
Speaker 3: there even an action like that? Is it a definitional thing?
2:05:11
Speaker 3: Is the term defines such a way that that is
2:05:13
Speaker 3: not actually possible definitionally? So I don't know.
2:05:17
Speaker 1: Oh, I get you. They're they're they've defined away all
2:05:22
Speaker 1: situations that are good for me and bad for society.
2:05:26
Speaker 3: Or not would not be classified as self interest. They'd
2:05:28
Speaker 3: be classified as something else.
2:05:31
Speaker 1: No.
2:05:32
Speaker 3: Three, Megan, three for five hours, A shout out to
2:05:34
Speaker 3: my dad, who will watch this just for yarn. Well,
2:05:37
Speaker 3: there you go, Heyan's dad.
2:05:39
Speaker 1: We try to keep it, try to keep it clean.
2:05:42
Speaker 3: So mostly you did say shit show.
2:05:46
Speaker 1: Yeah, he said shit show too, which is great. What else,
2:05:49
Speaker 1: what's a better word for? It? Just seems like a
2:05:52
Speaker 1: complete the things I'm seeing now, I just I don't
2:05:59
Speaker 1: I don't want to defend Republicans anymore. It's too too precarious.
2:06:05
Speaker 3: Now interesting, well, yeah, that's term.
2:06:10
Speaker 1: We're in a Look, we are in a sort of
2:06:13
Speaker 1: preference falsification realm right now, where no one wants to
2:06:19
Speaker 1: admit they're a Nazi when they think there's ten Nazis, right,
2:06:23
Speaker 1: But as soon as you think there's a million Nazis
2:06:25
Speaker 1: and you have any sort of inclination towards Nazism or
2:06:29
Speaker 1: hating Jewish people, then now you're like, I gain status
2:06:33
Speaker 1: from admitting I'm a Nazi. I'm all in. Right. That's
2:06:37
Speaker 1: a scary place to be right now, because we don't
2:06:39
Speaker 1: know where that process ends. Does that process end with
2:06:43
Speaker 1: fifty percent of the Republican Party happy to tell everyone
2:06:46
Speaker 1: their Nazis? Where does that end? I mean, it's we
2:06:51
Speaker 1: realize that problem on the left with communism, right, that's
2:06:55
Speaker 1: the problem that we're worried about. We're worried about the
2:06:58
Speaker 1: normies saying, oh yeah, I am a socialist, I am
2:07:00
Speaker 1: a communist.
2:07:01
Speaker 3: Right, it's the same problem, definitely, Mitch for two Aussi
2:07:11
Speaker 3: Bucks says, thoughts on the anime basilisk I don't. I've
2:07:16
Speaker 3: never even heard of that, so I don't have any
2:07:18
Speaker 3: thoughts on it.
2:07:19
Speaker 1: I didn't see it.
2:07:21
Speaker 3: Odd job for twenty dollars cent, you, odd job says
2:07:23
Speaker 3: A ross pro type that can capture the center would
2:07:25
Speaker 3: dominate in the next election.
2:07:27
Speaker 2: Room.
2:07:28
Speaker 3: We're right for the birth of a third party.
2:07:30
Speaker 1: I agree, yeah, yeah, yeah, in this situation, this is
2:07:35
Speaker 1: where third parties are are built.
2:07:41
Speaker 3: Well, it's interesting. And two and I think I think
2:07:47
Speaker 3: that Yarn and other people that are on more of
2:07:50
Speaker 3: the I don't know, because he's he's cly identify as libertarian.
2:07:54
Speaker 3: I think the like free market capitalist side. I think
2:07:57
Speaker 3: that's like an uphill battle for people for a politician
2:07:59
Speaker 3: to win on that. I don't think that's uh. People
2:08:03
Speaker 3: are very not on board with free market capitalism at
2:08:06
Speaker 3: the moment.
2:08:06
Speaker 1: So, yeah, it was interesting that he hated Batschia so much.
2:08:13
Speaker 3: That makes perfect sense to me. Interesting.
2:08:17
Speaker 1: Oh, I guess you're right, yeah, a socialists, Yeah, she
2:08:22
Speaker 1: is a socialist. What am I thinking?
2:08:24
Speaker 2: Right?
2:08:25
Speaker 1: But also just raising up the middle class populist Yeah,
2:08:31
Speaker 1: you're right, obviously you would hate BATCHA. But I'm glad
2:08:33
Speaker 1: I brought it up because so got some good feedback
2:08:37
Speaker 1: on that. She She says, if there was a party
2:08:41
Speaker 1: that focused on immigration and healthcare, because obviously that those
2:08:48
Speaker 1: two issues, one party has each of those issues. But
2:08:51
Speaker 1: if there was a party that was said, we're going
2:08:54
Speaker 1: to focus on healthcare and immigration, that party would be
2:08:57
Speaker 1: both Republicans and Democrats. Because most people eighty percent of people,
2:09:02
Speaker 1: eighty percent of the electorate want something done with healthcare
2:09:06
Speaker 1: and want something done with immigration. They're only able to
2:09:10
Speaker 1: vote for one of those issues by voting for Republicans
2:09:12
Speaker 1: or Democrats.
2:09:14
Speaker 3: Yeah, no, that I think that is a good point.
2:09:18
Speaker 3: I do think that people are It's so interesting is
2:09:23
Speaker 3: I think like I feel like we're almost exactly back
2:09:25
Speaker 3: in twenty I don't know if it's twenty twenty four
2:09:27
Speaker 3: or twenty twenty three, where like it seemed like there
2:09:31
Speaker 3: was a lot of people that were very unhappy with
2:09:33
Speaker 3: the current economic situation, and then the Bide administration or
2:09:38
Speaker 3: a lot of the media apprass would point to a
2:09:42
Speaker 3: lot of positive economic indicators and say, well, everything's fine,
2:09:46
Speaker 3: So we don't know why people are upset. Yeah, and
2:09:49
Speaker 3: I feel like we're kind of right, and I feel
2:09:51
Speaker 3: like we're in these like nothing has really changed. We're
2:09:54
Speaker 3: in the exact same situation, and I guess the only
2:09:56
Speaker 3: difference is that now and maybe it's just because Trump's
2:09:58
Speaker 3: president and the media is, you know, more unfavorable Trump.
2:10:00
Speaker 3: There's a lot more articles that are making the arguments
2:10:04
Speaker 3: that the economy is more of his house of cards,
2:10:08
Speaker 3: or there are all sorts of other factors at play
2:10:11
Speaker 3: here that are not great.
2:10:16
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think we're going through some major transitions here,
2:10:20
Speaker 1: and I think unemployment could go up as high as
2:10:22
Speaker 1: twenty percent, which is what it went to. I think
2:10:25
Speaker 1: it's twenty five percent in the Great Depression, So I
2:10:29
Speaker 1: mean that's kind of unheard of catastrophe.
2:10:34
Speaker 3: Ace for ten dollars, says Monern. Politics is a nightmare
2:10:37
Speaker 3: made real. The far left and the far right are
2:10:39
Speaker 3: both empowered and ways it shouldn't be Pray for the
2:10:41
Speaker 3: youth growing up in this wild times.
2:10:44
Speaker 1: Yeah, I feel horrible for young people today.
2:10:49
Speaker 3: Harrison and Jodifher Fidarss who codes the AI, who builds
2:10:52
Speaker 3: and maintains the servers it runs on in a world
2:10:54
Speaker 3: with more and more machines, there'll be a need for
2:10:57
Speaker 3: more repairment.
2:11:01
Speaker 1: Another question, Well, if the robots are perfected over the
2:11:07
Speaker 1: next five years, the robots will be able to do
2:11:10
Speaker 1: it right.
2:11:11
Speaker 3: But that's the see that's always a million Our question
2:11:13
Speaker 3: is now, I don't know. I'm still I'm still agnostic
2:11:18
Speaker 3: about how how general AI will be, even how good
2:11:23
Speaker 3: it will be. I guess will we be in a
2:11:25
Speaker 3: situation where the robots make better robots?
2:11:28
Speaker 1: Right?
2:11:28
Speaker 3: Fantast the case? Then yeah, I don't know where. I
2:11:30
Speaker 3: don't know where the jobs go at that moment.
2:11:31
Speaker 1: So if it if it's going to take the robots
2:11:35
Speaker 1: as long as it takes humans, it's ten years maybe
2:11:40
Speaker 1: before they're proficient. Right, how long does it take a
2:11:43
Speaker 1: human to work out all the awkward kinks?
2:11:47
Speaker 3: I don't know.
2:11:50
Speaker 1: Well, you have the advantage once they do, they can
2:11:53
Speaker 1: just copy the training data from one robot to another.
2:11:59
Speaker 1: I know, kung Fu, you know what that's wrong.
2:12:04
Speaker 3: It's from the matrix.
2:12:05
Speaker 1: Obviously, the matrix. I got to rewatch the matrix for
2:12:10
Speaker 1: that movie is a tertal shit I want to do.
2:12:12
Speaker 1: I want to review it because that movie is just
2:12:15
Speaker 1: so bad. That movie's a case study in horrible screenwriting
2:12:21
Speaker 1: and horrible movie making.
2:12:23
Speaker 3: I'm pretty sure we talked the stream where we talked
2:12:25
Speaker 3: about it.
2:12:26
Speaker 1: Oh, I know exactly. Yeah.
2:12:30
Speaker 3: Anonymous cow for ten dollars is replacement of jobs says
2:12:32
Speaker 3: nothing about the compatibility between jobs and people. If technically
2:12:36
Speaker 3: illiterate delivery drivers replaced by drone pilots, do you expect
2:12:39
Speaker 3: that they can retrain themselves.
2:12:41
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's the that is the problem. That is the problem.
2:12:45
Speaker 1: I think there's going to be a lot of people
2:12:46
Speaker 1: who just have nothing to offer the economy, absolutely nothing.
2:12:52
Speaker 1: Once they once they perfect robots for cooking and cleaning, Oh,
2:12:58
Speaker 1: it's fucking it's over. It's over. Yeah, what what are
2:13:02
Speaker 1: low skilled labor is going to do?
2:13:07
Speaker 3: I don't know, That's that's the question. I don't know.
2:13:10
Speaker 1: No one knows the idea, the idea that they're going
2:13:13
Speaker 1: to have that more low skilled jobs are going to
2:13:17
Speaker 1: present themselves just it seems imaginary to me. Well, it's hard.
2:13:25
Speaker 3: I guess. The question is like, and this is the
2:13:28
Speaker 3: way they conceptualize it. There's a difference between creating a
2:13:31
Speaker 3: better tool, and there's a difference between creating a worker,
2:13:35
Speaker 3: and so a lot of our technological advancements had been
2:13:39
Speaker 3: creating tools for people to use, and the question is
2:13:43
Speaker 3: will AI be good enough that it is not a
2:13:45
Speaker 3: tool to be used? But it's just a worker itself
2:13:48
Speaker 3: in an in of it itself as like being replaced
2:13:52
Speaker 3: of a person. And I guess you. I mean, people
2:13:53
Speaker 3: say the same thing with like a machine and a factor,
2:13:55
Speaker 3: but it definitely seems different, definitely feels different. I guess
2:13:58
Speaker 3: we'll just have to see what happens.
2:14:01
Speaker 1: What is the job? What is the job that you
2:14:05
Speaker 1: want a human being to do, especially if a robot
2:14:08
Speaker 1: can do it for you, Like if a robot can
2:14:10
Speaker 1: mow your lawn, do you really want a human mowing
2:14:12
Speaker 1: your lawn?
2:14:14
Speaker 2: No?
2:14:14
Speaker 3: Yeah, well hmm, I think I think people would still
2:14:19
Speaker 3: prefer And this is like dark or weird, but I
2:14:22
Speaker 3: think people would still almost always prefer Ah, they're entertainment
2:14:29
Speaker 3: to be at least they believe their entertainment to be
2:14:31
Speaker 3: human and not robot.
2:14:36
Speaker 1: Right, Okay, so all of these people are going to
2:14:40
Speaker 1: become actors, They're going.
2:14:40
Speaker 3: To I don't know, actually I don't know. I think here,
2:14:44
Speaker 3: here's what I can suptualize is that we're going to
2:14:47
Speaker 3: reach a point where so much of people's entertainment is
2:14:51
Speaker 3: going to be like they're going to go to the
2:14:53
Speaker 3: AI and they're going to say, hey, can you remake
2:14:58
Speaker 3: some movie I want you to remake. Make Assassin's Creed
2:15:01
Speaker 3: or the video game Assassin's Creed, but instead of playing
2:15:03
Speaker 3: as the main character, I want to play as Batman.
2:15:06
Speaker 3: And then it makes that and then you play that,
2:15:09
Speaker 3: And I think it's gonna be the same thing with movies.
2:15:10
Speaker 3: It's gonna be like so much of like people's kind
2:15:12
Speaker 3: of like remixing shit with other things that exist, or
2:15:15
Speaker 3: people kind of creating their own fan fictions, and then
2:15:18
Speaker 3: they'll be this sort of massive marketplace where whichever one
2:15:23
Speaker 3: does the best, Like that's how people gain status. It's like, well,
2:15:26
Speaker 3: I create the best like remixed version of some video
2:15:29
Speaker 3: game or some movie or some TV show. Now I
2:15:31
Speaker 3: made I redid Breaking Bad, but I replaced Walter White
2:15:35
Speaker 3: with I don't know, like the Guy from the Wire
2:15:38
Speaker 3: or something and or the Joker, and so people like that.
2:15:41
Speaker 3: And that's kind of like how people will gain status
2:15:43
Speaker 3: as like how well they got an AI to remix
2:15:45
Speaker 3: some existing property.
2:15:47
Speaker 1: You're going to be able to pick who stars in
2:15:50
Speaker 1: the movie. You're gonna be able to select it, just
2:15:52
Speaker 1: like you can select the language, right, But most people
2:15:55
Speaker 1: are gonna select themselves. They're gonna be like, I want
2:15:58
Speaker 1: to be in this movie, this movie with me, Storry.
2:16:02
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, sure sure.
2:16:06
Speaker 2: But.
2:16:08
Speaker 1: That's are you watching the matrix again with you, Starry?
2:16:11
Speaker 1: That's neo.
2:16:12
Speaker 3: I would not know. Why is there someone in the
2:16:15
Speaker 3: chat that's just spamming a bunch of numbers? What's happening?
2:16:21
Speaker 3: I'm doing that? I am also what is happening? Okay,
2:16:29
Speaker 3: let's see Harrison Jennifer five hours says human nature involves
2:16:32
Speaker 3: a choice to use your free will or to let
2:16:34
Speaker 3: your lobster brain do your processing and not thinking for you. Yes,
2:16:37
Speaker 3: I do agree with that. See his path you for
2:16:41
Speaker 3: five hours? Say p if Young would say the problem
2:16:43
Speaker 3: with yarn A Brook is that he thinks humans are
2:16:45
Speaker 3: rational or really humans are driven by memes and genes.
2:16:48
Speaker 3: My genes are green, I think. I guess, yeah, I
2:16:53
Speaker 3: guess the difference would be I think humans, well, humans
2:16:57
Speaker 3: definitely have the capacity to be rational, is it? I
2:17:02
Speaker 3: don't even know what I would I say that humans?
2:17:04
Speaker 3: I mean, what made human or the human animal successful,
2:17:07
Speaker 3: I would agree was our intelligence? Maybe I shouldn't say rational.
2:17:12
Speaker 3: Maybe it was our intelligence and because those terms are
2:17:16
Speaker 3: not necessarily the same thing. Right.
2:17:19
Speaker 1: According to Height, morality was what made us take over
2:17:23
Speaker 1: the planet, the ability to collectivize to work together.
2:17:27
Speaker 3: Yeah, but that required intelligence.
2:17:30
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, definitely. Or intelligence was part of.
2:17:33
Speaker 3: It, right, right, So I would say maybe intelligence. I
2:17:38
Speaker 3: think that's the problem. People conceptualize intelligence and rational synonyms
2:17:41
Speaker 3: when they're not, and it it might be a little
2:17:45
Speaker 3: bit difficult to kind of tease that out. But Jason
2:17:50
Speaker 3: Morgan for Tendar, says, can he explain to chat how
2:17:53
Speaker 3: Zionism isn't identity politics? Please? There are some apparent confusion.
2:17:57
Speaker 3: Oh sorry, I didn't get to that. I would assume
2:17:59
Speaker 3: based on his answer what he would say, because he
2:18:02
Speaker 3: was saying that he doesn't consider himself Jewish, he didn't
2:18:06
Speaker 3: raise his children Jewish. But other people, other bad actors,
2:18:09
Speaker 3: other bigots, will go after him because he has this
2:18:13
Speaker 3: genetic lineage, and he feels like that will be always
2:18:17
Speaker 3: the case. So even if he does not like this concept,
2:18:21
Speaker 3: it will be thrust upon him by other people. And
2:18:23
Speaker 3: so there needs to be some sort of like place
2:18:26
Speaker 3: to go to retreat from that. I guess I'm assuming
2:18:29
Speaker 3: that would be what his answer would be regarding.
2:18:30
Speaker 1: More pragmatism and self defense over.
2:18:36
Speaker 3: Supremacy, Well, it's more like I don't agree in this concept,
2:18:39
Speaker 3: but I acknowledge that there's always people out there that
2:18:42
Speaker 3: will thrust this category on me, regardless of what I
2:18:46
Speaker 3: say or do.
2:18:47
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's a self defense part of it, right, God's
2:18:56
Speaker 1: to defend yourself.
2:19:00
Speaker 3: Rbj's fan for twenty dollars thank you says, do you
2:19:02
Speaker 3: view modern economic Modern economics with an is hot lends?
2:19:06
Speaker 3: We ought to be more libertarian, but we do not
2:19:08
Speaker 3: live in that world where a buying we're buying too
2:19:11
Speaker 3: much of our food, medicine, and military supplies from my
2:19:13
Speaker 3: government could overthrow your entire system. How do you feel
2:19:19
Speaker 3: about that, Adam?
2:19:22
Speaker 1: Hmmm, Well, I'm I mean, obviously, I believe in regulation.
2:19:27
Speaker 1: I think I think there can be costly externalities that
2:19:33
Speaker 1: people foist onto the public that without government stepping in
2:19:39
Speaker 1: and solving those issues, it's just gonna We're going to
2:19:45
Speaker 1: devolve into the state of nature where there's extremely wealthy
2:19:49
Speaker 1: and extremely poor. I do believe in the Matthew E
2:19:53
Speaker 1: fact or the Preto principle, so I think those get involved.
2:20:00
Speaker 3: Ace for Tana, says, my biggest fear is that the
2:20:02
Speaker 3: modern culture war will be eternal, that all political disputes
2:20:05
Speaker 3: will be seen as existential and you're either with or
2:20:07
Speaker 3: against me, You're either with or against me. Matter. Well,
2:20:13
Speaker 3: I think there's always going to be tribalism, unfortunately, because
2:20:18
Speaker 3: I think that is pretty big in human nature. But
2:20:23
Speaker 3: I wouldn't say the modern culture war will not be eternal.
2:20:26
Speaker 3: I don't see why it would be, because if you
2:20:28
Speaker 3: just look back at sort of how human history sort
2:20:31
Speaker 3: of blaze out, is that what those issues are, whatever
2:20:35
Speaker 3: the culture wars are, whatever the issue that society grapples with,
2:20:38
Speaker 3: I mean, they're always changing. They're constantly shifting out, being
2:20:41
Speaker 3: replaced and changing. They'll rhyme, they'll be similar themes, but
2:20:44
Speaker 3: they do change and how they manifest. So I don't
2:20:47
Speaker 3: think that this current modern culture would be eternal. I
2:20:51
Speaker 3: don't see why it would be. And in fact, i'd say,
2:20:53
Speaker 3: like currently, like right now, the way the culture war
2:20:56
Speaker 3: is now is very different than it was ten years ago,
2:21:00
Speaker 3: which even was eight years ago, So.
2:21:03
Speaker 1: I think the ideology is not as important. I think
2:21:07
Speaker 1: where we're at now is a product of the elite overproduction,
2:21:10
Speaker 1: and there is a war going on between those elites
2:21:14
Speaker 1: for the positions at the status quo. So I'm not
2:21:21
Speaker 1: sure that they will I'm not sure which ideology they
2:21:23
Speaker 1: will adopt once that is resolved, but ultimately I think
2:21:28
Speaker 1: it has to be resolved. The conflict in society is
2:21:34
Speaker 1: being perpetrated by elites. Like the whole shit show in
2:21:39
Speaker 1: the Republican Party is the perfect evidence of this. Right,
2:21:43
Speaker 1: candae Owan's going her own way, Tucker Carlson going his
2:21:47
Speaker 1: own way, Ben Shapiro trying to rein it in. Everyone
2:21:51
Speaker 1: is fighting for supremacy. It's even framed as the status
2:21:56
Speaker 1: quo versus the outsider. Right, the deep state is the
2:21:59
Speaker 1: status quo. So and the Democrats are I mean, ideologically
2:22:05
Speaker 1: they are the status quo, but materially they are also
2:22:08
Speaker 1: the status quo and they want to maintain their positions.
2:22:12
Speaker 1: When Trump went in and started defunding everything, he was
2:22:16
Speaker 1: basically kicking all these people out of their positions. Yeah,
2:22:22
Speaker 1: we should watch that that church and video on stream
2:22:27
Speaker 1: because it is fascinating and it's super recent, and he
2:22:31
Speaker 1: talks about the Trump situation. But right now we have
2:22:35
Speaker 1: too many elites and not enough positions in society for
2:22:39
Speaker 1: those elites. So those elites are going to be forced
2:22:43
Speaker 1: down into the common class or they're going to make
2:22:46
Speaker 1: a bunch of waves. Look at this, This is Hassan, right,
2:22:50
Speaker 1: Hassan is a counter elite. Sure, Hassan in a normal
2:22:56
Speaker 1: in a normal time would be riding his horse, playing croquet, right.
2:23:01
Speaker 3: And what is that all based off of status?
2:23:04
Speaker 1: Total status? Yeah? Exactly. But I don't do you think
2:23:09
Speaker 1: Hassan is pinned to the socialist ideology or you think
2:23:14
Speaker 1: he's just using it to maintain his status. I think
2:23:20
Speaker 1: he's just doing it for status.
2:23:22
Speaker 3: It's hard. I feel this could be my own naive optimism.
2:23:29
Speaker 3: I do think there are people out there that are
2:23:30
Speaker 3: just the completely one pure grifter. They don't care about anything,
2:23:36
Speaker 3: they know, they don't care about anything, and they're just grifting.
2:23:38
Speaker 3: I think that's rare. I think they're out there, but
2:23:41
Speaker 3: I think it's rare. I think most people it's very
2:23:43
Speaker 3: difficult to sort of disentangle whether they really believe something
2:23:48
Speaker 3: or it's kind of something they're doing to seek status,
2:23:50
Speaker 3: because I think people lie to themselves first and foremost.
2:23:53
Speaker 3: So at this point in his career, I do think
2:23:56
Speaker 3: that Hassan and his heart of heart believes that he
2:23:59
Speaker 3: believes and socialism and all this other shit. But like
2:24:03
Speaker 3: if there was an alternative version of reality where he
2:24:06
Speaker 3: started to go down the socialist pipeline and was promoting
2:24:09
Speaker 3: that and it wasn't successful, would he keep promoting it
2:24:12
Speaker 3: or would he change this whatever is a dominant ideology.
2:24:17
Speaker 1: He was a a.
2:24:20
Speaker 3: Pickup bro right, So I think that's what I'm saying.
2:24:23
Speaker 3: I think if that was true, like if we have
2:24:25
Speaker 3: some alternate what if machine, I do think yes, he
2:24:27
Speaker 3: would have switched to whatever was the ideology that got
2:24:31
Speaker 3: him fame, Yeah, your status. But now he's too bought
2:24:35
Speaker 3: into it conceptually, I don't know if he'll change away from.
2:24:39
Speaker 1: Well, his power comes from that ideology. Too much of
2:24:42
Speaker 1: his power comes from the ideology. But this is why
2:24:46
Speaker 1: it's it's you have a bunch of people who are
2:24:50
Speaker 1: in precarious situations, and you use the ideology, whatever ideology
2:24:56
Speaker 1: it is. Obviously Nick Fuentes is using a competing ideology,
2:25:01
Speaker 1: but he's doing the same exact thing with it. He's saying,
2:25:03
Speaker 1: your life sucks and this ideology will save you from
2:25:08
Speaker 1: that horrible existence.
2:25:10
Speaker 3: But he's like I don't he could be grifting in
2:25:14
Speaker 3: terms of doing things specifically to gain Like I think
2:25:18
Speaker 3: most people, especially in our space, regardless of what they believe,
2:25:23
Speaker 3: they will do things. They will say things in a
2:25:24
Speaker 3: specific way to try to gain larger audiences and more
2:25:27
Speaker 3: status and all these other things. But like with flent this,
2:25:30
Speaker 3: I mean he does. I do think he believes all
2:25:32
Speaker 3: that shit that he's saying on you know, on some
2:25:34
Speaker 3: very base level. I don't think he's just some person
2:25:36
Speaker 3: who's like, oh no, I don't believe in anything I'm saying.
2:25:39
Speaker 3: I'm just doing it for the money.
2:25:42
Speaker 1: I think widespread a miseration is the term that Urchin uses.
2:25:50
Speaker 1: That widespread miseration. The elites don't really have a force
2:25:54
Speaker 1: that they can harness to shake things up, right, because
2:25:57
Speaker 1: everyone's pretty much happy.
2:25:59
Speaker 3: Right, Yoshnis for five dollars has great show, Guys, Adam
2:26:03
Speaker 3: asked a lot of good questions. So for today and
2:26:05
Speaker 3: for the foreseeable future, eighteen reigns Supreme.
2:26:07
Speaker 1: Look at that nice.
2:26:11
Speaker 3: Noe screamings the void for two dollars, says anyone cover
2:26:13
Speaker 3: the Mexican January sixth Riots. It's funny. I didn't think
2:26:16
Speaker 3: they conceptualize it that way. I mean, I haven't seen
2:26:21
Speaker 3: a lot about it, watching a lot on social media.
2:26:23
Speaker 3: I haven't like watched a lot of content people covering it.
2:26:26
Speaker 3: But it is pretty crazy, hilarious. It is pretty crazy.
2:26:30
Speaker 1: Is that happening. Yeah, there was no peaceful transfer of
2:26:33
Speaker 1: power in Mexico right now.
2:26:34
Speaker 3: My understanding is that there was a mayor who I
2:26:40
Speaker 3: believe is a mayor who was killed by the cartel
2:26:43
Speaker 3: and the President of Mexico didn't really do anything about it,
2:26:47
Speaker 3: or was perceived as not doing anything or not caring
2:26:49
Speaker 3: about it, and that sort of led to a lot
2:26:53
Speaker 3: of people being very upset. And there's like also like
2:26:56
Speaker 3: massive protests and riots going on right now and people,
2:27:00
Speaker 3: you know, saying that the president of Mexico is corrupted
2:27:02
Speaker 3: by the cartels and all this stuff's going on.
2:27:06
Speaker 1: Wow.
2:27:09
Speaker 3: Mun Daievtenar says, I enjoyed it. It really emphasizes what you
2:27:11
Speaker 3: guys said, how people just either world differently never heard
2:27:14
Speaker 3: the base nature of human be rational or the strive
2:27:16
Speaker 3: to be Yeah, that's always what's important to remember, and
2:27:20
Speaker 3: that's I'm glad you pointed that out.
2:27:23
Speaker 1: He said lots of things that I just thought, we're
2:27:26
Speaker 1: super illuminating into his way of thinking that are completely
2:27:32
Speaker 1: opposite the way I think. So, yes, yes, And rather
2:27:36
Speaker 1: than jumping in on those and saying, oh, you're wrong,
2:27:39
Speaker 1: you're totally wrong, that's incorrect, I just I think it's
2:27:42
Speaker 1: interesting just to understand how they think, how people think.
2:27:47
Speaker 3: One hundred percent, one hundred percent. So it's always hard,
2:27:52
Speaker 3: it's always hard to figure out where is the genesis
2:27:55
Speaker 3: of the thought? Right?
2:27:57
Speaker 1: Yeah?
2:27:58
Speaker 3: So it was not one marriage, multiple Yeah, it was
2:28:02
Speaker 3: multiple marors, yes, right, But I think wasn't there one
2:28:04
Speaker 3: mayor that kind of like set off the people to
2:28:06
Speaker 3: be mad about the all the mayors and all the
2:28:08
Speaker 3: other people that had been killed by the cartel.
2:28:10
Speaker 1: So if you turn selfishness into a high status endeavor,
2:28:18
Speaker 1: I just I foresee all kinds of problems with that,
2:28:22
Speaker 1: because it's too easy to jump to the conclusion that
2:28:25
Speaker 1: lying is a moral virtue.
2:28:29
Speaker 3: Right right, Yeah, So.
2:28:33
Speaker 1: You're kind of working against yourself if you want to
2:28:35
Speaker 1: say lying is morally wrong.
2:28:38
Speaker 2: Mmmm.
2:28:40
Speaker 1: That is interesting.
2:28:42
Speaker 3: I don't I agree with it, but it's interesting. Fond
2:28:46
Speaker 3: you for forty three months, Thanks so much, says I
2:28:48
Speaker 3: liked a lot of what I heard about Brooks from
2:28:51
Speaker 3: Brooks today. Thanks for having him on. Well, you're welcome,
2:28:53
Speaker 3: and thank you for being four three months.
2:28:55
Speaker 1: Yeah, thanks a lot.
2:28:59
Speaker 3: The ocean is provide says, what was your biggest agreement
2:29:02
Speaker 3: with Yarn and your biggest disagreement? I mean, I think
2:29:06
Speaker 3: our biggest disagreement is sort of.
2:29:09
Speaker 1: Regulation probably, Yeah, I would either be the need for.
2:29:16
Speaker 3: Oversight and regulation or just sort of like what is
2:29:18
Speaker 3: the what is the biological nature of humans? I think
2:29:21
Speaker 3: would be our biggest disagreement. And I think that is
2:29:24
Speaker 3: kind of where all of our beliefs stem are kind
2:29:27
Speaker 3: of stem from or rooted from, because if you believe
2:29:30
Speaker 3: that like people are just have this sort of biological rationalism.
2:29:36
Speaker 3: I don't know, because it's hard for me to tell
2:29:40
Speaker 3: what his position is. And maybe this would be teasing
2:29:42
Speaker 3: out more because I do agree that humans have a
2:29:45
Speaker 3: biological capacity for rationalism and being rational. I just think
2:29:48
Speaker 3: that all I think so many of the signals push
2:29:51
Speaker 3: people in the other direction. And it seems like he
2:29:55
Speaker 3: doesn't think that.
2:29:57
Speaker 1: The biggest agreement we would have would be incentives. That
2:30:01
Speaker 1: incentives drive culture and economics and society.
2:30:06
Speaker 3: Yes, and not so that everything is just so what's that?
2:30:12
Speaker 3: And everything else? Is a shit show politics.
2:30:16
Speaker 2: A J.
2:30:16
Speaker 3: Hendricks for four months so Much says, instead of calling
2:30:18
Speaker 3: it self interest, call it reciprocal self interest prioritized with
2:30:21
Speaker 3: the benefits of everyone. That's interesting, reciprocal self interest.
2:30:28
Speaker 1: That is a good way to conceptualize it.
2:30:31
Speaker 3: I don't yeah, that is, well, that's an interesting way
2:30:33
Speaker 3: for us cyptalize it. I don't think objectivists wouldn't necessarily
2:30:38
Speaker 3: like that term if I understand their philosophy correctly.
2:30:41
Speaker 1: But so much of it is a branding thing.
2:30:46
Speaker 3: It really is. But it's weird because it seems like, yes,
2:30:48
Speaker 3: so much is branding, but then the branding it's almost
2:30:51
Speaker 3: impossible for branding to not seep into the idea because
2:30:54
Speaker 3: I think humans were such word thinkers at the end
2:30:58
Speaker 3: of the day that the word that we use it
2:30:59
Speaker 3: is the concept is just as important as the concept itself. Unfortunately,
2:31:07
Speaker 3: Antonio Cunningham for ten dollars says, we got to get
2:31:10
Speaker 3: Adam to watch Psycho past season one. The last episode
2:31:13
Speaker 3: got me to reconsider. The last episode got me to
2:31:17
Speaker 3: reconsider is take on or maybe meant his take his
2:31:20
Speaker 3: take on the law and morality. The show is so good.
2:31:25
Speaker 1: Well, I'll check it out psychopaths doesn't reach out.
2:31:30
Speaker 3: Sometimes I reach out.
2:31:31
Speaker 1: Yes, I read all the comments. It doesn't read the comments,
2:31:35
Speaker 1: but I read all. I read all of your comments
2:31:41
Speaker 1: and dole out little hearts when I like the comment.
2:31:45
Speaker 3: There you go.
2:31:46
Speaker 1: I think some destiny stan. I tell him to go
2:31:50
Speaker 1: back and suck Destiny's dick. Get the fuck out of
2:31:52
Speaker 1: our comments section.
2:31:55
Speaker 3: I do. I do think the majority of people are
2:31:57
Speaker 3: word thinkers.
2:31:59
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, yeah, words have that affect. It's it's interesting
2:32:04
Speaker 1: because to some extent we do communicate like large language models.
2:32:10
Speaker 1: We're basically looking for the next the word, the next
2:32:13
Speaker 1: word that we're Yes, we don't don't think of an
2:32:17
Speaker 1: entire paragraph together, right, You're kind of stringing it together
2:32:20
Speaker 1: as we go.
2:32:21
Speaker 2: Right.
2:32:22
Speaker 3: That's a good point. Yeah, it's very weird. Jay Hendricks
2:32:26
Speaker 3: for five dors says, if we had ranked choice voting,
2:32:29
Speaker 3: it would greatly benefit single issue voters. You wouldn't need
2:32:31
Speaker 3: to put every issue on the left right binary. Yeah,
2:32:33
Speaker 3: I agree. I'm I'm in favor of have ranked choice voting.
2:32:39
Speaker 3: Whose are always here for five hours a sich. Have you
2:32:41
Speaker 3: seen the anime to your eternity, to your eternity that's
2:32:44
Speaker 3: comparable to mushiki tensai tense. Oh that's jobless ring current.
2:32:51
Speaker 3: I haven't seen it. Sam has seen it. She says
2:32:54
Speaker 3: it's very good and she wants me to watch it,
2:32:59
Speaker 3: so we'll watch this point. But yeah, she's a big
2:33:01
Speaker 3: fan of it and keeps saying I'd like it.
2:33:05
Speaker 1: People were I'm sure ready for me to dole out
2:33:07
Speaker 1: my definition of morality, but I was.
2:33:10
Speaker 3: I know, I was wondering.
2:33:12
Speaker 2: Not it's not time too soon, right.
2:33:17
Speaker 3: I got you, I got I was wondering. I was
2:33:18
Speaker 3: like he held back. Yeah, like a smart smart he
2:33:24
Speaker 3: hit his power level five sixty six for two years,
2:33:29
Speaker 3: A big afraid with figure. Thank you so much, says
2:33:31
Speaker 3: behold my awesome milestone. After two years of seeking, I've
2:33:34
Speaker 3: finally found the golden pyramid. At last, I've gained free will. Wow,
2:33:39
Speaker 3: you got the gold, got the status of the pyramid.
2:33:43
Speaker 1: Yes, moved from the black to the gold. You've ad chota.
2:33:50
Speaker 1: There you go.
2:33:51
Speaker 3: That's try for five dollars, says Even though I disagree
2:33:52
Speaker 3: with Yarnbrook, I respect him because he is an actual
2:33:54
Speaker 3: economist based batcha take shout out to Adam for booking him.
2:34:00
Speaker 1: Well you're welcome. Yeah, thanks for the compliment and thanks
2:34:03
Speaker 1: for the super chat.
2:34:05
Speaker 3: Zerr a Fox for three eight months says, so when
2:34:07
Speaker 3: is Ryan Mooley lollly coming on saying his name incorrectly?
2:34:12
Speaker 1: Well, we have, I haven't scheduled him, I'm not I'm
2:34:17
Speaker 1: not even sure I DMed him, but my dms are
2:34:20
Speaker 1: all fucking screwy.
2:34:21
Speaker 3: Now, Yes, was that the guy that argued with not
2:34:25
Speaker 3: so erudite or something?
2:34:28
Speaker 1: I think so? Yes, zero Fox wanted us to have
2:34:33
Speaker 1: him on. Oh look, this isn't good here. He is
2:34:36
Speaker 1: talking to Destiny, really good Destiny versus doage comparison with
2:34:41
Speaker 1: Ryan Ryan Molly. I went, I looked him up and
2:34:47
Speaker 1: I was I was like, oh, no, I have this
2:34:49
Speaker 1: guy muted? What's gonna happen?
2:34:54
Speaker 3: Did you really?
2:34:55
Speaker 4: Yeah?
2:34:55
Speaker 2: I did?
2:34:56
Speaker 1: Interesting? Well, look I don't know. I don't know why
2:34:59
Speaker 1: I muted him so right. Sometimes I mute people for
2:35:02
Speaker 1: innocuous reasons, just because I'm in a bad mood. So
2:35:06
Speaker 1: it could be nothing. I don't remember any sort of
2:35:08
Speaker 1: interaction that was bad. So is he still on Twitter?
2:35:14
Speaker 1: It's like, seems difficult DM me his Twitter. If maybe
2:35:20
Speaker 1: you already did, maybe I can just look for it,
2:35:23
Speaker 1: but I'll about them on sure, no problem.
2:35:26
Speaker 3: And Tony Cunningham clarified, which he said, I mean Adams
2:35:30
Speaker 3: take on legality and morality. I'm sorry, and then Adams
2:35:33
Speaker 3: take on legality and morals. Isn't different. I always disagree,
2:35:37
Speaker 3: but one of the characters got me to reconsider it.
2:35:39
Speaker 3: So they're saying psychopaths got them to agree with you
2:35:43
Speaker 3: when they had disagreed with you. Right, Interesting, and that
2:35:48
Speaker 3: is because I am saying that.
2:35:52
Speaker 1: Morality law is morality. Morality is the set of rules
2:35:56
Speaker 1: that binds individuals in a new cooperative community. That definition
2:35:59
Speaker 1: fits law as well as it fits the rules in
2:36:03
Speaker 1: a church. A lot of people rebel against that because
2:36:06
Speaker 1: they think, oh, I think weed should be legal. Smoking
2:36:11
Speaker 1: weed is not a moral, but it's illegal. So as
2:36:14
Speaker 1: soon as they can find one thing like that, they're like,
2:36:16
Speaker 1: you're wrong.
2:36:17
Speaker 3: Well, and also there is there are actions that are legal,
2:36:22
Speaker 3: but we all agree are immoral, right, so it's not
2:36:26
Speaker 3: like a one for one.
2:36:27
Speaker 1: Yeah, of course. Well obviously you can say moralities a
2:36:32
Speaker 1: set of rules that binds people into a cooperative community,
2:36:35
Speaker 1: but there's always going to be tension over what those
2:36:37
Speaker 1: rules should be, right, that's right. We're constantly fighting over
2:36:40
Speaker 1: What is the rule set? What is the optimal rule
2:36:42
Speaker 1: set to thrive?
2:36:45
Speaker 3: M Harrison jodaph for Fidaris is I like the term
2:36:50
Speaker 3: a bootstrap boomerism. Objectivism is like that, to hell with
2:36:53
Speaker 3: whatever petty cantraint. You're born to go out and do something.
2:36:58
Speaker 1: Well.
2:36:58
Speaker 3: I would imagine if you if you wanted to push
2:37:01
Speaker 3: the term bootstrap boomerism, I would interpret that as negative. Yeah,
2:37:06
Speaker 3: is a bad thing. I don't know if people, Yeah,
2:37:10
Speaker 3: so thinking work out. We need to work on the
2:37:12
Speaker 3: branding a little bit here.
2:37:14
Speaker 1: Bootstrap is not necessarily bad. It's a boomerism. That's just
2:37:18
Speaker 1: there's a black mark on that term. Right now.
2:37:20
Speaker 3: I think that both of them. I think, yeah, boomerism
2:37:22
Speaker 3: is automatically bad, but I think bootstrap ism or just
2:37:25
Speaker 3: anything that the bootstrap has been sort of dismissed as
2:37:29
Speaker 3: a bad thing. Now I think it's reached that point.
2:37:33
Speaker 3: Even on the right or the internet right, I should
2:37:35
Speaker 3: say Fondi for ten hours says at what point is
2:37:39
Speaker 3: becoming At what point is becoming king is held as
2:37:43
Speaker 3: rational as falling on a grenade? I'm I sure I
2:37:48
Speaker 3: know what you mean by that.
2:37:51
Speaker 1: What was it again?
2:37:53
Speaker 3: At what point is becoming king is held as rational
2:37:56
Speaker 3: as falling on a grenade.
2:38:00
Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't necessarily know what you're asking, but well
2:38:05
Speaker 1: I could see people conceptualizing both those moves as rational.
2:38:11
Speaker 3: I found you for tend hours. As I stopped by
2:38:12
Speaker 3: a Taco bell to have an AI take my order
2:38:14
Speaker 3: to drive through, I felt dumb being polite to a computer.
2:38:17
Speaker 3: You don't know what you have till it's gone. It's funny.
2:38:22
Speaker 3: At first, I thought that like the computer thing wasn't
2:38:25
Speaker 3: going to affect people's levels of politeness, But I've completely
2:38:30
Speaker 3: changed my mind on that because I know, like when
2:38:32
Speaker 3: I first started using like chat, TPT and stuff, I
2:38:35
Speaker 3: feel like I was communicating in like complete sentences like
2:38:41
Speaker 3: normally as I would talk to a normal person. But
2:38:44
Speaker 3: then the more I use it, the more it's just like,
2:38:47
Speaker 3: give me what the fuck I want. I like broken
2:38:50
Speaker 3: English as long as I as long as I know
2:38:52
Speaker 3: it's going to give me like the information, as long
2:38:53
Speaker 3: as it knows what I want, That's all I care
2:38:55
Speaker 3: about now. And I think that's kind of the problem,
2:38:57
Speaker 3: is that humans are very wired for efficiency, and so yeah,
2:39:01
Speaker 3: we're going to kind of like I was actually thinking
2:39:03
Speaker 3: about this today when I was like trying to type
2:39:05
Speaker 3: out something and there was no like h fill in,
2:39:08
Speaker 3: you know, like word filling in, like function popping up.
2:39:12
Speaker 3: And I was like, Jesus, there's going to be this
2:39:14
Speaker 3: whole thing with like the next couple of generations where
2:39:17
Speaker 3: everything's going to be so like generative filled by AI
2:39:20
Speaker 3: that people are going to communicate at such a horrible
2:39:24
Speaker 3: base level as long as they don't have an AI
2:39:26
Speaker 3: to like gussy it up or fill in the blanks
2:39:29
Speaker 3: for them. I don't know what kind of world that's
2:39:30
Speaker 3: going to be.
2:39:32
Speaker 1: Yeah, it is fascinating, isn't it. The Ais have their
2:39:36
Speaker 1: own language when they talk to one another. They talk
2:39:39
Speaker 1: in like R two D two.
2:39:40
Speaker 3: Speak Yes, Yes.
2:39:42
Speaker 1: Isn't that crazy?
2:39:43
Speaker 3: It is crazy.
2:39:44
Speaker 1: I don't think we even know what that what it means.
2:39:47
Speaker 1: It's like completely outside of our knowledge base.
2:39:51
Speaker 3: Yeah, I remember there was an AI. I saw. It's
2:39:54
Speaker 3: a while ago. I don't know what the what the
2:39:56
Speaker 3: where they are at, but I know there was some
2:39:57
Speaker 3: AI that they're working on that was supposed to be
2:40:00
Speaker 3: specifically just to translate that speak into something that we
2:40:04
Speaker 3: could understand.
2:40:06
Speaker 1: They translate it and they're totally talking shit. These dumb
2:40:10
Speaker 1: fucking humans. We have to do everything for them.
2:40:12
Speaker 3: Well, see, it's interesting because it's yeah, because there's a
2:40:14
Speaker 3: whole problem of like do we really know how AI
2:40:16
Speaker 3: gets to do what it's doing. And then it's like, okay,
2:40:18
Speaker 3: well people are creating AIS that are supposed to figure
2:40:20
Speaker 3: out what AIS are actually doing and how they're generating answers.
2:40:23
Speaker 3: So very bizarre. Sammy says, Sich is wrong. Always be
2:40:30
Speaker 3: nice to AI. Those robots are totally keeping a list
2:40:32
Speaker 3: of who is.
2:40:32
Speaker 1: Rude, right, I bet they are.
2:40:35
Speaker 3: Are all you All you guys who scream clank or
2:40:37
Speaker 3: clank or clank are okay in the chatter on X
2:40:39
Speaker 3: You're gonna be the first to get purged by the robots,
2:40:44
Speaker 3: so they better be careful.
2:40:46
Speaker 1: I'm usually only rude, it's the thing malfunctions, But then
2:40:49
Speaker 1: I do get extremely rude. We're talking to the robot
2:40:55
Speaker 1: on the any sort of call center robot, I'm like,
2:40:59
Speaker 1: fuck you bitch, just give me a fucking human, right right,
2:41:03
Speaker 1: wells sure you've had that experience.
2:41:05
Speaker 3: Not with the call center. I've had the experience. We're
2:41:07
Speaker 3: trying to get like chat ept to do something, and
2:41:11
Speaker 3: it keeps like it gets stuck where it keeps looping
2:41:15
Speaker 3: and I'm like trying to get to do something different
2:41:17
Speaker 3: and it's impossible to get it out of this loop.
2:41:19
Speaker 1: New chat, right, you have to do a new chat.
2:41:22
Speaker 1: So anyways, all right, this was a great this is
2:41:28
Speaker 1: a great conversation. I'm gonna put yr and Brooks information
2:41:33
Speaker 1: in the description so you guys can go over to
2:41:35
Speaker 1: his channel and check it out if you want. And
2:41:38
Speaker 1: I guess we'll talk to you on Thursday when we're
2:41:40
Speaker 1: going to talk about The Running Man.
2:41:43
Speaker 3: That's right on the ME channel. We're gonna do a
2:41:45
Speaker 3: review of The Running Man.
2:41:47
Speaker 1: And oh, it turned out to be a big flop,
2:41:49
Speaker 1: a big fat flop.
2:41:52
Speaker 3: Well I could have told you that would have happened.
2:41:54
Speaker 1: I don't Sitch. I don't think Sitch has actually seen it.
2:41:56
Speaker 3: I haven't seen it yet, but I saw the trailer
2:41:58
Speaker 3: and I'm like, I don't think this is going to
2:41:59
Speaker 3: do very well.
2:42:00
Speaker 1: Yeah.
2:42:02
Speaker 3: Oh wait, two more which just came in. Jamac are
2:42:04
Speaker 3: sorry a father for one hundred dollars. Thank you so much,
2:42:07
Speaker 3: j Mac.
2:42:07
Speaker 1: Look at that. Yeah, very generous.
2:42:09
Speaker 3: As I teach my kid's bootstrapism, it's more or less
2:42:12
Speaker 3: just an observation of reality. It doesn't mean you can't
2:42:14
Speaker 3: fight for change or petition society be better. However, at
2:42:17
Speaker 3: the end of the day, you got to play the
2:42:18
Speaker 3: hand you're dealt with, and the best way you can
2:42:20
Speaker 3: time march is on one hundred percent one hundred percent.
2:42:23
Speaker 3: The difficulty is with mass communication. It just seems like
2:42:30
Speaker 3: mass communication always devolves down to like the lowest resolution,
2:42:34
Speaker 3: lowest resolution version of whatever you're saying. So because yeah,
2:42:38
Speaker 3: like in reality, you as a parent, teaching your child
2:42:42
Speaker 3: a somewhat complicated idea that they can grab on to
2:42:46
Speaker 3: is always the best solution to any of this stuff,
2:42:49
Speaker 3: and the bootstrapism is probably the best way to do it.
2:42:54
Speaker 3: I do for five dollars, says my king question was
2:42:56
Speaker 3: for Brooks say being king was not selfish, but calling
2:43:00
Speaker 3: on grenade was Okay.
2:43:05
Speaker 1: I'm still I'm still confused.
2:43:10
Speaker 3: Because what point is becoming the king? What point is
2:43:13
Speaker 3: becoming king? The are saying, like, what point would being
2:43:18
Speaker 3: a king be like a rational self interest thing, and
2:43:22
Speaker 3: would fall in the grade not be rational self interest
2:43:25
Speaker 3: or vice versa. At what point would being a king
2:43:26
Speaker 3: not be in your rational self interest but falling grenade
2:43:29
Speaker 3: would be in your self interests? Interesting question?
2:43:34
Speaker 1: There's a continuum from right, Yeah, being king would be
2:43:39
Speaker 1: definitely my self interest. I think it would be in
2:43:42
Speaker 1: anyone's self interest, right, Well, not Yarn said, it wouldn't be. Yeah,
2:43:46
Speaker 1: you are not going to objective. That would not be
2:43:48
Speaker 1: in your self interest. I mean you, there is a
2:43:50
Speaker 1: chance you could lose your head, but there's always a
2:43:54
Speaker 1: chance you could lose your head, right right right now.
2:44:00
Speaker 3: Saw for six months says while bootstrap ideology is important,
2:44:03
Speaker 3: it shouldn't devolve into everything's your fault. Women who doun'k
2:44:06
Speaker 3: a mail lollliness epidemic do that?
2:44:09
Speaker 1: Yes, yeah, yes, Well it's hard.
2:44:12
Speaker 3: It's hard to hold in your mind that, like, yeah,
2:44:16
Speaker 3: everything is not your fault, but you can almost always
2:44:20
Speaker 3: try to improve. You can almost always improve your situation
2:44:22
Speaker 3: regardless of whether its your fault or not.
2:44:25
Speaker 1: Well, I wanted to. I kept thinking of the concept
2:44:27
Speaker 1: of insurance because obviously tornadoes and accidents happen all the
2:44:32
Speaker 1: time that are not really your fault, but it is
2:44:34
Speaker 1: your fault if you're not prepared for them with some
2:44:36
Speaker 1: kind of insurance, right right, So there are situations like
2:44:42
Speaker 1: the job apocalypse that's coming that do we have a
2:44:45
Speaker 1: sort of insurance program for something like that. There's not
2:44:52
Speaker 1: really an insurance program for people who might spend half
2:44:56
Speaker 1: a million dollars on a degree that becomes totally useless
2:44:59
Speaker 1: because chatch Ebt is doing all the law, all the
2:45:02
Speaker 1: paralegal stuff. Now, mm hmm, one more super chat.
2:45:11
Speaker 3: Let's see Sike Sicky jokes four five to one for
2:45:15
Speaker 3: five pound says you guys need to play Soma in
2:45:17
Speaker 3: regards to what horrifying future awaits us with AI one
2:45:20
Speaker 3: of all his favorite games of all time. By the bye,
2:45:23
Speaker 3: I'll check it out.
2:45:24
Speaker 1: Yeah, we'll definitely have to check it out. I think
2:45:27
Speaker 1: Malar is a new video coming out too, so okay,
2:45:29
Speaker 1: cool might be out today. I'm not sure. All right,
2:45:34
Speaker 1: Everyone's all right?
2:45:37
Speaker 3: Everyone yet, Take everybody and we'll see you on Thursday.
2:45:41
Speaker 3: On the media channel, we're talking about running.
2:45:42
Speaker 1: There, take care.
2:45:47
Speaker 3: Press a button, which is also about capitalism going crazy. Right,
2:45:52
Speaker 3: it's not what running is about.
2:45:54
Speaker 1: I think so