Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

Nov. 20, 2011 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux

02:27:55

2038 Freedomain Radio Sunday Call in Show, 20 November 2011

How would anarchy deal with evil bosses? Who would produce intellectual goods without intellectual property rights? And a dream with two Stef's in it!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hi everybody, it's Stefan Molyneux from Free Domain Radio.
	11-20-20-11.
	That's just... that's just freaky, man!
	The music is reversible, but time is not!
	Turn back! Turn back!
	I hope you're doing very well.
	We are going to skip my scintillating intro with the flashbots, bat wings, and disco dance moves, and go straight to the callers.
	Ladies and James, we have a caller on the line, if I am right.
	Looks like this gentleman...
	Oh, no. Okay, so you, Mr.
	JJ, go ahead and unmute yourself and have a chat.
	You're up. Hello there.
	Hi. Hi.
	I'm going by the alias John Johnson.
	Is your middle name Big?
	No, it's not, but that would be clever.
	I should incorporate that into my anonymous alias.
	So, I guess...
	How formal is this?
	I haven't prepared anything.
	I just had... What are you...
	Sorry, what are you wearing?
	Wow, it's that informal, huh?
	I'm wearing a smile and a stiff breeze.
	So, please, go ahead. So...
	I've just... I really like free market anarchism, and specifically anarchism in general.
	I've been drawn to it for a number of years and read a bunch of books, mostly coming from the more, I guess you could call it traditional anarchist tradition, like Goldman and that sort of thing.
	Emma Goldman, for those who don't know.
	Anyway, go on. And...
	The problem that I come up with, and I'm having a hard time finding a satisfactory answer, is how do you enforce ethics, like ethical behavior, and how is that incentivized in large scales?
	Alright, that's a great question.
	That's a great question. I'm going to Question you, because it's more fun for me that way.
	Okay. So, if ethics is enforced, is it really ethics?
	I... Well, the enforcement, I guess, would be unethical, but if you're...
	No, no, sorry. Not that it's unethical, but if you...
	To enforce ethics, because there's two realms of ethics, at least in the way that I look at it, right?
	So there's... There's ethics, what I call virtue, which is positive actions, like honesty, right?
	And that's sort of positive virtue.
	And then there's immorality or evil, which is, you know, shooting, raping, killing, whatever, right?
	And, I mean, the way that I've worked it out in my free book, Universally Preferable Behavior, Irrational Proof of Secular Ethics, available at freedomainradio.com forward slash free, free, free, free.
	It's that you are justified in using force to defend yourself against the initiation of force, but you can't shoot someone for just lying to you about something fairly inconsequential.
	And so I just, I sort of want to understand what it means when you say enforcing virtue.
	Okay. What is it? Do you mean like the positive virtues like kindness, honesty, compassion, consideration, integrity, or do you mean just like people running at each other, the chainsaws?
	No, it's a little bit more subtle than that.
	Just like... It seems like in the business world, being an asshole can bring you pretty great rewards if you really stick it to people and you put unreasonable expectations on people.
	That will encourage people to be more productive.
	Can I give you an example?
	Just to make sure we're on the same page.
	I'm plowing through this biography Of Steve Jobs at the moment?
	Yeah, so along those lines, yeah.
	Right, so at the very beginning, when he was working for Atari, he was asked by the head of Atari to design a breakout game, and he was not the greatest programmer or engineer in the world, so he turned to his good friend Wozniak, and he said that it had to be done in four days.
	Now, this wasn't true.
	It wasn't true that it had to be done in four days.
	But Steve Jobs wanted to go apple picking at a sort of farm orchard slash commune that he was involved in.
	And so he basically lied and Wozniak was up four days straight finishing this thing when there was actually no time pressure or requirement to do so.
	Is that the sort of stuff you mean?
	Exactly. Right, right, right.
	So that's lying, clearly.
	That's misleading someone. And, um, I'm not sure how that needs to be enforced.
	Like, what would you suggest?
	Meaning, how do we, like, how do you incur, how do you incentivize people, how do you remove the incentive to put those sorts of unreasonable demands on people?
	Well, volunteerism, right?
	Sure, like, but for example, at my place of work, um, there, my, I have to...
	Sorry, we just kind of, we just kind of skipped over that, as if that was an obvious answer, but it certainly may not be as obvious to everyone in the call.
	Yeah, but here's more what I'm – I guess – Okay, you go ahead with your example.
	At my place of work, I work there voluntarily.
	I get paid decently.
	But I have a particular supervisor that I'm not particularly fond of because he puts unreasonable demands and gets disproportionately upset about minor – It seems like the product of that is good.
	Besides having a stressed out workforce, things are profitable.
	I guess the question is more about the profit motive and how do you avoid people that are, in more general terms, not in my specific case, but as a society, How would the extreme actions or unethical actions, just not nice actions, be incentivized?
	Well, I'm not sure I understand the problem, so let me put it to you sort of another way, right?
	Let's say that some guy is a real jerk to the women he's going out with, right?
	Like, he tells them that he's going to go and visit his sister, and he's actually going out and having another date, right?
	He's double dating, he's late, he's, you know, he just calls up for booty calls.
	He kind of treats them pretty badly, right?
	And what would be the solution to that problem?
	Well, I mean, I guess the guy would eventually get caught or something like that, or you just...
	Yeah, but then he just goes on to some other woman, right?
	Yeah, sure. I mean this guy is free to do whatever he likes.
	It's just how do you – how are the victims saved from these sorts of people or how are their incentives so that that sort of behavior is not – isn't profitable.
	Like it's profitable to be a jerk is what I'm trying to say.
	Yeah, look, if you have some aspect that certain women really want, right?
	So let's say that you're just some chiseled, godlike-looking fella who's a Calvin Klein underwear model and has acts that you could bomb the Death Star through and so on, then certain women may overlook your cheerless behavior for the sake of arm candy, for the sake of Being seen with such a good looking guy, and of course men do the same thing with women as well, right?
	And so the only way that I can think of to challenge this kind of behavior is to, you know, so let's talk about the women, right?
	So women, there's some guy who's a good looking guy, but he's a real tool.
	Well, the only thing that I could suggest that would help This kind of behavior would be to raise girls with such a high level of self-esteem and such an expectation of being treated well that when this guy treated them badly, they'd just have nothing to do with him.
	Or they'd see straight ahead, straight up front, they would see very clearly that this guy was a tool, coasting on his look, and they would simply reject.
	Such a possibility, thus forming the guy, just in a sense, requiring that the guy reform his actions if he wants to be with any kind of women, like any kind of quality women.
	So the more quality women with high self-esteem that there are in the world, the less that jerks will be able to get away with being jerks.
	Because, you know, I mean, a woman has to be raised pretty badly in order to accept abusive behavior.
	So, you know, raise girls well, and these guys won't be able to get away.
	with the kind of crap that they get away with.
	Now, in terms of the workforce, the same thing would have to occur, I think, right?
	So you would have to raise people with such a high level of self-esteem that they would not be tempted to work for somebody who was abusive and therefore the managers would have to figure stuff out that was different.
	I mean, to take a silly example, this is an extreme example, but I think it's pretty relevant.
	When you were a slave master, right?
	You were a slave master in the Old South before slavery was, well, before the government stopped enforcing slavery.
	You could scream at and whip your slaves and this and that with impunity, and then once the slaves were free, you couldn't do that to your factory workers anymore, right?
	At least not really.
	It would be pretty rare. And so then you would have to adapt to that new environment because you were just in a different environment.
	And the only way to change the environment in the long run is through raising.
	I mean, I don't just mean like we have to start with kids and there's no other way because, I mean, you have to start with people who are Parents or who are going to be parents and convince them to use peace and respect in raising their kids and so on.
	And in this way, you know, assholes would be exposed.
	Like, trawls on the internet only survive because people don't see what they're up to or they've sort of been blinded to it through prior traumas.
	And so the way that you deal with trawling on the internet is simply to give people the tools and the self-esteem and the confidence to recognize that You know, when someone's being a troll and nobody would engage and interact with that person.
	So I think that's the way to do it.
	Okay, so it seems like that being a jerk would be less profitable in a society of You know, for individuals because, you know, they would be raised or everybody would have, there would be enough people that would hold, you know, not being a jerk as a value that, you know, they wouldn't be able to get away with it.
	They just wouldn't be able to find workers or whatever the case may be.
	Well, it would, sorry, but it wouldn't just be employees, right?
	It would also be customers, right?
	So, if somebody's a jerk, then...
	co-workers, they're a jerk to their customers, they're a jerk to everyone.
	So, I mean, they're not even going to get into that position because someone has to be promoted and someone has to do the promoting.
	And if somebody promotes a jerk, then somebody is a jerk, right?
	So it's endemic within the whole system when this kind of behavior is going on.
	And so if you have some, you hire somebody who's a jerk, A, you'll fire them.
	And B, obviously, since you're firing them, you're not going to be promoting them to positions of power.
	Because being a jerk works, in a way, only with traumatized people, right?
	Thank you.
	It only works with traumatized people.
	And in the same way that whipping only works for slaves.
	And so you raise people who aren't traumatized and being a jerk is going to be economically unproductive.
	Because you won't be able to get people to work for this guy.
	Interesting. Also, sorry, the other thing that I would imagine, I would anticipate is that if I wanted to go and work someplace, I would want to go and find out what this boss is like, right?
	So I'd go to the company and say, huh, okay, that's interesting.
	So this guy is going to be my boss, which means he's going to have power and authority over me and so on.
	And, you know, I mean, I got a funny sense of him maybe during the interview, but I just want to double check.
	You know, I mean, if you go and buy a $50 headset, sometimes you can have to run through a credit check.
	If you're buying it on credit.
	And so I would simply go to the company and say, I would like to see the ratings that the employees have given this manager over the past couple of years and the comments that has been delivered about this manager.
	And if the company refused to give me those, I just wouldn't work for the company.
	I mean, just wouldn't. Because, I mean, obviously, right?
	And if the company gives me the reports and it's like, oh, this guy's great...
	I love coming to work. He's enthusiastic.
	He's positive. He's exciting.
	He's motivating. I'd be like, yeah, let me go.
	Put me in coach. I'm ready to play.
	And of course, if he's a jerk and so on.
	So the information availability, particularly through the internet, is radicalized.
	The only reason it hasn't completely radicalized society is because there are so many government laws preventing the dissemination of information.
	But that would be another way that I would see it working.
	Can I ask another question?
	I think you just did.
	What do you recommend about political action?
	The most pertinent example I was thinking about is this recent bill, the Stop Online Privacy Act.
	Do you recommend people getting involved in that in any way?
	Or how do you recommend...
	I mean, I'm not getting involved in it.
	I mean, I think it's a contemptible and vile piece of legislation.
	But I don't, you know...
	I mean, petitions to the government is all kinds of nonsense, right?
	I mean, I would like for Amazon to stop selling the child abuse manuals that masquerade as Christian child-raising books.
	I signed that petition because that's private.
	But no, I mean...
	The reason... I mean, because it's really important to understand the reason why this is going on.
	The reason why this is going on is because Congress is so unpopular.
	And Washington and the government, particularly the federal government, are so astoundingly unpopular that what they're do...
	What they're terrified of is the media turning against them.
	Right? Which means that...
	They are portrayed as, you know, endless villains and not just the people.
	Because, you know, the system doesn't mind individuals being portrayed as villains because you've got the bad apple, blah, blah, blah.
	But when the system itself is portrayed as evil and unsustainable, unsurvivable, I mean, they're very afraid of that.
	And artists have enormous power in society.
	Most people get their education about the world, such as it is, through art.
	And so they're very afraid.
	That the artists are going to turn against them.
	And so what they do is...
	I mean, this is a continual process.
	It's been going on as long as human society's been going on.
	You know, the guy who could paint the king in a cave 20,000 years ago as a noble He-Man warrior with a big swinging pendulum penis, he was given three extra helpings of gruel at dinner time.
	And so they're handing out...
	The right to use state violence to protect their intellectual property.
	And in return, they're going to expect favorable portrayals in the media.
	So that's the deal that's going on.
	It doesn't have anything to do with should we protect intellectual property or jobs that are lost.
	I mean, that's all nonsense.
	If the government cared about jobs that were lost, they wouldn't be threatening people with five years in jail for Do-it-yourself tooth whitening treatments in malls.
	If they were interested in saving jobs, they would loosen the stranglehold of public and private sector unions on productivity.
	I mean, they're not interested in saving jobs.
	They're not interested in intellectual property, for heaven's sakes.
	I mean, intellectual property in the government is a joke.
	What they're interested in is maintaining the allegiance of the artistic classes.
	So, you know, they'll give them, they'll say, hey, you can use Our violent power to smike down your enemies, and in return, we expect the quid pro quo of portraying us as noble defenders of heroic property rights.
	And that's exactly what we're going to have.
	So signing a petition isn't going to change that arrangement.
	I mean, they'll just find some other way to do it, which may be even more heinous.
	So, no, I think strike at the root.
	Don't trim the leaves. Okay.
	Another question that I had is, where do you speak about your ideas regarding parenting?
	Oh, I have a, I mean, you can do a search, obviously, through the website for parenting, but I have, actually, lo and behold, I'll just get it for you, a feed with my parenting podcasts on it.
	So if you go to freedomainradio.com, radio.com, click on podcasts or go to forward slash podcasts.
	There is just below FDR total combined feed, there's a philosophical parenting feed.
	Okay. Do you have – or do you plan rather on writing a book on parenting?
	I just know some people that are – I don't have any kids at this time, but I do know people that are – find you – your work's influential that would like to see a book I guess about it.
	Do you have any plans? Well, if I don't have any plans, sorry, I don't have any plans at the moment to write a book.
	But of course, if this is something that people want, I will do it.
	I am, you know, I am market driven.
	So if you want me to write a book on parenting, my experience of parenting, my thoughts about parenting, I would be absolutely happy to do so.
	I would be honored and thrilled. But, you know, I'm going to just wait and see what the kind of response is for people who'd be interested in that.
	Okay. Well, thank you very much.
	You've been a great help.
	Is there anybody else waiting?
	I believe we do have somebody waiting, but I think we have time if you want to ask another quick question.
	Do you have any tips on how to deal with people that are in authority over you that you're not particularly appreciative of their behavior towards you?
	I don't want to say they're abusive, but along those lines.
	Look, you just have to not be afraid.
	You have to not be afraid. I mean, look, if they're just flat-out sadists, then you just got to try and get out, right?
	But if they're just like, okay, so Steve Jobs could obviously be a colossal jerk at work.
	That having been said, if people stood up to Steve Jobs, he respected and promoted them.
	And... There was an instance, I can't remember the details, where he had said, it's going to be this way.
	And the engineers didn't agree, and they tried to change his mind, but he insisted.
	And then they ended up doing it the way that they wanted, and his way turned out to be impossible.
	And when they revealed this, he thanked them for not listening to him and for proving him wrong and so on.
	And every year on the Mac project in the 80s, every year someone would get an award for standing up to Steve Jobs and so on.
	And the woman who finally did it after a year of cowing down before him...
	He found it very empowering.
	She gained his respect and then he ended up promoting her to director of manufacturing across all of Apple.
	My experience has been you just have to stand up to people.
	I had a very intimidating boss when I got my very first programming gig at a trading company.
	I was all kinds of at sea.
	It was a trading floor. I didn't know much about it.
	I was working in COBOL, which I didn't know much about, on a tandem operating system, which I knew virtually nothing, or actually knew nothing about.
	And I had to sort of, you know, sink or swim, go in and figure it all out.
	And it was my first professional job.
	And I felt all kinds of anxious about it.
	And I had a boss who'd be like, in my office now!
	And you're like, you know, your balls would shrink up, you know, pretty much where your cheeks are.
	And you'd look like a chipmunk trying to store his nuts literally for the winter.
	And And it would be just like, here, I've got a memo for you.
	So he would use these kinds of tricks.
	Anyway, I just sort of decided I just couldn't go to work and live in anxiety about this guy.
	And he would sort of give you really tough assignments and then come in every couple of hours saying, is it done yet?
	Come on! What's the matter with you?
	Anyway, so Jim, his name was, so eventually...
	The fourth time he came in that day when I was working on a pretty tough project, I stood up and I smiled at him and I said, Jim, Jim, listen, let me tell you, I promise you, I promise you, when I am done, you will be the very, very first person I tell.
	I'm not going to go get a coffee.
	I'm not going to go down for lunch.
	I'm not going to go to the bathroom.
	Even if I have to go to the bathroom, go straight to your office and tell you I am done.
	And that, think of how much time that's going to save you to do whatever else it is you do with your time.
	Anyway, so he just looked at me and his sort of jaw dropped and then he sort of turned to his secretary and said, all right, Debbie, call up fire.doc.
	I've got a letter to print out for this guy.
	Like he was pretending he was going to fire me for all that.
	But after that, our relations kind of normalized and so on.
	But there are people who will try and bully you and it's almost like a relief for them if you stand up for them because you're extinguishing the worst devils of their nature.
	It was, you know, that's sort of a story.
	Yeah. And if you stand up for someone and then they just turn all kinds of sadistic and trolley on you, then you've just got to hold your breath and get out when you can.
	That's sort of my thought.
	I like it. I like it.
	Thank you very much. I will continue listening, but my questions are exhausted at this point.
	And don't worry. If it gets you fired, there are lots of listeners who will let you live in their bed.
	All right, good stuff.
	Thank you.
	Hello, Stefan.
	It's Robert.
	We spoke about a month ago about property rights and land, and you had some great insights and helped me understand better about how it is one owns their land.
	And there was a request in the chat room to have us re-clarify the basic points of that, and if I'm not mistaken, it was basically that you are an owner of yourself, that when you create – when you take anything from the environment to make it into that when you create – when you take anything from the environment to make it into some object or food or whatever, then you're creating
	And that land exists solely for the productive value that it has, what it can produce for you.
	Ownership of land, unless you can do something with it, is irrelevant.
	That it's only about what you can do with the land.
	So would that be a fair assessment of what we've discussed, if you recall?
	All right. Well then, my question now for this thread is...
	Identity rights. Let's say for the sake of argument that I come up with an invention that I can point at somebody and go, and poof, I've created an exact duplicate of that person down to their brain chemistry and who they are and their identity and everything.
	It's identical. It's just an identical person.
	The reason why I do this is because, well, I'm a movie producer and I don't want to pay Tom Hanks all the money that I'm paying him anymore.
	Now I've got two Tom Hanks's and they have to compete for it.
	The same amount of money.
	So I've reduced the monopoly problem of having Tom Hanks as being a monopoly.
	Now there's competition, so I've reduced my costs.
	Would you say that there is a violation of rights there?
	I have no idea.
	Why are we talking about something that's impossible, at least for the foreseeable future?
	Well, it's to extrapolate to intellectual property that a person's obviously self-ownership and the productivity of their work from their own lives, they're spending their own live energy to create something.
	Obviously owner of those physical objects, but in the case of mental objects or things that can be copied readily, there seems to be a disconnect where the creative process and the investment of one's sweat and life into the creation of this object simply because it can be copied is no longer valuable.
	So if we were to go to the root of, you know, ownership, which is the person, the self, then would being able to copy a person have some sort of innate violation of some sort of right?
	Well, I mean, I'd rather just, I don't know about the sort of instant cloning and all that.
	I mean, I think that if you want to talk about intellectual property rights, I certainly would be happy to, but I'm not sure that the Cloning Tom Hanks with all of his memories and skills intact is a good way to talk about things.
	Well, I'm using it as a...
	I'm trying to, you know, boil it down to the starting principles that we work from.
	Let me sort of...
	Sorry, I'll explain to you the way that I see property rights in the intellectual realm shaking out, and then you can tell me if it sort of makes any sense.
	Because for me, if things are too abstract, I find that even if I can draw a principle from it, it's hard to move it.
	So let's say I write a book.
	I write a book. And I want to get paid for writing a book.
	Because, I mean, if I write a book on philosophy, I've invested 60,000, 70,000 hours studying philosophy and I invest another...
	A couple of months writing and editing a book and to create a comfort or whatever.
	So I would like to get paid for that.
	And so the book is sitting on my computer and I'm certainly not getting paid for it.
	Now, it certainly is true that if I go put it up on some website, then if somebody reads it, they don't take away my copy of the book.
	And if I create a PDF and somebody emails it, I don't end up with no PDF. And that's different, of course, from a car.
	If somebody takes my car, I don't have the car.
	But if somebody takes my book in an electronic format or photocopies it or whatever or lends it to somebody else, then I don't lose anything.
	So, I mean, I accept that argument.
	I think that's valid and so on.
	But the way that I think property rights in intellectual property will work out is...
	That there's going to be competing models for financing, right?
	And all that has to happen is the public awareness of the needs of artists needs to, I guess, generally increase, which means artists need to serve the people a little bit more than they serve the powers that be, which means stop singing about love and loss and heartbreak and going out to a disco and start singing about taxes and virtue and freedom and, you know, let's get a bit more fucking activism into our music and make people feel a little bit more grateful for To artists.
	Because artists at the moment are massive shiny sports like disco ball, empty headed, dance move nonsense, pretty shiny nothingness that distracts people from the exploitations and predations and degradations of those in power.
	And artists need to be a little bit more with the...
	You know, clanking, steamy balls of 60s radicalism juicing up their snare kits.
	That would be what artists need to do.
	And if artists do that, if they do actually start standing for the people and singing about shit that matters, and making movies about stuff that matters, rather than, you know, can two people, like, hook up and still be friends?
	Like, does it confuse...
	I mean, come on! I mean, is that really the big problem facing the youth of today?
	No. So, once artists start to Help the world rather than use their talents to distract and empty out the world, then I think people will be a little bit less likely to want to rip off artists.
	That's my particular feeling.
	Again, I can't prove that.
	That's my thoughts and feelings about it.
	But there are two ways that you can try and get money for your stuff.
	You can try and control the digital universe and you can put digital rights management on and you can try and make sure that stuff can't be copied and shared and this and that and the other.
	And that's all impossible. It's completely impossible.
	You can just put a line recorder on whatever's playing and record something in a non-DRM format and upload it and everyone can have it.
	You can't stop it. You can't stop copying.
	I mean, I wrestled with this for a long time, both with my podcasts and with my books.
	But podcasts, I'd originally thought, well, I'll charge 10 cents a podcast.
	I'll... And I recognized that not only would that increase people's cynicism about what I was doing, which might be rightly so, but it would also simply promote people to copy my stuff and put it out there on torrents and DVDs and whatever.
	And so then I would neither have the 10 cents nor the respect of giving things away for free.
	So I chose not to. It was a tougher decision for me to start giving books away for free because I'm old relative to a lot of people on the internet and I'm just used to the old school.
	I sort of challenged myself and said, well, if the books are free, then I don't have to spend nearly as much money on advertising, and therefore, therefore, therefore.
	So it was a good decision for me.
	So the model is that you try and control things, and you can legitimately and legally do that, I think, even in a free society, right?
	So you can have...
	A contract, right?
	That 56-page Apple contract that I think nobody but one lawyer has and somebody trying to fall asleep has read.
	So you click on agree and then you're bound by that contract with the music that you download from Apple or wherever.
	And you can do that, and then you can chase people all over the internet, if you want, trying to get them to cough up cash and threaten them and bully them.
	And all that will happen in the long run is you'll piss off and alienate your customers.
	I mean, that's sort of inevitable.
	But, sorry, sorry, let me just say, the other model for payment, and that's perfectly, you can make a contract with anyone.
	I can have a contract with you that says, if I hand you this flower, right, you...
	We cannot eat this flour.
	We can put that down in writing and we can make that contract.
	A contract, I mean, it's obviously a nonsense example, but you can make a contract about anything as long as two people legitimately sign it.
	And so if I sell a book and say, you can't redistribute this book, you can't lend it to your friends, well, you know, I don't know that I can bind somebody else I guess they'd be in receipt of stolen property or something if you handed them a book that I'd written.
	And you can try all of that. That's whack-a-mole.
	And it's really unenforceable.
	And I don't think in a free society without the weight, power, and might of the state would be sustainable.
	The other option is to do the donation-based model.
	And that's pretty good.
	You can, you know, authors only get, you know, what, 6%, 8%, 10% of the cover price.
	So it would be great to be able to download a book and have, you know, halfway through the book, have an ad screen that says click here to instantaneously send $1.50 to the author.
	Yeah, fantastic. Great.
	And that is sustainable.
	And I've proven that and lots of other people have proven that.
	And I think that's... Yeah, absolutely.
	It is. It's horrible. Well, I guess it's more about industries where There is a huge amount of research cost to development, and then the copying of a drug, let's say for example, is relatively inexpensive once the drug is actually created, but the research and development of it is extraordinarily expensive.
	The way I'm perceiving dealing with the drug thing, well, let's say you make a contract that says, all right, if you're going to receive this bottle of pills, you have to sign this contract that says that you will not reverse engineer the drug and make a copy.
	Well, it's fairly unenforceable.
	At some point, somebody will get their hands on a pill and then do that and reverse engineer it and start pumping out the...
	The copy. And at a significantly lower cost because they don't have to recoup their investment of research and development.
	So the financial possibility of a drug company being viable is almost non-existent at that point.
	Well, sorry, but there's tons of things you can do about that in a free society, right?
	So let's say that you have a bunch of big pharmaceutical companies in a free society.
	I mean, they wouldn't be nearly as big as they are now because the state wouldn't be handing over children for them to inject with horrible drugs all the time.
	But what they would do is they would all get together, I would assume, and pool their resources in R&D and then share the results and then see who would be best to market with, you know, marketing or packaging or, you know, the efficiency of their manufacturing and distribution process.
	That's one possibility. Now, somebody else could then come and reverse engineer that, but that's not the end of the world because what you want to do to compete with this kind of, I don't know, copying, to compete with it, You simply need to up your quality.
	You simply need to up your quality.
	So, one of the reasons people will be frightened about buying generic drugs is that the generic drugs would not have the same kind of assurance of quality control in the production, right?
	I don't agree with that. Well, no, you wouldn't know that for sure if it's smaller.
	It's a possibility, right? So I'm just saying that you would focus on quality, right?
	So you would say, you know, our drugs come with a guarantee that if you suffer adverse effects, X, Y, and Z, we will pay for all medical expenses, we would give you a million dollars, we will whatever.
	And we guarantee that all of our...
	I'm sorry, go ahead. The copier could do the same thing.
	So, I mean, that's a non-point, you know, adding...
	Sorry, let me just interrupt you for a second here.
	Do you have business experience in the R&D world or the entrepreneurial world?
	I've done some unusual programming and I've had my material copied, yes.
	Okay, so when you say immediately that the other company could do the same thing...
	They could offer the assurances, they could make the claims and basically what it comes down to is if you have a very well-established marketing system and the company that has the best The most well-established marketing system and customer loyalty program or perception is going to be the victor, not the company that spends money on research.
	Sorry, but by this argument, there should be no garages that repair cars that aren't owned by major manufacturers, right?
	Sorry, there should only be those garages.
	So I have a Volvo, right?
	And my Volvo is 13 and a half years old, and it's getting kind of creaky, and it needs some money put into it.
	And I can either go to the Volvo shop, which seems to be quite expensive, or I can go to some generic shop, right?
	Now, there are times when I'll go to the Volvo shop and there are times when I'll go to the generic shop.
	I sort of have my choice. And I won't sort of get into all of the details about why I'll make those decisions.
	But both business models are flourishing, even though the sort of off-market repair shops are cheaper.
	Yeah, but that's... That's because we have...
	I mean, you have to admit that you're talking about a fairly interfered with environment.
	You know, the government interferes with all sorts of things in this particular example that you're giving.
	So I don't think that it's a fair comparison.
	All right, let's take another example if you don't like that.
	So think of the fashion world.
	There's no IP in the fashion world, right?
	Right. Great.
	Right. So in the fashion world, if I design some, you know, flaming zoot suit of puppy ejecting death, Exactly.
	Absolutely. Well, isn't that exactly what I said about the people who are manufacturing drugs with the R&D? They're going to have great marketing.
	They're also going to have great quality control because the thing you hear about the knockoff Hermes handbags is that they're low quality, right?
	Okay, let's compare A and B. Company A has great marketing, great quality control.
	Company B has great marketing, great quality control, and a lot of expenses for research.
	Company A is going to own Company B every time.
	So every time you've got, like, this is empirical proof that you've got?
	Well, logistically, I mean, how can you compete when you have the additional expense without having your competitor have that same expense?
	Because, my friend, human beings do not act only on economic interest.
	They respond to marketing, if I'm not mistaken.
	I mean, it's a significant...
	Look, I mean, look, if I had a business model, like let's just say that there was no such thing as tipping in restaurants, right?
	And I came forward and I said, okay, I've got a business model here.
	We're going to start paying our waiters half what they make.
	And in return, the customers are going to voluntarily make up the wages.
	Okay. What would you say? I think it's a perfectly legitimate plan if you want to try that.
	In fact, I thought of an idea of opening a restaurant and not having any waiters or waitresses and offering anybody who would voluntarily like to do services, you know, live entirely off of their tips and not pay anybody anything as far as wait staff.
	Right, so people don't respond just to economic incentives, right?
	So, for instance, people tip waiters even in restaurants where they're never going to return because that's a kind thing to do, that's the right thing to do, so to speak, and they want to show appreciation for a job well done and all that kind of stuff, right?
	Well, yes, that's true.
	I don't see the application in this example, I mean in this situation, but Well, so, I mean, if I was a big pharmaceutical company, the first thing that I'd really want to do is make sure that everyone understood that if they go generic, they will get fewer drugs in the future.
	And I would make that clear.
	And what I would do, remember, of course, in a free society, insurance companies would do this, right?
	Would be the ones who would likely be somewhat responsible for drug costs, right?
	So I would go to the insurance companies and I would say, look, If you go generic, you will save, according to your statistics and my calculations, X amount of dollars this year.
	Let's say 100 million dollars this year.
	However, the drugs that we introduce save 25 million dollars every year.
	If you go generic, we will only be able to introduce one new drug a year instead of five.
	And so you'll You'll save 75 million dollars or whatever, but you will cost...
	Sorry, let me finish, please. In the long run, you will end up spending a lot more if you don't support the R&D for these.
	And here are the drugs we have in development.
	Here's our projected cost savings and so on.
	And I mean, just to take an example, right?
	I mean, insulin obviously saves a huge amount of money every year for, you know, millions and millions of people.
	And so you would go to the insurance companies and say, well, you know, you obviously want to be around for the long term.
	And so we want you to, you know, obviously some people, people below a certain income, absolutely pay generic.
	We, you know, we're fine with that.
	But we, you know, if you don't pay for any R&D, then you are going to start losing money in the long run.
	I mean, that's, you know, I'm just taking this off the top of my head, but you could certainly make a very effective case for that.
	I understand that but it tends to depend upon a populace that has foresight instead of immediate gratification and that tends to not be the case.
	I'm sorry, you're saying that people don't have foresight?
	Well, not when it comes to their individual momentary decisions and when it comes to when they go to the store to buy a bottle of aspirin, they're going to go with the one that costs the least for the most product.
	I'm sorry, what you're saying is that right now there's only one product in every category and that is the cheapest one.
	In other words, there's no such thing as a Maserati or a Rolls-Royce or anything other than...
	There's a difference between those two.
	We're talking about two things that are identical in function.
	Now, there are some people who will choose to buy Excedrin because...
	They've grown up having Excedrin.
	They've been indoctrinated into the Excedrin lifestyle.
	They have a positive perception of the brand name Excedrin because of a marketing strategy that worked.
	But the people that have never heard of either are going to go with the one that's least expensive.
	The point is, is that if...
	Sorry, let me just give you something to counter that.
	I'm sorry to interrupt, but I think they've done taste tests where generic colas are...
	People can't tell the difference between generic colas and Coca-Cola, right?
	But generic colas are much cheaper.
	Well, actually, I would say that there are some differences, but let's just assume that the taste is exactly identical.
	Well, I'm not saying it's exactly identical.
	I'm just saying that people can't tell the difference.
	Sorry, go ahead. Let me finish my thought.
	Okay, so just for the sake of argument, we've got an identical formula for Coke.
	Okay, and you've got Coke there, and you've got no-name brand Coke here.
	People are going to choose Coke because of the marketing that Coke did.
	If no-name brand instead had focused all of their...
	All their money in advertising and had a huge campaign that made their product line be very well desirable, like, let's say, Apple.
	A new product comes out called Mountain Dew.
	And there's this other product called iMountain Dew.
	And iMountain Dew, because it's got the I in front of it, seems to have a following and ends up beating out Mountain Dew, even though the company that developed Mountain Dew spent, oh, let's say $100 billion on development of this program, this product.
	The marketing is what's going to cause the person to go to the product.
	And whether it's marketing on we have safe products, or whether it's we contribute to defending the country, or we contribute to helping poor children.
	whatever those different marketing techniques are, each one of them is going to have a certain amount of budget, and the company that spends money on research has less budget than the company that doesn't.
	Okay, sorry. Maybe I missed something, but if people can't tell the taste of something, you said if things are identical, people will always choose the cheapest option, right?
	No, no. People will choose the one that is marketed best, and one of the components of that marketing is going to be cost.
	Sorry, what do you mean cost?
	You mean it costs money to market?
	Well, the cost of the product itself is a marketing gimmick as well.
	But regardless...
	I'm sorry, you mean people raise the cost...
	They artificially raise the price of, say, Coke as a marketing gimmick?
	Well, in the case of the fashion world we were talking about, that's the case.
	They do that sometimes. But it's not necessarily about...
	The price so much is it's about how much money that the company has to work with for the marketing of their product.
	I'm sorry, could you just say that again, please?
	Okay, it's not necessarily about the price of the product.
	It is how much money the equivalent companies have to invest in marketing.
	Right. So the company that spends money on R&D does not have...
	The same amount of funds available for marketing and assuming all marketing is equal, the company that has more money for marketing will be able to out...
	I'm sorry, but marketing is not a cost.
	Marketing is an investment, right?
	Right. I mean, you spend a dollar in marketing to get two dollars in sales, right?
	Well, if you have more money available to invest in marketing, then you're going to reap greater rewards than if you have less money, right?
	I would say, well, I mean a company that is more profitable has more money.
	I will certainly agree with that.
	So if you have a sunk cost called R&D and your competitor does not have that sunk cost or a minimal amount, they have R&D which is basically to break down your product into what it is to make and copy.
	So their R&D is...
	Let's say one one-thousandth of a percent of yours.
	Well, that means they've got that extra money for marketing.
	Or whatever. Yeah, for sure.
	And so in that case, the company that is the copier has...
	A huge advantage in the marketplace.
	So the company that is first to market certainly has an advantage, yes.
	But the amount of time delay to reverse engineer a drug is basically a week, depending upon how difficult the drug is.
	Maybe it's two months, whatever it is.
	You've already got, instead of spending all that money on research and development, they've already established a A base of consumers that trust their brand name through their marketing, and they release a duplicate product.
	And since they're already trusted and they have that marketing in place, they are going to beat out the company that had to spend money on research.
	Yeah, no, sorry, you keep saying the same thing as if I haven't said anything, right?
	So let's go back to the Coke example, right?
	So Coke costs twice as much as generic, and according to the research, people really can't tell them apart, right?
	Well, it's not about cost.
	You keep going back to the same thing you're saying, and I'm saying that the cost is irrelevant.
	It's the fact that the brand name Coke has been heavily invested in marketing.
	Okay, so the big drunk companies, they do marketing.
	Whatever you want to call it, they can still survive relative to the generics, the same way that Coke does relative to the Coke generics, right?
	I wouldn't necessarily put them up against the generic.
	I would put them up against a company that is entirely based upon building a brand and customer loyalty.
	And their whole business model is based upon a marketing premise that somebody comes out with a product, they copy it, and they market it.
	Sorry, but you only copy a product because it's already very successful, right?
	I mean, there's only generic Coke because Coke is already very successful and has a huge market share and this and that and the other.
	But let's drop that because obviously we're not getting anywhere with that argument.
	But tell me, what is the R&D percentage that is spent by a pharmaceutical company at the moment?
	What percentage of their revenue is allocated to R&D? Well, after all the years of being screwed with by the FDA and so on, I'm sure that it's not nearly what it was.
	But at one period of time, I would suppose it was probably around 40%, 50%, possibly 80%.
	Well, see, this is the kind of stuff that you need to look up if you're going to make this.
	So I've just got a website right here where Merck and Company Incorporated spend 6% on R&D. Okay.
	6% of its revenue on R&D. And if that 6% was spent on building...
	No, no, sorry. Just hang on a sec.
	Hang on a sec before we start launching off, right?
	See, I'm a bit concerned about our argument here because you were off by multiples on what you think R&D is.
	That's very essential to your argument, right?
	Well, you're talking about now versus prior.
	And let's say if we were to look at the R&D of these drug companies, you know, let's say 80 years ago.
	What percentage was it? Okay, what was the R&D spend of companies 80 years ago?
	Well, I'm sure it was significantly more than 6%.
	Well, how do you know?
	I mean, come on, you didn't make things up.
	I mean, if you're going to bring facts into the argument, where are your facts?
	Well, obviously we're talking is – what I'm trying to do is I'm trying to analyze it from a logic-based situation, not necessarily – it's kind of hard to use a free market analysis of a system that is so pervasively interfered with by governments right now, right? Okay, well, let me put it to you this way.
	I think, I'm quite convinced that all other things being equal, a company whose drugs cost 6% more, and that's assuming that the fact that they came up with the drug and have been first to market and have a great ad campaign that has prepared people for the market, they've worked with doctors, they've got their studies done, and they've, you know, assuming that none of that has any effect on their market share, which I think is crazy, but let's just throw that aside for the moment and just pretend that everyone's starting from the same gate.
	You have one company that says, our drugs cost 6% more than the generic ones.
	But for that 6%, you get new drugs.
	And their insurance companies say, well, geez, for 6% more, we're going to give you a cheaper premium for 6% more.
	Like, we'll spend 6% more on drugs, we'll give everyone a cheaper premium, because for life insurance, over the course of their life, we want new drugs to come into the marketplace.
	So insurance companies will charge less for drugs that are funded by R&D than they will for generic drugs because insurance companies think in terms of decades for health and medical insurance and so on.
	I'll grant you that. I mean, these are just some particular examples about how it could work.
	But I mean, that's the approach that I would take if I was in that business.
	Well, I would grant you that if you're going to be dealing with people who are using an insurance-based system that the insurer, being that they're in the long haul type of situation, they're definitely going to be taking that road and they'll do what you're talking about.
	I could see that would be very viable and reasonable.
	I just think that in the case of marketed to public Drugs that don't have the insurance involvement that it's going to become basically a non-starter to be into the research thing because if you've got drug...
	Let's say that you're a new starting company that has no brand name loyalty.
	Nobody knows your name.
	You come out with this drug that solves...
	I don't know, some issue, nearsightedness, then the same drug is released under the name Johnson& Johnson, you're at a significant disadvantage because people trust the name Johnson& Johnson.
	Then the issue comes up also when you were talking about sharing the R&D thing, doesn't that create a cartel?
	Yeah, of course. I mean, but there's always going to be competition against the cartel.
	Let me, I'm just going to read, you know, we don't have a lot of facts, but some theory here.
	I think we've got a workable model for why people would pay 6% more in the long run to get, or why insurance companies would certainly fund that and would be cheaper.
	And of course, this is 6% when the FDA puts in crazy impossible hurdles for people to get through to get drugs approved, right?
	Which wouldn't be the case in a free society.
	But let's see here. Can we imagine a world without drug patents?
	No need to dream. In the sweep of history, patents like we have today are essentially a post-war phenomenon.
	And prior to that, the industry developed faster in countries without patents than those with them.
	One way to show that is to examine 19th century chemical production.
	They tell the story of the French patent on coloring dyes granted to the Lafrosine company, a patent that pretty well destroyed all development in France, while the absence of patent in Germany, Switzerland, and Britain led to massive innovation and the beginnings of the modern industry.
	The US was very behind here due to its strong patents, and even in the First World War, the US had to import dyes from Germany in violation of the British blockade.
	This was how DuPont got its start.
	In recent decades, there have been pockets of farm patent freedom.
	Before 1978, it was Italy where a thriving industry existed for a century in the absence of patents.
	The patent accounted for the discovery of 10% of the new compounds between 1961 and 1980.
	Foreign companies poured into Italy to imitate and developed.
	But this shut down after 1978.
	When Italy introduced patents under pressure from foreign multinationals.
	India then took the position of the free market country and its industry became a huge player in the generic drug production market until India too was forced into the WTO agreement and shut down its dynamic market.
	The whole world of pharmaceuticals is now engulfed in an incredible patent thicket and people praise all the innovation taking place but rarely ask how much prior innovation really owes to the patent or how much innovation we might experience or how low the prices would be.
	In the absence of a patent.
	And, I mean, the book's free online.
	You can have a look at it. It's a fantastic series of chapters on intellectual property.
	Highly, highly recommend it. What's the name of the book?
	It's called It's a Jetson's World, and you can find it on...
	You can just do a search for it. You can find the PDF. It's available.
	Yeah, yeah. For free.
	But... So, let's see here.
	Patents had nothing to do with aspirin, AZT, cyclosporine, dioxygen, ether, fluoride, insulin, isoniazid, medical marijuana, methadone, morphine, oxytocin, penicillin, pharnobarbital, prontosil, quinine, ritalin, salverson, vaccines, or vitamins. These had nothing to do with patents.
	These were all developed prior to or outside the patent system.
	So, yeah, I mean, I think, you know, I think we can safely assume that R&D costs in a free society would be cut at least in half, which means that there'd be a 3% price differential between companies producing life-saving medicines.
	And boy, I tell you, if you get a life-saving medicine from a company, you're pretty loyal to that company.
	I got to tell you, you are pretty loyal to that company.
	That's definitely going to generate your loyalty. Yeah.
	Yeah, I mean, I'm alive, and so maybe I'll spend, you know, 3% more, right?
	I'll spend, what would that be?
	$10.30 rather than $10.
	I think the $0.30 would be my way of saying thank you to the company for being this side of the deep six.
	So I think that would have something to do with it.
	I also think that, again, insurance companies want to make sure that life-saving or health-enhancing drugs keep getting produced.
	So they would put pressure and offer lower rates to people who would accept the non-generic drugs.
	They would obviously – the people who are first to market are going to make a killing before.
	Because everybody knows that like a drug comes out and next week a bunch of imitation drugs come out, that those other drugs have been rushed into production.
	And there's a danger associated with that.
	And there's a concern associated with that.
	And so I think that there's many, many ways that this can work.
	And, of course, the other argument would be that it doesn't work now anyway.
	Like, obviously, having the government do it and all that.
	But I think there's lots of economic arguments as to how it can work.
	There's tons of historical examples.
	I've talked about them before about how this kind of stuff can work.
	Human beings have very, very complex, as you know, I'm not saying this to you, you're a smart fellow, but very, very complex ways of making decisions.
	It's not just about, well, I can save 30 cents and that's it.
	There's lots and lots of stuff.
	You know, the company who made the drug that saved your mother's life, They're going to get your business.
	You know, they're just going to get your business.
	People are funny that way. And I think it's actually a pretty good way of doing it.
	Okay. Well, I understand a different, you know, I think that I can grant you certain points.
	I think that... The idea of boiling it down to the cost of the drug is not what my point was, but I think that you have given me a good source to take a look into.
	And you did a damn fine job, let me tell you.
	I'm sweating. You're making me work for my money.
	I don't like that. But no, thank you.
	That was a great job. I really appreciate it.
	Also, I had a fairly similar type question to what...
	Sorry, let me just ask if we have other people, because we've spent quite a bit of time on this.
	I just want to ask if there are other people, or we have some text questions.
	We do. I think we have another caller.
	I don't remember what his name was.
	I'm just waiting to see if...
	I saw something in there where somebody says, is he going to have time to get to my questions?
	Alright, well, until James gets back so you can ask the question, we'll see if we can take a hack at it.
	But yeah, great job. Thank you very much.
	Sorry about that. I was ready to unmute.
	We do have a question from the chat.
	Okay, so if it's a question from the chat without someone on the line, then I'll take this gentleman's question because I feel like I need a good round two.
	Ding, ding! Sorry, go ahead.
	So that's still with me? Yes, go ahead.
	Okay, so one of the things that I found in...
	People that you were talking to, like prior, we had this caller who was dealing with their employer and they were getting negative feedback and so on.
	To extrapolate that, instead of being an employer-employee-based relationship, I'm finding that ever since I've been watching your work and been converted over to being an anarcho-capitalist, when I express my views on issues in Facebook,
	for example, I just receive Tirades of non-stop, you're wrong, idiocy, blah, blah, you know, kumbaya, world doesn't, you'll never happen, kinds of things.
	And I'm wondering if there is a particularly best way to achieve, you know, some sort of mutual understanding or how to achieve it.
	And I know that I really like the, you know, I respect your opinion.
	I will not use violence to...
	To make you follow what I believe, but would you afford me the same courtesy kind of thing?
	And I also really liked your video called – it's basically about – it's a statist – not confrontation, but – A statist intervention.
	Intervention, yes. So that one seemed a bit longer than what I would – Be able to get people to watch.
	So I'm just trying to figure out how do I deal with people that I consider friends when some of the things that I'm making them face challenge the very Like when I suggest to them that spanking is bad and they've been spanking, they know that if they somehow believe that, if they come to the conclusion that spanking is bad, then they've been abusing their child this entire time and said they're awful people.
	Well, that's a horrible thing to come to realize.
	I'm sorry, just to interrupt.
	I mean, first of all, I mean, the people who've never been exposed to the knowledge that spanking is problematic, I would not put into the category of abusers.
	I mean, to me, there's prior to knowledge and after knowledge.
	And so, you know, I mean, unless they've been hitting them with rubber hoses or some awful stuff.
	But, you know, people who've spanked their kids a couple of times thinking or with the knowledge that has been handed down to them that it's the only and reasonable and good way to discipline.
	And if they don't do it, then they're problematic parents and so on.
	That to me is not quite the same as as a child abuser.
	But anyway, I just want to sort of mention that.
	They'll have that self-image, though.
	They'll look at themselves and think, how could I have done such a horrible thing?
	Or if they will entertain my thought that it is not a good thing, then obviously they've been, number one, mistaken.
	So being proven wrong is never a fun thing.
	Actually, I kind of like being proven wrong.
	We'll get into your masochism later.
	It just helps me know that I've learned something new and I've been educated myself and growing in my knowledge of the world.
	But to a person who's had something deeply ingrained in their philosophy of how to deal with their children, which is a huge issue, if you force them to come to that realization, they're going to be very angry with you because their perception of self as being a good parent has been shattered.
	It's certainly been challenged, for sure.
	Yeah, and so these barriers that they throw up where they start throwing things back at you and become fairly abusive with their language and so on, I can point out, I can just say, please stop with the ad hominem attacks and things like that, but how do I actually just maybe give them bite-sized pieces where we can break apart these little things?
	I just don't know, how do you approach people that have been your friends your entire life and you're coming from a totally different world How do you communicate without creating this vitriol and horror and angst and anger?
	Sorry, I'm not sure why you'd be creating it.
	Well, because I'm bringing up a subject that is disquieting to them or challenging their...
	Well, sorry, but those are two different things.
	Sorry, I just want to separate those two different things.
	So you bringing factual, empirical information to people is not creating vitriol in them.
	Well, the end result is the same, whether it's the...
	Well, no, but you're not responsible for the vitriol, right?
	Right. What I'm trying to figure out is how do I avoid, or how do I... Ease them into these things instead of being that confrontational, like, you know, pointing out something and then they're like, no!
	And then I'm like, yeah.
	And they're like, no!
	Well, first of all, I mean, if at all possible, talk to them face to face, right?
	Because, you know, you don't want to give them asshole internet go-go juice, right?
	Well, that's a good point. Which is, I mean, people can be all kinds of brave behind a keyboard, right?
	Absolutely. But face-to-face is quite a different matter.
	You know, you're absolutely correct.
	I talked with some people in person about some of these things, and they were far more acknowledging of my points and willing to hear me out, and certainly more civil.
	Right, right. People have these two standards of behavior, online and offline.
	And so, yeah, I mean, definitely, particularly with something like spanking, I mean, that's a really challenging topic.
	Oh, yeah. I mean, I obviously can't go to everyone's house, so I have to put stuff out there that's just fact-based.
	But that gives you some chance.
	Of course, the problem is, I mean, are they actually listening or are they just pretending to listen?
	You know, like nodding and smiling and not going, right?
	Yeah, that's the case for both.
	I certainly would question a friendship where somebody attacks you for giving them factual information.
	Even if they strongly disagree with that, you know, hey, then come up with counterfactual information.
	I mean, I've had that challenge out forever.
	I put facts out and sometimes I'm wrong and I put out retractions and I've done entire shows where I'm reading corrections to what it is that I've done.
	But, you know, somebody who ad harms me, I mean, I just, I mean, how can that person be a friend?
	Well, it's a tough one to get...
	If you call them out on it and they later apologize and then they decrease the occurrences and eventually stop doing it, then that's fine.
	Yes, agreed. But that's pretty rare, right?
	Yeah, it is. I mean, the reality is most people, they throw their actions into the world like a spear.
	They just build up a fortification around wherever that spear lands and defend whatever it is that they've done.
	That's the typical reaction.
	But yeah, I mean, look, as long as you're not just Insulting people and saying, you bastard, rat bastard, child abusers, all of you, you should all burn in hell.
	I mean, obviously, you're not doing that.
	I get that that's not who you are.
	But, you know, if you put the facts out as gently as possible, if people react with rage, I mean, that's their deal.
	That's not yours. You can't control that.
	You can't control it.
	They responded with somewhat rage in regards to comparing child abuse with finding an Italian that's Catholic.
	I shared that video that you made and they basically said that I was trolling and so was the video.
	Look, saying something is trolling is not an argument.
	I mean, one day, if I ever have the time on my hands, I will gather together one single day's list of responses that I get to what it is I'm doing.
	You know, emails and board posts and YouTube comments and all of that.
	I'll gather together because I get like a couple of hundred a day of responses.
	Yeah. I'm going to Some kind of rational argument.
	And that's not true. In the Sunday show, I mean, you had great arguments and I really respect you bringing your points up and you did a great job.
	So this is, you know, I would count this as one of them.
	But just in terms of the comments that I get on Facebook and YouTube and all, I get maybe one in a thousand comments has some sort of argument.
	And the rest of them are just, I mean, it's just blurb.
	It's just embarrassing blurb.
	That means nothing.
	That has no content.
	And all people are telling me is I had a terrible childhood and I'm not aware of it.
	And they think that they're posting something that has some sort of content.
	And it doesn't.
	And so, but that's the reality.
	This is how we know how wretched the human condition is, that people have had their capacity to strip, to think, stripped and abused out of them in a horrible way.
	And I'll give you a tiny example of that.
	You know, people say, the first caller was asking, well, how do you enforce morality?
	Morality is something that children are naturally born with.
	You have to really harm children to take away morality from them.
	I mean, that's just what they're – and this is not just my belief.
	This is pretty well established scientifically through a wide variety of experiments on babies and so on.
	That sounds terrible. Peaceful experiments on babies.
	And so, for example, so it's on the Liberty Cruise.
	Yeah. And we met some friends of ours from California there.
	They've got two charming kids.
	And their son was saying, he was playing on my daughter's iPad, and then my daughter picked up one of his toys, and he said, I don't want other children playing with my toys.
	I don't want other children playing with my toys.
	Isabella, I don't want you to play with my toys.
	And I said, oh, that's interesting.
	And he was five, right?
	I said, oh, that's interesting. You do realize you're playing with Isabella's toy, right?
	And he gave me a long look, and then he shrugged and said, go ahead.
	Right? That's pure philosophy right there.
	That is pure...
	I mean, what he processed there...
	I mean, he got it immediately.
	What he was processing was, is there any way out of this universal rule?
	Because if I say, children shouldn't play with my toys, but I'm playing with another child's toys, then I don't have a leg to stand on.
	And I either have to give up this iPad, which I really want to play with, or I have to let Isabella play with one of my toys...
	Cost-benefit analysis.
	I want this iPad more than I don't want Isabella to play with my other toy.
	Right? Right. Bang on.
	He hasn't gone to a philosophy class, right?
	I mean, he hasn't studied Wittgenstein.
	He doesn't know postmodernism from the nose he's constantly digging into.
	So... But so, to me, and I'm not sort of, I know this is a bit off topic, but I just want to mention it.
	For me, when people say, well, how are we going to make sure people are moral?
	It's like saying, well, how are we going to make sure that Chinese women's feet grow straight after we stop binding them?
	Well, they're going to grow straight if you don't bind them.
	And children are going to grow up moral if we stop treating them like shit.
	Pointing guns in their face and telling them, give me your money so that I can educate your children.
	Yeah, I mean, if we just let children develop in the absence of aggression and bullying at home and at school and at church and all of that, I mean, they're going to grow up perfectly fine and moral.
	You know, if we stop making people walk at 90 degrees, they'll stop having back problems.
	I mean, it's as simple as that.
	Yeah, absolutely. Well, I do thank you so much for taking my questions.
	I did want to mention that call that you were going to make into the show where the guy was inviting Libertarians to call in.
	I called in shortly after you said, well, you're not going to wait for the hold time so that I could get in and talk to them and maybe try to do us proud.
	And it turns out that I was on hold basically until the end of the show and I was the next caller up, but they ended it.
	Yeah, I was sorry.
	I was hoping to. And I mean, yeah, I mean, I think the guy is pretty aggressive and, you know, all of that.
	But I mean, it's the audience that matters, right?
	I mean, we can't just preach to the choir.
	So I'd be happy to chat with the guy.
	And unfortunately, I was I mean, I was doing some FDR work.
	So it wasn't the end of the world. But I was on hold for about 25 minutes and gave up my whole time was getting longer because they got really stuck on the caller.
	Yeah, it was doing that to me too.
	In any case, if you do have an interaction with him, I would really enjoy it because I was listening to a lot of his discussions and he had several libertarians who were calling in who were really floundering with some of the issues like, do you believe that business owners should have the right to discriminate against a person because they're black?
	Yeah. That stumped a lot of people and the simple answer is I believe that the solution to that issue is not to stick a gun in their face.
	Yeah, you can't shoot people for being racists.
	I mean, you can't. Now, of course, what happens, of course, in the long run is the free market sorts this stuff out.
	And then he's going to bring up the bus companies and then he's going to fall into that trap, right?
	The bus companies in Montgomery in the 1950s.
	Well, there's an example of racism.
	It's like, well, look, if you don't know your history, don't blame me, right?
	I mean, the history, I mean, the reality is the government was forcing, it was a law that forced the blacks to sit in the back of the bus.
	Why on earth would the bus company want to piss off blacks who were their biggest customers?
	Yeah. Anyway, so, but yeah, no, I mean, it's, people can be racist.
	It's something that we have to tolerate in a society, and I'm sorry about it, and I will certainly make the case for it, and I think in the long run, there's no question that they're going to end up alienating and pissing people off, and, you know, but you simply can't go in and put guns in people's faces for being racist, because that's what laws do.
	Yeah, exactly. Well, thank you so much.
	I look forward to talking to you on another issue that I come up with later.
	Thanks. And listen, you're welcome anytime.
	You do a great job and I really, really appreciate your insights and your intelligence and your debating skills are superb.
	So thank you. Thank you for your kind words.
	Okay. Bye.
	You know, I'm very much, as I've said before, I'm very much around, I judge people on first impressions because scientifically that's a perfectly valid and healthy thing to do.
	And you can read through the book Blink.
	So somebody says, why do you use the word evil so frequently?
	I don't know, maybe I've used it a few times in this call.
	Because I'm a philosopher.
	I mean, that's like asking a nutritionist, why do you use the word nutrition so much?
	Because they're a nutritionist.
	If IP was banished, do you think Star Wars would be the biggest story adaptation of all time?
	Absolutely not. No question.
	If IP was banished, then we'd have no government.
	And if we'd have no government, there's simply no way that...
	You would have a princess winning control of an empire as the solution to the problem of a corrupt empire.
	I mean, you wouldn't have Aragorn taking over the kingship of Middle-earth as the solution to Sauron, right?
	Because the Ring of Power corrupts all.
	At the end of Macbeth you wouldn't have a new king coming in and at the end of King Lear you wouldn't have a new king coming in because that's always the fantasy, right?
	We have a bad king! We have Darth Vader!
	Let's get the good guys in power because then everything will be just great.
	So people would look at that and say, well, that was sort of pointless.
	They just went full fucking circle.
	We started with an evil empire, and now we've ended with more rulers who are going to get corrupted by power and turn it into an evil empire.
	What was the point of that?
	It's like having a movie where somebody struggles to rid themselves of a cancer, and then the end of the movie is, you've got cancer again!
	Why did we go through all of that?
	Hey, Steph. Hello.
	Hi. I, uh...
	I was calling today to discuss a dream that I had about a half a year ago.
	Before I go into it, I just kind of wanted to mention that I'm nervous as hell and my heart kind of feels like it's beating in my stomach.
	So I don't know if...
	I might be a little bit bouncy on what I'm talking about.
	I appreciate that, and I can completely understand that.
	I mean, talking about your inner life on a show is scary, and I completely appreciate that, and I applaud your courage in talking about it, and I'm glad to have a dream to do.
	It's been a while, so let's get it on, brother.
	Sorry, let me rephrase that.
	It'll make you even more nervous, sorry.
	No, it's actually...
	I don't think it's so much about discussing my inner life.
	It's more... A nervousness to do with you and I think it's related to the dream.
	I guess I'll get into the dream and we can see what we can figure out.
	When I had this dream, it was about six months ago, I was working at a McDonald's and I had this dream where I was Working at a McDonald's.
	Also, you mentioned that you like to hear about dreams that you're in, and it just so happens that there's two of you in this dream.
	Let's get the cloning guy back on the line, because I think he'd like this.
	Sorry, go ahead. So I'm working at this McDonald's, and it's inside a mall, and it's at the dead end of a mall.
	Sort of like where the bigger department stores would be generally in a mall.
	So it's at the dead end of a mall and it's kind of this futuristic McDonald's.
	It kind of looks like a spaceship or something like that, but it's in the mall.
	And what I'm doing at the McDonald's is I'm taking customers' orders and I'm at the register and I'm also serving their orders And I have this Gatling gun sort of thing.
	I don't know if you've ever seen American Gladiators, but there's this part where there's this Gatling gun that shoots tennis balls.
	It's like this big machine and you just hold on to it and it spits out tennis balls and tries to shoot the contestant.
	But basically people would give me their order And I would just be able to shoot the order right at them.
	Like, boom! Here you go! Boom!
	Okay, so you want a Big Mac meal?
	Boom, boom, boom! And I would just press the right button on the machine and it would be able to spit out exactly what each person has asked for and ordered.
	Okay, first of all, I really, really want to go to this McDonald's.
	I really do. That sounds fantastic.
	It's like murder ball with a meatball.
	I love it. Anyway, go on.
	So, um... After a while of doing that, I like the ease of it.
	Because at McDonald's, it's a lot of running around and remembering things.
	But in this position, I'm just sort of...
	The person tells me what they want, and bam!
	It's like that quick. I can get them their order.
	It's very easy, very simple.
	They're satisfied.
	I'm satisfied.
	But after a while, it gets boring.
	Like, it gets... Yeah, this job is easy and simple, but I kind of want to break.
	I want to change. So I stop doing that and I go to the other side of the McDonald's to look for something else to do.
	I see that there's some cleaning that can be done.
	So I go to grab a mop and a bucket and I start to wring it out and set it up so I can start mopping.
	And you are the manager of this McDonald's.
	And you are wearing like a knitted sweater.
	And you seem like a really soft-spoken, sort of like a great leader.
	Like a great manager.
	Like this is the type of guy you want as a manager.
	This guy is very understanding and very...
	Like very...
	Sorry, you're crackling a lot.
	I'm just wondering if you could maybe move your mic away a bit from your mouth.
	I'm not sure why you're crackling, but just it might help a little bit.
	Okay, I moved the mic away.
	I'm not sure if that's any better.
	Much better. Thank you. Sorry, go on.
	Okay. So there's you as a manager wearing a knitted sweater, kind of a soft-spoken, seemingly rational and understanding person, very empathetic and curious, and then there's V. You're also the owner.
	So the owner is visiting, and you're the owner also, and he's wearing a suit, and he's very strict and Sort of looks at things in a black and white sort of way.
	Like, how could we...
	Sorry, I'm the manager, but sorry, the owner is there, and he's kind of nasty?
	Right. Well, I wouldn't say he's nasty.
	He's more like...
	Kurt. Right.
	He's very, like, cost-benefit analysis, sort of like...
	Cold, abrupt. Yeah, okay.
	Right. And so...
	There's two of you. One of you is the manager and the other one is the owner of the McDonald's.
	And the owner, Steph, points to me and says, you see that guy over there?
	And the manager of you says, yeah, yeah, I see him.
	That's Stephen. And he goes, it looks like he's slacking.
	He's not doing what he's supposed to be doing.
	And, you know, I think he's costing us.
	I think we could probably replace him with someone else and they would do a better job.
	And the manager says, no, no, you don't understand.
	Right now he's going through some tough times and he's a great worker.
	Oh, hello.
	He's great. When he's on, he's on.
	When he's on his A game, he's like one of the best workers.
	Oh, yes. Can you hear me?
	Yeah, go ahead. Did we get disconnected?
	Yeah, we're fine.
	Oh, okay.
	So the owner says to the manager says, you know, this guy has a problem.
	We probably want to get rid of him.
	He's not good for the company.
	And the manager says to him, you don't understand.
	Right now he's just in a bad spot in his life.
	He's having some problems.
	But when he's on his A-game, he's like the best worker that's here.
	Trust me. Trust me.
	He offers a lot to this company.
	He offers a lot to the McDonald's.
	I don't think we should get rid of him that quick.
	We should give him more of a chance.
	And the owner says, all right, well, I mean, it's your store.
	You're the manager. I hire you because I trust your opinion.
	But I'm just telling you now, this is on you.
	I told you that I think that we should get rid of him.
	But if something happens with him in the future and he ends up costing us, it's on you.
	He's your responsibility.
	So, and I remember what I was feeling in the moment was sort of, I could overhear the conversation that was taking place and I felt a sort of resentment, like I felt like I was just a pawn or I was just a pawn in these guys' game.
	Sorry, these guys being who?
	The two U's? Yeah, the two U, the manager and the owner, Seth.
	I remember thinking, it's not even that I'm not doing any work.
	It's just that I got tired of doing that one specific job for a while and I wanted to do something else.
	I'm still putting in effort.
	I'm cleaning. I'm bringing something to the company.
	It's just shooting people's orders at them all the time is kind of boring and tiring, and I wanted to do something else.
	It's not like I'm slacking.
	It's not like I'm not doing any job.
	That's all I recall from the dreams.
	Right. So you felt that the two me's were sort of playing a game, is that right?
	You said you felt like a pawn in our game?
	Yeah, it kind of felt like I wasn't born into the conversation.
	I wasn't included in the conversation.
	They didn't call me over and say, hey, this is what the owner thinks and this is what I think and what do you think about it?
	They were just kind of talking behind my back, like, let's figure out what to do with this guy, and not include him.
	Right. Can I tell you what I think the dream means?
	Yeah, sure. Of course, you understand.
	I have no authority in this dream.
	I mean, I'm no professional.
	It's just my opinion, just so you understand that, right?
	Let me ask you this.
	Is it possible that...
	A pettiness in your temper and a sort of oversensitivity to taking things personally has got you stuck in your life and unable to progress?
	Absolutely. All right.
	I'll tell you where I got that from.
	First of all, you said it was at the dead end in a mall, right?
	Yes. The phrase dead end is usually associated with job, right?
	Yes. Are you stuck in a dead-end job?
	No, right now I'm not.
	I'm not working there anymore.
	Sorry, working where? At the McDonald's?
	Yeah, I'm not working at McDonald's anymore.
	Where are you working? I work for myself.
	And what is it that you're doing for yourself?
	You can just tell me very generically.
	I don't know how to say this really.
	I am a farmer and I sell what it is that I farm.
	Okay, good, good. All right. Is this something that you're doing for self-sufficiency or is this something that you're doing to grow?
	Both. All right.
	Yeah, that makes sense. Okay, because what are you doing in the restaurant?
	You're serving people food, right?
	Yes. And you're a farmer, right?
	Sorry, at the time when I had this dream, I was doing both.
	I was working in the McDonald's and I was farming.
	Okay, yeah, but what I'm saying is that, so you're, do you use machinery on your farm?
	I do. Right, and so that would, to me, you're using machinery to produce food in both situations.
	One is a Gatling gun, right?
	And one is whatever machinery you use on the farm to give people their food, right?
	Sorry, I think I need to be a little bit more specific.
	I don't farm anything that people can consume.
	Oh, I see. Nothing that people will, like, there's no nutrients in what it is that I farm.
	It's more of a recreational sort of thing.
	Yeah, yeah. I got it.
	I got it. All right. All right.
	And how are you enjoying your farming at the moment?
	It's, I guess I'm sort of split.
	I enjoy it very much.
	It's something that I like doing and I have a lot of interest in and I like producing something and I like...
	I like learning how to do it better and learning how to perfect what it is that I'm doing.
	But there's a certain amount of...
	There's like a certain amount of fear or like there's There's a lot of risk, and I don't particularly enjoy the feeling of risk.
	Right, right. Can I ask you another question?
	Sorry, that's a rhetorical question.
	Let me ask you another question. What is your perception of your customers?
	Do you like them?
	Do you respect them? Do you think that they're good people?
	My customers in farming or the customers when I was working at McDonald's?
	Farming. I only have one customer and I perceive them as...
	It's like a beneficial...
	It's a mutually beneficial situation.
	I like my customer.
	Everything is very easy.
	Everything flows very easy.
	I kind of prefer to just have one customer and...
	I don't know if that answers the question.
	Okay, I'm just trying to get a sort of mental map.
	And what did you think of the customers at McDonald's?
	Okay, that's a little bit more challenging of a thing.
	A part of me hated the customers at McDonald's.
	Like, someone would step up and there would be a part of me that would be like, oh, this guy.
	Like, it would look for things.
	Like, this person's stupid.
	Like, this person doesn't understand how to order at a McDonald's.
	Like, this person...
	Or, like, people will step up and they'll be, like, yelling at their kids or something.
	Or there'll be some sort of dispute and they'll be like, oh, these types of people.
	Like, I would be very judgmental of the people that would be stepping up.
	Yeah, I mean, because, I mean, in the dream, you're shooting them, right?
	You have a Gatling gun.
	And that's why it seemed to me that you've got to have negative feelings about somebody, because the gun doesn't show up in a dream for no reason, right?
	Right. It's, um...
	I mean, it is a gun, but it's not shooting...
	But it's shooting food.
	No, no, I got it. But it's not shooting healthy food, really, for the most part, right?
	And if the customers at your McDonald's or anything near where the customers I've seen at McDonald's, they're not exactly triathlons breaking vows, right?
	Or triathletes breaking vows.
	I mean, they're big people, right?
	Right. Some of them are.
	I mean, I don't...
	No, not all of them, but...
	Okay, so you got bored of that, and then you decide to go to the other side of the McDonald's.
	Is that the side that is closest to the mall exit?
	Or is that, yeah, because the front is always, like, the front facing the mall, it's a mall facing one, right?
	Yeah, it's facing the mall, the inside of the mall, sorry.
	So, what do you think, in the real world, what do you think that I think of your farming?
	Okay, there's...
	The way that I internalize you in relation to my farming and what it is I do is that's unhealthy, that's vile, that's...
	It's not a good thing.
	It's immoral.
	It's due to childhood trauma that you're doing that.
	that you're doing that because you got something to do with you're not processing something from your childhood and you're doing that and you're acting out bad things from your childhood and you I'm a bad person because of it I
	I should feel ashamed and people should disengage from me and That sort of thing.
	I can tell you, your Steph sounds like kind of an asshole.
	I'm glad your Steph isn't doing the podcast because it's like, man, that guy's a real prick.
	Anyway, I just wanted to mention it. Anyway, go on.
	I think that's part of a problem that I have.
	I don't know if it's a problem or not, but the way I internalize you sometimes, it's almost like you're...
	Right, like, I don't know, it pops up and it's like, Steph would say, I'm a narcissist, I'm abusive, I'm vile, I'm volatile, I act out, I am someone dangerous to be around.
	Sorry, just one interrupted. Somebody in the chat room has said, everyone has that Steph in their head once they hear you.
	You'd think I'd be able to use this more for power over people, but I just haven't figured it out yet.
	Anyway, we'll try it on you. Just kidding.
	Yeah, because there's two Stephs here, right?
	So one of them is...
	He's a nice guy, and I'm in a wool-knit sweater.
	I mean, talk about leave it to beaver dad, right?
	So I'm a nice guy, and I'm saying, look, he's going through tough times.
	He's a great worker. And the other one says, okay, right, so you can keep him here, but it's on you, right?
	And I guess that means that if you screw up, the nice staff takes the blame, right?
	Right. Right.
	And what was interesting to me was that The reaction that you had to me standing up for you against someone who is kind of a jerk, right?
	This bad Steph or whatever, right?
	It's almost like a cold, economically calculating, pragmatic Steph bot or something, right?
	But when I stand up for you and say, yeah, it's on me.
	He's a great worker. He's just going through a tough time right now.
	He's a real asset and so on.
	You don't feel happy about that.
	You don't feel any relief about that.
	It seems like you feel annoyed.
	Right. So tell me a little bit more about that, because one of the things that I would expect, you know, if this would happen in real life, if somebody was coming down hard on you and I stood up for you and accepted responsibility and blah blah blah, that you'd be like, hey, you know, thank you, that was real nice, right?
	Yeah. But what you feel is like, you know, yeah, I'm just a pawn in your games or whatever it is, like you don't feel that there's anything positive that comes out of me standing up for you, right?
	I... I think it's hard to because you're both the manager and the owner.
	So it's like...
	Well, sorry, to be precise, you're the manager and the owner because this is your staff, not me, right?
	Right. Right, so you're talking to yourself.
	So I'm the manager and the owner.
	But the owner has more power than the manager, right?
	Yes. But he's willing to accept the word of the owner about your reliability and value and worth as an employee, right?
	Yes. Right.
	And if you feel irritation when someone saves your job, it would seem to me most likely that you just don't want that job, right?
	Right, so let's picture this.
	So let's say you had a dream where you had a million dollar lottery ticket.
	In your hand, and it blew away, but I grabbed it from flying over a canyon, and I returned it to you.
	You'd be like, oh, thank you, man, right?
	Yes. Right, so that would be gratitude for something that you wanted, which was the million-dollar lottery ticket, right?
	Until Bad Stuff explained to you that that was stolen from the unborn through government predation and blah, blah, blah.
	I'm just kidding. But in this case, your job is threatened.
	I step in and save your job, and you feel annoyed.
	Right? I mean, that just must mean that you don't want that job, right?
	That's just like, oh man, why couldn't I have just gotten fired, right?
	Does that make any sense? Yes.
	You're right, I didn't want the job.
	And that's why I quit.
	Sorry, so let me just point this out.
	So, nasty stuff here is actually more on your side than nice stuff, right?
	Because, like, nasty Steph wants to fire you and you don't want the job.
	Whereas, nice Steph is saving the job that you don't want, right?
	Right. So it's kind of backwards, right?
	Yes. What's coming to my mind is...
	I sort of...
	I find myself battling, quote, you, in my head a lot.
	Sure. Like, the you that I, I guess I project, or the you that, my perception of you, and it's, it seems like a really dreadful battle, and it's like, it's something like, Steph is, like, if I'm going against Steph, then I'm totally shitting all over myself.
	Like, I was listening to a podcast and you said, when people get angry at me, don't get angry at me not because it hurts me or anything like that, but because it's going to hurt you.
	And it's sort of like a false self.
	It's like a battle with my false self.
	And I get stuck.
	I think I get stuck in it.
	It's like... Okay, no, I got it.
	Let me just, I want to make sure we get to the core of this dream, okay?
	Because the one thing that's missing here, and again, I really, really appreciate and hugely can't tell you how much I respect your strength and courage in talking about all of this stuff, because it's a powerful topic.
	And I just, I really, really, really appreciate you bringing this topic up, because, you know, the inner staff is out there.
	But look, who's missing in this dream is you.
	Because you don't want the job, but you're not saying to either Steph, I don't want the job.
	You're like, oh, there's Steph being a jerk and he wants to get rid of me.
	Oh, there's Steph being a nice guy and he saved my job.
	I guess I'll stay. But you're not making any decisions there, right?
	So you're focusing on the two Stephs because that way you don't have to focus on your choices and your actions and what you want.
	Does that make any sense?
	Yes. It doesn't matter what I would approve of or disapprove of.
	It matters what you would approve of or disapprove of.
	Right? I mean, because obviously, I mean, you're not initiating force and blah, blah, blah.
	It doesn't matter what my opinion is in your integrity, in your life.
	It matters what your opinion is.
	And that... It's what is not present at the end of this dream.
	You're sort of like a tennis ball being batted back and forth, but you're a tennis ball with legs, to mix metaphors.
	You can choose to leave, you can choose to stay, right?
	And so when I say, well, I'm going to, you know, he's a great guy, we'll keep him and it's on me and blah, blah, blah, you don't feel happy because you don't want to be there, but you're not voicing any opinions throughout any of the dream, right?
	You're not getting in there and saying, hey, how do you not talk to me about this?
	Or, you know, hey, Steph, nice Steph, cardigan Steph, I appreciate that, but I really don't want to sit here and fire meatballs at people's heads for the rest of my life.
	So I'm, you know, with all due respect, here's my apron, here's my two weeks notice, I'll be back tomorrow, but, you know, I'm done, right?
	You're not making decisions.
	And I don't mean this in any critical way.
	I'm simply observing the ecosystem of the dream.
	So let's go one more layer.
	If that's alright with you, let's do that real, what was that movie that came out where they ended up in Ice Station Zebra with everybody dressed in white.
	Inception? Sorry? Yeah, yeah, yeah, that's right.
	So let's go one more layer, right?
	So did you have a parent who was a pragmatist and a parent who was more sympathetic?
	Did you have a cold parent and a sympathetic parent when you were growing up?
	I... The first thing that comes to my mind is that my father was a pragmatist and my mother was sympathetic, but I don't think that my mother was truly sympathetic in a lot of ways.
	Sorry to interrupt you because I just asked the question, but I was going to mention that too about the dream.
	Because in the dream, I'm not actually...
	Cardigan Steph is not that nice.
	What you call the nice stuff, he's not that nice.
	Because he's just defending you without asking you whether you actually want to stay.
	He's not saying, oh, because you say, listen, I'm bored of doing this, and I'm not sitting there saying, oh, well, look, if you're bored, why don't we try this, or why don't we try that?
	I'm just sort of saying, well, you stay here.
	It's not really sympathetic to you.
	I'm defending you without actually asking you what you want.
	Right. I think, like, in the dream...
	I need that job.
	Like, I need it to eat.
	I feel like I need the job.
	And I think the manager, Steph, sort of understands.
	Like, he needs this job.
	He can't lose. Like, if he were to lose his paychecks, that would really leave him in a really screwed up position.
	So I don't want to... Like, I want to make sure that he keeps getting the paychecks that he needs.
	Because I know he kind of needs to feed himself.
	Right. But I would not...
	Like, since I'm in the dream, that would not be my approach to the problem.
	My approach to the problem would be, why don't you have a voice in this interaction?
	Tell me about that, right? And that would sort of be my approach, right?
	Which would be to help you to, not to sort of make a decision for you or say, you know, well, now you're going to stay or, you know, even if I made that decision, it would be just to buy breathing space so that we could talk about what was really going on for you, right?
	I mean, again, tell me if I'm wrong, and you know, I'm out on 600 limbs here, so I could be entirely full of shit, but tell me if I'm wrong.
	But you must have, I mean, to me it seems you must have grown up in an environment where choice was not encouraged in you, to say the least, where your willpower was not encouraged, where your choice and decisiveness was not facilitated and encouraged.
	I mean, you know, am I right?
	Am I wrong? Oh, you're right.
	You're, yeah, 100%.
	The first thing that comes to my mind is yes, you're right.
	The second thing that comes to my mind is who doesn't have that in their childhood.
	That's the definition of everyone's childhood, pretty much.
	My daughter doesn't have that in her childhood.
	I love her decisiveness.
	I love her willpower.
	I love her negotiations.
	And I don't need to encourage that.
	I just need to channel it and occasionally take some of the harsher edges off it.
	But, I mean, that's our natural birthright as human beings, is to have will, to have choice, to have power in our own lives, to have decisiveness, to have negotiation, to be respected, to be loved, to be treasured, to be worshipped, to be Adored, to be played with, to be encouraged, to be nurtured, to be fed all of the great food of life that can keep us full until the end of our days.
	That is everybody's birthright.
	That's what everybody should have.
	I agree with you. It's tragically rare.
	But there's no way to...
	It's not going to be helpful to you, my friend, to dilute your personal pain in the collective pain.
	It doesn't work. That's like saying, well, I'm really hungry, but I bet you there's a hungry guy in China.
	Oh good, now I'm not hungry.
	Well, you're still hungry. You've just tried to pretend that it's not as bad by saying it's worse for others or it's the same for everyone.
	When we're growing up, we don't know anything about collective pain.
	We only know about our own tragedies.
	And that's why I would strongly suggest do not try and dilute by saying, because your first response was, well, everybody has that.
	But so what? If everybody grows up in a war zone, it doesn't mean that growing up in a war zone is okay.
	Right. It's like a normalizing technique to reduce the amount of pain.
	It's normalizing the technique and it's yet another get out of jail free card for the parents, right?
	Yes. Well, they're just like everyone else.
	Right. I just wanted to say that in relation to how Izzy is raised, I think you're absolutely right.
	I think it's beautiful the way that you approach parenting.
	I just wanted to mention that I admire that very much.
	Well, thank you. I mean, it's been a huge education for me, and thank God it works.
	Because, you know, after being quite the lecturer for parents over the years, I'm glad that everything that I'm talking about is working even better than I imagined it would.
	And, I mean, it's just fantastic.
	So, look, let's go back to your dream, right?
	So, I think the dream is saying that...
	That you're stuck in circumstances until you gain the identity called choice, willpower, and a sense that your choices are going to have an effect on your environment.
	I don't get the sense from the dream or from what you've described about your life that you have much of a plan for the future.
	I do, actually.
	I have a very...
	Laid out. I spend a lot of time thinking about the future.
	I think sometimes I overthink and I sort of have plans for like where I'm going to be in 20 years from now and like that's how in-depth it gets.
	But there's the thought or there's the part of me that likes the idea or wants to over the next five years to When I have a little bit more money in my pocket, to go really hard in therapy and to work out some problems that I feel like I have to work on or I want to work on.
	Spend the next five years working on that.
	It might not take five years, but at that point, And also, it's to work in therapy and save money over the next five years to the point where I could feel like I could be a parent.
	I could be a parent and then I could start thinking about perhaps a family.
	And in the meantime, I'll be saving money so that the idea is that I'll buy land and I'll build sort of a self-sustaining I'm getting my electricity from solar panels and getting my water from the rain and growing everything that is that I consume and raising all the cattle, chickens or goats or something like that.
	And it's pretty much just like a self-sustaining living, at which point I could bring a child into that situation and I won't have to go to work.
	I could spend the first five, ten or however many years that the child needs me to be around with them and I could sort of model for them how I... like everything that I consume, I'm growing.
	I'm responsible for everything that I consume and this is how a person can take care of themselves without relying on others and Well, not without relying, without being dependent on others.
	So my future looks sort of something like that.
	Right, and I appreciate that, and I stand corrected.
	What I was going to focus a little bit more on is you don't negotiate with anyone in this dream, right?
	And if you're working alone, then you're in a society-less environment, so to speak.
	And so my question would be a little bit more along the lines of, do you feel, and I guess you've given me the answer, given that you want to live off the grid, whether you felt that you might be able to rejoin society at some point.
	And I would keep that open for yourself.
	I mean, through...
	You know, we need people in the trenches.
	You know, it doesn't have to be you, there's no obligation, blah, blah, blah.
	But it would be very helpful in this sort of fight that we have on our hands to have more hands rather than fewer hands.
	And I would like for there to be a possibility in your life, rather than abandoning society completely, to look at some possible ways of rejoining society and making a way in society.
	Because in this dream, you don't have a voice, right?
	You don't have a negotiation.
	You don't have a presence.
	And so this seems like something, you said, you know, when I'm debating with myself about whether you should stay or go, that you feel like a pawn in other people's games.
	And I would, I mean, just look inwards and say, is that how you feel about society as a whole?
	Or is that how you feel about your sort of family origin or education origin as a whole?
	I mean, for sure, I mean, children are, as a whole, in society, pawns of everyone's game.
	And I'd recommend a book I just finished reading called The Bee Eater about Michelle Rhee.
	She's in the movie Waiting for Superman.
	She tried to take on the Washington school boards, and she wrenched up everybody's tests by getting lists from the principals of people, of teachers that they wanted to fire.
	She did manage to fire a bunch of them.
	She got new principals in, and she really began to turn things around.
	And the test score... Achievements that she was able to affect were truly remarkable.
	And, of course, if you stop the film right there, it's a feel-good film.
	But if you fast-forward three frames, where the politician who supports it gets voted out of office, the new guy comes in, and she's forced to resign, and everything begins to slide back into the gutter again.
	And she points out in the book, or the book, She's interviewed for the book.
	She points out, she said that children are being sacrificed to keep the peace among adults.
	Right? Because people don't want to get into fights with the teachers unions or the principals or the government or the school boards.
	So because people don't want to get into those conflicts, children are being sacrificed.
	And that was her sole focus.
	I don't care what's good for the adults.
	I care what's good for the children.
	And if what's good for the children is bad for certain adults, so be it.
	Her focus, sole focus, was on the good of the children.
	The invention of pseudo-ailments, psychiatric ailments, mystery diseases for which there are no biological causes, resulting in millions of American children being bombarded with these dangerous medicines.
	I can call them medicines, just these dangerous drugs.
	Because the system won't change to adapt to children who've got far greater stimulation outside the home than inside the home.
	Right? Outside the home, their stimulation...
	Sorry, outside a school, their stimulation is free market.
	Inside the school, it's all statist.
	And again, here, your children are pawns in the games of others, the games of profiting from the government by pharmaceutical companies and psychiatrists and other witch doctors.
	So you see this all over the place.
	Children are pawns in the games of others.
	This can often happen in the family, of course, that children are pawns in the games between parents.
	They can be used to provoke conflict between parents, to humiliate the other parent, to manipulate and control others in the family.
	So I would simply look at that.
	It doesn't have to be that way.
	It doesn't have to be that way.
	You can have a community.
	You can rejoin a society where you can have a powerful voice and an effect in society.
	So I just wanted to sort of mention that.
	I think the dream is saying that...
	If you don't have a voice, then nothing that happens to you will be particularly satisfying.
	If you don't have a voice, if you can't make choices, if you can't affect your will on your social environment, then you will forever feel like a pawn in the games of others.
	And I think that you should deserve something far better than that.
	The question...
	I know it's after four.
	If you want to end the call now, I understand.
	No, we can go a little over.
	Okay. The thought that comes to my head is, how?
	How do I get my own voice?
	How do I stop letting other people control me?
	Well, you have to first...
	I mean, the first thing I would do is recommend that you recognize that this was who you were to begin with.
	Right? And that this was taken away from you.
	And mourn that loss.
	That's how you get your voice back, is you recognize that someone stole it.
	Right? If you have a treasured possession that's missing, and you want to get it back, the first thing you have to recognize is, well, it's been stolen.
	Well, who stole it? Well, so-and-so stole it.
	Well, where did they put it? Well, I'm going to go get it back.
	Asshole. Stole my stuff.
	Right? And so this, again, I am a minimalist interventionist parent.
	You know, I mean, it's not easy.
	Lord knows there's 12,000 voices in my head telling me to intervene every other second.
	But I push those back.
	I negotiate. I reason with them.
	And I don't let them take over.
	Because I am rapidly curious to see how the human child develops in the absence of Of interference.
	I tell you, Isabella does not like my singing.
	She does not like my singing.
	She's very, very certain about that.
	She will actually cover my mouth when I sing.
	She is not a fan.
	I think that is great.
	She has very strong opinions about things.
	This is how she has developed.
	I don't know whether it's partly biological that she may have a stronger will than others, but I'd have to have 50 more kids to figure that out for sure, or have more evidence of that.
	But I believe that we're all born with a voice, and we're all born with a strong willpower.
	We're all born with a clarity of purpose and desire, and we're also all born with the discipline of that which gives us productive and useful pleasure.
	Like learning how to walk. She's really, really working hard to figure out letters at the moment.
	And she's just doing a fantastic job.
	And to recognize that this was your birthright.
	This is who you were born to be.
	And tragically and awfully, it was taken away by a combination of factors.
	It's really three. It's religion, school, or family.
	And sometimes it's all three. And you mourn that loss.
	And through mourning of that loss, you uncover the voice.
	That was taken or you recover the voice that was taken.
	But recognize that where you ended up, A is not your fault and B was not right.
	And then you can begin to recover it from there.
	I have a helpless part coming up and I don't know if you want to hear it because part of me says you're going to start talking about how When you were in your 20s, you used to walk 50 miles to work as a gold painter in the freezing cold Alps on the top of a mountain.
	Don't get helpless on me.
	I used to take the bus and did all this hard stuff, so don't get helpless.
	I kind of worry that that's going to happen, but the helplessness sort of says that something was stolen from me I don't see how to get it back.
	Even though you just explained to me how I would get it back, it's like...
	Wait a second.
	Are you saying that you can have a personality internalized from podcasts, but you have no idea where your true self is?
	See, you made up a me, layered in with your parents, and you never even met me.
	Well, you sure as hell met your original true self, because you were that person.
	So don't tell me that you are lost.
	When you can create a personality out of bits and bytes and burps from the internet called podcasts, you can create a personality and split that personality, and that's how creative you can be in the construction of an identity, but you can't get back to the basic honesty of who you were.
	I don't believe you.
	If you have that level of fertility and creativity within you, Fuck it, if you can't find your true self, just make a true self.
	You can make one too.
	It's simply, it's just whatever grows from the seed called honesty and the watering of the tears of loss.
	Whatever grows from that is your true self.
	I, um...
	And if you can make two me's, you can make one you, right?
	Right. I, um...
	I... I've been listening to FDR for like three and a half years now and I feel like at a certain point, maybe after a year and a half or so, I feel like I was really connected with myself.
	I feel like I was finding my true self and a lot of happiness was being generated and I felt like I could be honest and I felt really open and I feel like I've relapsed from that, and I've kind of reverted back to where I started at the beginning somewhat, where it's sort of like...
	It's that...
	It's thinking that, you know...
	It's like a certain amount of...
	Like hatred towards what you're talking about, what the podcast equal up to.
	It's like my parents, sort of that whole, like my parents weren't that bad.
	You know, you don't know what you're talking about.
	Like that nihilistic, it's sort of like a nihilistic thing.
	Sure, sure.
	Yeah, I mean, look, this is how culture and lies and superstition survive.
	As they drive reason and virtue into the woods, right?
	As they provoke hatred, despair, futility, horror, and a desperate desire for the second-hand integrity called solitude.
	Because if they can drive you into the woods, they stay in control of the world.
	You know, there's a scene, I don't know if you've ever seen the movie Fight Club, one of the most amazing portrayals of nihilism in all of art.
	There's a scene in Fight Club where the main guy, the non-Brad Pitt guy, he punches himself in order to control his boss, right?
	I don't know if you've ever seen it, but it's a very powerful scene.
	He punches himself.
	And in my experience, one of the things that you have to fight when you are on the path to truth and virtue and social effectiveness is you have to fight the horror of seeing how people conduct themselves in the world.
	Because when you see people...
	Doing all the horrible things that they do.
	And I mean, maybe I see it a little bit more than most because of some of the listeners who's...
	Not that they've been doing horrible things, but horrible things have been done unto them, of course.
	But also, you know, just the general comments and feedback that I receive.
	And I receive a lot of positive feedback, don't get me wrong, but there's an awful lot of just negative, hostile, weird, creepy, nasty, blah, blah, blah, right?
	And I know, I know for a fact...
	That people are doing themselves horrible things by acting in this way.
	They are punching themselves in the face.
	And anybody with any compassion and any humanity can only stand to watch people punching themselves in the face for so long before you just want to flee the whole fucking spectacle, right?
	Right. And that's partly why this kind of masochistic destructive behavior is on full display.
	Is that it drives those with sensitivity and humanity out...
	Of the social conversation.
	Because you see how people behave and how they interact and what they justify and what they praise and what they worship and how much they lie and how much they twist and how much they deceive and how revolting and putrid their essence has become.
	And eventually you feel that staying in society It's like attempting a soulful slow dance in a field full of half-rotted zombies and you just want to flee the entire mausoleum, right? Yeah.
	It's... What you're saying is reminding me of...
	I was mentioning before how I sort of...
	I felt like I had turned around and I had sort of found myself and was feeling a lot happier and a lot better and conversations were going much more smoothly with people and I found that I could be very helpful and I felt,
	I guess, there was a pull back to my original position and I sort of It felt like a relapse.
	My experience of it was almost surreal.
	I felt like it was almost like an out-of-body experience.
	The world around me was very odd and strange.
	At the end of that sort of feeling, I didn't even recognize my own apartment building that I had been in for three years.
	It was like, this place looks different.
	This place looks weird. I sort of just ended up back where I started.
	I guess what I'm saying is I was trained a certain way And I worked really hard to change that, to reshape how I was trained.
	But there's like a pullback.
	It's not a pullback, it's a pushback.
	It's a pushback. Can I tell you what happened?
	Sure. What happened was you tried to bring truth to the world.
	Before, you were just trying to bring truth to yourself.
	And as long as you're just trying to bring truth to yourself...
	The world will pretty much leave you alone.
	But the moment you try to bring truth to the world, then you get the second wave counterattack, right?
	Yeah. Were you engaging philosophically with people?
	Were you attempting to, not necessarily consciously or with the program, but were you attempting to bring your truth into your relationships during this time?
	Yeah, and I recall feeling like...
	What I was trying to do for a while was actually RTR with the people that I had in my life and tell them how I feel.
	And I felt really positive about it, but at the same time, I felt very nervous and insecure about it.
	Like, this is really vulnerable stuff.
	This basically puts me in a position where I'm Tied down and put an axe in the other person's hand because they could just chop off my head when I'm in such a vulnerable position.
	But at the same time, it felt very freeing.
	I felt like now I have freedom.
	I could tell people how I feel.
	And how did that work out in your relationships?
	Was it sustainable?
	Well, it didn't stay.
	It didn't stick for some reason.
	I regressed back.
	And I remember...
	No, no, no. Sorry. At this point, at this point of the conversation, you must focus on the choices of others, not on yourself.
	Because you attempted to bring...
	Honesty and truth and vulnerability and who you really are into your relationships, right?
	And how did the other people react in the long run?
	Not with curiosity or empathy.
	How did they react?
	The reaction I got was sort of standoffish.
	People didn't want to hear what I was saying.
	People didn't want me to be saying what I was saying.
	There was a vague sort of...
	They would be bored with what I was saying or say that I'm always trying to...
	I'm trying to be so black and white, but the world isn't like that.
	And that sort of response is what I would be getting.
	That's all intellectual.
	What was their emotional response?
	How did they feel when you were talking about your true thoughts and feelings?
	Anxious. Anxiety.
	Right. Right.
	Right. And my belief, my analysis of that situation would be that by being honest with them, it provokes anxiety because it exposes the degree to which they are not honest either with others or with themselves.
	And then they feel really weird.
	But what they do is they try and put that weirdness into you so that you take it.
	Right? And then you end up feeling so weird because you're weirding out other people, or other people feel weird in the face of your honesty.
	You end up feeling so weird that you don't even recognize your own apartment building.
	Right. I... How can I prevent that from happening?
	How do I prevent myself from internalizing?
	I have to prevent that from happening every day.
	So, I will speak with some authority, at least from my own situation here, is you have to be honest.
	You have to be more honest.
	Which is, you don't pick up The bags are crazy that people hand to you.
	Don't pick it up. You know, we have this instinct.
	So someone comes up and holds out their hand, we just shake their hand, right?
	We just shake their hand.
	You have to really focus to not do it, right?
	It's so automatic. Especially if it's someone we know.
	Actually, for me, it's more like My first reaction is, get the fuck away from me.
	Excuse my language.
	If someone comes up to me with their hand out, it's like, you're scheming, you're manipulative, there's something wrong with you, you're trying to get an in when there's no in here.
	I'm a pawn in your game, as the dream said, right?
	Right. Right.
	Okay, so...
	But you did let...
	Other people's craziness into your mind after you were honest with them, right?
	Yes. Because you felt weird.
	You felt strange.
	You felt disembodied.
	Out-of-body experience, you said, right?
	Yeah, that's what it felt like.
	It was really like reality was just not...
	It wasn't computing.
	There was something odd going on.
	Right. Right. And that's other people's experience, not yours.
	That's other people's experience, not yours.
	So when you're honest with someone who's lived a false life, then they face a fork in the road, a crossroad, so to speak.
	They're either going to say, shit, I've lived a fake life.
	I've lived a false life. I'm going to start being honest.
	I'm going to, this person has really woken me up.
	I'm out of the matrix. I'm going to grow.
	I'm going to charge.
	Let's go, right? Or they're going to Slam tight the briefest crack in the mental doors that lead to a perception of the true world.
	They're going to retreat back into fantasy.
	They're going to repeat back into slander.
	They're going to retreat back into ad hominems.
	And they're going to work as hard as they can, my friend, to make you feel like a freak.
	To make you feel weird.
	Because if you don't feel weird, they feel weird.
	And they do not have the ego strength for that.
	They are going to work as hard as they can to normalize themselves and to de-normalize you.
	You're weird. You're obsessed.
	You're shallow. You're just, you know...
	You know, what's come over you?
	What's the matter with you? What's wrong with you?
	What kind of weird shit are you into?
	You're trying to play tricks with me, with dishonesty.
	I don't like it. We already talked about this.
	Why are we bringing it up again?
	Right. I mean, there's so many things that people will say to try and drive the nails of crazy into your forehead so that you walk around Christ-like bleeding and staggering all the time, right?
	Right. So...
	Sorry, I feel like sadness growing up.
	I feel like my eyes are getting teary thinking about.
	Yeah, because it's tragic, because it is a sacrifice.
	People who love us, who say that they love us, should not try to make us feel crazy or weird or broken or wrong or bad or dissociated or freaky when we're merely honest with them.
	That's not the actions of love, right?
	It shows so often how shallow and tenuous these so-called relationships really are.
	I mean, if somebody says that they love me, the word me is in the sentence.
	The word love is in the sentence.
	Therefore, when I am honest, if I bring more and more of my true self to the relationship, they should love me even more, right?
	You know, it's like if I eat nothing but donuts.
	There's more to love, right?
	They should love. Love you more if you bring more of yourself to the relationship.
	But what happens when you do that?
	Are they happy? They withdraw, or they want you to withdraw, or they want you to stop whatever it is that you're doing.
	Yeah, somebody in the chat room eloquently put, shit gets fucked up.
	Because we're supposed to have this dance of manipulative distance called relationships and the moment you actually reach out and try and touch someone, do you know what they feel?
	Do you know what somebody feels when you reach out to try and genuinely touch themselves?
	Do you know what they feel?
	They feel your hand pass right through them.
	And when you're standing in front of somebody who reaches out for you and their hand passes right through you, one of you, One of you has to be a ghost, right?
	One of you has to be a ghost!
	And how many people are willing to look in the mirror, see emptiness and say, I am the ghost and you are alive?
	No. I am alive and you are the ghost!
	That's what people say, right?
	Yeah. Not in those words, but that's pretty much what they're insinuating or that's what they're acting off of.
	That's the premise that they're acting off of.
	Right. And that's a terrifying thing for people to experience, right?
	Yeah. It's also sort of I think terrifying for me also.
	Oh, absolutely.
	Of course it is. It's completely terrifying.
	It's like the sixth sense.
	I see dead people.
	Right? I thought I had relationships with real-life people.
	And they're paper-thin, angry, empty ghosts.
	Right. I thought I was surrounded by love.
	I'm surrounded by the dead.
	I live in a city of ghosts, and that's why your apartment building looks weird to you.
	And that's why you phrased it as an out-of-body experience.
	That's a ghost is out-of-body, right?
	Yes. The...
	The problem is...
	I feel like I internalize that.
	That becomes a part of me and I become a ghost.
	I don't even recognize myself.
	Of course. I guess I'm wondering...
	How do I... Stop.
	How do you stop that? How do I stop being a pawn?
	There's only two things that you can do, and they're both philosophical.
	Reason and evidence.
	Reason and evidence. Reason and evidence.
	That is the lifeblood of the human soul.
	That is what keeps us alive. That is what keeps us vital.
	That's what keeps us strong. That's what keeps us protected.
	So if people are making you feel crazy, go back to reason and evidence.
	Go back. That's your anchor. That's your north star.
	That's your compass. That's your gravity.
	That's your firm footing.
	Reason and evidence. So, people say, you're being weird.
	Okay. What's your definition of weird?
	Go back to reason and evidence.
	Ask them for the reason and the evidence behind their assertions.
	Drive them back. That way.
	And one or two things will happen.
	People will either say, well, here's what I view as weird, and here's the reasons why, and here's what I view as normal, here's the disparity, here's the evidence, and here's the causality in your behavior, and blah, blah, blah, which will almost never happen.
	Or they'll just switch to another attack.
	Oh, now you're just trying to manipulate me.
	Okay, can you define to me what manipulation is and explain to me how it is that I'm doing that?
	They won't have an answer. They just use words, right?
	They just use words. Like monkeys throwing shit.
	I don't have any idea really what they're doing.
	It's just an instinct. Just go back to reason and evidence.
	Explain to me why you're coming to this perspective.
	Explain to me why you're coming to this conclusion.
	Explain to me why you are placing upon me this label.
	And most people, how many people in the world are going to have a clear answer to that?
	Well, no one who uses the word weird is going to have a good answer as to why they're using that word weird because the word weird is an ad hom.
	It's an ad hominem. It's an insult.
	Insults are not used by people who have good philosophical reasoning.
	Doesn't mean I've never used insults, but hopefully I've used the reasoning first, right?
	And I've certainly not used insults with people that I say that I love.
	So when people are trying to stick labels up your ass, clench!
	Right? And say, no, no, no, no.
	Explain to me how this label is, how I deserve this label.
	By what objective process you have come to give me this label.
	Reason and evidence. Reason and evidence.
	Don't start down this path and then drop those weapons.
	Tell me how. Tell me why.
	Explain to me how this label is valid, how this label fits, and then explain to me how calling me weird is supposed to be helpful.
	But if people can't answer, and if people refuse to answer, and if people continue to manipulate, take several slow and steady steps backward.
	Right. Because they're not dead, they're undead, and they be hungry.
	What do zombies eat, my friend?
	Human flesh?
	No. Brains!
	Right. Right?
	Identity, self, integrity, personhood.
	And for some reason, there's a part of me that wants to help those people the most.
	Well, then do.
	Go and call them up and help them.
	But don't go in without reason and evidence.
	And don't go in without an exit strategy.
	Go help them, you know?
	I mean, I find that Troll to human, zombie to person is such a transmogrification that if you can achieve anything, it's almost always completely temporary.
	Because the amount of work it takes to rehumanize yourself when you're in that state, it is years.
	It is years. I will tell you that up front.
	It is years. And it is years of highly dedicated, often very expensive, Therapy and journaling and self-knowledge, and it involves a revolution in all of your personal relationships.
	It involves a revolution in your business relationships.
	It involves a revolution in your romantic relationships.
	It involves a revolution with your children.
	It involves significant restitution to those you have wronged.
	It includes no longer staying in abusive relationships, manipulative, destructive relationships where truth cannot be, because where there is no truth, there is no relationship.
	It's a big-ass, long, difficult, expensive, time-consuming process.
	All you can do is launch that ship.
	You cannot sail it for people.
	You cannot help people in that way.
	You can get them started.
	That's why I always say to people, go to a therapist.
	I can't help people that way.
	I'm not a psychologist.
	I'm not a therapist.
	I'm not any of those things.
	I'm interested in philosophy.
	So I can point out logical contradictions, and I can point out the insights from my experience, but I cannot save anybody.
	I can point them in the direction of the resources that I think will help them, which is why I'm always nagging people to go into therapy, to do self-work, to analyze their own dreams, to write down their own thoughts and experiences, to commit to honesty in their relationships.
	Because that is, according to the science that I've read or the experts that I've interviewed, the most effective, most long-term, most sustainable, at least medically destructive approach to take.
	But you cannot save people.
	You cannot save them.
	You can say, the light is over that huge fucking mountain.
	And you think that mountain's huge, you wait till you see the one that's on the other side of that, and the one that's on the other side of that one.
	And after years of bitter, grueling, ice-shattering, clamp-on-twisting, nail-dropping, chilly hiking, you will get to the Promised Land.
	But it's over there. But I can't carry you.
	I can't carry you.
	And if people look up and say, I don't care if there are 20 mountains after that.
	I'm getting there because I'm worth it.
	And I want to live before I'm dead.
	Then you can travel with them.
	And you can share rations.
	And you can share heat.
	And you can share tents.
	but you cannot carry them.
	Right.
	I, uh...
	This has been...
	Very, very useful to me.
	And I know you can't carry me over the mountains, but I certainly appreciate the care package that you're sending me off with.
	Yeah, I can give you a map and a view of the destination that I could tell you here as well.
	But I wish I could. I wish I could.
	But it's not possible because you cannot strengthen someone's legs by carrying them, right?
	Right, it's impossible.
	If you have physical rehab to do, it doesn't make any sense for the other person to move your limbs, right?
	You have to strengthen them yourself.
	It's not possible.
	I can't lose weight for you by eating less.
	I don't know what to say.
	I think that you've pretty much Hit the nail on the head in this call and I really appreciate your questions and your time and for going over the normally scheduled time.
	I really appreciate it.
	I'm going to listen to this again because a lot of it got drowned in my nervousness.
	But I really appreciate it.
	Oh, you're welcome. And I really, really appreciate you bringing this topic up.
	I mean, I've been wanting to do a dream for a while because they're just so fertile.
	And I think we can all agree based on the comments that we got in the chat room and all that.
	I mean, it's this incredibly fertile conversation.
	I can tell you thousands and thousands of people are going to hugely benefit from this conversation.
	So I just really want to express my intense admiration for having the courage and strength to bring this up because we are increasingly Susceptible to feeling alone and to fleeing the world and it's not going to work.
	We need to stay.
	We need to stand. And I'm really, really thankful that you brought this topic up.
	And I'm thankful to all the listeners.
	I mean, what an amazing show.
	What an incredible show this is.
	I mean, we're talking about all of the wildest topics.
	We have a great debate about IP. We talk about a dream.
	We talk about self-knowledge, our relationship to society, truth, honesty, virtue in relationships.
	What an incredible show.
	You people take me on a wild ride every single week.
	And I thank you, thank you for it so much.
	And have yourselves a wonderful week.

▲