Latest / PlasticPills Critical Theory & Philosophy / Palantir's "Marxist Critical Theory" CEO // 263

Transcript

Palantir's "Marxist Critical Theory" CEO // 263 · PlasticPills Critical Theory & Philosophy

• 0:02
  Speaker 1: All right, welcome back everybody. This is the Plastic Pills
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: Philosophy and Critical Theory podcast. We've dealt with philosophy saying
• 0:19
  Speaker 1: we're done with philosophy, Okay, I am No one else
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: has said that, But today we're doing critical theory in
• 0:26
  Speaker 1: that we are discussing quite a famous member of the
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: Frankfurt School. Yes, we might even say the most fascist
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: of the Frankfurt School, who are typically known for their
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: anti fascism. Unlike today's subject, who's is. We won't say
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: fascist because Victor's not here, and he's asked us to
• 0:48
  Speaker 1: not say fascist anymore because it doesn't describe anything. We
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: need to use a more precige analytical term. Well, guess what.
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: Victor's not here, so we're going to use it. And
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: that's exactly what he sounds like.
• 1:00
  Speaker 2: He's our most fascist member. Ironically, I would say.
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: I would say that too. It's easy to say because
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: he's not here, but he's also a liberal who, let's
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: be honest, when the chips are down, they don't have
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: that much of a problem with fascism. But our subject today,
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: he is. He studied under Habermas. According to Business Insider.
• 1:25
  Speaker 2: Yeah, he passed through the spaces that Habermass might have
• 1:31
  Speaker 2: passed through at the same university, so that I guess
• 1:35
  Speaker 2: that's close enough.
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: Yeah, if you're a business insider, then being in the
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: same vicinity is studying under for them.
• 1:43
  Speaker 2: The Gerta Institute in Frankfurt.
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: So who is it that we're talking about today, Eric,
• 1:52
  Speaker 1: We are talking about the Carp Alexander Karp, the man
• 1:57
  Speaker 1: behind the all seeing of Pallenteer.
• 2:02
  Speaker 2: I never looked into this, but he had. He has
• 2:05
  Speaker 2: a weird thing about Lord of the Rings, doesn't he,
• 2:09
  Speaker 2: because that's the Palenteer.
• 2:11
  Speaker 3: The most ironic me too?
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: Does he as well? Because I think the Lord of
• 2:17
  Speaker 1: the Rings stuff is Peter Teal's naming convention.
• 2:21
  Speaker 2: I think maybe maybe it's a Peter Teal thing, isn't that? Yeah?
• 2:25
  Speaker 1: Because Teal also named his fund after a different Lord
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: of the Rings element, which I gotta say as a
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: as a as a teenage fan of Lord of the Rings,
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: these guys have really fucked it up for me, Anderill Pallenteer,
• 2:39
  Speaker 1: And then you kind of realize it's just like a
• 2:41
  Speaker 1: Catholic allegory.
• 2:43
  Speaker 2: Oh yeah, there's a couple names Mythrill Capital Valar Adventures,
• 2:50
  Speaker 2: So it takes random cool sounding names. That what's the
• 2:54
  Speaker 2: ventures called Valor ventures? Those are the angel that made
• 3:00
  Speaker 2: the world? Right, the name of the gods in the
• 3:04
  Speaker 2: in the Middle Earth universe, right, the gods or the
• 3:08
  Speaker 2: val are Yeah, so perverting Token's beautiful creation anyway, And
• 3:15
  Speaker 2: I mean the Pallenteer are the seeing stones that the
• 3:20
  Speaker 2: one in the movies. They corrupt Soamon because Sauron has
• 3:25
  Speaker 2: one of them, So when you look into them, Souron
• 3:29
  Speaker 2: just gets like direct access to your mind and can
• 3:31
  Speaker 2: corrupt you.
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: There's so much reporting of all these profiles on Pallenteer.
• 3:36
  Speaker 1: They are like it's named after an evil artifact. That's
• 3:40
  Speaker 1: not true. They're not evil until the evil guy gets
• 3:43
  Speaker 1: on them. Formerly, they're used by the Gondorians. No, not
• 3:48
  Speaker 1: the Gondorians. What's the island the new Minorians? The New
• 3:50
  Speaker 1: Minorians right to communicate?
• 3:52
  Speaker 2: Yeah they Yeah, they were made by the same dude.
• 3:56
  Speaker 2: I think they might have been made by the same
• 3:58
  Speaker 2: dude who made the Silmuriles.
• 4:00
  Speaker 3: Fan or uh.
• 4:02
  Speaker 2: So they're not like inherently evil things. But I guess
• 4:07
  Speaker 2: if you don't know where they all are, which a
• 4:10
  Speaker 2: lot of them were lost over the year over the ages,
• 4:14
  Speaker 2: then things can get a bit dangerous, but otherwise they
• 4:17
  Speaker 2: were just brought over by the new Menorians to Middle
• 4:20
  Speaker 2: Earth as like a long distance communication devices essentially like
• 4:25
  Speaker 2: walkie talkies and spyglasses kind of combination.
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: Yeah, so add this to the pile a thing that
• 4:32
  Speaker 1: business journalists just make up. Number one that alex Karp
• 4:37
  Speaker 1: studied under Habermass, and number two that the pall and
• 4:42
  Speaker 1: TII are evil in themselves. Yeah, it's not a great
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: thing to know mythology, and we're gonna helpful turn from
• 4:50
  Speaker 1: the Silmarillian mythology into real life mythology because this guy
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: is is nothing if not mythologize. Makes mister Alexander Karp,
• 5:02
  Speaker 1: this is a case of don't look under the rock
• 5:05
  Speaker 1: because you don't you don't know what's under there.
• 5:07
  Speaker 3: I have.
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: We're gonna go. We're gonna go not too deep because
• 5:12
  Speaker 1: I don't know why this guy is not more conspiracized.
• 5:15
  Speaker 1: You know, it seems like he should be. He sounds
• 5:18
  Speaker 1: like such an op like he Okay, here here, I'll
• 5:22
  Speaker 1: tell you. Here's the backstory that I'm reaching towards. We're
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: gonna cover his his critical theory connections. But here's his
• 5:29
  Speaker 1: his backstory connections post post PhD in social theory under
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: Habermass asterix. He it says he inherited. This is in
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: a book called The Philosopher in the Valley. He inherited
• 5:48
  Speaker 1: a whopping great inheritance set him up for life, twelve
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: thousand dollars grand twelve thousand dollars and uh, that's about
• 5:58
  Speaker 1: enough to buy you know, a ten year old a
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: ten year old Toyota camry. But no, it says, this
• 6:04
  Speaker 1: is this mythology, right, He inherited twelve thousand dollars and
• 6:07
  Speaker 1: started a money management firm with it, and he was
• 6:10
  Speaker 1: so good with money. Tell me if this is echoing
• 6:13
  Speaker 1: anything Eric. He was so good with money that wealthy
• 6:17
  Speaker 1: Europeans saw this guy and said, oh wow, this guy's
• 6:21
  Speaker 1: so good with money. I'm gonna let him manage all
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: my money. These are unnamed. Also, these unnamed high network quote,
• 6:30
  Speaker 1: high net worth European clients end quote. So any bells
• 6:36
  Speaker 1: ringing over there?
• 6:37
  Speaker 2: It is a backstory archetype that should remind one of Epstein. Perhaps,
• 6:47
  Speaker 2: I mean the really good at wealth management and gathering
• 6:51
  Speaker 2: people to you and getting mysterious donors and just having money.
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: Yeah, what I find so ridiculous is that they put
• 6:59
  Speaker 1: a number on it though, Like you have to lie
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: at least you have to make it one hundred and
• 7:05
  Speaker 1: twenty thousand dollars. So what's a what's a great investor
• 7:09
  Speaker 1: gonna gonna? What's his rate of return? Like, oh, god,
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: ten percent if you're if you're exceptional, twenty percent, if
• 7:17
  Speaker 1: you get super lucky and you're exceptional, twenty percent, and
• 7:20
  Speaker 1: normal maybe ten percent. Except he started with twelve thousand dollars,
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: so he turned that into what thirteen thousand dollars, And
• 7:28
  Speaker 1: then Europeans were like, oh, this guy's so amazing with money.
• 7:34
  Speaker 2: Yeah, if he's good with that much money, let's just
• 7:37
  Speaker 2: give him tons more. It's a litmus test.
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: Again. No one that I found has conspiracized this, but
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: it should be. This is this is Karp's direct quote.
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: I'll read the sentence and then his direct quote is
• 7:52
  Speaker 1: embedded in it. Not long after obtaining his doc, hearent
• 7:55
  Speaker 1: he received an inheritance from his grandfather and began investing
• 7:58
  Speaker 1: it in startups and stocks, with surprising success. Some high
• 8:02
  Speaker 1: net worth individuals heard that quote this crazy dude was
• 8:07
  Speaker 1: good at investing, unquote, and began to seek his services.
• 8:12
  Speaker 1: Karp says, so just the worst lie, the worst lie.
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: Even if you doubled your money, you have now twenty
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: four thousand dollars. Now this is so patently false, at
• 8:27
  Speaker 1: least as it's told. No rich person is like, what
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: am I gonna do with all this money that I have?
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: I need to invest? I'm gonna give it to this
• 8:35
  Speaker 1: guy who did really good with twelve grand. That high
• 8:39
  Speaker 1: net worth individual does not exist. And this sounds exactly
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: like the fantasy of a nineteen year old who watches
• 8:46
  Speaker 1: like hustle preneur Instagram reels.
• 8:51
  Speaker 2: I suspect, I suspect it was his relationship with Peter
• 8:55
  Speaker 2: Teel that got him into all of what he's been
• 8:59
  Speaker 2: up to, at least to the beginning.
• 9:02
  Speaker 1: That wouldn't actually make sense, because he admits that Peter
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: Teal gave him a bunch of money later, and according
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: to his story, during this time, when he's starting his
• 9:13
  Speaker 1: his hedge fund or whatever this is, private private equity
• 9:16
  Speaker 1: management he does, he's not in contact with Peter Tiel.
• 9:19
  Speaker 1: According to him, I don't like who knows if any
• 9:21
  Speaker 1: of this is true, But he was in contact with
• 9:24
  Speaker 1: Teal earlier, but not during this period, because this was
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: after he finished his doctorate, before he started Pallanteer. It's
• 9:33
  Speaker 1: on the it's on the cusp. Now, I don't want
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: to get too conspirable. I'm just conspiratorial. I'll just tell you.
• 9:40
  Speaker 1: I'll just tell you the bear facts. Eric, Where do
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: you think he was You're not gonna guess. I'll just
• 9:46
  Speaker 1: tell you where he was working at this time when
• 9:49
  Speaker 1: he was connected to these wealthy contacts. It's an organization. Again,
• 9:55
  Speaker 1: this is just a dot. I'm not connecting the dots
• 9:58
  Speaker 1: called the Jewish philant Anthropy Partnership. It has since changed
• 10:03
  Speaker 1: its name to the United Jewish Communities. Then it changed
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: its name again to the Jewish Federations of North America.
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: Why so many name changes. It's just a it's just
• 10:15
  Speaker 1: a dot. So this is a huge Israel fundraiser thing.
• 10:25
  Speaker 1: They fundraise billions, and this is where Alex Karp was
• 10:30
  Speaker 1: working when he also overnight was suddenly managing a lot
• 10:36
  Speaker 1: of rich people's money. That's it. That's I have no theories,
• 10:43
  Speaker 1: any any theories over there.
• 10:45
  Speaker 3: No, it's all just uh, just hustling.
• 10:49
  Speaker 1: Now following this is immediately following, and I'm only connecting
• 10:52
  Speaker 1: this because the next time, these wealthy Europeans show up
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: palent Here, which was mostly funded by p Teal, but
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: I guess he didn't want to dump any more money
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: into it, even though he's a founder. It's again unclear.
• 11:07
  Speaker 1: But they couldn't find any investors, so this is again
• 11:10
  Speaker 1: another mythological prologue. Everyone turned them away, they laughed them
• 11:15
  Speaker 1: out of the room. They said, you can't ever do this,
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: You're never going to succeed at this. And then these
• 11:20
  Speaker 1: wealthy Europeans return and keep the company solvent somehow, along
• 11:28
  Speaker 1: with guess who the investment arm of the CIA, So
• 11:33
  Speaker 1: he has no connections in the world except Peter Teel,
• 11:37
  Speaker 1: the CIA, This Israel fundraiser company and wealthy unnamed wealthy Europeans.
• 11:45
  Speaker 1: And I did go check. I know this is not
• 11:47
  Speaker 1: what we're supposed to be doing on this podcast, but
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: I did go check. I looked through the investors of Pallenteer,
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: because if they were in this pre series A group,
• 11:57
  Speaker 1: they should own a good chunk and it's almost all
• 12:01
  Speaker 1: like American hedge funds. I couldn't find any that fits
• 12:06
  Speaker 1: the bill for unnamed wealthy Europeans that should own a
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: large chunk of Palanteers, so maybe they sold it. I'm
• 12:12
  Speaker 1: not sure, but we don't know who these people are.
• 12:15
  Speaker 1: But I'm not saying it's anything like perhaps Epstein working
• 12:20
  Speaker 1: for the Massade or anything like that.
• 12:24
  Speaker 2: I mean, this is a strange guy. He's struck up
• 12:29
  Speaker 2: a friendship with Peter tel back in law school at
• 12:32
  Speaker 2: Stanford in the early nineties, and he was the he
• 12:38
  Speaker 2: was the Communist of the two. He was the Marxist
• 12:42
  Speaker 2: identified as a Marxist, had arguments to love to have
• 12:47
  Speaker 2: discussions arguments with Teal, who was more of a capitalist.
• 12:53
  Speaker 2: But I guess they just bonded in that way over
• 12:56
  Speaker 2: their mutual dislike of law school apparently, and over there
• 13:03
  Speaker 2: completely opposite economic worldviews, which which clearly weren't that opposite.
• 13:09
  Speaker 2: But that's this is I guess this is again mythology territory,
• 13:14
  Speaker 2: you know, because he's the carp also goes on to
• 13:20
  Speaker 2: supposedly be have a right a dissertation at the Frankfurt
• 13:26
  Speaker 2: School of Critical Theory, i e. The Institute for Social
• 13:31
  Speaker 2: Research that aber that that Abermas worked at that was
• 13:36
  Speaker 2: started by.
• 13:38
  Speaker 3: Morkhimer and Adorno.
• 13:41
  Speaker 2: And he would supposedly even go on to talk to
• 13:44
  Speaker 2: his employees about Marxist topics and have discussions like that,
• 13:50
  Speaker 2: even though this guy is just the biggest capitalist in
• 13:53
  Speaker 2: the world.
• 13:54
  Speaker 3: This is all just.
• 13:55
  Speaker 2: Again weird mythologizing. He didn't really write his dissertation under Abermas,
• 14:05
  Speaker 2: was not his supervisor, didn't even write it at the
• 14:09
  Speaker 2: Frankfurt school that Aurkhimer and Adorno founded, not the Institute
• 14:14
  Speaker 2: for Social Research, but in a different department. But he
• 14:18
  Speaker 2: does borrow. And this is the weird bit. This is
• 14:21
  Speaker 2: the whole point. This is a dot. This is a
• 14:23
  Speaker 2: distant dot to connect. Is that he wrote his dissertation
• 14:29
  Speaker 2: and one of the central ideas he borrows is jargon
• 14:33
  Speaker 2: from Adorno's book The Jargon of Authenticity. And he borrows
• 14:40
  Speaker 2: this idea of jargon and he uses to analyze the
• 14:43
  Speaker 2: speech of some German right wing novelist from like nineteen
• 14:49
  Speaker 2: ninety eight. This guy receives I guess, this literature prize,
• 14:56
  Speaker 2: and the guy uses the opportunity of the speech to
• 14:59
  Speaker 2: say should stop doing public celebrations of the Holocaust, or
• 15:03
  Speaker 2: we should stop doing public The guy uses his award
• 15:09
  Speaker 2: speech to claim that they should stop publicly mourning Holocaust victims,
• 15:17
  Speaker 2: which is weird but okay, So that's one of his
• 15:20
  Speaker 2: case studies he applies to. But we found another article
• 15:27
  Speaker 2: on somebody's substack.
• 15:29
  Speaker 1: Yes, Indigo Broom, I'm going to say Indigo Bruma.
• 15:35
  Speaker 2: And as some people might know, Palenteer has been making
• 15:38
  Speaker 2: waves lately because they released a very racy twenty two
• 15:45
  Speaker 2: point manifesto. Some of the points in which, especially the
• 15:51
  Speaker 2: last three, really earned the label in the mass media
• 15:55
  Speaker 2: of techno fascist.
• 15:57
  Speaker 1: It's exactly what you'd expect from a social list who
• 16:00
  Speaker 1: tells his employees about Marx when they're they're eager to
• 16:03
  Speaker 1: hear about it.
• 16:04
  Speaker 2: There's there's Victor's voice coming back in again saying, don't
• 16:07
  Speaker 2: use fascist, it's too easy. Well, you got to do
• 16:11
  Speaker 2: the work to earn the right to call someone a fascist,
• 16:16
  Speaker 2: and uh, this Indigo Groom does that work and connects
• 16:19
  Speaker 2: the dots between.
• 16:22
  Speaker 3: Uh, basically.
• 16:25
  Speaker 2: Carp's weird appropriation of Adorno in his dissertation and the
• 16:30
  Speaker 2: idea of jargon, which she seems to appropriate and use
• 16:35
  Speaker 2: in an almost positive way. I mean a Doorno uses
• 16:39
  Speaker 2: it as like a critical category, like there's jargon and
• 16:43
  Speaker 2: it's something we need to critique and negate Carp takes
• 16:49
  Speaker 2: the idea of jargon and seems to look at it
• 16:52
  Speaker 2: as like a socially beneficial thing.
• 16:55
  Speaker 1: A tool. Yeah, he's gonna.
• 16:57
  Speaker 2: Use it's it's a it's a necessary component of what
• 17:03
  Speaker 2: keeps societies unified, and it fits right into his Parson framework.
• 17:09
  Speaker 2: But anyway between and and then his use of jargon, techno, jargon,
• 17:16
  Speaker 2: jargon of systematization, as Indigo calls it in his manifesto,
• 17:23
  Speaker 2: that he is just like kind of a condensation of
• 17:29
  Speaker 2: his book he wrote with some guy last year. He
• 17:33
  Speaker 2: condensed it into a twenty two point manifesto which contains
• 17:39
  Speaker 2: all sorts of policy grievances, moral moralizing claims, cultural gripes,
• 17:48
  Speaker 2: the Wokes.
• 17:49
  Speaker 1: Yeah, the West, all that stuff.
• 17:52
  Speaker 2: Yeah, all that stuff you'd expect, kind of weird, a
• 17:55
  Speaker 2: bit of an overreach for corporation, things you wouldn't but
• 18:01
  Speaker 2: really really just expressing his personal vision. I guess you
• 18:07
  Speaker 2: could say, which is it's weird, it's a it's a
• 18:10
  Speaker 2: strange document.
• 18:12
  Speaker 3: But there's a there's.
• 18:13
  Speaker 2: A apparently, whether he knows it or not, there's a
• 18:16
  Speaker 2: direct line from Karp's dissertation back his in his quote
• 18:20
  Speaker 2: unquote Frankfurt school days to him writing this, this manifesto
• 18:27
  Speaker 2: of his vision of the future and where the country
• 18:30
  Speaker 2: should be going in the duties and of tech billionaires.
• 18:35
  Speaker 3: Yeah, so I check this out.
• 18:37
  Speaker 1: I was no, he didn't go to the what's it
• 18:40
  Speaker 1: called the i f S. He wasn't at the IFS.
• 18:44
  Speaker 1: His supervisor and seems to be where he was an
• 18:47
  Speaker 1: associate was at the Freud Institute. And I Google mapped it.
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: I know we should be doing philosophy, but I, you know,
• 18:54
  Speaker 1: I had to find out they are actually two blocks
• 18:57
  Speaker 1: away from each other. It looks from Google maps that
• 19:01
  Speaker 1: go through university is like one of the city universities
• 19:04
  Speaker 1: were just like a buildings integrated with the city rather
• 19:09
  Speaker 1: than an American style isolated campus. So these are about
• 19:13
  Speaker 1: two blocks away from each other. But and this is
• 19:17
  Speaker 1: not I'm not making this up right, business insider is like,
• 19:21
  Speaker 1: this is a Frankfurt School scholar, a socialist Frankfort School
• 19:27
  Speaker 1: scholar who studied under Habermas. I don't know where they
• 19:31
  Speaker 1: got that from, but he was at the same school.
• 19:35
  Speaker 1: I didn't see any other associations beside them. So this
• 19:39
  Speaker 1: is again part of the mythology. This is an outsider.
• 19:43
  Speaker 1: He's a socialist. He quotes Marx at people which sounds
• 19:48
  Speaker 1: like a great way to be cool and make friends
• 19:52
  Speaker 1: and not come off as weird or annoying as to
• 19:54
  Speaker 1: walk around quoting marks at people. But this makes an
• 19:58
  Speaker 1: impression for some reason on the also not at all
• 20:02
  Speaker 1: annoying guy who was running the Stanford Review, Peter Thiel.
• 20:07
  Speaker 1: And then yeah, then we do you want to get
• 20:10
  Speaker 1: into the technical the jargon technicalities here. So jargon's a concept, right,
• 20:15
  Speaker 1: We're not saying jargon in the normal English sense of
• 20:19
  Speaker 1: the word, but jargon is.
• 20:20
  Speaker 2: A technical terms. No, not not exactly. No, Well, just
• 20:25
  Speaker 2: one last note on his supposed marxistness his socialist views
• 20:34
  Speaker 2: is that we have actually encountered this pattern before of
• 20:37
  Speaker 2: like people who were obviously like very right wing, very
• 20:42
  Speaker 2: capitalist or libertarian or whatever whatever the case may be,
• 20:47
  Speaker 2: some right wing ideology being sort of endowed with a
• 20:51
  Speaker 2: with a very leftist background, and that was you remember
• 20:55
  Speaker 2: the neo conservatives. Supposedly all these neo con servatives were
• 21:01
  Speaker 2: x Trokskyists and anti stalin well, anti Stalinist leftists, ex Trotzkyists.
• 21:09
  Speaker 3: And then they become.
• 21:12
  Speaker 2: We were like Irving Crystal and then they become disillusioned
• 21:16
  Speaker 2: with the left after whatever nineteen sixty eight, and then
• 21:19
  Speaker 2: they go over to the right. We have a similar
• 21:22
  Speaker 2: endowment being foisted upon Karp here emphasizing this like weird
• 21:28
  Speaker 2: leftism he's got despite his just very capitalist kind of
• 21:34
  Speaker 2: silicone libertarianism.
• 21:37
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it's unclear. I don't know how much of this
• 21:40
  Speaker 1: is being like a contrarian he's Peter Thiel has described
• 21:45
  Speaker 1: him as a Marxist. I think he said once he's
• 21:48
  Speaker 1: a neo Marxist in an interview with a Swiss magazine,
• 21:52
  Speaker 1: and he's also described himself as a socialist. Weirdly, though
• 21:56
  Speaker 1: in his dissertation Now I control Aft there Marxism one time,
• 22:02
  Speaker 1: it makes mention of Marx. In just a list of
• 22:05
  Speaker 1: philosophers of sociologists, there's not a single direct citation of Marx,
• 22:12
  Speaker 1: and Marx is not in the bibliography, in the work
• 22:15
  Speaker 1: cited at all, it's almost all sociology. So even though
• 22:19
  Speaker 1: he's using Adorno's concept but making it so generic that
• 22:23
  Speaker 1: it's not really part of the neo Marxist tradition. It's
• 22:26
  Speaker 1: more a part of the German sociology tradition. So Horkheimer
• 22:32
  Speaker 1: is mentioned once, I believe, and marcusa is given a mention.
• 22:38
  Speaker 1: But there's not really neo Marxist in here. It's mostly
• 22:40
  Speaker 1: on German sociology. So you see like Sigmont Boehman, Max Weber,
• 22:46
  Speaker 1: Talcot Parsons, and Nikolas Luhmann. So I don't know where
• 22:51
  Speaker 1: Marxism is coming from. He doesn't seem to be in
• 22:55
  Speaker 1: that tradition based on this limited amount of evidence except
• 22:59
  Speaker 1: by other people's words.
• 23:01
  Speaker 2: And that's just he's just being like retconned with with
• 23:04
  Speaker 2: all of these Marxist views.
• 23:06
  Speaker 3: But that's fine, that's fine.
• 23:10
  Speaker 1: And let's be honest, Like most of this criticism is
• 23:12
  Speaker 1: obviously jealousy because the end goal of a of a
• 23:17
  Speaker 1: critical theory degree being a billionaire. That's I mean, who
• 23:21
  Speaker 1: wouldn't be jealous of that? Yeah, So we are just jealous.
• 23:25
  Speaker 1: That's why we're that's why we're critiquing this, Uh, you know,
• 23:30
  Speaker 1: pretty annoying guy. Like all the mythologizing is he was
• 23:34
  Speaker 1: such a genius and he had such a way and
• 23:36
  Speaker 1: people just knew he had something going on in his
• 23:38
  Speaker 1: mind all the time. And you know, if you listen
• 23:40
  Speaker 1: to him talk, I see I see a lot of
• 23:44
  Speaker 1: self aggrandizing and you know, not really a lot of coherence.
• 23:48
  Speaker 1: I mean the guy, the guy could describe what he
• 23:51
  Speaker 1: had for lunch and it would sound like condescension. But
• 23:54
  Speaker 1: he's all like spastic when he talks. So people think
• 23:57
  Speaker 1: there must be something, there must be something going on
• 24:00
  Speaker 1: here because this guy made eighteen billion dollars. Yeah, So.
• 24:05
  Speaker 2: His dissertation the beginning going go right back to the
• 24:12
  Speaker 2: beginning where he's going to have this view of jargon.
• 24:18
  Speaker 2: I mean, his dissertation is called Aggression in the Life
• 24:21
  Speaker 2: World Colon expanding Parsons concept of aggression through a description
• 24:31
  Speaker 2: of the connection between jargon, aggression and culture and jargon. Well,
• 24:37
  Speaker 2: aggression comes from his Freuden side, I guess, because aggression
• 24:44
  Speaker 2: was kind of like a proxy for Nazism, and it
• 24:48
  Speaker 2: was a big area of study in like the seventies
• 24:52
  Speaker 2: and eighties in Freud in Freudian studies in Germany. And
• 24:57
  Speaker 2: his supervisor was named Carola Bread or Carolla Bready, and
• 25:04
  Speaker 2: she was working in the social science department but also
• 25:08
  Speaker 2: at the Freud Institute in in this school, and so
• 25:12
  Speaker 2: he sort of took up her work on aggression. Staying
• 25:17
  Speaker 2: true to his neo Marxist self proclaimed neo Marxist background,
• 25:21
  Speaker 2: he dug into Adorno and took the idea of jargon
• 25:24
  Speaker 2: and being in the social science department, he used a
• 25:29
  Speaker 2: framework devised by Talcott Parsons to to put all this together.
• 25:35
  Speaker 2: So that's his his dissertation is is kind of patchworky.
• 25:39
  Speaker 1: No criticism, that's what that's what that's what it's about.
• 25:42
  Speaker 2: Interdisciplinary they would call it. Yeah, but let's uh, let's
• 25:46
  Speaker 2: start with jargon. I know you read this yesterday, so
• 25:50
  Speaker 2: I'll howbould I do the broad strokes and you help
• 25:54
  Speaker 2: me with the details if I forget, because the jargon
• 25:58
  Speaker 2: concept I I R C is Uh. Adorno hated Heidiger.
• 26:03
  Speaker 1: I think he hated Heidiger more than anyone else for
• 26:07
  Speaker 1: you know, for a couple couple good.
• 26:10
  Speaker 2: Reasons, existentialism in general, I think, but mainly Heidigger's and
• 26:16
  Speaker 2: imitators after the war as well after World War Two.
• 26:20
  Speaker 1: Yeah, when we think of Heidieger and as existentialist imitators,
• 26:23
  Speaker 1: we think of Jumpelscht. But I think what we're referring
• 26:27
  Speaker 1: to here, if I recall, it's uh like Jaspers and
• 26:33
  Speaker 1: uh Boober, those kinds, those kinds of guys. But the
• 26:38
  Speaker 1: main problematic concept here is Heidigger's authenticity. Now Heidegger's authenticity.
• 26:46
  Speaker 1: It doesn't exactly mean what we think of when we
• 26:49
  Speaker 1: mean like being authentic, but it's what we think of
• 26:53
  Speaker 1: is basically a descendant of what Heidiger started and what
• 26:57
  Speaker 1: Sart took over. It's like beach to yourself, be authentic.
• 27:02
  Speaker 1: And existentialism is at least in part responsible for bestowing
• 27:07
  Speaker 1: this curse on the world, the curse that we still
• 27:09
  Speaker 1: have with us today, the cult of authenticity. But anyway, jargon,
• 27:14
  Speaker 1: jargon is uh. It's used to describe Heidigger's project as
• 27:21
  Speaker 1: this almost a theological register. We could say something like
• 27:26
  Speaker 1: myth mythology, because we've been using it so far. But
• 27:30
  Speaker 1: this jargon is used to make something sound profound, mythological,
• 27:34
  Speaker 1: have this religious tenor to it, and it the purpose
• 27:40
  Speaker 1: of it is to obfuscate, you know, it's an ideological
• 27:43
  Speaker 1: obfuscation to take away politics. Right. If you make something religious,
• 27:49
  Speaker 1: then it seems to be outside of the sphere of politics.
• 27:52
  Speaker 1: And this is what Adorno takes the existentialists to be doing.
• 27:58
  Speaker 1: And Heidiger included an existential as putting all this deep, profound,
• 28:03
  Speaker 1: religious sounding language, the political situation is no longer relevant,
• 28:10
  Speaker 1: or it's hidden by a magical thinking or mystical thinking.
• 28:16
  Speaker 1: That's an example of jargon is decontextualization. Anything I missed
• 28:21
  Speaker 1: there is that? Is that a pretty on the nose.
• 28:25
  Speaker 2: Yeah, the book, the book itself is quite long and difficult.
• 28:30
  Speaker 2: I cracked it open and inhaled as much as I
• 28:33
  Speaker 2: could in a single sitting, just to just to get ready.
• 28:36
  Speaker 2: Not not that it mattered a whole lot, because we're
• 28:39
  Speaker 2: looking at how Karp is sort of using it, so
• 28:44
  Speaker 2: that's fine. But yeah, Adorno's target existentialism, and he thinks
• 28:51
  Speaker 2: that this sort of they just kind of have a
• 28:56
  Speaker 2: theological language that they've taken over and de theologized but
• 29:02
  Speaker 2: kept it sort of sacred qualities, and they use everyday terms,
• 29:09
  Speaker 2: and they just use the terms like, you know, basic
• 29:13
  Speaker 2: ideas being existence. He gives a bunch of examples existential appeal, encounter, statement, concern.
• 29:25
  Speaker 2: These are like the clearing Yeah, just like sort of
• 29:29
  Speaker 2: everyday terms that are given this sort of extra oomph
• 29:34
  Speaker 2: by emphasizing them in the way he kind of describes
• 29:39
  Speaker 2: it by saying, the theological addictions of these years have
• 29:45
  Speaker 2: seeped into the language far beyond the circle of those
• 29:49
  Speaker 2: who at the time set themselves up as the elite.
• 29:53
  Speaker 2: The sacred quality of the authentics talk belongs to the
• 29:57
  Speaker 2: cult of authenticity rather than to the Christian cult. Prior
• 30:03
  Speaker 2: to any consideration of particular content. This language molds thought.
• 30:10
  Speaker 2: So it gets this immediate appeal of this everyday language
• 30:14
  Speaker 2: that you throw out there in your philosophy as.
• 30:17
  Speaker 3: If it has some kind of.
• 30:19
  Speaker 2: Meaning, some kind of originary mystical meaning. Yeah, and they
• 30:25
  Speaker 2: use it to make their point. And the whole point
• 30:28
  Speaker 2: of calling it jargon is to is to de mythologize
• 30:31
  Speaker 2: it and critique it and show it that it's it's uh,
• 30:35
  Speaker 2: it's dehistoricizing and depoliticizing a kind of Yeah, it's a
• 30:40
  Speaker 2: kind of dehistoricizing way of doing philosophy. And yeah, Adorno
• 30:45
  Speaker 2: just really hates it. It's like it's like it's like
• 30:49
  Speaker 2: Benya means talking about the idea of the fading of
• 30:54
  Speaker 2: the aura in the age of technological reproducibility and fascism
• 31:01
  Speaker 2: tries to sort of reinstate the aura by focusing on
• 31:06
  Speaker 2: leaders and faces and individual personalities and doing certain things
• 31:10
  Speaker 2: with the camera like in Try like in Hitler's Triumph
• 31:13
  Speaker 2: of the will Well. Similarly, for a Doorno, jargon is
• 31:18
  Speaker 2: like trying to reinstall the aura around language by giving
• 31:24
  Speaker 2: these words this unique sort of mystical feeling of distance
• 31:30
  Speaker 2: and time and space, this sort of sacred effect, this
• 31:33
  Speaker 2: halo around them. And so yeah, kind of the same
• 31:38
  Speaker 2: sort of idea.
• 31:40
  Speaker 1: This is one possible reading of Heidigger. There are other ones, right,
• 31:46
  Speaker 1: This is kind of a reading of Heidegger that says
• 31:49
  Speaker 1: he's basically bullshitting. So not everyone agrees with this. I
• 31:52
  Speaker 1: don't really agree with this, but this is one possible reading.
• 31:56
  Speaker 3: I mean it's different.
• 31:58
  Speaker 2: It's different from the modern fascist callers, right, because all
• 32:02
  Speaker 2: you have to do now to call him a fascist
• 32:04
  Speaker 2: is to just look at his his black notebooks and
• 32:08
  Speaker 2: look at the parts of his of his works that
• 32:11
  Speaker 2: were sort of edited out and put them back in,
• 32:15
  Speaker 2: just to see how kind of during his Nazi period
• 32:18
  Speaker 2: some of what he was writing was like some of
• 32:21
  Speaker 2: some of the anti Semitic or weird anti religious shit
• 32:26
  Speaker 2: was weaved right in there with his high philosophy. But
• 32:29
  Speaker 2: Adorno's root is more like the formal critical route to
• 32:35
  Speaker 2: calling him fascist by saying he's using like like like
• 32:40
  Speaker 2: Benjamin's reinstatement of the aura after its decay, jargon is
• 32:47
  Speaker 2: a kind of preparing the preparing the ground for a
• 32:51
  Speaker 2: for a fascist mythologizing.
• 32:55
  Speaker 1: Yeah, proto fascist. And if you read the Frankfurt School,
• 32:59
  Speaker 1: fucking everything's proto fascist. You know, Disney's proto fascist cameras
• 33:04
  Speaker 1: are proto fascists. The family's proto if you find if
• 33:08
  Speaker 1: you read all the prank for school together, you can
• 33:09
  Speaker 1: always find something that's proto fascist. And here it's philosophy language.
• 33:14
  Speaker 1: Try to make your your language deep sounding, and and
• 33:18
  Speaker 1: it hypnotizes supposedly in that company's fascist tendencies. So that's
• 33:23
  Speaker 1: the Adorno definition of jargon. Now, Carp weirdly likes the
• 33:32
  Speaker 1: likes the word jargon, and likes Adorno saying it, except
• 33:35
  Speaker 1: when he uses it, he just changes the meaning. So
• 33:39
  Speaker 1: it means exactly the opposite, or maybe not exactly the opposite,
• 33:42
  Speaker 1: it means something completely different from what it means in
• 33:45
  Speaker 1: this like neo Marxist context.
• 33:49
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 33:50
  Speaker 2: So the very first line of Karp's dissertation is pretty
• 33:55
  Speaker 2: indicative of how he uses the term jargon or how
• 33:58
  Speaker 2: he's going to use it. And he's says, some statements
• 34:01
  Speaker 2: have a drive relieving effect.
• 34:05
  Speaker 1: Hypnotic.
• 34:05
  Speaker 2: There you go, yeah, drive relieving. There's your Freudenism. Some
• 34:10
  Speaker 2: statements have a drive relieving effect, and not despite but
• 34:14
  Speaker 2: because of their obvious irrationality. And in Karp's view, jargon
• 34:23
  Speaker 2: has this irrationality to it. And what statements containing jargon
• 34:29
  Speaker 2: terms do is they relieve like unconscious drives, like fraudgen
• 34:35
  Speaker 2: you know, like pent up kind of repressed psychic energy.
• 34:41
  Speaker 2: Because they are blatantly irrational. They allow you to state
• 34:46
  Speaker 2: something that seems true or seems rational on the surface
• 34:52
  Speaker 2: of it, but is actually self contradictory. And in social terms,
• 34:57
  Speaker 2: it functions as as a acknowledgment of social norms, but
• 35:03
  Speaker 2: at the same time a statement of something that is
• 35:08
  Speaker 2: taboo and beyond those norms. And in this sort of way,
• 35:13
  Speaker 2: it resolves a kind of social tension.
• 35:16
  Speaker 3: It resolves.
• 35:19
  Speaker 2: A kind of Moira Weegel, who wrote something in Boundary
• 35:23
  Speaker 2: Too on this as well, seriously engaged with the with
• 35:26
  Speaker 2: the dissertation, says describes it.
• 35:29
  Speaker 1: Yeah, let me let me sorry, that's Moira Wegel. She's
• 35:32
  Speaker 1: she wrote something a paper called Palanteer goes to the
• 35:35
  Speaker 1: Frankfurt School, which we also read a Lincoln.
• 35:39
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 35:39
  Speaker 2: And the way she kind of describes it is as
• 35:42
  Speaker 2: a result, rather than destroy social order. Such irrational statements
• 35:47
  Speaker 2: integrate the speaker into society while also providing compensation for
• 35:52
  Speaker 2: the pains of being integrated. And to describe these kinds
• 35:58
  Speaker 2: of statements cards carp in Kates who will borrow a
• 36:01
  Speaker 2: concept from the late work of Adorno jargon, But of
• 36:06
  Speaker 2: course Karp doesn't use it in the same way as
• 36:10
  Speaker 2: Adorno does.
• 36:13
  Speaker 3: Karp doesn't want to.
• 36:14
  Speaker 2: Carp wants to take it out of Adorno's historical and
• 36:17
  Speaker 2: specific use of it against the phenomenological tradition of phenomenological existentialism,
• 36:24
  Speaker 2: and he wants to generalize it. And this is also
• 36:28
  Speaker 2: Indigo also makes this point. He does the sort of
• 36:32
  Speaker 2: exact opposite thing that Adorno does with it, and rather
• 36:37
  Speaker 2: than seeing jargon terms as historically specific and using jargon
• 36:45
  Speaker 2: as a term of criticism, he wants to generalize the
• 36:50
  Speaker 2: term and give it a non historically specific application, whereas
• 36:58
  Speaker 2: fascism can creep in it any time. But he thinks
• 37:01
  Speaker 2: fascism is a historical phenomenon, it's over and done with.
• 37:06
  Speaker 2: That's that's sort of shit. So so Carp robs it
• 37:09
  Speaker 2: of its critical force. Basically, that's that's the whole idea.
• 37:12
  Speaker 2: He inverts the concept and robs it of its critical
• 37:16
  Speaker 2: force and uses it in a non critical framework.
• 37:20
  Speaker 1: And yeah, that's that's well put. He this is like
• 37:25
  Speaker 1: a term to describe a proto fascist impulse in philosophy specifically,
• 37:31
  Speaker 1: like you could call it mystification or onto theology. It's
• 37:36
  Speaker 1: proto fascist historically speaking. I don't know what he does about. Sorry,
• 37:41
  Speaker 1: that doesn't really make sense, but anyway, it's historically specific.
• 37:45
  Speaker 1: It's a proto fascist type of speech that is used
• 37:47
  Speaker 1: to deceive. And then Karp goes, oh, actually, let's just
• 37:53
  Speaker 1: generalize it. This can be This can be used in
• 37:56
  Speaker 1: any context. It's not mid century European philosophy context. That
• 38:01
  Speaker 1: can be used at any time with this aggression, this
• 38:06
  Speaker 1: drive what do you call it, drive Catharsis or something
• 38:10
  Speaker 1: like that. And then we see later on Surprise, Surprise,
• 38:14
  Speaker 1: when he becomes a billionaire and the CEO of Palenteer
• 38:19
  Speaker 1: plenty of examples of him deploying jargon in the Adorno
• 38:25
  Speaker 1: sense for either fascist, proto fascist, imperial whatever you want
• 38:29
  Speaker 1: to whatever bad thing. He's deploying it for those ends.
• 38:33
  Speaker 1: He's obscuring, he's allowing contradictions to sit next to each other.
• 38:39
  Speaker 1: And we could call this in you know, more structuralist terms.
• 38:43
  Speaker 1: This is mythology. It's a big mythology, And every every
• 38:50
  Speaker 1: profile of him New York Times, New Yorker, Forbes, they
• 38:54
  Speaker 1: all just buy into it and repeat what he says.
• 38:58
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and I like, I like Bart's kind of idea
• 39:02
  Speaker 2: that behind mythology is an effort to naturalize something. And
• 39:10
  Speaker 2: I really do think that at least that that Marxist
• 39:13
  Speaker 2: part of Karp's mythology is definitely meant to mythologize, just
• 39:18
  Speaker 2: like with the neo cons mythologizing the the sort of
• 39:23
  Speaker 2: narrative of going up, moving away from Marxism, sobering up, yeah,
• 39:28
  Speaker 2: moving direction, Yeah, yeah, exactly.
• 39:32
  Speaker 1: They realized that the Marxist theory didn't have it, so
• 39:35
  Speaker 1: they moved to the good theory, which is neo conservatism.
• 39:38
  Speaker 1: That's that's what's being done here as well. So I
• 39:40
  Speaker 1: watched this guy's earning call, right Q two palanteer earning call.
• 39:44
  Speaker 1: The first line is we've had great results. We love
• 39:49
  Speaker 1: what these results mean for our customer and for the West,
• 39:53
  Speaker 1: so capital w And this is just an example of
• 39:57
  Speaker 1: one of these contradictions, like customer a customer, This is
• 40:01
  Speaker 1: a profane merely business transaction, right, But if you're if
• 40:07
  Speaker 1: Palanteer is also the West capital w this is like
• 40:12
  Speaker 1: a destiny. This is an imperial global destiny. So are
• 40:16
  Speaker 1: you are you serving your customers or are you serving
• 40:20
  Speaker 1: the destiny of civilization? Because those should be contradictory things.
• 40:24
  Speaker 1: But in his first line he just presents an opposition.
• 40:27
  Speaker 1: The opposition, if you think about it for more than
• 40:29
  Speaker 1: ten seconds, doesn't make sense. But it's evoking the danger,
• 40:34
  Speaker 1: evoking the danger to the west. The West is us.
• 40:38
  Speaker 1: We have to stick together and if you're sitting there
• 40:40
  Speaker 1: scared of what's about to happen, which is why all
• 40:44
  Speaker 1: this emotional language has to be used all the time.
• 40:47
  Speaker 1: But if you accept this emotional language, it allows him
• 40:51
  Speaker 1: to stick oppositions together and deliver deliver them to you
• 40:55
  Speaker 1: as if they're like natural, organic truths.
• 40:58
  Speaker 2: Yeah, that's the idea of I guess jargon and irrational statements.
• 41:05
  Speaker 2: Is that, yeah, like an irrational statement, something that's self contradictory,
• 41:11
  Speaker 2: jargon filled texts say what we're going to look at
• 41:15
  Speaker 2: like his his his manifesto, Pallenteers manifesto. I mean, this
• 41:23
  Speaker 2: is this is exactly what Adorno historicizes and politicizes and
• 41:29
  Speaker 2: and critiques. Uh, and exactly what Karp looks at as
• 41:35
  Speaker 2: as socially beneficial and and hasing having an integrative function,
• 41:40
  Speaker 2: like looking at the irrational function within society. So he's
• 41:44
  Speaker 2: clearly going to be happily using jargon. Karp thinks Adorno's
• 41:51
  Speaker 2: kind of too historically specific, trapped in the past.
• 41:54
  Speaker 3: Whatever.
• 41:55
  Speaker 1: Yeah, this is like taking Carl Schmidt and then taking it.
• 41:58
  Speaker 1: Are you reading it as a user's guide?
• 42:01
  Speaker 2: Car believed doing the exact opposite, And then we're gonna
• 42:05
  Speaker 2: see these earning reports and things like that. You know,
• 42:10
  Speaker 2: I think modern jargon now we get to when we
• 42:12
  Speaker 2: get to it. And what Pills was just bringing up there,
• 42:16
  Speaker 2: what you were bringing up is we have all this
• 42:18
  Speaker 2: techno jargon, economic language, the language of AI.
• 42:25
  Speaker 1: Yeah, they use everything like whatever the earnings, the stock
• 42:31
  Speaker 1: price is completely dependent on like mythological speech about what's
• 42:36
  Speaker 1: going to happen in the future. But I'd say also
• 42:38
  Speaker 1: their self mythology mythologization is like their perpetual outsider status
• 42:45
  Speaker 1: no matter what the material facts are, like these are
• 42:48
  Speaker 1: our billionaire government contractors, but they're always an outsider. They're
• 42:53
  Speaker 1: always an outsider. Iconoclass like, here's here's a title from
• 42:57
  Speaker 1: a Forbes article. Right, it's just oh god. It says
• 43:04
  Speaker 1: how a deviant philosopher built Palenteer Scia funded data mining
• 43:09
  Speaker 1: juggermut Juggernaut. A couple problems there, A, he's not a philosopher.
• 43:13
  Speaker 1: He's a so so he's in the sociology department. And
• 43:18
  Speaker 1: also he's not deviant. He's just like, did exactly what
• 43:22
  Speaker 1: every grad student does. I'm gonna take a concept from
• 43:25
  Speaker 1: this guy and a concept from this guy and generalize
• 43:28
  Speaker 1: it and make a new theory of aggression. There's nothing
• 43:31
  Speaker 1: deviant about it. But this is so annoying how it's
• 43:34
  Speaker 1: in every fucking article on him that he's he's an iconoclass.
• 43:40
  Speaker 1: New York Times called him. He's not. He's not in
• 43:43
  Speaker 1: it for the money because he's a Marxist, and he's
• 43:45
  Speaker 1: a he's not a rapacious state organ government contractor. He's
• 43:51
  Speaker 1: a he's a genius with messy hair. They keep mentioning
• 43:55
  Speaker 1: his hair too. There's there's the adjectives of his hair
• 43:59
  Speaker 1: are unruly on camped like we're supposed to think of
• 44:02
  Speaker 1: this is Einstein, right, this is like a real a
• 44:05
  Speaker 1: real breaker genius. He has a house in the woods.
• 44:09
  Speaker 1: They like to they like, they love mentioning this again,
• 44:11
  Speaker 1: he's not a typical businessman. He's a woodsy recluse, so
• 44:15
  Speaker 1: he must be smart. So yeah, this this crazy outsider genius.
• 44:21
  Speaker 1: He came from academia to revolutionize the industry. In just
• 44:25
  Speaker 1: another fucking founder narrative. When where did he get his
• 44:28
  Speaker 1: money from? Where did he get his status from? Unnamed
• 44:33
  Speaker 1: European people who just gave him money? And then like
• 44:36
  Speaker 1: Peter Teel who just gave him, gave him half a
• 44:40
  Speaker 1: palanteer for some reason. So you have to square this,
• 44:43
  Speaker 1: like all these contradictions Silicon Valley idealism, he hates Silicon
• 44:48
  Speaker 1: Valley for being two idealists because he's a realist and
• 44:50
  Speaker 1: he has to He realizes the future is going to
• 44:53
  Speaker 1: be dark and China's gonna get Ai, so we have
• 44:55
  Speaker 1: to beat China at Ai. We can't have this happy
• 44:58
  Speaker 1: plan of not working right, And he also has to
• 45:01
  Speaker 1: square being a defender of Western civilization trademark versus a
• 45:08
  Speaker 1: guy who just sells software to insurance companies and police.
• 45:12
  Speaker 1: So it's it's it's such bullshit, right, It's just that
• 45:18
  Speaker 1: there's no way that this could be maintained, except that
• 45:22
  Speaker 1: The New Yorker, the New York Times, Forbes, Business Insider,
• 45:25
  Speaker 1: they're just gonna say what he says. And now he's
• 45:30
  Speaker 1: an unruly, unkept iconoclass genius that does tai chi like
• 45:35
  Speaker 1: no other, No other founder does taichi. So the founder myth,
• 45:40
  Speaker 1: I mean, I've never seen it this bad. I've never
• 45:42
  Speaker 1: I never read anything about this guy until this week,
• 45:45
  Speaker 1: but I've never I've never seen it this bad.
• 45:48
  Speaker 3: Yeah, it is. It is all lore.
• 45:51
  Speaker 2: I think it is all low and flavor text for investors,
• 45:56
  Speaker 2: because yeah, if you google him on YouTube, all you
• 46:00
  Speaker 2: get is like economic booster videos right now, like Vollunteer
• 46:05
  Speaker 2: and even I mean the Frankfurt School tends to in
• 46:11
  Speaker 2: so far as they're critical and their critical theories is
• 46:15
  Speaker 2: a Marxist critical theory that they tend to ignore the
• 46:18
  Speaker 2: economic motives a little bit too much, I think, and
• 46:23
  Speaker 2: they do the formal analysis and it's all well and
• 46:26
  Speaker 2: good to look at. How this like depoliticizing jargon is
• 46:30
  Speaker 2: kind of a paves the way towards a fascism, which
• 46:37
  Speaker 2: is the one side and then the other side is
• 46:39
  Speaker 2: the story the media is painting about him being this
• 46:42
  Speaker 2: like Marxist genius outsider who comes in out of nowhere
• 46:46
  Speaker 2: but like and then that part is the flavor text
• 46:49
  Speaker 2: for his economic boosters, who really, that's all it really
• 46:52
  Speaker 2: is is to just invest in his company, because if
• 46:56
  Speaker 2: you strip away all that bullshit, yes it's just a
• 46:59
  Speaker 2: fucking software company. And it doesn't even make cool software
• 47:04
  Speaker 2: like video games. It makes software for Ice to help
• 47:08
  Speaker 2: them target immigrants. It makes software for Israel to help
• 47:15
  Speaker 2: know where to point their missiles and generate kill lists
• 47:18
  Speaker 2: so they can press a button and blow up some
• 47:21
  Speaker 2: family's house, or for the police to use facial recognition
• 47:26
  Speaker 2: technology and track people's movements and help police help help
• 47:31
  Speaker 2: turn America into a police state. That's all his that's
• 47:35
  Speaker 2: that's his software, and his economic motive is a releasing
• 47:42
  Speaker 2: those manifestos. There's actually another one about AI sovereignty, which
• 47:49
  Speaker 2: goes even closer to the core of his of his
• 47:51
  Speaker 2: economic motives to generate buzz and get all of this attention.
• 47:59
  Speaker 2: And then once he's got the attention, they can roll
• 48:01
  Speaker 2: out all these narratives and archetypes and paint him as
• 48:06
  Speaker 2: This basically gets them all this attention, gets his stock inflated,
• 48:12
  Speaker 2: and really also part of his economic motive is he
• 48:15
  Speaker 2: hates companies like Anthropic and chat GBT open AI because
• 48:23
  Speaker 2: they're closed AI companies. If you want to use them
• 48:26
  Speaker 2: with your software, you have to give them your data
• 48:29
  Speaker 2: and you don't get to keep your data anymore. They
• 48:32
  Speaker 2: potentially get to train their AI on your data and
• 48:35
  Speaker 2: steal your value, so he hates them. He wants to
• 48:37
  Speaker 2: partner with open AI. Open weight AI companies like that
• 48:43
  Speaker 2: are trying to undermine those companies, so he partners with
• 48:47
  Speaker 2: people like Nvidia and Meta who make open weight AIS.
• 48:53
  Speaker 2: Because they are hardware companies.
• 48:54
  Speaker 3: They don't care.
• 48:55
  Speaker 2: They want to give away the AI for free. So
• 48:58
  Speaker 2: when you want to locally run on your AI, you
• 49:00
  Speaker 2: have to buy expensive hardware. And that's where video comes in. Ooh,
• 49:04
  Speaker 2: who's got all the chips?
• 49:05
  Speaker 3: We do, so they take.
• 49:07
  Speaker 2: So it's it's just basic, non mythological, not interesting economic moves,
• 49:15
  Speaker 2: because that's what it is. It's the economic mode of
• 49:17
  Speaker 2: driving all of this underneath. Frankfurt school tends not to
• 49:22
  Speaker 2: pay attention to that. I think they they start at
• 49:26
  Speaker 2: the surface and they and they they penetrate down from
• 49:30
  Speaker 2: there and and and they look at they look at
• 49:32
  Speaker 2: the political and the mystifications around all of this, but
• 49:37
  Speaker 2: they never quite get there. But that's fine, because fine
• 49:43
  Speaker 2: this this, it's good to be able to learn, learn
• 49:46
  Speaker 2: how to be critical of of this, I mean, And
• 49:50
  Speaker 2: what indigoes pointing out in this, this this jargon of
• 49:53
  Speaker 2: systematization which is leading towards this phenomenon on of techno fascism,
• 50:02
  Speaker 2: which I think is a nice update of the Frankfurt
• 50:05
  Speaker 2: school looking at postwar Hidigerian existentialism and connecting those dots
• 50:13
  Speaker 2: back to mid century fascism, because I think we do
• 50:18
  Speaker 2: have now with the technology, we have the dangers of
• 50:23
  Speaker 2: techno fascism. And in lieu of a definition, there's a
• 50:30
  Speaker 2: description here. Techno fascism appears wherever political judgment is converted
• 50:38
  Speaker 2: into technical administration, violence being made to look like the
• 50:45
  Speaker 2: inevitable conclusion of a rational process, all supported by a
• 50:51
  Speaker 2: language that elevates technical administration into something that cannot.
• 50:55
  Speaker 3: Be argued with. So I think that is indigoes.
• 51:00
  Speaker 2: That's a good nice Instead of a definition, it's a
• 51:04
  Speaker 2: kind of description. It appears in these places where political
• 51:08
  Speaker 2: judgments convert a depoliticization right, technical calculative decisions made to
• 51:17
  Speaker 2: look like rational decision making processes rather than political struggles
• 51:23
  Speaker 2: and power struggles and the violence.
• 51:27
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 51:27
  Speaker 2: Jargon jargon diverts attention from violence and the historical specificity
• 51:34
  Speaker 2: of those terms and makes it seem like the outcome
• 51:37
  Speaker 2: of some rational historical progress process. And all of the language,
• 51:44
  Speaker 2: all the myth, all of the lore, all of the
• 51:47
  Speaker 2: all of the flavor text around it is just meant
• 51:50
  Speaker 2: to give it this sort of aura of authenticity, this
• 51:55
  Speaker 2: this aura of techno authenticity, right, and something that is
• 52:00
  Speaker 2: just for the experts, for the people who for these
• 52:03
  Speaker 2: for these geniuses, and who can build these companies and
• 52:08
  Speaker 2: work with the government and for everybody's benefit. And and
• 52:13
  Speaker 2: that's what it's all. I mean, all techno fascism is like,
• 52:17
  Speaker 2: that's the Petrie dish, and techno fascism is then the
• 52:21
  Speaker 2: mold that that grows when all those conditions are ripe.
• 52:27
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I agree with I agree with that to a point,
• 52:31
  Speaker 1: except I wonder, you know, it doesn't seem like a
• 52:34
  Speaker 1: rational justification is even necessary anymore, like when you're when
• 52:41
  Speaker 1: you're describing that definition of techno fascism, like it's we
• 52:45
  Speaker 1: have to give this over to rationality, We have to
• 52:47
  Speaker 1: let Ai run the state. It made me think of
• 52:49
  Speaker 1: like Doge and what a colossal failure, stupid idea. Everyone
• 52:53
  Speaker 1: thought it was stupid, except like founder culture worshiper, like
• 52:59
  Speaker 1: the like Carp's ten fans and Elon Musk's whatever one
• 53:04
  Speaker 1: hundred fans that still think he's actually a super a
• 53:09
  Speaker 1: super genius that's still bought into the SpaceX I p O.
• 53:13
  Speaker 1: It's like there's there's so little need for even rationality,
• 53:19
  Speaker 1: and it's the all the all the rhetoric is still there.
• 53:22
  Speaker 1: You know, Karp is talking about the West, and the
• 53:25
  Speaker 1: West means Israel or he's been to uh, he's been
• 53:29
  Speaker 1: been there at least three times publicly in the last
• 53:32
  Speaker 1: in the last two years. So he's helping them out.
• 53:35
  Speaker 1: He's helping out ice. You know, he's got a direct
• 53:38
  Speaker 1: attention or direct the need for attention to these internal threats.
• 53:43
  Speaker 1: I wouldn't be surprised if he's got some like Antifa
• 53:46
  Speaker 1: sort of database and an anti an anti Israel sort
• 53:51
  Speaker 1: of database or whatever you need, and then dropping bombs
• 53:54
  Speaker 1: and apartment buildings and cause of course, but all this rhetoric,
• 53:58
  Speaker 1: it's so thit it's like they're not even trying to
• 54:01
  Speaker 1: convince anybody. And I guess if your customer is, you know,
• 54:05
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump, then you don't know. You don't need much
• 54:10
  Speaker 1: of a story. But it's it's there's so little attention
• 54:14
  Speaker 1: paid to the ideology anymore, Like if you read Adorno,
• 54:20
  Speaker 1: it's like paranoid how he sees proto fascism in anything.
• 54:23
  Speaker 1: Now it's just like the thinnest justification. And then they say, okay,
• 54:27
  Speaker 1: well we need to be the government now. SpaceX needs
• 54:30
  Speaker 1: to be the government now. Pallunteer needs to be the
• 54:33
  Speaker 1: government now. And it's instead of an ideological sheen, it's psychosis.
• 54:39
  Speaker 1: It's like these guys spend too much time on chat
• 54:43
  Speaker 1: GPT four when it's just like, that's a great idea,
• 54:45
  Speaker 1: you should take over the government. There's psychotic narcissists that
• 54:50
  Speaker 1: think like, of course I need to be in charge
• 54:52
  Speaker 1: of the government. I'm an immortal god with because my
• 54:55
  Speaker 1: hair's messy and I do tai chi. That's why I'm
• 54:57
  Speaker 1: so much smarter than all of these idiots. Me and
• 55:01
  Speaker 1: me and Musk and Teal, Like, we deserve to run
• 55:04
  Speaker 1: the government, we deserve to be the state. And it's
• 55:08
  Speaker 1: almost seems like they're that's the thinnest justification you can
• 55:12
  Speaker 1: possibly have. They're they're they're contractors who believe that they're gods.
• 55:17
  Speaker 1: And who am I to say maybe they maybe they
• 55:20
  Speaker 1: really are gods, old gods with tentacle faces.
• 55:25
  Speaker 2: I mean, all that just does sound like irrationalism to me.
• 55:29
  Speaker 2: So I don't think it's outside the remit of techno fascism.
• 55:34
  Speaker 1: Oh, I was just saying. I wasn't really disagree with
• 55:36
  Speaker 1: the definition, just more like there's no one who believes it,
• 55:40
  Speaker 1: and that doesn't matter anymore. Like Adorno, if you read
• 55:43
  Speaker 1: his critiques of ideology, it's like tricking everybody. But now
• 55:48
  Speaker 1: they don't need to trick anybody. They just do it.
• 55:51
  Speaker 2: I could, doesn't I don't know if I can't remember
• 55:53
  Speaker 2: if Jijik does jokes like this, but about like pornography, right,
• 55:57
  Speaker 2: Like we all know the little narrative they throw on
• 56:00
  Speaker 2: top of it is just complete bullshit and it doesn't
• 56:03
  Speaker 2: even try to be a good narrative, but they still
• 56:06
  Speaker 2: do it. They still put the little like narrative in there,
• 56:11
  Speaker 2: They still put the rational they still rationalize the encounter
• 56:16
  Speaker 2: right in the in the most minimal and flimsiest possible terms.
• 56:21
  Speaker 2: But that's the problem, that's the point. You don't get
• 56:24
  Speaker 2: rid of that. Everybody knows it's fake. It doesn't try
• 56:27
  Speaker 2: to be real. You go see a movie and it
• 56:31
  Speaker 2: tries to be real and authentic, to use that term,
• 56:37
  Speaker 2: but and deep down you know it's not. But but whatever,
• 56:40
  Speaker 2: you give yourself over to the experience. But the jargon
• 56:44
  Speaker 2: is like the opposite. It's like pornography. You know, you
• 56:47
  Speaker 2: know that the justification is just total bullshit, and that
• 56:51
  Speaker 2: you're into this because of the pornographic obscenity of it,
• 56:57
  Speaker 2: all the the the money, the lifestyle, the vibes, the
• 57:04
  Speaker 2: mano sphere, wherever, whatever you're coming from, whatever, whatever effective zone,
• 57:10
  Speaker 2: it is your erogenous zone. But it's still there. It's
• 57:15
  Speaker 2: it's still there as as flimsy and and and painted
• 57:19
  Speaker 2: on an afterthought as it is.
• 57:21
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it's uh, I mean there's you don't get the
• 57:24
  Speaker 1: sense that they really believe in any cause. But you
• 57:27
  Speaker 1: do get the contrast between like the California ideology. I
• 57:30
  Speaker 1: think it's called just this the libertarian Silicon Valley attitude.
• 57:35
  Speaker 1: Carp hates that, and you can you can maybe see
• 57:38
  Speaker 1: this as some of his Marxism coming through and saying
• 57:42
  Speaker 1: no business is political. It's just when he says business
• 57:45
  Speaker 1: is political. He just means, yeah, we are going to
• 57:48
  Speaker 1: serve the empire. We are on the side of Israel.
• 57:51
  Speaker 1: Israel is the West, America is the West, Germany is
• 57:54
  Speaker 1: the West. Let's go to war with our internal enemies.
• 57:57
  Speaker 1: Round them all up, Let's go to war with the
• 58:00
  Speaker 1: non West, which I who is at China, the other
• 58:03
  Speaker 1: the other people with AI that aren't the West. But
• 58:06
  Speaker 1: the conflict, I don't know. It seems like he doesn't
• 58:09
  Speaker 1: believe in it. He just wants He thinks there's there's
• 58:12
  Speaker 1: no reason that he doesn't deserve to be the state
• 58:15
  Speaker 1: because he's such a genius and a crazy outsider who's
• 58:19
  Speaker 1: who's realized the truth. But again, it's like we it's
• 58:22
  Speaker 1: like when we uh covered Peter Teel in his mythology
• 58:26
  Speaker 1: of this Antichrist narrative. Oh yeah, which everything indicates he
• 58:32
  Speaker 1: actually believes. But that's kind of the problem with these guys.
• 58:36
  Speaker 1: We've seen what happens to a normal person when when
• 58:39
  Speaker 1: something tells them that they're correct all the time. You
• 58:44
  Speaker 1: enter a bubble. You enter a psychosis bubble where you're right,
• 58:50
  Speaker 1: and the more everyone says that, the more all information
• 58:53
  Speaker 1: about you is that you're a genius founder. Every time
• 58:56
  Speaker 1: you open up the Internet, and every time you open
• 58:58
  Speaker 1: up a business insider, it says, what a genius, crazy
• 59:01
  Speaker 1: person you are, and then you're like every every step
• 59:04
  Speaker 1: along the way. Maybe I just lean into that crazy
• 59:07
  Speaker 1: a little more. Yeah, maybe I can colonize asteroids. Yeah.
• 59:11
  Speaker 1: Maybe I am the outsider disruptor that this world needs. Yeah.
• 59:15
  Speaker 1: Maybe I am the front line of defense against the
• 59:18
  Speaker 1: against China's Ai. Yeah. Maybe this is a cosmic war
• 59:22
  Speaker 1: and I am the guy standing at the very front
• 59:24
  Speaker 1: of the line in the warhammer marine suit, yelling charge. Yeah,
• 59:29
  Speaker 1: this is all true. You know, we've this the whole
• 59:34
  Speaker 1: system has caused these individuals to become absolutely psychotic. So
• 59:41
  Speaker 1: maybe we should really feel bad for them. This is
• 59:44
  Speaker 1: introduced some new new ideology. Drop, we should feel bad
• 59:47
  Speaker 1: for these people because they're lost, they're lost souls.
• 59:51
  Speaker 2: A musk wearing his Occupy Mars shirts and trying to
• 59:56
  Speaker 2: conquer the moon and things like that. Now, yeah, that's
• 1:00:00
  Speaker 2: another that's another little But the irrationality of the manifesto
• 1:00:07
  Speaker 2: is the same kind of functional irrationality that characterizes like
• 1:00:12
  Speaker 2: techno fascism today, and these guys musked heal whatever else
• 1:00:19
  Speaker 2: Karp even uh, even even the meta guy and all
• 1:00:24
  Speaker 2: the others. They're technocrats, right, they're engineers, they're money managers,
• 1:00:30
  Speaker 2: they're economists, they're software programmers, they're they're technocrats.
• 1:00:34
  Speaker 1: I think I think you're giving them, by and large,
• 1:00:36
  Speaker 1: way too much credit. They're usually resellers, heypmen. Uh, contractors,
• 1:00:44
  Speaker 1: they sell contracts, contract salesmen.
• 1:00:46
  Speaker 2: Yeah, like, well they're contracts. Yeah, Like you know, volunteer
• 1:00:51
  Speaker 2: gets contracts from the government. But the irrationality and then,
• 1:00:57
  Speaker 2: well there's part of the irrationality of it. And in
• 1:01:01
  Speaker 2: case you don't think that the manifesto is irrational, I
• 1:01:07
  Speaker 2: mean point number one, Silicon Valley owes a moral debt
• 1:01:12
  Speaker 2: to the country that made its rise possible. The engineering
• 1:01:16
  Speaker 2: elite of Silicon Valley has an affirmative obligation to participate
• 1:01:21
  Speaker 2: in the defense of the nation. Okay, pollunteers saying that,
• 1:01:26
  Speaker 2: and it's a defense contractor sounds pretty rational, right, That's great,
• 1:01:30
  Speaker 2: that's great. It wants more contracts from the government. Silicon Valley,
• 1:01:35
  Speaker 2: I mean the historically libertarian, anti government, anti statist Silicon Valley,
• 1:01:42
  Speaker 2: that Silicon Valley, whom he's chastising and telling them that
• 1:01:48
  Speaker 2: they have a moral debt. They have a moral obligation.
• 1:01:51
  Speaker 2: This country made your rise possible, right, and we need
• 1:01:56
  Speaker 2: to defend this country. Another one saying Silicon Valley or
• 1:02:02
  Speaker 2: the elites have been too religiously intolerant, basically saying they
• 1:02:08
  Speaker 2: need to be more inclusive. And then the final one
• 1:02:14
  Speaker 2: where he questions inclusivity and says inclusivity and what we
• 1:02:19
  Speaker 2: must resist the shallow temptation of a vacant and hollow pluralism.
• 1:02:26
  Speaker 1: Not gay inclusivity, but the inclusivity of people that have money,
• 1:02:33
  Speaker 1: people that are in charge of government contracts. We haven't
• 1:02:36
  Speaker 1: been inclusive of enough of Republicans.
• 1:02:39
  Speaker 2: I think he's signaling his relationship with Israel there, that
• 1:02:43
  Speaker 2: the elites have been too anti Semitic basically, yes, of course,
• 1:02:50
  Speaker 2: of course, I wonder where he got these talking points from.
• 1:02:52
  Speaker 1: We're about to be in a technological robotic killing field
• 1:02:57
  Speaker 1: between a four country shootout of row bots massacring people.
• 1:03:01
  Speaker 1: But we have to be worried about antisemittism. Don't forget
• 1:03:04
  Speaker 1: about the real threat. He wants a religious tolerance. The
• 1:03:08
  Speaker 1: elite's intolerance of religious belief is perhaps one of the
• 1:03:11
  Speaker 1: most telling signs that its political project constitutes a less
• 1:03:16
  Speaker 1: open intellectual movement than many within it would claim. Oh
• 1:03:21
  Speaker 1: so the elite's religious intolerance and the N zero point
• 1:03:25
  Speaker 1: twenty two inci inclusion into what.
• 1:03:31
  Speaker 3: America.
• 1:03:32
  Speaker 2: We in America and more broadly in the West, have
• 1:03:35
  Speaker 2: for the past half century resisted defining national cultures in
• 1:03:39
  Speaker 2: the name of inclusivity, but in inclusion into.
• 1:03:42
  Speaker 1: What well quote, he thinks the United States is very
• 1:03:47
  Speaker 1: likely to end up in a three front war with China, Russia,
• 1:03:50
  Speaker 1: and Iran. So he argues, we have to keep going
• 1:03:53
  Speaker 1: full tilt on autonomous weapons systems because their adversaries will
• 1:03:57
  Speaker 1: and they don't have the same moral considerations that we do.
• 1:04:00
  Speaker 1: So we need to be inclusive of religio nationalist beliefs
• 1:04:07
  Speaker 1: of Republicans and Jews. So American crysto fascism is rarely
• 1:04:13
  Speaker 1: Jewish fascism, and if we combine those, the West can
• 1:04:16
  Speaker 1: survive against China.
• 1:04:18
  Speaker 2: So kind of a pessimistic view that war is inevitable,
• 1:04:23
  Speaker 2: and AI is not going to bring us together, solve
• 1:04:25
  Speaker 2: our problems, or either put everybody out of work in
• 1:04:31
  Speaker 2: a negative sense, or make it so nobody has to
• 1:04:34
  Speaker 2: work in a positive sense. He's not going down those
• 1:04:37
  Speaker 2: directions right.
• 1:04:38
  Speaker 1: No, of course not, because in that timeline, in the
• 1:04:40
  Speaker 1: timeline where AI solves problems, Pallenteer doesn't have a purpose.
• 1:04:44
  Speaker 1: We need war always to be on the horizon AIS
• 1:04:47
  Speaker 1: causing wars. Everything's going to blow up in war. That's
• 1:04:50
  Speaker 1: why we need Pallenteer. And Alex Karp is the perfect
• 1:04:54
  Speaker 1: guy to be in charge of Palenteer reluctantly, of course,
• 1:04:58
  Speaker 1: because he doesn't want to be in charge of it.
• 1:05:01
  Speaker 1: That's what makes him such a great leader is he
• 1:05:04
  Speaker 1: never even wanted this job in the first place. He
• 1:05:06
  Speaker 1: wanted to be a philosopher. All he wants to do
• 1:05:09
  Speaker 1: is go skiing. He's just trying to ski. But civilization,
• 1:05:13
  Speaker 1: the West has called upon him to shepherd AI into
• 1:05:19
  Speaker 1: being and make him a what do you call eleven
• 1:05:23
  Speaker 1: digit billionaire because if he doesn't, then trying to might
• 1:05:27
  Speaker 1: do it. That's why that's why he specifically is needed.
• 1:05:30
  Speaker 1: He doesn't want this job. It was forced forced upon
• 1:05:34
  Speaker 1: him by destiny.
• 1:05:35
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and I guess Teal's apocalyptic Antichrist message makes more
• 1:05:41
  Speaker 2: sense to me in this case too, because it's not
• 1:05:45
  Speaker 2: like they're just leading you towards the AI super intelligence.
• 1:05:50
  Speaker 2: Because it's not going to need human beings anymore. It
• 1:05:52
  Speaker 2: may it may even just get rid of human beings altogether, right,
• 1:05:57
  Speaker 2: or like the or or or we can join it,
• 1:06:01
  Speaker 2: we can join our consciousness with it, like the transhumanists
• 1:06:04
  Speaker 2: want us to do. Right, But the sort of the
• 1:06:10
  Speaker 2: Palatier message is pretty hawkish and very kind of moral
• 1:06:18
  Speaker 2: cultural terms, culture wars kind of message, as I think,
• 1:06:23
  Speaker 2: I kind of prefer the weird transhumanist or or kind
• 1:06:28
  Speaker 2: of apocalyptic messages of Teal or Musk a little more
• 1:06:33
  Speaker 2: to describe these things, because that feels a little more
• 1:06:35
  Speaker 2: accurate to me about what the world would actually be.
• 1:06:38
  Speaker 3: Like if this fabled. But they really are.
• 1:06:41
  Speaker 2: They're just the shepherds, right. They're the religious prophets showing
• 1:06:45
  Speaker 2: us the way to the ai super consciousness that we
• 1:06:53
  Speaker 2: can all join with one day.
• 1:06:55
  Speaker 1: They're the humble servants, and because they're so humble, they
• 1:06:58
  Speaker 1: deserve to rule the state also.
• 1:07:00
  Speaker 2: And they'll shepherd us into the next stage of human
• 1:07:03
  Speaker 2: evolution with their wonderful inventions as long as we give
• 1:07:07
  Speaker 2: them our money.
• 1:07:08
  Speaker 1: Now and the government our taxes.
• 1:07:11
  Speaker 2: Yeah, cut cut the budget for everything except military spending
• 1:07:15
  Speaker 2: and police spending, and then give those contracts to them.
• 1:07:19
  Speaker 1: And if we give them everything, if we give them
• 1:07:21
  Speaker 1: control of everything the state us, then they will take
• 1:07:26
  Speaker 1: care of us. Thank you, Oh, beneficent ones.
• 1:07:29
  Speaker 2: Yeah, that's that's the story here.
• 1:07:32
  Speaker 1: Yep.
• 1:07:32
  Speaker 2: And give give give more handouts to the government, from
• 1:07:38
  Speaker 2: the government to private sector.
• 1:07:41
  Speaker 1: Yep. This makes me, this makes me insane. We can
• 1:07:46
  Speaker 1: call it there, you can call it there free Luigi.
• 1:07:51
  Speaker 2: Yeah what yeah, sorry, Yeah, that's the that's the counter
• 1:07:55
  Speaker 2: that's the counterpoint.
• 1:07:56
  Speaker 1: And again, if we got some conspiracy theorists out there,
• 1:07:59
  Speaker 1: go find find out who these wealthy European benefactors are. Unnamed.
• 1:08:06
  Speaker 1: They just show up at any time that you need them.
• 1:08:09
  Speaker 1: Like the valar. Hey, that's a good framing device. What's
• 1:08:13
  Speaker 1: what's the tier one below the valor that the bell
• 1:08:15
  Speaker 1: rocks on an or?
• 1:08:18
  Speaker 3: Oh, the the mayar.
• 1:08:20
  Speaker 1: Oh yeah, that's it. We need them, We need the.
• 1:08:22
  Speaker 3: Mayar, the mayar, the aner.
• 1:08:25
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah, I turned my I turned my back on
• 1:08:28
  Speaker 1: Lord of the Rings because these if these fuckers like it,
• 1:08:31
  Speaker 1: then I can't like it. So maybe Luigi is a
• 1:08:34
  Speaker 1: my Maya in disguise.
• 1:08:37
  Speaker 2: Yeah, Antifa, poor poor algae into the reflection.
• 1:08:42
  Speaker 3: We need some counterpoints.
• 1:08:44
  Speaker 2: Not be afraid don't be afraid of the vallenteer.
• 1:08:48
  Speaker 1: Oh, speaking of we eve an update on that he
• 1:08:50
  Speaker 1: fired Uh what's her name, Piro? She she had to testify, uh,
• 1:08:57
  Speaker 1: and she testified that No, there was no vandalism to
• 1:08:59
  Speaker 1: the it to the reflecting pool, and Trump is gonna
• 1:09:02
  Speaker 1: fire her now, dumas. These are These are the archons,
• 1:09:10
  Speaker 1: These fucking idiots are the arcons, and we're just stuck here.
• 1:09:14
  Speaker 1: We're stuck in this reality created by this demon Demiurge,
• 1:09:18
  Speaker 1: and there's no way out. We just have to listen
• 1:09:20
  Speaker 1: to this bullshit. What's even the point of decoding it anyway? Okay?
• 1:09:24
  Speaker 2: What facts are no match for his beliefs?
• 1:09:26
  Speaker 1: Oh, for sure, the Demiurge, Theurge was a narcissistic idiot
• 1:09:31
  Speaker 1: in narcissism too, And that's where we're stuck, all right. Okay,
• 1:09:34
  Speaker 1: see you guys, Thank you everybody. Good time, you have fun.
• 1:09:38
  Speaker 1: You have to go drink something lovely, something caustic later.
• 1:09:43
  Speaker 3: Yeah, have a lovely day. We'll see you next time.