All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 28, 2010 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
14:16
1568 State Livestock Farming - Freedomain Radio

Some more examples on how the state treats us as human livestock.

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey, everybody. Hope you're doing well, Steph.
We are off to the mall with Isabella, because all she wants to do is walk, walk, walk.
And she has become less interested in the library and its infinite tool of doodads and house ads.
And now she's only interested in walking because she's learning how to walk.
Which, again, every time she learns a fundamental new skill, it is exciting for her.
As if we, you and I, had learned how to fly.
Wouldn't that be all we wanted to do all day?
And that's the lay of the land.
So, I wanted to talk about an idea that I've been, oh, it has been cooking von Brothing in the back of my brain, lo, these many months, in fact, over 18 months.
And I think it's finally coming to a state where it's usable, and that is, I've used the metaphor, of course, of the state as a livestock farmer.
And I think it's really, really important to explore that metaphor, because I actually don't think it's a metaphor.
Fundamentally, I don't think, I think it's an analogy, it's a direct analogy.
I don't think that it is actually a metaphor.
And so, let's look at what the state does and why and look at it through the harvesting of tax resources, fundamentally tax and obedience resources.
That is what would be necessary to understand.
You can't understand the state if you don't understand why it's doing what it's doing and you can't understand why it's doing what it's doing unless you understand that it's all about the harvesting of tax resources.
So, let's look at some of the basics sort of chronologically.
Now, I was surprised.
It was interesting to me.
It was very interesting to me that healthcare up here in Canada is largely a massive bag of crap and you can't get any help.
We were talking to, Christina and I were talking to a couple when we were in Mexico, who were Canadian.
At the moment, she had a problem with her foot.
And it's basically taken her three years and she still doesn't have the surgery schedule.
It took a year to get a reference.
Sorry, it took a year to find a specialist to then refer to another specialist.
It took a year for that. And now that specialist said you need this operation and she's been waiting more than a year for it.
And it's a problem, right?
I mean, you become really shackled because you're almost like you don't want to leave the country in case you get the call.
Surgery is, you know, in three days kind of thing.
So it really is. And she's been suffering with this foot problem for three years.
It's just, it's a massive bag of contemptible fail.
And yet, and I thought about this when I was in the hospital.
And I've never been, I mean, I've been lucky enough with my health.
I've never actually been in a hospital.
I mean, I had some stitches cut my thumb earlier this year.
No, late last year. But I've never spent a night in a hospital.
I've just been very, very lucky with my health.
I mean, it's not all luck, but obviously a large degree of it is luck.
And yet, we actually got really good care.
When Isabella was being born, I would say we got a 24-hour nurse, just one in to come away.
Now, we had to pay for a private room, and that was sort of ridiculous.
But nonetheless, and it was like $750 for two or three nights in a private room.
It was just crazy. All the taxes we pay, right?
You'd think that they could manage that.
But the care, I will say, was really proactive and really good.
And when you think about that, well, why is it that...
Some old lady is waiting three years to get a surgery to relieve pain in her foot, and yet we're getting really good care when Isabella comes along.
Well, look at it from a resource standpoint.
It profits the state if there are children.
The state needs children in the same way that a livestock farmer needs to breed his cattle.
The state needs children, which is why the state is interested in the health and well-being of the birth of children.
I think that's really, really important.
That helped me to really sort of grasp it.
That a farmer, you know, if the cow is just limping a little bit and is still producing a lot of milk, the farmer is not really going to give a shit, right?
But when the cow has been inseminated and gone through labor and is producing another cow, right, another revenue source, then the farmer is going to call all kinds of vets to We're good to go.
So I think that's something that's really important to understand.
And in socialized countries, to my knowledge, I looked a little bit of this up, that people aren't generally satisfied with the quality of care that they get when they're having their babies.
There are way too many C-sections according to some reports, but nonetheless, the state is very interested and you can't understand the good care around birth unless you understand the livestock management aspect.
Now, the other thing, of course, that occurs is that, you know, reasonably intelligent human beings, who are actually the most productive in many ways of the livestock, do not breed well in captivity.
And as the amount of control goes up, state control and state power goes up in society, You get some significant problems because the more intelligent people say to themselves, well, crap.
I mean, why would I want to have a child?
I mean, even if I do want to have a child, why would I want to have a child?
Because what's going to happen to me?
Well, both myself and my wife are going to have to work.
And because of that...
We're not going to spend very much time with our children.
You know, maybe an hour or two a day or three if you get up crushingly early.
But a couple of hours a day with our kids if we're lucky.
And it's going to add a lot to our stress because we're going to have to arrange for childcare.
It's going to add a lot to our expenses.
So, it's going to be sleepless nights, physical pain, stress, expense.
For what? An hour or two, or maybe three, if we're lucky, with our kid.
And a lot of the time with our kid is going to be, you know, some of the less fun maintenance stuff, you know, like feeding.
Feeding's okay. It's not a lot of fun.
Bathing, okay.
A bit stressful, though, especially when the babies are young, because you've got to make sure they don't slip or whatever.
But, you know, we're not going to be playing patty cake.
A lot of the time that I'm going to spend is going to be dull animal maintenance on the children.
And so, I'll get my weekends and so on, and that'll be fun.
But the cost benefit, if you've got any reasonable brains at all, in a modern statist, 50% taxation, two parents, working country, the arguments for having children, if you've got any kind of rational calculation, the arguments for having children get weaker and weaker.
And so, what does the state do?
Well, There's generally a two-pronged approach.
The first is it will provide some cash incentives for having babies, right?
So, it'll provide some bonuses.
In South Korea, I think they've just recently started giving people off, making sure they go home Wednesdays at 7 p.m.
in order to breed. They will provide in Canada up to a year off.
And you understand, like a year off is pretty sad.
If you're in the public sector, it's really lucrative, but it's pretty sad if you're in the private sector and you sort of get $1,500, I think $1,200 or $1,500 a month.
But you get up to a year where you can't be fired and all this kind of stuff, right?
So they will provide some cash incentives to get the livestock to breed because the cost-benefit of breeding goes down as state power There's less of an enticement to have kids, so the government's going to have to pay you, and that, of course, becomes a vicious circle.
The more they pay people to have children, the more they have to raise taxes, which means the less people want to have children, which means the more you have Pay people to have children, etc.
So, that's the one aspect that they do.
Now, another thing they do that I think is quite interesting, and I'm not saying this goes all the way back to Jane Austen and Samuel Richardson and before, but the other thing is...
The myth of the romantic comedy, right?
The myth of the romantic comedy is something that's a staple, right?
This dream that romantic love, which is a wonderful statist concept, which is not to say there's no such thing as romantic love.
It's just the way that it's portrayed.
And I've been meaning to do a podcast on romantic comedies.
For quite some time, and I will get around to that at some point, so forgive me if I sort of skimp the argument here, but that the sole purpose of life, the sole happiness and joy in life, is not self-actualization, wisdom, education, virtue, courage, all the things which are under your control, but it's meeting somebody you can share your seat with, settle down with, have marriage, have a family, and so on.
And all these romantic comedies are all about, you know, life is nothing until you have somebody who's willing to sleep with you on a regular basis.
And that propaganda...
For essentially procreation is pretty fundamental to a state of society and you can see some very interesting things have occurred in the romantic comedy since the 1940s when Hepburn and Tracey And other actors, there was the strong, tough, competent female.
And now, I mean, it's just ridiculous.
I mean, romantic comedies are like two metaphorical steps above pedophilia because the women are so retarded and childlike that it's hard to imagine that any man of any self-esteem would want to end up with somebody as neurotic and insecure and childish as Bridget Jones or the heroine in the Sophie Kinsella novel Shopaholic and so on.
I mean, they are They're functionally retarded and essentially childish, childlike.
Again, a bit of an insult to children, but they have nothing.
It's the Betty Boop thing, right?
It is sort of functional pedophilia because it's a child in a woman's body.
They're always physically clumsy and oops, and, you know, titter-headed and all.
I mean, it's just ridiculous, and this is a long way.
This is not really supposed to be the fruit of feminism, but what it does is it encourages men to want to procreate because it portrays women as, you know, simpletons with vaginas, right?
Oh, no problem. You're always going to be in charge and so on, right?
That's ridiculous, of course, but it's a common stereotype and myth, so common that it's really, really hard to see.
So you want to continually pump out the propaganda, right?
Around sexualization and the joys of romantic love and marriage is the most beautiful thing and so on.
You want to have that propaganda so that your cattle will breed.
You have to kind of give them that.
So after sort of marriage and birth, you have, of course, you need to get a hold of the children as soon as possible.
And up here in Canada, because working families, which means enslaved families, right?
Working families are very, very under the gun as far as childcare goes.
We were just about ...
Christina and I took Isabella to a play center yesterday where they have like rabbits and budgies and mice and slides and it's a great deal of fun and she really likes it there.
It was like Grandmother Central.
And I was chatting with one of the grandmothers and saying, man, this is, I said, you know, I'm 43 and it's a lot of work to keep up with Isabella.
I mean, kudos to you.
And she's like, oh, it's exhausting.
But what can I do?
My kids have to work. So I have to take care of my grandkids.
I don't want strangers taking care of them.
And she said, I'm sort of, I'm right in the middle, right?
I'm like, the circle is complete.
I mean, I got a wheelchair in the backseat of my car.
I have a wheelchair for my own aging mother and I have two car seats for my grandchildren who I have.
I think three or four days a week.
And that's true. It's brutal on the grandparents.
I mean, I'm looking forward to be a grandparent someday.
It's going to be a lot of fun. But it's a full-time gig.
I feel somewhat creaky at the moment.
I can't imagine in sort of 25 years what that's going to be like.
So it's brutal on the grandparents and I think creates a lot of sort of family tension.
And we know a lot of people where the grand...
The grandmother is the de facto childcare provider, or the grandmother and grandfather.
It's mostly the grandmother. And that's really rough intergenerationally, familially.
And it really is very tragic for the parents who have the inconvenience and expense, which are significant.
The expense, not so bad.
The inconvenience of having children is monstrous.
You have no idea. And the only compensation, and it is by far an effective compensation for the inconvenience, is the joys of the time that you spend with them, watching them grow and teaching and learning.
And if you don't get that much during the day because you're at work and they're doing all the functional shit, well, it's just not a very good deal.
And of course, it's bad for the progress of parenting, right?
To have the grandparents who come from a more primitive parenting time And parenting the grandchildren.
It's skipping a generation of at least some progress and enlightenment.
And I could see this with the grandmothers.
They had a very, very archaic style of parenting at this place.
You know, just barking orders and afraid of conflict and overbearing and no interaction, just management and don't fall and barking, you know, yelling orders and so on.
And you could see the effect on the kids.
They were all, you know, hyper and dissociated.
And one of the girls just pushed Isabella over to get past, and Isabella sort of went spinning on the ground, literally.
And the girl didn't pause or stop or turn back or apologize.
Anyway, we can get into that another time, but...
So, you have to sort of sell all this stuff, and then you have to get a hold of the children as soon as possible.
So, here in Canada, sorry to come back to my original point, here in Canada, they're setting up daycare for babies, right?
Basically, the state will get them after a year.
And that is, of course, very important.
Of course, it doesn't cost the state anything.
They're just taxed or going to debt. And it's something that's desperately needed by people because, you know, more state power always solves the problems of earlier state power.
And so the government will get its hands on the children even before the age of five.
And whether that's coincidental or not with the new recognition that by five the personalities largely form so the government wants them younger, I think that is something that is perhaps coincidental.
I'm certainly not saying it's consciously planned, but nonetheless, it's there.
Well, you want to get a hold of the kids as quickly as possible because the most effective and productive human livestock are those who self-attack, are those who self-enslave, as I talk about in RTR. And those children, sorry, those people, you have to get them early.
You have to propagandize them hard and early.
About the virtue of state and patriotism towards the society and the necessity of taxes and the friendliness of police and, you know, all of the inevitable statist garbage that is sort of jammed down our throats when we're children to the point where eventually, I guess, like Jesus' way for us, it starts to taste good.
And so you will see an ever-increasing or an ever-encroaching governmental involvement with the young.
▲
Export Selection