Latest / Yaron Brook Show / Trump in China; Israeli Rape Dogs; Oct. 7th; Kevin Warsh; Billionaires; Alberta | Yaron Brook Show

Transcript

Trump in China; Israeli Rape Dogs; Oct. 7th; Kevin Warsh; Billionaires; Alberta | Yaron Brook Show · Yaron Brook Show

• 0:02
  Speaker 1: A lot of it under the metal principles of lead,
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: last little and the individual wats This is the show?
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: Oh right, everybody, welcome to your own book show on
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: this Thursday, May fourteenth. There's been a whal suddenly been
• 0:27
  Speaker 1: a whal for a news show, so uh, thanks for
• 0:32
  Speaker 1: joining me. I being sick, I got what is it,
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: the stomach flu, this stomach virus that's going around, and
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: it wake me out and I'm still not recovered. So
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: I'm a little off today, so I don't know. We'll
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: see how long it can last. Well, we've got a
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: lot of questions already, and I haven't he started the show.
• 0:57
  Speaker 1: I mean, Michael has been stowing up questions to ask me,
• 1:02
  Speaker 1: but he puts his mouth his money where his mouth is.
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: So I hugely appreciate the support. Michael, thank you. And
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: I see a bunch of others of us ask questions,
• 1:12
  Speaker 1: so thank you, guys. I really appreciate the support. Anyway,
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: I'm a little slow, so bear with me. It's it's
• 1:20
  Speaker 1: been a rough week. God, it's been a rough week. Anyway.
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: I think it's over, or it's on the beginning of
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: being over. So we'll see how today's show goes. And
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: and Yeah, a lot of stuff been happening while I've
• 1:36
  Speaker 1: been out, mostly the early stuff. Trump, you know, not
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: doing anything about Iran, over and over and over and
• 1:46
  Speaker 1: over again. Just repete, repete, repeat. So take my shows
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: by capitulation and just replay them. Maybe when he comes
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: back from China now he'll do something about Iran. We'll
• 1:55
  Speaker 1: see that's what the israelis expecting. Maybe that's what Trump
• 1:59
  Speaker 1: into to do. I have no idea, but but nothing
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: was happening. Uh. But Trump is now in China. Trump
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: is now in China. He's met with Hi. Uh, he
• 2:11
  Speaker 1: has he bought with him quite a large number of
• 2:15
  Speaker 1: American CEOs to cut deals to get business. I understand
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: that China has guaranteed to Bay I don't know, two
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: hundred Boeing airplanes and and Trump has agreed to in
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: Nvidia selling a bunch of not the most advanced ship
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: the second most advanced tip to China or though it's
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: not like China actually wants to buy them. Uh. Trump
• 2:41
  Speaker 1: went there with with the idea of business deals. Let's
• 2:44
  Speaker 1: do business deals, and let's let's grant my favorite CEOs favors.
• 2:49
  Speaker 1: This is corneyism, par excellence. Now every president does this.
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: Every trip overseas has this. With Trump, everything is is
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: on speed, it's it's it's great, accelerated is greatly, it's
• 3:02
  Speaker 1: much more bigger. But anyway, they man and Trump does
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: what he does best. When he meets authoritarian dictators. He
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: gobbles or he profusely expresses his admiration for them. Trump says,
• 3:24
  Speaker 1: she this is a quote direct. We're going to have
• 3:29
  Speaker 1: a fantastic future together. I have such a respect for China.
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: The job you've done. You're a great leader. It's an
• 3:37
  Speaker 1: honor to be with you. It's an honor to be
• 3:40
  Speaker 1: your friend. That's personally even gonna say, it's going into
• 3:49
  Speaker 1: a series of pretty tough they tell me negotiations and
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: pretty tricky issues and complicated stuff with the leader of China.
• 3:58
  Speaker 1: She's jumping uh. And you know the first thing is
• 4:02
  Speaker 1: I love you, bro. I just think you're fantastic. You're
• 4:05
  Speaker 1: you're my favorite person out there. I mean, here's the
• 4:08
  Speaker 1: admiration for authoritarians, which we saw in his first term
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: with his relationship with the dictator of North Korea and
• 4:18
  Speaker 1: then with Putin, and then we see again with Putin.
• 4:20
  Speaker 1: And I was in with Eduon, the leader of Turkey
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: will go over and over the well, return to that
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: story again because it has to do with regime change
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: in Iran and how we go on prevented it prevented
• 4:34
  Speaker 1: a certain plan. Uh, it's just, it's just it's just embarrassing.
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: It's embarrassing to be an American and for this guy
• 4:43
  Speaker 1: to be president going into such a high level meeting
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: with this kind of attitude. I mean, compare this to
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: how he talks to I don't know, the premiere of Canada,
• 4:57
  Speaker 1: who is you know, bad as socialist, but not quite
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: as a as as as authoritarian, not quite as uh,
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: you know, aggressively anti American as Xi Jinping is. He
• 5:10
  Speaker 1: doesn't talk like this too, Zelenski, who is boldly standing
• 5:15
  Speaker 1: up against, you know, an invasion by authoritarian thug who's
• 5:23
  Speaker 1: again enemy of the United States. He doesn't talk like
• 5:25
  Speaker 1: this to anybody about anybody in Europe. This is language
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: he preserves for authoritary and dictators. And part of the
• 5:34
  Speaker 1: reason he does this is he thinks by doing this
• 5:39
  Speaker 1: he gets on their good side. They will they will
• 5:42
  Speaker 1: really like it, because he thinks he thinks that everybody's him,
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: like he knows that when people talk like that to him,
• 5:52
  Speaker 1: it works, it works there immediately on his good side,
• 5:59
  Speaker 1: and so he projects that to other leaders and he thinks, Okay,
• 6:04
  Speaker 1: I know what I like. I like butt kissing, so i'll,
• 6:09
  Speaker 1: you know, I'll do the same to these other leaders.
• 6:13
  Speaker 1: And it's just it's embarrassing. It's it's it's embarrassing. It's
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: you know, on the other hand, you know, they've had
• 6:21
  Speaker 1: negotiations that you know, this meeting is supposed to be
• 6:23
  Speaker 1: about Yon. It's supposed to be about Taiwan. We'll get
• 6:26
  Speaker 1: to Taiwan in a minute. It's supposed to be about
• 6:29
  Speaker 1: trade and tariffs and national security issues regarding trade. And
• 6:39
  Speaker 1: it's just the whole attitude is, I'm your buddy, guy,
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: you know, what do you want? How can I help
• 6:44
  Speaker 1: you where you're supposed to be going in with a
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: little toughness. I mean. On the other hand, when she
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: talked to him, you know, she said, you know, we
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: got to be careful about Taiwan. You gotta be careful.
• 7:01
  Speaker 1: If we misheadled Taiwan, our relationship was in great jeopardy.
• 7:07
  Speaker 1: Trump didn't mention jeopardy too. She didn't mention jeopardy. And
• 7:21
  Speaker 1: then she also asked Trump whether he whether the US
• 7:26
  Speaker 1: and China could avoid the thiccilidious trap. I'm probably pronouncing
• 7:35
  Speaker 1: Thicilidius's name wrong, right, trap right, which refers to the
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: ancient Greek ancient Greek historian describing the trap involved in
• 7:50
  Speaker 1: a decaying empire, decaying power and arising power. And how
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: how how that relationship works? And the idea is that
• 8:06
  Speaker 1: how does that not involve war? So rising power and
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: a declining power. So she is basically saying, with a
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: rising power, you Trump represent the declining power. How are
• 8:22
  Speaker 1: we gonna avoid war? Can can you help me? And
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: and and uh and my guess is the Trump turned
• 8:28
  Speaker 1: to his advisors has said, what what's he talking about? What's
• 8:32
  Speaker 1: what's what's who's that? Die Clitus chap. Yeah, you got
• 8:45
  Speaker 1: to believe that Trump didn't know what that was going on.
• 8:47
  Speaker 1: But but yes, this is the different levels, right, Trump
• 8:53
  Speaker 1: bestowing you know, uh, love and affection, and she stressing
• 9:05
  Speaker 1: that the most important issue in US China relations is
• 9:09
  Speaker 1: Taiwan and that Taiwanese independence an idea of peace in
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: the Taiwan Straits that is even consilable. That is, like
• 9:23
  Speaker 1: fire and water, there is never going to be a
• 9:26
  Speaker 1: time where China will accept Taiwanese independence. So here is
• 9:31
  Speaker 1: she's just laying it down straight out. And she kept
• 9:36
  Speaker 1: going back in the in the official statement of the
• 9:38
  Speaker 1: Chinese keep going back to Taiwan. Does does Trump? No,
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: not a mention of Taiwan. Not a mention of Taiwan.
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: So Trump has no real answer, nothing as far as
• 10:00
  Speaker 1: I can tell. I mean, who knows what happened in private.
• 10:04
  Speaker 1: But it's hard to believe that Trump would stand up
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: to for Taiwan in front of his good friend, his
• 10:10
  Speaker 1: great you know, a friend he admires so much. She's
• 10:13
  Speaker 1: jumping I think, you know, to an extent. Trump was engaged.
• 10:19
  Speaker 1: It was engaged around trying to talk about, you know,
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: economic relations. If you look at a readout of the talks,
• 10:30
  Speaker 1: the US does not mention Taiwan, and they said they
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: had a good meeting centered on enhancing economic corporation between
• 10:38
  Speaker 1: the two countries. That thing they agreed on. They agreed
• 10:41
  Speaker 1: on this. They agreed that the states of Amos had
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: to be open and free of tolls, according to the
• 10:51
  Speaker 1: US readout, although the Chinese readout didn't really say that.
• 10:57
  Speaker 1: She also expressed interest in buying more US oil to
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: reduce China's dependence on the straits of homos in the future.
• 11:04
  Speaker 1: I'm sure Trump took that as a huge win. It
• 11:07
  Speaker 1: doesn't really matter. It's global market. There's only so much
• 11:10
  Speaker 1: oil out there. There's no trade deal, and any trade
• 11:14
  Speaker 1: deal that Trump and she are going to sign is
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: going to be good for China. Again, the best trade
• 11:21
  Speaker 1: deal for the United States is unilaterals, zero tariffs, get
• 11:26
  Speaker 1: out of the frigging way, government, get out of the
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: way of what I want to buy and who I
• 11:31
  Speaker 1: want to buy from. And you know, if you think
• 11:34
  Speaker 1: national security is an issue, then yeah, you know that's
• 11:38
  Speaker 1: an issue, but that's an issue that needs real thought,
• 11:42
  Speaker 1: real considerations, not the kind of anyway. Yeah. So Trump
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: performs that the relation is going to be better than
• 11:57
  Speaker 1: ever before, and she says, yeah, well, we need to
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: avoid the thick litist trap. Uh, that's how you start
• 12:07
  Speaker 1: a meeting. Look, I mean China, China came into this
• 12:12
  Speaker 1: meeting confident. It's it's seeing. Uh. It sees the US,
• 12:20
  Speaker 1: particularly over the last few years, I'd say since COVID.
• 12:25
  Speaker 1: It sees the United States as in decline. Uh, it
• 12:29
  Speaker 1: sees what's going on in you you know, Ukraine now
• 12:33
  Speaker 1: inability to support Ukraine, to provide Ukraine with the support
• 12:38
  Speaker 1: necessary for you to fight. It sees the United States
• 12:42
  Speaker 1: distancing itself from NATO. It sets the US backing off
• 12:47
  Speaker 1: from its alliances. It sees the US, while achieving incredible
• 12:52
  Speaker 1: military success in Yuan, not falling through no, not being
• 13:00
  Speaker 1: willing to actually go for broke. It sees a trade
• 13:04
  Speaker 1: policy that the United States has which makes no sense
• 13:08
  Speaker 1: to anybody, anybody, even Trump, it doesn't make sense to him.
• 13:13
  Speaker 1: And they laugh, and they really see what they see
• 13:16
  Speaker 1: as a declining party, declining power. And so they're they're
• 13:21
  Speaker 1: they're much more confident they come to this. You know,
• 13:25
  Speaker 1: I think I think from their perspective as a as
• 13:28
  Speaker 1: a leader, not a follower. They're not they're not playing
• 13:31
  Speaker 1: second fiddle to Trump. And yeah, it's it's not good.
• 13:45
  Speaker 1: It's not good. But we will see how Trump spends this,
• 13:49
  Speaker 1: will see what kind of a quote deal he gets
• 13:52
  Speaker 1: on trade or whatever else. Uh and uh we'll go
• 13:56
  Speaker 1: from there. But and we'll see where the China does
• 14:01
  Speaker 1: anything vieus of the Iran, which is what Trump was hoping.
• 14:05
  Speaker 1: I doubt that's going to happen. I think if Trump
• 14:07
  Speaker 1: wants anything to move on the Iiron front, He's going
• 14:11
  Speaker 1: to have to start bombing again. And I wouldn't be
• 14:14
  Speaker 1: surprised if that happened when he gets back from the
• 14:18
  Speaker 1: China trip. All right, So the next two stories are
• 14:26
  Speaker 1: pretty upsetting, and if you have if you have a
• 14:30
  Speaker 1: delicate disposition, beware the two next stories are very much related,
• 14:38
  Speaker 1: and they're basically pretty they're pretty brutal. I mean, two
• 14:43
  Speaker 1: things happened two days ago on Tuesday, May twelfth. The
• 14:49
  Speaker 1: first was a report came out which examined what actually
• 15:00
  Speaker 1: happened on October seventh from particularly from the perspective of
• 15:05
  Speaker 1: sexual violence by the Palestinians against Israeli's on October seventh.
• 15:11
  Speaker 1: It was based on ten thousand photographs, thousands of videos,
• 15:19
  Speaker 1: you know, you know, thousands of videos, and the testimonies
• 15:25
  Speaker 1: of over four hundred survivors and hostages who we released.
• 15:32
  Speaker 1: And that came out, and we'll talk about that in
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: a little bit. That came out on Tuesday, and the
• 15:39
  Speaker 1: story to write a story about that, about this report
• 15:43
  Speaker 1: that was offered to the New York Times, The New
• 15:45
  Speaker 1: York Times decided to pass on it, not to have
• 15:48
  Speaker 1: a story about it. Not to make it a big deal,
• 15:52
  Speaker 1: as some other news outlets indeed did both here and
• 15:57
  Speaker 1: in Europe. Instead, The New York Times chose to publish
• 16:03
  Speaker 1: a essay article, news report how Hotel, which on the
• 16:11
  Speaker 1: editorial page so kind of an editorial by a Nick Christoph,
• 16:16
  Speaker 1: a well known New York Times reporter, an article that
• 16:23
  Speaker 1: is it's pretty horrifying. The article, you know is is
• 16:30
  Speaker 1: is a uh is about uh testimonials of torture and
• 16:39
  Speaker 1: rape not Israelis by Palestinians, but our Palestinian prisoners in
• 16:46
  Speaker 1: Israeli prisons. You know, uh, the the you know, torture
• 16:56
  Speaker 1: in reade by gods you know who have abused these
• 17:03
  Speaker 1: Palestinian prisoners in the post October seventh Israeli prison And look,
• 17:12
  Speaker 1: there is some evidence to suggest that there has been abuse.
• 17:18
  Speaker 1: I mean, it's been quite a bit of abuse by
• 17:21
  Speaker 1: between the Palestinians, the Hamas abusing other prisoners, torturing them,
• 17:28
  Speaker 1: sexual abuse. But also there's probably and there's good reason
• 17:31
  Speaker 1: to believe that there has been some abuse by gods,
• 17:34
  Speaker 1: by Israeli gods of some of these Palestinians. I mean,
• 17:38
  Speaker 1: think about thousands of these Palestinians being captured in Gaza.
• 17:43
  Speaker 1: Many are responsible for the vicious crimes of October seventh,
• 17:47
  Speaker 1: These gods because of the sheer number of prisoners coming in,
• 17:53
  Speaker 1: untrained gods who just seen maybe the videos of what
• 17:57
  Speaker 1: the Palestinians had done, and there was you know, there
• 18:01
  Speaker 1: was probably some real abuse. But Christoph's piece is just
• 18:09
  Speaker 1: full of weird claims, lies, testimonials for people who have
• 18:19
  Speaker 1: been shown in the past to be unreliable. Uh, famed
• 18:25
  Speaker 1: Tamus propagandist, spewing propaganda without any sources, without any reliable
• 18:35
  Speaker 1: confirmation the you know, it's it's the stuff he was claiming. Uh.
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: Some of it is just sourd This is in the
• 18:55
  Speaker 1: New York Times, right, You'd think this would go through
• 19:00
  Speaker 1: real fact checking and sourcing and exploration. But he cites
• 19:10
  Speaker 1: NGOs who are affiliated with Ramas. He cites an Israeli
• 19:17
  Speaker 1: source who has said that he hates the state of
• 19:20
  Speaker 1: Angel and wishes for its demise as a credible source
• 19:25
  Speaker 1: in spite of the fact that this source claims not
• 19:28
  Speaker 1: to witness anything himself. I mean, the article is filled
• 19:36
  Speaker 1: with just for any kind of news story, unsourced, unverified,
• 19:48
  Speaker 1: but horrific claims about you know, rape, and torture of prisoners,
• 19:58
  Speaker 1: all the most severe claims anonymous, uncoorroborated and presented in
• 20:06
  Speaker 1: a kind of an emotional way as to make it
• 20:09
  Speaker 1: meekeur really get all riled up. He cites you are
• 20:14
  Speaker 1: mad human rights monitor, an organization that's repeatedly be criticized
• 20:20
  Speaker 1: for its ties to Ramas. It's disinformation, it is the
• 20:30
  Speaker 1: whole piece is just an absurdity. It is a blood
• 20:34
  Speaker 1: libel against Israel. While there probably is abuse, this this
• 20:45
  Speaker 1: is just a horrible expression anti Semitic hatred. You want
• 20:52
  Speaker 1: to do a real story and abuse, do a real
• 20:54
  Speaker 1: story and abuse, Do the work, find the source, figure
• 21:01
  Speaker 1: out what's true and what's not. Christoff does none of that,
• 21:06
  Speaker 1: none of that. And look, he's this is not a
• 21:10
  Speaker 1: This is not a junior reporter. This is a well
• 21:13
  Speaker 1: established senior person at the New York Times. And this
• 21:19
  Speaker 1: of course is not a not new for the New
• 21:22
  Speaker 1: York Times. The New York Times who decided that Gaza
• 21:25
  Speaker 1: was a genocide, that people were dying of starvation in
• 21:28
  Speaker 1: Gaza with no evidence, zero evidence. You remember that the
• 21:31
  Speaker 1: babies showing babies who you know, look like starving, without
• 21:37
  Speaker 1: mentioning the fact that the baby had cancer that the
• 21:41
  Speaker 1: New York Times had to this is fun page photograph.
• 21:45
  Speaker 1: The apology and correction appeared in page twenty two, way
• 21:50
  Speaker 1: in the back someway. A systematic approach by The New
• 21:57
  Speaker 1: York Times to make Israel out to be a home,
• 22:05
  Speaker 1: you know, homicidal, sadistic, horrific place society, and to whitewash
• 22:17
  Speaker 1: at the same time Habas's crimes. You know it's it
• 22:30
  Speaker 1: all comes together in one of his most outrageous claims,
• 22:33
  Speaker 1: right most outrageous claims that he puts together, and that
• 22:42
  Speaker 1: is that Israel has trained dogs to assault Palestinians and
• 22:52
  Speaker 1: rape them. I'm not making this up. I'm not making
• 22:56
  Speaker 1: this up. But the dogs are trained to rape the prisoners.
• 23:02
  Speaker 1: And he recounts testimony of people who say they've seen
• 23:07
  Speaker 1: this happen, including penetration. Now, I don't know, but that
• 23:23
  Speaker 1: is a strong claim, pretty bizarre claim, and a very
• 23:28
  Speaker 1: strong claim. You would need strong evidence for that. Christoph
• 23:35
  Speaker 1: provides no such evidence, he claimed on acts and defending
• 23:39
  Speaker 1: his article after the fact. He claimed that there are
• 23:42
  Speaker 1: three different medical journals articles discussing rectal injuries and humans
• 23:48
  Speaker 1: from anal penetration by dogs. But he didn't provide those studies,
• 23:53
  Speaker 1: didn't provide links to them. And when you actually dig
• 23:58
  Speaker 1: through and you find the studies, you discover is those
• 24:01
  Speaker 1: are cases of bestiality. Now, how exactly worked, how they
• 24:06
  Speaker 1: got the dogs aroused and all that go figure, But
• 24:13
  Speaker 1: that's kind of research you would think a journalist would
• 24:15
  Speaker 1: do because based on dog experts who've been interviewed about this,
• 24:24
  Speaker 1: this whole scenario is an impossibility when with dogs, you know,
• 24:31
  Speaker 1: in order to penetrate, they would have to get an erection.
• 24:35
  Speaker 1: To get an erection, they have to smell another dog
• 24:40
  Speaker 1: in heat, a female dog in heat. It's only then
• 24:46
  Speaker 1: when the ferono pheromones are released can a dog actually
• 24:55
  Speaker 1: do it. Anyway, I'm going into this detail just a
• 25:00
  Speaker 1: illustrate how ridiculously absurd this is. And again maybe it's possible,
• 25:09
  Speaker 1: I don't know, maybe, but to make such a claim
• 25:13
  Speaker 1: and to blame Israeli's for it, you would think you'd
• 25:20
  Speaker 1: need real evidence, substantial evidence, some kind of scientific verification.
• 25:30
  Speaker 1: Now this is he you know, one example of what
• 25:35
  Speaker 1: he did is he he has a He's interviews Hud
• 25:40
  Speaker 1: Olmert from from from a Prime Minister of Israel who's
• 25:44
  Speaker 1: quite critical of a lot of stuff that's happening, particularly
• 25:46
  Speaker 1: on the West Bank, and almost it says something about, yeah,
• 25:49
  Speaker 1: I wouldn't surprise if these things are happening. These kind
• 25:53
  Speaker 1: of things happen on the West Bank all the time.
• 25:56
  Speaker 1: And he takes that quote, he puts it right in
• 25:57
  Speaker 1: the smack in the middle of the article, but almost
• 26:02
  Speaker 1: says Christoff completely misrepresented the conversation. This is almost statement.
• 26:08
  Speaker 1: Mister Christoft's article includes claims of extraordinary gravity. The Israeli
• 26:13
  Speaker 1: authorities have directed the rape of children, the dogs have
• 26:16
  Speaker 1: been used as instruments of sexual assault, the systematic sexual
• 26:19
  Speaker 1: torture state policy. I did not validate these claims. I
• 26:24
  Speaker 1: have no knowledge supporting these claims, as I said to
• 26:27
  Speaker 1: mister Christoph. Therefore, the positioning of my quote after pages
• 26:31
  Speaker 1: of such allegations misrepresents my views. It's pretty stunning, pretty stunning,
• 26:51
  Speaker 1: And of course the New Times is completely supporting Christoph,
• 26:54
  Speaker 1: completing backing him up. And you know they're claiming this
• 27:01
  Speaker 1: is all you know, even though it's published as an
• 27:05
  Speaker 1: up ed, this is all stands up to journalistic grigor.
• 27:14
  Speaker 1: There are times, as you know, descended into a kind
• 27:20
  Speaker 1: of Israel hatred and any opportunity to attack Israel, any
• 27:27
  Speaker 1: opportunity to make Israelis look like monsters, any opportunity to
• 27:31
  Speaker 1: make Israel look like some kind of horrific, awful, evil state,
• 27:35
  Speaker 1: they will jump on. They will take, and it's cheered
• 27:40
  Speaker 1: on and celebrated by their readers, by you know, the
• 27:51
  Speaker 1: new Democratic establishment today. They just just glorifies in anti Semitism,
• 28:01
  Speaker 1: and you know they hide behind Oh no, it's just
• 28:04
  Speaker 1: anti Zionist, anti Israel. But it's really looking here as
• 28:08
  Speaker 1: a deep, deep, deep hatred of Jews, hatred of Israel,
• 28:13
  Speaker 1: hatred of everything Israel represents. No We've talked about many
• 28:16
  Speaker 1: times why they hate Israel so much, and we'll talk
• 28:18
  Speaker 1: about it again, I'm sure, but it is shocking the
• 28:25
  Speaker 1: extent to which antisemitism today is all over the place.
• 28:30
  Speaker 1: I mean, when you have Hassan Paika as a representative,
• 28:36
  Speaker 1: as a spokesman, as somebody who the Democrats will not condemn,
• 28:46
  Speaker 1: it's you're not just anti Israel, you're anti your anti civilization,
• 28:54
  Speaker 1: your anti human life. And now a sizeable part of
• 28:59
  Speaker 1: the Democratic Party, well particularly the primary voting Democratic Party,
• 29:05
  Speaker 1: is brought into this. If you look at candidates across
• 29:07
  Speaker 1: the spectrum. The candidates that are leading right now in
• 29:10
  Speaker 1: Democratic primaries are vicious anti Israel advocates, and those who
• 29:18
  Speaker 1: are pro Israel constantly required to apologize for it. Senator Wiena,
• 29:25
  Speaker 1: who has been relatively pro Israel, had to admit that
• 29:29
  Speaker 1: Israel committed genocide in order to, I guess be still
• 29:33
  Speaker 1: be part of the Democratic Party in Michigan. Abdul El sayed,
• 29:40
  Speaker 1: it leads in the Democratic primary for US Senate seed
• 29:44
  Speaker 1: he campaigns with us on Pika, and the competitors to
• 29:51
  Speaker 1: I'll say, yet won't call him on that, won't call
• 29:56
  Speaker 1: him on the Hassan Pika links because they're afraid. They're
• 30:02
  Speaker 1: afraid of their own voters. Anyway, one last point in this,
• 30:11
  Speaker 1: and this will lead us into the next story. Why
• 30:16
  Speaker 1: did the New York Times publish this? And why did
• 30:19
  Speaker 1: it publish it on Tuesday? Why did it publish it
• 30:23
  Speaker 1: on Tuesday? It published it on Tuesday because Tuesday was
• 30:31
  Speaker 1: the day when they report on the October seventh horrors
• 30:38
  Speaker 1: was published. They knew that this would divert attention away
• 30:46
  Speaker 1: from the big story. They knew that this would take
• 30:50
  Speaker 1: attention away from an article blame me camas, some of
• 30:56
  Speaker 1: the most horrific actions human beings can engage in. They
• 31:04
  Speaker 1: knew that this would be a distraction. They published it
• 31:11
  Speaker 1: so that the defenders of Hamas could say, yeah, maybe
• 31:15
  Speaker 1: all that stuff on October seventh is right, but the
• 31:17
  Speaker 1: Israelis do it too. They're just as bad, They're just
• 31:22
  Speaker 1: as evil. They did it to defend I think it
• 31:28
  Speaker 1: was the same day on the twelfth, I think it
• 31:30
  Speaker 1: was Tuesday. They did it to basically side with Ramas
• 31:36
  Speaker 1: and to deflect the horrors of what is in the
• 31:40
  Speaker 1: report that was published. And that just makes the New
• 31:52
  Speaker 1: Times even more evil than I suggested before, more horrific
• 31:56
  Speaker 1: than I suggested before. It's yeah, it's a real disgrace.
• 32:15
  Speaker 1: So what was the report? Pot came out again? Based
• 32:19
  Speaker 1: on ten thousand photographs and videos farm October seventh, the
• 32:22
  Speaker 1: videos taken by Ramas and uploaded onto the internet, eighteen
• 32:29
  Speaker 1: hour eighteen hundred hours of visual analysis, hundreds of testimonials
• 32:36
  Speaker 1: from survivors, and what do they present well? When survivor
• 32:45
  Speaker 1: tells the story, Have I heard one rape where they
• 32:48
  Speaker 1: were passing her around? She was probably injured, judging by
• 32:52
  Speaker 1: her screams. Screams you never heard before. It's between silence
• 33:02
  Speaker 1: and screams, between pain and wanting to die. And after
• 33:06
  Speaker 1: they finished they shot her. You wear a bang and silence.
• 33:11
  Speaker 1: There was laughter, there were jokes. You were passing them
• 33:14
  Speaker 1: from one to another. It was done for fun. After
• 33:21
  Speaker 1: she was rescued, she said she saw bodies. It wasn't
• 33:26
  Speaker 1: a single body there wasn't that just died normally. Every
• 33:31
  Speaker 1: single one had gone through torture. I mean the level
• 33:39
  Speaker 1: of barberism. I mean, I don't know, I guess. I
• 33:43
  Speaker 1: encourage you to read this for yourselves. There's video out there,
• 33:48
  Speaker 1: everything is documented, but you should read this just to
• 33:58
  Speaker 1: get a sense of what this is all really about. Now,
• 34:05
  Speaker 1: remember this is wasn't Ramas. This was led by Ramas,
• 34:10
  Speaker 1: but it wasn't only Ramas. Thousands of Palestinians came across
• 34:15
  Speaker 1: the border, regular Palestinian men, not members of Ramas, to
• 34:20
  Speaker 1: participate in the fun. You know. The women were stabbed
• 34:31
  Speaker 1: to death, raped after they were already dead. In parts
• 34:38
  Speaker 1: of the body, in the intimate areas, nails were embedded,
• 34:42
  Speaker 1: said one first responder. Of the bodies, he encountered aluminum cans, grenades, nails,
• 34:50
  Speaker 1: blunt objects, rods, household tools spiked like instruments insided into
• 34:55
  Speaker 1: genitals and other parts of the bodies of the victims.
• 35:00
  Speaker 1: The practice was systematic. In one room where bodies were
• 35:05
  Speaker 1: discovered completely mutilated, the touta was gleeful. It was filmed, uploaded, celebrated.
• 35:25
  Speaker 1: In some cases, sexually abused people sexually abused right next
• 35:29
  Speaker 1: to their family in front of family members. In one
• 35:34
  Speaker 1: case who were taken family members who were taken hostage,
• 35:42
  Speaker 1: family members were forced to commit sex acts on one another,
• 35:47
  Speaker 1: an intentional, premeditated strategy to destroy family units even after
• 35:53
  Speaker 1: they were released from captivity. The women who fell into clutchers,
• 36:01
  Speaker 1: who are you know? They were stripped, bound, stabbed, shot, burned, executed,
• 36:09
  Speaker 1: both during and after they were raped. Some women's heads
• 36:14
  Speaker 1: had been bashed in with a brain spilling out, others
• 36:19
  Speaker 1: riddled with so many bullets. The extremities disintegrated, genitals were disfigured, impaled,
• 36:28
  Speaker 1: burned as they were their faces. And I know it's
• 36:31
  Speaker 1: difficult to read this and it's difficult to hear it.
• 36:39
  Speaker 1: Bet it was real, well documented, evident testimonies, photographs. Now
• 36:49
  Speaker 1: it turns out that the Hamas actually had written instructions
• 36:57
  Speaker 1: coming into the joe about how to do all this
• 37:01
  Speaker 1: they learned. You know, I hadn't had in writing the
• 37:04
  Speaker 1: Hebrew words for get undressed, open your legs. They were
• 37:10
  Speaker 1: guided to behave this way. They were instructed to behave
• 37:14
  Speaker 1: this way, and they relished it. So I mean, this
• 37:25
  Speaker 1: goes on for pages and pages and pages, right, and
• 37:31
  Speaker 1: this is now reporting the Wall Street Journal, you know,
• 37:34
  Speaker 1: and you know with all the gory details, so you
• 37:47
  Speaker 1: know people the way people survived that day. You know,
• 37:50
  Speaker 1: here's an example of one. One woman describes another fell
• 37:56
  Speaker 1: to the ground, shot in the head. I pulled her
• 37:59
  Speaker 1: body over me and spied her blood on me so
• 38:02
  Speaker 1: it would look like I was dead too. I will
• 38:04
  Speaker 1: never forget her face. Every night I wake to it
• 38:10
  Speaker 1: and apologize to her, saying I'm sorry. They gang raped
• 38:19
  Speaker 1: males as well, not just women. They laughed, They were
• 38:24
  Speaker 1: very pleased, as if they were playing with a six dollar.
• 38:30
  Speaker 1: Now again, this is went way beyond, way beyond the
• 38:39
  Speaker 1: the hamas, the dedicated Hamas. This was, you know, this was,
• 38:51
  Speaker 1: this was Palestinians, gousins coming in and doing this. They
• 38:56
  Speaker 1: didn't have to Nobody put a gun to their head.
• 38:59
  Speaker 1: They wanted to. This is the kind of hatred, the
• 39:05
  Speaker 1: kind of evil that is in their minds, not in
• 39:07
  Speaker 1: their hearts, in their minds of evil that is in
• 39:10
  Speaker 1: their minds that led them to this. This is an
• 39:14
  Speaker 1: educational system that teaches them the Jews are not human.
• 39:17
  Speaker 1: This is the consequence of systematically teaching people and preaching
• 39:21
  Speaker 1: anti Semitism. So that is that is the report. I mean,
• 39:44
  Speaker 1: I'm not doing justice because again, you guys should expose
• 39:48
  Speaker 1: yourself to it, as hard as that might be, because
• 39:52
  Speaker 1: you need to understand the evil that is being fought here.
• 39:57
  Speaker 1: And it's not unique to the Palestinians. There is the
• 40:04
  Speaker 1: Palestinians have this in space because and they feel like
• 40:09
  Speaker 1: they are owed it because they're supposedly oppressed. They think
• 40:16
  Speaker 1: that the Israelis are sub human because that's what they're
• 40:19
  Speaker 1: being taught for when they're little by at schools that
• 40:21
  Speaker 1: the United Nations runs. But this is how human beings
• 40:27
  Speaker 1: behave towards one another in the pre civilized era. This
• 40:31
  Speaker 1: is what Christians to one another in the pre Enlightenment.
• 40:36
  Speaker 1: This is what routinely happened in the glorious Bronze Age
• 40:41
  Speaker 1: that so many people celebrate and wolfit throughout the ages
• 40:45
  Speaker 1: in uncivilized periods of human history. This is how people behaved.
• 40:51
  Speaker 1: Now this is particularly vicious because the hatred is so vicious,
• 41:02
  Speaker 1: and the use of sexual violence to degrade intentionally, it
• 41:08
  Speaker 1: was so intentional and so vicious. But this is barbarism.
• 41:14
  Speaker 1: This is what barbarians do. And beware of the barbarians,
• 41:21
  Speaker 1: Beware of letting them in, and beware of, you know,
• 41:31
  Speaker 1: not teaching them a lesson when they behave in barbaric ways.
• 41:36
  Speaker 1: This is why it's so crucial to defeat the Palestinians,
• 41:41
  Speaker 1: not just ramas the Palestinians, to defeat them, to crush them,
• 41:45
  Speaker 1: to humiliate them, to bring them to their knees, not
• 41:48
  Speaker 1: bisexually abusing them, not by raping them, not by gratruitously
• 41:53
  Speaker 1: murdering them, but by teaching them a lesson that such
• 42:01
  Speaker 1: behavior as October seventh will never be rewarded, will never
• 42:06
  Speaker 1: result in anything good, anything positive, that their dreams finished,
• 42:12
  Speaker 1: they're gone, they you know. And and we are way
• 42:21
  Speaker 1: way way too nice to these people, way too nice.
• 42:33
  Speaker 1: And the one Gaza is not finished. Remember the one
• 42:35
  Speaker 1: Gaza is not finished. Still a so called cease fire.
• 42:43
  Speaker 1: All right, let's switch gears that's hard. It's not easy
• 42:53
  Speaker 1: to switch gears after that. But let's switch gears. We've
• 42:57
  Speaker 1: got a newman of the Federal Reserve, Colin Powell. His
• 43:04
  Speaker 1: term is up for the first time in I think
• 43:08
  Speaker 1: eighty years. He will stay on at the Federal Reserve,
• 43:11
  Speaker 1: Powell until the end of his term as a FED member,
• 43:16
  Speaker 1: which as a FED board member, which ends in two years.
• 43:20
  Speaker 1: And he's doing that basically for self preservation. He is
• 43:23
  Speaker 1: afraid that if he leaves the FED that Trump will
• 43:27
  Speaker 1: turn around and accuse him of you know, foud or
• 43:33
  Speaker 1: whatever around this, you know, renovation of the Federal Reserve building.
• 43:38
  Speaker 1: And he's staying on the board so basically until all
• 43:41
  Speaker 1: of that investigation and all of that is cleared up
• 43:45
  Speaker 1: and gone. But importantly, there is a new There is
• 43:49
  Speaker 1: a new Chairman of the Federal Reserve, and that is
• 43:53
  Speaker 1: Kevin Wash. Kevin Wash is a kind of a visit
• 44:02
  Speaker 1: I guess scholar at He teaches at the Business School
• 44:05
  Speaker 1: at Stanford, but he's really a member the Hoover Institute,
• 44:08
  Speaker 1: a visiting scholar over there. He is non economist. He
• 44:14
  Speaker 1: graduated with a bachelor's degree in public policy from Stanford
• 44:17
  Speaker 1: in nineteen ninety two. He got a Harvard law degree
• 44:21
  Speaker 1: in nineteen ninety five. He worked emergency and acquisitions at
• 44:27
  Speaker 1: Morgan Stanley in New York. He rose to become the
• 44:32
  Speaker 1: firm's vice president and executive director of Investment Banking within
• 44:36
  Speaker 1: the Mergers and Acquisition's division. In two thousand and two,
• 44:42
  Speaker 1: President Bush made wash a Special Assistant to the President
• 44:46
  Speaker 1: of Economic Policy an executive Secretary of the National Economic Council.
• 44:53
  Speaker 1: Wassh's work involved handling the aftermath of multiple significant accounting scandals,
• 44:59
  Speaker 1: if you remember, that led ultimately to the horrific regulation
• 45:05
  Speaker 1: that involved Sarbain's Oxley. In January two thousand and six,
• 45:11
  Speaker 1: he was nominated to serve on the Board of the
• 45:14
  Speaker 1: Federal Reserve. He became, I think the youngest member ever
• 45:18
  Speaker 1: to serve on the board. He was thirty five that
• 45:22
  Speaker 1: right two thousand and six, he would have been thirty six,
• 45:24
  Speaker 1: thirty five, thirty six, and he served does a lieutenant
• 45:29
  Speaker 1: to the board's chairman, Ben bernanke In particularly in the
• 45:33
  Speaker 1: response of two thousand and eight financial crisis. He was
• 45:38
  Speaker 1: involved in the mergers and acquisitions. He's emergency acquisition guy.
• 45:41
  Speaker 1: She is involved in the sale of Best stunts, the
• 45:45
  Speaker 1: JP Morgan and the bankruptci of Lehman Brothers, and the
• 45:48
  Speaker 1: bail out of IIG and all the crap that was
• 45:51
  Speaker 1: going on during that period. And he ultimately resigned from
• 46:02
  Speaker 1: the board in twenty eleven because he objected to one
• 46:07
  Speaker 1: of the q e's the quantitative easings, the massive buying
• 46:11
  Speaker 1: of gum and bonds by the Federal Reserve. And at
• 46:14
  Speaker 1: that point he became a lecture at the Stanford Graduate
• 46:17
  Speaker 1: School of Business. He has been nominated by It was
• 46:20
  Speaker 1: nominated by Trump and approved by the Senate by the
• 46:24
  Speaker 1: smallest margin in history of this vote. So it becomes
• 46:30
  Speaker 1: it becomes more and more partisan, if you will, these
• 46:36
  Speaker 1: kind of votes. But he won by fifty four I
• 46:40
  Speaker 1: think to fifty four to forty to forty six or
• 46:45
  Speaker 1: something like that, which is the smallest margin ever in
• 46:48
  Speaker 1: Fed history. Let's see what else you know. The assumption
• 46:55
  Speaker 1: is that Trump brings him in to lower interest rates,
• 47:00
  Speaker 1: and Trump has been hoppying on the Fed for a
• 47:02
  Speaker 1: while now that they need a lower interest rates. I
• 47:05
  Speaker 1: don't know if you notice. We would have talked about
• 47:07
  Speaker 1: this if I had a show. But the inflation numbers
• 47:10
  Speaker 1: came in earlier. This week's CPI price inflation came in
• 47:14
  Speaker 1: very high, the highest it's been since the high inflation
• 47:19
  Speaker 1: rate Jing Obama. Much higher than expected, much higher than
• 47:24
  Speaker 1: previous months, primarily result of the rising prices. So I
• 47:28
  Speaker 1: don't think this is really inflation. This is more prices
• 47:32
  Speaker 1: going up because of some prices going up because of
• 47:36
  Speaker 1: the run war. But there's also indication that there might
• 47:39
  Speaker 1: be actual inflation going on. M two, which is a
• 47:42
  Speaker 1: measure of the monetary supply. Money supply, it's been going
• 47:46
  Speaker 1: up quite a bit in the last few months anyway.
• 47:53
  Speaker 1: Kevin wassh is I guess a gender that Trump has
• 47:58
  Speaker 1: sent Tom in is the lower interest rates, and yet
• 48:02
  Speaker 1: it's rare that interstates are lowered while inflation CPI is
• 48:06
  Speaker 1: as high as it is. Walsh has a strategy of
• 48:09
  Speaker 1: how to deal with this. He wants to actually actively
• 48:12
  Speaker 1: shrink the money supply by reducing the size of the
• 48:18
  Speaker 1: Fed balance sheet that is selling morgasbacked securities and bonds
• 48:23
  Speaker 1: and government bonds into the market, which sucks money out
• 48:26
  Speaker 1: of the economy right and at the same time reduce
• 48:30
  Speaker 1: interest rates. He also believes that reducing interestrates is going
• 48:37
  Speaker 1: to be fine because of massive increases in productivity from
• 48:40
  Speaker 1: AI are going to create downward pressure on prices very soon.
• 48:46
  Speaker 1: So that's the agenda. It's going to be interesting to
• 48:49
  Speaker 1: see what he actually does. All of that is going
• 48:53
  Speaker 1: to be difficult, and some of it is a little
• 48:58
  Speaker 1: self contradictory and complicated. Won't get into it here. Why
• 49:03
  Speaker 1: reduce the size of the balance sheet if the Fed
• 49:06
  Speaker 1: is not as easy as it sounds. But we're going
• 49:10
  Speaker 1: to watch and see. As I've told you many many times,
• 49:14
  Speaker 1: maybe those of you and you have not not hood
• 49:16
  Speaker 1: this before. There is you know, the Federals of chairman.
• 49:23
  Speaker 1: The best Federals of Chairmen can do is not screw
• 49:26
  Speaker 1: up too badly. There's no such thing as good monetary
• 49:33
  Speaker 1: policy anymore than there is any such thing as good
• 49:36
  Speaker 1: price setting in an economy. Central planning doesn't work, Trying
• 49:42
  Speaker 1: to set prices doesn't work. Trying to manipulate the economy
• 49:46
  Speaker 1: from above doesn't work. It's just a matter of how
• 49:50
  Speaker 1: much harm you do or don't do. You can minimize
• 49:54
  Speaker 1: damage or not. Powell was a pretty bad chairman of
• 49:58
  Speaker 1: the Fed, primarily because he oversaw a huge spiking inflation
• 50:04
  Speaker 1: in the post COVID era, which could have been avoided.
• 50:08
  Speaker 1: He didn't see it coming. He called it transitory. He
• 50:10
  Speaker 1: thought it was a supply shock and didn't realize the
• 50:13
  Speaker 1: monetary origins of the inflation, and as a consequence, didn't
• 50:18
  Speaker 1: know anything about it. So what you get is, you know,
• 50:25
  Speaker 1: so Federal chairman again can screw up. They can't do
• 50:28
  Speaker 1: much good. Alan Greenspan screwed up in many ways, Binanke did.
• 50:36
  Speaker 1: So we'll see. We'll see how Wash handles all this.
• 50:40
  Speaker 1: It's particularly interesting with Wash because because he has he
• 50:47
  Speaker 1: has to appease Donald Trump, so there's that combination of things.
• 50:54
  Speaker 1: But so we will we will see, of course how
• 50:56
  Speaker 1: all that plays out. Will keep an eye on him. Wait,
• 51:02
  Speaker 1: two more quick ones. Earlier this week, there was a
• 51:05
  Speaker 1: video circulating, a few videos of circulating, I guess it
• 51:09
  Speaker 1: was late last week of AOC talking about billionaires, and
• 51:14
  Speaker 1: that stimulated whole discussion online about billionaires and about whether
• 51:19
  Speaker 1: they should be billionaires and who they are and what
• 51:22
  Speaker 1: they are and how you become a billionaire and so on,
• 51:26
  Speaker 1: which has just been you know, horrific. But AOC I
• 51:34
  Speaker 1: couldn't let this comment pass because it's so brilliant, ALC
• 51:37
  Speaker 1: said in a discussion. She said you know, after all,
• 51:40
  Speaker 1: the American Revolution was against the billionaires of their time.
• 51:46
  Speaker 1: I didn't realize it. I mean, did you realize that
• 51:48
  Speaker 1: that the American Revolution was fought by against the billionaires.
• 51:54
  Speaker 1: And that's why we have a Declaration of Invendance. Don't
• 51:56
  Speaker 1: you remember the argument in the declaration again against the
• 52:00
  Speaker 1: wealth accumulation by the British. So the American Revolution was
• 52:08
  Speaker 1: fought against billionaires. George Washington was probably the richest man
• 52:13
  Speaker 1: in America at the time, was the equivalent of billionaire today,
• 52:19
  Speaker 1: was on the wrong side of that revolution. It turns
• 52:21
  Speaker 1: out she was fighting against himself. It wasn't again, the
• 52:27
  Speaker 1: Revolution was not fought for freedom, not for rights to life,
• 52:32
  Speaker 1: liberty and pursuit of happiness, not for the idea all
• 52:34
  Speaker 1: men are equal in their rights and before the law. No,
• 52:37
  Speaker 1: none of that. It was a it was a class war.
• 52:41
  Speaker 1: It was a it was a war of those who
• 52:44
  Speaker 1: do not have against those who have. It was all
• 52:47
  Speaker 1: about economics, and it was all about class, and it
• 52:50
  Speaker 1: was all about getting rid of getting rid of billionaires.
• 52:53
  Speaker 1: She also said, I'm not sure if a staying interview
• 52:55
  Speaker 1: or if she was just on a role that week,
• 53:00
  Speaker 1: just said that it's impossible to become a billionaire. Honestly,
• 53:07
  Speaker 1: that really the only way to become a billionaire is
• 53:10
  Speaker 1: by exploiting people and stealing stuff. And Robert Which then
• 53:19
  Speaker 1: came out with a post saying they're basically five ways
• 53:25
  Speaker 1: to accumulate a billion dollars. One profiting for monopoly, two
• 53:30
  Speaker 1: inside of training, three political payoffs four four five inhabitants
• 53:36
  Speaker 1: don't believe the self made myth. Now I've got a
• 53:40
  Speaker 1: question for Robert White and for aoc where does JK
• 53:46
  Speaker 1: Wallins fit in this? JK Rollins? I mean, let's just
• 53:52
  Speaker 1: go over these ways in which you become a billionaire.
• 53:54
  Speaker 1: Because j K Wallins is a billionaire. Did she inhabit
• 53:58
  Speaker 1: the money? No? I mean JK. Wallens came from a
• 54:00
  Speaker 1: pretty simple background when she was when she wrote the
• 54:03
  Speaker 1: first Harry Potter novel, she literally was in welfare, so
• 54:07
  Speaker 1: it can be from inheritance. Do we have any any
• 54:12
  Speaker 1: evidence that JK. Rollins committed fraud to achieve a billionaire status? No,
• 54:18
  Speaker 1: it's fuzz I know, she just sold books. She just
• 54:21
  Speaker 1: sold books. Was that a political payoff? Did somebody did?
• 54:28
  Speaker 1: Was she a crony? Yes? The Conservative government really wanted
• 54:32
  Speaker 1: Harry Potter out there. So they paid her off. They
• 54:35
  Speaker 1: paid her billion dollars to write the book. No, I
• 54:37
  Speaker 1: mean that's not true. Instide of trading. Nope, nope, nope, nope.
• 54:44
  Speaker 1: Profiting for a monopoly. Well yes, okay, granted you know
• 54:49
  Speaker 1: they got me. She had a monopoly over Harry Potter.
• 54:54
  Speaker 1: There you go if you call that a monopoly, just
• 54:59
  Speaker 1: like Apple has a monopoly over Apple, Google has a
• 55:02
  Speaker 1: monopoly over Google. J. K. Rollins have monopoly over Harry Potter.
• 55:10
  Speaker 1: Edward thinks you got to write magic. But that's true
• 55:16
  Speaker 1: of you know, pretty much all these billionaires. If you
• 55:28
  Speaker 1: look at the biographies of the Forbes four hundred riches,
• 55:31
  Speaker 1: four hundred people in America, most of them, well over
• 55:35
  Speaker 1: fifty percent, are self made. None of them made their
• 55:40
  Speaker 1: billions inside of trading a fraud or monopoly or what
• 55:45
  Speaker 1: was the other one. You know, inhabitants, they're self made,
• 55:49
  Speaker 1: they literally, So this is all bs. Twelve point five
• 55:56
  Speaker 1: percent of the Forbes four hundred are inherited fortunes. Twelve
• 56:01
  Speaker 1: point five percent, I guess another ten percent inherited fortune,
• 56:08
  Speaker 1: but then grew it significantly, right, inhabited a business and
• 56:15
  Speaker 1: then grew the business. Another six percent inhibited a business
• 56:19
  Speaker 1: and scaled it to billions. I know what you want
• 56:21
  Speaker 1: to call that? Self made with wealthy head start. Another
• 56:30
  Speaker 1: ten percent self made with middle upper income, middle class income.
• 56:38
  Speaker 1: Basically thirty eight point five self made from little or
• 56:43
  Speaker 1: from actual adversity nineteen percent. The more people in the
• 56:47
  Speaker 1: group that came from adversity than inherited, they will and
• 56:54
  Speaker 1: the lifes continue, and the war on billionaires continues, and
• 56:57
  Speaker 1: it's not going to go away. I mean, part of
• 57:01
  Speaker 1: the reason, part of the way you can justify, for example,
• 57:05
  Speaker 1: right raping and mutilating human bodies is by dehumanizing them.
• 57:13
  Speaker 1: It's by convincing yourself and others that they're not human,
• 57:16
  Speaker 1: they're not real. And one of the ways that the
• 57:24
  Speaker 1: Democratic Party right now, the left is looking towards, you know,
• 57:30
  Speaker 1: massive tax increases and billionaires, is by convincing themselves and
• 57:36
  Speaker 1: trying to convince you that they didn't make it, that
• 57:39
  Speaker 1: they didn't known it, that they stole it, they exploited it.
• 57:41
  Speaker 1: It's not theirs. So you get now you get Mamdani
• 57:48
  Speaker 1: and AOC of course claiming this, but you know, it's
• 57:53
  Speaker 1: it's not just them, you know, Boone said, is Elizabeth Wan.
• 57:56
  Speaker 1: But it's not just that part of the Democratic Party.
• 57:59
  Speaker 1: You so what they didn't want us in the state.
• 58:01
  Speaker 1: You're seeing what they're going to try to do in
• 58:02
  Speaker 1: California and what bum Donny wants to do in New York.
• 58:06
  Speaker 1: There is a tidal wave against billionaires coming. This is
• 58:12
  Speaker 1: going to be very hard to stop because thanks to Trump,
• 58:16
  Speaker 1: we're gonna we're gonna get a tsunami of Democrats getting
• 58:19
  Speaker 1: elected to Congress next year or this year. And this
• 58:24
  Speaker 1: is higher on their agenda. Higher on their priority list
• 58:28
  Speaker 1: is to raise as much revenue as they can from
• 58:31
  Speaker 1: billionaires by stealing, by taking it all. Right, Finally, this
• 58:41
  Speaker 1: is the story we talked about a few weeks ago,
• 58:43
  Speaker 1: and that is I remember the Alberta they had gotten
• 58:46
  Speaker 1: three hundred thousand signatures to get a referendum for independence
• 58:52
  Speaker 1: to leave Canada. This is in Alberta, Canada. Well, the court,
• 58:58
  Speaker 1: the Canadian I guess Alberta, what is it? The Alberta,
• 59:02
  Speaker 1: Alberta Court Provincial court has decided that the petition is
• 59:10
  Speaker 1: illegitimate because it did not consult the first nations, these
• 59:18
  Speaker 1: the Indian tribes that live in Alberta. The judge decided
• 59:25
  Speaker 1: that that the that the secession might contradict in conflict
• 59:39
  Speaker 1: with treaties that the first nation signed from before there
• 59:44
  Speaker 1: was even a Canada, or not before there was a Canada,
• 59:48
  Speaker 1: before it's an Alberta. Uh and uh that since it
• 59:54
  Speaker 1: affects the treaties with Canada, they would have to sign
• 59:58
  Speaker 1: off of it. So those of you are Canadian who
• 1:00:03
  Speaker 1: had hopes that Alberta was going to become an independent
• 1:00:09
  Speaker 1: state or maybe even join the United States or something
• 1:00:12
  Speaker 1: like that, a judge is just squash that destroyed that
• 1:00:16
  Speaker 1: it's gone in happening. Sorry, guys, all right, that is
• 1:00:22
  Speaker 1: the news on this May fourteenth Thursday, a day where
• 1:00:28
  Speaker 1: I'm still recovering from being sick. A little slow. I
• 1:00:31
  Speaker 1: apologize for that, but we will get back on track
• 1:00:36
  Speaker 1: here soon enough. All right. I mean remind you that
• 1:00:41
  Speaker 1: you guys make this show possible. Couldn't happen without you,
• 1:00:45
  Speaker 1: So thank you to all of you. Let me thank
• 1:00:47
  Speaker 1: the people with the stickers roll in. Thank you selfie
• 1:00:50
  Speaker 1: subscriber fifty dollars. Thank you really appreciate that. And let's
• 1:00:58
  Speaker 1: see everything else is a question. I don't think we
• 1:01:00
  Speaker 1: had any other stickers, so you can still jump in
• 1:01:03
  Speaker 1: with the stickets. What the show value for value, exprest
• 1:01:06
  Speaker 1: that trade. It'll be great A goal. A third, our
• 1:01:10
  Speaker 1: goal is to get to seven hundred and fifty, so
• 1:01:13
  Speaker 1: we're just ninety three dollars short. A few stickers would
• 1:01:15
  Speaker 1: get us there pretty easily, so please consider using the
• 1:01:20
  Speaker 1: sticker feature to support their on book show. All right,
• 1:01:25
  Speaker 1: a few sponsors. The Ironman Institute wants to remind you
• 1:01:31
  Speaker 1: that OCON is happening. It's happening in late June between
• 1:01:37
  Speaker 1: June twenty sixth and thirtieth in New Orleans of all places,
• 1:01:41
  Speaker 1: great city, great food, and now actually today and tomorrow.
• 1:01:49
  Speaker 1: That's it. Today and tomorrow there is a twenty percent
• 1:01:53
  Speaker 1: off all adult and young adult registration. Today and tomorrow
• 1:01:59
  Speaker 1: there is twenty percent off of everybody, not just your
• 1:02:02
  Speaker 1: on book show listeners. Everybody gets twenty percent off. So
• 1:02:05
  Speaker 1: go to you know, go to uh what's said? H Yeah,
• 1:02:18
  Speaker 1: you can. You can get information on it at iran
• 1:02:22
  Speaker 1: dot og slash ybs Ironran dot og slash ybs and
• 1:02:27
  Speaker 1: just go down the page. You'll get to okon. Click
• 1:02:29
  Speaker 1: on the OCON and you can get twenty percent off
• 1:02:31
  Speaker 1: today and tomorrow on OCON. Now if you are under
• 1:02:36
  Speaker 1: thirty five years old. If you're under thirty five years old,
• 1:02:41
  Speaker 1: you can apply for a scholarship. And the scholarships are
• 1:02:44
  Speaker 1: pretty generous, and they eager to get young people to
• 1:02:47
  Speaker 1: come to Okon, so they're giving out a lot of scholarships,
• 1:02:50
  Speaker 1: is my understanding. So if you're under thirty five and
• 1:02:55
  Speaker 1: would like to come to Okon, get a scholarship. It
• 1:03:00
  Speaker 1: might not cast you anything hotels, travel, I don't know
• 1:03:05
  Speaker 1: what includes, but check it out. That deadline, the deadline
• 1:03:10
  Speaker 1: to apply for scholarship has been extended to May nineteenth.
• 1:03:14
  Speaker 1: She got another five days to apply for scholarship. So
• 1:03:18
  Speaker 1: do it now, don't wait. Do it now. Those of
• 1:03:21
  Speaker 1: you listening online, those of you who are listening after
• 1:03:24
  Speaker 1: the fact, you don't have a lot of time apply
• 1:03:26
  Speaker 1: for I mean, I don't see the downside of applying
• 1:03:28
  Speaker 1: for scholarship. The worst that can happen is they say no.
• 1:03:31
  Speaker 1: But if they say yes, you get to come to
• 1:03:34
  Speaker 1: you know, the best objectivist event of the year with
• 1:03:40
  Speaker 1: talks by me and lots of other objectivist thinkers. The
• 1:03:46
  Speaker 1: theme is the Declaration Independence and producers and the connection
• 1:03:50
  Speaker 1: between the two. Stephen Pinker is going to be there
• 1:03:54
  Speaker 1: and we're going to have poker and talent, those and
• 1:04:01
  Speaker 1: just a bunch of interesting fun stuff. So join us
• 1:04:07
  Speaker 1: by either getting your twenty percent discount, which you should
• 1:04:10
  Speaker 1: all do, why are you not coming to okah and
• 1:04:12
  Speaker 1: you should ask yourself, really ask yourself, why do I
• 1:04:15
  Speaker 1: not go to okon? It's it's it's a it's an
• 1:04:18
  Speaker 1: amazing event. You'll get it. You'll come out of it
• 1:04:21
  Speaker 1: with so much energy. It's like being in a gold
• 1:04:28
  Speaker 1: sculture for a while. Right. Yeah, Poka tournament, poke a toonament,
• 1:04:34
  Speaker 1: beat you on book. That's the poka tournament. Somebody usually does,
• 1:04:40
  Speaker 1: but that is the goal of the poker tournament is
• 1:04:43
  Speaker 1: to beat me twenty percent off for today and tomorrow,
• 1:04:48
  Speaker 1: so midnight tomorrow. But those of you who are thirty
• 1:04:52
  Speaker 1: five years in under, you gotta tell me in May
• 1:04:58
  Speaker 1: nineteenth to apply for scholarship. So super exciting. All right,
• 1:05:05
  Speaker 1: I'm going to skip the rest of the sponsors for
• 1:05:08
  Speaker 1: today just because I'm not feeling great and jump in
• 1:05:11
  Speaker 1: with the questions so we can move forward. We have
• 1:05:15
  Speaker 1: quite a few, all right. Let's start with Michael, who
• 1:05:19
  Speaker 1: was put a lot of questions, a lot of questions
• 1:05:23
  Speaker 1: and a lot of money. Thank you, thank you Michael, Oh,
• 1:05:28
  Speaker 1: thank you Bonnie, and thank you Enric for the stickers. Michael,
• 1:05:34
  Speaker 1: this is one hundred dollars. I had a professor tell
• 1:05:36
  Speaker 1: me not to use the word bum because that kind
• 1:05:40
  Speaker 1: of language dehumanizes the poor, and dehumanizing language leads to
• 1:05:45
  Speaker 1: atrocities like the Holocaust. Is there such truth to this
• 1:05:50
  Speaker 1: or is this just an altruistic way to never criticize
• 1:05:53
  Speaker 1: the poor. Well, it's both. There's truth to the fact
• 1:05:59
  Speaker 1: that in order to get a way worth a Holocaust,
• 1:06:02
  Speaker 1: first they needed to dehumanize the Jews. They needed to
• 1:06:06
  Speaker 1: make it okay to kill them in mass So there
• 1:06:09
  Speaker 1: was a campaign to dehumanize them. But the goal was
• 1:06:13
  Speaker 1: always to get rid of them, to kill them, to
• 1:06:17
  Speaker 1: eliminate them, and dehumanization was necessary to achieve that goal.
• 1:06:27
  Speaker 1: Calling somebody a bum is not necessarily dehumanizing. It's a
• 1:06:32
  Speaker 1: description of what they actually are, in some cases, not
• 1:06:36
  Speaker 1: all poor people, but certainly some. And your goal is
• 1:06:40
  Speaker 1: not to eliminate the poor, so it you know, the
• 1:06:50
  Speaker 1: two don't match, right. So if your goal was I
• 1:06:53
  Speaker 1: want to get rid of the poor, I want to
• 1:06:54
  Speaker 1: have concentration camps and kill all the poor people, then
• 1:06:58
  Speaker 1: the first step I would do is the human use them.
• 1:07:03
  Speaker 1: But if you just want to insult somebody because maybe
• 1:07:07
  Speaker 1: you think they deserve the insult, that is not leading
• 1:07:12
  Speaker 1: to genocide. There's no goal here of I want to
• 1:07:16
  Speaker 1: kill them all. I just want to say, you know,
• 1:07:18
  Speaker 1: shape up, bum, you know, get a job. So I
• 1:07:26
  Speaker 1: but I think it's I think ultimately it's it's driven
• 1:07:29
  Speaker 1: by altruism. You can't say anything to criticize the poor.
• 1:07:33
  Speaker 1: The poor are virtuous by the very fact that they
• 1:07:36
  Speaker 1: are poor. You can you really shouldn't insult them. You
• 1:07:47
  Speaker 1: you know, they are worthy of your respect. Why because
• 1:07:51
  Speaker 1: they are poor? And uh, you know that's Christianity, that
• 1:07:56
  Speaker 1: is that is altruism, the whole idea that we need
• 1:08:01
  Speaker 1: to respect people who we don't respect. And again, not
• 1:08:06
  Speaker 1: all poor people are bums, but some poor people are.
• 1:08:11
  Speaker 1: Assuming a bomb is somebody who doesn't want to work,
• 1:08:13
  Speaker 1: and it's just laying around doing nothing and expecting to
• 1:08:16
  Speaker 1: be to leach off of others. Some people are like
• 1:08:20
  Speaker 1: that and they should be called that. It's just a rational,
• 1:08:23
  Speaker 1: objective description of what they are. So that's not dehumanizing,
• 1:08:26
  Speaker 1: that's actually showing them for what they are. Kim, thank
• 1:08:33
  Speaker 1: you for the sticker. We really appreciate it. Thank you, Michael.
• 1:08:39
  Speaker 1: But we're going back to Michael for fifty dollars. Does
• 1:08:43
  Speaker 1: it really make sense to leave New York or California
• 1:08:46
  Speaker 1: and move to a red state? You pay a little
• 1:08:48
  Speaker 1: less in taxes and streets a little cleaner, they're fewer homeless,
• 1:08:54
  Speaker 1: but there's no culture, there's nothing to do. It just
• 1:08:57
  Speaker 1: seems it just seems worth it. It doesn't seem worth it.
• 1:09:01
  Speaker 1: I mean, it depends on you, right, It depends on
• 1:09:04
  Speaker 1: how much you value culture versus cleanliness and maybe less crime,
• 1:09:09
  Speaker 1: although it depends somewhere. It states are more violent than
• 1:09:13
  Speaker 1: blue states. New York is not particularly crime is not
• 1:09:17
  Speaker 1: particularly a problem, hasn't been at least a problem. But
• 1:09:21
  Speaker 1: in California, in many parts of California, crime is not
• 1:09:24
  Speaker 1: a problem. So is it worth it? Depending on your situation,
• 1:09:29
  Speaker 1: how much money would you save, How do you value
• 1:09:33
  Speaker 1: the different parts of your life? Do you have kids,
• 1:09:37
  Speaker 1: don't you have kids? You know? Do you want to
• 1:09:41
  Speaker 1: what kind of conditions you want to live under? So
• 1:09:44
  Speaker 1: it only makes sense to leave the question of whether
• 1:09:48
  Speaker 1: it makes sense to leave any particular place, under any
• 1:09:51
  Speaker 1: particular circumstances is dependent on you, on your values, on
• 1:09:56
  Speaker 1: an objective assessment of them. For some people, it makes
• 1:09:59
  Speaker 1: sense if right now in life, your focus in life
• 1:10:03
  Speaker 1: is on saving money. You're focus in life is is
• 1:10:08
  Speaker 1: try to save as much money as you can. You're
• 1:10:11
  Speaker 1: pursuing a career. You don't have a lot of time
• 1:10:13
  Speaker 1: for the culture, and you could look for red states
• 1:10:15
  Speaker 1: that have culture. Austin has culture, Dallas and Houston have culture,
• 1:10:20
  Speaker 1: so it's not obvious that rich states don't have culture.
• 1:10:24
  Speaker 1: You know, Miami has culture. So it's a different culture,
• 1:10:29
  Speaker 1: and you have to make the choice of whether it's
• 1:10:31
  Speaker 1: worth it or not given your circumstances, given your higher
• 1:10:35
  Speaker 1: key of values. At this point in life, I would
• 1:10:39
  Speaker 1: have not left California earlier in my life. Bet at
• 1:10:43
  Speaker 1: the point in life where I left California, it made
• 1:10:45
  Speaker 1: complete sense for me to leave California. But you have
• 1:10:48
  Speaker 1: to make that assessment for you for yourself. Michael again,
• 1:10:59
  Speaker 1: I mean hearing again fifty dollars, Thank you, Michael. I've
• 1:11:02
  Speaker 1: been hearing the argument lately that anti Semitism isn't rising,
• 1:11:05
  Speaker 1: it's returning to the normal levels. The post World War
• 1:11:08
  Speaker 1: Two suppression of anti Semitism was an anomaly. Now the
• 1:11:12
  Speaker 1: traditional levels of anti seven are being restored. I don't
• 1:11:15
  Speaker 1: know how people know this and how they measure it
• 1:11:17
  Speaker 1: and how they would figure this out right, And clearly
• 1:11:21
  Speaker 1: the Nazis represent a spike in anti Semitism, but off
• 1:11:25
  Speaker 1: of what I mean, the programs in Russia were spiking
• 1:11:28
  Speaker 1: anti semitism, and there was a lull when post World
• 1:11:33
  Speaker 1: War Two suddenly in the West. But is this a return?
• 1:11:38
  Speaker 1: Are they going to be pograms the Nazis coming back?
• 1:11:41
  Speaker 1: I mean, I think it's just sloppy. I think the
• 1:11:44
  Speaker 1: whole thing is sloppy. Anti Semitism is on the rise,
• 1:11:46
  Speaker 1: and arguably the post World War two represent it an
• 1:11:51
  Speaker 1: advance towards more civilized state. You know, progress means constantly
• 1:11:57
  Speaker 1: being more civilized, and the anti semitism, anti racism attitudes
• 1:12:02
  Speaker 1: of the post Civil Rights era at least represented an
• 1:12:09
  Speaker 1: advancement towards civilization. We're retreating from that. Are we retreating
• 1:12:13
  Speaker 1: to the pre World War two or are we retreating to
• 1:12:16
  Speaker 1: Eastern Europe Russia? Are we were treating to nineteenth century France?
• 1:12:21
  Speaker 1: What are we were treating too? Is less important then
• 1:12:25
  Speaker 1: the fact that we were treating we're moving away from civilization,
• 1:12:30
  Speaker 1: you know, away from the civilized, towards the barbaric. That's
• 1:12:34
  Speaker 1: what antisemitism represents. That's what it is, is the canary
• 1:12:40
  Speaker 1: in the coal mine. It is representative of a move
• 1:12:47
  Speaker 1: away from reason, away from rationality, and definitely away from individualism,
• 1:12:53
  Speaker 1: towards a world of collectivism and ultimately barbarism. And that
• 1:13:00
  Speaker 1: is what we need to be afraid of. And what
• 1:13:03
  Speaker 1: the level is exactly and how to calibrate that and
• 1:13:06
  Speaker 1: whether that's you know, that's irrelevant. It's it's getting worse,
• 1:13:09
  Speaker 1: moving away from goodness, away from civilization, all right, James,
• 1:13:18
  Speaker 1: thank you. Michael Junior interview with Terror Smith. She said
• 1:13:23
  Speaker 1: altruism has brought us here, referring to the rise of Trump,
• 1:13:27
  Speaker 1: and is disgusting racism, But isn't what we're witnessing. Isn't
• 1:13:34
  Speaker 1: what we're witnessing more nihilism and collectivism. Is altruism at
• 1:13:39
  Speaker 1: the base of both of these, Yes, because nihilism and
• 1:13:44
  Speaker 1: the kind of irrationalism and narcissism expressed in Trump both
• 1:13:52
  Speaker 1: all reactions to altruism. There are forms of rejecting altruism,
• 1:14:00
  Speaker 1: but on altruisms, on altruisms standards on altruisms context, they're
• 1:14:08
  Speaker 1: not about rejecting altruism for a real alternative. They're about, oh,
• 1:14:14
  Speaker 1: I don't want the consequence of altruisms. I'll do something else.
• 1:14:17
  Speaker 1: Not I'll do something that's in myself interest in a
• 1:14:20
  Speaker 1: rational way, rationally speaking. So, I mean, if you think
• 1:14:23
  Speaker 1: about nihilism, nihilism is that is the recognition that on
• 1:14:29
  Speaker 1: the altruism there are no values. I must live for you.
• 1:14:33
  Speaker 1: Why so what values can I have? I mean, my
• 1:14:39
  Speaker 1: values are condemned. If they if they promote my self interest,
• 1:14:43
  Speaker 1: my real self interest, I'm condemned. So I can't have
• 1:14:47
  Speaker 1: any values. So nihilism in a sense of recognition for
• 1:14:51
  Speaker 1: that and embracing of that, and and and the rejection
• 1:14:55
  Speaker 1: of all values as a consequence. But altruism sets that up,
• 1:14:59
  Speaker 1: makes that possible. And of course collectivism is just a
• 1:15:03
  Speaker 1: political manifestation of altruism. Collectivism is all it says is
• 1:15:09
  Speaker 1: your life is not yours. Well we knew that from altruism.
• 1:15:12
  Speaker 1: You should sacrifice for others. Yeah, you should sacrifice for
• 1:15:15
  Speaker 1: this other, this collective, this group, this tribe. Collectivism is
• 1:15:23
  Speaker 1: just the political manifestation of altruism. All right, so hopefully
• 1:15:40
  Speaker 1: that answers James. But yes, it's all about altruism. I mean,
• 1:15:45
  Speaker 1: everything bad in our world today you can link to
• 1:15:48
  Speaker 1: altruism in one way or another. Altruism and mysticism or
• 1:15:51
  Speaker 1: would destroy civilization seeing nature observer, thank you for the sticker.
• 1:16:02
  Speaker 1: I think I got in. Yeah, I got kim. All right,
• 1:16:04
  Speaker 1: so I think caught up. By the way, we're only
• 1:16:07
  Speaker 1: thirty nine dollars short of out of our goal. Not
• 1:16:12
  Speaker 1: you have age algorithm. Two part question. Llms do think,
• 1:16:18
  Speaker 1: just not the same way humans do. It's clear that
• 1:16:22
  Speaker 1: they demonstrate conceptual thinking. If you're going to handwave, what
• 1:16:28
  Speaker 1: an LLM does is just playing back old information, and
• 1:16:32
  Speaker 1: you have to say that's what humans do as well. No,
• 1:16:36
  Speaker 1: I don't have to say that at all. So the
• 1:16:39
  Speaker 1: two completely different. If a machine can do a task
• 1:16:42
  Speaker 1: that requires a conceptual thought and do it without being
• 1:16:45
  Speaker 1: specifically trained for that exact task, then it is demonstrating
• 1:16:50
  Speaker 1: conceptual thought. I use lms every day in my work.
• 1:16:53
  Speaker 1: They're not simply regurgitators. I agree. They're not simply regurgitators.
• 1:16:58
  Speaker 1: They're very, very complicated, complex regurgitators. But they're not expressing
• 1:17:04
  Speaker 1: conceptual thought because they can't think because they're not conscious.
• 1:17:09
  Speaker 1: Conceptual thought requires consciousness, and that's not what they're doing.
• 1:17:13
  Speaker 1: They're mimicking it and they pretend, you know, I'm thinking,
• 1:17:16
  Speaker 1: I'm thinking about this, I'm thinking about this, But that's
• 1:17:18
  Speaker 1: just they're pulling material together, not They can't induce. They
• 1:17:25
  Speaker 1: have no capacity for induction. They can't literally think because
• 1:17:33
  Speaker 1: they can't they're not conscious, so they can't create new knowledge.
• 1:17:40
  Speaker 1: They can take existing knowledge and you know, sol problems
• 1:17:43
  Speaker 1: with it and manipulate it and we configure it, but
• 1:17:49
  Speaker 1: they're not actually doing what we do as human beings.
• 1:17:54
  Speaker 1: They're not observing, you know, a chair and another chair
• 1:18:00
  Speaker 1: and a different type of chair and another different type
• 1:18:02
  Speaker 1: of chairs and coming up with the concept of chair.
• 1:18:04
  Speaker 1: They can't do that. They can't foam concepts. They can't
• 1:18:09
  Speaker 1: do what's involved in concept formation, which is seeing similarities
• 1:18:13
  Speaker 1: and dropping the measurements. They certainly can't form an abstract
• 1:18:21
  Speaker 1: concept like love because they don't have reference to it. Well.
• 1:18:27
  Speaker 1: In order to form a concept, you have to have
• 1:18:29
  Speaker 1: it refer to something, but they don't know what refers
• 1:18:31
  Speaker 1: it except what they've read in a dictionary. But if
• 1:18:36
  Speaker 1: all you do is read a dictionary definition of love.
• 1:18:39
  Speaker 1: You can't, you know, haven't conceptualized love unless you actually
• 1:18:43
  Speaker 1: feel love, experience love. See the love you can have
• 1:18:47
  Speaker 1: for a child, and a love you can have for mother,
• 1:18:49
  Speaker 1: and a love can f o a spouse and see
• 1:18:51
  Speaker 1: the differences between them, but still identify them all as love.
• 1:18:55
  Speaker 1: Until you can do that, you haven't conceptualized love. Now
• 1:18:59
  Speaker 1: you can ask about love. It can even tell you
• 1:19:01
  Speaker 1: the differences between love between a mother and between a
• 1:19:06
  Speaker 1: parent and a child and a spouse and all of that,
• 1:19:10
  Speaker 1: and difference between romantic love and family love and all
• 1:19:12
  Speaker 1: that stuff. It can tell you that, but that's not
• 1:19:15
  Speaker 1: because it's experienced it therefore, not because it knows it knowledge,
• 1:19:21
  Speaker 1: but because its database has stories about this and that,
• 1:19:27
  Speaker 1: and and it can you know, it can see differences,
• 1:19:32
  Speaker 1: but it can't experience any of it. And even our language, see,
• 1:19:36
  Speaker 1: our language is not even appropriate for talking about ler limbs,
• 1:19:41
  Speaker 1: because we say see differences, but they don't see differences.
• 1:19:44
  Speaker 1: We say it realizes or thinks or calculate, but it
• 1:19:47
  Speaker 1: doesn't do any of those things. It's running and I'm
• 1:19:52
  Speaker 1: good that basically looks for difference and similarities. We don't
• 1:19:57
  Speaker 1: run it out good, not statistical algorithm like an LLLM does.
• 1:20:04
  Speaker 1: We're literally sensing beings. We are connected to reality. Now
• 1:20:11
  Speaker 1: it might be that once you connect the machine to
• 1:20:13
  Speaker 1: reality and once it becomes a sensing being, and maybe
• 1:20:16
  Speaker 1: it can develop consciousness. I doubt it without biology, but
• 1:20:19
  Speaker 1: maybe that you could create something. But as of now
• 1:20:26
  Speaker 1: it is simply not. It is a very very very
• 1:20:29
  Speaker 1: sophisticated amazing because I use LLLMS and I am blown
• 1:20:34
  Speaker 1: away by them all the time. Amazing tool, but they're
• 1:20:41
  Speaker 1: not conceptual thinkers. They use concepts, but they don't think
• 1:20:48
  Speaker 1: thinking requires consciousness because you're being aware of the fact
• 1:20:52
  Speaker 1: that you're thinking and they can't. So you know, a
• 1:21:04
  Speaker 1: subconscious is doing something right. It finds connections, similarities and
• 1:21:09
  Speaker 1: so on, but it's not running a mathematical algorithm. Maybe
• 1:21:13
  Speaker 1: the outcome is you could we're trying to do with
• 1:21:16
  Speaker 1: LMS is maybe try to mimic what is actually happening
• 1:21:20
  Speaker 1: with a mathematical algorithm. But there's no math in our brains,
• 1:21:29
  Speaker 1: so it's not even like our subconscious brain. There's no
• 1:21:32
  Speaker 1: math in our brains. There's no formula in our brains,
• 1:21:36
  Speaker 1: So how does the brain exactly work. How does it
• 1:21:39
  Speaker 1: do what it does? We're still learning. We don't know.
• 1:21:43
  Speaker 1: We know very little about the brain. Still to extrapolate
• 1:21:49
  Speaker 1: from that to yeah, lllms just like a brain. And
• 1:21:52
  Speaker 1: therefore their thinking, sorry, don't buy it, all right, but
• 1:22:01
  Speaker 1: thank you not you have a joago with them. Thank
• 1:22:03
  Speaker 1: you there's one hundred dollars. Really appreciate that. James for
• 1:22:05
  Speaker 1: fifty dollars, Really appreciate the support. Guys. You guys are great.
• 1:22:10
  Speaker 1: And Michael, of course with two hundred three hundred dollars,
• 1:22:15
  Speaker 1: I think here or close to all right, Michael for
• 1:22:18
  Speaker 1: twenty dollars. Trump is a real test of the system.
• 1:22:22
  Speaker 1: The courts have to stand up to him. Are they
• 1:22:25
  Speaker 1: like Rymer courts stood up to Hitler? Well, the Viema
• 1:22:28
  Speaker 1: courts didn't stand up to Hitler. American courts have stood
• 1:22:32
  Speaker 1: up to Hitler here and there. We'll see if they
• 1:22:34
  Speaker 1: consistently do so, you know both right, Citizenship will be
• 1:22:37
  Speaker 1: a big test. We've already got tariffs. That was a
• 1:22:41
  Speaker 1: big test. We'll see some other things that come to
• 1:22:43
  Speaker 1: the courts over time. I think the system can sustain Trump,
• 1:22:50
  Speaker 1: but what comes next, you know, over the long run,
• 1:22:53
  Speaker 1: the system will be eroded, There's no question about that.
• 1:22:57
  Speaker 1: So we'll see what comes next, what happens after Trump
• 1:23:00
  Speaker 1: of a crazy leftist because people fed up with Trump,
• 1:23:03
  Speaker 1: so they'll they'll go left, and then he'll do He'll
• 1:23:10
  Speaker 1: be a disaster. And then what will the right come
• 1:23:12
  Speaker 1: up with, you know, to combat the crazy leftist, the
• 1:23:14
  Speaker 1: crazy rightist. I mean, it doesn't end well, Michael. Is
• 1:23:22
  Speaker 1: the West turning away from freedom is a question. I
• 1:23:25
  Speaker 1: guess only the left and right, also most libertarians and
• 1:23:29
  Speaker 1: of course most contemporary intellectuals, including many business leaders. But
• 1:23:32
  Speaker 1: really that's about it. But that's everything. Yes, the West
• 1:23:40
  Speaker 1: is turning away from freedom, sadly, not completely, but incrementally,
• 1:23:45
  Speaker 1: and it's not going in a good direction. But yeah,
• 1:23:48
  Speaker 1: that's pretty funny, Michael, Liam. Do you think any or
• 1:23:55
  Speaker 1: many concentration Kemp guards weren't bothered or tormented at all
• 1:24:00
  Speaker 1: by their subconsciousness for what they were doing on a
• 1:24:03
  Speaker 1: daily basis. I think some were. I think, you know,
• 1:24:08
  Speaker 1: human beings are really good at evasions, so some and
• 1:24:12
  Speaker 1: some convinced themselves this is the humanizing that Jews were
• 1:24:19
  Speaker 1: really rats, were really vermin, and therefore what was happening
• 1:24:25
  Speaker 1: to them was just and right. Whether they ever came
• 1:24:29
  Speaker 1: to grips with that later on in life, I don't know.
• 1:24:32
  Speaker 1: I don't know. I don't know the psychology of them.
• 1:24:35
  Speaker 1: There's something called the banality of evil that you know,
• 1:24:38
  Speaker 1: people can be horrifically evil, and I don't think they
• 1:24:43
  Speaker 1: can ever be happy. I think they're tormented to some extent,
• 1:24:46
  Speaker 1: But how much I just don't know. I just don't know. Yeah,
• 1:24:50
  Speaker 1: I mean, there's no question that evasion on that scale
• 1:24:57
  Speaker 1: involves mutilating yourself in a way that you can never
• 1:25:01
  Speaker 1: be happy. To what extent that leads to nightmares or
• 1:25:07
  Speaker 1: torment or what is? I don't know the psychology of it.
• 1:25:12
  Speaker 1: Not you have a jogorhithm when your subconscious takes over.
• 1:25:16
  Speaker 1: Is that still reason? For instance, when you play the
• 1:25:19
  Speaker 1: piano perfectly without consciously thinking about it, it's that still reason?
• 1:25:28
  Speaker 1: I think it is because it's based on your practicing,
• 1:25:36
  Speaker 1: it's based on you're thinking about it. It's based on
• 1:25:40
  Speaker 1: the work that you've done to get to that point.
• 1:25:44
  Speaker 1: It's not your emotion, it's not anti reason. It's you
• 1:25:48
  Speaker 1: have automatized through reason, You've automatized certain actions, and now
• 1:25:54
  Speaker 1: those actions can be done without thought. Maybe it's not really,
• 1:26:00
  Speaker 1: but it's not unreason put it that way. Not your
• 1:26:10
  Speaker 1: average algorithm. Again, thank you well. Also very generous today.
• 1:26:15
  Speaker 1: Is lying often appropriate to protect values but never to
• 1:26:19
  Speaker 1: gain a value? Well, it depends what you mean by often.
• 1:26:22
  Speaker 1: I don't know what often is it's lying up. Can
• 1:26:25
  Speaker 1: I lying be appropriate to protect values? Yes, but it
• 1:26:28
  Speaker 1: depends on the context. It has to be real. That
• 1:26:31
  Speaker 1: is that you're protecting them against the threat of force,
• 1:26:34
  Speaker 1: not just against a challenge or arrival, you know, a
• 1:26:40
  Speaker 1: non violent rival, but against force. Then you know the
• 1:26:43
  Speaker 1: classic the Nazi comes knocks in, you don't ask you
• 1:26:45
  Speaker 1: where your wife is, or you're hiding those Jews or whatever.
• 1:26:52
  Speaker 1: Then it's appropriate, but it's never appropriate to gain a value.
• 1:26:55
  Speaker 1: That is true Clark. Do Americans look forward to and
• 1:27:04
  Speaker 1: like to work while Europeans resented? Although Europeans seem to
• 1:27:08
  Speaker 1: know how to connect better on an interpersonal level with
• 1:27:11
  Speaker 1: than Americans. I don't know if either. I don't know
• 1:27:14
  Speaker 1: if that's true, but yeah, I think generally as a statement,
• 1:27:18
  Speaker 1: I think again there are exceptions, and this is a
• 1:27:21
  Speaker 1: massive generalization. Americans have a much more positive you have
• 1:27:25
  Speaker 1: worked than Europeans do much more positive particularly but again
• 1:27:29
  Speaker 1: Europeans whom Among Europeans, I think not all Europeans are
• 1:27:32
  Speaker 1: the same. The French ship particularly bad in this respect.
• 1:27:36
  Speaker 1: Probably the Scandinavia is pretty good in this respect. They
• 1:27:39
  Speaker 1: like they work, so it depends. But as a broad statement, yeah,
• 1:27:44
  Speaker 1: that's probably right. Europeans better at connecting. I don't know
• 1:27:50
  Speaker 1: if that's true. It depends which Europeans. Italians might be
• 1:27:54
  Speaker 1: better at connecting, but Scandinavia's and not particularly good at connecting.
• 1:27:59
  Speaker 1: Europe is much more, you know, varied than America is.
• 1:28:06
  Speaker 1: The cultures are really different in different parts of you
• 1:28:10
  Speaker 1: so it's hard to generalize Clark. Fifty years from now,
• 1:28:16
  Speaker 1: I doubt objectives and will be the dominant philosophy in academia.
• 1:28:20
  Speaker 1: But will free market political parties be the norm? We
• 1:28:23
  Speaker 1: got a sense after Reagan things were moving in that direction.
• 1:28:27
  Speaker 1: Well maybe I don't think I never got a sense
• 1:28:30
  Speaker 1: that we were heading in that direction after Reagan, but
• 1:28:33
  Speaker 1: in America at least. But I do think that in
• 1:28:36
  Speaker 1: fifty years there will be significant pro free market political
• 1:28:41
  Speaker 1: parties in major countries around the world. Not sure which ones,
• 1:28:47
  Speaker 1: but major ones. Whereas now Melay is the only one
• 1:28:51
  Speaker 1: I can think of. Jimmy, please do your best to
• 1:28:57
  Speaker 1: characterize Israel's position at the start of the Iraq War.
• 1:29:01
  Speaker 1: You have stated before that they opposed it. Correct me
• 1:29:04
  Speaker 1: if I'm wrong, But it looks like BB spoke in
• 1:29:07
  Speaker 1: front of Congress in favor of the war. I mean,
• 1:29:13
  Speaker 1: we'd have to look at the exact timeline. I mean
• 1:29:16
  Speaker 1: the wood Iraq was launched in two thousand and three. BB,
• 1:29:23
  Speaker 1: If I remember, right, was not prime Minister of Israel?
• 1:29:27
  Speaker 1: Who was Prime Minister of Israel in the beginning? You
• 1:29:37
  Speaker 1: are col I think it was Sean? Yeah, oh yeah,
• 1:29:44
  Speaker 1: Shoon was. He served until from March of two thousand
• 1:29:49
  Speaker 1: and one until April or twenty two thousand and six.
• 1:29:54
  Speaker 1: I don't think Sean supported the war. I think Sean
• 1:29:58
  Speaker 1: was opposed to it. Natsa Niel at the time was
• 1:30:00
  Speaker 1: not a significant player. And uh oh yeah, Sharon was.
• 1:30:06
  Speaker 1: He was the prime minister and a famous general, and
• 1:30:09
  Speaker 1: he was the one who forced Israel to retreat from
• 1:30:13
  Speaker 1: Gaza and basically abandoned Gaza and leave Gazin to the Gozens.
• 1:30:17
  Speaker 1: That didn't work out too well for Israel. But Shoon
• 1:30:22
  Speaker 1: it was against the one I walk. He believed the
• 1:30:24
  Speaker 1: enemy was I Wan, not I wok. Now, it's quite
• 1:30:29
  Speaker 1: possible that nitanao. Let's see bb BB test teammony in
• 1:30:39
  Speaker 1: Congress for he rock. Oh, that was September twenty twenty two,
• 1:30:51
  Speaker 1: before the war. But again, he was a private citizen.
• 1:30:55
  Speaker 1: He was not a member of dreaded government. He was
• 1:30:59
  Speaker 1: not certainly not prime minister, but he was not Defense minister.
• 1:31:03
  Speaker 1: It was not anything. He was a private citizen. I'm
• 1:31:06
  Speaker 1: not sure why he testified in front of Congress, but yeah,
• 1:31:10
  Speaker 1: he supported though. But Israel qua Israeli government believed at
• 1:31:15
  Speaker 1: the time that the real enemy was Iran, and that
• 1:31:18
  Speaker 1: Iran had link style Kaita and that Iraq didn't, and
• 1:31:23
  Speaker 1: is all thought that Iraq was a secular dictatorship that
• 1:31:27
  Speaker 1: was unrelated to what was going on a nine to eleven,
• 1:31:32
  Speaker 1: but that Iran was a real threat. I think they
• 1:31:36
  Speaker 1: were right. Evan, thank you for doing a show today
• 1:31:42
  Speaker 1: despite illing us. Thank you, Evan, appreciate the support. I
• 1:31:53
  Speaker 1: was googling the dates so and making sure who was
• 1:31:56
  Speaker 1: prime minister and who was a private citizen. But yeah,
• 1:32:00
  Speaker 1: you can you can definitely google see what answers you
• 1:32:03
  Speaker 1: get Michael, how would you compare Elon Musk to a
• 1:32:08
  Speaker 1: Jeff Bezos or Steve Jobs. I mean, look, it's really
• 1:32:18
  Speaker 1: hard to tell because I don't know having delved into it.
• 1:32:21
  Speaker 1: But look, Elon Musk has one thing going for him,
• 1:32:28
  Speaker 1: and that is his unbelievable success with a variety of
• 1:32:33
  Speaker 1: different businesses and managing those businesses, being successful at those businesses,
• 1:32:40
  Speaker 1: and uh and launching businesses in a variety of different fields,
• 1:32:43
  Speaker 1: all based on strong engineering talent Tesla, SpaceX and and
• 1:32:53
  Speaker 1: I don't know the the the drilling company h. So
• 1:32:58
  Speaker 1: he is in that sense, you know, a bigger than
• 1:33:03
  Speaker 1: bet Us and Jobs. On the other hand, he also
• 1:33:09
  Speaker 1: spends a lot of time on things that he shouldn't,
• 1:33:11
  Speaker 1: like Twitter and politics, which he's not very good at,
• 1:33:15
  Speaker 1: which Jeff Bezous and Steve Jobs did not, which is
• 1:33:19
  Speaker 1: to their credit and to his detriment. I think it
• 1:33:23
  Speaker 1: only does his harm the more politically becomes Let's see
• 1:33:41
  Speaker 1: what else. I mean. The other thing is that in lundmask,
• 1:33:52
  Speaker 1: how would have Tesla done if not for government subsidies
• 1:33:57
  Speaker 1: and government kind of bailout in two thousand and nine,
• 1:34:00
  Speaker 1: Jeff Bezels and Steve Jobs never relied on government for
• 1:34:03
  Speaker 1: the stuff that they did. Uh Earn Musk's contracts are
• 1:34:08
  Speaker 1: all governed contracts with SpaceX ot set of bad things.
• 1:34:12
  Speaker 1: The only way to do space is governed contracts. But
• 1:34:15
  Speaker 1: it's just not the same. It's doesn't have the same
• 1:34:17
  Speaker 1: market impact, doesn't have the same impact on your quality
• 1:34:21
  Speaker 1: of life. Clearly, I think Jeff Bezels and Steve Jobs
• 1:34:25
  Speaker 1: impacted your life more. But they're all looked. They're all
• 1:34:29
  Speaker 1: productive geniuses, they're all amazing, spectacular businessman. Elarn Musk dabbles
• 1:34:36
  Speaker 1: in politics. That's too bad the others didn't. I think
• 1:34:39
  Speaker 1: that's the big difference. My favorite of those is Steve Jobs.
• 1:34:42
  Speaker 1: I think he of all of them, he was the
• 1:34:45
  Speaker 1: one who handled himself best and was the most you know,
• 1:34:50
  Speaker 1: visionary in a kind of real world kind of way,
• 1:34:54
  Speaker 1: not going to Mars, but changing all day to day
• 1:34:57
  Speaker 1: lives here on planet Earth. Michael, Americans are screwing up schools,
• 1:35:05
  Speaker 1: watching Tucker CAFs and Nick Foyntis and voting for Trump.
• 1:35:09
  Speaker 1: These are not happy people of self esteem, No they're not.
• 1:35:11
  Speaker 1: I mean, this is a country with a lot of
• 1:35:14
  Speaker 1: angst and a lot of distress, and a lot of
• 1:35:17
  Speaker 1: challenges and problems, and they have been misdiagnosed. Those challenges
• 1:35:21
  Speaker 1: and problems are be misdiagnosed, and the consequence of that
• 1:35:25
  Speaker 1: mistagnosis is that their Americans are lashing out at the
• 1:35:28
  Speaker 1: wrong people and embracing the wrong people. And I don't
• 1:35:32
  Speaker 1: see how that gets fixed anytime soon. Harpacambo, Why does
• 1:35:38
  Speaker 1: your Maazoni hate Kant? His nationalist protocol seems very Hegelian
• 1:35:43
  Speaker 1: and content. It's only Agalian. He hates Kant because he
• 1:35:49
  Speaker 1: believes that Kant led to this, to the world, the
• 1:35:52
  Speaker 1: secular world. I think he probably, I think he properly
• 1:35:57
  Speaker 1: identifies Kant as the source of kind of of this subjectivism,
• 1:36:02
  Speaker 1: them all relativism, and the the the kind of what
• 1:36:08
  Speaker 1: postmodernism ultimately became was a consequence he you know, I
• 1:36:12
  Speaker 1: think of Kant, and I think he's right about that.
• 1:36:14
  Speaker 1: I think he's right about diagnosing a lot of the
• 1:36:18
  Speaker 1: secular ills Marxism comes out of Kant. A lot of
• 1:36:23
  Speaker 1: the secular ills that befell the West he properly identifies
• 1:36:29
  Speaker 1: as coming from Kant. And I think, for some of
• 1:36:33
  Speaker 1: the right reasons and some for the wrong reasons, from
• 1:36:37
  Speaker 1: Hazoni's perspectives. So, and he's got a whole book, his
• 1:36:41
  Speaker 1: book on Israel I can't remember the name of the
• 1:36:43
  Speaker 1: book that he wrote in the nineties, which I read
• 1:36:47
  Speaker 1: and thought it was really good. I disagreed with a
• 1:36:50
  Speaker 1: lot of it. Thought it was really good in many respects.
• 1:36:53
  Speaker 1: Basically argued that Israel was, you know, defending itself, not
• 1:37:01
  Speaker 1: living up to its potential because of the influenced contad
• 1:37:06
  Speaker 1: on Israeli intellectuals. And I thought he was absolutely right
• 1:37:08
  Speaker 1: about it Selfie subscriber, thank you another twenty dollars stick.
• 1:37:13
  Speaker 1: I really appreciate that we only nineteen dollars away from
• 1:37:16
  Speaker 1: our goal. Happa Campbell. Does jerry mandarin even do anything.
• 1:37:20
  Speaker 1: I don't think it's going to stop Republicans from losing
• 1:37:22
  Speaker 1: the mid terms. Well, it very well could if it
• 1:37:26
  Speaker 1: was done on a large scale, on a scale large enough,
• 1:37:32
  Speaker 1: if you really could create i mean, just through the math,
• 1:37:36
  Speaker 1: if you could create districts that were, because of the
• 1:37:41
  Speaker 1: nature of the House of Representatives, most of the districts,
• 1:37:49
  Speaker 1: you know, jerry mandering could make districts that are purely
• 1:37:53
  Speaker 1: of one party and increase the influence of Republicans overall
• 1:37:59
  Speaker 1: in country. Through there you know the fact that they
• 1:38:04
  Speaker 1: have that they heavily concentrated in lots of different places.
• 1:38:09
  Speaker 1: You'd have to run the math on it, but it
• 1:38:12
  Speaker 1: can matter absolutely. It certainly will matter to the in
• 1:38:15
  Speaker 1: terms of how big the Democrats win the midterms or
• 1:38:19
  Speaker 1: how small it is. It will be affected by germinal ending.
• 1:38:23
  Speaker 1: If you know, if you take away House seats from
• 1:38:25
  Speaker 1: the Democrats and Republicans win those seats, then it makes
• 1:38:28
  Speaker 1: a difference. I like numbers. Craig Biddle posted that AOI
• 1:38:34
  Speaker 1: was smearing OSI on conference calls with students. Are their
• 1:38:40
  Speaker 1: rules for accruiting new students from rival organizations? I don't
• 1:38:44
  Speaker 1: know what those rules would be. I don't think anybody's
• 1:38:48
  Speaker 1: smearing the objective standard. If somebody is negatively evaluating them,
• 1:38:53
  Speaker 1: is that a smear? If I think somebody is not
• 1:38:57
  Speaker 1: a very good intellectual, is that a smear? Or is
• 1:39:00
  Speaker 1: that just my evaluation of somebody? So I don't know
• 1:39:04
  Speaker 1: what smearing means in this context. Smearing is not the issue.
• 1:39:10
  Speaker 1: The issue is was anybody on the call lying? But no,
• 1:39:16
  Speaker 1: I don't think there's any rules for recruiting new students
• 1:39:18
  Speaker 1: from rival organizations other than tell the truth. Don't lie,
• 1:39:22
  Speaker 1: don't deceive. It's like all human relationships. There's nothing special
• 1:39:27
  Speaker 1: about recruiting. Thomas work believes his work is good based
• 1:39:34
  Speaker 1: on his standards. If he's creating the standard, isn't that subjective?
• 1:39:38
  Speaker 1: How does he know he's a good architect. Well, he's
• 1:39:43
  Speaker 1: not creating the standard subjectively. He has to be able
• 1:39:47
  Speaker 1: to defend the standard. The standard is the standard architecture.
• 1:39:52
  Speaker 1: The standard is is this does form meet function? Is
• 1:39:58
  Speaker 1: it functional for the purple people living in it? And
• 1:40:01
  Speaker 1: is it inspiring? And you know, he can defend the
• 1:40:07
  Speaker 1: standard and he can defend him meeting the standard. So
• 1:40:10
  Speaker 1: he has to be able to do both rationally objectively.
• 1:40:13
  Speaker 1: It's not like he randomly comes up with the standard
• 1:40:16
  Speaker 1: and then meets it. He rationally comes up with the standard.
• 1:40:20
  Speaker 1: It has to meet. He has to live up to
• 1:40:26
  Speaker 1: the to reality and and and then he his architecture
• 1:40:32
  Speaker 1: meets that standard. But it's not a The standard is
• 1:40:36
  Speaker 1: not just him. The standard is a standard he can
• 1:40:40
  Speaker 1: articulate based on his based on his understanding of the world,
• 1:40:45
  Speaker 1: and he has to be able to convince make it objective.
• 1:40:52
  Speaker 1: I think he does. In the book okay Mon sulls
• 1:40:57
  Speaker 1: about for fifty dollars month. Mob reminds me of the
• 1:41:01
  Speaker 1: founding fathers of America. She was wealthy with a prestigious career.
• 1:41:07
  Speaker 1: She risked everything to support the rebellion, even when she
• 1:41:10
  Speaker 1: had to do it alone. Too bad, she is fictional. Yep,
• 1:41:16
  Speaker 1: it is too bad. And of course, you know, I
• 1:41:19
  Speaker 1: guess she didn't realize she was just fighting the billionaires.
• 1:41:23
  Speaker 1: It's just a rebellion against the billionaires. She's just one
• 1:41:26
  Speaker 1: of those amchier communists fighting against the billions. No, I'm kidding,
• 1:41:30
  Speaker 1: that is AOC. Yes, she is a great character in
• 1:41:34
  Speaker 1: and and It is a great a really good TV series. Everybody,
• 1:41:38
  Speaker 1: you guys should watch it. I really enjoyed it. And
• 1:41:43
  Speaker 1: Maykatt said, salt the earth. He's talking about Gaza, uh crypto.
• 1:41:49
  Speaker 1: May one is International Labor Day. Why do so many
• 1:41:51
  Speaker 1: people believe the government have a duty to protect workers
• 1:41:55
  Speaker 1: from exploitation by employers? Well, because they believe that people
• 1:41:59
  Speaker 1: are generally stupid or unable to protect themselves, and it's
• 1:42:08
  Speaker 1: our responsibility. Is a good altruists to protect them and businessmen,
• 1:42:16
  Speaker 1: businesses who are in you know, obviously self interested. Self
• 1:42:21
  Speaker 1: interest leads always to exploitation. According to them will lead
• 1:42:25
  Speaker 1: to the exploitation of labor unless somebody protection. They need protection,
• 1:42:29
  Speaker 1: and that somebody has to be you indirectly, and the
• 1:42:33
  Speaker 1: way the way we facilitate that is through government. So
• 1:42:38
  Speaker 1: it's a consequence against altruism. It's it's a consequence of
• 1:42:41
  Speaker 1: this belief that you might of a particular view of
• 1:42:45
  Speaker 1: self interest which is placed on the businessman, and a
• 1:42:50
  Speaker 1: particular view of you have to protect people from being exploited.
• 1:42:54
  Speaker 1: You do it through government, and that's why we all
• 1:42:58
  Speaker 1: vote for it. Id Miika war is not over until
• 1:43:02
  Speaker 1: the only song coming out of Gaza is catgirls singing
• 1:43:08
  Speaker 1: having aguila in Japanese. All right, Gail, thank you Ron
• 1:43:14
  Speaker 1: for your bravey for exposing the two horrors of October seventh.
• 1:43:18
  Speaker 1: You know, there's no bravery for my part. You know,
• 1:43:23
  Speaker 1: there's bravery of the people who wrote the reports to
• 1:43:26
  Speaker 1: put it all together, who went through all the documents.
• 1:43:28
  Speaker 1: I wouldn't do it. It's too horrific of a task.
• 1:43:32
  Speaker 1: And who who you know went through the videos and
• 1:43:35
  Speaker 1: did it all. I'm just reading off of somebody else's reports.
• 1:43:39
  Speaker 1: They are the brave ones. So yeah, but I appreciate it. Gail,
• 1:43:47
  Speaker 1: thank you, Harrison. When I said that modern AI assimulating brains,
• 1:43:53
  Speaker 1: I mean it in a literal sense. They're neural networks
• 1:43:57
  Speaker 1: modeled after the way biological brains work. I don't think
• 1:44:00
  Speaker 1: that's true. I just don't think that's true, partially because
• 1:44:05
  Speaker 1: I know that we don't know exactly how brains work,
• 1:44:08
  Speaker 1: and their training consists of adjusting the connections between billions
• 1:44:12
  Speaker 1: of virtual nuances. It's not true. Again, that's not what
• 1:44:15
  Speaker 1: their training is, a step by step of instructions I e.
• 1:44:19
  Speaker 1: And algorithm needs no training a brain does. Though. It's
• 1:44:23
  Speaker 1: not being trained on neuon connections. It's being trained on text,
• 1:44:29
  Speaker 1: it's being trained on information, it's being trained on stuff. Right,
• 1:44:37
  Speaker 1: So no, I disagree with all of that. That's not
• 1:44:41
  Speaker 1: what It's not what AI is. It's not a neural
• 1:44:46
  Speaker 1: network in the sense of a brain, and even our brain.
• 1:44:52
  Speaker 1: We don't know how the new network works and how
• 1:44:55
  Speaker 1: exactly it functions, and how it creates consciousness and how
• 1:44:58
  Speaker 1: it does all the stuff that, So how can we
• 1:45:01
  Speaker 1: simulate something we don't really understand? I have to bring
• 1:45:06
  Speaker 1: an AI expert on to talk about this, and then
• 1:45:09
  Speaker 1: how is it trump folded? The Left may take Congress,
• 1:45:17
  Speaker 1: wouldn't the war and billionaires have happened much more in
• 1:45:20
  Speaker 1: earnest already if he'd lost in twenty twenty four. No,
• 1:45:24
  Speaker 1: I don't think so. I think the more he does stupid,
• 1:45:28
  Speaker 1: ridiculous things, the more the left becomes further out there left,
• 1:45:32
  Speaker 1: the more he pushes the left left at the right
• 1:45:35
  Speaker 1: and left playoff of each other all the time. The
• 1:45:38
  Speaker 1: more woke the left becomes, the more crazy the right becomes,
• 1:45:42
  Speaker 1: the more crazy right becomes, the more socialist the left becomes.
• 1:45:46
  Speaker 1: And basically the left's going to take Congress because Trump
• 1:45:51
  Speaker 1: could have not done tariffs, actually won the warn Iran,
• 1:45:58
  Speaker 1: you know, done things that actually would raise his popularity
• 1:46:01
  Speaker 1: and actually not lose. He's created a mess, a disaster,
• 1:46:07
  Speaker 1: and cost of living is up. You know, the economy's
• 1:46:12
  Speaker 1: puttering along somehow, but it's not thriving, and the one
• 1:46:17
  Speaker 1: you run is not going anywhere. It just seems like
• 1:46:22
  Speaker 1: a mess. So Democrats are gonna win. They're not gonna
• 1:46:25
  Speaker 1: win on their own merits. They're gonna win as an
• 1:46:26
  Speaker 1: anti Trump vote. Just like Trump didn't win on his
• 1:46:29
  Speaker 1: own merits. He won on an anti Democrat vote. That's
• 1:46:34
  Speaker 1: all we have. We have anti anti it's do yet.
• 1:46:40
  Speaker 1: Richard Dawkins states Claude is conscious. That is astonishing. I
• 1:46:44
  Speaker 1: assume he has no understanding of consciousness. Said, yeah, I
• 1:46:49
  Speaker 1: mean I'm surprised Richard Dawkins would say that. But no,
• 1:46:53
  Speaker 1: I don't think Claude is conscious. It pretends to be
• 1:46:56
  Speaker 1: conscious really really well, but it's not conscious. All right,
• 1:47:03
  Speaker 1: we'll have to bring on a somebody who really knows
• 1:47:06
  Speaker 1: this AI stuff because it's only getting more complicated and
• 1:47:10
  Speaker 1: people are only going to be more confused by it.
• 1:47:13
  Speaker 1: We'll have to do an interview about that soon. All right, guys,
• 1:47:18
  Speaker 1: thank you. I'm going to go rest. I will see
• 1:47:22
  Speaker 1: you all tomorrow, I hope, unless I decline if I'm better,
• 1:47:29
  Speaker 1: I will see you all tomorrow. And yeah, have a
• 1:47:34
  Speaker 1: great rest of your week. Oh thanks to the super chatters.
• 1:47:37
  Speaker 1: You are all great today and super generous, so really
• 1:47:40
  Speaker 1: really appreciate it. Bye everybody,