Latest / Yaron Brook Show / The Frankfurt School and Cultural Marxism | Yaron & Nikos Dialogues

Transcript

The Frankfurt School and Cultural Marxism | Yaron & Nikos Dialogues · Yaron Brook Show

• 0:02
  Speaker 1: Otters and this is.
• 0:20
  Speaker 2: Everybody, walk up to your own book show with Nicos
• 0:23
  Speaker 2: or Sunday Program, regular Sunday Program, And uh yeah, I
• 0:28
  Speaker 2: mean I don't know if I'm I'm experiencing some form
• 0:33
  Speaker 2: of insanity where I keep doing the same thing expecting
• 0:35
  Speaker 2: different results, but I keep starting the show about five
• 0:38
  Speaker 2: minutes too early. I will figure this out at some point.
• 0:42
  Speaker 2: I have to put up a big sticker on my
• 0:44
  Speaker 2: on my skin. Anyway, Hi, Nicos.
• 0:49
  Speaker 3: We don't do this non organic thing. We already said Hi.
• 0:52
  Speaker 2: We already said I in the pre but recorded session.
• 0:56
  Speaker 2: So something like that anyway. All right, So today we're
• 0:59
  Speaker 2: talking about the Frankfurt School and and the concept if
• 1:06
  Speaker 2: there was such a thing as cultural Marxism.
• 1:08
  Speaker 4: We'll talk about that.
• 1:10
  Speaker 2: We want to talk about also kind of the impact
• 1:12
  Speaker 2: of the Frankfurt School and the influence on Postmdernism. But
• 1:16
  Speaker 2: also and I think this is where we'll start, uh
• 1:20
  Speaker 2: because is give us a little bit of a of
• 1:22
  Speaker 2: a picture of where what's happening in the world where
• 1:26
  Speaker 2: the school is a rising from. I think it's founded
• 1:29
  Speaker 2: in nineteen twenty three, so this is a kind of
• 1:31
  Speaker 2: a post post World War One. So what's going on
• 1:35
  Speaker 2: in the world, both in terms of political world but
• 1:39
  Speaker 2: also cultural world, but also what is happening intellectually in
• 1:43
  Speaker 2: the world that these people are coming out of.
• 1:46
  Speaker 5: Yeah, so if we had to describe Frankfurt School in
• 1:49
  Speaker 5: four worlds, it would be make sense of defeat defeat
• 1:54
  Speaker 5: throughout its history. The Frankfurt School deals with tragedy after tragedy,
• 2:01
  Speaker 5: tragedy for.
• 2:01
  Speaker 3: Their own worldview but also for the world.
• 2:03
  Speaker 5: So they come up after the First World War, so
• 2:07
  Speaker 5: all ready for them. So these are disillusioned Marxists, all
• 2:13
  Speaker 5: from a Bourzois background. We can talk a bit more
• 2:15
  Speaker 5: later about about that. And they have to explain two things.
• 2:20
  Speaker 5: Number one is how is it that the workers chilled
• 2:26
  Speaker 5: and joined an imperialistic war, a war for their bosses,
• 2:30
  Speaker 5: which left behind and armageddon of dead people. That's the
• 2:34
  Speaker 5: first existential shock they have to explain. Imagine being a
• 2:38
  Speaker 5: Marxist at that time, right, So you you have one
• 2:42
  Speaker 5: thing for sure that the working class of each country,
• 2:45
  Speaker 5: they are brothers with each other, So you know for
• 2:48
  Speaker 5: sure that they're not gonna fight and die for the bosses.
• 2:50
  Speaker 5: Not only they go and fight and die, they do
• 2:52
  Speaker 5: it enthusiastically.
• 2:54
  Speaker 4: And on both and on all the different sides.
• 2:57
  Speaker 3: Right and all on all the different sides.
• 2:59
  Speaker 5: And when in Germany the Social Democratic Party votes for
• 3:05
  Speaker 5: the war expenses in the parliament, it's very difficult to
• 3:09
  Speaker 5: convey to people how crazy it is. Imagine I'll give
• 3:13
  Speaker 5: a random example. Imagine if during the lockdowns a Cato Institute,
• 3:18
  Speaker 5: for example, would say, we are in favorite of the lockdowns.
• 3:22
  Speaker 5: I imagine if you're betality, like, this is my whole
• 3:25
  Speaker 5: world is collapsing.
• 3:26
  Speaker 3: This is what happened with Marxist when the.
• 3:29
  Speaker 5: Social Democratic Party vote for the war credits, and after
• 3:33
  Speaker 5: nineteen nineteen, they go through a second sock. In nineteen nineteen,
• 3:38
  Speaker 5: immediately after the war, there is a revolution in Germany,
• 3:41
  Speaker 5: a proper working class communs revolution. People might have heard
• 3:45
  Speaker 5: it as these the Spartassist.
• 3:48
  Speaker 3: Uprising with Rosa Luxemburg, Karliblen.
• 3:51
  Speaker 5: And the second sock is that this uprising is defeated,
• 3:55
  Speaker 5: and defeated by whom, by other workers, and by the
• 3:59
  Speaker 5: Social Theocratic Party of course, together with of course, together
• 4:04
  Speaker 5: with the right wing paramilitary groups. So these Marxists have
• 4:08
  Speaker 5: to explain how is it that everything we predict failed? First,
• 4:14
  Speaker 5: the workers support the bosses and then workers put down
• 4:19
  Speaker 5: the revolution of other workers. So our toolkit, what Marxism
• 4:24
  Speaker 5: taught us might not be enough. We have to go
• 4:27
  Speaker 5: back to the whiteboard and try to figure out things
• 4:31
  Speaker 5: from the start. The tools that Marxians gave us are
• 4:34
  Speaker 5: not enough if we want to get to this emancipatory
• 4:38
  Speaker 5: world beyond capitalism and beyond the exploitations.
• 4:42
  Speaker 2: It is also one other kind of challenge for them.
• 4:45
  Speaker 2: And there is then eighteen seventeen revolution. So communism comes
• 4:49
  Speaker 2: about not where it's supposed to right now. We marx
• 4:52
  Speaker 2: predicted now with the theory predicted, but in Russia of
• 4:55
  Speaker 2: all places, an Agraian an Agraian society, and it's not
• 4:59
  Speaker 2: a worker who bringing about. So again what communism is established?
• 5:05
  Speaker 2: Kind of communism from their perspective, it's now way Max
• 5:09
  Speaker 2: Again Max has been one.
• 5:11
  Speaker 5: So any where they look, the message is all the same.
• 5:15
  Speaker 5: We need to thinks, to think things over. And these people,
• 5:20
  Speaker 5: the people who are the core of the group earlier,
• 5:23
  Speaker 5: mostly a guy called Max or Heimer and Theodoradorno, they
• 5:28
  Speaker 5: decide that we have to expand beyond Marxism as orthodox Marxers.
• 5:33
  Speaker 3: We have to become what they would call interdisciplinary.
• 5:37
  Speaker 5: We have to check psychology, we have to check sociology,
• 5:40
  Speaker 5: we have to check every cultural studies, which back then
• 5:44
  Speaker 5: we're not even a thing. We have to use every
• 5:47
  Speaker 5: tool available to try to understand and undermine the existing
• 5:52
  Speaker 5: social order. And this gave birth to their intellectual child,
• 5:56
  Speaker 5: which is what we would call critical theory.
• 5:59
  Speaker 3: What most people will have heard us critical theory.
• 6:02
  Speaker 2: So how do you define or you consider actual critical theory?
• 6:07
  Speaker 5: Yeah, so critical theory, let's think about it this way.
• 6:12
  Speaker 3: Critical of what? First of all, critical of the existing world.
• 6:16
  Speaker 5: So the first command of critical theory is don't take
• 6:19
  Speaker 5: the world for granted. They say, look, we can never
• 6:22
  Speaker 5: properly understand the world fully. Why because there is no
• 6:27
  Speaker 5: outside of the world. If you try to criticize capitalism,
• 6:30
  Speaker 5: you're still within capitalism. And this begs the question, then
• 6:34
  Speaker 5: what do we do? Then, they say, the best thing
• 6:38
  Speaker 5: we can do is try to put ourselves in a
• 6:41
  Speaker 5: position where we are opposed to capitalism.
• 6:44
  Speaker 3: Now, the big question is how do can you find
• 6:46
  Speaker 3: this position.
• 6:47
  Speaker 5: You just told us that we can never properly truly
• 6:49
  Speaker 5: understand the world, So how can you be in a
• 6:51
  Speaker 5: position to criticize the world that you cannot understand we'll
• 6:55
  Speaker 5: never find that out. But they say that through this concept,
• 6:58
  Speaker 5: criticizing it is imposing questions, resisting, resisting even the simplest
• 7:04
  Speaker 5: practices that this world gives you, for example, consume or
• 7:08
  Speaker 5: enjoy popular music. By this constant criticism and resistance, we
• 7:12
  Speaker 5: can find ourselves in a position where we put barriers
• 7:16
  Speaker 5: to the cause of things as they are to everyday life.
• 7:21
  Speaker 5: And somehow critical theory, this constant critique and this constant
• 7:26
  Speaker 5: questioning might become this midwife, these breeds that will take
• 7:31
  Speaker 5: us from where we are to a world beyond capitalism.
• 7:35
  Speaker 5: It will give birth to this new thing, which will
• 7:38
  Speaker 5: be a post capitalist society. And if you have questions
• 7:42
  Speaker 5: how this will happen, I have the same question. And
• 7:45
  Speaker 5: franku School never answers this basic question. If you're telling
• 7:49
  Speaker 5: us that everything we do, even the most let's say,
• 7:54
  Speaker 5: primal thing like the sexual activity, if you're telling it
• 7:57
  Speaker 5: that even this, even our instincts, are very heavily influenced
• 8:03
  Speaker 5: by capitalism, then how can we find ourselves in a
• 8:07
  Speaker 5: position where we can criticize it and we can properly
• 8:10
  Speaker 5: understand it.
• 8:11
  Speaker 3: They never answered this question.
• 8:13
  Speaker 5: The question always turns down to something like trust me,
• 8:18
  Speaker 5: bro somehow I know better. So they are.
• 8:24
  Speaker 2: They're in Germany in the nineteen twenties, and obviously this
• 8:30
  Speaker 2: is a this is a time of you know, the
• 8:33
  Speaker 2: vioument of republic, and there's a lot of economic, cultural
• 8:37
  Speaker 2: and other angst. They are big supporters of kind of
• 8:41
  Speaker 2: the avant gode art movement and kind of the critical
• 8:47
  Speaker 2: of you know, the critical of a lot of of
• 8:52
  Speaker 2: conventional art for sure, even the kind of more heading
• 8:55
  Speaker 2: edge hot. You know. They seem to be in art
• 8:58
  Speaker 2: in particular, seem to be motivated by nihilism. How much
• 9:01
  Speaker 2: how much nihilism is going on here?
• 9:04
  Speaker 5: Well, okay, so the person who is again remember there
• 9:07
  Speaker 5: are two main figures at this time in the Franchis school,
• 9:11
  Speaker 5: Max Horkheimer and Theodore ra Dorno. By the way, both
• 9:14
  Speaker 5: of them, both of them, they are the sons not
• 9:18
  Speaker 5: just of the bs, they are the sons of some
• 9:21
  Speaker 5: of the most prominent members of the bus. So Adorno
• 9:26
  Speaker 5: his father was a businessman, his mother, for God's sake,
• 9:29
  Speaker 5: was an opera singer, and his aunt was a piano virtuoso.
• 9:34
  Speaker 3: So Adorna was this music child prodigy.
• 9:37
  Speaker 5: Unfortunately he didn't stick with with music, but Yeah. He
• 9:41
  Speaker 5: starts as a music as a music critique, and it's
• 9:44
  Speaker 5: very interesting to see what is his he I mean,
• 9:48
  Speaker 5: his famous for two things. The one is criticizing Donald
• 9:51
  Speaker 5: Duck on how Donald Duck is, you know, a tool
• 9:55
  Speaker 5: of capitalism.
• 9:56
  Speaker 3: We'll see about this in a second.
• 9:58
  Speaker 5: And the other thing is his critic this is of music,
• 10:01
  Speaker 5: and most specifically of jazz. So what is the problem
• 10:05
  Speaker 5: that he has with jazz? So think about it this way.
• 10:09
  Speaker 5: He says that jazz, you might think that has this
• 10:13
  Speaker 5: element of liberation, because remember these people claim that we
• 10:17
  Speaker 5: just want to liberate the individual.
• 10:19
  Speaker 3: We're not collective is here.
• 10:20
  Speaker 5: We just want to make sure that we push let's say,
• 10:24
  Speaker 5: we push humanity to absolute freedom. So I don't know
• 10:28
  Speaker 5: what say you might think that jazz is this you
• 10:33
  Speaker 5: come up on the spot with your own ideas, you
• 10:35
  Speaker 5: break the rules, but actually this is a false revolt
• 10:40
  Speaker 5: because you are still within the parameters of an oppressive system.
• 10:44
  Speaker 5: So when, for example, Charlie Parker does his crazy stuff
• 10:48
  Speaker 5: when he walks out from the club, it's still capitalism
• 10:51
  Speaker 5: over there. He says something like, these crazy solos in
• 10:55
  Speaker 5: jazz are like the spasms of an erotic who is
• 10:59
  Speaker 5: in the sexual at and he's climaxing too early because
• 11:02
  Speaker 5: he's existentially in horror. It's like what happens when you're
• 11:05
  Speaker 5: existential in horror, your climax early.
• 11:08
  Speaker 3: The same thing happens with jazz.
• 11:12
  Speaker 5: Now, the interesting thing with Adornment is how little curiosity
• 11:16
  Speaker 5: he actually had about jazz. So he writes this famous
• 11:20
  Speaker 5: piece in the thirties. He doesn't know anything about American jazz.
• 11:23
  Speaker 5: He doesn't know about Sidney be Sets or Armstrong or
• 11:26
  Speaker 5: Duke Ellington and anyway.
• 11:28
  Speaker 3: Then when the Nazis come to power, he goes to
• 11:31
  Speaker 3: the US.
• 11:32
  Speaker 5: He's in la at the same time with Charlie Parker
• 11:35
  Speaker 5: at the same time without Pepper. You'd expect you wrote
• 11:38
  Speaker 5: a huge about just just build down the road and
• 11:41
  Speaker 5: go listen to some jarge.
• 11:43
  Speaker 3: No, it's like I don't.
• 11:45
  Speaker 5: It's like that brilliant line that Jesus said, I don't
• 11:48
  Speaker 5: need to read the book to review it. I'm a
• 11:50
  Speaker 5: theorist anyway, So this was this was an Now the
• 11:54
  Speaker 5: big question is was he an elitist? So was he
• 11:57
  Speaker 5: defending some higher tradition or was he You called it
• 12:01
  Speaker 5: the nihilist Then, to be honest, I couldn't figure that out.
• 12:04
  Speaker 5: He it's like he goes from the one, he goes
• 12:08
  Speaker 5: from the one to the other. He will say, of course,
• 12:11
  Speaker 5: you know, we need we appreciate the traditional art, but
• 12:14
  Speaker 5: traditional alert has served its purpose. What's next and whatever
• 12:19
  Speaker 5: comes next is never good enough.
• 12:21
  Speaker 2: So he didn't he didn't really publish any positive reviews
• 12:24
  Speaker 2: of I don't know the some of the crazy modern
• 12:27
  Speaker 2: music that was being modern noise, I would call it
• 12:30
  Speaker 2: that was being put out during that period.
• 12:34
  Speaker 5: Well, I mean, you know more about that type of
• 12:36
  Speaker 5: not so for example, he criticized the Stravinsky, but again
• 12:40
  Speaker 5: it's very difficult for me.
• 12:41
  Speaker 2: Against Stravinsky is still melodic. You know, it's rhythmic. And
• 12:45
  Speaker 2: he's criticizing Stravinsky because he hokens back to a pre
• 12:50
  Speaker 2: like a primitive and it's true he does. I mean,
• 12:53
  Speaker 2: it's Christians. Stravinsky is not bad. I mean, it's based
• 12:56
  Speaker 2: on actual stuff. But I haven't seen anything. You know,
• 13:00
  Speaker 2: what does he think of Schoenberg or you know John
• 13:04
  Speaker 2: k So you know Sandra's you know clearly e tonal,
• 13:10
  Speaker 2: no harmony, no no melody, kind of call it music.
• 13:15
  Speaker 2: I'm curious if if if if it was if it
• 13:17
  Speaker 2: if it if it reached that kind of nihilistic stage, Well,
• 13:22
  Speaker 2: do you know what if you of, for example, of
• 13:25
  Speaker 2: people like Kandinsky and and and kind of they haven't
• 13:28
  Speaker 2: gone painting.
• 13:30
  Speaker 5: First of all, it wouldn't be their view. It would
• 13:32
  Speaker 5: just be Adorna didn't have much to do with that.
• 13:36
  Speaker 5: Walter Benyjaman, who was the most famous cultural critic, although
• 13:39
  Speaker 5: he was not technically in the front for school, he
• 13:41
  Speaker 5: was a big influence.
• 13:42
  Speaker 3: So beny Imine Moore had to do with cinema. So
• 13:44
  Speaker 3: it would be Adorna.
• 13:46
  Speaker 5: I don't have a good answer because I don't know
• 13:48
  Speaker 5: very well that type of music. I know you're not
• 13:52
  Speaker 5: know something like that because we discussed it in my
• 13:55
  Speaker 5: padro community the other day. He seems to know more
• 13:57
  Speaker 5: if he was and he can drop us a comment
• 14:00
  Speaker 5: what ad thought about atonal music. But since I don't
• 14:04
  Speaker 5: know this, let me tell you why he didn't like
• 14:06
  Speaker 5: Donald Duck.
• 14:07
  Speaker 4: Yes, so.
• 14:10
  Speaker 5: When he goes to I mean we were jumping ahead here,
• 14:13
  Speaker 5: but when he and Krkheimer get to the United States,
• 14:16
  Speaker 5: you'd expect that the reaction would be okay. Instead of
• 14:21
  Speaker 5: me now being on the way to Birkenau, I am
• 14:24
  Speaker 5: to Los Angeles.
• 14:25
  Speaker 3: Thank you whatever is up there.
• 14:28
  Speaker 2: Life is as good as these guys are all Jewish,
• 14:31
  Speaker 2: which is we'll talk about later. But they were all Jewish.
• 14:34
  Speaker 2: They left Germany because they were heading the concentration camps.
• 14:38
  Speaker 5: If they didn't, yes, Walter benj I mean, for example,
• 14:41
  Speaker 5: who didn't leave Europe on time, killed himself in a
• 14:44
  Speaker 5: Spanish hotel because he wouldn't be able to escape. I
• 14:47
  Speaker 5: mean that was tragic because eventually he would, but he
• 14:50
  Speaker 5: didn't have faith enough, so he killed himself anyway. And
• 14:54
  Speaker 5: these people lost many people they knew in the hollows.
• 14:57
  Speaker 5: But when an Orkhimer found himself United States, they only
• 15:02
  Speaker 5: have complaints, complaints after complaints, after complaints, and particularly they
• 15:08
  Speaker 5: find everything in the United States sallow, very not good
• 15:12
  Speaker 5: enough for their taste. So for Adornman, for Horkheimer, music
• 15:18
  Speaker 5: and anything that has to do with popular culture, they
• 15:21
  Speaker 5: call it something like it's like the sound of the
• 15:24
  Speaker 5: food on the dog's plate. When you throw food on
• 15:28
  Speaker 5: the dog, they hear the or you rattle the thing
• 15:31
  Speaker 5: for the cat. It creates a Pavlovian reaction that perpetuates
• 15:36
  Speaker 5: your cats or your dogs serveude to you and Adorna says,
• 15:40
  Speaker 5: the same thing happens with popular culture. Its it puts
• 15:43
  Speaker 5: you into this instinctive mindset to be a slave. And
• 15:49
  Speaker 5: particularly they have harsh things to say about Donald Duck.
• 15:53
  Speaker 5: This tells you all you need to know about these guys.
• 15:55
  Speaker 5: And because they say Donald Duck in an instrument for
• 15:58
  Speaker 5: the subjugation of the working class. Why because remember in
• 16:02
  Speaker 5: every episode, in every page of the comic, Donald Duck
• 16:06
  Speaker 5: is beaten into submission by Scoots mc doug. So they
• 16:10
  Speaker 5: say Donald Duck, it conditions the working class to take
• 16:14
  Speaker 5: a beating and to think that it is funny. So
• 16:17
  Speaker 5: they were not the funniest people to have around. There
• 16:20
  Speaker 5: were not the most exciting people to have at a
• 16:22
  Speaker 5: dinner party. And they went to many dinner parts. By
• 16:26
  Speaker 5: the way, they were part of the high society, even
• 16:28
  Speaker 5: in a lake. They had houses in great areas, they
• 16:32
  Speaker 5: had big mansions.
• 16:34
  Speaker 3: And yet it was not it was not good enough.
• 16:38
  Speaker 2: So I asked the authority about you know, donal and
• 16:44
  Speaker 2: Schoenberg Schburg in music, And this is what GPT says.
• 16:51
  Speaker 2: A Donna regarded Schoenberg as the decisive Barron composer, the
• 16:54
  Speaker 2: figure who made music faced the crisis of modernity. Honestly,
• 16:59
  Speaker 2: you know, he wrote a section of Schuenburg in progress. Uh.
• 17:03
  Speaker 2: He contrasted him with Strinsky, which was haulkening backwards. Schuenburg
• 17:08
  Speaker 2: is moving us forward. If you listen to Schumburg, it's
• 17:12
  Speaker 2: not music. I mean it's it's a rejection of music.
• 17:14
  Speaker 2: It's a rejection of melody. It's a rejection of harmony.
• 17:17
  Speaker 2: And it's exactly what appeals to him. And then Kandinsky
• 17:19
  Speaker 2: and painting, it's the same. It's you know, I don't know,
• 17:23
  Speaker 2: embrace his condenced. He's critical of him as well, but
• 17:26
  Speaker 2: he embraces the breaking a form, the move away from
• 17:32
  Speaker 2: representation in painting, God forbid you actually represent anything. Kendisky
• 17:37
  Speaker 2: just splashes of paint on canvas and a donor is
• 17:40
  Speaker 2: excited about that.
• 17:41
  Speaker 4: Although he's also critical of you know, he thinks this.
• 17:46
  Speaker 2: You know, he has to be critical, right, that's part
• 17:50
  Speaker 2: of that's part of it's too cerebral for him. Yep,
• 17:53
  Speaker 2: he's you know, it's too sabribo. So although what's cerebral
• 17:57
  Speaker 2: about slashing paint in the canvas? I have no idea,
• 18:00
  Speaker 2: But if I don't know, Kandinsky is disagreeable, but but yees,
• 18:04
  Speaker 2: so they're very much I don't know, at least is
• 18:08
  Speaker 2: very much celebrating I think, a nihilism in art, a.
• 18:15
  Speaker 4: Destruction of form.
• 18:17
  Speaker 2: Again, it is anything that might serve a capitalist culture,
• 18:22
  Speaker 2: anything that might serve this consumer mentality. There's more and
• 18:26
  Speaker 2: more more, this desire for for consumption. He is celebrating,
• 18:33
  Speaker 2: and certainly modern, this kind of modern art is a
• 18:37
  Speaker 2: rejection of.
• 18:37
  Speaker 5: All of that. Sally put it differently, everything and anything
• 18:42
  Speaker 5: that the average person who is not an aristocrat of
• 18:46
  Speaker 5: music like Adorna, anything that person can understand and enjoy
• 18:50
  Speaker 5: for adornmently suspicious. So with it is with the it's
• 18:55
  Speaker 5: of all the conspiracy theories. And we were going to
• 18:57
  Speaker 5: discuss this thing about the Franco School. The one thing
• 19:01
  Speaker 5: which is absolutely true is they gave to the new left,
• 19:04
  Speaker 5: the elities, the anti working class attitude that they still have.
• 19:08
  Speaker 5: And you see, for example in England they talk about
• 19:10
  Speaker 5: the working classes gammon, they are all racist. All our
• 19:15
  Speaker 5: problems are because of them. If only they would be
• 19:19
  Speaker 5: like us, if only they would be like us. This
• 19:21
  Speaker 5: starts from the Frankfurt School.
• 19:24
  Speaker 2: Since that part of how they explain the failure Marxism
• 19:28
  Speaker 2: in the sense market. Marx was too positive about the
• 19:33
  Speaker 2: Polo Chamian. He was too you know, too positive about
• 19:37
  Speaker 2: the working class.
• 19:38
  Speaker 5: Now until at least the sixth is they would not
• 19:41
  Speaker 5: dare to go that far. So they dance, they dance
• 19:45
  Speaker 5: around it. The other thing we need to say is
• 19:47
  Speaker 5: that since they went to the US Horchimer, who was
• 19:50
  Speaker 5: very pragmatic, he said, guys, not anymore talk about Marxism, capitalism, revolution,
• 19:59
  Speaker 5: no find cold words. So they do all these criticism,
• 20:03
  Speaker 5: but they dance around. So they don't speak anymore in
• 20:06
  Speaker 5: Marxist categories. They don't speak anymore about the revolutionary subject
• 20:12
  Speaker 5: and all and all that and all that stuff. But
• 20:15
  Speaker 5: there's no question that the Frankfurt School is the biggest
• 20:20
  Speaker 5: deviation from Marxism. You will hear all the concerns of
• 20:25
  Speaker 5: these bandits calling them no Marxist communists two point zero.
• 20:29
  Speaker 5: For me, the Frankfurt School is not the Victorian the
• 20:33
  Speaker 5: return of Marxism.
• 20:34
  Speaker 3: It is the defeat of Marxism.
• 20:36
  Speaker 5: It is the stone that you put in the graveyard
• 20:40
  Speaker 5: and you said, Marx, rest in peace, we are done
• 20:44
  Speaker 5: with you.
• 20:45
  Speaker 2: So I think that's all way, But isn't there ultimately
• 20:52
  Speaker 2: you know, the the the they can't explain the transition,
• 20:55
  Speaker 2: but what is the world in which they would They
• 20:58
  Speaker 2: believe that, you know, the I do O rests. That
• 21:02
  Speaker 2: is communist, right. That is very similar to to kind
• 21:06
  Speaker 2: of Marx's uh, kind of end stage where you know,
• 21:12
  Speaker 2: from each according to his ability, to each according to
• 21:14
  Speaker 2: his need, and nobody has to work too much, and
• 21:18
  Speaker 2: everything is.
• 21:19
  Speaker 5: Yeah, that's letter, that's Marcus, that's definitely MARCUZI about Actually,
• 21:22
  Speaker 5: let's let me support what I said. Salver first say
• 21:25
  Speaker 5: where they deviate, and then when they agree with margin.
• 21:28
  Speaker 5: So let's take it systematically, so that so that what
• 21:31
  Speaker 5: we say becomes clear.
• 21:33
  Speaker 3: For first major deviation from Marx.
• 21:36
  Speaker 5: Marx claim that what makes you really human is your
• 21:38
  Speaker 5: capacity to work, is your capacity to produce, and taken
• 21:42
  Speaker 5: out of context, even you and me could find something.
• 21:45
  Speaker 3: Nice in it.
• 21:46
  Speaker 5: There's this Promethean it has been marked let's conquer nature.
• 21:50
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 21:50
  Speaker 5: The frank Foods don't like this at all. They have
• 21:53
  Speaker 5: this Dionesian Freudian idea that we have this instinct for
• 21:59
  Speaker 5: joy and for play and for idleness. At the end
• 22:03
  Speaker 5: of the day, idleness the ideal is a world of play,
• 22:07
  Speaker 5: a world of errors, as marcusa with Data, putting down
• 22:10
  Speaker 5: with Prometheus, up with the Dionysius, and that would be
• 22:14
  Speaker 5: the first diviasion.
• 22:15
  Speaker 2: And it's the true of all of them, or just
• 22:17
  Speaker 2: just to Akuza.
• 22:18
  Speaker 5: Now that's that's you see elements of this also with
• 22:23
  Speaker 5: Adorn and Horkheimer, because they criticize the socialist resumes for
• 22:27
  Speaker 5: the same thing for and he will get the second point,
• 22:31
  Speaker 5: the conguest of nature. For Marks, the conquest of nature
• 22:35
  Speaker 5: is very important. Trotzky had this brilliant line. In my view,
• 22:39
  Speaker 5: instead of the conquering of man to man, will have
• 22:43
  Speaker 5: the conquering of nature of man of nature Roman anyway, but.
• 22:47
  Speaker 3: It's a nice court.
• 22:49
  Speaker 5: The frank Footians disagree with this because they claim that
• 22:53
  Speaker 5: the conquest of nature leads very soon to the conquest
• 22:57
  Speaker 5: of man. So they don't like. Is promittent you The
• 23:01
  Speaker 5: big difference we already touched upon it. The working class
• 23:04
  Speaker 5: for Marx obviously is their evolutionary subjects.
• 23:07
  Speaker 3: For Mark, the working class is.
• 23:08
  Speaker 5: The angel of history who comes here to show us
• 23:11
  Speaker 5: the way and leaders to the promised land. For the
• 23:14
  Speaker 5: Frankfurt school, it is just part of the problem. It
• 23:17
  Speaker 5: is not only it is not a revolutionary class. It
• 23:20
  Speaker 5: is a constant source of disappointment already from World War One.
• 23:25
  Speaker 5: Another major difference, there is no vander Leninist party.
• 23:29
  Speaker 3: None of these people.
• 23:30
  Speaker 5: Ever joined the party or advocated for the party. There
• 23:34
  Speaker 5: is no theory then of revolution. Marcus would give something
• 23:38
  Speaker 5: like it. And the most important thing they move the
• 23:42
  Speaker 5: emphasis from the economic and the political field to the
• 23:46
  Speaker 5: cultural field. And an even more unspeakable scene in the
• 23:52
  Speaker 5: Marxis universe is this emphasis on psychology.
• 23:57
  Speaker 3: Why would the Marxist care about psychology?
• 23:59
  Speaker 5: History is not made by individuals who think history is
• 24:02
  Speaker 5: made by classes. So all these things we have to
• 24:06
  Speaker 5: realize are unspeakable scenes against Marxisms. And to give you
• 24:11
  Speaker 5: an example that all our odd imagine if I came
• 24:15
  Speaker 5: to you today and I told you Yer and I
• 24:17
  Speaker 5: don't believe A is a I don't think human beings
• 24:20
  Speaker 5: have free with Araman an archo capitalist.
• 24:24
  Speaker 3: But I am a new objectivist.
• 24:26
  Speaker 5: You tell me something is wrong here, like even you
• 24:29
  Speaker 5: don't understand.
• 24:29
  Speaker 2: I know some people online who argue that, yeah, I
• 24:33
  Speaker 2: think there's a movement called new objectivists out there that
• 24:36
  Speaker 2: kind of take pics and chooses what they like and
• 24:39
  Speaker 2: what they don't like.
• 24:39
  Speaker 3: Okay, well.
• 24:42
  Speaker 2: Mar you just created it's you just created a new movement,
• 24:46
  Speaker 2: but excellent.
• 24:48
  Speaker 5: So that's how I view That's how I viewed them
• 24:52
  Speaker 5: related to to Mark.
• 24:54
  Speaker 3: Now, what is the similarity.
• 24:56
  Speaker 5: The similarity is that in the same way as Marx
• 25:01
  Speaker 5: things that for everything that happens in the world, in
• 25:04
  Speaker 5: the last instance, the problem is capitalism.
• 25:07
  Speaker 3: The same happens with Frank.
• 25:08
  Speaker 5: For school, the villain is still capitalist for anything from
• 25:13
  Speaker 5: sexual dysfunctions to people being born, to people not to
• 25:18
  Speaker 5: the family being disintegrated.
• 25:20
  Speaker 3: The problem at the end.
• 25:21
  Speaker 5: Of the day is always, always always capitalism, or as
• 25:25
  Speaker 5: we put it in the last distance, it is capital
• 25:28
  Speaker 5: So it is an anti capitalist movement, but it breaks
• 25:32
  Speaker 5: with all the main tenets and also it breaks with
• 25:35
  Speaker 5: the most dangerous tenets of Marxism when it comes to
• 25:38
  Speaker 5: Marxism as a political project. So they are the end
• 25:42
  Speaker 5: of socialism as an organized movement rather than any birth
• 25:46
  Speaker 5: of it.
• 25:47
  Speaker 2: So the obviously a rejection of capitalism will reveling against capitalism.
• 25:54
  Speaker 2: They endorse kind of a communist ideal as the end
• 25:59
  Speaker 2: of time. Uh, just like pre Marks, did I mean
• 26:03
  Speaker 2: there were plenty of communists pre Marks, or at least
• 26:05
  Speaker 2: people who believed in that ideal marks did invent that
• 26:10
  Speaker 2: that conception, the early Christians who believed in communal living
• 26:13
  Speaker 2: and sharing everything into each according to his need, from
• 26:16
  Speaker 2: each according to his abilities. That's not a Marxist invention.
• 26:20
  Speaker 2: So what what they So they're not really Marxist? What
• 26:23
  Speaker 2: would you say?
• 26:23
  Speaker 4: What are their intellectual influences?
• 26:25
  Speaker 2: I mean, from you know, from what I've seen, it
• 26:28
  Speaker 2: strikes me there's a there's definitely you know, Plato and
• 26:32
  Speaker 2: kind of all the bad guys in history, right, Plato
• 26:35
  Speaker 2: and Hegel. So therefore Kant and and as you mentioned
• 26:40
  Speaker 2: a lot of a lot of psychology and psychology I
• 26:43
  Speaker 2: guess primarily Freud. So so maybe elaborated a little bit
• 26:48
  Speaker 2: on kind of how Plato and particularly Hegel fit into
• 26:51
  Speaker 2: this story.
• 26:52
  Speaker 5: Yes, the way mostly Plato. First of all, The problem
• 26:56
  Speaker 5: is none of these people gave us very let's say,
• 27:00
  Speaker 5: concrete view of their philosophy. The only person who did
• 27:03
  Speaker 5: this is actually Marcuse, and he does this in two places.
• 27:09
  Speaker 5: The one is the one dimensional Man, which I would say,
• 27:11
  Speaker 5: if people would read one thing, read this, and the
• 27:14
  Speaker 5: other is Errors and Civilization, which he wrote before this.
• 27:18
  Speaker 3: So where does Plato and Hegel fit in this.
• 27:22
  Speaker 5: So for Marcusen probably also for the others in the
• 27:25
  Speaker 5: Fronto school, there are two levels, let's say, of reality,
• 27:29
  Speaker 5: the reality as it appears to us, as we think
• 27:33
  Speaker 5: we understand it, and also reality as it actually is.
• 27:39
  Speaker 5: So that's why you will hear, for example, the discussion
• 27:42
  Speaker 5: about negative dialectics. It means these dialectics that help you
• 27:46
  Speaker 5: go beyond what you be beyond what you actually beyond
• 27:50
  Speaker 5: what you actually see.
• 27:53
  Speaker 3: So this is something very Hegelian, and you'll.
• 27:55
  Speaker 5: Find also something very Platonist platonisticies. So Marcuse grows up
• 28:01
  Speaker 5: as a hegel scholar and it brings he's the one
• 28:04
  Speaker 5: who actually brings Hegelian dialectics to the school. And so
• 28:11
  Speaker 5: that's the main that's the main idea that somehow there
• 28:16
  Speaker 5: was one time back in the day where we're at
• 28:18
  Speaker 5: one with our true nature, where we were living happily,
• 28:23
  Speaker 5: we were sharing. Apparently there was a lot of sexual
• 28:26
  Speaker 5: activity all the time. Basically that was life, joy and
• 28:30
  Speaker 5: the sexual activity all with all.
• 28:34
  Speaker 2: It's about the pleasure principle. It's all about pleasure, a
• 28:37
  Speaker 2: kind of Heiddenism.
• 28:39
  Speaker 5: It's interesting exactly it was this garden of Eden basically.
• 28:44
  Speaker 5: But then something happens, and this something is that people
• 28:48
  Speaker 5: started naming this is mine, this is yours. So we
• 28:52
  Speaker 5: lost our essence, we lost our true essence. And that's
• 28:59
  Speaker 5: when the would put also Hegel, sorry Freud, because Marx
• 29:04
  Speaker 5: would say it was the element of property and of scarcity.
• 29:09
  Speaker 5: But they would also add here they would throw in
• 29:11
  Speaker 5: Freudian psychoanalysis, and they would say, Marx told us that
• 29:16
  Speaker 5: the way we experience the world is flawed because it
• 29:19
  Speaker 5: is skewed by socioeconomic faculs.
• 29:22
  Speaker 3: Freud tells us that the way we experience the world.
• 29:25
  Speaker 5: Is flawed because it is skewed by subconscious, by our
• 29:29
  Speaker 5: instincts or whatever. And the Frankos school says these two
• 29:33
  Speaker 5: need to be combined. You're not only skewed by the
• 29:38
  Speaker 5: fact that your boss is exploiting.
• 29:41
  Speaker 3: The fact that.
• 29:42
  Speaker 5: Your boss is exploiting you is keewing even your subconscious
• 29:46
  Speaker 5: and your instincts.
• 29:48
  Speaker 3: Anyway, we went away from Hegel.
• 29:51
  Speaker 5: But history then is this process towards which overcoming this
• 29:57
  Speaker 5: allienation for your true self. And somewhere there, somewhere on
• 30:02
  Speaker 5: the other side, we will find again ourselves being reunited
• 30:08
  Speaker 5: with our true essence. With our species, which is close
• 30:11
  Speaker 5: to what Mark's called species being. But this is not
• 30:13
  Speaker 5: going to be through production, as Martin experience, and this
• 30:15
  Speaker 5: will be through play through love. And there's a very
• 30:22
  Speaker 5: good objectivist critique of this. It's an essay by Nathaniel
• 30:26
  Speaker 5: Brandon on Capitals the non Ideal.
• 30:29
  Speaker 3: It's his essay on alienation.
• 30:32
  Speaker 5: In my view, it's not in my view, it's my
• 30:35
  Speaker 5: favorite essay by Brandon, and he's criticizing this whole idea
• 30:38
  Speaker 5: of of alienation, going back again to Hegel, going back
• 30:43
  Speaker 5: to the medieval types, if.
• 30:45
  Speaker 2: Our specifically criticizing eric From Eric From, Yeah, and eric
• 30:50
  Speaker 2: From is part of the circle of the The.
• 30:55
  Speaker 5: Eric From is, let's say, the psycho of the wing
• 30:59
  Speaker 5: of the Frankfurt School, particularly once it moves to the US.
• 31:02
  Speaker 5: At some point, eric From goes his own way. Marcus,
• 31:06
  Speaker 5: by the way, also goes his own way. Funny thing
• 31:08
  Speaker 5: is that when Marcus is most popular, not only he's
• 31:11
  Speaker 5: not in the frank for School, he's at bad intellectual
• 31:15
  Speaker 5: terms with Adorn and Horkimer.
• 31:16
  Speaker 3: But we can get to that.
• 31:17
  Speaker 5: So if someone wants to understand better the trade, the
• 31:21
  Speaker 5: historical trajectory, the intellectual trajectory, there are two sources. The
• 31:25
  Speaker 5: one is obviously this essay by Brandon and also in
• 31:28
  Speaker 5: this famous book by Rogers Scraton with a brilliant title Fools,
• 31:32
  Speaker 5: Frauds and fire Brands. It has a good genealogy going
• 31:36
  Speaker 5: from Hegel to Frankfurt school. Of course Cradom is a
• 31:39
  Speaker 5: bit more sympathetic to Hegel, but you will you will
• 31:45
  Speaker 5: be able to connect, to connect the dots for people
• 31:48
  Speaker 5: who want a deeper dive into that.
• 31:50
  Speaker 2: But there's also there's also an essay by We were
• 31:53
  Speaker 2: talking about this only by Wash in the Objective is
• 31:58
  Speaker 2: George Walsh? How did I find It's?
• 32:01
  Speaker 5: Yes, So in order to find it you can find
• 32:04
  Speaker 5: it in the Objectivist or you can try to persuade
• 32:07
  Speaker 5: they only if he has a saying this to release
• 32:09
  Speaker 5: all these things out there in the world.
• 32:10
  Speaker 2: So I wish I could. I would love to do that.
• 32:13
  Speaker 2: But it's called Hubert Malcuse Philosopher. Then you left. And
• 32:17
  Speaker 2: it is a great essay by By because he and
• 32:21
  Speaker 2: he really ties it.
• 32:22
  Speaker 4: And this is where where it takes.
• 32:23
  Speaker 2: This is the impact that Macusea has, and and and
• 32:28
  Speaker 2: maybe water of the Macuza does. Does the frank Foots
• 32:31
  Speaker 2: call have on the wiser than you left in then
• 32:34
  Speaker 2: eighteen sixties in the United States.
• 32:36
  Speaker 5: Yes, yes, so of all these people. So now let's
• 32:40
  Speaker 5: get to the meat of the situation. How impactful is
• 32:44
  Speaker 5: the Front School, because again, if we hear right wingers
• 32:47
  Speaker 5: and conservatives, they are the reason that West went down here,
• 32:52
  Speaker 5: So Adornan Horkheimer, I don't think there's anyone outside of
• 32:56
  Speaker 5: the circles that ever read them or they had than in.
• 33:00
  Speaker 5: The person who truly had an impact was Herbert Marcuse,
• 33:04
  Speaker 5: who was a later addition to the school at some point,
• 33:06
  Speaker 5: mostly towards the towards the thirties. And Marcus's in the
• 33:11
  Speaker 5: United States is not even in Frankfurt. So there are
• 33:15
  Speaker 5: two books of marcusa that are important here. The first
• 33:17
  Speaker 5: is Eras and Civilization in the fifties, and this book
• 33:21
  Speaker 5: talks about to put it in terms that we'll understand,
• 33:25
  Speaker 5: it brings back this Dionsian aspect that we have all
• 33:31
  Speaker 5: these repressive instincts and that capital that does not only
• 33:36
  Speaker 5: oppress the worker in terms of sarcus value, but also
• 33:41
  Speaker 5: it takes this instinct that we have for joy, for creation, recreation, procreation, and.
• 33:48
  Speaker 3: Direct it towards towards work.
• 33:52
  Speaker 5: So if you think about the hippie the woodstock, it's
• 33:55
  Speaker 5: not necessarily that they've read Marcuse, but they definitely were
• 33:59
  Speaker 5: in fact impacted by this idea that life is more
• 34:03
  Speaker 5: than work, and reason has put iron caids around our lives,
• 34:10
  Speaker 5: and it is true instinct that we will pave the
• 34:13
  Speaker 5: way to revolution. But then the big thing is in
• 34:17
  Speaker 5: ninety sixty four, this book One Dimensional Man. This book
• 34:21
  Speaker 5: actually we know it had an impact because it became
• 34:24
  Speaker 5: a best seller. It said, it's sold hundreds of thousands
• 34:27
  Speaker 5: of copies. So by the time the people were out
• 34:31
  Speaker 5: in the streets with ninety sixty eight, the may revolved
• 34:35
  Speaker 5: in Paris. We know that Angela Davis was his student,
• 34:39
  Speaker 5: so most people had actually read this book. Marcus was
• 34:43
  Speaker 5: something like who would be today an example an intellectual
• 34:48
  Speaker 5: superstar think of Chomsky maybe later, although he was a
• 34:51
  Speaker 5: different type think of Zizek in the two thousands. So
• 34:55
  Speaker 5: he was someone who when he would show up to
• 34:57
  Speaker 5: university the student radicals would treat them, would treat him
• 35:01
  Speaker 5: in the way they would treat the Bob Dylan, for example.
• 35:03
  Speaker 5: He was he was an actual start and Mark Use
• 35:08
  Speaker 5: was committed committed to violent revolution, which is not the
• 35:14
  Speaker 5: case with Adornment hork Him. So for me, the truth
• 35:16
  Speaker 5: villain here is Markcuse adorned Horkheimer. Mostly they view themselves
• 35:22
  Speaker 5: as these bourzois, serious intellectuals. They tiptoe with ideas, but like, look,
• 35:28
  Speaker 5: basically I want to have a Burza life. Don't take
• 35:32
  Speaker 5: all this seriously.
• 35:33
  Speaker 2: But they have to. I mean they have a huge
• 35:35
  Speaker 2: impact on I mean much. I think they have a
• 35:39
  Speaker 2: huge impact I mean critical theory has a huge impact
• 35:42
  Speaker 2: today at our universities right today.
• 35:44
  Speaker 5: Yes, absolutely, But for example the sixties, actually the radical
• 35:49
  Speaker 5: students wanted to counsel Adorno. They attack his classes, they
• 35:55
  Speaker 5: attack his sem they have struggling sessions with him. One
• 35:59
  Speaker 5: time they occupy room where a Doorna was supposed to teach,
• 36:02
  Speaker 5: and a Dorna calls the police, and then you can
• 36:05
  Speaker 5: imagine the struggle sessions. How dare you do that? Marcuse
• 36:09
  Speaker 5: is writing letters from New York, from California to Adorno.
• 36:14
  Speaker 3: What you did is something which is.
• 36:16
  Speaker 5: Unacceptable, and adorn is so agitated with all this. It
• 36:21
  Speaker 5: had an impact allegedly to his weak heart, and he died.
• 36:26
  Speaker 5: So think about think about the main the person was
• 36:29
  Speaker 5: more consciously, let's say, to his was definitely Marcus adorned
• 36:35
  Speaker 5: Horkheimer were the intellectuals who unlisted something that they did
• 36:40
  Speaker 5: not expect, and they were not ready for what they enlisted.
• 36:43
  Speaker 5: And to be honest, mostly the impact came later, yes,
• 36:47
  Speaker 5: in the seventies, in the eighties, and they paid the
• 36:50
  Speaker 5: way for problematizing, enlightenment and reason.
• 36:54
  Speaker 3: And we can discuss, we can discuss.
• 36:57
  Speaker 5: Their critique of instrumental resort, but it is Marcuse who
• 37:02
  Speaker 5: is the actual villain. And the Masks sleeps with Marcuse
• 37:07
  Speaker 5: with his essay Repressive Tolerance, his essay from the nineteen sixties.
• 37:12
  Speaker 5: And I encourage the audience, whatever you've heard about this essay,
• 37:15
  Speaker 5: go and read it for yourself. It's so bad it
• 37:19
  Speaker 5: reminded me the monologue by to Peter Key, to Peter
• 37:23
  Speaker 5: keating it's I couldn't believe what I was actually reading.
• 37:27
  Speaker 5: So to put it very simply, Marcus says, first of all,
• 37:30
  Speaker 5: he opens by saying, look, we're all here for individual
• 37:34
  Speaker 5: rights and tolerance and the enlightenment. But he said, and
• 37:39
  Speaker 5: he starts by quoting John's your Mill, but he said,
• 37:42
  Speaker 5: even liberals will accept that rights apply to thinking people.
• 37:48
  Speaker 5: Rights would not apply to how do we call it
• 37:51
  Speaker 5: without using the air word, someone whose mind is not
• 37:54
  Speaker 5: someone who's mentally challenged. You would say, rights do not
• 37:58
  Speaker 5: apply to someone who's mentally challenge But because we live
• 38:03
  Speaker 5: in capitalists, everybody, all of you are basically mentally challenged barbarians,
• 38:09
  Speaker 5: so rights do not apply to you because you do
• 38:12
  Speaker 5: not understand how brain was you are. Therefore, he says,
• 38:16
  Speaker 5: you need people like us to say who has rights.
• 38:20
  Speaker 5: So till everyone gets above the stage of being a barbarian,
• 38:26
  Speaker 5: there will be no free speech for defenders of capitalist
• 38:30
  Speaker 5: for nationalists, for races, or even for people who want
• 38:33
  Speaker 5: to cut down the welfare states. So there will be
• 38:35
  Speaker 5: no free speech for your own in Marcuis's u and
• 38:38
  Speaker 5: when everyone stops being brain was, then again we can
• 38:42
  Speaker 5: all be tolerant.
• 38:44
  Speaker 3: And I'm sure people will say, come on, you're making
• 38:46
  Speaker 3: this up.
• 38:47
  Speaker 5: You can find the essay available online and you can
• 38:52
  Speaker 5: go and read it and decide for yourselves.
• 38:55
  Speaker 2: And this strikes me as very influential in modern cancer culture.
• 39:01
  Speaker 2: The whole idea of the of the new new Left,
• 39:04
  Speaker 2: the kind of the left of the two thousands of
• 39:08
  Speaker 2: you know, claiming there for free speech. But yet this
• 39:10
  Speaker 2: speech is you cannot talk about it, you cannot say it.
• 39:14
  Speaker 2: They would like that silence, pro capitalist and pro anything.
• 39:17
  Speaker 2: So Macusa's influence has gone way beyond the sixties and
• 39:23
  Speaker 2: very much into the activist left of today.
• 39:26
  Speaker 5: Yes, because Marcuse has the gods that Adorn and Horkheimer
• 39:31
  Speaker 5: don't have to say. Okay, let's put this. We say
• 39:35
  Speaker 5: the society is totalitarian and authoritarian. Anything to take it
• 39:40
  Speaker 5: down goes. And because we are men of the Enlightenment,
• 39:44
  Speaker 5: supposedly we cannot unleash the red commerce out there. So
• 39:48
  Speaker 5: we will dress it in a way that, of course
• 39:50
  Speaker 5: we are for tolerance. But to get to tolerance we
• 39:53
  Speaker 5: need to have a society of rational human beings.
• 39:56
  Speaker 3: Now we have a society of beasts of burden.
• 39:58
  Speaker 5: Therefore, sat up and wait for your betters to decide
• 40:02
  Speaker 5: when you barbarians can have rights.
• 40:06
  Speaker 2: And they shift to revolution in a sense from the
• 40:10
  Speaker 2: politarian to the students.
• 40:13
  Speaker 5: Oh yeah, words, Marcus actually unleases the ghetto.
• 40:18
  Speaker 2: Yes, the yeah, ghetto flus to students that combination the.
• 40:23
  Speaker 5: Ghetto and the students. Yes, he gives right to identity politics.
• 40:26
  Speaker 5: Notice not in terms of and there were many good reasons.
• 40:31
  Speaker 5: By the way, let's be very clear in the sixties
• 40:34
  Speaker 5: to try to find emuncipatory politics for black people. There
• 40:39
  Speaker 5: were very obvious injustices there. But Marcusin does not do that.
• 40:43
  Speaker 5: He uses them as tramp cards, not to get individual
• 40:47
  Speaker 5: rights because he doesn't believe in a society of individual rights.
• 40:50
  Speaker 5: He wants them as the ground troops for their evolution,
• 40:55
  Speaker 5: because he realizes the working class cannot be anymore these
• 40:58
  Speaker 5: ground troops. He wants the ground groups to be the blacks,
• 41:04
  Speaker 5: the minorities, students, and the peasants of the third world.
• 41:09
  Speaker 5: So he looks this third world is that we call
• 41:12
  Speaker 5: today has a very strong He looks at the Vietnam, Cuba,
• 41:17
  Speaker 5: and China. Yep. So the great defender of humanity is
• 41:22
  Speaker 5: looking at China during the time cultural evolution, after the
• 41:26
  Speaker 5: great leap forward with the tens of millions of death.
• 41:29
  Speaker 5: This is where the great friend of humanity is looking
• 41:32
  Speaker 5: for inspiration.
• 41:34
  Speaker 2: So you can see how, you know, because because he's
• 41:37
  Speaker 2: arguing for evolution, is you know, inspires kind of the
• 41:43
  Speaker 2: the new the new new left, not only the sixties
• 41:46
  Speaker 2: left which kind of disappeared, which which we should talk
• 41:49
  Speaker 2: about sometime and why the new Left kind of dissipated
• 41:52
  Speaker 2: the way it did. But rising up, you know, in
• 41:57
  Speaker 2: the last decade or so was Incuzo's influentially being everywhere.
• 42:03
  Speaker 5: And let's sorry, let's mention one more thing that Marcus does,
• 42:06
  Speaker 5: which is again very insidious and iron Rand notices this
• 42:10
  Speaker 5: in almost all the essays. In the Return of the
• 42:13
  Speaker 5: Primitive Marcus does a monumental sifting of the goalposts, actually
• 42:18
  Speaker 5: the whole of Frank for school. But Marcuse is very
• 42:21
  Speaker 5: clear about that. So the fact that capital is delivered
• 42:24
  Speaker 5: the good now becomes a damning factor for capital. It
• 42:28
  Speaker 5: means that you are now even more brain washs So
• 42:33
  Speaker 5: now you're even more oppressed. He has a line I
• 42:37
  Speaker 5: tweeted about a couple of hours ago. People can find
• 42:40
  Speaker 5: a line there. It's on page ten on One Dimensional Man.
• 42:44
  Speaker 5: And again people need to read it because otherwise it's
• 42:46
  Speaker 5: difficult to believe that someone would say that.
• 42:48
  Speaker 3: He says something like the fact that the workers.
• 42:50
  Speaker 5: Can now have cars, or black people can can own
• 42:55
  Speaker 5: a Cadillac, or a secretary can be as attractively made
• 43:00
  Speaker 5: up as the daughter of your employer. All these things
• 43:02
  Speaker 5: he said. Don't think that they are necessarily good things.
• 43:06
  Speaker 5: These are just new forms of exploitation. So here you
• 43:09
  Speaker 5: have someone actually telling you the fact that capitalist delivered
• 43:13
  Speaker 5: the good is just a proof of why it's an
• 43:16
  Speaker 5: exploitative system. Where have we seen this recently in critical
• 43:21
  Speaker 5: race theory? All you think we have a black present.
• 43:24
  Speaker 5: You think this means there's no racism. No, it means
• 43:27
  Speaker 5: that racism is even more insidious because now you can't
• 43:29
  Speaker 5: see it. It's a moving of the goalpost. It's a
• 43:33
  Speaker 5: non falsifiable assault on capitalism.
• 43:37
  Speaker 2: And it's clearly not Marxist.
• 43:40
  Speaker 5: It's clearly not, of course, because Marx his whole theory
• 43:45
  Speaker 5: was a rationalization for his collectivism and for his hatred
• 43:49
  Speaker 5: for individualism. We don't know how Marxist, how Marx himself
• 43:53
  Speaker 5: would I wouldn't be surprised if you would do the
• 43:55
  Speaker 5: same thing in the six because for them, the constant
• 44:00
  Speaker 5: is I cannot stand that people are free to do
• 44:04
  Speaker 5: whatever they want with their lives.
• 44:05
  Speaker 3: This is the thing they can understand. This is their
• 44:08
  Speaker 3: beef with capital.
• 44:09
  Speaker 2: And that they're doing things that they don't like. That is,
• 44:12
  Speaker 2: it's not that they just fee to do stuff. It's
• 44:14
  Speaker 2: instead of you know, being lazy and having sex all
• 44:19
  Speaker 2: the time. And you know, Woodstock, Woodstock is their utopia, right,
• 44:24
  Speaker 2: Woodstock is their idea and talks about that in Apollo
• 44:29
  Speaker 2: and Dionysus. I mean, it's it's a perfect Marcusian celebration.
• 44:33
  Speaker 5: Woodstock is, right. She calls them the Marcusian hordes. Yes, yeah,
• 44:41
  Speaker 5: that's my that's my favorite. That was one of the
• 44:44
  Speaker 5: first daces of iron Rand. And actually I read these
• 44:47
  Speaker 5: essays before I read anything else, and that's when I
• 44:49
  Speaker 5: realized this woman has said everything that a critical of
• 44:54
  Speaker 5: the left we never want to want to say. Yes,
• 44:57
  Speaker 5: And I encourage people to also read these essay or
• 45:00
  Speaker 5: the actual history of Woodstock, because Woodstock is actually ugly.
• 45:05
  Speaker 5: Woodstock is not We're having a good time. Woodstock turned
• 45:09
  Speaker 5: out almost like a primordial apocalypse now situation. So NB
• 45:15
  Speaker 5: essay makes clear how ugly it came, and it relied
• 45:19
  Speaker 5: again on the man on the rational bureaucrat to send
• 45:23
  Speaker 5: them helicopters and save them from themselves, because otherwise they
• 45:27
  Speaker 5: would dive from thirst and from from hunger.
• 45:29
  Speaker 2: Yep. So let's let's dive a little bit into the
• 45:35
  Speaker 2: philosophical kind of the philosophical claims kind of the the
• 45:38
  Speaker 2: metaphysics and epistemology, because they the at least my Couza
• 45:43
  Speaker 2: definitely has a metaphysics and a pistemology. So so what
• 45:46
  Speaker 2: are their metaphysical and epistemological claims? What is the view
• 45:49
  Speaker 2: of reason? And ultimately you know how you know what
• 45:53
  Speaker 2: happens to the individualism?
• 45:55
  Speaker 5: Yeah, so for that, For if people want to go
• 45:59
  Speaker 5: to the actual source, it's the Dialectics of the Enlightenment
• 46:02
  Speaker 5: written by Horkheimer and Adorno. Now the interesting thing is
• 46:05
  Speaker 5: they write this book after the Holocaust, and their goal
• 46:11
  Speaker 5: is we want to save the project of the Enlightenment
• 46:14
  Speaker 5: and we want to save the project of reason. But
• 46:16
  Speaker 5: notice how they try to do it. So what is
• 46:18
  Speaker 5: their main beef with reason? They say reason takes care
• 46:21
  Speaker 5: of the memes but does not question the ends. So
• 46:26
  Speaker 5: they will claim instrumental reason is what helped the Nazis
• 46:31
  Speaker 5: to efficiently send the maximum amount of juice to birken Ouh.
• 46:35
  Speaker 2: And you hear that critique of reason all the time.
• 46:37
  Speaker 2: I hear it from from from you know, from anti
• 46:40
  Speaker 2: reason jokes that the reason is what leads us to
• 46:44
  Speaker 2: the concentration camps. And you hear that from the religious way,
• 46:47
  Speaker 2: often not just from the from the crazy.
• 46:50
  Speaker 5: Left, forgetting, of course that the Nazis were open reject
• 46:56
  Speaker 5: They were openly rejecting reasons absolutely, so they say.
• 47:00
  Speaker 3: Okay, reason did not help anyone.
• 47:03
  Speaker 5: Question if sending people to gas pain saying that well
• 47:06
  Speaker 5: as good, then they would say there is totalian a
• 47:10
  Speaker 5: is a is also problematic? Why because it means that
• 47:15
  Speaker 5: it accepts things as they are. But we are Hegelians here,
• 47:20
  Speaker 5: we know that they're dialectics. Things are not just as
• 47:23
  Speaker 5: they are. And then they take it a step further.
• 47:26
  Speaker 5: If you accept that things are what they are, that
• 47:29
  Speaker 5: things have identity, then you.
• 47:31
  Speaker 3: Are accepting the status quo.
• 47:34
  Speaker 5: Then you are accepting the man made. As I answered,
• 47:37
  Speaker 5: the metaphysical versus the man made. They had the problem
• 47:40
  Speaker 5: figuring that there is such a thing as metaphysical. So
• 47:43
  Speaker 5: if you accept the identity of the things, you accept
• 47:46
  Speaker 5: the status quar. They think that everything out there is
• 47:49
  Speaker 5: man made. Therefore, if you believe in reason, you get
• 47:54
  Speaker 5: into some type of epistemological totalitarianism that I know everything.
• 48:00
  Speaker 2: You hear that a lot as well, right, that that
• 48:02
  Speaker 2: that idea has well currency out there in the culture.
• 48:07
  Speaker 5: Even Jordan Peterson quite often would say the problem with
• 48:09
  Speaker 5: the balls whigs, they were two too ideological.
• 48:12
  Speaker 3: They will too sure of themselves.
• 48:14
  Speaker 2: Yes, confidence and reason lead to the concentration.
• 48:18
  Speaker 5: Cams exactly, so they will say, epistemological authority totalitarianist leads
• 48:23
  Speaker 5: to real totalitarianisms. And they sum it up this way,
• 48:27
  Speaker 5: They say, look, Aristotle and a A is what led
• 48:31
  Speaker 5: us to this urge to control nature, which is what
• 48:35
  Speaker 5: led us to this urge to control man, which is
• 48:38
  Speaker 5: what led us to our swits. The I think it's
• 48:42
  Speaker 5: over there in this work, And in other possible you
• 48:45
  Speaker 5: might have heard the line something like, after Ouswitz the
• 48:49
  Speaker 5: categorical imperative of humanity is Ouswitch can never happen again.
• 48:53
  Speaker 5: And what is the number one culprit of Ouswitz instrumental reason,
• 48:58
  Speaker 5: which is another way for them of saying, as so
• 49:02
  Speaker 5: against as we said before, the pronthianism of nature to
• 49:06
  Speaker 5: be commanded must be obeyed. They think that this is hubris,
• 49:10
  Speaker 5: and this hubris was paid at Birkenal, this hubris was
• 49:16
  Speaker 5: paid in the Gulags, and this is the hubris we
• 49:19
  Speaker 5: have to avoid. And then you said, as okay, so
• 49:22
  Speaker 5: what's the proper pristemology your guest there is as good
• 49:26
  Speaker 5: as mine.
• 49:27
  Speaker 2: Well, Walsh talks about in a Macuza talks about, you know,
• 49:33
  Speaker 2: their elevation of fantasy, of imagination, of a primacy of
• 49:39
  Speaker 2: consciousness right of your subject. You know, you've got this
• 49:43
  Speaker 2: voiding an idea your subconscious is somehow connected to human
• 49:49
  Speaker 2: evolution and is feeding you fantasies of the ideal. I mean,
• 49:54
  Speaker 2: it's hard to say this with a straight face because
• 49:57
  Speaker 2: it's so stupid and ridiculous. But it he also an exit,
• 50:01
  Speaker 2: which is always clever, to Plato's idea that we're your
• 50:04
  Speaker 2: subconsciousness feeding you as memories of life before you were born,
• 50:09
  Speaker 2: which it was, which was in the world of forms.
• 50:14
  Speaker 2: They don't believe that, but they believe something very similar.
• 50:17
  Speaker 2: They're taking Plato while rejecting his particular form mysticism, and
• 50:22
  Speaker 2: replacing it with their mysticism.
• 50:24
  Speaker 5: So let's try to put it very simple so that
• 50:28
  Speaker 5: it becomes step by step the absurdity, as you called it.
• 50:32
  Speaker 3: And now we're.
• 50:33
  Speaker 5: Doing something difficult because you're trying to explain something which
• 50:36
  Speaker 5: is inexplication. Expert. Yeah, so let's say let's put this
• 50:39
  Speaker 5: one in Capitalists, you do not leave to your true potentiality.
• 50:44
  Speaker 5: But somewhere out there there is this There is this
• 50:49
  Speaker 5: version of yourself which is your true self, this potentiality
• 50:53
  Speaker 5: of your life outside of capitalism.
• 50:55
  Speaker 2: Which is suppressed by yourself conscious which is void.
• 50:58
  Speaker 5: Right, it's some we're out there and somewhere here and
• 51:04
  Speaker 5: somehow you can get in touch with First of all
• 51:06
  Speaker 5: the questions, how do they know? Go figure? Now, how
• 51:10
  Speaker 5: can we get access to this part of our subconscious?
• 51:13
  Speaker 5: The solution to say is freedom, freedom? What type of
• 51:18
  Speaker 5: freedom we will access this freedom if we get rid
• 51:22
  Speaker 5: of actual freedom, if we get rid of freedom to trade,
• 51:26
  Speaker 5: the freedom of speeches. Marcus If that sounds weird, it's
• 51:29
  Speaker 5: because it's dialectics, and it's.
• 51:34
  Speaker 3: Very interesting to say.
• 51:34
  Speaker 5: Okay, guys, what is at the end of the road, though,
• 51:38
  Speaker 5: What is the end of the road to all this?
• 51:40
  Speaker 5: And the end of the road of all this is,
• 51:42
  Speaker 5: if you remember from Adlas Dragt Directive ten does two
• 51:46
  Speaker 5: eight nine, a moratorium of brains, Because MARCUSA says, we've
• 51:52
  Speaker 5: already produced enough. So what we need to do is
• 51:57
  Speaker 5: to give for everyone the possibility to re experience this
• 52:02
  Speaker 5: way of life which is our true potential, where you
• 52:05
  Speaker 5: don't have to worry about anything, so we start producing
• 52:09
  Speaker 5: too much whatever we have. So, because my question is
• 52:12
  Speaker 5: what are your true needs? You don't need the today
• 52:15
  Speaker 5: would say iPhones. You don't need these things. You need
• 52:18
  Speaker 5: something over your head, something to put in your mouth.
• 52:21
  Speaker 3: So you will have all these things. We're all going
• 52:24
  Speaker 3: to work for everyone else.
• 52:26
  Speaker 5: Therefore you will not anymore feel the oppression of reality basically,
• 52:32
  Speaker 5: and you will go back to this libidinal, ideal, platonic
• 52:36
  Speaker 5: potentiality that Capitals has made you lose it. And in
• 52:42
  Speaker 5: that way also your brain will develop beyond the barbarian
• 52:49
  Speaker 5: that you are now are, and you will even be
• 52:51
  Speaker 5: able to have freedom. So then will allow you, will
• 52:54
  Speaker 5: allow you freedom people like us who actually know what
• 52:57
  Speaker 5: is good for you. So this is how they're metaphysics
• 53:01
  Speaker 5: and pystomology translates to their politics.
• 53:03
  Speaker 3: Their politics.
• 53:04
  Speaker 5: We need to find a way for people to be
• 53:07
  Speaker 5: again in this liberated level of existence. And let's clarify
• 53:11
  Speaker 5: this is only Marcusa. The rest of the frank School
• 53:14
  Speaker 5: does not want to give any culpries for the future
• 53:17
  Speaker 5: because they said.
• 53:18
  Speaker 3: Marx didn't give it to them.
• 53:20
  Speaker 5: We believe our mind is destroyed by capital, and so
• 53:23
  Speaker 5: it destroyed mind?
• 53:24
  Speaker 3: How can we come up with the outline for the future?
• 53:27
  Speaker 5: Again, at least at that they are consistent with their ideas,
• 53:31
  Speaker 5: except again for Marcus, because again too, he also wants
• 53:35
  Speaker 5: to give us what is He's like the Bond villain.
• 53:38
  Speaker 3: He gives us the whole plan.
• 53:41
  Speaker 2: And what's striking is when I when I went some
• 53:44
  Speaker 2: of these quotes and Macuza and his vision for what
• 53:48
  Speaker 2: the world looks like is how much this is this
• 53:52
  Speaker 2: bias into kind of the the uh the Garden of
• 53:59
  Speaker 2: Eden story. I mean, this is pure Garden of Eden.
• 54:02
  Speaker 2: Man is fallen. You know what is the fall represented?
• 54:06
  Speaker 2: He has to work for a living. Now. So there
• 54:08
  Speaker 2: was a period in which we were just animals. Were
• 54:12
  Speaker 2: we didn't have to think. You remember, the food of
• 54:14
  Speaker 2: knowledge is what is what Eve bites into. So we
• 54:17
  Speaker 2: didn't have to think. We had no reason, We had
• 54:19
  Speaker 2: no instrumental reason in their grobage. We just lay around
• 54:24
  Speaker 2: enjoyed whatever. I don't think there was sex in the
• 54:26
  Speaker 2: Garden of Eden, but there was maybe sensuality or whatever.
• 54:29
  Speaker 2: There was. There was some uh Win worship ping. We
• 54:33
  Speaker 2: didn't have to work. And then the fall is we
• 54:36
  Speaker 2: gain reason and what's the payment we have to pay.
• 54:40
  Speaker 2: We have to now work and and that is a penalty.
• 54:43
  Speaker 2: And this is so in many ways. This is so
• 54:46
  Speaker 2: Christian or Jewish, doesn't matter.
• 54:48
  Speaker 4: This is so Biblical.
• 54:50
  Speaker 2: And it seems to always return to that longing for
• 54:54
  Speaker 2: a world in which you don't have to work. I
• 54:56
  Speaker 2: mean literally, he says. You know, work is oppression. Work
• 54:59
  Speaker 2: is work is like a freedom. Trade is a violation
• 55:02
  Speaker 2: of freedom. Employment is a violation of freedom. Causion has
• 55:06
  Speaker 2: nothing to do with freedom, you know. It's it's you
• 55:10
  Speaker 2: can do something voluntarily, but because your psychologic can condition
• 55:15
  Speaker 2: to do it, you know, you're not free and doing it.
• 55:18
  Speaker 2: Freedom is pursuing whim, but in a different state, in
• 55:24
  Speaker 2: a state where your whims are aligned with the garden
• 55:26
  Speaker 2: of Eden. And of course you're not changing nature, right
• 55:31
  Speaker 2: the garden of region. You're not doing the capitalist or
• 55:34
  Speaker 2: the Marxist thing of changing nature and improving your lot.
• 55:39
  Speaker 2: You're just accepting nature the way it is.
• 55:42
  Speaker 5: Yeah, and maybe this is why these people knew that
• 55:45
  Speaker 5: in any proper Marx would literally put them at the
• 55:48
  Speaker 5: wall and suit them, which is why after World War
• 55:52
  Speaker 5: Two do they have a choice. Do we return to
• 55:55
  Speaker 5: West Germany. The capitals were Germany or the colonists is Germany.
• 55:59
  Speaker 5: Of course they went back to capitalist West Germany because
• 56:03
  Speaker 5: they wouldn't go to them. And now we know the
• 56:06
  Speaker 5: line Bey Eying ran that every philosophy bad philosophy, is
• 56:09
  Speaker 5: a system of rationalization, and I don't want to psychologize.
• 56:14
  Speaker 5: I wonder how much of this has to do with
• 56:16
  Speaker 5: these people's aristocratic attitude and origin. For example, Walter Benjamin
• 56:22
  Speaker 5: keeps fighting with his father with his family in his thirties.
• 56:26
  Speaker 5: Why do I have to work? You are a rich family,
• 56:29
  Speaker 5: Give me money? Does it remind you of anything? Karl
• 56:32
  Speaker 5: Marx did the same thing. He was fighting. He went,
• 56:35
  Speaker 5: We're going to do an episode about Marx the man.
• 56:37
  Speaker 5: At some point he sends a letter at some point
• 56:41
  Speaker 5: to his mother telling her, if you don't send me money,
• 56:44
  Speaker 5: I'm going to submit myself to the pros and authorities.
• 56:48
  Speaker 5: Who does this to his mother?
• 56:50
  Speaker 2: But you know, not only does it remind me of marks,
• 56:53
  Speaker 2: but you know, I tell the story of the students
• 56:56
  Speaker 2: at the University of Sexis. I was doing a debate
• 56:58
  Speaker 2: with a socialist and the student came to the microphone
• 57:02
  Speaker 2: and he says, and at the time it shocked me.
• 57:06
  Speaker 2: I just you know, I responded, But he says to me,
• 57:10
  Speaker 2: I don't understand why when I graduate, I have to
• 57:12
  Speaker 2: go to work.
• 57:14
  Speaker 4: Why can't I.
• 57:15
  Speaker 2: Be supported by the state and just pursue my hobbies
• 57:19
  Speaker 2: and do what I feel like doing. And of course,
• 57:21
  Speaker 2: the more I read about you know these, you know
• 57:25
  Speaker 2: the Frankfort School, the you know, this is exactly the attitude, right,
• 57:30
  Speaker 2: that is the ideal. The ideal is just to be
• 57:34
  Speaker 2: able to sit around play video games in your mother's
• 57:36
  Speaker 2: basement and somebody else to take care of you.
• 57:40
  Speaker 5: You know, I'm laughing bitterly. Somewhere in the archives of
• 57:44
  Speaker 5: the Internet. There's a Facebook dialogue from twenty ten. Luckily
• 57:49
  Speaker 5: I've deleted my Facebook.
• 57:51
  Speaker 3: But it's somewhere there.
• 57:52
  Speaker 5: Yeah, when I'm having exactly this discussion, but I am
• 57:57
  Speaker 5: at the point of view of the student. It was
• 57:59
  Speaker 5: around the time time of the educational reform in the UK,
• 58:02
  Speaker 5: and I was arguing that people should basically pay for
• 58:07
  Speaker 5: my PhD. And someone asked exactly what you asked, and
• 58:11
  Speaker 5: you know what, for the first time I felt some
• 58:14
  Speaker 5: element of same slash pride, and I basically backed down.
• 58:20
  Speaker 5: I said, it was the first time I had oops.
• 58:23
  Speaker 5: So if you have any pride inside. When you realize
• 58:26
  Speaker 5: that what actually you expect is other people for paying
• 58:29
  Speaker 5: for your existence, you should at that point revolt. And
• 58:33
  Speaker 5: these people, at least that was what I was like
• 58:35
  Speaker 5: twenty four These people never did that. Not they didn't
• 58:41
  Speaker 5: do it. In the thirties, Water Benjamin didn't know how
• 58:44
  Speaker 5: to make coffee. According to literally he didn't know how
• 58:47
  Speaker 5: to make coffee. He left his wife and his child. Anyway,
• 58:51
  Speaker 5: this is a personal failure, has nothing to do with
• 58:54
  Speaker 5: once intellectual pursuit.
• 58:56
  Speaker 3: But here you see some happen the persona and the ideas.
• 59:00
  Speaker 2: And and and these were not aristocrats in the sense
• 59:03
  Speaker 2: of aristocracy, right, formal aristocracy. These were all upper middle
• 59:09
  Speaker 2: class Jews. They all came from upper middle class Jewish families.
• 59:13
  Speaker 4: They're almost all Jews.
• 59:15
  Speaker 2: And uh, it came from successful business The parents were
• 59:18
  Speaker 2: successful business people, some of them. It's several generations of
• 59:22
  Speaker 2: very successful wealth creation integrated into German society. You know,
• 59:28
  Speaker 2: these assimilated, very assimilated Jews, Jews who thought they the
• 59:33
  Speaker 2: Germans would never turn on them because they were part
• 59:36
  Speaker 2: of German society. And uh, and so that it's not
• 59:40
  Speaker 2: a it's not this, it's it's a these are the
• 59:43
  Speaker 2: Neuvau reach, and yet they're behaving like spolit aristocrats, which
• 59:46
  Speaker 2: is which is these are the kids of the Neuvau Reach,
• 59:50
  Speaker 2: and they're behaving this way. So I want to I
• 59:51
  Speaker 2: want to. I mean, we still have to review a movie.
• 59:54
  Speaker 2: So if you watched the.
• 59:56
  Speaker 5: Movie, of course, okay, if if people pay for staff,
• 1:00:00
  Speaker 5: we don't deliver it, we over delivered.
• 1:00:03
  Speaker 3: I wanted the movie. I watch every video or iView
• 1:00:05
  Speaker 3: I could find.
• 1:00:07
  Speaker 5: I was the whole I just watched the movie.
• 1:00:09
  Speaker 2: So because over the delivery shows but has given us
• 1:00:13
  Speaker 2: the additional five hundred dollars, so he has paid in
• 1:00:16
  Speaker 2: one thousand dollars. So we will do the movie with view.
• 1:00:19
  Speaker 2: So I want to, I want to, you know, wrap
• 1:00:21
  Speaker 2: this up. But there's still a few things I think
• 1:00:23
  Speaker 2: they are important to cover. I think the most important
• 1:00:26
  Speaker 2: thing is the impact they've had long term, you know.
• 1:00:31
  Speaker 2: So first I want to ask what is the relationship
• 1:00:33
  Speaker 2: between them and the post moderns? And I don't want
• 1:00:36
  Speaker 2: to get deep into post moderns, which we should do
• 1:00:38
  Speaker 2: a separate show on that, but at least what is
• 1:00:40
  Speaker 2: the relationship, and then what is your valuation of the impact.
• 1:00:44
  Speaker 2: We talked a little bit about this already on the
• 1:00:46
  Speaker 2: world today, not the sixties, but the world, the world today,
• 1:00:51
  Speaker 2: the list today.
• 1:00:52
  Speaker 5: The big pixure. So if we want to be very specific,
• 1:00:57
  Speaker 5: think about it this way. There's a German branch of
• 1:01:00
  Speaker 5: philosophy and a French branch of philosophy. Both are bad.
• 1:01:03
  Speaker 2: Postmodernis more German, That's all you have to say.
• 1:01:07
  Speaker 5: Yeah, But there is an element though, and the element
• 1:01:11
  Speaker 5: is that with the Frankfurt school, criticism and deconstruction becomes resistance,
• 1:01:20
  Speaker 5: actually becomes the only resistance, because they're impotent for any
• 1:01:23
  Speaker 5: other form of political action. Again, with the exception of
• 1:01:26
  Speaker 5: marcusa and with postmodernists, this becomes a thing in itself. Also,
• 1:01:31
  Speaker 5: how does Marcus and his one dimensional man. He basically
• 1:01:36
  Speaker 5: calls to the ghetto and the minorities, and he finishes
• 1:01:39
  Speaker 5: with the famous phrase, it is only for the sake
• 1:01:42
  Speaker 5: of those without hope that hope is given to us.
• 1:01:45
  Speaker 5: This means, go find anyone who is truly or imaginatively
• 1:01:50
  Speaker 5: still in a worse situation than the higher class. In capitalists,
• 1:01:54
  Speaker 5: they are the new subjects. So there you have the
• 1:01:57
  Speaker 5: identity politics. They don't say much about feminism, but later
• 1:02:01
  Speaker 5: this will become this will become a thing. So the construction,
• 1:02:06
  Speaker 5: the Luben proletariat and the minoritarian groups are the new
• 1:02:11
  Speaker 5: revolutionary subjects. These are two and of course critique to
• 1:02:14
  Speaker 5: instrumental reison. They do it from the point of view,
• 1:02:17
  Speaker 5: we defend enlightenment. But then people will take the baton
• 1:02:21
  Speaker 5: and will leave behind even the pretense of the defending enlightenment.
• 1:02:24
  Speaker 5: So this is the short story of the relationship. But
• 1:02:27
  Speaker 5: there's not much let's say, personal teacher student relationship with postmodernism.
• 1:02:34
  Speaker 2: And impact on kind of the leftist culture today.
• 1:02:41
  Speaker 5: Oh yeah, they became a standard for sociology. They became
• 1:02:45
  Speaker 5: standard for and they became standard, particularly with Marcus. This
• 1:02:50
  Speaker 5: model of the intellectual activists. This starts with marcuse this
• 1:02:54
  Speaker 5: was not there with most of the other intellectuals of
• 1:02:57
  Speaker 5: the left or even of the New Left up to
• 1:02:59
  Speaker 5: this point. Marcus gives rise to this idea that now
• 1:03:03
  Speaker 5: the university, also the university is a field of struggle.
• 1:03:07
  Speaker 5: I mean, this is also I think with the New Left.
• 1:03:09
  Speaker 5: But Marcus is a good personification, so he becomes this
• 1:03:12
  Speaker 5: focal point of here's the example of the intellectual of
• 1:03:16
  Speaker 5: the intellectual activists.
• 1:03:19
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and I think I think, you know, they had
• 1:03:22
  Speaker 2: a huge impact on on the world of arts and
• 1:03:24
  Speaker 2: esthetics and particularly the world of criticism of aesthetic criticism,
• 1:03:30
  Speaker 2: I don't know, you know, I think had a profound
• 1:03:34
  Speaker 2: impact on film criticism, but also movies and so and
• 1:03:39
  Speaker 2: also music and and the plastic arts. So he covered
• 1:03:43
  Speaker 2: the whole gamut, and h I think popular popular, what's
• 1:03:50
  Speaker 2: taught in universities today in terms of aesthetic criticism is
• 1:03:54
  Speaker 2: very much influenced by them.
• 1:03:56
  Speaker 3: And one last thing about the influence.
• 1:03:58
  Speaker 5: You have seen all the reactions right wingers who post
• 1:04:02
  Speaker 5: that quote from Fight Club with Tyler Delden. We work
• 1:04:05
  Speaker 5: jobs that we want to want that we hate, to
• 1:04:08
  Speaker 5: buy things we don't need, to please people we don't want,
• 1:04:11
  Speaker 5: and then think where, Wow, this is so cool. This
• 1:04:16
  Speaker 5: game is a paraphrasing of Marcuse. So the reactionary right,
• 1:04:20
  Speaker 5: the traditionalist right, who is going to save the West
• 1:04:23
  Speaker 5: from postmodernist now Marxist whatever that means? Well done, you
• 1:04:28
  Speaker 5: are quoting Marcuse. You deserve each other.
• 1:04:31
  Speaker 2: Now, why do you think Here's my last question, and
• 1:04:34
  Speaker 2: I don't know if you have an answer. Why do
• 1:04:35
  Speaker 2: you think the way wants to associate them with marx
• 1:04:40
  Speaker 2: Is it just a lack of you know, ability to
• 1:04:44
  Speaker 2: think or what is it about the way that forces
• 1:04:48
  Speaker 2: this cultural Marxist category.
• 1:04:51
  Speaker 5: Yeah. So if you go to Wikipedia cultural Marxism and
• 1:04:55
  Speaker 5: all that stuff, it's put as a conspiracy theory, and
• 1:04:59
  Speaker 5: the truth is it has all the great elements of
• 1:05:03
  Speaker 5: a conspiracy theory. Here you have a network of people
• 1:05:07
  Speaker 5: who have a common agenda, who are foreigners in the
• 1:05:11
  Speaker 5: United States and they're Jews. What can make a better conspiracy? Now,
• 1:05:18
  Speaker 5: beyond that starting point, everything else is mostly imagination. First
• 1:05:23
  Speaker 5: of all, these people were not conspirators. They were out
• 1:05:26
  Speaker 5: there in the open. It's like saying the Nine Institute
• 1:05:29
  Speaker 5: has a conspiracy to spread objectives. No, you can go
• 1:05:31
  Speaker 5: in the about page and everyone and see what it
• 1:05:33
  Speaker 5: is about. And actually, if you told to Adornan for
• 1:05:37
  Speaker 5: Chimer you're in the West, they would be very surprised
• 1:05:41
  Speaker 5: because they spent all their life thinking that we're fighting
• 1:05:45
  Speaker 5: a futile battle and we are the voice of one
• 1:05:48
  Speaker 5: crying in the wilderness, how to put it. And the
• 1:05:51
  Speaker 5: other thing with the Frankfurt School, particularly adorned for Chimer,
• 1:05:56
  Speaker 5: had very non radical views on many issues.
• 1:06:00
  Speaker 3: Give you two examples.
• 1:06:01
  Speaker 5: Adner Horgheimer support Israel in the nineteen fifty six Warren Swiss. Horkheimer,
• 1:06:08
  Speaker 5: for God's sake supports the US intervention in Vietnam until
• 1:06:13
  Speaker 5: early on, at least because they want to stop at China,
• 1:06:16
  Speaker 5: who he considers they are basically barbarians. Markcuse works with
• 1:06:22
  Speaker 5: the precursor of the CIA and the Institute. When they
• 1:06:27
  Speaker 5: go back to West Germany they get a research collaboration
• 1:06:31
  Speaker 5: with the Ministry of Defense. And again Adorno is in
• 1:06:35
  Speaker 5: some ways also conservative. He defends the institution of the
• 1:06:39
  Speaker 5: family as a barricade of resistance against totalitarianism.
• 1:06:43
  Speaker 3: So they are not the figure that people have in mind.
• 1:06:47
  Speaker 5: Marcuse is the one person who indeed is committed. I
• 1:06:52
  Speaker 5: want to destroy the free society. But I think the
• 1:06:55
  Speaker 5: main thing is this element that they were all foreigners
• 1:06:57
  Speaker 5: and Jews. This made the perfect con and also most
• 1:07:01
  Speaker 5: of these people have not have not read them, so
• 1:07:04
  Speaker 5: they think they have this agenda to destroy religion and
• 1:07:08
  Speaker 5: the family and God knows what.
• 1:07:10
  Speaker 2: Yep, all right, So that is that is the Frankfurt school. Guys.
• 1:07:21
  Speaker 2: You can ask questions about that. You can ask questions
• 1:07:23
  Speaker 2: about anything, of course. On the on the super chat
• 1:07:27
  Speaker 2: I've set a very ambitious goal today because I figured
• 1:07:30
  Speaker 2: we're going to get the shows about five hundred. But
• 1:07:34
  Speaker 2: you know that's the movie of you. You know, the
• 1:07:37
  Speaker 2: thousand needs to come in beyond and above that. So
• 1:07:40
  Speaker 2: the goal today is fifteen hundred dollars.
• 1:07:43
  Speaker 5: This is just part of the work we did and
• 1:07:45
  Speaker 5: does not include the kindle books, and it does not
• 1:07:47
  Speaker 5: include the essay here not to guilt you, but to
• 1:07:51
  Speaker 5: guilt you.
• 1:07:53
  Speaker 2: So that's what you're paying for, the actual work that's
• 1:07:56
  Speaker 2: going into it.
• 1:07:57
  Speaker 5: And plus you're paying for me to get the second
• 1:08:00
  Speaker 5: source of internet, not to have in the problems of
• 1:08:02
  Speaker 5: last time.
• 1:08:02
  Speaker 2: So yeah, yeah, and you know not and and you know,
• 1:08:07
  Speaker 2: the thing is that Nicos enjoys this work, so let's
• 1:08:11
  Speaker 2: not you know, this is all selfish. So but he's
• 1:08:14
  Speaker 2: got to get paid. He's got to be. He's gotta
• 1:08:16
  Speaker 2: he's gotta, he's got to go, he's got to He
• 1:08:18
  Speaker 2: would work better with communists, absolutely absolutely guilt them into it,
• 1:08:22
  Speaker 2: you know, And and he suffered in order to deliver
• 1:08:26
  Speaker 2: you this content. So yes, all right, so Storman, let's
• 1:08:34
  Speaker 2: let's jump into the movie view. Thank you Shasbat, who
• 1:08:38
  Speaker 2: delivered his second payment on the Starman movie.
• 1:08:43
  Speaker 4: You know, I.
• 1:08:43
  Speaker 2: I I don't think I've seen this movie since nineteen
• 1:08:47
  Speaker 2: eighty four. I think I saw in nineteen eighty four.
• 1:08:51
  Speaker 2: I'm not sure, but it was it was fun to
• 1:08:53
  Speaker 2: see again. It was very much it had a feel
• 1:08:57
  Speaker 2: and nineteen eighties feel to it. I don't know if
• 1:08:59
  Speaker 2: they you know you have you have memories of the eighties.
• 1:09:02
  Speaker 6: I do.
• 1:09:03
  Speaker 5: Yeah, that was the main thing that So two things
• 1:09:06
  Speaker 5: jumped out for me the first time I saw it
• 1:09:09
  Speaker 5: before I started process. One was the eighties vibes, the
• 1:09:12
  Speaker 5: product placement, the indoor smoking.
• 1:09:16
  Speaker 3: I was like, we used to be a counter.
• 1:09:18
  Speaker 6: And the second thing, well, the the hair, the hair,
• 1:09:22
  Speaker 6: both his hair and her hair, the clothes that they're wearing,
• 1:09:26
  Speaker 6: and even the fashion, even the cinema, which makes even
• 1:09:30
  Speaker 6: a cinematography.
• 1:09:32
  Speaker 2: A lot of the way it's filmed, it has a
• 1:09:35
  Speaker 2: kind of an eighties, you know, and a lot of
• 1:09:39
  Speaker 2: that is benevolent, kind of an eighties kind of benevolent
• 1:09:41
  Speaker 2: vibe to it, which which definitely exists. I was trying
• 1:09:45
  Speaker 2: to think how they would make that movie today, and
• 1:09:47
  Speaker 2: it would be very different, partially because the special effects
• 1:09:50
  Speaker 2: would be like one hundred times better. Special effects were
• 1:09:53
  Speaker 2: pretty pretty lame, but it was eighties, but you know
• 1:09:57
  Speaker 2: it would just be which would be filmed I think
• 1:09:59
  Speaker 2: significant the definitely. So this is the movie Starman Guys.
• 1:10:03
  Speaker 2: It was made in nineteen eighty four, directed by John Campeter.
• 1:10:09
  Speaker 2: It has.
• 1:10:13
  Speaker 3: What's his name Jeff Bridges and Karenal.
• 1:10:16
  Speaker 2: Jefferson Alan, and you know, the main actors. The a
• 1:10:23
  Speaker 2: bunch of supporting actors that are not very familiar, and.
• 1:10:29
  Speaker 3: So it gives a storyline very quickly for people who
• 1:10:32
  Speaker 3: haven't watched.
• 1:10:32
  Speaker 2: The storyline quickly.
• 1:10:34
  Speaker 5: So there's an alien that comes to Earth and he
• 1:10:38
  Speaker 5: learns somewhere in the middle of nowhen and there's a house.
• 1:10:41
  Speaker 5: There's a woman who has lost her husband very recently,
• 1:10:45
  Speaker 5: but there's an album, and the alien through a photo and.
• 1:10:47
  Speaker 2: Through a hair piece of hair.
• 1:10:49
  Speaker 5: Yep, through a piece of hair, he becomes the husband.
• 1:10:53
  Speaker 5: And of course he's an alien and for some reasons
• 1:10:56
  Speaker 5: he has to be somewhere, so he takes this woman
• 1:10:59
  Speaker 5: in a row to it through America and the woman
• 1:11:01
  Speaker 5: is with an alien, I mean, he has a form
• 1:11:04
  Speaker 5: of her husband, but she still freaked out this is
• 1:11:06
  Speaker 5: an alien. But through their own trip they come closer
• 1:11:10
  Speaker 5: and the whole meaning is how would an alien see
• 1:11:13
  Speaker 5: us human beings? So the alien is let's say, an
• 1:11:17
  Speaker 5: anthropologist of the aliens who came to see us, because
• 1:11:21
  Speaker 5: back then it was the time where we would send
• 1:11:24
  Speaker 5: to the space I think voyage there. It was this
• 1:11:26
  Speaker 5: mission where would send messages come visit us. At the
• 1:11:31
  Speaker 5: same climb, there's a manhunt. The army wants to catch
• 1:11:35
  Speaker 5: the alien for ne various for not good reasons. So
• 1:11:40
  Speaker 5: and obviously there's a romance developing between the woman and
• 1:11:45
  Speaker 5: Jeff Bridges, the alien.
• 1:11:47
  Speaker 3: But there's another character.
• 1:11:48
  Speaker 5: In the movie, which is the second thing that came out,
• 1:11:50
  Speaker 5: which is music. I think music is the real protagonist
• 1:11:55
  Speaker 5: in that movie. Music is so brilliant. Interestill is not
• 1:11:59
  Speaker 5: carp and then although carpet and wrote music, music is
• 1:12:02
  Speaker 5: by Jack Knitze and it is absolutely hunting. You listen
• 1:12:07
  Speaker 5: to that music at that point like oh nice music.
• 1:12:10
  Speaker 5: Next day, this music is stuck in your mind and
• 1:12:13
  Speaker 5: it is. It has a special role I think in there.
• 1:12:16
  Speaker 5: It's very few films that the music has such a
• 1:12:20
  Speaker 5: direct impact on your mindset and how you enter the.
• 1:12:24
  Speaker 2: Universe of the movie. Yeah, so this is so it's
• 1:12:29
  Speaker 2: a it's you know, it's an interesting movie. It's very enjoyable.
• 1:12:34
  Speaker 2: So just at a very basic level, I think it's
• 1:12:36
  Speaker 2: very enjoyable. It's it's it's quite benevolent. It's you know,
• 1:12:42
  Speaker 2: it's a little there definitely elements that you could say,
• 1:12:46
  Speaker 2: you know, there's the silliness involved. Right, the plot doesn't
• 1:12:50
  Speaker 2: quite make sense that the things that happened that you go, no,
• 1:12:53
  Speaker 2: I mean, that's ridiculous. But you know, I definitely think
• 1:12:58
  Speaker 2: that the that the theme, as Nicos suggested, has to
• 1:13:02
  Speaker 2: do with what kind of a species is man? Right?
• 1:13:06
  Speaker 2: And and and what would somebody from the outside coming
• 1:13:10
  Speaker 2: and looking, what would the evaluation be? And there's a
• 1:13:13
  Speaker 2: a couple of lines towards the end of the movie
• 1:13:15
  Speaker 2: where I think the alien kind of sums it up
• 1:13:18
  Speaker 2: and and uh, and you know, one of the lines
• 1:13:20
  Speaker 2: is about the world he lives in where everything's peaceful
• 1:13:26
  Speaker 2: and everything's nice. Not quite Mucus's uh, more like.
• 1:13:31
  Speaker 5: A now dose hawks lay. Everything is quiet, everyone is equaled,
• 1:13:35
  Speaker 5: but much is happening.
• 1:13:37
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and but now much is happening, And he says, yeah,
• 1:13:41
  Speaker 2: maybe maybe not enough is happening. He kind of he
• 1:13:44
  Speaker 2: kind of suggests that maybe his experience of the Earth
• 1:13:47
  Speaker 2: has suggested that they've lost something. They've lost a certain passion,
• 1:13:51
  Speaker 2: they've lost the pursuit of values. They they they've they've
• 1:13:55
  Speaker 2: lost something in this more idealized uh you know, uh,
• 1:14:02
  Speaker 2: the future. You know that that he doesn't he doesn't
• 1:14:06
  Speaker 2: quite spell out, but you kind of get get a
• 1:14:09
  Speaker 2: sense of what it what it may.
• 1:14:10
  Speaker 5: He also spells out something they miss, something that you
• 1:14:13
  Speaker 5: would also miss. There's no food. Food is automatically take
• 1:14:17
  Speaker 5: and get off. So he says your food and dancing,
• 1:14:19
  Speaker 5: these things, these things are not there.
• 1:14:21
  Speaker 2: And sex, it's clear that there's no sex.
• 1:14:27
  Speaker 5: Oh yeah, okay, oh yeah, yeah one of the things
• 1:14:29
  Speaker 5: on TV. Yeah yeah, and figured it out.
• 1:14:30
  Speaker 2: Well, no, And and they have sex and then you know,
• 1:14:33
  Speaker 2: at some point he's saying what the things he likes
• 1:14:36
  Speaker 2: about Earth and he and he says food and and
• 1:14:40
  Speaker 2: those other things. This is just after they've had sex
• 1:14:43
  Speaker 2: and some other things. And it's clear what he means
• 1:14:46
  Speaker 2: is is the intimacy the sex itself, and that you know,
• 1:14:50
  Speaker 2: the sex is filmed, you know, the movie's PG uh,
• 1:14:54
  Speaker 2: but it's a pretty lengthy scene where they're making out
• 1:14:57
  Speaker 2: and it's clear they're having sex.
• 1:15:00
  Speaker 4: It's fairly lengthy.
• 1:15:01
  Speaker 2: So you know, this is something that's they're trying to
• 1:15:04
  Speaker 2: emphasize that that is that is happening and that he's enjoying.
• 1:15:11
  Speaker 5: So and remember that other line. I mean, he doesn't
• 1:15:15
  Speaker 5: view humans in the way that I run with you.
• 1:15:18
  Speaker 5: Oh you're the rational argument, but he says, you're at
• 1:15:21
  Speaker 5: your very best when things are worst. So this is
• 1:15:24
  Speaker 5: his that's a final take on a human that there's
• 1:15:27
  Speaker 5: something nice and there's something good in you even when
• 1:15:31
  Speaker 5: you're not at your best.
• 1:15:32
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and and this is interesting given the fact that
• 1:15:35
  Speaker 2: there's he's being hunted, that is, he is exposed to
• 1:15:39
  Speaker 2: as one woman who's treating him in evidently and there's
• 1:15:42
  Speaker 2: one scientist, there's a scientist there who's a good guy.
• 1:15:45
  Speaker 2: But the rest of the official humanity of the representatives
• 1:15:49
  Speaker 2: of the government hunting him down and and and for
• 1:15:53
  Speaker 2: no good reason, ready to cut him open. And uh,
• 1:15:58
  Speaker 2: it's a you know, in that sense it presents it's
• 1:16:00
  Speaker 2: a very malevel and view of of government, which is
• 1:16:03
  Speaker 2: not not not too bad from our perspective, But there's
• 1:16:10
  Speaker 2: enough of the good. You know, he sees the essence,
• 1:16:14
  Speaker 2: he sees the goodness, and I think it's very much
• 1:16:18
  Speaker 2: of a minder of of the of the things that
• 1:16:23
  Speaker 2: are enjoyable in life, the things that are good in life,
• 1:16:26
  Speaker 2: the things that can be appreciated. It should be appreciating
• 1:16:30
  Speaker 2: life in spite of the sorrows and the problems and
• 1:16:33
  Speaker 2: the challenges.
• 1:16:34
  Speaker 5: So if you want people a nostalgic dive to the
• 1:16:37
  Speaker 5: eighties road trips, country roads, what's the movie if if
• 1:16:44
  Speaker 5: we give you two nice hours and it will live
• 1:16:47
  Speaker 5: an aftertaste that is a sweet after taste. But just
• 1:16:51
  Speaker 5: make sure you have this how it's called suspension of
• 1:16:54
  Speaker 5: this belief because with today's standards, you'll find it a bit.
• 1:16:59
  Speaker 4: Yeah, and it's not a great movie.
• 1:17:00
  Speaker 2: There are lots of things that are that are missing
• 1:17:02
  Speaker 2: to make it a great movie, but it has It's
• 1:17:04
  Speaker 2: definitely a fun movie, and it's definitely enjoyable and worth watching.
• 1:17:08
  Speaker 2: There's also a little bit of a just because we've
• 1:17:10
  Speaker 2: just talked about the Frankforts called there's a little play
• 1:17:13
  Speaker 2: over there right because god, I'm going to give away
• 1:17:16
  Speaker 2: a spoiler. But when he talks about the baby, he
• 1:17:20
  Speaker 2: talks about the baby having knowledge. That the baby will
• 1:17:26
  Speaker 2: be born with knowledge, he will know stuff, he will
• 1:17:30
  Speaker 2: know everything. The father knows and there's a little bit
• 1:17:35
  Speaker 2: of that kind of you know, you're born with knowledge
• 1:17:40
  Speaker 2: and now you just have to recollect it in there,
• 1:17:44
  Speaker 2: which epistemological was screwed up but doesn't really hurt the
• 1:17:49
  Speaker 2: basic of the movie.
• 1:17:51
  Speaker 5: Well, you have to be the chairman of the board
• 1:17:53
  Speaker 5: of the end and needs to get so deep philosophical knowledge.
• 1:17:57
  Speaker 2: He literally gives her this little ball and she says,
• 1:18:01
  Speaker 2: what would I do with this? And he says, the
• 1:18:03
  Speaker 2: baby will know the movie literally almost remember the scene,
• 1:18:08
  Speaker 2: but I didn't make the connection. Yeah, because he told
• 1:18:11
  Speaker 2: he told them before that the baby will know everything
• 1:18:14
  Speaker 2: he knows. So yeah, I have I have a long,
• 1:18:22
  Speaker 2: long experience in uh philosophically taking apart movie. So this is.
• 1:18:29
  Speaker 3: Not this was this was fun.
• 1:18:31
  Speaker 5: So first of all, a huge thank you to Soul
• 1:18:33
  Speaker 5: Spots and accordanting other people to Now, personally, I would
• 1:18:37
  Speaker 5: do it for less money, but I'm not the boss here, so.
• 1:18:40
  Speaker 2: It's five hundred dollars for a movie. So you know,
• 1:18:43
  Speaker 2: if we're both gonna do it, it's fizy, you gotta
• 1:18:46
  Speaker 2: you gotta shoot high in order to you know, get
• 1:18:50
  Speaker 2: to where you need to be. So we're shooting high.
• 1:18:53
  Speaker 2: So and and look, we haven't made it.
• 1:18:58
  Speaker 5: Go If the movie is five under beats, how much
• 1:19:00
  Speaker 5: would be a book?
• 1:19:03
  Speaker 2: A book depends on the length, but it would be substantial.
• 1:19:05
  Speaker 2: But you know, if you guys want us to review
• 1:19:08
  Speaker 2: a book, you know, a sponsor a show in your
• 1:19:12
  Speaker 2: book shows one thousand dollars, So again, I think a
• 1:19:15
  Speaker 2: thousand would make sense. We could do a if you
• 1:19:19
  Speaker 2: have a topic, by the way, guys that you would
• 1:19:21
  Speaker 2: like Nicos and I to delve into intellectual history, history,
• 1:19:27
  Speaker 2: anything related to kind of the intersection of ideas and history.
• 1:19:31
  Speaker 2: We're definitely up for that, so send you know, so
• 1:19:36
  Speaker 2: a sponsorship is one thousand dollars and what else did
• 1:19:41
  Speaker 2: I want to say? Yeah, if you want, you know,
• 1:19:45
  Speaker 2: it would be interesting if any of you want to
• 1:19:48
  Speaker 2: ask us about music, because I think I think here
• 1:19:50
  Speaker 2: we might you know, Nikos and I might not have
• 1:19:52
  Speaker 2: the same taste in music, so.
• 1:19:57
  Speaker 4: Yeah, good.
• 1:19:58
  Speaker 5: When people ask about music, I will react the same
• 1:20:01
  Speaker 5: way you react when people talk about Arsenal and their
• 1:20:03
  Speaker 5: defensive Yeah.
• 1:20:04
  Speaker 2: Exactly, exactly, no, but you have opinions about music.
• 1:20:09
  Speaker 3: My opinions about music at the level.
• 1:20:11
  Speaker 2: Of my opinions the.
• 1:20:13
  Speaker 3: Best rock music. That's it, all right?
• 1:20:16
  Speaker 2: Well, that's okay, all bock. Music is music, so so
• 1:20:19
  Speaker 2: we can so you can also ask so other than
• 1:20:23
  Speaker 2: other than movies and books, were esthetics, anything anything you
• 1:20:26
  Speaker 2: would like them to ask you.
• 1:20:28
  Speaker 5: About sports, anything about history of sports, basketball.
• 1:20:32
  Speaker 2: Football, Right, so I can participate a little bit in basketball,
• 1:20:37
  Speaker 2: a little bit, particularly if it's related to the Celtics
• 1:20:41
  Speaker 2: and football. Not really.
• 1:20:48
  Speaker 5: The tomorrow is the first of June, is the month
• 1:20:51
  Speaker 5: of the where the World Cup starts.
• 1:20:52
  Speaker 2: So I do watch the World Cup. So it's the
• 1:20:56
  Speaker 2: only football I watch on a regular basis.
• 1:20:59
  Speaker 5: Is the World Up.
• 1:21:00
  Speaker 2: And and uh, I do know that Paris won last night,
• 1:21:07
  Speaker 2: not so much because I watched the game or anything
• 1:21:10
  Speaker 2: like that, but because I was following the riots that
• 1:21:13
  Speaker 2: happened after the game. They basically burned down Paris yesterday.
• 1:21:16
  Speaker 2: I tried to burn down Paris yesterday because they won,
• 1:21:19
  Speaker 2: not because they lost because they want exactly.
• 1:21:20
  Speaker 5: That doesn't tell you anything about the results they would
• 1:21:23
  Speaker 5: drive if they don't, that's true, if they.
• 1:21:25
  Speaker 2: Want, that's true. I think the article that I read
• 1:21:28
  Speaker 2: actually mentioned that fact that it didn't really matter that
• 1:21:31
  Speaker 2: some storekeepers in Paris had had prepared their stores because
• 1:21:36
  Speaker 2: they knew there would be riots, no matter what would happen.
• 1:21:39
  Speaker 3: It's actually sad. It's not funny.
• 1:21:41
  Speaker 5: No, it's not the background reasons for why parties and.
• 1:21:44
  Speaker 3: All that, but that's what another soul.
• 1:21:46
  Speaker 2: Yes, all right, so sports is another issue. But we've
• 1:21:49
  Speaker 2: got a lot of questions. So we're going to jump
• 1:21:51
  Speaker 2: into our Q and A, and as always, we do
• 1:21:54
  Speaker 2: it from the people who put the most money in
• 1:21:58
  Speaker 2: and then we go we go backwards, right, and okay,
• 1:22:00
  Speaker 2: let me also thank the stick of people. Stick of
• 1:22:03
  Speaker 2: people are important. So Barry, thank you, Kate dem To,
• 1:22:06
  Speaker 2: thank you, John, thank you, Bonnie thank you. And this
• 1:22:11
  Speaker 2: is great.
• 1:22:11
  Speaker 4: Because the stickers and this is the beauty of stickers.
• 1:22:13
  Speaker 2: Very from a dollar literally a dollar two one hundred dollars,
• 1:22:17
  Speaker 2: so it's it's terrific. Mike, thank you, Stephen Harper, thank you.
• 1:22:23
  Speaker 2: Let's see Roland Swiss Frank. Always like for Swiss Fanks,
• 1:22:27
  Speaker 2: you know, when the Swiss Fank is going up, it's
• 1:22:30
  Speaker 2: always good. Kate dem To again, I think, let's see
• 1:22:33
  Speaker 2: what Catherine from Europe, thank you. And I'm pretty sure
• 1:22:37
  Speaker 2: Wes did a was it just a question? Just I
• 1:22:43
  Speaker 2: guess Wes did to two hundred dollars questions. All right, wow,
• 1:22:49
  Speaker 2: thank you Wes so West first did this is why
• 1:22:52
  Speaker 2: I thought it was a sticker, because I love these shows.
• 1:22:54
  Speaker 2: These guys sound like real life two's. I think you
• 1:22:57
  Speaker 2: mean the fank let's called Namia Nikos, So you know,
• 1:23:01
  Speaker 2: I appreciate that. Thanks chres uh, And then we says
• 1:23:04
  Speaker 2: a question or maybe also a comment. These discussions are great.
• 1:23:09
  Speaker 2: It's amazing how these radical ideas spread and how accepted
• 1:23:13
  Speaker 2: by average person. Many people who spout eluded versions of
• 1:23:16
  Speaker 2: this nonsense would be horrified if they wead the actual sources.
• 1:23:22
  Speaker 3: Yeah, think about it this way.
• 1:23:23
  Speaker 5: There would be no Fight Club, which by the way,
• 1:23:25
  Speaker 5: is one of my favorite movies. But for other reason,
• 1:23:27
  Speaker 5: there would be no fight Club without the Frankfurt School.
• 1:23:29
  Speaker 5: If anyone tells you, oh, your ideas are theoretical, just
• 1:23:33
  Speaker 5: tell them this, no marcuse, no fight Club.
• 1:23:37
  Speaker 4: So here's a here's a real question.
• 1:23:39
  Speaker 2: I mean that I think always is challenging for us
• 1:23:44
  Speaker 2: is when you think about when you when you read
• 1:23:47
  Speaker 2: these stuff and you read a rational analysis of it,
• 1:23:50
  Speaker 2: like like Waltsher's or you know, kind of what we've
• 1:23:54
  Speaker 2: discussed today, it sounds so stupid. And as we said,
• 1:23:59
  Speaker 2: it's it's it's so mystical in a sense that they're
• 1:24:04
  Speaker 2: ultimately the epistemology is a rejection of reason and a
• 1:24:07
  Speaker 2: rejection of reality, the rejectment of physically reality. So it's
• 1:24:11
  Speaker 2: pure mysticism, it's pure privacy of consciousness. It's the fantasy.
• 1:24:15
  Speaker 2: They make stuff up, you know, whatever your subconscious is.
• 1:24:19
  Speaker 2: Why is this so? I mean, why are they so fluential?
• 1:24:24
  Speaker 2: Why is this so dominant in the bastions of academia,
• 1:24:29
  Speaker 2: right in the places of learning and thought for tourisms.
• 1:24:33
  Speaker 5: Then one the obvious superficial level is appealed to authority
• 1:24:37
  Speaker 5: when people, I mean, do you know how many people
• 1:24:39
  Speaker 5: have had who've told me that high they gear is
• 1:24:41
  Speaker 5: the greatest philosopher of the twentieth century. And then I
• 1:24:45
  Speaker 5: asked them, can you tell me, ay, what did this?
• 1:24:47
  Speaker 5: Guys say, p why is he the greatest? And they
• 1:24:50
  Speaker 5: have zero idea, not even the idea of the level
• 1:24:52
  Speaker 5: of the first paragraph of Wikipedia. Okay, So that's the
• 1:24:55
  Speaker 5: one thing. The other thing is that these people go
• 1:24:59
  Speaker 5: deeper and give some intellectual respectfulness to nauseans that are bromides.
• 1:25:07
  Speaker 3: Consumeris makes us stupid.
• 1:25:11
  Speaker 5: Science and art are the tools of the powerful like
• 1:25:15
  Speaker 5: the things that you hear in Greece, we say in
• 1:25:18
  Speaker 5: the coffee place. Now get the element and the depth
• 1:25:22
  Speaker 5: of respectability. So these are two reasons that, without thinking
• 1:25:26
  Speaker 5: it very deeply, come as answers. They give intellectual dressing
• 1:25:33
  Speaker 5: to bromides that are easy to digest and to false
• 1:25:37
  Speaker 5: premises that people anyway have.
• 1:25:39
  Speaker 2: And I'm going to add a third, which I think
• 1:25:41
  Speaker 2: is the capitalizing on Christianity, the capitalizing on religion, so
• 1:25:48
  Speaker 2: the basically intellectualizing the mysticism of religion. I don't think
• 1:25:55
  Speaker 2: you could get away with this crap in a in
• 1:25:59
  Speaker 2: a era that had gone beyond religion, right, maybe even
• 1:26:05
  Speaker 2: in ancient Greece, although you know Plato maybe comes close sometimes,
• 1:26:08
  Speaker 2: But I don't think it's this.
• 1:26:10
  Speaker 4: I don't think it's quite this bad.
• 1:26:11
  Speaker 2: And particularly in Plato doesn't have the experience of the
• 1:26:14
  Speaker 2: last two thousand years of technology and science and all
• 1:26:17
  Speaker 2: that they are capital So there's it's not an accident
• 1:26:21
  Speaker 2: that they some of this sounds like the Garden of Eden,
• 1:26:24
  Speaker 2: and and that you know, some of foid sounds like
• 1:26:29
  Speaker 2: stuff you know you read in canaan Abel and all
• 1:26:31
  Speaker 2: the I mean, Jordan Peterson has made a old career
• 1:26:33
  Speaker 2: almost on on, you know, taking stories from Christianity and
• 1:26:38
  Speaker 2: modern and giving them a modern voice, because I think
• 1:26:40
  Speaker 2: that a lot of this is just an intellectualizing, a secularization,
• 1:26:45
  Speaker 2: a pseudo intellectual presentation of mystical ideas coming out of
• 1:26:54
  Speaker 2: religious tradition. And you couldn't do this if religion didn't
• 1:26:59
  Speaker 2: have such a strong stronghold on culture and on our
• 1:27:03
  Speaker 2: world exactly.
• 1:27:05
  Speaker 5: And again for a deeper dive on the link between
• 1:27:07
  Speaker 5: the religion and the Frankfurt School, check out Nathaniel Brandon's
• 1:27:12
  Speaker 5: essay or Alienation in Capital their known idea.
• 1:27:15
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and now when I have second that I did
• 1:27:17
  Speaker 2: a whole show on that essay years ago, maybe seven
• 1:27:22
  Speaker 2: before COVID. I did it when I was living in California. Still,
• 1:27:25
  Speaker 2: so I did it from California, a whole show on
• 1:27:27
  Speaker 2: that essay because I think that that's an incredibly important,
• 1:27:32
  Speaker 2: powerful essay. And you know, his point about what really
• 1:27:37
  Speaker 2: causes people's alienation, which is kind of the mixed economy,
• 1:27:41
  Speaker 2: These confusing ideas they call, you know, these crazy ideas
• 1:27:47
  Speaker 2: that people are hearing and people are internalizing that caused
• 1:27:50
  Speaker 2: them to be alienated because it caused them to be
• 1:27:52
  Speaker 2: alienated from reality. It causes them to be alienated from
• 1:27:55
  Speaker 2: their own self interest, it causes them to be alienated
• 1:27:59
  Speaker 2: from from what really is leading for good life. That
• 1:28:02
  Speaker 2: is that that's towards the end of the essay. That
• 1:28:05
  Speaker 2: is so so powerful. So yeah, that is also my
• 1:28:09
  Speaker 2: favorite by far Nathanael Brandon essay and the and I
• 1:28:14
  Speaker 2: think he captures something.
• 1:28:15
  Speaker 4: And you know when I did it.
• 1:28:17
  Speaker 2: I did that because to me it explained so much
• 1:28:20
  Speaker 2: of the of the of the the Trump phenomena in
• 1:28:24
  Speaker 2: Trump versions. One think about that essay in the context
• 1:28:27
  Speaker 2: of Trump, the people who loved Trump, the people who
• 1:28:30
  Speaker 2: follow Trump, and and you know the alien so the
• 1:28:34
  Speaker 2: supposed alienation that they feel, and what they alienated by
• 1:28:39
  Speaker 2: and and what you know, what they're looking for. So
• 1:28:41
  Speaker 2: that was the context in which I did the show.
• 1:28:44
  Speaker 5: Probably found the soundtrack. I found the soundtrack for tomorrow's workout.
• 1:28:49
  Speaker 5: I'll find that that episode.
• 1:28:51
  Speaker 2: Yeah, it was It was a it was a funny episode.
• 1:28:54
  Speaker 2: All right, let's see not you have a jagohithim, let's
• 1:28:57
  Speaker 2: see fifty dollars thank you? Whoever?
• 1:29:01
  Speaker 4: Not you have a Jago? With the mess.
• 1:29:02
  Speaker 2: Not long ago, when someone was accused of racism and
• 1:29:05
  Speaker 2: anti semitism, they would rigorously deny the accusation. Now no
• 1:29:10
  Speaker 2: one cares. Being a racial bigot is a normalized part
• 1:29:14
  Speaker 2: of podcasting culture. Is the next phase some kind of
• 1:29:17
  Speaker 2: ethnic cleansing.
• 1:29:22
  Speaker 3: Who's gonna do the ethnic clesing?
• 1:29:23
  Speaker 5: So I don't I don't think there's gonna be athnic clesiic,
• 1:29:26
  Speaker 5: But what you say is correct.
• 1:29:28
  Speaker 3: So we were in a situation where.
• 1:29:30
  Speaker 5: Racism had lost all its gravitas and had lost all
• 1:29:35
  Speaker 5: its all its weight as an accusation because it was
• 1:29:38
  Speaker 5: thrown to anyone who was slightly to the left of
• 1:29:42
  Speaker 5: I don't know Angela Davis, to the right of Angela Davis.
• 1:29:45
  Speaker 5: But the problem is that there is such a thing
• 1:29:47
  Speaker 5: as racism. There is such a thing as a disebeitis.
• 1:29:50
  Speaker 3: And it began.
• 1:29:52
  Speaker 5: It began as something which was transgressive on Twitter. Let's say,
• 1:29:56
  Speaker 5: let's put the boundaries, and now it's become this banal,
• 1:30:01
  Speaker 5: disgusting which it's not fun, it's not transgressive and exists.
• 1:30:07
  Speaker 5: It's just disgusting as it deserves to be. So we
• 1:30:11
  Speaker 5: are where we would be.
• 1:30:14
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that's right, and I agree. I don't
• 1:30:16
  Speaker 2: think there's anybody to do ethnic cleansing. Who is going
• 1:30:20
  Speaker 2: to go out there into the streets and round up
• 1:30:23
  Speaker 2: the Jews. I mean, you don't see that as a
• 1:30:25
  Speaker 2: political agenda outside of you know, very really crazy, you know,
• 1:30:31
  Speaker 2: crazy nut cases. You know, the we get a false
• 1:30:35
  Speaker 2: vision of the world when we live online. Most Americans
• 1:30:42
  Speaker 2: are not racists or anti Semites. Most Europeans are not
• 1:30:45
  Speaker 2: racists and anti Semites. There's more of it than they
• 1:30:48
  Speaker 2: should be. There's more of it than a good culture
• 1:30:51
  Speaker 2: would have. And these anti Israel demonstrations all over the
• 1:30:55
  Speaker 2: world illustrate that.
• 1:30:56
  Speaker 4: But even that, that's a minority of people.
• 1:30:58
  Speaker 2: That's not a majority of those cultures. So yes, there's
• 1:31:02
  Speaker 2: going to be more violence against Jews, no question about that.
• 1:31:04
  Speaker 2: If you live if you're Jewish and you live in
• 1:31:07
  Speaker 2: in the UK, particularly, but in Europe more generally, beware,
• 1:31:11
  Speaker 2: or even if you live in New York in LA
• 1:31:14
  Speaker 2: beware you know racism. Will there be shootings of some
• 1:31:22
  Speaker 2: white crazy shoot up black so some black guys shoot
• 1:31:24
  Speaker 2: up what.
• 1:31:25
  Speaker 4: Yeah, there's going to be more of that.
• 1:31:27
  Speaker 2: But there's not going to be a political driven ethnic
• 1:31:31
  Speaker 2: cleansing program anytime soon. Now, you know, I don't know
• 1:31:35
  Speaker 2: what happens in twenty years if things keep getting worse,
• 1:31:37
  Speaker 2: who knows, but I, you know, and I predicted ethnic
• 1:31:42
  Speaker 2: cleansing in Europe, but to Muslims, so that was my prediction.
• 1:31:47
  Speaker 2: We'll see if that happens, you know, sometime in the
• 1:31:50
  Speaker 2: next thirty years. But I don't. I really don't see
• 1:31:56
  Speaker 2: it happening anytime soon. Although what going on online is
• 1:32:02
  Speaker 2: is scary and super unpleasant. And again, if you live
• 1:32:04
  Speaker 2: in certain places and you're obviously Jewish, be careful, you know,
• 1:32:11
  Speaker 2: be careful. I mean it changes behavior like I, you know,
• 1:32:18
  Speaker 2: hesitant to speak Hebrew in Europe.
• 1:32:20
  Speaker 5: Now ohnas when I was traveling with Yonatan in Ubert.
• 1:32:26
  Speaker 5: First of at some point we stopped taking Ubert we
• 1:32:28
  Speaker 5: prefer the traditional taxes. But in Ubert he would not
• 1:32:31
  Speaker 5: speak Hebrew to his family. He would speak in English.
• 1:32:35
  Speaker 5: And for me, that was a major red pill moment,
• 1:32:39
  Speaker 5: made the moment of realization, oh my god, this is
• 1:32:42
  Speaker 5: this is I'm seeing it in front of me, and
• 1:32:45
  Speaker 5: I understand it.
• 1:32:46
  Speaker 3: It wasn't hysterica.
• 1:32:48
  Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, And it's something I've noticed because I used
• 1:32:52
  Speaker 2: to speak Kbu and Uber, right, so I've lived through
• 1:32:55
  Speaker 2: the transition of being hesitant about it, and I.
• 1:32:59
  Speaker 5: Remember pre October seventh, I remember hearing you speaking Hebrew
• 1:33:05
  Speaker 5: in a Newbert in Amsterdam. In Amsterdam today, I'm not
• 1:33:09
  Speaker 5: even sure if I would take a Newbert.
• 1:33:12
  Speaker 2: Anyway, Yeah, all right, Moulten splendor. Many advocates of socialism
• 1:33:20
  Speaker 2: believe that they should be taking care of by the state.
• 1:33:24
  Speaker 2: Would you connect someone that wants to be taking care
• 1:33:26
  Speaker 2: of and not be producer, worker or laborer as an
• 1:33:31
  Speaker 2: example of the divine right of stagnation or just simply entitled?
• 1:33:39
  Speaker 3: Why why is it one or the other?
• 1:33:42
  Speaker 5: They you aren't You have a divine line of stagnation
• 1:33:46
  Speaker 5: because you're entitled, and you are entitled because you have
• 1:33:49
  Speaker 5: this passive mentality that is in the in the essay,
• 1:33:55
  Speaker 5: which also is a very good is also a very
• 1:33:59
  Speaker 5: good one.
• 1:34:01
  Speaker 2: The divine right isag nation.
• 1:34:02
  Speaker 3: Yes, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, it's yeah, it's.
• 1:34:06
  Speaker 2: In the virtue of selfishness.
• 1:34:09
  Speaker 5: I'm not sure I was taking it earlier, but for
• 1:34:12
  Speaker 5: some reason.
• 1:34:13
  Speaker 2: No, I don't know. It's there maybe in philosophy who
• 1:34:17
  Speaker 2: needs it?
• 1:34:17
  Speaker 3: I can problem philosophy, who needs it?
• 1:34:21
  Speaker 2: But yeah, it's it's I think it all comes from
• 1:34:24
  Speaker 2: the same source, from the same resentment of both the entitlement,
• 1:34:29
  Speaker 2: mentality and the divine right, which which are related, and
• 1:34:33
  Speaker 2: they they they have you have both of them, but
• 1:34:35
  Speaker 2: they come from this notion of there's something bad about work.
• 1:34:41
  Speaker 2: Uh you know, there's a certain anger at reality. Remember
• 1:34:45
  Speaker 2: the if you if you're against work, you're against reality.
• 1:34:50
  Speaker 2: You know, you're against the nature of the world. The
• 1:34:53
  Speaker 2: nature of the world is such and this is remember
• 1:34:55
  Speaker 2: what Christianity considers the fall. The nature of the world
• 1:34:59
  Speaker 2: is such that human beings, like every other animal out there,
• 1:35:04
  Speaker 2: has to act in order to survive. We have to
• 1:35:07
  Speaker 2: do stuff in order to take to to to survive biologically,
• 1:35:11
  Speaker 2: just like any other animal. It's just like any other
• 1:35:13
  Speaker 2: living being that you have to pursue values. So if
• 1:35:18
  Speaker 2: you against work, you're you're against existence, you're against reality,
• 1:35:25
  Speaker 2: you're against everything in the world. Uh, you know, And
• 1:35:28
  Speaker 2: this is kind of the This is why I understand
• 1:35:31
  Speaker 2: why people like that become nihilists. And I don't think that,
• 1:35:36
  Speaker 2: you know, they become nihilists because they hate reality, they
• 1:35:39
  Speaker 2: hate the world, they hate existence because existence demand that
• 1:35:42
  Speaker 2: they actually go pursue work.
• 1:35:44
  Speaker 4: And you can you can imagine.
• 1:35:45
  Speaker 2: And somebody who takes Markuza seriously is likely to become
• 1:35:50
  Speaker 2: a nihilist in the end, because where do you go
• 1:35:53
  Speaker 2: from that? If that that the outcome, you're not going
• 1:35:56
  Speaker 2: to achieve. You're not going to achieve that utopia where
• 1:35:59
  Speaker 2: you can just hang around and have sex all day
• 1:36:02
  Speaker 2: and not have to work, right. That's although what's interesting
• 1:36:06
  Speaker 2: is right now the people in the AI community that
• 1:36:12
  Speaker 2: are resurrecting in this idea, with the idea that AI
• 1:36:16
  Speaker 2: and the robots are going to do all the work,
• 1:36:19
  Speaker 2: that will be able to lounge around and do nothing
• 1:36:24
  Speaker 2: and be able to live in this Marcusian or Marxist
• 1:36:28
  Speaker 2: you know, uh, post whatever utopian world and that the
• 1:36:33
  Speaker 2: robots will feed us and the robots will do everything
• 1:36:36
  Speaker 2: for us and we'll be able to survive that way.
• 1:36:42
  Speaker 2: It's literally, I think they're really influential people within the
• 1:36:48
  Speaker 2: AI community. You believe this is what we're heading.
• 1:36:51
  Speaker 5: And it's not miles away from the UBI discussion, which
• 1:36:55
  Speaker 5: was big also among libertarians. And now I don't remember
• 1:37:00
  Speaker 5: wherein the objective is literally to what I found it.
• 1:37:02
  Speaker 5: Maybe it was in Brandon's essay. By the way, the
• 1:37:04
  Speaker 5: Divine Rhino stagnation is individual. He says that there are
• 1:37:10
  Speaker 5: defenders of capitalism who espouse some of these ideas that
• 1:37:14
  Speaker 5: you should that scarcity is a natural condition and sorry,
• 1:37:21
  Speaker 5: a condition of capitalist and economics start from scarcity. So
• 1:37:24
  Speaker 5: you start from the same premises as the Marcusians, and
• 1:37:28
  Speaker 5: you think you're going to defend capitalism.
• 1:37:31
  Speaker 2: Every standard economic treaties, including Ostian economists, start with the
• 1:37:41
  Speaker 2: idea of scarcity. So Thomas soul in his Introduction Economics,
• 1:37:46
  Speaker 2: first line, I think something about scarcity. There's a well
• 1:37:51
  Speaker 2: known Ostian economist who wrote a book in introduct each
• 1:37:54
  Speaker 2: Economics that I was all excited about reading. First paragraph
• 1:37:58
  Speaker 2: starts of scarcity. So they are start with scarcity. So
• 1:38:01
  Speaker 2: it is when I say to economists, no, economics is
• 1:38:06
  Speaker 2: not about scarcity, they all, I mean, they really get upset.
• 1:38:09
  Speaker 2: They they don't understand how how one can think that way.
• 1:38:14
  Speaker 2: So but yeah, Welden spent. It's it's it's absolutely it's
• 1:38:18
  Speaker 2: it's the same thing. It is, it is this, it's
• 1:38:24
  Speaker 2: both there's a psychological element to it.
• 1:38:27
  Speaker 4: Uh this you know.
• 1:38:28
  Speaker 2: At some point in Walsh's say, he quotes Morkuza, I
• 1:38:32
  Speaker 2: think is saying something like, you know what we really
• 1:38:36
  Speaker 2: want is to sleep. You know, life is driving us
• 1:38:41
  Speaker 2: towards sleep. That that is the ideal. The ideal is
• 1:38:44
  Speaker 2: to sleep. And it's so the idea is idleness. The
• 1:38:47
  Speaker 2: ideal is idleness. It's not to do anything. And you
• 1:38:52
  Speaker 2: know what you know, being entitled being being, uh, you know,
• 1:38:57
  Speaker 2: divined right of stagnation.
• 1:38:58
  Speaker 4: All these things are all saying all.
• 1:39:00
  Speaker 2: The resentment of the world, all the resentment of the
• 1:39:04
  Speaker 2: requirements of a living being to maintain its survival.
• 1:39:10
  Speaker 5: And remember how I'm rand captures in the Natlas rat
• 1:39:14
  Speaker 5: It says something like at the end of this road
• 1:39:16
  Speaker 5: is the figure of this fat like Indian mystical rads
• 1:39:20
  Speaker 5: figure who is kind of on this half alive, but
• 1:39:25
  Speaker 5: basically it's death at the end of the day. This
• 1:39:27
  Speaker 5: is almost like a dress rehearsal for death.
• 1:39:29
  Speaker 4: Yep, yeah, I mean.
• 1:39:31
  Speaker 2: And again it was to say he talks about the
• 1:39:34
  Speaker 2: seeking nirvana and nirvana which is the Buddhist idea and
• 1:39:39
  Speaker 2: Markusa the ideal is this sleep, nirvana, idleness. But it's
• 1:39:43
  Speaker 2: it's the opposite of ran right, it's the opposite of productiveness.
• 1:39:47
  Speaker 2: It's the opposite of rationality. It's the opposite of taking
• 1:39:50
  Speaker 2: responsibility for your own life and making something of your life.
• 1:39:54
  Speaker 2: And Indeed, a lot of the critique the Van School
• 1:39:56
  Speaker 2: is the critique of this hero, the producer and creates and.
• 1:40:01
  Speaker 4: Changes the world. That then that to them is the villain.
• 1:40:04
  Speaker 2: Uh and uh And you know so this is this
• 1:40:08
  Speaker 2: is even more the opposite of Rand than Marxist.
• 1:40:15
  Speaker 3: And there's no surprise.
• 1:40:16
  Speaker 5: If you're a Walter Beniamin, who you think it is
• 1:40:20
  Speaker 5: the meaning to make your own coffee. Imagine how you
• 1:40:23
  Speaker 5: feel visa Videranian hero. It's embarrassing. It puts this mirror
• 1:40:27
  Speaker 5: in front of you, and you you should be very
• 1:40:30
  Speaker 5: scared of what you see there, scared for where your
• 1:40:34
  Speaker 5: life is going. It's distractive, first of all, not for
• 1:40:37
  Speaker 5: the world, for the system we's gonna feed you while
• 1:40:39
  Speaker 5: you're a parasite.
• 1:40:40
  Speaker 3: It's first of all distractive to you.
• 1:40:42
  Speaker 5: It destroys your life, your self esteem, everything, Nat.
• 1:40:49
  Speaker 2: You have a jogo with them. Candice own an Enna
• 1:40:53
  Speaker 2: Kasparian started doing podcasts together discussing the Jewish question. It
• 1:41:00
  Speaker 2: seems what can unite the left and the way is
• 1:41:05
  Speaker 2: some form of obsessive, conspiratorial you hatred. I mean yeah, good, yeah.
• 1:41:15
  Speaker 5: As I said in my speech in Israel, which was
• 1:41:18
  Speaker 5: my favorite ever live talk and the last live talk
• 1:41:21
  Speaker 5: I've done. It's available in my challenge to view it
• 1:41:24
  Speaker 5: because I elaborate on that anti Israeli think is the
• 1:41:29
  Speaker 5: focal point where the worst people meet. It's like the
• 1:41:33
  Speaker 5: honey which attracts Actually, I wasn't having the hand in
• 1:41:36
  Speaker 5: mind that attracts flies. And this this is what anti
• 1:41:39
  Speaker 5: Israel is. And back then I predicted that till now
• 1:41:44
  Speaker 5: it attracts the same people, the worst people from its side.
• 1:41:47
  Speaker 5: Soon I predicted it will start bringing people from different sides,
• 1:41:53
  Speaker 5: and this is exactly what happens. Anna Kasparian is supposedly
• 1:41:56
  Speaker 5: from the left, candes own supported from the right, but
• 1:41:59
  Speaker 5: it doesn't matter if you're a moral degenerate. Anti Israel
• 1:42:03
  Speaker 5: is the meeting point and everyone is welcoming that meeting point.
• 1:42:07
  Speaker 2: And of course doing a show on the Jewish Question,
• 1:42:11
  Speaker 2: which was Carl Marx's first published essay was titled on
• 1:42:17
  Speaker 2: the Jewish Question, and it was during an era in Germany,
• 1:42:21
  Speaker 2: during a period in Germany where a lot of different
• 1:42:23
  Speaker 2: intellectuals were writing essays on the Jewish Question because there
• 1:42:26
  Speaker 2: was a period in Germany where they were trying to
• 1:42:28
  Speaker 2: figure out Germany was trying to figure out what to
• 1:42:31
  Speaker 2: do with the Jews? Would they would they integrate them
• 1:42:33
  Speaker 2: into their society or would they keep them in the ghetto.
• 1:42:37
  Speaker 2: And it's my favorite essay by Marx because I think
• 1:42:42
  Speaker 2: everything you need to know about Marx is in that essay.
• 1:42:45
  Speaker 2: It's brutal, it's it's naked in that sense. He doesn't
• 1:42:50
  Speaker 2: hold back. He connects capitalism with selfishness in a way
• 1:42:55
  Speaker 2: that he doesn't later on. Here it's just laid out
• 1:42:59
  Speaker 2: right in front of you. And of course the connection
• 1:43:01
  Speaker 2: between capitalism and selfishness is the Jew who is selfish
• 1:43:05
  Speaker 2: and a capitalist. And so yes, so that if you're
• 1:43:08
  Speaker 2: gonna read one thing by Marx, that's what I would read.
• 1:43:12
  Speaker 5: And the anti semitism is so socking that most people
• 1:43:16
  Speaker 5: fail to see what is even worse in the essay.
• 1:43:19
  Speaker 5: What is even worse is that the real enemy of
• 1:43:22
  Speaker 5: Marks in that essay is not the Jew. It's it's
• 1:43:25
  Speaker 5: one of you. Yes, it's every person pursuing their own interest.
• 1:43:28
  Speaker 5: This is what turns Marks crazy about capitalist and not
• 1:43:32
  Speaker 5: something else. This is a time where March hasn't discovered
• 1:43:35
  Speaker 5: sarpless value or any of these things. He has already
• 1:43:38
  Speaker 5: decided that capitalism allows you living for yourself, and therefore
• 1:43:41
  Speaker 5: capitalisms is bad. Everything else, the Parish manuscripts, the theory
• 1:43:46
  Speaker 5: of exploitation, the Manifesto, all these come later already everything
• 1:43:52
  Speaker 5: else is rationalization. Marx has decided, I don't want people
• 1:43:56
  Speaker 5: to live life for themselves, and people do that are
• 1:44:01
  Speaker 5: so bad as the ultimate eval for him.
• 1:44:03
  Speaker 3: Which is a selfish Jew.
• 1:44:05
  Speaker 2: Yes, absolutely, And this is why you can't defend capitalism
• 1:44:09
  Speaker 2: unless you're defending individualism, unless you're defending a morality of individualism.
• 1:44:13
  Speaker 2: And that's the mistake all the free marketers make is
• 1:44:16
  Speaker 2: that they won't go.
• 1:44:17
  Speaker 5: There and mark So what Adam Smith had not seen
• 1:44:21
  Speaker 5: and what Steely Berdas don't see that capitalism equals selfishness?
• 1:44:26
  Speaker 5: And well down to him right he was? This shows
• 1:44:28
  Speaker 5: that he was a perspective perceptive perceptive.
• 1:44:36
  Speaker 2: Uh, this is James. Does Trump have a vision of
• 1:44:40
  Speaker 2: what he wants for the next two years or is
• 1:44:43
  Speaker 2: it random narcissistic marketing the latter. Yeah, I don't think
• 1:44:48
  Speaker 2: he could put vision and Trump in the same sentence. No,
• 1:44:52
  Speaker 2: he has no vision of what he wants. He wants
• 1:44:55
  Speaker 2: the narcissistic. He wants to be great, he wants he
• 1:44:59
  Speaker 2: wants pyramid to be built with his name on them.
• 1:45:02
  Speaker 2: And the thing that upset him more than the war
• 1:45:04
  Speaker 2: and more than anything is the judge dead to force
• 1:45:10
  Speaker 2: them taking Trump's name off of the Lincoln Center and
• 1:45:15
  Speaker 2: keep JFK's name and take his name off, and he
• 1:45:18
  Speaker 2: they're all missive on his social to social honest because
• 1:45:23
  Speaker 2: it's all about narcissism.
• 1:45:26
  Speaker 5: Just one very quick challenge to any one of our viewers,
• 1:45:29
  Speaker 5: we still protramp be very honest. Viewer, go to Trump's
• 1:45:34
  Speaker 5: Truth social and just check the post from the last
• 1:45:37
  Speaker 5: twenty four hours and tell me, honestly, if this was
• 1:45:40
  Speaker 5: your uncle, what would be your evaluation? How consent would
• 1:45:44
  Speaker 5: you be that there's something wrong with this guy? He
• 1:45:46
  Speaker 5: cannot be posting every twenty minutes like sit posts and
• 1:45:50
  Speaker 5: memes portraying himself as this. Like if you saw your
• 1:45:53
  Speaker 5: uncle doing this, you would be concerned. And yet you
• 1:45:56
  Speaker 5: see the president of the United States during the war
• 1:45:59
  Speaker 5: suppose doing this, and you're not concerned.
• 1:46:03
  Speaker 2: Yep, absolutely, Tom uh just wanted to give a shout
• 1:46:09
  Speaker 2: out to you too, greeting some Austin, Texas. Thank you, Tom,
• 1:46:12
  Speaker 2: really appreciate that. Hey, to Austin, Liam, how would you
• 1:46:19
  Speaker 2: compare Trump to Woodrow Wilson. I think Wilson is worse
• 1:46:22
  Speaker 2: because he's more intellectual. Oh, no question, Wilson is much
• 1:46:27
  Speaker 2: more intellectual. Wilson is an ideologue, He is a progressive,
• 1:46:31
  Speaker 2: He has an agenda.
• 1:46:32
  Speaker 4: He knows what he wants to do. In that sense, Wilson.
• 1:46:37
  Speaker 2: Is worse in a sense that he knows what he
• 1:46:39
  Speaker 2: wants to do, and he gets it done, and and
• 1:46:42
  Speaker 2: he he institutes programs that have survived to this day
• 1:46:47
  Speaker 2: that are significant changes.
• 1:46:50
  Speaker 4: The problem with the difference is this.
• 1:46:54
  Speaker 2: Trump is is in a sense a nihilist in a
• 1:46:57
  Speaker 2: he's a destructive force. He's not building anything, he's not
• 1:47:02
  Speaker 2: creating anything. He's not passing important laws or anything like that.
• 1:47:09
  Speaker 2: The main impact that he has is the demolition right
• 1:47:14
  Speaker 2: the uh you know, we stop respecting the courts. We
• 1:47:21
  Speaker 2: hate immigrants, We now distrust trade. People who used to
• 1:47:25
  Speaker 2: be free traders not that long ago, now they hate trade.
• 1:47:29
  Speaker 2: He has this impact on people, changes the way people
• 1:47:32
  Speaker 2: are thinking and trust and believe in the institutions. The
• 1:47:38
  Speaker 2: institutions in America will never be the same post Trump.
• 1:47:42
  Speaker 2: They will never be the same post Trump. So Wilson,
• 1:47:46
  Speaker 2: you can and this is the thing. You can argue
• 1:47:48
  Speaker 2: against the Wilson. You can debate a Wilson. You can
• 1:47:51
  Speaker 2: debate the progressive movement and you might lose, you might win,
• 1:47:54
  Speaker 2: but you can debate them. There's no debating Trump because
• 1:47:58
  Speaker 2: there's no there There's there's just his, his momentary whims
• 1:48:05
  Speaker 2: and and that's all there is.
• 1:48:10
  Speaker 5: You said you don't.
• 1:48:12
  Speaker 2: Hop up do Most people have a cynical and malevolent
• 1:48:18
  Speaker 2: universe premise. That's why they can't resonate with Rand's heroes
• 1:48:23
  Speaker 2: or the vision she presents of a benevolent universe and
• 1:48:26
  Speaker 2: win win relationships.
• 1:48:29
  Speaker 5: Or at some level they know they could be more
• 1:48:34
  Speaker 5: like these heroes, but it's too difficult, so they avoid
• 1:48:37
  Speaker 5: their responsibility. So it's easier to say, all this is
• 1:48:40
  Speaker 5: a child this or whatever.
• 1:48:43
  Speaker 4: I think that's right.
• 1:48:44
  Speaker 2: I mean, there are a lot of different psychologies that
• 1:48:46
  Speaker 2: lead people to reject rants. I don't think you can
• 1:48:48
  Speaker 2: say they're all cynical or they're all the level. And
• 1:48:51
  Speaker 2: you know a lot of them are like I.
• 1:48:54
  Speaker 4: Would have to give up my Christianity for this.
• 1:48:56
  Speaker 2: Can't do that? And why do they say can't do that?
• 1:48:59
  Speaker 2: Because this being culcated into them. It's family, it's it's
• 1:49:03
  Speaker 2: or they're just conventional, they're just lazy. They they're not,
• 1:49:07
  Speaker 2: they're not, they're not they're cowards. A lot of them
• 1:49:10
  Speaker 2: are just cowards. So there are lots of reasons why
• 1:49:14
  Speaker 2: somebody would not respond positively to R and I think
• 1:49:17
  Speaker 2: benevolence and cynicism. Certainly the end cynicism is probably at
• 1:49:22
  Speaker 2: an all time high today. I mean, we live in
• 1:49:24
  Speaker 2: a very cynical culture. But don't forget the impact of mysticism,
• 1:49:28
  Speaker 2: and the impact of cowardness, and the impact of of
• 1:49:31
  Speaker 2: just social pressure and conformity, and lots of different psychological reasons.
• 1:49:38
  Speaker 2: Author when you have money, you don't really have problems.
• 1:49:42
  Speaker 2: Most of the problems are just created by you. I
• 1:49:47
  Speaker 2: don't get that, right, I really don't get that. So
• 1:49:50
  Speaker 2: does money solve your you know, I don't know, inability
• 1:49:55
  Speaker 2: to find a girlfriend. I mean maybe some, but not
• 1:49:59
  Speaker 2: the kind of world when you want.
• 1:50:00
  Speaker 4: Necessarily right, it's.
• 1:50:03
  Speaker 2: Money doesn't solve you know, I don't know. The conflict
• 1:50:06
  Speaker 2: you have with your best friend right now, you're disagreeing
• 1:50:09
  Speaker 2: about something and you're fighting.
• 1:50:11
  Speaker 4: Is money the solution to that?
• 1:50:12
  Speaker 5: I mean, even with health, which money can't buy your
• 1:50:17
  Speaker 5: better health up to the point even up to the
• 1:50:19
  Speaker 5: points think of think of the life of Steve Jobs.
• 1:50:21
  Speaker 5: Would you say Steve Jobs had no problems? Would say
• 1:50:24
  Speaker 5: Michael Jordan had no problem?
• 1:50:26
  Speaker 2: Yeah, No, I don't. I don't think that's true. I
• 1:50:28
  Speaker 2: think I don't think the only problem in life is
• 1:50:32
  Speaker 2: not having enough money, which is what you ask, what
• 1:50:34
  Speaker 2: your question suggests, and what you'll find is that you
• 1:50:40
  Speaker 2: can you quickly adjust the amount of money you have.
• 1:50:43
  Speaker 2: So it's always the case you don't have enough money,
• 1:50:47
  Speaker 2: almost always. I mean, I think you can certainly reach
• 1:50:49
  Speaker 2: a certain place where that's not true. But that's a
• 1:50:54
  Speaker 2: very high number, at least in my life, it's a
• 1:50:57
  Speaker 2: very high number, that number where yeah, money is no
• 1:51:00
  Speaker 2: longer something I you know, I would strive for.
• 1:51:03
  Speaker 3: So I remember, we're definitely not there.
• 1:51:07
  Speaker 5: So people said, super.
• 1:51:09
  Speaker 2: No, you're definitely not there. Uh yeah. I remember literally
• 1:51:13
  Speaker 2: having conversations with friends in the I don't know, thirty
• 1:51:15
  Speaker 2: years ago, say, Okay, if I had X amount, if
• 1:51:18
  Speaker 2: my income was X, I'd be done. I mean I'd
• 1:51:21
  Speaker 2: be done. There'd be nothing more. And then I got
• 1:51:23
  Speaker 2: there and it was like, no, I really need two X.
• 1:51:26
  Speaker 2: And you know, and when you get to two exits
• 1:51:28
  Speaker 2: four x and and now I have a number prostibally
• 1:51:31
  Speaker 2: because i'm, you know, arguably, you know, towards the end.
• 1:51:36
  Speaker 2: But so I have a number that I think would
• 1:51:39
  Speaker 2: be it. I'm not there quite yet. But you know,
• 1:51:42
  Speaker 2: money is not it doesn't function that way, and it's
• 1:51:44
  Speaker 2: certainly not the only source of challenges or problems or
• 1:51:48
  Speaker 2: troubles at all that you know. The reality is constantly
• 1:51:53
  Speaker 2: there's constantly points of challenges that are core, and some
• 1:51:57
  Speaker 2: of them relate to money, and sew of them don't
• 1:51:59
  Speaker 2: many of them. Michael, do you think the average work
• 1:52:05
  Speaker 2: week will drop to thirty hours or less in your
• 1:52:08
  Speaker 2: lifetime due to AI and automation? And I do think
• 1:52:13
  Speaker 2: that the average work hour will drop. It's been dropping
• 1:52:16
  Speaker 2: for a century now, and I think it probably will continue.
• 1:52:19
  Speaker 2: I don't know what the optimal level will be. There
• 1:52:22
  Speaker 2: will still be people working as there are today seventy
• 1:52:25
  Speaker 2: eighty ninety hours a week, so.
• 1:52:28
  Speaker 4: Averages are very deceiving.
• 1:52:31
  Speaker 2: But yeah, I think for many people, let's say that
• 1:52:34
  Speaker 2: work is not that interesting, the amount of hours they
• 1:52:38
  Speaker 2: will need to work in order to make a good
• 1:52:40
  Speaker 2: living will be lower. How much lower, I don't know.
• 1:52:45
  Speaker 3: That's one more thing.
• 1:52:46
  Speaker 5: The pioneers in every area will always work more because
• 1:52:50
  Speaker 5: they will find new angles. Yes, think, for example, the
• 1:52:53
  Speaker 5: cutting heads that advanced analytics have brought to football or basketball.
• 1:52:58
  Speaker 5: But you cannot say that work less. They can find
• 1:53:02
  Speaker 5: information faster. But this information opens new doors. Yep, so
• 1:53:06
  Speaker 5: now you can you can go even further and get
• 1:53:09
  Speaker 5: more cutting edge on something that you didn't even know
• 1:53:12
  Speaker 5: existed three years ago, so not to say thirty years ago.
• 1:53:16
  Speaker 2: In my view, the biggest impact AI will have on
• 1:53:21
  Speaker 2: work is it will make it more fun. It'll make
• 1:53:25
  Speaker 2: it more interesting. You know, say, it will replace drudgery.
• 1:53:29
  Speaker 2: I mean, think about programming. Program is fun, but if
• 1:53:32
  Speaker 2: you've programmed for five years, okay, yeah, you know so
• 1:53:35
  Speaker 2: much for new challenges and you know, like writing code
• 1:53:40
  Speaker 2: line by line is less fun. Now Claude does the
• 1:53:43
  Speaker 2: coding and you manage cloud, and the managing cloud makes
• 1:53:48
  Speaker 2: makes you more strategic. It makes it more interesting. And
• 1:53:51
  Speaker 2: actually I've heard people who are saying that they have
• 1:53:54
  Speaker 2: now they're writing five different programs at the same time.
• 1:53:57
  Speaker 2: Right they're managing Claud one and Claud two in Cloud three,
• 1:54:00
  Speaker 2: each one working on a different project that brings new challenges.
• 1:54:03
  Speaker 2: Doesn't mean you're working less. It means your productivity is
• 1:54:06
  Speaker 2: five x and you're probably making more money and you're
• 1:54:10
  Speaker 2: having more fun because you're working at at a much
• 1:54:12
  Speaker 2: higher level of conceptualization of what we're good at as
• 1:54:17
  Speaker 2: human beings, which is thinking. So I'll take a lot
• 1:54:21
  Speaker 2: of the drudgery out of work. I am having fun
• 1:54:25
  Speaker 2: with AI these days.
• 1:54:26
  Speaker 5: I was.
• 1:54:26
  Speaker 2: I was telling my wife yesterday how excited I was
• 1:54:28
  Speaker 2: about AI. So I'm not gonna say why, because you know,
• 1:54:32
  Speaker 2: hopefully there'll be a new project that I reveal in
• 1:54:35
  Speaker 2: the next few weeks. But it's it's just there's there's
• 1:54:39
  Speaker 2: some just you know, playing around with it, having it
• 1:54:43
  Speaker 2: do different things. It's so interesting. It's so interesting what
• 1:54:47
  Speaker 2: it comes back with. You know, I do a lot
• 1:54:50
  Speaker 2: of right, you know, write me a speech in you
• 1:54:54
  Speaker 2: Ron Brooks voice on this topic, and it's brilliant. It's
• 1:54:57
  Speaker 2: it's really at these things away the It's not going
• 1:55:02
  Speaker 2: to write my speeches for me, but I find it.
• 1:55:06
  Speaker 2: The response is so interesting what it chooses to come
• 1:55:10
  Speaker 2: back at me, and that fuels more thinking for me.
• 1:55:15
  Speaker 2: So that then I think, Okay, what do I have
• 1:55:17
  Speaker 2: to add on on this? Right? But no, I'm not
• 1:55:21
  Speaker 2: going to have you on books. What do you call it?
• 1:55:23
  Speaker 2: A three dimensional hologram. I'm not gonna have a hologram
• 1:55:28
  Speaker 2: of your one speaking at conferences. It's still gonna be
• 1:55:31
  Speaker 2: men preparing the.
• 1:55:37
  Speaker 5: True funds. Know that you don't write your talks in advance,
• 1:55:40
  Speaker 5: so A, I cannot write your talks anyway.
• 1:55:43
  Speaker 2: That is true. That is true. But the talks that
• 1:55:47
  Speaker 2: it writes pretty good, you know, pretty good, which is
• 1:55:53
  Speaker 2: interesting how it does that, you know, I'm fascinated by
• 1:55:56
  Speaker 2: the whole phenomenon.
• 1:55:59
  Speaker 5: Molt it.
• 1:56:00
  Speaker 2: It says, great work, guys. I'm especially impressed by the
• 1:56:02
  Speaker 2: research and work that Nicos has put into these presentations. Absolutely,
• 1:56:07
  Speaker 2: these literally my job. But thanks these episodes care care
• 1:56:12
  Speaker 2: a something I will treat. Thank you all this plant
• 1:56:16
  Speaker 2: absolutely and uh. I mean the nice thing is that
• 1:56:19
  Speaker 2: when you do this kind of research that that Decos
• 1:56:22
  Speaker 2: is doing, he's going to be able to use it
• 1:56:25
  Speaker 2: on multiple different products, right, multiple different podcasts, lectures, talks, classes,
• 1:56:29
  Speaker 2: he teaches. So I mean deep research like this biz
• 1:56:34
  Speaker 2: lots and lots of fruit.
• 1:56:35
  Speaker 5: Uh.
• 1:56:36
  Speaker 2: And this is a job.
• 1:56:37
  Speaker 5: This is what intellectuals do, and we want also this
• 1:56:40
  Speaker 5: to be ever to be a legacy to be out
• 1:56:43
  Speaker 5: there forever potentially.
• 1:56:45
  Speaker 2: Yeah. I mean, one thing we could do is ask
• 1:56:48
  Speaker 2: Ai to summarize, to summarize.
• 1:56:51
  Speaker 4: The discussion we had today and see what it comes
• 1:56:54
  Speaker 4: back with.
• 1:56:56
  Speaker 3: Yeah, but people, what's the whole discussion?
• 1:56:58
  Speaker 5: Don't ask a.
• 1:56:59
  Speaker 2: Semi well yeah, true, Yes, there's a lot more fun
• 1:57:04
  Speaker 2: in actually watching us. Cook really enjoyed these shows. Keep
• 1:57:10
  Speaker 2: up the good work. Thank you, Cook, and thanks again, gentlemen,
• 1:57:15
  Speaker 2: thank you, and and I owe you an email. I'm
• 1:57:18
  Speaker 2: going to get to it, James. Is a bill going
• 1:57:23
  Speaker 2: through Congress that would eliminate capital gains taxes on all
• 1:57:27
  Speaker 2: home sales. Trumpsy's seems eager to sign it. Is it
• 1:57:31
  Speaker 2: likely to pass? I doubt it that it would pass.
• 1:57:38
  Speaker 2: But maybe I'm very very much against capital gains taxes,
• 1:57:44
  Speaker 2: so that it's one of the taxes that I'm most against.
• 1:57:48
  Speaker 2: So I'm all for going away in California. Well, no,
• 1:57:52
  Speaker 2: even to no, it's not kind of fun, it's a
• 1:57:56
  Speaker 2: it doesn't really affect many people. So let me just say,
• 1:57:59
  Speaker 2: you know, it's as I remember, the first half million
• 1:58:03
  Speaker 2: dollars is free of capital gains taxes anyway, so you
• 1:58:08
  Speaker 2: would have to make on the sale of your home
• 1:58:10
  Speaker 2: more than half a million before you started, you know,
• 1:58:14
  Speaker 2: not paying capital gains, So it only affects It doesn't
• 1:58:18
  Speaker 2: affect most people. Most people don't have unless you live
• 1:58:21
  Speaker 2: in California, half a million dollar more than half a
• 1:58:25
  Speaker 2: million dollar gain on your home. So it seems like
• 1:58:28
  Speaker 2: a bill that could pass because it won't have that
• 1:58:31
  Speaker 2: big of effect on anybody. And the people who will
• 1:58:34
  Speaker 2: have an effect on a relatively well.
• 1:58:37
  Speaker 5: Off judge a man by the size of his problems. Meanwhile,
• 1:58:41
  Speaker 5: I'm having two hour discussions with my accountant what to
• 1:58:45
  Speaker 5: do with a two hundred dollars donational stripe weeks after
• 1:58:49
  Speaker 5: weeks after weeks what type of two hundred dollars.
• 1:58:54
  Speaker 4: Greek tax law?
• 1:58:55
  Speaker 2: Guys, Greek tax law? Yep, I don't move to Greece.
• 1:59:04
  Speaker 2: Why do you think somebody like James Lindsey, who wrote
• 1:59:06
  Speaker 2: some insightful stuff about critical theory when so far off
• 1:59:10
  Speaker 2: track and became a nut who caused everything Marxism?
• 1:59:14
  Speaker 5: First of all, wait a minute. First of all, he's
• 1:59:16
  Speaker 5: done very very good job in presenting these views. Now
• 1:59:20
  Speaker 5: do I agree with his intellectual conclusions.
• 1:59:26
  Speaker 3: Fifty percent his bottom fifty percent not?
• 1:59:29
  Speaker 5: But he at least, he's trying to do serious intellectual work,
• 1:59:32
  Speaker 5: and very importantly he also does it against the war.
• 1:59:36
  Speaker 3: Right, he's doing God's work.
• 1:59:38
  Speaker 5: There not many people who were on the let's say,
• 1:59:42
  Speaker 5: in Maga train, and he still sees himself as Maga.
• 1:59:45
  Speaker 5: But this doesn't take away that he did very good
• 1:59:48
  Speaker 5: work in cynical theories the book, very good work. He
• 1:59:51
  Speaker 5: has many long essays on critical theory. Again not exactly
• 1:59:56
  Speaker 5: intellectual of my taste, but he tries to do his work,
• 2:00:00
  Speaker 5: and most importantly he does this also for the right,
• 2:00:03
  Speaker 5: So he has he has my respect irrespective of any disagreements.
• 2:00:07
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, I'd like to see more people do
• 2:00:10
  Speaker 2: the kind of work that he does, you know, and
• 2:00:13
  Speaker 2: even if they even if we end up disagreeing, at
• 2:00:16
  Speaker 2: least at least the you know, this is an intellectual disagreement.
• 2:00:20
  Speaker 2: It's it's something that can be discussed debated. Uh, And
• 2:00:25
  Speaker 2: it's yeah, I wouldn't call him a nut in spite
• 2:00:30
  Speaker 2: of his attraction Omega.
• 2:00:33
  Speaker 5: And he does something very rare, He actually reads the stuff.
• 2:00:36
  Speaker 5: So when he criticizes Marcus, and he's very honest. He said,
• 2:00:40
  Speaker 5: for example, I haven't read one dimensional man. I'm not
• 2:00:43
  Speaker 5: going to talk about that. I'm going to talk about
• 2:00:44
  Speaker 5: the essays that I've read. I respect that.
• 2:00:46
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and he and he does a lot of work.
• 2:00:48
  Speaker 2: That is, he does seminars and courses and write books
• 2:00:52
  Speaker 2: and and and and you know, so he's very intellectual active,
• 2:00:55
  Speaker 2: which I respect. Christian. Did you ever hear of so
• 2:01:01
  Speaker 2: called anti Germans? They are pro asual leftists coming out
• 2:01:06
  Speaker 2: of the Frankfurt School. Anti Imperilests versus anti Germans was
• 2:01:11
  Speaker 2: a hot fight between leftists twenty years ago.
• 2:01:16
  Speaker 5: So mainly from the Frankfurt School where pro Israel again
• 2:01:20
  Speaker 5: and again. They were very traumatized from the Holocaust, so
• 2:01:24
  Speaker 5: they had a very sensitive spot. They were not self
• 2:01:27
  Speaker 5: hating Jews or what we call today self hating Jews.
• 2:01:30
  Speaker 5: I don't know when this phrase came about, but they were.
• 2:01:34
  Speaker 5: They were not like that at the same time. Anyway,
• 2:01:38
  Speaker 5: Now now it goes to a different to a different discussion.
• 2:01:41
  Speaker 5: But I haven't heard about that particular group of people,
• 2:01:46
  Speaker 5: So I cannot help our our dear viewer.
• 2:01:49
  Speaker 3: But thanks for the question and the contribution.
• 2:01:51
  Speaker 4: Yeah, anti Germans, Well, I have to look it up.
• 2:01:52
  Speaker 2: I've never heard that. What we saw yesterday night in
• 2:01:56
  Speaker 2: Paris was a reminder that postcolonial studies wreck havoc in
• 2:02:01
  Speaker 2: the West, that garbage trickles down to football hooligans who
• 2:02:05
  Speaker 2: only wait for any excuse to lutes and riot.
• 2:02:09
  Speaker 5: I don't think, by the way, they were football hooligans.
• 2:02:11
  Speaker 5: If you ask them to name the starting lineup of
• 2:02:14
  Speaker 5: parisones and then I doubt they could name anyone. I
• 2:02:18
  Speaker 5: think they were just it was just nihilistic rioting. If
• 2:02:22
  Speaker 5: you're happy that your team won, you don't go out.
• 2:02:25
  Speaker 5: You don't go out looting.
• 2:02:28
  Speaker 2: So the phenomena of football hooligans is not a looting phenomena.
• 2:02:36
  Speaker 5: It is, but yesterday they were not football hooligans. I
• 2:02:41
  Speaker 5: think they were ethnic hooligans, not football.
• 2:02:43
  Speaker 2: I think they were. They were flying Palestinian flags and
• 2:02:46
  Speaker 2: stuff like that.
• 2:02:51
  Speaker 5: Just guys, imagine your team has won a second conservatives
• 2:02:54
  Speaker 5: obvious league and you go out and look, no, you
• 2:02:56
  Speaker 5: try to absorb every moment, you watch the press converse.
• 2:02:59
  Speaker 5: You don't go out to looting. This already owes me.
• 2:03:01
  Speaker 5: They don't care about football. If you're if you're a
• 2:03:04
  Speaker 5: real one, you know what I mean. Guys, when when
• 2:03:07
  Speaker 5: something very important happens with sports, you want to absorb
• 2:03:11
  Speaker 5: it you don't want to go to a carnival.
• 2:03:13
  Speaker 4: You go partying, not losing. So in Israel, So in Israel.
• 2:03:18
  Speaker 2: Going back to history of basketball in Israel, twice there
• 2:03:22
  Speaker 2: was a sporting event where literally the entire country went
• 2:03:26
  Speaker 2: out into the streets and it was dancing. There was
• 2:03:29
  Speaker 2: music and dancing all night. One was both were basketball.
• 2:03:35
  Speaker 2: One was Macabi Tel av beating CHESSCA Moscow for the
• 2:03:39
  Speaker 2: European Championship in nineteen seventy something. Maybe you know when
• 2:03:43
  Speaker 2: that happened.
• 2:03:44
  Speaker 5: Well, it happened first of all, more recently in twenty fourteen.
• 2:03:47
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't think there was dancing in the streets
• 2:03:49
  Speaker 2: in twenty fourteen, but in the seventies. This is in
• 2:03:52
  Speaker 2: the seventies. And then the Israeli national team I think
• 2:03:55
  Speaker 2: beat the USSR. It's some basketball also at a European
• 2:04:00
  Speaker 2: thing and it was literally massive dancing in the streets.
• 2:04:04
  Speaker 5: Probably the time of Gordan Bergovic was the first great
• 2:04:08
  Speaker 5: Israeli player.
• 2:04:08
  Speaker 2: I remember, Yes, Bill Kovic was definitely in both teams.
• 2:04:13
  Speaker 2: I can you know, if I really thought about it,
• 2:04:16
  Speaker 2: I could probably name the starting five from Akabi Tel Aviv.
• 2:04:21
  Speaker 2: Os Perry was the was the nominal American, the black guy,
• 2:04:26
  Speaker 2: tall guy who who literally loved Israel so much that
• 2:04:30
  Speaker 2: he that he got circumcised and and and converted to
• 2:04:33
  Speaker 2: Judaism so he could stay in Israel and play for
• 2:04:36
  Speaker 2: the national team. And you know, getting sircercized is not
• 2:04:42
  Speaker 2: pleasant at that age.
• 2:04:45
  Speaker 5: And Bill Kovich was then sorry, sorry, sorry, because so
• 2:04:49
  Speaker 5: if at any point life becomes unbearable in the bag
• 2:04:53
  Speaker 5: and I have to go to Israel to get nationale,
• 2:04:57
  Speaker 5: do you have to.
• 2:04:59
  Speaker 2: I think have to be you have to convert to Judaism.
• 2:05:01
  Speaker 2: And to convert to Judaism, you have to.
• 2:05:03
  Speaker 3: Have ye seriously, like someone's gonna take um.
• 2:05:09
  Speaker 2: They have to get some diploma from the rabbinicle whatever.
• 2:05:12
  Speaker 5: God.
• 2:05:13
  Speaker 3: Okay, there goes my plan.
• 2:05:15
  Speaker 2: B Gotta look for a plant. See yeah, I mean,
• 2:05:21
  Speaker 2: I don't know how long you could live in Israel
• 2:05:22
  Speaker 2: without being a citizen. But but yeah, you don't want
• 2:05:25
  Speaker 2: to become you don't want to have to convert to Judaism. Okay,
• 2:05:29
  Speaker 2: not a good idea, Nikos, as both our teams are
• 2:05:35
  Speaker 2: not qualified. Who are you rooting for in the World Cup,
• 2:05:39
  Speaker 2: he says. A Christian says, I am for Netherlands.
• 2:05:43
  Speaker 5: I'm with the team I support in every World Cup
• 2:05:47
  Speaker 5: since ninety ninety obviously Argentina. One more reason why because
• 2:05:52
  Speaker 5: Messi is playing there. I supported Argentina before Messi for
• 2:05:56
  Speaker 5: leftist reasons when I like Maradonna, and now I like
• 2:06:00
  Speaker 5: them for pure football reasons.
• 2:06:02
  Speaker 3: So every big tournament it's always Argentina.
• 2:06:06
  Speaker 2: All right.
• 2:06:08
  Speaker 5: I can't tell you probably the starting lineup of every
• 2:06:12
  Speaker 5: Argentina team from ninety four till today, although the first
• 2:06:17
  Speaker 5: one I was was ninety ninety, but I can't remember.
• 2:06:21
  Speaker 3: Only Maradonna, can Nita.
• 2:06:22
  Speaker 2: And all right, so you didn't ask me my opinion.
• 2:06:28
  Speaker 2: But the last Netherland teams I really I supported were
• 2:06:34
  Speaker 2: the teams you and Koiv played. That was my favorite
• 2:06:37
  Speaker 2: team in the in the nineteen seventies. In Koi if
• 2:06:42
  Speaker 2: I thought Koif was the you're just a genius. I mean,
• 2:06:45
  Speaker 2: I thought he was an amazing player.
• 2:06:48
  Speaker 5: Two consecutive World Cup finals. In both I think they
• 2:06:53
  Speaker 5: go ahead, and yet they lose the Queen without the crowd.
• 2:06:57
  Speaker 3: Avacross played only in a seventy four.
• 2:07:00
  Speaker 5: You didn't playing seventeen eight.
• 2:07:02
  Speaker 4: That's right, that's right, and so you know.
• 2:07:05
  Speaker 2: But I used to support Brazil, but I have no idea,
• 2:07:09
  Speaker 2: if they have any chance.
• 2:07:11
  Speaker 5: They have a good they will have a good team.
• 2:07:14
  Speaker 5: I never supported the Brazil my first grade. We should
• 2:07:18
  Speaker 5: do a wholesow on World Cup. Although my biggest World
• 2:07:20
  Speaker 5: Cup love was Roberto Badjos from ninety four, I still
• 2:07:26
  Speaker 5: considered him my biggest football craft ever. And this will
• 2:07:31
  Speaker 5: because always your favorite World Cup is the first World
• 2:07:33
  Speaker 5: Cup when you can properly watch and understand. So for
• 2:07:37
  Speaker 5: me it was Roberto badis.
• 2:07:38
  Speaker 2: So the first World Cup get probably properly watch and
• 2:07:43
  Speaker 2: understand what was seventy four? And I think the first
• 2:07:47
  Speaker 2: World Cup I have a memory of was Mexico City
• 2:07:51
  Speaker 2: in nineteen seventy you know Pele in the finals. So
• 2:07:56
  Speaker 2: and as actually I think on Netflix there's a a
• 2:08:00
  Speaker 2: five there's like a duck, not a documentary. There's like
• 2:08:04
  Speaker 2: a drama the entire thing.
• 2:08:07
  Speaker 4: It's like five.
• 2:08:07
  Speaker 2: Episodes a series focused on Brazil's nineteen seventy.
• 2:08:12
  Speaker 3: Teen many claimed the best team that ever, but they.
• 2:08:16
  Speaker 2: Had a lot of drama around the coach. The coach
• 2:08:18
  Speaker 2: was was fired just as the World Cup began and
• 2:08:23
  Speaker 2: Peale rebelled and they were they didn't do well in
• 2:08:26
  Speaker 2: the opening round and so anyway, that's on my to
• 2:08:31
  Speaker 2: watch list is that should be a lot of fun.
• 2:08:35
  Speaker 2: But that was. You know, I'm also an England fan
• 2:08:39
  Speaker 2: and that goes back to Bobby Charlton, which is nineteen sixties.
• 2:08:45
  Speaker 5: Last World Cup I was supporting England was two thousand
• 2:08:49
  Speaker 5: and two against Brazil, but Brazil. Brazil won.
• 2:08:52
  Speaker 2: Yep, yeah, the England never wins for a long time,
• 2:08:56
  Speaker 2: since sixty six. Right.
• 2:08:58
  Speaker 4: I know a little bit about football, just enough.
• 2:09:02
  Speaker 5: To see we we I think we can do a
• 2:09:04
  Speaker 5: World Cup episode if someone really want it, although no
• 2:09:07
  Speaker 5: one's gonna want it from the American.
• 2:09:09
  Speaker 2: I don't think so. Basketball, maybe we have a better shot.
• 2:09:13
  Speaker 3: Well, the finals are beginning in a few days.
• 2:09:16
  Speaker 4: Who won yesterday?
• 2:09:18
  Speaker 3: The Spurs?
• 2:09:19
  Speaker 4: Oh wow, okay, you can if only.
• 2:09:23
  Speaker 5: Someone told you two episodes ago that seven out of
• 2:09:26
  Speaker 5: the ten next the NBA leagues are gonna be won
• 2:09:30
  Speaker 5: by the Spurs.
• 2:09:31
  Speaker 2: Yeah, somebody did tell me that. So they beat the Knicks.
• 2:09:36
  Speaker 2: I think they beat the Knicks.
• 2:09:37
  Speaker 5: Yeah, yeah, they beat then although we are with the Knicks, perhaps.
• 2:09:43
  Speaker 4: Why are we with the Knicks.
• 2:09:46
  Speaker 5: It's a cultural event for the United States, the Knicks,
• 2:09:48
  Speaker 5: Boston Guard, It's it's it's these things that are a
• 2:09:54
  Speaker 5: big thing. Like whenever the Celtics or the Knicks or
• 2:09:57
  Speaker 5: the Lakers go to the final, it's a cultural.
• 2:09:59
  Speaker 2: It's this is why San Antonio needs to win. You know.
• 2:10:03
  Speaker 2: This is uh, this is uh. It's the it's the new,
• 2:10:07
  Speaker 2: the vibrant, the exciting, the West. You know, the only
• 2:10:11
  Speaker 2: team in the East that has to win the Celtics.
• 2:10:14
  Speaker 2: Everybody else in the East should lose whenever they reach
• 2:10:17
  Speaker 2: the finals, right uh, neil. I also believe that most
• 2:10:22
  Speaker 2: things will be produced by robots in the future. What
• 2:10:25
  Speaker 2: foundational objectivist philosophical concept would have to change your added
• 2:10:31
  Speaker 2: in this new science fiction world? No? None, I don't
• 2:10:36
  Speaker 2: think any foundational objective sociophical concept. I certainly we'll have
• 2:10:42
  Speaker 2: to think about a lot of things differently because the
• 2:10:45
  Speaker 2: world will be different, and and uh, and certainly will
• 2:10:48
  Speaker 2: have to reconceive certain ideas in economics, I'm sure. And
• 2:10:53
  Speaker 2: but I don't think of any philo foundational philosophical issue
• 2:10:57
  Speaker 2: that AI changes unless you know, here's here's an idea, right,
• 2:11:04
  Speaker 2: what if we can actually create artificial life? That is,
• 2:11:08
  Speaker 2: what if we can imbue a robot? And I think
• 2:11:12
  Speaker 2: it would have to be with biology, biological material. But
• 2:11:15
  Speaker 2: imagine if we can imbue a robot with consciousness, then
• 2:11:18
  Speaker 2: I think you have to start thinking about, Okay, how
• 2:11:21
  Speaker 2: to rights apply to this?
• 2:11:23
  Speaker 4: That is it fully writes, you know worthy call it
• 2:11:28
  Speaker 4: that way. I mean some thinking would have to be done.
• 2:11:31
  Speaker 2: So and I think even now, I think objectivism needs
• 2:11:37
  Speaker 2: to do the thinking about, Okay, why are we so
• 2:11:40
  Speaker 2: sure the day I cannot be conscious? And what is
• 2:11:45
  Speaker 2: it about consciousness that we hold that makes it clear
• 2:11:47
  Speaker 2: the day? I think I think objectivism needs to come
• 2:11:51
  Speaker 2: up with some written content about this stuff. So this
• 2:11:55
  Speaker 2: is I think that a frontier issue that objectivism needs to.
• 2:11:58
  Speaker 5: Talk about, but always do it with the horizon towards life.
• 2:12:03
  Speaker 5: And I'm saying this because you know how many objectives
• 2:12:05
  Speaker 5: are heard telling me, oh, I wouldn't want to upload
• 2:12:08
  Speaker 5: my consciousness to a robot because I'm around and said
• 2:12:11
  Speaker 5: an indestractable robot cannot have a value. No nobody I
• 2:12:15
  Speaker 5: told you that. No ways, are you kidding me? I've
• 2:12:19
  Speaker 5: heard it at least for three four different people. Really,
• 2:12:22
  Speaker 5: it's the yeah, yeah, yeah, I have often discussions about
• 2:12:25
  Speaker 5: quote transhumanis this is the standard answer I get.
• 2:12:30
  Speaker 2: God, I'm glad. Let me say I'm glad. I've never
• 2:12:34
  Speaker 2: heard that one.
• 2:12:35
  Speaker 3: I haven't heard that one.
• 2:12:37
  Speaker 5: Have you ever done an episode on transhumanism?
• 2:12:40
  Speaker 2: No, but I've mentioned transhumanism. I mentioned that I think
• 2:12:43
  Speaker 2: that that's the future.
• 2:12:45
  Speaker 5: Oh that's cool.
• 2:12:46
  Speaker 2: I'm a I'm a you know, I believe that we're
• 2:12:49
  Speaker 2: gonna I don't think you can upload your consciousness in
• 2:12:51
  Speaker 2: to your robot, but I think you can implant a
• 2:12:54
  Speaker 2: robot into your brain. And you know, there's no reason
• 2:12:58
  Speaker 2: why we can enhance a must and our ability to
• 2:13:01
  Speaker 2: do stuff and hack out.
• 2:13:03
  Speaker 4: Genetics and do all kinds of things.
• 2:13:04
  Speaker 2: So, depending on what you mean exactly by transhumanism, I
• 2:13:08
  Speaker 2: definitely think we can improve the human brain and human
• 2:13:13
  Speaker 2: bodies to make them better than they are, whether through electronic.
• 2:13:18
  Speaker 4: Means or through biological means.
• 2:13:19
  Speaker 5: So, and speaking about synesism, how sad that more people
• 2:13:22
  Speaker 5: are not excited about that.
• 2:13:24
  Speaker 2: I'm thrilled. I'm super exciting. And if I thought it
• 2:13:27
  Speaker 2: was possible to upload my consciousness to a computer or
• 2:13:29
  Speaker 2: to a robot, I would do it in a you know,
• 2:13:32
  Speaker 2: in a second. I mean, it wouldn't hesitate.
• 2:13:34
  Speaker 3: I mean, I'm very glad to hear that.
• 2:13:37
  Speaker 2: Why would I not? I mean in motive robot. First
• 2:13:39
  Speaker 2: of all, there is no such thing as any motive robot,
• 2:13:42
  Speaker 2: because all robots in reality can die, right. You can
• 2:13:46
  Speaker 2: unplug them, you can chop the head, you can you
• 2:13:49
  Speaker 2: can destroy their electronics. There's there's literally I mean, it's
• 2:13:53
  Speaker 2: a fictitious example she makes up to make a point.
• 2:13:56
  Speaker 2: The point is not don't upload your consciousness. The point
• 2:13:59
  Speaker 2: is that you have to have the possibility of non
• 2:14:02
  Speaker 2: existent in order for values to mean anything, and the
• 2:14:07
  Speaker 2: possibility of non existent exists for a robot. So you know,
• 2:14:12
  Speaker 2: so it's it's it's crazy that idea. You know, one
• 2:14:17
  Speaker 2: of my favorite books when I was young. I don't
• 2:14:20
  Speaker 2: know what I think of it if I've hit it down.
• 2:14:23
  Speaker 2: You said you hadn't read Robert Henline. Yeah, so Time
• 2:14:26
  Speaker 2: Enough of Love is this amazing book about a guy
• 2:14:30
  Speaker 2: named Lazarus who basically lives forever, and he's he's every
• 2:14:37
  Speaker 2: one hundred years or ninety years. He goes to rejuvenation
• 2:14:41
  Speaker 2: clinic and because of his particular DNA, he can make
• 2:14:44
  Speaker 2: himself look young, but everything is still working, so he's
• 2:14:47
  Speaker 2: still functioning. He can be so he lives, he can
• 2:14:51
  Speaker 2: be shot, he can be killed, but he won't die
• 2:14:54
  Speaker 2: of natural causes, right, and the technology is such that
• 2:14:57
  Speaker 2: he can always look young. And it's I love the
• 2:15:01
  Speaker 2: book because it, you know, so he has relationships with people.
• 2:15:04
  Speaker 2: For example, he as a relationship with women and they
• 2:15:06
  Speaker 2: get old. So part of the part of the almost
• 2:15:11
  Speaker 2: tragedy tragedies in the book is how how he deals
• 2:15:15
  Speaker 2: with that, how they deal with it. It's a very
• 2:15:18
  Speaker 2: it's a sign fiction books. It's adventure, but it's also
• 2:15:21
  Speaker 2: a very personal book with a lot of this these
• 2:15:24
  Speaker 2: kind of issues. So Time Enough of Love is a
• 2:15:26
  Speaker 2: book I really I you know again, I haven't read
• 2:15:29
  Speaker 2: it in thirty years, so it's hard to recommend. But
• 2:15:32
  Speaker 2: when I read it in my twenties, I loved it.
• 2:15:35
  Speaker 5: It was what the nice deep rabbit hole to dive
• 2:15:39
  Speaker 5: in fifty minutes after midnight, two hours and fifty minutes
• 2:15:42
  Speaker 5: in the soul?
• 2:15:43
  Speaker 3: See see people, what can happen in the soul?
• 2:15:46
  Speaker 2: Absolutely? Absolutely yes, And I'm sorry I'm keeping you up
• 2:15:51
  Speaker 2: after midnight.
• 2:15:52
  Speaker 3: No no, no, no, no, it's the opposite.
• 2:15:53
  Speaker 5: It's the opposite. It's the opposite.
• 2:15:55
  Speaker 3: That's it's it's really.
• 2:15:56
  Speaker 2: Fun all right, well almost done right, Enwicks says, although
• 2:16:01
  Speaker 2: you know, we could take a few more super chats,
• 2:16:03
  Speaker 2: particularly at the fifteen hundred dollars level. Enwick says the
• 2:16:09
  Speaker 2: relationship the following movements of the French postmodernism for co
• 2:16:14
  Speaker 2: Delida at all and any after that, I mean we
• 2:16:21
  Speaker 2: will do a show on postmodernism. I mean I think
• 2:16:24
  Speaker 2: that's essential given given.
• 2:16:27
  Speaker 5: I have a whole self on on on, so we
• 2:16:31
  Speaker 5: can we can discuss go and spoiler alert, I am
• 2:16:36
  Speaker 5: more positively inclined to call than your average anti post
• 2:16:41
  Speaker 5: modern So it's gonna be interesting and not entirely predictable.
• 2:16:46
  Speaker 2: Okay, And and any other thinkers that Enwicks should look
• 2:16:50
  Speaker 2: into in post modernism other Deda.
• 2:16:54
  Speaker 5: Well, I don't think you can go into Derri Dakas
• 2:16:56
  Speaker 5: he's impenetrable. What you could do is check start from
• 2:17:02
  Speaker 5: cynical theories the book, because what Linsday and plac Rose do.
• 2:17:07
  Speaker 5: They give a fair reading to these things. So their
• 2:17:09
  Speaker 5: first achievement is not that they criticized these ideas. That's
• 2:17:12
  Speaker 5: why I also gave it to my students at the university.
• 2:17:15
  Speaker 5: They first explained to you what they say, which is
• 2:17:17
  Speaker 5: not easy. You're not going to find many books which
• 2:17:20
  Speaker 5: will the code defy post modernis So start from there.
• 2:17:25
  Speaker 2: A cob as a tutored Bolsheviks were mostly Jewish. That
• 2:17:30
  Speaker 2: the Bolsheviks was Jewish.
• 2:17:32
  Speaker 5: Lenin was not Jewish. Stalin was not Jewish, Krutzev was
• 2:17:37
  Speaker 5: not Jewish, Bresnyev.
• 2:17:39
  Speaker 2: Was not Jewish, head of the KGB.
• 2:17:43
  Speaker 5: Berria was not Jewish, and drop of what was not Jewish?
• 2:17:49
  Speaker 2: So who was Jewish?
• 2:17:50
  Speaker 4: Shotsky?
• 2:17:52
  Speaker 5: Yeah, and how did this turn out for him? Okay,
• 2:17:55
  Speaker 5: there were many, there were many Jewish amongst the Bolsheviks,
• 2:17:59
  Speaker 5: but also can do it? So about this? There was
• 2:18:02
  Speaker 5: institutional antisemities in Soviet Union post World War Two, proper
• 2:18:07
  Speaker 5: institutional antisemities. Ask yourselves, why is it that the only
• 2:18:12
  Speaker 5: people who could live Soviet Union were the Jews?
• 2:18:16
  Speaker 2: They wanted them out exactly. But here's the thing. Every
• 2:18:21
  Speaker 2: single intellectual movement out there, every single one, you will
• 2:18:26
  Speaker 2: find Jews over represented. Even in the conservatory, libertarianism, objectivism,
• 2:18:35
  Speaker 2: neo conservatism, you know, every single movement on the left
• 2:18:41
  Speaker 2: and on the right, it doesn't matter, is overrepresented by Jews.
• 2:18:46
  Speaker 2: And Jews have over the last one hundred and fifty
• 2:18:50
  Speaker 2: years being mostly left. And there's a reason for that.
• 2:18:54
  Speaker 2: If you associate the right with the Nazis. If you
• 2:18:58
  Speaker 2: associate the right with the Dreyfus trial, then Jews the
• 2:19:04
  Speaker 2: enemy of the Jews other people on the right, So
• 2:19:07
  Speaker 2: they think that they will find allies on the left.
• 2:19:09
  Speaker 2: They don't, as even in the Soviet Union Trotsky discovered right.
• 2:19:13
  Speaker 2: They don't find allies on the left. But it makes
• 2:19:16
  Speaker 2: complete sense for the Jews to rebel against the right
• 2:19:18
  Speaker 2: because the right is persecuting them all over Europe throughout
• 2:19:21
  Speaker 2: the nineteenth century and into the twentieth century, into the
• 2:19:23
  Speaker 2: middle of the twentieth century. But even then, movements on
• 2:19:27
  Speaker 2: the right have over represented by Jews. So generally intellectual
• 2:19:34
  Speaker 2: activities from science to intellectual movements to professors at university
• 2:19:40
  Speaker 2: is over represented by Jews. And if that is the
• 2:19:42
  Speaker 2: basis phantas Semitism, you know, so their achievement is why
• 2:19:46
  Speaker 2: we should be anti Semitic, We should hate Jews because
• 2:19:48
  Speaker 2: because they're achievers.
• 2:19:50
  Speaker 4: It's just bizil.
• 2:19:52
  Speaker 2: It's bizil Cobb. Yeah, I mean the Dwreyfus trial would
• 2:19:59
  Speaker 2: be an interesting that would be an interesting historical episode
• 2:20:02
  Speaker 2: to dig into.
• 2:20:04
  Speaker 5: It's and they impacted, had they impacted?
• 2:20:07
  Speaker 2: Had I mean it launches the Zionist movement. You don't
• 2:20:11
  Speaker 2: have Zionism in this form. It takes without the driver style.
• 2:20:16
  Speaker 2: But it also has profound impacts on France itself. It's
• 2:20:20
  Speaker 2: it's a it's a it's a it was a big
• 2:20:22
  Speaker 2: European event. It was It's hard to imagine today that
• 2:20:26
  Speaker 2: a trial could have the kind of impact it had
• 2:20:29
  Speaker 2: at the time.
• 2:20:30
  Speaker 5: And speaking of France, people who think all the Jews
• 2:20:33
  Speaker 5: and the left are the same, think how many French
• 2:20:37
  Speaker 5: revolutionaries around the Drevo Stein are Antisemites, and how in
• 2:20:42
  Speaker 5: France Sorel impacts both the fascists and the.
• 2:20:46
  Speaker 3: Marxian the Marxian left.
• 2:20:48
  Speaker 5: So it's it's not so simple like Jews left, others
• 2:20:52
  Speaker 5: anti Semites.
• 2:20:53
  Speaker 2: Right, because how do you objectively define status status?
• 2:21:02
  Speaker 5: I never thought of it. I don't know your reputation
• 2:21:05
  Speaker 5: in a community, but I never thought about that. I
• 2:21:08
  Speaker 5: never wonder what my status is in the this community
• 2:21:13
  Speaker 5: or the are. But I guess how people view you,
• 2:21:17
  Speaker 5: and here's here's probably what is the impact you have
• 2:21:21
  Speaker 5: on them in terms of you know you, if you
• 2:21:24
  Speaker 5: tell something, is it going to be taken seriously or not?
• 2:21:28
  Speaker 5: Maybe this, But I've never thought about it before.
• 2:21:37
  Speaker 4: W c z N says, this is good.
• 2:21:40
  Speaker 2: The wash tapes, all of Walsh's stuff is apparently almost
• 2:21:48
  Speaker 2: all of them a part of the Salem Center YouTube channel.
• 2:21:52
  Speaker 3: So check got the excellent.
• 2:21:55
  Speaker 2: Much and and it's Blan Capel and put them all
• 2:21:58
  Speaker 2: up there.
• 2:21:59
  Speaker 5: Thank you. This is very important because some years ago
• 2:22:02
  Speaker 5: when I checked, there was almost nothing on the on Dangel.
• 2:22:05
  Speaker 5: That's very important. Thank you.
• 2:22:07
  Speaker 2: Yep uh volta, best check, check, best check. The nineteen
• 2:22:15
  Speaker 2: ninety World Cup was the first for me as well.
• 2:22:18
  Speaker 5: So I have a funny story from that the World Cup.
• 2:22:21
  Speaker 5: So I watch the final West Germany Argentina in crete
• 2:22:27
  Speaker 5: in my grandmother's village, and my aunties, my grandmother and
• 2:22:32
  Speaker 5: her sister entered the room and it's like we were
• 2:22:35
  Speaker 5: obviously with Argentina. I said, yes, but why you can
• 2:22:38
  Speaker 5: never be with the Germans. They burned the village. So
• 2:22:42
  Speaker 5: in nineteen ninety they still had in their mind that
• 2:22:45
  Speaker 5: the West Germans is basically one generation after the Nazis,
• 2:22:49
  Speaker 5: and they were traumatized.
• 2:22:50
  Speaker 3: They literally, the Najers literally burned the whole village.
• 2:22:53
  Speaker 5: So they were horrified with the idea that anyone could
• 2:22:56
  Speaker 5: support West Germany.
• 2:22:57
  Speaker 2: Yep, my grandmother to the day she died. I mean
• 2:23:00
  Speaker 2: she she wouldn't buy anything made in Germany.
• 2:23:03
  Speaker 5: Wow.
• 2:23:03
  Speaker 2: She if you if you told her I drive a
• 2:23:06
  Speaker 2: BMW an Audi, she would be very upset, you know.
• 2:23:10
  Speaker 2: And she she did not her family, you know, I
• 2:23:14
  Speaker 2: think most of her family were killed. But she was
• 2:23:16
  Speaker 2: not in Europe when when it happened. She was in
• 2:23:19
  Speaker 2: South Africa, so she was spared from the horrors of it.
• 2:23:22
  Speaker 2: But she would have nothing to do. And as I
• 2:23:25
  Speaker 2: think I told you, in Israel, you can't play Wagner
• 2:23:30
  Speaker 2: right and orchestra, you know, the people will Now today
• 2:23:33
  Speaker 2: it's a little different maybe, but twenty years ago, thirty
• 2:23:35
  Speaker 2: years ago, you couldn't play Wagner. People would walk out,
• 2:23:38
  Speaker 2: they would boo, they would yell, they would interrupt the concert.
• 2:23:41
  Speaker 2: They wouldn't allow you to play Vagner. So yes, anything
• 2:23:44
  Speaker 2: associated with Germany, with the Holocaus, you know, with somebody
• 2:23:48
  Speaker 2: who was antisemitic German, yeah, was out. So yeah, people
• 2:23:53
  Speaker 2: remember these things and they bear they bear a grudge.
• 2:23:57
  Speaker 5: And on a lighter note, football wise, easily the worst,
• 2:24:01
  Speaker 5: the worst World Cup of modern time, like the football
• 2:24:04
  Speaker 5: that was played, which was absolutely ninety because it was
• 2:24:09
  Speaker 5: the last World Cup with the old rules, the old
• 2:24:11
  Speaker 5: off side rules, the rules where you could throw the
• 2:24:14
  Speaker 5: ball pass to the goalkeeper and he could catch it
• 2:24:16
  Speaker 5: with the hands. So for various reasons, the football was
• 2:24:19
  Speaker 5: so bad that they had to change the rules.
• 2:24:23
  Speaker 2: Well, the World Cup starts Toma no no no in
• 2:24:27
  Speaker 2: ten days, ten days, ten days. Oh actually, so it'll
• 2:24:31
  Speaker 2: be gone while yeah, okay, so when does it end?
• 2:24:35
  Speaker 2: When's the final?
• 2:24:38
  Speaker 5: This time? There are so many teams, I know, many rounds,
• 2:24:41
  Speaker 5: probably more than a month from now.
• 2:24:43
  Speaker 2: Okay, I'm looking for to seeing the World Cup. It's
• 2:24:47
  Speaker 2: my one football engagement of every four years. Orthough last
• 2:24:53
  Speaker 2: I was three years ago. So it's the times a
• 2:24:56
  Speaker 2: little weird Messi is playing. I like Messy, enjoy watching him.
• 2:25:00
  Speaker 2: So that'll be fun. And we oh, no show next week,
• 2:25:06
  Speaker 2: So no show next week. I'm I'm I'm in New
• 2:25:09
  Speaker 2: York and I'm Sundays, I'm traveling. But two weeks from
• 2:25:13
  Speaker 2: now there will definitely be a show. The topic to
• 2:25:16
  Speaker 2: be determined. We will let you know as soon as
• 2:25:19
  Speaker 2: we decide. Uh and uh yeah. Have have a great week,
• 2:25:24
  Speaker 2: have a great rest. Well, your week is over. Have
• 2:25:27
  Speaker 2: have a good week. Starting today in Greece, Bye everybody
• 2:25:32
  Speaker 5: Thanks everyone, Thanks you, Avon