Ryan Holiday, 35 and a former Hollywood assistant who left college at 19 after studying The 48 Laws of Power, contrasts the industry’s toxic gatekeeping—like Tarantino’s producer exploitation or child stars like Demi Lovato—with Stoicism’s focus on resilience, citing Marcus Aurelius’ warnings about power’s corruption. They critique modern media’s outrage-driven, disposable content (e.g., Gawker’s 2008 shift) versus podcasting’s loyalty-based depth, while Rogan rejects ideological binaries, framing systemic failures like student loans or inner-city poverty as collective challenges. Holiday links Lincoln’s post-Civil War clemency to unresolved racial tensions and modern polarization, emphasizing progress requires effort over external validation, from Nobel Prizes to self-help books like Think and Grow Rich. Ultimately, they argue legacy stems from personal discipline—not arbitrary success metrics—highlighting Stoic mastery as the antidote to exploitation. [Automatically generated summary]
Well, no, so I was working for Robert, and I had the 40 laws of power on my desk because I was working on it, and one of the partners became convinced that I was up to shit.
So he had me on some call for him and I was supposed to like be like feeding him info, you know, like when you're on the, on the conference call, I was supposed to like type him stuff.
And, uh, you know, like you log into the call and, uh, it's like, you're the seventh caller, but there was only supposed to be like six people on the call.
And, uh, so the partner's like, someone else is on the call.
Like who was on the call?
And I was like, am I supposed to say something?
Because, like, I'm not supposed to be on the call.
I dated a girl when I was like 27 and she was an assistant for an agent and she would wake up in the middle of the night terrified that she fucked something up.
She would just have these fearful moments.
She worked 16, 17 hours a day for nothing.
I mean, she got paid garbage money.
And the whole idea was that you're kind of interning slash working there, and you were eventually going to get a career as an agent.
So she worked for this guy who was just...
A complete asshole.
Just a fucking asshole to everybody who worked under him.
It's the dumbest system in the entire world because, like, the person who is good at being an assistant, and I was so bad at it, and would put up with it for, like, five or six years is not the person that anyone would then want to be their agent.
It's, like, filtering out for, like, pencil pushers and, like, nerds and, like, you know, it's the craziest system, uh, And that's why most agents are horrible.
It's because most people would get up and quit or just not be interested in it at all.
Because then you abuse, if you ever get to that position where you're an agent and you get an assistant, you're just going to abuse them because you were abused when you were an assistant.
But does it in a world where everyone's a piece of shit, like depending upon what, like there's different cultures of different, you know, businesses.
And when you have a business like that where, you know, there's, one of the weirdest things about Hollywood is that there's literally people that just decide to pick you.
And if they pick you, your life becomes your wildest dreams.
You're in the cover of Vogue magazine.
You're starring in an action movie right next to the biggest A-list celebrities in the world.
You fucking made it.
You're at the Oscars accepting the award and thanking that person who points at you in the front row.
If they chose.
If they choose you.
But if they don't choose you, you're fucked.
It's not a meritocracy.
It's just not.
You can see by someone like Amber Heard, she's not a good actress, but if you get into the right spot and you do the right thing and you fucking make the right noises, you can become famous and successful.
Well, I think any industry that has gatekeepers is inherently susceptible to being corrupted because those people have a certain unearned power.
And they probably, deep down, know That they don't really do anything and that they're just, like, guessing, you know?
And there's probably something in that, too, where you're aware of the inherent bankruptcy, like, we don't make anything, we don't do anything, and it probably goes to your head and you need distractions and stuff.
Well, I think this is an interesting jump-off point to talk about your work and your fascination with stoicism because what you're talking about there is like a truth.
You're talking about there's a reality to that job.
It's that these people who are the gatekeepers, there's a lot of people that work in Hollywood that work as executives that are really not talented people and I've known them forever and I've seen them fail upwards I've known them since I've been there.
It was like 20, 30 years ago, and they're still around.
And they were retarded then, and they're stupid now.
It's like they're the same person.
It's like there's a reality to that.
And one of the things that I think you highlight very well is the importance of reality, of dealing with things.
And of finding positives in any sort of, you know, the title of your book, The Obstacles, The Way.
It's a great title because obstacles are very important.
And although they don't seem like they are when, you know, you're there, they don't seem like they're beneficial.
They seem like it's just like the end of the world and this is going to be horrible.
But there's some great benefit in difficult times and difficult things.
I wanted to be a writer, but I got this really good advice from a writer, and he said, writers live interesting lives, so you have to, like, go do stuff.
You have to be around people.
You have to go get...
You have to go earn having a point of view.
You can't just get good at the craft of doing the thing.
Obviously, that's super important.
And that's what I learned from Robert as a research assistant.
Because, like, if you are reading, and people do this, and I'll recommend Marcus to read this, and they'll just get what's free on the internet or whatever.
If you're reading a translation from the 1850s or the 1600s, it's going to be in Shakespearean English.
But I think your point about how it feels timeless, that actually does feel like a thing I've heard comedians say, which is that the specific is universal.
I don't think he was trying to talk to the audience.
I think he was so unflinchingly honest with himself that he was touching something universally human.
Because we should not be able to relate to his experience at all.
There is literally a cult of the emperor that worshipped the emperor and their spouse as living deities.
And he controlled the largest army in the world.
He had unlimited wealth.
He could kill or murder or torture or exile anyone he wanted.
People cheered him as he walked in the streets.
There's no way we should be able to be like, this passage was talking about struggling to get out of bed in the morning and you want to huddle under the warm covers.
Like, how?
Because I guess people are people no matter where you get in life.
People are people and not everyone gives in to the temptations of being in that position.
And in his case, I think it made him more apt to reflect upon his thoughts and find the source of why he believed what he believed and why he thought what he thought.
Through this crazy adoption process, he has a stepbrother.
And so that he inherits through Hadrian.
It's a complicated thing, but he has a stepbrother.
And so, like, we know what kings do to their rivals.
Like, you have to kill them, right?
The first emperor of Rome, Octavian, he's Julius Caesar's nephew.
Julius Caesar has a half-son with Cleopatra.
Or he has a half-brother or whatever.
He has a son with Cleopatra, a son out of wedlock.
And Octavian has two Stoic teachers who instruct him to murder his rival, which he promptly does.
Or have murdered.
So the precedent was, like, you can't have too many Caesars.
Like, you can't have more than one viable heir.
And Marcus, when he's Antoninus' favorite, Antoninus preps him, he ascends to the throne, the first thing Marcus does is he names his brother Lucius Ferris co-emperor, which has not only never happened basically before Orsons, It is a nod to how the Republic was.
The Republic of Rome, before it becomes a monarchy, is led by two consuls, like two elected presidents who served together as a check against power.
So Marcus, by naming, he can't put it back to a republic, which is the plot of Gladiator.
He can name himself a co-emperor.
And the thinking is that's what he was planning to do with his sons, but they all died.
Marcus was writing in what we now call the Antonine Plague.
They named it after him.
But it's like a global pandemic.
It starts in the East.
It overwhelms Rome.
Five, ten million people die.
They have no way of stopping it.
So Marcus leads through all of that.
And then the suspicion is that he catches it at the end, realizes he has it, has to send his son away so he doesn't give it to his son, sets in motion a series of advisors who should lead his son, and then his son promptly gets rid of all of them and goes bad.
So how does a man like that, who's so introspective and so thoughtful, particularly for the times, how does a man like that have a son that's such a piece of shit?
I mean, one argument is he's a psychopath and there's sort of nothing you can do.
Like, no blame whatsoever.
The other argument, the more likely one, is like most great men, and we're talking about history, so it's mostly great men, but again, Queen Elizabeth has crappy kids.
I think growing up with that amount of wealth and that amount of power that your mind develops in this privileged position that Where you never have to struggle, you never have to develop character, and you always feel entitled to everything.
Imagine being a prince.
Imagine being the son of an emperor.
You have the most ultimate power.
You could have people killed.
He probably did.
He probably killed people.
If he got in an argument with a boy while they were playing, he would probably stab him.
You could get away with that.
And if you did that many, many, many times, you would develop this ultimate sense that you're superior to all mortals.
Like, you would think of yourself as a god-king.
You would think of yourself as someone who's not a normal human being.
And I don't think you could ever get that out of a person.
If you grew up...
It's like childhood stars.
Are the most broken people that we have on exhibit?
If you want to really examine human beings, if you want to do a psychological study, what is the average architect like?
What is the average singer like?
What is the average child star like?
Well, they're almost all drug addicts.
They're almost all completely wrecked.
Their personalities never fully develop.
They develop under this weird position where everyone loves them.
From the time they're little, and they get exorbitant amounts of attention that are completely unearned, then they never have to develop character under adversity.
They never have to prove themselves.
You cannot prove yourself, in fact.
You never have the opportunity.
And so, what do they do?
They get their faces tattooed, they get hooked on drugs, they're fucked up, man.
Yeah, I don't know if it's possible for someone to—I mean, I think it's the same as being famous, right?
I mean, essentially, he's the son of the emperor.
He is famous.
I think it's the same thing.
I've met dozens of people that were child stars.
And I've met some of them that were very nice.
Demi Lovato is very nice.
Miley Cyrus is very nice.
I've met a bunch of them.
But they're all fucked.
They're all fucked in one way or another.
They're all like, I'm sober now or I'm going to do this now or I'm going to do that.
There's never like this sense of calm and discipline and being centered and there's always like this state of change and improvement.
Like they're always like in this weird place where they don't feel fully centered or they're always like falling over to the left or falling over to the right.
I mean, I think it's all about what kind of activities you get your child involved in.
I get my kids involved.
My kids are involved with a lot of athletics because I think people have this faulty position on athletics that don't participate in them and they think of athletics being something that is for the body.
It's not a smart pursuit.
It's a dumb pursuit.
It's like a physical thing.
It's not a mental thing, but they're not right.
They're incorrect.
There's a giant amount of success in athletics that are about not just mental states, but about discipline, which is also...
Discipline is a part of the mind, right?
We all agree to that.
But so is the ability to perform under pressure.
So is the ability to deal with a loss and sort of reestablish yourself and come back feeling better.
The feeling that you get of the shame of loss is very valuable and that's a mental thing.
And there's mental sort of challenges that you acquire from sports that I don't think are available in any other way.
I think you get different mental challenges and there's different lessons that can be learned from academic pursuits.
But there's mental challenges that you only get from athletic pursuits.
You only get when you have to force your body to keep going even though your mind is exhausted, your body is exhausted, and your will is leaving you, and there's parts of you that are telling you to quit.
And you have to learn how to manage that, and that is a mental thing.
But it's a mental thing in a different way than calculus is.
It's a mental thing in a different way than learning languages.
I think one of the things I think a lot about and that I dislike, like, if I was like, describe a philosopher, he'd be like, university professor, turtleneck, like, tweed, you know, a jacket with pads on it or whatever.
Like, you'd think of a weakling.
And in the ancient world, like, philosophers were people who did shit, right?
That's what people don't understand and don't pursue them.
There's...
In America, unfortunately, there's this sort of intellectual elitism.
There's this mindset that some very smart people have because they're very good at certain intellectual pursuits and they look down upon pursuits that are physical in nature because of this sort of prejudice.
I think it's also like a fear of encountering something that you're not good at or something that's going to humiliate you and something that's going to make you feel bad.
It maybe came from gym class, maybe came from being forced to participate in sports when they were younger and they didn't enjoy it.
So they have this thing in their head that there's no value there.
So, like, you're doing it in the cold plunge or running or fighting or whatever.
And then when you're, like, when I'm working on a book and books are hard, you know, and they're, like, halfway through, I'm like, this isn't coming together.
Like, you have to build that – because you're going to go through hard things in life, and you want to have cultivated a sense of, like, not quitting when things are hard.
And one of the reasons why he's such a good bow hunter, I believe, is because of all the exercise he does.
Because I think there's, I used to think that it was just him building endurance for the mountains.
I think there is some of that too.
But I think more than that, it's his ability to maintain calmness.
Because he's always torturing himself.
So he's always running like 15 miles in the morning before he goes to work.
He's always torturing himself.
So he has this ability to just stay in this like steady state.
So when he's at the top of a mountain and there's a giant bugling bull that's like 50 yards away, he can center his pin right on that bull's vitals and release a perfect arrow every time because he's so good at managing uncomfortable states.
Ataraxia is the Greek word, but it's sort of like freedom from disturbances.
Like, even if it's crazy outside or even if you're going through something internally.
Like, how do you slow things down?
Mark Aurelius talks about, he says, be like the rock or the cliff that the waves crash over and eventually fall still around.
I think when you've been in crazy stuff or you've exposed yourself or you've endured things, you just realize that I've got to slow this down, I've got to center myself, and that being excited is not a positive contributor to this situation.
There's a thing that happens when you do a difficult thing, is that you develop more of an ability to do difficult things.
And it's also like, it's a daily thing.
It's not as simple as like, oh, I used to do difficult things, so now I can do this difficult thing.
I don't think so.
I think you are better off than someone who has never encountered something difficult.
But I think there's a reason why fighters take warm-up fights, and fighters when they're active, when they fight all the time, they fight better.
When I was competing, I would be at my best if I had just fought like a week ago.
Like if I fought a week ago, I was like, I know this experience.
I know this feeling.
I've been here before.
I was just there.
But if I got injured once and I couldn't compete for four or five months, it was weird.
Coming back was weird.
It was a totally foreign experience.
It felt very nerve-wracking.
And I think there's something to forcing the brain, forcing the mind into these difficult positions, into these difficult situations, so that the mind gets accustomed to that feeling.
And then you can maintain calm.
And then you can keep yourself.
In the midst of all the chaos, you can keep who you are.
you yeah terrible but is it like all this other stuff we're talking about like hard working out like doing difficult things like endurance work and sauna work and all that stuff is it also a resilience does it build up your ability to tolerate massive amounts of information coming your way Because would you be worse at it if you hadn't experienced it?
Because me personally, I have something like 15 million Instagram followers and 9 million Twitter followers.
It's a lot of people.
And if I absorb all their opinions, it's unmanageable.
Well, you thought it was a real person, but it's also, you cannot respond.
There's no one there, so you feel helpless.
It's like you're swinging at ghosts.
No one would say to your face, unless they were a really dangerous person, a lot of the things that people say on Twitter.
Someone to say that to your face, they're trying to instigate a literal, physical, violent encounter.
Most people would never do that.
But they can say something and just throw it out there and it reaches you and it causes emotional pain to people.
And they know it does, but they feel disconnected from it.
And so it takes a long time for someone to understand what that is and how this is A negative thing that you really probably shouldn't have in your life.
So don't go looking for it.
Don't go reading that stuff because it's just not good for you.
But if you aren't accustomed to it, when it does get through and slip into you, it can fucking really bother you.
And I know some people that never learn this skill.
And I will see something happen to them, and then I'll see them two, three days later, and it looks like they haven't slept.
Because they're just fucked from people being mad at them.
And I think that there's a certain amount of resilience you can build from social media.
It's just like snake venom.
Take a little bit of it, you develop a tolerance, but if you get too much of it, it's gonna fucking kill you.
Yeah, it's like if this is the way of the world and this is how things are, to totally step back from it, pretend it doesn't exist, live in a fantasy world, there's kind of a fragility to that.
It's like you haven't been exposed to germs, so your immune system is now more vulnerable.
I found...
I used to love New York.
I lived there when I wrote Obstacle, actually.
And then when I moved to Texas, and then when I moved to the country in Texas, now when I go to New York, I hate New York.
It physically hurts me.
It's too loud.
I can feel the noise.
My heart is just like...
The noise pollution is so radically different than my life.
It's not healthy...
One, it tells me that the day-to-day life of a New Yorker is actually much worse than they want to admit.
They've just built up a tolerance to it.
But my withdrawal from that makes me vulnerable to it when I'm in it, and I just can't handle it too much.
The one that I dislike the most is like when a dump truck or something goes through an intersection in New York and the back kind of lifts up and then it...
Neuralink is an idea that Elon has that is initially going to be used for people that have spinal cord injuries and it's going to change the way your brain communicates with all your muscle tissue.
So you're going to be able to move your body even with spinal cord issues.
It's going to be fantastic for people that have been paralyzed.
They'll regain use of their body because instead of the spinal cord being the conduit for all the information and all the signals that you're sending, there's going to be an electronic interface.
And this electronic interface will, I think it will initially mimic What the mind does with the spinal column and then ultimately be far superior.
And then one of his things that he said that always freaks me out, he said, we're going to be able to talk without words.
I think there's going to be an information, a transfer of information, hopefully, that surpasses language, meaning that there'll be some way of universally expressing information, where you don't have to, like, you know, you don't have to write it in Greek, you don't have to write it in Latin, it'll come out as intent.
Yeah, I know having moved here, one of the really beneficial things was that I know, but I don't see that regularly, people who do what I do.
So it turns off kind of a competitive part of my brain, where I just get to be me and do what I want to do and focus on what I think is cool and what I want to create.
There's not that keeping up with the Joneses part that can be a powerful driver of your career, but also a source of Unhappiness?
Yeah, that's one of the things that Stokes say is, like, you would be jealous if you didn't have what you had and someone else did, you would be jealous of that person.
But I think it's also, if good work comes from being present, it's preventing your ability from actually being great on the television show that you're on.
Because you're spending energy out in the world on stuff that doesn't matter instead of being like, I'm going to be the best that I can be in the thing that I am.
If you are constantly dwelling on other people's opinions, if you're constantly dwelling on other people's success, it will 100% diminish your capability of doing good work.
There's just no ifs, ands, or buts about it, because the mind has a certain amount of bandwidth.
And the way I always express this when I talk to people about it, I go, look at it like a number.
If you had 100 bandwidth, like if your bandwidth was 100, and then someone said something mean to you on Twitter, and you read that and responded, and you're going back and forth, now how much do you have?
I bet you got about...
30% is gone.
30% is just dedicated to this thing.
It might be 40%.
And now what happens?
Now whatever work you are actually trying to do is greatly diminished because you don't have the focus.
I don't think it's arrogant, though, because I think it's ignorant.
I don't think people are really aware when they're doing this.
I think it's just so instinctive.
It's so instinctual.
It's such a normal thing to do, to, you know, read some mean quote that someone said about you, or read an article that someone wrote that pisses you off.
Or, you know, I know friends, I have friends that I'm not close with, but I'm close enough to them that I pay attention to them, and their career is a disaster.
But when I go onto their Twitter page, they're so deeply involved in politics, like massively, where they're quoting spending bills that I don't even know, and they're talking about what the problem with these bills are.
I'm like, if you spend a fraction of your life Paying attention to your own career and doing what you actually love doing instead of focusing on this.
You're focusing on this because you feel like this is something that you can get involved with mentally where the burden of performance is not on you.
There's many books that are available if you want to go seek it.
But this is not something that's being beaten into the head of people on a daily basis, and it should be.
It should be something that television shows that are supposed to be these intellectual exercises in examining the world around us.
One of the most important things is how are you looking at the world around us?
How are you thinking about things?
And through what lens?
And have you done the work on your own self?
Because if you have not, you're going to look for these struggles in other places because you're uncomfortable dealing with your own personal struggles.
And you're avoiding those.
So you'll find them in other places.
You'll start fires because you haven't dealt with your own bullshit.
And the knowledge that if you force difficult situations into your life that you can control, like rigorous exercise, like meditation, like sauna and cold plunge, there's many different things you can do, like writing, like sitting down and forcing yourself to do work.
That will free your mind in so many ways and allow you to have a philosophy or at least a philosophical perspective that's based on how you actually think, not based on overcompensating for deficits, not based on trying to pile dirt on the problems that you've created.
And what's fascinating about it, Neil Brennan recommended it, I think, when he was on my podcast, right?
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
One of the things that's fascinating about it is that it's from the 1980s.
And they talk about...
Television, the same way we talk about social media today, and he compares television to the way they talked about the printing press.
When the printing press was first made available, a lot of people thought it was a disaster and that really the written word on a piece of paper, in a book, like a written book, was the way to go.
And this printing press was some cheap, easy cop-out that was going to make people stupid.
So he's talking about how much of what we respond to, even then, It was not real, but things that were made for the media to suck our attention away.
And then, you go back even further, there's another book called The Brass Check, which was written in, I don't know, 1910, 1912, 1930. Anyways, Upton Sinclair, who wrote The Jungle, you know The Jungle, the expose of the meatpacking industry?
He wrote an expose of the media industry in, like, the 1910s about how Almost all the same things that were happening then.
This has always been a problem.
It's just different mediums.
What Postman is saying is that when television is the dominant medium, the world conforms around that medium.
Before that, it was radio.
Before that, it was newspapers.
Now, it's social media and video.
Our world conforms around what What the medium wants, right?
Yeah, they told people to go home for dinner and come back for four more hours.
And so they would make these agreements like this man would speak for an hour and a half, and then he would have a rebuttal for a half an hour, and then he'd have his own speech for an hour, and then the other guy would rebuttal.
And it's like they had these attention spans that it was based possibly on that there was no TikTok.
There was no distractions, no real, like the kind of media that we have available, the touch of our fingertips just did not exist back then.
It was not a thing.
So you had to get all of your entertainment from literature.
If you saw a live performance, that was it, or literature, and that's it.
There was no recordings.
So you can go before that, before written word, everything was oral.
It was all oral traditions.
So you had to learn these oral traditions.
They were passed on from generation to generation.
And you had to learn them.
They were a very important part of your upbringing.
So you had to have a grasp of...
Language in a sense that you had to be able to communicate things in an eloquent and sophisticated way because it was part of being a fully formed, grown adult.
And it's interesting with podcasting how one of the things that happens is that you take social media, which is inherently a short attention span platform, and then people will take out of context clips of podcasts and then insert them into their world of outrage farming.
And they'll instead of like looking at a conversation in terms of the entire three plus hour conversation They'll find a sentence from someone may have misspoken or a disagreement that someone might have had and they'll Force it into their world and then attack it with also short attention span non sequitur short little 140 280 word sentences or letter sentences Well, I think Twitter broke a lot of people's brains.
But you could have like Twitter threads where you can have one thing and then you have a second comment on a third and fourth and people do that and they do get coherent points out.
Because I was talking about media manipulation and I was saying the primary manipulators of media are not just bad people like dictators or marketers or whatever.
Journalists themselves are inherently manipulative.
Think about it this way.
You would never want a reporter to write a story about a company they own stock in, because that would be a conflict of interest, potentially.
Or if they were shorting the stock, that would make them write negatively.
If they were long, the stock would make them write positive.
But what happens when the journalist is compensated or at least evaluated based on the number of views that that piece gets?
That is also a conflict of interest.
It's like they're working on commission.
And you wouldn't want a shoe salesman to be working on commission because they would pressure you into doing something that maybe you wouldn't actually want.
And you couldn't trust their judgment.
And that is the drive.
And that was a metric of journalism that was invented by Gawker like in 2008, like not a long time ago.
Like all journalism forever was not monetized in that fashion until like our lifetime.
Well, the reason that fundamentally was, and Upton DeClaire was talking about this in the 1910s, whenever that was, he was saying that, okay, when the newsboys are selling the paper, like at the street corner, it's a similar competition, right?
So when we think of yellow journalism, it was, you know, extra, extra read all about it.
So you had, let's say there's 50 newspapers in New York City, and you get off a train at Grand Central, and there's newsboys for all of them.
They have to have the most salacious headline or breaking story that day to get you to buy it.
But then as the 20s, as we got into the 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, the newspapers stopped being sold one-off at newsstands, for the most part, and most people subscribed.
We'd say, I take the New York Times, or I take the Washington Post.
You would subscribe to a newspaper.
And so when you look at the breaking of the Pentagon Papers, The headline is beyond boring.
It's like a long-ass headline because the New York Times didn't need to sell you the paper.
The New York Times knew we are delivering this story to 20 million, 30 million homes today.
And I think what a podcast does, you're not thinking, I want to have this guest on to grow the show, to get attention.
You're thinking...
How many subscribers do I have of the show?
Am I honoring or disappointing them?
I know you don't really think about the audience too much, but your point is you have a fan base that you are making stuff for as opposed to a thing you are trying to sell and shout over everyone else to dominate the news cycle that day.
So I just say, like I go through the request, like I get emails, and there's like hundreds of them.
So I'm like, no, no, no.
Where did he go?
What?
Like Charlie Walker, who was on the other day, like, what?
Four years, he bicycled through fucking Asia and Africa?
Holy shit!
Get that guy!
He just got out of a Russian jail?
Holy fuck!
He wound up in Russia, because he was in the Arctic, in Siberia, during the time where Russia invaded Ukraine, just coincidentally, and then they thought he was a spy, so they arrested him, and he's in jail in Russia for a month?
Like, crazy!
I'm like, let me talk to that guy.
So it's that kind of a deal.
Or Snoop Dogg wants to come on.
Fuck yeah, I want to talk to Snoop.
It's that kind of a deal.
It's not like this is going to be huge.
I don't think that way at all.
And that's the only reason why I think it works.
I think if I stopped thinking that way, I don't think it would work.
I think if there was a...
If there was a fucking hint of disingenuous behavior, if there was a hint of bullshit, I think people wouldn't trust me anymore.
If they thought that I was only doing this to get attention...
I mean, I'm sure some people that don't know me think that that's what I'm doing, but that's not.
I don't have to.
It works.
And I did it from the beginning where I didn't think I was ever going to make any money doing it.
So I only did it for fun.
And then once I started making money, I said, well...
I'm doing it this way anyway, and this is how I want to do it, so I just keep doing it this way.
I never would have thought you could become the number one podcast in the world by just talking to people you want to talk to.
I thought you'd probably have to...
Promoted everywhere.
You'd have to go way out of your way and take ads out and pump a bunch of money.
I've done none of that.
I don't even talk about it.
I just do it.
And through word of mouth, it's become what it is.
It's really the most organic thing I've ever done.
I like Substacks that way, the idea that you're writing for an audience, and ideally that audience is paying you, so you're not doing this sort of virally thing.
I think the only downside, the only risk can be, do you get in a place where, I'm not saying you are, but some people are, where you're like, if I tell these people what they don't want to hear, that costs me money.
But they call this audience capture, though, like where you're – because these people are paying you, because that's your audience, you're not necessarily thinking about what's true.
You're going to have an audience because your ideas are interesting.
But if you decide that you're only going to speak from a right-wing perspective, there's a lot of people that do that.
There's a lot of people that do that already.
And they do that because there's a business in that.
It's very valuable.
You can talk from a pure left-wing progressive perspective and attack everyone as being far-right or Nazis, and you can get a lot of money that way.
It's a good business model.
But it's not smart.
It's not good for you, either.
It's not good for you intellectually, because...
You're not going to be examining things from a purely objective perspective.
You're not going to look at your own flaws in your own thinking and the way you formulate ideas and go, hmm, why do I think like that?
You're not going to do that if you're captured by the progressives or captured by the Republicans.
The people that get locked into that, it's like, man, and when they transition, like if someone transitions, it's very similar.
The word transition has been captured right by transgender today, but it's kind of similar because if you go male to female, you're most likely not going back.
They talk about one issue and then that issue gets so much attention and then it's like, like magic, they suddenly also have the same right wing opinion.
But it's only if you choose to align yourself with a very specific ideology.
If you don't do that, you can have opinions like...
I mean, I have a lot of opinions that are on both sides, and I think most people do.
I think most people have conservative as well as, like I'm very socially liberal, like about as socially liberal as you can get.
But more and more as I get older, I start looking at things from a perspective of being a pragmatist, and I start looking at things, and instead of looking at what do I hope people will do, If you give them free money and if you give them free education, if you give them free this and free that and take care of them, I start going, well, what does that do to the psyche?
And does that force laziness?
If everyone in this country, let's imagine a world where everyone in this country gets $50,000 a year, everyone, how much less productive would we be?
It would probably be horrific.
unidentified
Now, I want to live in a world where- This is universal basic income.
I mean, I want to live in a world where no one has to worry about how to feed themselves.
No one has to worry about how to put a roof over their head.
All you have to worry about is what do you want to do?
What would best serve your interests?
And also, how could you provide- A service or whether it's art or something that other people are going to enjoy and appreciate and that could elevate you past the middle class, past making $50,000 a year into becoming affluent.
But wouldn't that be nice if you didn't have to struggle and spend your resources thinking about how am I going to feed myself?
And instead, let me write the best book I can write.
I wonder, but I don't want people to live in poverty.
Poverty sucks.
It's a terrible place to be, to be desperate, and that causes a lot of crime.
It causes a lot of violence.
There's a lot that's attached to poverty that's horrific.
However, it is an incredible motivator to get people to to get moving and to do something and Desperation much like loss and humiliation are great motivators to make you work harder to be better at whatever thing you were attempting to do that failed There's something about being poor that forces people into this feeling this this hunger that causes Greatness in
so many human beings, so many artists, so many great musicians, so many great comedians, and so many great people that have accomplished amazing things came out of nothing.
And there's this inherent hunger And this desire to be someone, to be something that creates greatness, that gets recognized by so many people and enriches so many people's lives.
If you think about how many hip-hop artists who are so poor became so rich and inspired so many people with their music.
How many comedians did the same?
How many people who wrote books have come out of utter poverty And through the struggle and pain of their existence, it gave life to their words in a way that you're just not going to get sleeping on silk sheets.
How many people would just get that kickstart from poverty and leads them into success?
And this is just...
This is not encouraging poverty.
I don't think poverty is good.
I was poor when I was a kid.
I hated it.
It's a horrible feeling.
But that feeling...
It is a motivator that is unlike anything else.
The pain and the discomfort of poverty and of feeling like a failure or feeling like a nothing is an insane vehicle for your human potential.
It can push you if you get on it and ride it.
But it can also destroy your life.
I mean, it causes so many people to become drug addicts and so many people to become criminals because they're desperate and they're poor and they feel like the world has abandoned them.
You know that quote, like, if you aren't liberal when you're young, you have no heart, and then if you're not a conservative when you're older, you have no brain?
There's probably a truth to that, but I also really hate that expression because it sort of means you're supposed to care less about people or think less with your heart as you get older, which strikes me as kind of one of the problems in the world.
Okay, there's people out there that don't have anything.
And I don't even think most of these people saying that, like, you just got to put your nose to the grindstone and get to work.
You don't even understand where these people are starting from.
And if you're these kids living in Brooklyn, walk around sucker punching people in the street and stealing money from them, Like your morality is so fucked.
It would take so many mushrooms and so many psychedelic trips and so much therapy and so just to try to realign you with good and love.
The liberal part of me feels terrible for the guy who got killed but also feels terrible for these boys That sucker punched this guy because in my mind, I think if I lived their life, I would be them.
If I was in that situation of dire poverty and probably a lot of emotional and physical abuse, but if you're accustomed to just walking up to someone and punching them, you've probably been punched.
You've probably been abused.
You've probably seen it all.
And you probably have like deep anger towards society and civilization and you've probably been conditioned to think that you you deserve this and that you got to go get what's yours It's a horrible failure on all of our parts so even though like I might have some conservative ideas.
Most of my ideas are very liberal.
And in that regard, my feeling is we need to pump insane amounts of money and time and effort into inner cities.
We need to fix the imbalance.
There's obviously an income inequality problem in this country.
Sure.
But there's also an effort inequality problem in this country.
Both things are true.
And poverty, like extreme poverty, has a gravity that is so difficult to escape.
You're like a 500-pound man who's trying to do box jumps.
Like, it is so goddamn hard.
And we gotta teach that 500 pound man how to lose some weight.
And that's how I look at the general state of the horrific poverty that exists in these inner cities.
Its gravity is inescapable.
So many people have been trapped in it for so long.
And there's been decades upon decades of these places There's multiple ones in this country that have been completely ignored by this country that supposedly wants everything to work out better.
Well, if you want something to work out better, you've got to look at the people that are in the very worst starting position that's available in the United States of America and change that.
There's a really good book, and I read it not that long ago.
It's basically about people who, because of the financial crisis and other stuff, it's like old people who lost their houses, and so now they live in vans or campers, and they just drive around the country working at different theme parks or Amazon seasonal warehouses.
These companies recruit those people because they're like, old people work hard.
They don't have anywhere to go.
They pay them next to nothing.
They get a couple hundred bucks a month in Social Security.
These are people living right on the edge.
They live in a van.
And as I was reading it, there was this voice inside me that was trying to think, how bad do you have to screw up?
What choices do you make in your life where you end up this way?
My first thought was basically, how is it this person's fault?
Right?
And I realized that I was doing that because if it was their fault, then it wouldn't have to make me sad, and I wouldn't have to do anything or change any of my habits or viewpoints.
And then you're like, no, the system failed these people.
These people have worked their whole lives.
Maybe they messed up once, they got addicted to alcohol, or they went through a divorce, or they got fired from one...
The system failed them in some way because if you work your whole life, you shouldn't end up in a van down by the river.
These aren't people addicted to crack on the side of the street.
These are people who, if you saw on the street, you wouldn't know that they live in a camper.
I think the idea that the system has failed huge amounts of people And that you can't individually hold someone responsible for something that is a collective failing.
And then you go right next door, and they would give you the pills.
And there was no database.
So you could go to Jamie, and Jamie could prescribe you the pills, and then you could come to my office, and I would prescribe you the pills, and people would do that, and they would go to 10, 15 different doctors, and they had it set up that way, specifically to make the maximum amount of profit.
So they knew that they were doing this, and then these people would take these pills, they'd have a trunk full of them, and they'd drive them up through Kentucky, and that's the OxyContin Express.
Yeah, and then we're like, that person lives in a camper park because they were a drug addict, as if they weren't exploited and basically like their humanity extracted out of them by these doctors and these multi-billion dollar conglomerates that they're doing fine.
But if that same four-year-old grew up with, like, a really healthy person who lives in an upper-middle-class suburb and spends time going over the homework with the kids and takes them to practice and gets them involved in sports and, you know, maybe exposes them to some activity that will eventually be their career, that person could be a functioning, thriving member of society and be a benefit to everybody.
It's really in where you fucking start from.
And this is why the whole If you are young and you're not a liberal, then you have no soul.
But if you're old and you're not a conservative, you have no mind, doesn't work with me.
Because I'm forced to look at the reality of the situation.
I didn't have the best childhood, but I had food.
I had parents who cared about me.
I had stuff.
I didn't have a bad childhood.
I went to high school in a pretty nice area.
It was not bad.
It was enough bad to make me motivated.
But it ain't shit compared to what someone who lives in Appalachia, who lives in a fucking trailer park, whose whole family is a bunch of drug addicts and criminals.
I think about that even with the student loan thing, which I'm a dropout, so I don't have any student debt, so I don't have super strong opinions on whether it should be forgiven or not.
But you think about how exploitative and extractive that system is, where colleges were like, oh, you're 18, you can't even legally drink, but sign this contract to pay $70,000 a year for your, you know, insert obscure degree that has no viable job prospects.
Oh, you can't afford that?
Just take out a loan.
We won't, you don't, just don't even look at it.
By the way, this is the only unforgivable debt in the entire world.
Why do they go get a job on Wall Street or whatever?
It's because they have to pay back this obscene debt.
Meanwhile, the college is just hiring more and more bureaucrats and administrators and putting in a fucking lazy river and, you know, all this nonsense.
And this is coming off the backs of a generation of people who were misled or outright conned into a thing that, you know, is totally unjustifiable.
If someone sells you a house that you paid too much for, filled termites or whatever, you would get a bad deal on a house.
You can just walk away.
You'll take a bath on it, but you can just walk away.
If you got conned into some for-profit school or they over-promised that, hey, this is what you'll make if you become a physical therapist, you get your master's in this or whatever, You have no recourse.
And those people in their middle class houses or bigger, the people that profited from that money.
So people sometimes say this about me.
They're like, oh, you're profiting from philosophy because I sell my books and stuff that I'm profiting from it.
And I go, you think this college professor who has job security for life paid for by the U.S. government, subsidized by the U.S. government, meanwhile is charging students $50,000, $60,000 a year for the courses, for this piece of paper?
He or she isn't also profiting from it?
I can sleep at night.
I know I charged $17 for a book that took me two years to write.
You made someone take out unforgivable debt to attend your university class at obscene amounts of...
But the system is inherently exploitative and extractive.
Against people at their absolute, and not their most vulnerable, but vulnerable people who don't understand that they're signing away their financial freedom or the choices they can make as far as their careers goes for their entire life because you'll never be able to get out of this.
Yeah, and the thing is, too, that information is available.
It's like that scene in Good Will Hunting, where he talks about going to the library, like, you could learn all this from the library, you don't have to spend all this money on education.
That didn't really used to be true.
But it's true now.
You can get a full-blown, 100% education without ever stepping into a classroom.
You can have a varied, nuanced education about a myriad of subjects.
And you can get that all from books.
You can get it from online.
There's online courses you can take for free.
I mean, you can become incredibly well-educated.
Would you be able to do an internship with some scientist that's working on genetic engineering?
No.
You probably would have to have some sort of a degree to qualify you for something like that.
But for just general education in terms of elevating your intelligence or elevating the information that you possess, that's readily available.
When you think about probably what Harvard cost when that movie came out versus what it is now, I bet it's doubled or tripled.
I remember when my son was born, someone told us that there's a thing in Texas where if you want to send them to UT, you can prepay for their education now.
But the bet there is that, let's say it's 200 grand, that 200 grand compounded in the stock market for 18 years will be less Yes.
Will be less than just the natural increase in tuition over 18 years, which is obscene.
They are implying that they plan to beat the stock market compounded every year with their tuition increases.
Yeah, because if they're your kids and you could choose, you want them to play lacrosse or something where they have the most upside but the least downside.
Yeah, CTE. And they did it from, they measured from children playing Pop Warner football all the way up into the NFL. And they found an astounding number of people at every step of the way exhibited symptoms of CTE. It's a sport where you...
I know fighters that don't have, like, visible CTE, and they're really good fighters.
The Journal of American Medical Association found CTE in 99% of brains obtained from the National Football League players, as well as 91% of college football players and 21% of high school football players.
That is fucking crazy.
The data suggests that there is very likely a relationship between exposure to football and the risk of developing disease.
Duh.
99%?
What the fuck, man?
And it's a degenerative brain disease.
And it comes from repeated head trauma.
It's a terrifying disease.
And I, you know, look, in many ways, I'm kind of morally compromised because I am a commentator for professional mixed martial arts.
It's a big part of what I do.
I'm a giant fan of the sport.
You know, I've been a martial artist my whole life.
I used to compete.
It's a big part of who I am.
And I know it's bad for you.
And it's not just bad for you.
It's bad for you in one of the worst ways possible, and then it compromises your ability to think.
Which, one of the reasons why I stopped, and I stopped when I was young, when I was in my early 20s, because I knew that I was compromising my ability to think.
I knew what was coming.
I saw it in other people, and I'm like, I gotta get out of this.
And...
When I see it now in friends, and I see it in people that I care about, and I've seen all that they've gone through, and I know what's ahead of them, I get terrified for them.
And I try to sound the alarms, and when anybody's thinking, like, man, I don't know how much longer I'm gonna be able to do this, get out now.
Like, get out now.
Pretend you can't do it.
Think of your next fight as a death sentence.
Get out.
Just get out.
If you're thinking you don't want to do this anymore, don't do it.
Because somewhere out there, there's a guy who's not thinking about that at all.
And he's just trying to be a destroyer.
That's Mike Tyson when he was 21. And he wants to separate you from your consciousness.
And you've got to get away from that guy.
Don't do that anymore.
Stop doing it.
Because you don't get those brain cells back.
You don't get them back.
CTE doesn't reverse itself.
I mean, there might be some therapies that come along in the future, but right now, from what I'm aware of, I don't know of anything that makes me comfortable saying, like, you're going to be fine.
If you choose to spend a good portion of your life living the wildest, most dangerous, and extreme way Outside of war and law enforcement and firefighting and being an EMT or something like that, being a professional fighter is one of the craziest fucking things you could do with your brain and your body.
You're literally playing a game of, I'm trying to steal your health.
You're trying to steal health.
You kick someone in the liver.
You're stealing their health.
You're shutting their body down.
and you can only do that so many times to a person before their body deteriorates.
And it's a choice.
If, as long as you're aware of what that choice is and the exhilaration of victory is worth it to you and you can go through the pain and the horrible feelings of loss and the punishment of training, if you're willing to do that and that is exciting to you. if you're willing to do that and that is exciting Because ultimately you know that the end product is so entertaining.
If you watch an incredible, incredible fight, it is so entertaining that the joy that you bring to people.
When those guys, like if Michael Chandler is sitting on top of the octagon cage with his arms up in the air and the whole arena is like, yeah!
And then millions of people around the world are watching that and they're feeling the same like, wow!
You're providing a drug.
You're literally providing an endorphin rush to millions of people.
And you're doing so at the cost of your own health.
You're doing so where you're compromising your lifestyle to dedicate yourself to the Spartan existence, where all you're doing is training and eating clean and resting right and going through all of the recovery modalities.
You could choose to do that.
And I am all about people choosing.
I'm all about people.
If you want to fucking flip dirt bikes over the Grand Canyon, I'm not going to stop you.
I don't really know about Michael's background in terms of how he grew up, but I knew he was a very high-level wrestler in college, and generally that means he's got an education, and he chose.
He's a competitor, so he chose to fight.
A lot of people just come from Conor McGregor.
Conor McGregor, who's a great fighter, came from poverty.
There's other guys that have come from various levels of struggle, but ultimately were compelled by the challenge of this insanely difficult pursuit and the glory of victory.
No, no, there's definitely ones that have a choice, but I'm just saying when you look at some of these athletes or fighters or whatever where the alternative was like jail, drugs, like nobody.
So they chose it, but they didn't have a lot of choices to choose from.
And so is there something inherently exploitative then in being like, well, it's horrible, but they chose it, but they didn't really choose it because nobody actually gave them any options.
But at a certain point in time, Mike Tyson could have retired.
The amount of money that he generated by the time he was 20 years old, he could have probably lived off if he lived well for the rest of his life, if he decided to.
It's just the glory of it, and the excitement of it, and the thrill of victory.
You know, it's the old sports thing, ABC Wildwater Sports.
You certainly can make an argument that is exploitive because you exploit people's desire for victory and their desire to conquer and their desire for wealth beyond what they can imagine.
If you're the average fighter that becomes a world champion, you're going to make millions of dollars.
The average person doesn't make millions of dollars.
You have a path that is an incredibly lucrative path if you can get to the tippy top.
But how many people get there?
How many people become a Kamaru Usman?
You know, how many people become a Charles Oliveira?
How many people?
There's not that many people.
It's really hard to become a champion.
And those are the ones that make the money.
The regular folks, you know, it's just a hardscrabble existence.
Well, the positive argument, and they also make this about porn, is that this is an empowering way to recover from that trauma, to take this thing where you were small and little and vulnerable and turn it into a strength of yours that you can channel that energy and that rage into something positive, you know, that you're really good at.
Like, clearly, I think, when I think about, like, why did I become a writer, clearly there was some Desire to be seen or heard that went fundamentally unfulfilled as a kid.
Because why would you develop the skill to sit at your computer and just, you know, if I just get it perfect, they'll understand me and it'll match.
Maybe their circumstances were dire and awful and unpleasant and it drove them to pursue a world that they could control and make, you know, and explore and have agency over.
And you know what I mean?
Like you could imagine the fantasy author being drawn to fantasy for a reason.
But Robert E. Howard was like a really fucked up, depressed guy who lived with his mom, you know, and his life was kind of a disaster.
And he wrote the greatest fantasy novels the world has ever known.
I mean, his character to this day is like, I don't know how many millions of copies of the Conan books, but I read them all when I was a kid.
And they're fucking good, man.
And it's about this character that is the opposite of who Robert E. Howard was.
Robert E. Howard wound up taking his own life.
I think he was like 30-something years old.
He shot himself.
But before he did that, he wrote about this unstoppable, unconquerable man who was a giant amongst men who slayed everyone before him and fought demons and dragons and...
He carried you through these incredible adventures that Conad would go through.
It was so impassioned.
The words were so vibrant and exciting.
Meanwhile, this guy's life was dog shit.
It was terrible.
But he wrote about someone who he wishes he would be.
I think also if your life sucks or you're struggling with something or you don't feel good or you don't feel your parents are proud of you or whatever, there's something inherently satisfying and rewarding about just mastering something because you have power over it.
It operates the way that you want it.
So whether you're mastering writing fantasy or archery or fighting or trading stocks, there's something about I go into this place And in that place, it doesn't feel quite like real life.
It feels like you're a superhero.
You know what I mean?
There's something inherently human and wonderful, though, about mastery and mastering something.
And then you look at, like, where they were and where we are now and this sort of unbroken passing of torches from, like, these rudimentary buffalo or horses or whatever to, like, the Sistine Chapel.
The difference between the cave paintings and St. Peter's Basilica, which when I went to when I was in Rome a few years back, I couldn't believe how big it was.
When you look at that and you're like...
How long did this take?
Because you see it in a photograph, and it's pretty beautiful, and it's gorgeous, but when you're there in person and you're walking around, you're just like, holy fuck.
And it's funny though, Mark Cerullo talks about this.
It's kind of weird.
Only recently could you get up and look down on human beings.
You can maybe climb a mountain, but you couldn't get in a hot air balloon, you couldn't get in an airplane.
We only saw the Earth from space in 1970-something.
You know the blue marble photo, the famous photo?
Like, that was just 50 years ago.
But, like, that's what bees do.
That's what beavers do.
That's what ants do.
There are other things that do.
We just think we're special because we're us.
But, like, empires are that.
And whole civilizations and whole eras.
We're just all part of this giant collective thing that's just going on, and we all think we're so important, we're so integral, but we're really just one part of a process that randomly produces progress, for the most part, sometimes produces the opposite of progress, but randomly produces these sort of evolutionary improvements, and then that's how you go from there to here, but it's this timeless, enormous thing that you're just a minuscule part of.
And there's certain instincts that we have that we think are detrimental, like the instincts and inclination towards materialism.
Why does that exist?
Well, that ensures that you keep buying the latest and greatest stuff, which ensures that we keep making the latest and greatest stuff, so innovation keeps pushing forward.
If everybody was wise and didn't need anything and was pragmatic and was relaxed and wanted to just live in a log cabin, we would stay static and nothing would improve.
And then when something comes along, like some horrible situation where things go badly, like war, like the Nazis, like Hitler...
Well, what happens?
Well, the reaction to that is so intense that it forces people into action, and it forces them to go out and stop that, and then you look at the innovation that happens after World War II, and it changes culture all around the world.
This horrible event takes place, and through this horrible event, we realize, oh my god, this can happen.
And now, we got through that, and there's V-Day, where they're kissing in the street, and everybody's celebrating, and then civilization moves forward in this beautiful way for a while.
It's like, horrible thing, reaction to the horrible thing.
And so, if you look at world events up close, you're like, Russia invades Ukraine.
It's this horrendous, violent, awful thing.
It's also, though you zoom out, you look at it on a 100-year timeline, a 200-year timeline, it's Humanity staggering towards some sort of global balance of power.
Then it gets out of balance, then it has to rebalance.
And so we take these things personally when in fact they just are what they are and it's always been happening, just like waves have always been crashing on the beach and trees have been growing and falling down.
This is what it is.
And it's always been that way.
It always will be that way until eventually it's not that way.
Yeah.
And that's why I think so fascinating about meditations is like, Marcus is the most powerful man in the world.
And he's like, who remembers the emperor six emperors ago?
You know, he's like, he'll go like, the name Vespasian, you know, like how odd that feels now.
And that was like just a couple before him.
And he's like, think about all the people that worked in Vespasian's court.
They were so powerful.
Where are they now?
And he's like, the same thing's going to be happening to you.
And that this is this thing that just happens.
And there's a beauty and a horror to it.
But you've got to choose the view you're going to take, I think.
Well, so he famously is betrayed by his best friend who declared he thinks Marcus is sick and near death.
And so this guy named Avidius Cassius goes like, I'm the emperor now.
But Marcus wasn't dead.
And so it puts him in this horrible position of like, obviously, you can't allow this.
But he doesn't want to fight a war over it.
And he basically says, this is the final chapter in The Obstacles Away, the idea that even this is an opportunity.
And he says, I want to show history how civil strife can be dealt with.
And so he tries to give Cassius a chance to come to his senses.
Eventually he has to take the Roman army out in battle.
He deals with it.
And then he weeps when someone kills Cassius because it deprives him of the opportunity of Forgiving him, of like giving him clemency.
And he orders the Senate, he says, do not execute a single person for this.
He says, do not let my name be stained in blood, which is maybe impractical, maybe too philosophical, but there is a beauty to that, that, you know, he talks about forgiveness in meditations, but But then he has to actually apply it in his life.
Yeah, I mean, the horrible part of the Civil War, the genius of Lincoln is he said, both Lincoln and Grant are like, just let him go home, right?
Just let him go home.
He says, turn their swords into plowshares, according to the Bible.
And they think it's going to work.
And there's a genius element to it, a sort of almost a Christ-likeness to it.
But then the horror is that the South doesn't They're not immediately like, yeah, slavery is bad.
Why did we fight this war over?
They go home and they're like, we still hate black people.
We still don't want them here.
And now that we can't own them, now they're a problem for us.
And some of the worst massacres in American history are basically Confederate sort of paramilitary soldiers.
This is what the Klan is originally, is this terrorist organization that just goes around and murders black people.
Sometimes hundreds at a time.
There's other sort of almost battles of the Civil War.
And the US really struggles with how do you pacify after a war like that?
The argument is we kind of learn this lesson in the Second World War.
We go and there's a process of denazification in Germany, which we don't manage to do after the US Civil War because Lincoln is assassinated, which you could argue is why he was assassinated.
But we never fully sort of get rid, not get rid of, but change the hearts and minds of the people who went to war for like the worst possible cause you can think of for going to war for next to the Nazis.
And so like there's a Confederate statue in the little town that I'm in.
And like, why is that there?
That's there as a giant middle finger to the federal government.
So the states that used to be Confederate are now red, but there's also some red states that were not Confederate.
I see what you're saying.
Yeah, that's true.
It takes generations.
We're fucking dumb and slow to learn.
It takes a long time for people to figure that out.
And I think what we were talking about before, and this is something I discuss ad nauseum, the lack of attention to the worst spots in this country.
I've always said that if you want to make the world a better place, make less losers.
How do you make less losers?
Give people a better starting position.
Give people more support.
I don't think you should hand things to people necessarily, but I think there's a real value in making communities safer and more conducive to people advancing and getting ahead and showing people more examples of it.
Then you have a better, more robust civilization because you have more competition.
You have it filled with more people that are doing exciting things and doing things that are fulfilling.
And I think you probably have less finger pointing because you'd have a better perspective.
Introspective of what our society actually is.
Our society is a society that lifts people up.
Our America.
America is a great place because we treat people not just equally, but we look at people who don't have an equal shot and we want to give them a head start and give them a hand up.
Some people have criticisms of that in terms of aspects of it.
Some people have criticisms of affirmative action because they think that affirmative action rewards people that are less qualified simply because they came from another place.
I think there's a way to do that where we don't feel like that.
Get them young.
And train them better and educate them better and also protect them.
Give them environments.
Give them community centers.
Give them places where they feel like they're a part of a great group of other human beings that are also striving.
So the environment that they're around is an environment of information.
Education, they're learning how to think and behave and rewarded for progress, rewarded for improvement, rewarded for succeeding and overcoming bad situations, and also rewarding themselves for discipline.
And then also learning that loss and learning that failure and humiliation are valuable teachers.
And you don't have to be defined by your worst moments.
Those worst moments can actually enable you to produce a better result in the future and Show other people that have done that and help them lead the way.
This is all possible, man.
This all can be done and would have a radical effect on the way this country behaves.
No, no, but I mean like Ruby Bridges, you know, from the famous photo, she integrates that school, she's the little girl, all the parents are yelling horrible things at her, right?
Think about what her parents went through and the effect that that had on her.
And think about like the age of her children now.
Yeah.
Like they're like maybe my age.
Right.
Yeah, because she's like...
I remember...
Yeah, she's like a year older than my mother-in-law.
And you're just like...
My grandmother went to Little Rock High School, the famous one that was integrated, like two years before it was integrated.
And so you think about the environment that she grew up in, and the privilege of the fact that a good chunk of the population was not allowed to go to school with her.
And then what those people, the school they had to go to.
It's not any part of my family's history that we benefited from this.
We think it's a long time ago.
But it obviously shaped my dad.
It shaped the life that we live.
There's a legacy of that, and you have to figure out how to address it.
But the reason we haven't figured out how to address it is I think a good chunk of us just don't want to think that it's true.
It's inconvenient for people to concentrate on things that have happened in the past when they can say, well, hey, I had nothing to do with that.
I'm just living my life and I'm doing the best that I can.
But I also think that it's like you were talking about before with the negative things that happen and then through those there's this kind of yin and yang effect, right?
I think one of the things that we're going through today is just that.
It's just like we're in the middle of it.
So we can't recognize that progress is being done.
It's just there's so much work to do and it's one of the reasons why greedy politicians are so disgusting.
When we find out that politicians are making hundreds of millions of dollars off illegal insider stock—well, I guess it is legal—insider stock trades, and that's really what they're concentrating on.
They're not really concentrating on their constituents.
They don't give a fuck if people get ahead.
That's nonsense.
It's all lip service.
When you hear the White House press secretary talk about, you know, the economy's in a better place than it's ever been before, like, you know that's horseshit.
And it makes everyone angry.
And that anger is there to encourage people to act.
It's encouraged people to take steps to do better, to force politicians to be more upfront, to force honesty, and also to get people that are maybe qualified to be better leaders but are reluctant to get involved in that.
It may motivate them to get going.
I even think, like, I'm very critical of, like, woke ideology because I think it's essentially a religion, but I think the overwhelming thing about woke ideology that gives me comfort is that all of it Is encouraging people to be more inclusive, kinder, more accepting, even if it's wrong.
Even if you're in doing so, enforcing this ideology, you're really victimizing other people, which is possibly the case in some ways.
The overwhelming direction that things are going is to make it so that everything's okay.
Sometimes when they make everything okay, they make people that are not guilty, guilty, and they make victims out of people that were innocent, but the direction that it's going is supposedly in kindness.
Now they're being vicious and mean in enforcing their kindness, but this is sort of a natural aspect of human ideology anyway.
Like when people have an ideology that's rigid, they enforce it, and they enforce it the same way they enforce a religion.
I mean, if you were growing up in Nazi Germany and you were openly a Nazi.
Like, that's an ideology.
That's an ideology that you signal to all the other Nazis that you are on board, and your cruelty to Jews, and your decision to enforce genocide.
You're signaling to your tribe that you're doing...
So that's humanity in a terrible direction.
This is humanity in a good direction, but it's been hijacked by terrible people.
And generally by people that are failures, that don't have good character or will, and don't have the ability to objectively assess their own thoughts and their own actions, and try to figure out why they're motivated to do what they do.
Instead, they just do what gets them attention, because this is part of what people do.
Have you noticed that our caps have actually got little pictures of skulls on them?
I don't, uh...
Hands...
Are we the baddies?
Alright, let's see.
We should be able to hold them at this point here, at least for a few hours.
Then why skulls, then?
Why skulls?
Well, maybe they're the skulls of our enemies.
Maybe.
But is that how it comes across?
I mean, it doesn't say next to the skull, you know, yeah, we killed him, but trust us, this guy was horrid.
Well, no, but...
I mean, what does skulls make you think of?
Death, cannibals, beheading, um, pirates?
Pirates are fun!
I didn't say we weren't fun, but fun or not, pirates are still the baddies.
I just can't think of anything good about a skull.
What about pure Aryan skull shape?
Even that is more usually depicted with the skin still on.
Whereas the Allies...
Oh, you haven't been listening to Allied propaganda.
Of course they're going to say we're the bad guys.
But they didn't get to design our uniforms.
And their symbols are all, you know, quite nice.
Stars, stripes, lions, sickles.
What's so good about a sickle?
Well, nothing.
And obviously, if there's one thing we've learned in the last thousand miles of retreat, it's that Russian agriculture is in dire need of mechanisation.
Tell me about it.
But you've got to say, it's better than a skull.
I mean, I really can't think of anything worse as a symbol than a skull.
A rat's anus?
Yeah, and if we were fighting an army marching under the banner of a rat's anus, I'd probably be a lot less worried, Hans.
They're in the middle of it, and they just keep doing what they're doing.
And I think it's also the culture that they're involved.
People imitate their atmosphere, right?
I think, going back to politicians, one of the things that got revealed when this whole Nancy Pelosi thing happened, when they started looking at the insane amount of money that she's made from insider trading, they started looking at all of Congress.
I mean, that obviously, we have to look to that when we look at horrific moments in history like World War II or like Genghis Khan or like any of these horrific moments where things are so hard to imagine years later.
Like when we're looking back on the Inquisition and looking back on the horrific methods of torture that they used on people that were infidels.
Who the fuck are these people and how could they have done this?
Someone sent me this.
I'm going to send you this, Jamie, because this is really fascinating.
We don't give ourselves enough credit for the progress that we've made collectively as a society away from cruelty.
At the founding, obviously the founders were horrible hypocrites, owning slaves, but the idea that cruel and unusual punishment should not be a thing, that that was an advancement not that long ago.
And even the ones they said were not cruel were still super cruel, that we've made a lot of—like, I mean, in World War II, they still executed soldiers by firing squad.
And just like how horrendous or heinous that you would just make a bunch of your troops just murder another one of your members of— For doing something wrong.
Do you know what I mean?
And that the progress away from cruelty is a huge improvement.
And so when we watch something like George Floyd or the video of Ahmaud Arbery, and you're just like, that's the worst thing I've ever seen.
That does say something about the progress we've made as a society because not that long ago, people would have seen that many, many times.
Yeah, and even though horrific things still do exist, it doesn't minimize them by recognizing that the trend is towards people being kinder and better to each other.
Steven Pinker is a great example.
His work has been roundly criticized by woke people because they're saying you're spending too much time concentrating on how much better things are.
Instead of how much better we need to get.
But he's like, I study trends.
I'm studying the progress of the human race, and over time, things have gotten far safer, and people are far kinder, and they're far more educated than ever before.
And we collectively have an ability to communicate these ideas that is unprecedented.
There's never been a time in history where we could communicate these ideas better and you're going to get a lot of fog and a lot of noise and a lot of background noise and a lot of people trying to take advantage of this opportunity because of the fact that there's unprecedented models of communication.
But overall, the ability to change things for the better has never been We've never had a situation that is this positive.
Yeah, the economy sucks.
Yeah, gas is too high.
Yeah, there's potential for a nuclear war with Russia.
But just our understanding of the inequalities of life, our understanding of what could be possible, our understanding of the positive aspects of being a good person, they've never been more highlighted.
Yes, but if you visualize that you're capable of making a better life for yourself and then you fucking work at it every day, chances are, barring some insane, unforeseen, unfair circumstances, you will likely get there.
Like if you read the book, what's interesting to me about the book is it's clearly you have absorbed yourself into the writing of the Stoics and you relay it in a manner that's very absorbable and applicable.
And that's why it's so effective.
And when I put it up on Instagram, my God, I got so many messages from friends.
I'd say, I fucking love that book.
That book's incredible.
It's helped me so much.
So, you know, through this fascination that you have with this philosophy, I mean, you've generated a lot of really positive thoughts for people, and you've really got people moving.
And generally a good direction because you give them these quotes in this book, all the different philosophers that you quote and all the different scenarios where you apply these thoughts, those things, they stay with you.
And they're like little sparks that you have in your head that you can blow on those embers and start a fire with.
The funny thing, so I got offered to write a book about stoic philosophy because I'd written an article about it that was popular online in like 2008, 2009. And I went to Robert and I was like, this is my dream.
This is what I want to do.
Should I do it?
And he was like, I don't think you're ready yet.
And that was like the hardest thing in the world to hear.
But he was totally right.
I turned it down and I waited like almost five more years.
And then I think I – I mean if I wrote it today, I'd be more ready.
But like there's always a point of over-preparation.
What was his – I think he was like, look, you're getting better every day as a writer, so you're going to only write this book one time, so you should, every day that you wait, you'll be more prepared, you'll be better for it.
And he's like also like he was like the difference between like 21 and 27 is a transformative amount of life experience.
It's still pretty young to have written that book.
But like I went through some shit in that period.
Right.
And so that the book is more relatable because of my experience.
You know what I mean?
Like if I just was I would have just been speculating about the ideas if I wrote it when I was 21, I think.
Well, luckily we're talking about stoicism and you literally are preaching the philosophy in your books that any sort of negative happenstance or anything that sets you back will probably ultimately be to your benefit.
But, like, if you look at the fine print in the New York Times list, and I know this now because I have a bookstore, and so we report to the list.
Right?
You have to send a report each week.
And you have to flag, like, whether there's bulk copies or other things.
But, like, the list every week would be, like, in advice how-to miscellaneous, the Bible would be the best-selling book every week.
Right?
Or Harry Potter would be the top of the fiction.
Like, they decide...
They decide to filter stuff out.
I wrote a book about this a couple years ago, but they explicitly filter out what they call perennial sellers, which are books that sell every year a shit ton of copies because schools buy them.
So there's a certain amount of filtering, but the big one for the bestseller list is You know, how many of your copies were sold on Amazon?
How many of your copies were sold in independent bookstores?
Was it all in New York and LA and San Francisco?
Or did you sell a lot of books in Cincinnati?
Right?
Like, they're trying to...
It's not that they're putting their thumb on the scale, but they are trying...
Well, they are putting their thumb on the scale.
There's certain books that don't appear for suspicious reasons, people allege.
But, like, they are trying to create a more robust definition of what bestseller is.
Not just objectively who sold the most because that could be unfair.
Well, it's okay because of those reasonable examples that you used, but not because of the ones where they just decide that your subject matter is problematic.
So do you think that they decided that stoicism is problematic?
General nonfiction, like the general nonfiction list, like maybe the 10 spot is like 5,000 books.
But the 10 spot on the advice how-to miscellaneous, because you're competing against the Guinness Book of World Records and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, is...
You know, could be 15,000 copies.
Like Malcolm Gladwell, because he's sort of part who I love, is a super awesome guy and I think one of the greatest in the world at what he does.
His books are considered nonfiction.
But that's, I think, because he's a New Yorker writer.
Yeah, I think that has to be the case when it comes to selling books, right?
Because the most important thing you have achieved is that your books resonate with the people who read them, and they enrich people's lives, and that's what you set out to do.
You didn't set out to, I don't know how many people are involved in curating the New York Times bestseller list, but you didn't set out to please those people.
There's a story about Jimmy Carter, who was not the best president, obviously, but he was being interviewed by Admiral Rickover, who was the head of America's Nuclear Navy.
And Jimmy Carter, people don't see him this way, because maybe we think about him as this old man.
But he was like, he went to the Naval Academy, he was ambitious, successful.
He was driven to be great from a very early age.
And so he's being interviewed.
He just graduated from the Naval Academy.
It's like 48, 49. And he wants to get on a nuclear sub.
But the way to do it is this guy, Admiral Rickover, decides, who's one of the unsung heroes of American history that very few people know about.
Immigrant went through Ellis Island.
Jewish guy's family flees persecution, helps us win the Second World War, and then the Cold War.
But anyways, he's interviewing Jimmy Carter.
It's like a three-hour interview, like this.
They were kind of these big, long discussions.
And Jimmy Carter's going on and on about all his accomplishments, you know?
Like, here's what I did.
I got this grade, this grade.
And then Rickover goes, like, how'd you finish in your class at the Naval Academy?
And he was like, I was 56 out of 800. And Carter thought he'd be like, oh, wow, that's great.
He was beaming with pride about it.
And Rick over just looks at him and goes, did you always do your best?
And then Jimmy Carter was going to be like, of course.
You know, that's what you say.
And then he thought about it.
He's like, you know, I kind of coasted through this class.
Like, I didn't always study this.
And he was like, I'm going to be honest.
He's like, no, I didn't always do my best.
And then Rickover looked at him and he said, why not?
And then he got up and left the room.
And what you control is whether you did your best.
You don't control how you rank in the class.
You don't control whether you won this award or this scholarship or best sellers.
You don't control any of that.
You don't even really control if people like what you do.
You only control if you did your best and if you were proud of it.