All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 4, 2006 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
32:57
356 You Are Your Own Proof (Part 1)

A very dangerous (but very powerful) idea

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Good morning, everybody.
Hope you're doing well. It's Steph.
It is 8.43.
Boy, it's amazing just how, when you're going to leave a job, the time to leave creeps up just a little bit.
So I hope you're doing well.
I wanted to talk this morning about a very, I say, advanced topic, a very subtle topic, a very dangerous topic, but a topic that can be enormously powerful and helpful in your life.
And it's a little doodad I like to call.
You are your own proof.
Oh yes. Oh yes.
We can feel the danger, the fear of narcissism self-proof coming up.
Absolutely. But we can only do our best to hope that we can do it in such a way or understand this proof in such a way that it really does make sense and is helpful to us.
But when I say something like, you are your own proof, I know that people are going to maybe, maybe misinterpret that to think that I mean that you don't need to refer to reality, that You don't need to check or validate or use a scientific method or use logic or empirical evidence or whatever, or that everything you think or feel is right.
And we'll get to that topic another time.
But I'd like to invite you just to consider this possibility that...
One of the ways in which your life might be made better and easier is to just explore this principle of you are your own proof and let me tell you sort of a little bit more about what that means.
Well, let me give you, if you wouldn't mind, I'll give you two examples and then we'll talk about the principles behind them that can help make your emotional apparatus a lot more effective and a lot more helpful in guiding you through life so that you don't have to think through everything from sort of the top of your head down to the bottom of your toes, which can be enormously exhausting, of course.
So, the first example is that Christina was up at this conference.
She's a member of the Canadian Psychological Association.
It's a professional association she kind of has to be a member of.
It's one of these enforced state unions.
And they give these lectures, and so she went up, and I went up with her for a couple of days.
I listened to one.
She listened to a whole number of lectures.
And one of them was around the relationship, and I think this is very interesting, The relationship between cognitive therapy which is a specific kind of therapy that Christina favors which is around logically challenging core assumptions or core beliefs that people have about themselves and the world.
The relationship between that and mindfulness meditation.
Now, I'm not going to go into a big thing on mindfulness meditation or meditation as a whole.
I think it's a fantastic discipline.
But the unfortunate thing is that a lot of meditation is predicated on this idea that there's something sort of fundamentally wrong with your cognitive abilities to start with.
So a lot of things that you hear about in terms of meditation is that your mind is sort of broken or incorrect because it has a stream of consciousness and thoughts and so on and to-dos and that you have to sort of fix that by...
Becoming more aware or deeper or, you know, this sort of stuff.
And to quiet the mind.
And I think that's a good idea.
Don't get me wrong. I think it's a good idea.
But there's nothing wrong with the brain and the way it works.
The only thing that's wrong with the brain is the stuff that we've been taught from being a child onward.
So I'm always very wary of any kind of philosophy or approach to the mind which says, you're broken, right?
I mean, you're broken and you need to be fixed.
Because that is, generally there's a kind of power grab in that kind of stuff, but we can talk about that another time.
So this guy who was teaching this mindfulness meditation approach was saying, okay, imagine when you look at your own feelings and so on, and he said, imagine that you're hosting a dinner party.
And at that dinner party, there are some nice people, some pleasant people, and some mean and angry and unpleasant people, and you're the host.
And you graciously invite them in, and you graciously let them have their say, and whatever, whatever, right?
Now, Christina immediately sort of felt, well, there's something wrong with this.
This is not the right approach.
Because why would I, as a host of a dinner party, why would I want mean and unpleasant and difficult and nasty people at my dinner party?
I mean if somebody started getting really mean at a dinner party of mine, I'd toss them out.
And she had this urge to bring it up.
And then she didn't bring it up.
And then she kind of was a little bit self-castigating.
Oh, you know, I should have challenged him.
I have all these values, but I don't bring them up.
And so, and so, and so.
So there's one example.
Now, the other example is that in my job, I handed in my resignation on Tuesday, and then I went on vacation for Wednesday, Thursday.
Now I'm back on Friday, and I'm hoping that this is my last day.
Now, legally, they can ask me for two weeks, right?
They can ask me to stick around for two weeks.
Now, there's nothing for me to do, and so if they ask me to stick around for two weeks, then...
It would be kind of...
Well, there's lots of reasons that they would do it, but it'd be kind of selfish.
I guess I'm making a lot more money at my new job, so if I've got to stick around for two weeks here, it's going to cost me money, and so that would be kind of problematic.
And... So when we were talking about this, I felt anger and I felt that it was a possibility that they would ask me to stick around for the two weeks.
And Christina said, if they do ask you to stick around for the two weeks, then they're jerks.
And... That emotion, the emotion that I felt, the anger that I felt at the possibility that I was going to be asked to stick around for two weeks, was already there.
And then Christina said, if they do this, then they're jerks, or whatever.
Now let's take a stab at the first instance, so that I can at least help you understand the idea that I talk about with, or what I mean by when I say, you are your own proof.
So... Christina is in this gathering of other psychologists, and this guy is making this metaphor of hosting a dinner party with mean people, and that's what it's like to meditate, right?
Your feelings come, and you examine them with curiosity and openness and non-judgmental and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
And she felt like oomph, right in her gut, that there was something seriously wrong with that metaphor.
And of course, I would say that there is something seriously wrong with that metaphor, because Christina has told me.
And because, just very, very briefly, the thing that's the problem with that metaphor is that it assumes that some of your emotions are productive and positive, And some of your emotions are hostile and negative and so there's no differentiation between authentic true self emotions and inauthentic manipulative and destructive false self ragings or passions or whatever you want to call them.
And that you simply invite them all to the table and let them speak.
And there's nothing wrong with letting negative emotions speak, but to simply dissociate yourself from your emotions to the degree with which you think that you are hosting them is, to me, rank arrogance on the part of the conscious self.
I mean, please, people, you do not host your emotions at a dinner party.
You are not the head of the household when it comes to your feelings.
Your feelings host you.
Your passions are the things that are the most central core and often, often, often the most logical parts of you.
And I would say that there's more of a balance if you're raised in a rational way, but given that none of us really are, I would say that you actually would do well to abandon yourself to your feelings rather than to feel that you're the host of them.
Or somehow managing or in control.
And also I don't like the idea of separating your consciousness from your emotions.
Like you're the host and you're having a dinner party.
That is not a healthy approach to the emotions in my view.
You want to get involved with your emotions.
You want to get wrapped up in your emotions.
You want to feel deeply and express your emotions in a powerful way.
And not act them out in a brutal way or any kind of abusive way.
But The idea that you invite your feelings in and you're still in control and managing the dinner party is naive.
For most of us, if we really allow our true self feelings in, they kind of hit us like a tsunami.
They kind of hit us like a truck.
And the idea of staying in control is a dissociating kind of metaphor, and I think it's actually kind of dangerous.
And it's also saying that, you know, well, your emotions are all helpful.
Some are happy, some are angry, and blah, blah, blah.
But it's a dinner party.
Well, it's not a dinner party, my friends.
Frankly, down in your gut, it's a free-for-all.
It's a slugfest. It's mud wrestling.
And virtue will win, but only if you let it have its real swings, rather than try and control it and manage it like a dinner party.
It's far too civilized a metaphor for what is going on in our deepest core, which is elemental and very powerful.
And those of you who are going through this on the board know what I'm talking about.
Oh, and welcome to our new members, by the way.
Welcome to our new members. We have some, I guess, half a dozen or so new members over the last couple of days.
Fantastic. I really, really welcome you aboard, particularly a regular poster has come by.
unable to read her posts because it's blowing away everything that I believe about public school teachers.
And of course, when you have a belief and you have evidence, you obviously want to ditch the evidence so that you can stick to your belief, or as I like to call it, irrational prejudice.
Now, it's wonderful, and thank you so much for joining us and for posting.
Welcome aboard.
And so there's something wrong with the metaphor, something fundamentally disrespectful about the metaphor to the unconscious, and something that places the consciousness in a superior and dissociated fashion, and non-judgmental fashion.
which is impossible, and unhealthy.
So Christina had this urge, she said, oh man, this is nonsense.
And she had the urge to say, this is nonsense, in the middle of this guy's lecture.
And she didn't. And then she felt like, oh, what's the point of having all these beliefs if I don't spit them out and this and that and the other?
Well, now that I've mentioned on the board that Christina has in fact defood, which means she has separated from her family of origin for very specific and positive reasons, this occurred, I did it about six years ago, maybe seven, and Christina did it about two years ago.
Now that she has gone through that process, and this has also occurred with all of her friends except one that we don't talk about ideas with.
So, as I said to her, I said that her true self is the one saying, don't speak, don't speak, don't open your mouth.
And she said, well, but I should talk about these ideas, I should try and put them out there, or at least I should resist ideas that are not rational relative to what we're talking about, and so on and so on.
And I said, well, but freedom is the freedom to not do stuff, right?
If you're compelled to stand up and talk about freedom, then you're not really free.
And also, let's have a look at this rationally, right?
Because when you have a feeling that is very powerful within you, and hers was to not talk about it, right?
It was a fear that was brought up.
She felt afraid to talk about it.
And you've probably had the same feeling as well when you're in...
Social situations or work situations and stuff comes up around freedom or politics or philosophy or religion or whatever and you feel this sort of urge to speak up.
Well, I would say more power to you.
If you want to speak up, then speak up.
But if you don't want to speak up, then don't speak up.
Because there's probably a damn good reason that you're not going to speak up or that you don't want to speak up.
And so listen to your instincts.
Listen to your instincts.
They're there to help you. And so, with Christina, I said, well, okay, so you're in this class.
If you speak up, what's going to happen?
Well, this is Canada, right?
So Canada is just about the most angry and passive-aggressive country in the world.
So what's going to happen is everyone's going to look at you like you grew an extra horn because that's the professor.
That's the leader. He's got a PhD.
Who are you? And everybody's just going to look at her like she's grown a set of horns, and it's going to flock around the leader, and then the leader is going to say, well, does anyone else have a problem with this metaphor?
And everyone's going to say, oh no, oh no, it was wonderful, oh, it totally illuminated things for me, and then they're going to all look at you like you're just some idiot, and then the professor might sigh and say, well, perhaps just go along with it for now if you don't mind, and we'll talk about it after class.
I don't want you holding up the whole process, right?
So you're going to get this kind of stuff.
And it's not like you're going to have changed anything.
All you're going to have done is discredited yourself with people.
And if you feel aggressive about the metaphor, like it's really stupid and manipulative, then you can't honestly and authentically be just sort of open and curious and say, well, isn't that interesting?
Why would you use a metaphor like that?
Well, he's going to say, well, I've been using it for 20 years and it's very effective.
And lots of people have told me that that's how they've really understood it.
What are you going to say? It's a stupid metaphor.
Your entire idea of how consciousness works with the passions is dissociated and incorrect and passive-aggressive.
And you're not helping people.
It's not going to work, right? That's really, really not going to work.
And you're not going to change anyone's mind.
You're just going to be viewed as somebody who's disruptive and difficult and hostile, right?
I mean, you know, this guy's trying to help with mindfulness meditation.
He's putting himself out there.
He got up early. He's not getting paid much.
He's trying to give us new ideas, and you're hammering at him.
What the hell's the matter with you? You, my sister, probably need some more mindfulness meditation so that you can control your aggression.
I mean, you're going to get nowhere.
And I said, so your urge, your fear of talking about it, and the fear only existed because she had a false self-standard called speak up no matter what the cost, which is silly.
I mean, that's not freedom.
I must speak up no matter what the cost.
That's not freedom. And I said, look, you had your family for X numbers of years, and when you began to have conversations with them about things that you wanted tweaked in the relationship or things that you would prefer...
In the relationship, what happened?
Well, they kind of got angry and kind of said no to everything and kind of were negative about it all.
And there was no possibility of any kind of alteration in the relationship.
I said, okay. And then, you know, it all came to a head and you ended up not being able to see them or choosing not to see them.
So that was your relationship for three plus decades with your family of origin.
And I said, and your sister.
Same thing, right? You said to your sister, I prefer these things change in the relationship.
And your sister basically said, no, and no possibility, and you're crazy, and you're wrong, and these things never happened, and blah blah blah, right?
So, had to ditch that too.
And then she had a friend who had a really mean husband, and This husband was not only physically abusive, but also when this woman was in hospital, yelled at her when she came out of being under.
And so, at that point, I knew Christina.
We sort of leapt into action, offered this woman a sanctuary so she could get away from her husband.
And she ended up turning on us, and after a short period of, yes, I need to get out, she ended up turning on us.
Another friend, and we sort of could go on and on, right?
But basically, her friendships of up to eight to ten years, when her friends asked her her opinion, and she began to actually give her real opinion about their boyfriends, about their husbands, about their families, when invited, when asked.
Well, they all just ditched her.
And so I said, you've had a family of three plus decades, you've had friends of up to ten years, and when you begin to speak your mind around your family and your friends, all of those relationships, you got ditched.
Fundamentally, you got ditched from all of those relationships.
So I said, when you have a 30-plus year hold on your family and a 10-year reciprocal set of relationships with friends, you would think that you have a little bit more voice in those relationships than you would in some class where you're showing up and nobody knows you from Adam.
And I said, you couldn't get any valid or honest opinions embedded into those long, long, long-term, heavy, heavy investment relationships.
No. So, logically, would it make any sense to think that you could have any kind of positive effect on strangers when, with your nearest and dearest friends and your closest and ever-loving family, you had zero effect?
Well, no. I said, wouldn't it be rather an insane world if your friends and family didn't listen to you, but complete strangers listened to you?
No. Was it fun when you had to sort of say goodbye to your friends and your family?
No. It was living hell.
And it is a living hell. And I said, so, given that you have no potential upside, no capacity to change people, and that going into situations or talking with people about situations where you're going to have no chance of changing them and they're going to end up humiliating you and insulting you and scorning you and passive-aggressively doing something to you that's going to be really difficult and unpleasant...
Why would you open your mouth?
You're in the torture chamber, you have no chance of escaping, and do you spit at the torture guy?
Well, no, not unless you're a masochist.
Yes, whatever you want to hear.
You don't need to even approach my fingernails.
Whatever you want to hear, I'm going to tell you.
Because you're in a situation of force, and there's no such thing as ethics.
So, I think that her impulse not to tell Not to talk about her problems with this metaphor was entirely correct.
And her fear only arose because she felt in a false self kind of way that she must talk about these ideas with strangers or they have no validity.
Well, that's nonsense. That's absolute nonsense.
And I say this with all sympathy because it's a common belief, and I've had it myself.
And I so don't mean this nonsense like anybody who believes this is an idiot, but the belief itself is pure nonsense.
It's age-inappropriate, frankly.
I mean, the way that I view the world, Christina asked me yesterday, she said, when you're talking with people, do you feel superior?
And I said, no, not really.
I said I sort of view like I have to be sort of age-appropriate.
Like when you're talking to a five-year-old, you have to sort of dumb things down quite a bit and you have to change your intonation and you have to be more gentle and you have to speak in an age-appropriate manner.
And when I'm talking to a five-year-old, and of course I worked in a daycare for a couple of years, so I know a little thing or two about five-year-olds.
And when I'm talking to a five-year-old, I don't sit there and say, you know, I could really take you.
I could take you down, sonny.
I could take you with two hands tied behind my back.
I don't feel superior like, you know, I'm really a lot smarter than you.
You know, my language skills are way better than yours.
You know, my reasoning skills...
I got yours down in the dust compared to my magnificent rational skills or anything like that.
I don't feel superior to a five-year-old.
I don't feel superior because it's just a different stage of development.
I have happened to have thrown 20-odd years or more Into personal development, rational examination, philosophy, therapy, self-understanding, and so on, introspection.
And so that's given me some additional development and growth.
You don't just do this stuff because of the funsies of it.
And so when I look at a five-year-old, I don't feel superior.
It's just a different stage of development.
It's ridiculous to compare.
I would say that I'm more advanced than a five-year-old, but I wouldn't say that that makes me superior because the five-year-old will grow.
Now, that may not be the case with a lot of people, but it's still their choice.
So, from that standpoint...
It's not that I feel superior.
It's just that I think things are age-appropriate, right?
So if, I don't know, let's just say your wife had a miscarriage.
You've got a five-year-old kid and your wife just had a miscarriage.
She comes down and she's kind of pale and shaky and upset.
And your five-year-old says, Mommy, what's wrong?
Well, you don't say, Well, dear, Mommy had a miscarriage, right?
Because it's not age-appropriate.
And... So you just, you make some, oh, mommy's tired, I got a headache, oh, you just make things up, right?
Because a child can't process or handle that kind of knowledge.
So it's important in communicating with people to understand age appropriateness.
And it's also important to understand developmental appropriateness, right?
It's why it took Podcast 183 for me to bring libertarianism into the family and personal relationships.
It's why I'm waiting until this one, 356, believe it or not, In order to talk about you are your own proof, because otherwise this is a club that people use to become narcissistic.
But I think that everyone understands things enough now that I can start to talk about these more sophisticated approaches to things without worrying about, oh my god, I just sent people off the past megalomania.
And so... So from that standpoint, I think it's important to understand that you don't have to tell people about freedom any more than you have to tell a five-year-old about and show them pictures of the Israeli conflict down in the Middle East at the moment, the bombings that are going on between Israel and Lebanon.
You don't show them pictures and say, look, here's a baby with its head sheared off, and it's important for you to understand war.
Oh, and by the way, there's this great movie called Platoon that you should watch so that you understand war as well, and here's the first 20 minutes of saving Private Ryan, and so on, to a five-year-old.
It blows their minds.
It's too much for them.
They're too immature.
They're too early in their development to be able to understand and process these things.
All it's going to do is traumatize them.
It's going to make them freaked out and angry and unable to sleep and weirded out and have significant problems.
It's going to cause significant psychological problems for them.
Because it's not age appropriate.
And that's sort of how I feel with most of the people that I talk to.
No, I'm not going to talk to them about freedom and personal responsibility and ethics and capitalism and all these things.
Because it's age-inappropriate.
They don't know how to process it.
It's just going to scare and frighten and upset them.
And that's not because I'm superior.
I've just worked a little harder at self-development.
And if they want to, they can get there.
And if somebody starts saying intelligent things, then of course I will absolutely engage them in a conversation.
Or if I say one or two things in a very abstract way, and they show interest and the capacity to handle those concepts, then sure.
But I'm generally going to assume that it's entirely age-appropriate.
So I think that Christina had a good reason not to talk about these concepts.
These concepts with this instructor and with all these other people.
And I think she had every reason to feel irritated at the metaphor, but she also should have respected her emotions when they said, don't talk.
Now, when she said, but I must talk, then she began, her emotions began trying to head her off at the past, right?
So it's important to understand the back and forth of the true self and the false self here, right?
So the true self indicates, like, immediately identifies in like a nanosecond that there's a problem with this metaphor of the emotions at the dinner table.
And then... The true self also communicates that I don't want to talk about this with these people because I know exactly what's going to happen.
I've already read the situation.
I already understand the nature of everybody in this room.
I already understand the emotional tone and tenor of the conversation.
I've lived in this country for 30 plus years and so I absolutely for sure know entirely and completely how this is going to go.
And so I don't really want to bother getting involved in this because it's going to be no plus and painful.
So the false self says all of that.
Now the true self says, because the true self is all about the fear and terror of hypocrisy, because the true self is at bottom hypocritical or is a scar tissue formed around hypocrisy of the parents, which also creates hypocrisy of the personality, the false self then says, oh, so you really don't believe these things, do you?
So, it's all just words for you.
The moment that the rubber hits the road and you actually have to talk about it with people, you want to chicken out and run away and keep your mouth shut.
And be stifled, and be stifled just like you were when you were a child.
So, you've got nowhere, these ideas are nothing to you, blah blah blah.
I'm not saying it was that harsh, but it could be and probably was at some level.
And so then, the...
True self says, oh, okay, so if you're thinking of talking to these people about your problems with this metaphor, I'm going to crank up the fear so that I can help you avoid doing something which is going to be self-hurtful.
So, the true self does not engage in false self language wars.
It does if you sort of work at developing yourself and work at having conversations with yourself.
In one form or another, I found writing it like a play with my true self and my false self engaged in a debate was very helpful.
The true self, because it's so buried and so early, is a little bit more mute than that at the beginning of things.
And so the true self is going to say, oh, okay, well, I'm not going to debate with you because that's not part of our consciousness yet.
But what I am going to do is I'm going to try and get you to avoid doing what I know is going to be self-destructive by cranking up the fear.
And then the false self says, ah, you see?
It's fear that's making us not speak.
So we're not only hypocritical, but we're cowardly as well because we won't confront and overcome this fear.
Ah, whatever, whatever. And that's where Christina was at the end of this particular session.
So, what I'm going to say, and we'll obviously talk about this a little bit more this afternoon, I very much doubted I was going to get to the second metaphor, and I might not even, because there's some sensitivities around that that I don't want to get into.
I'll come up with another one.
But... She did not say, I am my own proof.
She did not say, I don't want to talk.
I don't want to talk. I don't feel like talking, so I'm not going to talk.
How do I know that this is a situation that I don't want to talk in or shouldn't talk in?
Well, I don't want to talk. I mean, this is pretty radical, right?
This is a pretty powerful idea.
How do you know the reality of the situation?
You don't sit there and analyze it because that's already happened.
The moment, snap, that Christina heard this metaphor, she judged it, she judged the room, she judged the consequences of speaking out, she came to an emotional evaluation and had a reluctance to speak out.
So, for Christina to say, well, should I speak out or not?
Well, the decision has already been made because she doesn't want to speak out.
She's not a cowardly person.
She's a magnificent soul.
And it would be, I think, and she goes, oh, it's low self-esteem because I don't want to open my mouth and so on.
And I said, no, there's nothing wrong with you.
You've got to not think that there's something wrong with you.
And you'll be fine. There's nothing wrong with your emotional apparatus.
It picked up The situation, the effects of speaking out, immediately and perfectly accurately.
And we validated it using reason by saying, well, okay, if I feel that speaking up would have been any good, how did speaking up work out for me before with relationships where I had almost infinitely more hold and influence?
Well, it didn't really work out so well at all.
So we can logically validate these things, and it's worthwhile checking at the beginning to make sure that you can logically validate these with a relevant prior experience.
But frankly, she was perfectly correct.
And the only reason that she ended up in a situation where she was upset, discombobulated, and out of sorts with herself is because she didn't accept that she was her own proof.
What's the proof that I should not speak?
I don't want to speak. What's the proof that speaking is going to be a self-destructive act in a minor way?
I don't want to speak. I don't want to speak.
I've already understood the situation.
I've analyzed it. I know the effects.
I don't want to speak.
That is the proof of whether or not I should speak.
This is a very important thing for anger as well.
Anger is a tricky one, and you've got to really be rigorous about comparing it with relevant prior experience and proving it logically to begin with.
But once you've validated that, Then you can say, not, somebody's a jerk because they did X, Y, and Z. Right?
Once you've got the hang of how to really work with your emotions, you can say, somebody's a jerk because I feel that they're a jerk.
And I know that this is dangerous stuff.
And I know people are going to say, well, that just means that everything that you feel is true and you're going to become narcissistic and so on.
Well, no. Because if it's genuine true self-feelings, which is why before this I was talking about how to differentiate between true self and false self-feelings, If it's genuine, true self-feelings, then you have already sifted and figured out the evidence, and so your true self is saying this person is a jerk because they've already done jerky things.
You don't need to circle back and say, oh, well, what were those jerky things, and let me compare them to this, that, or the other.
Right? I mean, because you already know.
It's like if you've got arthritis, and you've had it for 10 years, and when your joints ache, you don't say, God, what the hell is that?
What the hell is going on? Do I have a parasite?
Is there an alien invading my joints?
No, you say, oh, my joints are inflamed.
And you don't need to go to the doctor.
Every time you, if you have this condition, you don't have to go to the doctor and say, Doc, it's weird.
My hands are hurting. Giants are killing me.
I don't know what's going on. You get the hang of it, right?
You go to the doctor the first time, right?
So you are your own proof, I think, is a very liberating and important thing.
And it is very much around freedom.
And it's very much around trusting your unconscious, your underbrain, your instincts.
Because they're accurate.
And so rather than having...
When you have a back and forth with yourself, should I, shouldn't I, should I, shouldn't I? I think it's just very important to understand that, first of all, if you're having a back and forth, you shouldn't.
You shouldn't do whatever it is because you need to resolve that for sure.
And you need to figure out what was your first feeling.
Well, Christina's first feeling was irritation.
And then her second feeling was, no, I don't want to talk about it.
And everything after that was just false self-makeup, right?
So I would say that you are your own proof is important.
We'll talk about it a little bit more this afternoon, and I'll give you another example, and hopefully it will help.
Thank you so much for listening. Appreciate the new listeners.
Feel free to sign up for either the one-time donations or $17 and change, a monthly donation.
Really appreciate that. Appreciate the listener feedback, and I will talk to you soon.
▲
Export Selection