Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

Jan. 2, 2014 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux

02:48:19

2574 Photogenic Bullshit Artists - Wednesday Call In Show January 1st, 2014

A message to start the New Year, Bitcoin skepticism, defending Gandhi, photogenic bullshit artists, using virtue to cover for vice, Steven Pinker on parenting, Dr. Phil on family separation, the why cant you just let this go defense and the dangers of having a plan B.

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hi everybody, Stefan Molyneux from Freedom Main Radio, January the 1st, 2014.
	I hope you're doing very well, and welcome to the next year.
	I like the New Year thing.
	Some people think it's sort of an artificial division.
	Round and round the sun we go.
	Where we stop, nobody knows.
	Well, other than physicists and Nostradamus.
	But I think it's useful to have...
	Years to recognize a new year, the same way I think it's useful to have birthdays and recognize a new birthday, because it reminds us that we're going to die.
	Always a great thing to be reminded, shorter of breath, and one day closer to death.
	That's really good stuff to remember, and there are times, as it was for me with an aggressive form of cancer this year, where it's a little bit more vivid, and there are times when it becomes a little bit less vivid, but it is always essential.
	To remember the death thing.
	Absolutely essential.
	Death is the great spur of ethics because the reality of death is a reminder of prioritization.
	Prioritization is basically only required because of mortality.
	If we had an infinity in which to get anything done, then we wouldn't really need to prioritize too much.
	But death is the great organizer of hierarchy.
	We need values Because we're going to die.
	Now, because we're going to die, we can remember, based upon the inevitability of death, we can remember how important it is to be kind to those we love, to be courageous with evildoers, to strive for virtue, and to not fall prey to the great temptation of procrastination of virtue.
	Which is conformity, fear of disapproval, fear of others, fear of frowns, fear of scowls, and all that other sort of nonsense.
	There's nothing that clarifies, cuts through, and captures, as Gecko said, virtue than a remembrance of mortality.
	So this is the year 2014.
	This is the year that I will turn 48.
	And in that great Middle land of masculinity between 30 and 50 where nothing in particular seems to change.
	I still look pretty much the same as I did a decade or two ago.
	And in that great middle wasteland of middle age for men in particular.
	For women, of course, you're going from fertile to non-fertile and so on.
	So there's a lot of Changes that occur.
	And of course, the women are a little bit more focused on looks and there's a great deal of change between 30 and 50.
	But for men, there's this great kind of swath of no change and it is easy to get stuck in that revolving door, that groundhog day of every day, kind of like the previous day.
	And the great thing about a new year, the great thing about mortality is Do not learn priorities in your old age.
	That is one of the great tragedies to be avoided in life.
	Do not learn what is really important when you're old.
	Or, as I think Cordelia said to King Lear, Thou shouldst not have been old before thou were wise.
	Learn wisdom.
	Learn priority.
	Capture courage.
	Act nobly.
	Based upon a remembrance and a premonition of death, do not wait until you are old and sick and wasting away and possibly even on your deathbed to wonder why you weren't better, why you weren't more courageous, why you weren't more forthright,
	why you weren't more honest, why you may have wasted your life in inaction, procrastination, delay, avoidance, video games, and crappy non- Exalting relationships.
	We want relationships to be a fire under the rockets of our true selves.
	We don't want relationships to be a repetition of avoidance and decay and historical habit.
	So it's good that it's a new year.
	It's good to make resolutions.
	It's good to remind yourself of the fact that the hourglass is always falling out.
	The ass is always falling out of the hourglass and we are always running out of time.
	And the only way to make the best use of time is to remind yourself of its grim, organic finity.
	And so I remind you of that.
	Be good, be virtuous, be courageous.
	Seize the day now.
	Be courageous now.
	Do not wait for life to ease your passage to a better existence.
	Do not wait for circumstances to open all of the thorny doors of self-improvement.
	Do it now.
	Will it now.
	There is nothing but decay without willpower.
	There is nothing but disintegration without resolution.
	And find your values.
	Hopefully don't make up your values, but get them philosophically.
	Get your values.
	Get your values in front of you.
	Make the priorities that are necessary for your values and then just freaking act on them because we are not even guaranteed tomorrow, let alone next decade, let alone the next half century.
	And the last taste you do not want to have In your mouth, as you slip into the grey beyond, as you fall into the infinite black, the last word that you ever want to be tasting in your mouth is regret.
	So, do the right thing now.
	Make the right life choices now.
	Improve your relationships now.
	Confront Vacillators, including those within yourself, now.
	And remember, every edition of years is a subtraction from yours, whatever they're going to be.
	So that's my New Year's message.
	Make New Year's resolutions in particular.
	Make them for other people.
	I, of course, presented a long list of New Year's resolutions to my wife for her, which resulted in a very exciting conversation, most of which centered around the fact that The vast majority of them are actually illegal in most of the Western world, or at least unsavory.
	And you just can't get batteries that big.
	So have yourselves a wonderful New Year.
	Don't forget to donate to the show, fdrurl.com forward slash donate.
	And why don't we move on with the show?
	Mike, who do we have up first?
	All right, Matthew, you're up first today.
	Go ahead, Matthew.
	Hey, Seth.
	How's it going?
	Happy New Year.
	Thank you, Matthew.
	Happy New Year to you, too.
	Okay, great.
	So I wanted to talk about Bitcoin today.
	So I had a couple of arguments to some of the things that you've said, and I wanted to kind of get your take on them.
	And first off, just to point out, I'm citing pretty heavily from a lot of things that I've listened to from Joe Salerno and Thomas Woods on money, so hopefully I'm able to synthesize their thoughts with Some of the things that I know about Bitcoin and also that I do own a little bit of gold and no Bitcoin.
	So hopefully I'll be able to argue from a rational standpoint and not an emotional one.
	So one issue that I do have with Bitcoin is that it is purely deflationary.
	And if you look at gold, one of the reasons why it has emerged in the market as a money is because it's both inflationary and deflationary, and it's at the exact correct rate that the market wants.
	So one of the things that What really kind of made the idea of gold click for me is – I think it was Thomas Woods that said that if the price of gold – if there's so much inflation in terms of gold that it costs 100 ounces of gold to buy a shovel, that's an immediate signal for the market to stop mining gold, and it becomes impossible to buy new gold.
	Whereas if there's so much deflation in terms of gold that you get one ounce of gold, could buy a Cadillac, then that's an immediate signal to the market to go out and mine more gold because there's such an incentive to do it.
	And I don't see that with Bitcoin because, you know, it seems that the price to mine a new Bitcoin is only $10.
	Whereas the cost of a Bitcoin right now is somewhere around $1,000.
	So that would be a signal to the market to go mine more Bitcoins, but because it's being arbitrarily limited by the mechanism which they introduce new Bitcoins into the market, it seems like the market for Bitcoins is unable to clear.
	So I just wanted to get your take on that.
	So, yeah, there's a lot of what you said.
	First of all, of course, the price Of mining bitcoins, the $10 is exclusive of hardware costs, and the hardware costs are significant.
	Obviously, if you could spend $10, I think bitcoins are now at $800, if you could spend $10 to get $800, that would be a pretty unstable economic situation.
	But that's just the electricity cost.
	That's also somewhat disputed.
	I found that somewhere, and it's disputed, but basically, There is a fairly good equilibrium in terms of time and hardware costs and so on to mine the Bitcoin.
	And so from that standpoint, if the price of Bitcoin goes down, then fewer people will mine it.
	And if the price of Bitcoin goes up, then more people will mine it.
	So the same thing occurs from that standpoint with regards to gold, right?
	It's just, you know, fairly environmentally friendly to mine Bitcoin as opposed to mining gold.
	The stability of gold is also somewhat open to question.
	Over the last 10 years or so, it's gone from a couple of hundred bucks to almost $2,000.
	Now I think it's sitting around $1,100.
	So there's a lot of variability in gold as well and a lot of economic signals that go out to gold producers who then invest a lot in gold mining or gold exploration who then have to shutter like a lot of the mines in Australia.
	Are now shuttered because the price of gold has gone below.
	There's a huge amount of economic cost to gold that you don't really have with Bitcoin.
	You might buy some Bitcoin hardware and you'll still be producing Bitcoins because it's pretty cheap to run them.
	But think of the amount of wasted economic activity that occurs in searching for gold based upon a prediction of price and then the price of gold then changes to the point where it's no longer economically productive.
	Think of all the people who educate themselves in geology and so on and It's hard to say.
	Is Bitcoin always going to be deflationary?
	I don't know.
	It's hard to say.
	I mean, I think there will become an equilibrium point at some point.
	And of course, if Bitcoin is unstable to the point where people find it hard to use, then somebody else is going to come up with some other cryptocurrency that's going to be more stable based upon something.
	I don't know what it could be.
	It could be that you come up with a currency which has a fairly difficult base to mine, but instead of it being limited to 21 million coins, as in the case of Bitcoin, it could be based upon Everyone agreeing that the economic output per year has grown by X percentage and then allowing it to grow by that, which would be pretty stable.
	But the other nice thing about the Bitcoin is it's not quite as dependent upon the actions of the Federal Reserve.
	So of course a lot of people bought into gold expecting significant Money printing on the part of the Fed, money printing that was going to go into the economy, the Fed has restrained its money printing to some degree, which is one reason why the gold price is going down significantly.
	So with Bitcoin, it's not quite as dependent on the actions of the Federal Reserve as gold is.
	So anyway, those are just my thoughts on it, but go ahead.
	So doesn't it necessarily have to be deflationary if, you know, if you take it to the logical end where, I mean, I know it's far out into the future where the last Bitcoin is mined, right?
	Once that happens, doesn't it necessarily have to be deflationary?
	Oh, you mean so if economic productivity continues to increase but there aren't any new Bitcoins?
	Right, right.
	Well, I don't think it has to be deflationary necessarily, because it only really works that way if you think of Bitcoin as like one Bitcoin, and then as the economy grows, each Bitcoin is going to be worth less.
	So there is, in a sense, each Bitcoin is going to be worth more if Bitcoin is a fix and economic growth continues.
	But you just subdivide, right?
	You just subdivide.
	And of course, you can create your own Bitcoin systems, the colored coins.
	You can create your own Bitcoin systems within it, which could be more specialized.
	So there is going to be some aspect of it.
	Yeah, I think for sure it's going to be deflationary.
	But because it's fairly infinitely divisible, it's still going to be a very useful currency.
	I thought there was a limit on the number of, I guess, like the decimal place to which it could be broken down.
	I thought I read somewhere that it was an arbitrary limit, like maybe 8 decimal places or 12 decimal places or something like that.
	It could be, but remember, if the majority of Bitcoin users agree to a new protocol, then that new protocol will be developed.
	We'll be accepted, right?
	So if everyone says, wow, you know, bitcoins are worth a billion dollars each, and so 12 decimal places isn't really enough, then somebody says, okay, well now we're going to do it to 40 decimal places.
	And if people accept that, in other words, if bitcoins become more valuable because they can be further divided, Then remember, this is the ultimate democratic currency.
	Almost any rule, as long as it's accepted by the majority of users, can be implemented in the protocol.
	So, you know, the fixed limits kind of thing is not too accurate.
	Okay, and so the other thing I just wanted to ask you is, so when you keep saying that the transaction costs are low for Bitcoin, So, and that if basically there's problems with it, Bitcoin people would run in and fix these problems.
	The one issue I had with that was So even if we accept that the people's labor will be, you know, donated essentially because they want to protect the value of their currency, there's no way to say whether or not the solutions that they implement will increase the transaction costs, right?
	So one thing that I kind of looked at was the number of transactions that, you know, Visa does within a year I think it was like 20 billion compared to the highest month of Bitcoin somewhere around 162,000.
	So that's the one issue that I could foresee is as the volume grows, you might have services that You know, come up to maybe prioritize your transactions.
	Let's say if you're in a store, you know, you subscribe to the service to prioritize your Bitcoin transaction to make sure that it clears well a person is in the store.
	But as they implement those, that could increase transaction costs.
	Because you're going to need whatever extra equipment, you know, extra servers, extra equipment in the store, and somebody would need to provide those types of services.
	So I don't know if transaction costs can be really compared right now or whether or not you can know whether transaction costs will increase pretty significantly over the next couple of years if, you know, Bitcoin continues to grow in use.
	Yeah, I mean, there's a couple of things that could happen, and again, we're very much theorizing, which is not too helpful, because who can predict what the combined genius of self-interested technical people is going to produce?
	But a couple of options sort of occur to me.
	The first is that the important thing is not costs, but value, right?
	So it costs money to pay down your mortgage, right?
	But that's an investment, or at least it certainly is the accumulation of value.
	As opposed to going to, you know, you put $50,000 down on your mortgage, you have invested that money, or at least it's going to retain some sense of value, as opposed to you go and blow $50,000 at the racetrack and all you have is some exciting memories, right?
	So when you look at transaction costs, my guess is that transaction costs are only going to accrue in the Bitcoin network if they add to the value of Bitcoin, right?
	So if for some reason people need instantaneous approvals...
	Then that will make Bitcoins more valuable.
	And so if there is some minor overhead to that, it will increase the value of Bitcoin.
	Don't just look at it as increasing the cost of Bitcoin.
	Because generally, things will only occur if they add to the value of the cryptocurrency.
	So that would sort of be the first thing that I would suggest.
	But the second thing that I would suggest...
	I'm sorry, go ahead.
	How can you be certain that it will be a minor...
	A minor cost, right?
	If you look at the networks that Visa or American Express has, they're pretty significant.
	There's a pretty significant amount of hardware and even just labor that goes into just processing all these transactions.
	It could be that when Bitcoin starts to be transacted or if Bitcoin starts to be transacted at higher and higher volumes like that, the cost to implement those solutions could be significant.
	Well, I'm sorry, but there is no labor involved in clearing Bitcoin transactions.
	I mean, there's huge labor involved in issuing credit cards and 40% of credit card profits are eaten up through fraud and, you know, the chargebacks and dispute resolutions and chasing after people who don't pay their interest or their principal, people who die with significant credit card debts outstanding and so on, right?
	So none of these things accrue in the Bitcoin network.
	So I think you may be comparing apples to oranges if you're trying to figure out How Bitcoin is going to replicate the costs.
	It's sort of like saying, well, email, you know, the U.S. Postal Service has a huge amount of labor processing physical mail.
	And so email is going to need to duplicate that in some manner to achieve that efficiency.
	I don't think that would work as an analogy.
	So if you, let's say I come up with a company to process, you know, rapidly process Bitcoin transactions, right?
	There's labor in building the servers.
	There's labor in somebody being on a help desk in case your server goes down and somebody's in the store and they can't connect to your server.
	They need somebody to call.
	So there would be labor assuming that.
	But why would anyone use that service?
	You already have something which is free and frictionless.
	Why would anyone want to use that service?
	Well, I guess that's kind of, in a way, this is kind of a counter-to-fact argument because we don't know the future of Bitcoin, but I guess the...
	No, no, sorry to interrupt.
	We have some idea, though, right?
	I mean, if you went to investors and you said, well, I'm going to charge people 50 cents an email, but I'm going to deliver a little bit faster, what would the investors say?
	Well, so let's say you were an entrepreneur and you had an idea.
	If everybody used your email service, you could deliver it faster than regular email.
	Like regular email can be a minute or two or even more, right?
	So if you were an entrepreneur and you went to a bunch of investors...
	And you said, I'm going to charge people 50 cents per email, but on the plus side, they will be delivered faster and they will get receipts and it will be secure and encrypted and all that kind of stuff.
	What would the investors say?
	Sure.
	I mean, who knows?
	There could be a need for that service.
	If there was a need for that service, then...
	Well, no, the investors would say that you're competing with free.
	And if people want encrypted emails, they already have that.
	They can set that up on a client site.
	If people want read receipts or whatever it is, right?
	And so this is why there are, to my knowledge, no places which will charge you 50 cents an email, right?
	Because you are competing with free and the services are already there if people need them.
	And so that's why no investor would pay to create that.
	And, you know, email has been around now for about 30 or 40 years.
	years and no 50 cents an email delivery system has been set up and I assume that there's you know reasons for that and so if you want to set up that kind of thing then you wouldn't be able to charge anyone who didn't want to use it right so if you and I wanted to exchange right I would agree with that right so you can't possibly charge anyone who wants to use it now if people if you can find something that adds value For instance,
	if you set up a dispute resolution Bitcoin area or company, then people may want to give you half a point on their Bitcoin transactions to be insured of all that kind of stuff, right?
	Sure.
	And so that could be one way of doing it.
	But you wouldn't be able to charge other people who didn't have that system, right?
	Right, right.
	I agree.
	There is a free method of transacting Bitcoins, but I guess my point is that when you start throwing 20 billion, let's say, or however many, let's say the whole world.
	I mean, I think it was 20 billion for the US. Let's say you threw the whole world's transactions in there.
	Let's say that it takes now, when you do that, let's say it takes, for instance, 20, 30 minutes to process a transaction.
	Who knows whether or not people would want to use a service that prioritize transactions.
	So what I read about this on Bitcoin...
	Sorry, that already exists.
	So if you want to spend a little bit of extra, you can prioritize your transactions.
	And so that functionality already exists.
	And the other thing too, of course, what you could do is every time you have a successful transaction, you could get a tiny colored coin reputation fragment deposited into your account.
	And then what could happen is this would be like a reputation system.
	And so if you have done 10,000 Bitcoin transactions with no complaints and no problems, Then you would have 10,000 tiny fragments of a colored reputation coin in your Bitcoin chain.
	And then people could look at that and say, well, the guy's done 10,000 honest transactions.
	He didn't do all of that and build his reputation up over years to screw me on a tenth of a Bitcoin.
	So there's lots of different ways that you could...
	The time thing is only really relevant if you don't trust the person.
	So if you've built up a reputation in your Bitcoin chain, Arena for trustworthy transactions, then if there's a delay, it doesn't matter, right?
	It's going to be trustworthy anyway.
	It's the same thing that works on eBay.
	If you've been in business for 10 years and you've got 100% success rate in your transactions and no complaints, people are going to order something for $30 from you without really worrying that you built up all of that just to shaft them on $30, right?
	So, again, I don't know how it's going to work.
	But see, if there is some advantage, right, if there is some advantage to paying people for dispute resolution or paying people to increase the speed of transactions and so on, that's great.
	But that's not a cost, right?
	I mean, of course, you know this, right?
	Well, it's not a cost because people are gaining more economic value out of pursuing that.
	It saves them money in some manner.
	You can't sell people stuff that doesn't save them money.
	I mean, at least in terms of economic transactions, right?
	No, I completely accept that.
	I mean, they're only going to pay that if there's a perceived value greater than the cause of actually paying for it, right?
	So I completely understand and accept that for sure.
	Okay, good.
	So, I mean, of course, one of the reasons why...
	Visa, other credit cards are important.
	It's for people who travel internationally, for people who wish to accumulate points, for people who don't want to defer gratification until later in the month or next month or whatever, people who wish to build up their credit rating, people who want to have disputes with overseas merchants or whatever it is, right?
	I mean, there's lots of value that people have.
	Credit cards are not a cost.
	They are a value to people.
	Otherwise, they wouldn't exist.
	And in the same way, if there are transaction costs to something within the Bitcoin environment, first of all, they have to stay low because you're competing with free, and there's going to be lots of people who are going to try and drive those costs as low as possible.
	And the other thing, of course, is that even if they are costly, they still have to be less costly than whatever the alternative is, otherwise people won't be pursuing them.
	So it's still, it's not a cost in the network, it's its value to the network.
	Right.
	And so the last thing that I just want to put forward, I guess, is there was another point that you had made.
	I think it was with a caller that you're speaking with.
	And you said something about like considering the cost of Bitcoin to the cost of using gold to for like a third world country.
	Right.
	So the fact that a third world country can enter the Bitcoin network and be more productive because they're not looking for gold.
	And the issue I had with that is, assuming that they're able to get whatever hardware and they need an iPhone or whatever they need to transact Bitcoins, they still have the issue of their productivity is still limited by whatever they're able to produce.
	So let's say they are in an agricultural economy and they're growing potatoes or something like that.
	There's a number of potatoes that they're going to be able to grow.
	They're not necessarily going to be mining their own gold.
	They could be exchanging whatever value they're producing for other people's gold, right?
	Yeah.
	Well, there's a couple of things that I just wanted to correct.
	I didn't compare the third world access to bitcoins to the cost of mining their own gold.
	I think that's important.
	What I did was I said that if you wanted to raise loans, if you wanted to go public, if you wanted to have investment, then you can do that through bitcoins and have a stock exchange based on bitcoins that is infinitely cheaper, basically, than what is going on right now in the stock exchange market.
	That's the first thing.
	Secondly, of course, there are very few people who get to mine for gold, particularly in the third world.
	Because it's controlled by the local warlords, just in the same way that the diamond trade is controlled by the local warlords and people are basically enslaved for the sake of the diamond trade.
	So people don't, you know, in Africa, you don't just say, oh, I think I'm going to go and stake a claim and dig up some gold and sell it on the free market and so on.
	It's all government controlled and government manipulated and all that kind of stuff.
	So it really is compared to the massive overhead of state power I think that's a really important aspect to try and figure out with regards to comparing the value of gold with the value of Bitcoin.
	And so people can just, you know, if you've got an iPhone or you've got a burner phone even with a Bitcoin client on it, you can start to work with that kind of stuff and bypass the state and bypass the regulatory, i.e.
	the rent-seeking restrictive powers for getting investment and stuff like that.
	Does that help at all?
	Yeah, that's interesting.
	Maybe I misunderstood, I guess, what you're saying.
	So essentially the argument is that the value of Bitcoin comes from the fact that it's able to circumvent state power more than anything, right?
	It's the fact that because state power is controlling the gold production in that particular area, Yeah, that's interesting.
	I think it definitely is best for me to probably listen over to this call and consider these points for sure.
	Well, thank you, and I appreciate the objections, I think.
	And I don't know that the primary value of Bitcoin is its circumvention.
	I'm not circumcised in state power, although I'd like to.
	Yeah, in that particular instance, for sure.
	I mean, one of the reasons why China recently cracked down on Bitcoin is because China has very strict currency restrictions on what you can take out of the country in terms of won.
	And, of course, Bitcoins, you can take the currency out of the country clickety-split, so to speak, in other words, with a click of a mouse or whatever.
	In fact, you can walk out of a country with your Bitcoins in your head.
	I mean, Peter Schiff was talking about a thumb drive and all that, and you can do it that way as well.
	But if you memorize your blockchain address, then you can delete everything to do with it, and you can walk out with your money in your brain, and then just type it in to get it somewhere else.
	And that's pretty remarkable.
	You know, governments don't like that, particularly.
	It's the ultimate wetware repository, right?
	That you can walk out with your money memorized.
	That's really quite a remarkable thing.
	Right, right.
	Alright, well, it was great talking to you.
	I really do appreciate the time and I hope to be able to listen over to this and maybe I'll come up with some counter-arguments.
	But it was great talking to you and I hope the rest of the show goes great.
	Thank you very much and I appreciate that.
	And one of the things I wanted to remind people...
	about Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies is when people get upset as, oh the Chinese government is moving against it or this government is banning this or this government is...
	But don't you understand people?
	That's how we know it has value.
	That's so essential.
	If the Chinese government didn't give a rat's ass about bitcoins, that would be a sure argument against its value.
	In other words, the degree to which A step forward in liberty causes problems for the existing powers that be is exactly the degree to which they're going to act against it.
	In other words, if Bitcoin didn't threaten existing entrenched power structures, then it would have almost no value.
	I mean, and this is as true of currency as it is of virtue.
	If Bitcoin did not Threaten the existing moneyed central banking interests.
	They would not act against it.
	They would not notice it.
	And so when people say, well, Bitcoin, you know, the governments are going to act against it and therefore its value is threatened.
	No!
	Look, if Bitcoin is going to threaten the powers that be, they're going to act against it.
	That's how you know it has value.
	Because anything which...
	Provokes the ire of a totalitarian system like the Chinese government?
	Well, of course that's a good thing.
	That's how you know it has value.
	It's the same thing with just about anything.
	How do you know Scott Walker of Wisconsin?
	Did something of value to the general population of Wisconsin?
	Well, because he got death threats and people threw stones at his car and threatened to gut his wife like a deer.
	You know, it's tragic and horrible, but you measure the value of virtue to some degree by the response of evil.
	You know, this is one of the few libertarian podcasts with some real haters.
	Well, That's because we're actually doing some good, right?
	If you don't have haters, you're not doing any good.
	If the cancer doesn't have any problem with your medicine, your medicine is not doing anything good to cure or prevent cancer.
	So yeah, I just wanted to mention that.
	I wish that more central banks would act against it.
	I was quite disappointed when the US said, oh, it's totally fine.
	I'm sure that will change.
	But then people will say, oh, that knocks the value of it down.
	I think that's only because they confiscated a bunch.
	I think it's only because they confiscated all those in that range.
	I bet you the U.S. government, as soon as the politicians have some Bitcoins, well, anyway.
	And I'm sure they do.
	So anyway, I just want to mention that.
	So yeah, thanks for your call.
	And again, people say, because I think Bitcoin was like $1,000 now, it's down to like $800 after I had my Peter Schiff debate.
	And people say, Steph, are you going to admit that you're wrong?
	Hell no.
	Hell no.
	Because I'm not.
	Actually, just a quick point about that debate.
	So I think, to me, the less interesting thing is whether or not the price of Bitcoin will be $1,000 or $800 or $1,200 next month.
	I think, to me, the more interesting thing will be, will it be able to be transacted on a day-to-day?
	You go to the store and you want to buy a Coke, will you be able to use it easily?
	I think, to me, that's the more interesting point about Bitcoin than Bitcoin.
	I mean, you could sit there and talk about what the price of Apple is going to be next month, and that's not particularly interesting.
	I think the interesting thing is, will this be able to emerge and replace money and be used in day-to-day transactions as a better store of value?
	Sorry to interrupt.
	Personally, I would not measure the value of Bitcoin by your ability to buy a Coke with it.
	Because we already have change, spare change for that.
	Like we already have fiat currency lying under the couch cushions, which we can use for that.
	So I would not personally think that that's, particularly as well, of course, if it has this deflationary aspect, then you probably won't want to buy a Coke with it.
	You don't want to end up with those people who bought $100,000 snowmobiles from the Microsoft stock when they got it and sold it before it split and got even more value and so on.
	So I think that the value of Bitcoin is going to first show up In larger economic transactions, right?
	What is the transactional overhead of spending a buck on a Coke with fiat currency?
	Well, virtually none, right?
	You found, you know, you got a buck in quarters in your car, you go and buy a Coke.
	What is the overhead?
	What is the value of Bitcoin for that really?
	Well, not really a huge amount.
	But if you're trying to go public with a company and you get to save $3.5 million or if you want to send $10 million and you get to save a couple of hundred thousand dollars in transaction costs, that's where the real value of Bitcoin is going to show up.
	It's going to show up in the macro world.
	I wouldn't necessarily look for it in the micro world.
	And also, I mean, look, gold coins are useless for that, too.
	I mean, you can't buy a Coke with a gold coin or even a silver coin.
	And also, you know, people talk about, well, Bitcoin can be spoofed or Bitcoin can be hacked.
	Well, there's massive and rampant fraud in the gold industry as well, right?
	I mean, people wrap tungsten in gold, there's pyrates, there's, you know, all that kind of stuff, right?
	So there's lots of fraud in this, you know, escape that by going to gold.
	So anyway, I just thought I'd mentioned that earlier.
	On the Silk Road, you can buy Coke with Bitcoins, yes, but I think that's a different kind of Coke.
	Sorry, go ahead.
	There's a huge amount of transaction cost of buying a Coke with a dollar if you consider the amount of money that's wasted for, like, the Treasury printing that dollar, right?
	Yes, but you don't – sorry, but you don't save that.
	You don't save that by not spending it, right?
	It's already done.
	That cost is already done, absorbed, taxed, borrowed, indebted, right?
	It's not like if you don't spend the Coke – it's like if you don't spend the quarters on the Coke, you save money on your taxes or the treasury prints one less dollar or whatever, right?
	I mean that's already there.
	It's a fixed cost, so you might as well use the coins, right?
	Okay.
	Right.
	Fair enough.
	All right.
	Well, I don't want to monopolize the conversation, so I'll let you get on to the next caller and I'll consider your points and maybe have another conversation in the future about this.
	Please do.
	We definitely don't want to be talking about the evils of central banking and end up with a monopoly of you and me.
	So thank you very much.
	Appreciate your call.
	All right.
	Via phone is going to be Josh.
	Hello, Josh.
	Oh no!
	Oh no!
	Mike, I've told you do not speed dial your 900 numbers during the show.
	Remember, Candy won't talk to you anymore ever since you had that exotic reindeer fantasy.
	Alright, since for whatever reason we can't call Josh, I'm going to butcher your name, my friend.
	I'm sorry.
	Prashanath, you were up next.
	Hi, Stefan.
	Hello.
	Hi, can you hear me?
	Yes, go ahead.
	Wonderful.
	Thanks, guys.
	So this is me talking to you for the first time.
	So I'm really excited.
	I really admire all the philosophy podcasts that you have put forward.
	Thank you so much for your hard work.
	My pleasure.
	Thank you.
	And I wanted to talk One of the things about your The Truth About series, like you make these shows about the truth about Gandhi or the truth about Mandela.
	So I think that the title of this podcast means not necessarily do justice to the content.
	The reason why I say this is because you put forward certain things that are not mainstream about these folks, like the The dark side of Gandhi or Mandela not being a pacifist in certain situations, like marrying your wife who doesn't renounce violence, things of that sort.
	So there's certainly value to that.
	Everyone needs to know the dark side of their ideas and we should choose who we should aspire to.
	I agree with that.
	But the problem I see with it is not a problem.
	Maybe you can comment on that.
	The point is that both these guys, like a million other guys who are idealized, have dark sides because they're all human, no matter how much we think of them as gods.
	But they also did things that others were not able to do.
	They stood for nonviolence in other walks of life.
	They were able to achieve certain things that others were not able to.
	So maybe, like, should the title be like, hey, here are the things that you might not know about Gandhi or these are the things that you might have not heard of in Mandela?
	Sorry to interrupt.
	You're using some very vague statements, which is fine.
	I just need to be clarified more.
	Alarm bells goes off for me when people start talking about things like pushed the envelope or were able to achieve things that other people weren't able to achieve and stuff like that.
	Philosophically, those statements have no content at all.
	You know, I don't know what pushed the envelope means.
	I don't know what, you know, able to achieve things that other people weren't able to achieve.
	Well, you know, Rogers Bannister, the first guy to run the four-minute mile, did things that other people weren't able to achieve.
	You know, Hitler pushed the envelope with regards to genocide.
	So I don't know what any of that means.
	If you can point to some very specific things, I think that would be great.
	And not in terms of words, but in terms of deeds, and not in terms of the short term, but the long term.
	Absolutely.
	Thank you for correcting me.
	I will try to do a better job now.
	So, the time he was, like, you know, he led India was a very chaotic time.
	You know, we had the First and the Second World Wars, and India was, you know, under the British colonial rule.
	We had so many different religions floating around, like Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, people fighting between each other.
	And then at another level, people are trying to fight against the British colonial rule.
	So the world they lived in was a very chaotic world.
	So India was never united.
	That's one of the reasons why the Mughals and the Arabian emperors waged wars against India.
	They plundered and looted throughout the Middle Ages.
	And India still, because it was never united, it gave a chance for the Dutch, the Portuguese, the British to come and take over.
	So and no one was like, there was no cohesive force to fight against them.
	And Gandhi took the lead.
	I really admire what you've done with the video describing things that are not mainstream about Gandhi, but there are also many instances where he stood for the weaker sections of the communities, like the weaker castes, He made sure that their rights are represented as well.
	And using the principles of nonviolence, he joined the Indians together and formed a cohesive force to fight the British.
	And that's a very difficult task, considering the world that they lived in, if not almost impossible.
	And I don't think anyone else has the guts or the courage To stand for the principle that he stood for.
	Sorry, what was the principle that he stood for?
	Non-violence, like we cannot achieve any good with violence.
	So then he should have been...
	Sorry to interrupt.
	Sorry to interrupt.
	I just need to...
	Okay, so he stood for non-violence, which means that there should have been no state.
	He should have been advocating for no state, because that is the universal application of non-violence.
	The state is an agency of violence, and therefore he should have stood against the state.
	He also should have stood against...
	Spanking, child aggression, child abuse.
	You also should have stood against religion, which is of course a threat of verbal aggression against children.
	So in the area of statism, And in the area of child abuse and in the area of religion, it seems to me that he was quite wanting, to say the least.
	So when you say that he stood for the principle of nonviolence, I assume that's the principle, in which case he should have been advocating for a stateless society and peaceful parenting and atheism.
	Absolutely.
	And I have a little more to add to that because I think the situation is much more complex.
	Sorry.
	I agree with that.
	Okay, so he was pro-state, he was pro-religion, and I don't believe that he really talked much about child abuse.
	In fact, he seemed to be a pretty horrendous father himself.
	So I don't know where these principles are that you're talking about other than in his language.
	He was pro-state.
	I agree with that.
	But the reason for that is because you and I, libertarians, we have a relatively much better and comfortable life.
	We don't have to fight for injustice or anything like that in our walks of life.
	I mean, we used to do it, but what I'm saying is our lives are much more comfortable compared to the lives that they have made.
	So for them, they had bigger priorities.
	I know that Gandhi had plenty of time on his hands.
	Maybe, you know, he would have had a conversation with you and, you know, you would probably question him and he would say, hey, maybe I made a mistake.
	Maybe these are the things I need to correct myself so that, you know, because I'm in the public sphere of life, I have some dark sides to myself, so I need to correct this.
	So maybe he would have reflected, like he would have positively responded to these allegations you were making.
	That's fine.
	That's perfectly fine.
	But the problem is, like I've said, it was a very chaotic time they had, like, you know, when we are in the survival mode, We put our shiny parts, like libertarian or whatever, like the freedom and everything.
	When we are in survival mode, we put these aside and we act as cruel as we can.
	That's what I meant.
	Back then it was chaotic.
	I'm not supporting what he has done, but all I'm saying is that maybe when you do a video, maybe it would be nice to explain that as well, the time he lived in.
	And also the cultural differences are very significant.
	And most of the complaints against him are derived from books that were written after his death.
	So there's no way to disprove or prove any of these facts.
	There was more documentation on what happened.
	Maybe a journalist could have probably spent some time with him and written everything down because he was a popular person back then.
	But none of that...
	There are some accounts, but none of them can be verified.
	So all I'm saying is that I really admire what you have done, but I think people who probably watched this for the first time, who haven't spent much time on Gandhi, they might get a completely different opinion about Gandhi, like an unfair Well, I mean, again, you've said a lot there.
	If somebody claims to be a fair principle, then I expect them to enact that principle.
	And if they don't enact that principle, then they're not for that principle.
	Then there's just kind of an aesthetic to it.
	It's an image.
	I don't think, as far as Gandhi's written writings go to 80 volumes, so I don't think we're short of information about Gandhi.
	And I also would not say that Gandhi has been portrayed unsympathetically after his death.
	I think there's been a huge whitewash campaign after his death.
	Partly for reasons of nationalism and partly for other reasons.
	Some theories that the British clergy wish to venerate Gandhi as a way of attempting to proselytize among Hindus and so on by sort of accepting him into the Christian fold and so on.
	But I don't think it's unfair to say that if somebody promotes a certain philosophy that we expect them to promote it consistently.
	I think that it's more than fair.
	I mean, if I said that I was against child abuse and beat my own daughter, then I think that people would have a lot to say about that, and I would be taken a lot less seriously as a thinker.
	Or if I said, well, I'm against the initiation of force, but I'm a full supporter of taxation and the war in Iraq, then people would say, well, he's not put a lot of thought into what he's doing.
	And the moment that you realize somebody hasn't put a lot of thought into what they're doing, Then, whatever conclusions they come to are only accidentally correct.
	Fundamentally, you cannot be a religious person and come up with rational conclusions.
	That's like saying that I pray for knowledge of the universe and call myself a scientist.
	Now, maybe when you pray for knowledge of the universe, you come up with a few things that are true, but they're only accidentally true.
	They're not actually true by a consistent methodology.
	You know, I can teach a monkey to write numbers and I may give questions to that monkey and the monkey may write down numbers and occasionally those numbers may match the questions like the multiplication or the addition questions that I'm providing to the monkey, but nobody would say that that monkey is a mathematician.
	And so whatever conclusions Gandhi came up with, or Nelson Mandela, they did not have a consistent philosophy which was reasoned from first principles and expanded to all available areas of human interactions.
	And so when people are praised for their philosophical conclusions, When they do not have a philosophical methodology, that is an insult to philosophy.
	Like if I praise people who accidentally come up with scientific truths, I'm actually condemning the scientific method.
	I'm saying that, well, you might as well just pray for scientific answers.
	And it's true that you'll be wrong 99% of the time, but the 1% of the time that you're accidentally right...
	I mean, it would be an insult to the scientific method to say that mystics who occasionally get scientific statements right are who we should emulate.
	And so the elevation of Mandela and Gandhi to world icons of virtue when they have no consistent philosophical methodology is an insult to philosophy.
	They are the opposite of philosophy, the same way that a mystic who prays for information about the natural world, if he is venerated to a truth-teller about physics, that is an insult and a damning of the philosophical method.
	And you'll know when a mystic prays for knowledge about science, he will get things almost completely wrong and may get things occasionally right, but it will only be accidental.
	And then you need a massive whitewash campaign to scrub out everything they get wrong and promote everything, the few things that they got right accidentally.
	It is a way of damning philosophy.
	It is a way of damning consistency.
	It is a way of damning rationality and evidence.
	So yeah, I do take it pretty personally, and the truth is that they were extraordinarily photogenic bullshit artists who got a few things accidentally right, but based upon that and upon the acceptance of their accidental conclusions, you end up damning philosophy as a whole, and it makes the job of the philosophers that much harder because people think you can accidentally pray or Be incarcerated into developing the truth.
	And you can't.
	The truth is something you develop from first principles, reason and evidence, a strong studying of logic, a strong studying of philosophy, a reasonable knowledge of history.
	That is how you develop the truth.
	And you know that the truth is coming out of someone when it radiates from personally actionable things into the most exotic, abstract things.
	And when it puts demands on people that make them very uncomfortable.
	And there are not a lot of people who get very uncomfortable with the few fortune cookies that spill out of the lives of Mandela and Gandhi.
	I mean, everybody's like, yeah, you know, they did these great things and they're into nonviolence and so on.
	Well, so what?
	I mean, that doesn't change anything for the most people.
	And if you look at Africa now, how's that nonviolence thing working out?
	Well, it's not.
	And if you look at India, how many of the governments and the people are taking Gandhi's non-violent approach?
	It's a postage stamp.
	It's like looking at a picture and thinking you understand a philosophy.
	Excuse the rant, but go ahead.
	Yeah, in India, actually, there is still a lot to be done when it comes to making sure that none of this political prejudices and caste system exists.
	But a great progress has been made compared to the other countries on the island, like Pakistan, which is pretty much an Islamic state.
	But we embrace democratic principles.
	And now, whether I disagree with it, almost every low caste member of Indian society I disagree with this principle, but right now the situation is a little different.
	People are still embracing Gandhian principles.
	Not all.
	There's still a lot of room for growth and also addressing inequality towards women, those kind of things.
	But the problem is, like, you know, human corruption, there's a lot of corruption and a lot of other things going on which are So that's what's going on with India right now.
	And also, another thing about consistency, like, for example, if you, Stefan, or me, myself, if we had horrible childhoods, like, for example, we lived in a war-torn region where there is so much chaos going on around us,
	it would be very difficult for us to We still cling on to these moral principles as much as we like to because, first of all, when your survival is at stake, you wouldn't think about, you would probably think about if you're going to have food today or food tomorrow, you would probably not sit down and think about how a certain person has done wrong in the past or how a certain thing can be improved.
	When your survival is at stake, your survival is at stake.
	So that's why I think people with Mandela and Gandhi, even though we can touch them for what they have done, I agree with that.
	I don't want them to have an unreasonable cult status.
	I want people to see them for who they are, the good parts and also the bad parts.
	But I can't discredit them because Mandela, he spent 26 years in prison.
	He went against the tide.
	He stood against the apartheid rule.
	And I'm not sure about the other instances where he broke that rule, based on your video.
	I still need to research that.
	And also, similarly with Gandhi, he fasted so many times to go against oppression against minorities, Muslim minorities, even during the partition when Hindus and Muslims started fighting and a lot of people were getting killed, including elderly folks and children.
	He again fasted and pleaded to the public not to fight so that to continue with their lives and make the partition as smooth as possible.
	And he never agreed to it, but he had to do it because that's what happened.
	Also, when there were constant lootings and violence towards the British, he objected to that as well.
	And he did that in a peaceful manner.
	Every time people went against his nonviolence principles and did something like looting police stations or killing other people or minorities, He fasted.
	He never took his gun and, you know, started shooting people.
	He did that.
	And also, even after independence, everyone wanted him to become the prime minister, but he did not because...
	So these are not necessarily...
	I wouldn't say that we should treat him as God because of all these good things, but what I'm saying is that when painting a picture We should also acknowledge these sites and also understand that he's a human and he lived at a So even though he is not God, no human being, I think, can be treated like God because we all have imperfections.
	For example, when Aristotle was asked about the laws of motion and someone asked why objects in motion stop, he simply said they stop because they get tired.
	That doesn't mean that we should discredit him as a great philosopher.
	The reason why he said it stopped is because he lacked the necessary understanding of loss of physics, and later Newton, after so many centuries, said objects in motion stop if they are compelled by an experiment.
	Sorry, I've got to stop because there's just this massive tide of relativistic goo coming out of you and an appeal to emotion.
	First of all, Aristotle's limited knowledge of science was not in contradiction to his basic principles.
	So he didn't know that the moon caused the tides.
	And so, yeah, maybe he said it was Neptune.
	I don't know.
	But the fact is that he didn't have a core principle called logic and then act against it in the vast majority of his utterances.
	Now, Gandhi had a core principle called nonviolence and did not apply it to children and did not apply it to the state and did not apply it to religion.
	So, I'm not judging him according to the standards of his time.
	I'm judging the man according to his own standards.
	According to his own core values, which he did not apply consistently.
	This is not relative to what was going on in India or relative to...
	Like if I say, don't hit your children and I hit my daughter and then I say, well, I'm living in a chaotic time, that doesn't excuse anything.
	If I have a value which I proclaim as the core of my philosophy and then I do not act consistently with regards to that value in what I propagate and how I act...
	Then I should be judged harshly for hypocrisy.
	So putting this all in the context of the...
	I'm not.
	I'm putting Gandhi's statements and Mandela's statements and actions in the context of what they claimed to be their value.
	And the reality is, in the 1940s, it did not matter who was in charge of India.
	It did not matter.
	Look, if I said that I was for nonviolence and I set events in motion which resulted in the murders of over a million people, yeah, I should be held to account for that.
	Because either I knew that these murders were going to result, in which case my claims to be against violence when I set...
	Events in motion that result in one of the largest fleeings in human history, 10 to 12 million people fleeing across the Pakistan-Indo border.
	Well, either I knew what I was doing, and I knew that this was going to be the result, in which case me claiming that I'm against violence when I set things in motion that result in the fleeing of over 10 million people and the murder of over a million people.
	If I knew that was going to happen, then I cannot claim to be against violence.
	If I didn't know that was going to happen, then I am an incredibly dangerous human being, in that I set events in motion Which resulted in the deaths of over a million people and two subsequent wars and the nuclear capacity of a formerly relatively peaceful country.
	Well, if I did not know that was going to happen, then I am a fool who has no idea what he's doing.
	So either Gandhi is evil or he is a complete fool.
	And so I don't care about the context of the time.
	Who cares who was in charge of India?
	If you've got a philosophy of nonviolence, preach it to the parents.
	Preach it to the parents.
	And then you don't have to change Rulers, when you have an insane population, when you have a propagandized, religiously tortured population, if you want to change the world, you preach to the parents your philosophy of nonviolence, they raise their children nonviolently, and then you transition to a peaceful society inevitably.
	If you change the rulers with an insane population, all you get are rulers who reflect the insanity of the general population.
	If you do not work to make the population more sane and you switch the rulers, then you're basically enfranchising lunatics to put people in power who are a reflection of their own insanities.
	And so he changed rulers without doing much, if anything, to make the world more sane because he was not preaching to parents.
	Which is core to what he should be doing.
	This is not hard to figure out.
	The child is the father of the man.
	The effects of childhood on adulthood were, by the time Gandhi was politically active, known for at least a hundred years.
	And in fact, you could go back to the ancient Greeks for more information about that.
	So the fact that he wanted to change the rulers in a country without addressing the insanity of the population is entirely corrupt and very much against his values.
	So no, I don't judge him according to the times.
	Of course it was a chaotic time and he was adding to that chaos and to the headcount.
	I have to disagree with that because who ruled at that time really mattered because Indians were all for self-rule, you know, who wouldn't at that time.
	Everyone was fighting against the British colonies.
	Do you really think that the million people who were murdered out of partition or the 10 million people plus who had to flee on foot, do you think that they were very keen on self-money?
	Yes, yes.
	Oh, come on.
	Look, come on.
	You cannot claim to speak for a million dead people that they were very happy to die so that the government in Pakistan could be established.
	He wanted them to die.
	I'm not saying that he wanted them to die.
	No, I'm talking about the individuals themselves.
	Would you be willing to die to shrink the power of the state?
	No, because you're talking to me, right?
	And so you cannot claim that the million people who died were very keen on self-rule because self-rule got them killed.
	If they had a choice, probably they wouldn't have done that.
	But the political situation made it happen.
	Even Gandhi had no choice.
	Not many people had any choice.
	And who ruled the country at that time really mattered.
	By agitating for political independence without addressing the irrationalities of the population, how did he have no choice in that?
	Back then, the mentality was like, once we have self-rule, I don't think anyone envisioned the partition of India and Pakistan before independence.
	But what the original goal was to have independence, self-rule, and then solve these problems, like create a democratic state like India.
	Okay, so hang on.
	So let me make sure I understand.
	So what you're saying is that Gandhi and Nehru and the others who were agitating for independence had no idea...
	That mass exiles and the murders of over a million people were going to result from their political activism.
	Not in the 40s because this whole moment of separate Pakistan started in the 20s and 30s and back then I don't think they anticipated.
	So I would call them foolish for not anticipating this.
	Okay, so they didn't know what they were doing and their incompetence resulted in the deaths of over a million people.
	Can we not criticize people whose rank incompetence?
	a death of over a million people?
	If there was some company that put out a pill that caused the deaths of over a million people and caused 10 million people to have to flee their homes, would we say, well, you know, they had good intentions, but they were a little bit confused?
	No, the person who actually manufactured the pill The person who actually ordered the pill to happen, like the CEO of the company, is more responsible than the person who actually made it happen.
	And in this situation, Gandhi and Nehru, they were only obliging with what the British has said as rule.
	When they left, they gave a decree that India and Pakistan should be divided, and that's what happened.
	A couple of English barristers broke the arbitrary line.
	They said, this is India, this is Pakistan, and how can any single person No matter how against or far you are, how can anyone influence that situation?
	So if Gandhi is not responsible...
	Okay, so that's fine.
	Sorry to interrupt.
	But if Gandhi is not responsible for the independence of India, if he's not responsible for the English leaving or what they did, Then there's no reason to venerate him.
	He was just an oddity and a historical figure who liked sleeping with girls and his cousins and so on and he didn't really have any effect.
	So you can say then that he's not responsible for what happened in partition.
	That's fine.
	Then he's not really a major actor at all and let's not bother talking about him.
	I'm not saying that he's not responsible for veneration of India.
	What I'm saying is that the decision-making of the British, even though the British took his advice, whatever decisions that they made, he's not responsible for the British decisions taken out by the British.
	That's what I meant to say.
	Okay, so did Gandhi know that the British were going to act in a manner that could not be controlled or predicted when it came to the end of the Rajan partition?
	I have to look that up at what time...
	Okay, look, again, this is the same issue, though.
	You're not seeing...
	Either he knew that the British were going to do something arbitrary, let's say.
	I mean, I don't know what the hell would not be arbitrary in the division of a formerly united country, but everything that's going to happen could be called arbitrary, right?
	But either he did know that the British were going to do something not politically sensitive, or he didn't.
	Now, if he did know that the British were going to do something politically insensitive...
	Then he's responsible for advocating for independence and so on, and therefore he has some say or some cause in the million deaths and the 10 million displacements.
	Or he didn't know that the British were going to do something arbitrary, in which case he's a fool who's playing with the lives of millions of other people and, you know, indirectly or directly or however you want to say, is causal in their deaths.
	You can't say that, well, the British did it and, you know, he's responsible for the movement that he started.
	Even though the British did it, I wouldn't put the blame on them completely because the situation at that time was like, you know, after the Britain won the World War II by winning, I mean like only on paper because they took a big hit and the empire pretty much collapsed.
	But what happened was like at that time, the choices were, hey, we are going to give you your independence.
	What do you want to do?
	And then there was a Muslim faction who wanted to have a separate country because they feared that the minority would be oppressed if they remained united.
	Or, that's why they wanted a separate state, while the other section of the Indian community, the majority of the Indian community said, no, that's not going to happen, we'll make sure that the rights of the minority are protected.
	So, those were the two choices that were in front of all...
	Wait, were the Hindus trying to guarantee the Muslims that the rights of the minorities would be protected when Hinduism has entrenched within the class system?
	A caste system, again, has nothing to do with Hinduism.
	That's something I can clarify again.
	It has nothing to do with Hinduism.
	It's not written in any of the Hindu texts.
	It was created by the Hindu elite from 2500 BC when the Vedas and Upanishads, those are the guiding books for Hindus.
	There is no mention of caste system in those books at all.
	So this is a human creation.
	Sorry, I'm talking about the beliefs of the Hindus, right?
	Going back to the text is about as helpful as saying there's no Christians who go to war because God says thou shalt not kill, right?
	So, I mean, let's look at the general beliefs of the population.
	Do the general beliefs of most Hindus support the caste system?
	Back then, but it's not as prevalent like it was before.
	So the short answer is yes, the majority of Hindus support the caste system, which has of course the Dalits or the untouchables at the bottom.
	And therefore, the idea that the Hindus were going to protect the minority, the rights of the minority, would not be particularly believable any more than it would be believable that once you put the Muslims in power, they're not going to persecute all people of different religions, right?
	Right now, that's not the mainstream opinion of Hindus.
	No one supports banning people, banning untouchable people from lower castes, from temples or public works.
	That's not the mainstream opinion.
	Okay, so hang on, I'm sorry to interrupt.
	So are you telling me that Gandhi did not know that if you put Muslims in charge of a country, that persecution may result?
	Sorry, can you please repeat your question?
	Sorry.
	Are you saying that...
	The last part.
	Okay, so in partition, the Muslims were put in charge of Pakistan, right?
	Yes, yes.
	And the Hindus have a history of persecuting minorities, right?
	And the Muslims have a history of persecuting other religions, right?
	As is demanded by their faith, right?
	And so...
	In the creation of Pakistan, for sure, either the Hindus were going to oppress the Muslims or the Muslims were going to oppress the Hindus.
	And when you put the Muslims in charge of a country, the fact that 10 million Hindus and other religions felt it very important to flee and the fact that there were about a million murders based upon religion is something that anyone could predict with any knowledge of Islam and its history, right?
	And the other choice is to have a united India, which they did not agree to, and they were ready to start a war for that.
	The Muslims were ready to start a war for that.
	So you have two difficult choices, horrible choices, two horrible choices.
	Either way, the minorities are going to be oppressed, but right now the situation has changed, and I hope that it will continue to change so that everyone is treated equal, and we abolish caste system completely and religions completely.
	That's the utopia for us, and I would like it to happen.
	But back then, these were the only choices.
	And India is different from Canada or the United States, I'm sorry, sorry.
	You cannot possibly say in history, these are the only two choices.
	History is not a fork in the road.
	Those were the only two choices.
	No, for Gandhi, his choice was to say, I am for non-violence.
	Therefore, instead of attempting to find some sort of political independence and create a very unstable situation with a pretty insane population, and I mean this in terms of the Hindus and the Muslims, Which is going to result in massive catastrophes, massive human casualties, massive displacements.
	Instead of trying to change the rulers on an insane population and destabilize the rulers over an insane population, I am going to work to apply the principles of nonviolence to make the insane population more sane.
	And I'm going to do that by focusing on the parenting.
	I'm going to do that by opposing the state.
	And I'm going to do that Mm-hmm.
	resulted in the deaths of over a million people, to put it mildly, in the displacement of 10 million people.
	I'm sorry.
	If people don't follow their own values and what results is the deaths of over a million people, I can't just look at them and say, well, you know, he was pretty photogenic and he looked like a nice guy.
	No, Stefan, he did not sanction the division, the partition or the deaths of millions of people.
	He did not sanction any of that.
	He fasted whenever he encountered violence, and he did not destabilize the British.
	On the contrary, he actually supported the British in World War II because he thought supporting the Nazis would be even worse.
	So, he supported the British.
	So, he did not take up the arms to fight the British government.
	So, anyway...
	Okay.
	Well, I'm sorry.
	I'm going to have to move on because we're just going around in circles.
	My final point is that either he knew that these disasters were going to occur, in which case he's responsible for them, or he had no idea that these disasters were going to occur, in which case he is both a fool and an extremely dangerous human being.
	Anyway, I certainly appreciate the call.
	It's always interesting to chat about the icons of history, but as a philosopher, people who don't reason consistently from first principles and who are venerated.
	As noble and moral and heroic figures, it's like saying you don't need to study math to be a great mathematician.
	You can just randomly guess some answers and be considered a genius.
	And anybody who's not got a consistent methodology for approaching truth and virtue who is venerated is an insult to philosophy and usually all of the mess and crimes that result from their irrationalities are swept under the rug and they are praised.
	And it's a way of keeping virtue away From the average person.
	We say, well, I have to just have this amazing willpower, this incredible strength to be this world historical figure in order to be heroic in virtue.
	And this is not true at all.
	You do not need to be divinely inspired to be a competent mathematician.
	You just need to study math You do not need to be born into a chaotic world historical time and be some great mover of the masses in order to be virtuous and to contribute to the virtue of the world in your own life.
	All you need to do is be consistent with the non-aggression principle in your personal life and in the lives of those around you.
	Encourage peaceful parenting.
	Encourage skepticism towards the violence of the state.
	These things are possible to everyone.
	The veneration Thank you, Stefan.
	Thank you, Stefan.
	Thank you, Stefan.
	And since it's my first call, if I have gone off a tangent, I'll make sure that we'll have a more constructive talk next time.
	And I really appreciate the opportunity to talk with you.
	Thank you.
	Well, thank you.
	And let me tell you, you did a fantastic job.
	I have no criticisms with the job that you did.
	You did a fantastic job in a very challenging topic.
	So kudos to you.
	Genuine and thankful kudos to you.
	So who do we have up next, Mike?
	Alright, I'm going to try Josh again via phone.
	Hello.
	Josh?
	Hello, Josh.
	How are you?
	Hello.
	Excellent.
	Your call?
	Hit me with your 1980 sound.
	Josh, Happy New Year.
	What's on your mind?
	Well, I was in the chat room on the last call-in show, and the last call was a woman who called in about spanking her own children.
	And I expressed in the chat room some kind of anxiety around that.
	And Mike, who's a really cool guy, was nice enough to call me and invite me onto the show to talk about my experiences with that.
	Yeah, if I remember rightly, the woman was not...
	I'm sorry, if I remember rightly, the woman was not specifically talking about spanking, but she was talking about saying to her three-year-old, I hate you and having huge problems with her tantrums and so on.
	But anyway, so yes, it was a very interesting call and I certainly appreciate the caller, but go ahead.
	How did you feel during the call?
	Well, you know, first of all, I'll say I totally appreciate her calling in and this is nothing personal towards her.
	My own experience kind of just kind of prompted an anxiety in me, which is that I had My own abusive mother, who's kind of an expert in this kind of language, the language of child abuse.
	She was abusive as a child and spent a lot of time in chat rooms during my youth, you know, so-called working on her child issues, but all the while being extremely abusive to me.
	And it kind of brought back a...
	I spent the last couple days just really thinking about it a lot, too, and kind of coming to some conclusions, thanks to a lot of your podcasts.
	But just in general, my experience was that So your concern is that the woman was calling up because she felt bad, was going to receive some advice that made her feel better but wasn't going to focus on any particular change, is that right?
	Yeah, like, I mean, I just grew up with, like, such this kind of, like, I mean, I literally, like, I mean, I remember moments where my mom would volunteer to do, like, a kind of a chat room not too dissimilar from yours, helping people with abuse and things like that.
	And, like, literally, like, coming into the room and her being like, get the fuck out of here!
	I'm helping abuse children!
	You know, and it's like, It's just psychotic, psychotic, double-think, fucked-up behavior.
	And so I started to feel kind of anxiety hearing this woman, and it really brought up a lot of that stuff for me, which was good because it helped me really kind of confront the inner rage that I felt towards her.
	I don't really have a particular question.
	I kind of just wanted to share that experience with you, and I also wanted to say that I really, really, really, really appreciate all the work you've done.
	In my own life, it's been just so invaluable, so important, and I I just praise you infinitely and I hope you keep continuing this.
	Well, thank you.
	And look, I'm incredibly sorry to hear about that really disturbing behavior on the part of your mom.
	You know, fuck off, I'm helping child abuse victims or people who are child abusers is truly insane.
	I mean, at such a fundamental level.
	And look, it is certainly true that a pursuit of virtue or a supposed pursuit of virtue can be a great cover for a vice.
	I mean, we all know the stories of the televangelists who end up in extremely compromising positions.
	Gaining a reputation for virtue or the pursuit of virtue is a wonderful cover for the pursuit of vice.
	Of course, right?
	I mean, gaining a reputation for trustworthiness is a wonderful cover for defrauding people, right?
	So, yes, we certainly do have to be very careful about people who claim Not just the pursuit of, but the achievement of virtue.
	I try to remain rationally humble in my pursuit of virtue, talk about the mistakes that I made, the lack of meeting even of my own values that occurs for me.
	So I certainly don't say I have achieved any kind of perfect state of virtue.
	I'm continually reminding people that I'm not in any ivory tower of perfect virtue, but I'm sort of down there struggling with the same issues as everyone else I've talked about.
	My vulnerabilities, my confirmation biases, and read corrections to the show, and so on.
	So I certainly try not to, and not even try to.
	I mean, it would be insane for me to elevate myself to any kind of standard of any kind of perfect virtue.
	Even, you know, the parenting that I do remains challenging.
	I think I'm doing a pretty good job of staying with my own values.
	But of course, the big challenge of parenting...
	Many years ago I wrote that I don't think there are any really good parents in the world.
	And part of that is because, of course, the amount of dysfunction in parenting relative to ideal philosophical standards.
	But let's say there was a parent out there who was able to achieve some sort of perfect philosophical standard of parenting.
	Well, the child would still find that kind of parenting difficult because you'd have to live in a world full of people who weren't that way raised.
	So there are always challenges when it comes to parenting until the world gets substantially or significantly better.
	So yeah, you do have to be careful about people who make massive protestations as to the values and virtues that they're pursuing.
	The way that I look at it is if somebody proclaims a particular virtue...
	Then, if they're not defrauding people, if they're not out there creating a halo so you can't see the person, and so you worship the halo and eliminate imperfections in the person within your own mind, what I do is if somebody claims a particular value, which ties into the last conversation that we had, if somebody claims a particular virtue or value, I look for the degree to which they enact that in their own lives.
	That's all.
	That's all I do, is I look at the person.
	That's not sure proof or anything like that.
	Go ahead.
	I couldn't agree more.
	I also, maybe just to add to this, the next day after the phone call, I got an email from an aunt of mine, an aunt who's been excommunicated basically by the rest of my family.
	And I had the food about three months ago officially, but I've been kind of outside the family for over a year now.
	And I started chatting with her.
	I mean, I gave her kind of a warning ahead of time, like, look, if you want to talk to me, like, we're going to have to RTR this thing and be really open and honest and stuff like that.
	And she's been giving me a lot of interesting feedback and interesting perspective.
	For example, like, she was under the impression my entire childhood that I was placed in a Montessori school and I was being given the freedom to do whatever I wanted and never screamed at and never hit.
	And, I mean, I was literally, like...
	This alternate universe where I was treated great was brought up to me very casually and often in conversation.
	There was a whole series of excuses, a timeout at a park and refused to leave and some other things like that when I was a young child that are all the reasons why my mom never really fully adopted to the idea of being a peaceful parent.
	But she had expressed to her sister and my aunt that she was going to be raising me at a Montessori school and raising me peacefully with love and blah blah blah blah.
	And I didn't even know...
	Like I said, she's kind of excommunicated, so I had no idea that my mom was even propagating this illusion outwardly like that.
	And it's scary how fucked up a house can be and how...
	No, like, I mean, I have to kind of take her word for it that she just had no idea that, like, those things were occurring.
	And I mean, I don't doubt her either, because she really wasn't brought into the house.
	Like, when I hung out with her, I was brought to her house, and my mom kept her at arm's length always, you know?
	Yeah, look, I mean, it's depressingly common.
	Yeah, I mean, that gave insight.
	Yeah, it's depressing.
	I mean, my mom was constantly praising her own parenting.
	Sorry, my mom was constantly praising her own parenting in front of people and talking about how she had this philosophy of peace and virtue when it came to parenting and so on, right?
	And one of the reasons that people do that...
	Really?
	Okay.
	Oh yeah, no, it's depressingly common.
	You know, the people who most proclaim their own virtue and moral perfection are the people who almost always, almost always, will...
	I'd be those who are preying on others the most.
	Your kids are safe with me, right?
	I mean, that's what people like to say.
	My kids are safe with me, and so on.
	My parents would yell at my friends that were staying there.
	There's no one safer than them.
	I have a kind of question, too.
	she's like almost a spitting image of my mom physically, and even her personality doesn't really inspire me to think of her as a very particularly peaceful person.
	But she chose not to have children.
	She's not a child abuser.
	She kind of knew her own issues and went the route of, I don't want to inflict this on other people.
	So she's not guilty or anything kind of like that.
	But it's kind of put a question in my own head of, like, you know, I've been listening to these podcasts for four years now, and it's inspired me to think about, you know, having my own family and things like that.
	Sorry to interrupt you.
	I apologize.
	Sorry to interrupt you.
	Was she around you and your mom when you were growing up?
	My aunt?
	Yeah.
	I mean, it was almost always a situation like I was dropped off with her.
	Like, it was very rare that her and my mom were actually together.
	No, I know, but so she had access to you, right?
	Yeah, yeah.
	Alright, and then did she ever ask you how things were with your mom?
	She made an attempt when I was 13 years old.
	She took me to England with her, and she made an attempt on the flight there.
	She sat down with me, and I wish I could remember the details of the conversation a little better, but she really tried to kind of get my insight about my family.
	Try to kind of, I don't know, warn me back to the proprietary nature, but at the time as a kid I got really defensive that she was attacking my mom and ended up writing her off on the whole trip as this like maniacal bitch trying to destroy my family kind of thing.
	Right.
	And I've had time to kind of reflect on that now, and I really...
	And I asked her too to kind of clarify, and she just told me that she was concerned about...
	It's kind of nebulous with her though.
	It's like I don't think she has...
	She doesn't have the skills that you have or that people in this community have put forward in terms of thinking about these things, that's for sure.
	And it's tough.
	I mean, it is very tough.
	One of the reasons why people pretend virtue to cover vice is that if you confront them, I guarantee you there is a nuclear explosion in the family.
	Hypocrisy is the most volatile emotional substance known to mankind.
	It makes gelignite look like a brick.
	And if somebody is publicly proclaiming a virtue and privately acting in the opposite manner, if they are confronted, you will get a sky-blistering supernova of rage.
	It incredibly raises the stakes to the point of relationship suicide bombs if you confront someone on a core hypocrisy.
	So it's a great way of warning people to never ever confront you on your hypocrisy because everybody knows what happens if you Attempt to defuse a moral hypocrite.
	Yeah, and this ends up ringing especially true after Defoe.
	I don't know why, but I guess I kind of expected some integrity from their response, and it was just completely lacking in any kind of integrity, attacking me, blaming me.
	I was actually thankful.
	I was almost worried they were going to use the kind of language I grew up with about child abuse and stuff, and be like, no, we know, we want to talk to you, and we care, and this kind of stuff.
	I was relieved to know the truth, finally.
	You know what I mean?
	Like, to see behind the mask that they had been putting up this whole time.
	And about the false virtue, I mean, my dad would routinely say, I'm your best father.
	I'm the best father there is, right?
	You know, and it's like, with his arm around you, you're kind of like, yeah, yeah, you're great, whatever.
	You know, until you realize, until you're an adult and you're just like, ugh, he was horrible.
	Horrible.
	Yeah, I mean, this is something that with the DFU, you know, people get confused, you know?
	I mean, if...
	It's a trial separation.
	That's all it is.
	And if you're engaged in a trial separation in a marriage, what you need to do is fix the relationship.
	Work as hard as you can to fix the relationship.
	If you're a parent who's got an adult kid who is so unhappy with the relationship that they're thinking of separating from you, then get into therapy.
	Go get the help.
	Go find out whatever you need to do to fix the relationship.
	It's really essential.
	I've said this before and I'll say it again.
	You know, you do not have to spend time with abusive people.
	There are very few mental health professionals that I know of who will say it's really, really healthy to spend time with people who are abusive or dismissive or contemptuous or insulting or demeaning or even just outright boring and disconnected.
	I don't think there are any mental health professionals who would say those relationships are really healthy to maintain.
	But if you are a parent and your child is drifting off the radar and is looking for a way out, now is the time to act.
	Get into therapy.
	Get the help that you need.
	Try and figure out some way to repair and rescue the relationship because the idea is growing about volunteerism in families.
	And anyways, I just wanted to mention that.
	And I'm very sorry that they chose...
	You know, the most destructive way.
	Like, oh, my wife is having a trial separation.
	I think what I'm going to do is stalk her and put a GPS on her car.
	And it's like, all you're doing is confirming why she's not there.
	Anyway, so I'm sorry about that.
	Right.
	Their entire response was that I needed, I had a chemical imbalance.
	And my dad said, you know, I needed help.
	I was visceral.
	Misremembering my past and my mom replied a couple days later recommending some stupid fucking child book that she read to help her with her problems, so she thinks.
	And that was it.
	That was their big attempt to pull me out of the kind of depression I was feeling at the time I sent an email.
	But I'll say, man, since Defoe, things have been Incredible.
	Dreams, memories, lost memories, my motivation, my relationship with my girlfriend.
	I mean, the honesty and integrity I've been able to bring to this relationship has made me love her and her love me so much.
	I mean, even like...
	Even sex is better after Defoe.
	And not that that's the reason to do it, but I've just found the experience to be just so, so rewarding and so liberating.
	And I really appreciate the work you've done to help me kind of see the hypocrisy that I was surrounded by.
	You are very welcome.
	There's not a lot of Defoe stories that come with a porn soundtrack, but I certainly don't dismiss the implications.
	It is something that...
	Look, I am absolutely convinced that when I got an abusive family of origin out of my life, I got my great family now.
	I am truly convinced that I would not have ended up married to the wonderful woman that I am married to if I had said, oh, here's the mother I love.
	Let's go spend some time with her and been who I was around my mother.
	And allowed this woman to see that I valued my lover, my mother, sorry.
	So if that is what is occurring, I'm just enjoying that Freudian slip there, truly a Freudian slip, but if that is, like I have this destructive and abusive mom, and let's say the healthy woman, like my wife, comes into my life, right?
	Okay, so what am I going to do?
	Well, am I going to say, I really like and love my mom, And she's going to see who my mom is right away.
	And she's going to say, okay, well, I'm the opposite.
	I hope I'm the opposite of that woman.
	So if he loves and likes and respects that woman, then he's going to have huge problems with me, right?
	So she's, no, that's going to be the issue.
	If I say, well, I really don't like my mom.
	I consider her an abusive person.
	Let's go and spend lots of time with her.
	Then she's going to know that my values don't have any connection to my actions.
	And I'm, you know, all talk and no action.
	Which means that none of the promises I make are going to hold any value to her.
	Because the connection between word and deed is not only separate or severed, but it's opposite, right?
	And so that's the other possibility.
	The other thing that's going to occur is a healthy woman comes into my life, and I have this abusive and destructive mom.
	Well, what can happen is I can say, hey, if you get married to me...
	Here's who's going to be a big part of your life.
	Yay!
	How does that sound to you, honey?
	Well, how is that?
	Here's who's going to be around when we have kids.
	Here's who's going to be around when she gets old and sick.
	Here's who might move in.
	Here's who I'm going to take care of.
	You are going to get your face rubbed in this crazy person's personality dysfunction.
	For the next 20 or 30 or 40 years, how does that sound to you?
	It would not have happened.
	And I'm sorry.
	My mom's own integrity, too, because...
	I'm sorry to interrupt.
	No, go ahead.
	That really speaks to my mom's kind of own integrity, too, because she was so aware of how abused she was as a child, and yet I was surrounded by her abusers as a child, too.
	I mean, I was in contact with her mom who abused her and her brother who abused her.
	And nothing was done to keep me out of contact from them either, not to mention my own father.
	So, you know, but I'll say that maybe just to kind of bring it to a question, the only thing I've kind of been thinking about is like, I mean, this is just fear.
	I don't know what it is kind of driving this, but like a kind of slight in the back of my head thing like, man, am I just...
	Building myself up the way my mom did, surrounding myself up with all these, oh yeah, I would do Montessori, or I would do unschooling, and I would do this, and I would treat my kid great, and then when the moment of truth really comes and I have a kid in front of me, I don't know what the moment was for her where all of her integrity just went out the window, if it was probably long before me being born, but I don't know, I have a kind of fear now, like, hmm, maybe...
	Maybe this kind of stuff creeps up on you really hard once you have a kid.
	I don't know.
	I'm afraid of that.
	Look, I think that's perfectly understandable because you've been exposed to Protestations of Virtue that cover the practices of vice.
	And you obviously don't want your own Protestations of Virtue to be the same thing.
	But parenting, it's like running a marathon, right?
	If you know that you want to run a marathon in a year or two, what do you do?
	Practice, jog, run every day.
	Well, you will do that, but the first thing I would suggest you do is you talk to people who've run marathons and talk to experts about the kind of diet and exercise that is going to give you the most chance of success, and also you get the right equipment, the right shoes, and you make sure you don't practice too hard so that you injure yourself but not so soft that you're not ready for the race.
	You simply prepare, and you run shorter distances, and then you run longer distances, and you practice, and you prepare.
	And then by the time you were going to run the marathon, you've already run the marathon like 20 times.
	And then you don't sort of wake up one morning and say, oh my God, there's no way I can run this marathon, right?
	Yeah.
	I mean, I recently had a couple of friends here that have kids, and I don't know if that counts as kind of preparing, but just engaging with their children.
	And even...
	I remember the very beginning with one of my newer friends here when I started to engage his kid.
	I was playing kind of rough with him, not violently or anything, but we were playing a tag game running back and forth and stuff like that.
	And I said, you'll never beat me.
	I'm better than you.
	Or something like that.
	You know, this fucking five-year-old kid.
	kid, I'm such an idiot.
	And like all of the memories suddenly, instantly fell back of like all my childhood when my dad was always constantly saying that to me while we were playing, like, oh, you'll never beat me.
	I'm the greatest, I'm the best.
	And I didn't have to apologize to the kid.
	He barely realized it, but I felt horrible horrible after that and I was just like, oh my god, I'm just repeating a pattern so clearly, you know?
	Yeah.
	Yeah, no, look, I mean, I understand that.
	My daughter will occasionally say to some three-year-old, I can climb better than you can, and I sort of have to remind her that she has older friends who don't put her down for not doing as well as they do, and that she has to be sensitive and encouraging rather than say that she's better.
	I mean, again, it's understandable and all that.
	She's transitioning from being a toddler to...
	A young girl, which means that she's really now conscious of and exposed to children who are younger than herself, which she was neither conscious of, particularly not exposed to a lot children who are younger than herself.
	And she is very competitive, and I think that's fine.
	That's natural.
	I think that's healthy.
	I know I am.
	I compete with the greatest minds in history to add even more value to the human canon and practice of virtue.
	Yes, you do.
	Yeah, so I have high standards and I'm very competitive and I think that's fine, but I have to reorient herself.
	I have to reorient her back to the fact that she's now older, that there are younger kids, and that instead of being the one who's always youngest and being mentored, she can now actually mentor other children and encourage them.
	So this is just a bit of reorientation that happens.
	It doesn't sound like it happened to a huge degree with your dad, but that's pretty sad and I'm sorry that that occurred.
	And...
	You know, these, I was just, somebody sent me a video on Dr.
	Steven Pinker, the Brian May of neuroscience.
	He, based on the hairdo, he was talking about how studies show that parents aren't that influential in their children's lives, that it tends to be something called culture and something called genetics, but they can't find more than 0 to 10% of influence on Children from their parents and so on.
	And I'm going to do more research on this, and to me it all seems like significant nonsense.
	And I say that with all due knowledge and humility of the fact that I'm trained in history, not neuroscience.
	And again, this is based upon a 10-minute video, but the idea that parents don't have much influence on children's behavior seems to me quite...
	Quite natural because parents have very little interaction with their children.
	The average dad has about a half-hour conversation with his kid every week.
	The moral corrections, the influences upon behavior that you need as a parent are constant insofar as you never know exactly when they're going to happen.
	For me, they happen maybe five or seven times a week.
	my daughter when she's awake for like 14 hours straight usually.
	And so of these 70, 80 hours that I have her during the week, there's maybe five or seven times where there's a sort of important correction or nudge that is needed to help her understand something.
	But if she was in school, and I was working full time, I would have very little exposure to that.
	And it would all be hurried, get bathed, get to dinner, get to bed, here's a story.
	There would be very little of this connected correction that occurs.
	You need to be there a lot in order to influence your children.
	And the fact that parents really aren't there that much anymore, even if it's a stay-at-home mom, There's lots of time where the kid is away.
	The fact that kids end up in these rote government schools for most of their lives where throughout the West there tends to be a very similar curriculum and so on, which is why you can get these international tests.
	So he says, well, children are influenced more by peers than by parents.
	And it's like, well, of course they are.
	Of course they are, because they spend much more time around peers than parents, because they go to these government schools.
	So all you're talking about is the effects of government schools, not anything fundamental to human nature.
	And so...
	Right.
	It's like saying, well, look, if I go to prison, I'm going to be influenced by my prison mates more than my friends.
	It's not fundamental to human nature.
	It's just the nature of being in prison, who you're exposed to.
	Anyway, I could go on and on, but I just wanted to point out these...
	These aspects of how people just, I think, really still don't understand any of this stuff and how strange our human upbringing is these days and how much people mistake that for human nature.
	A minor tangent.
	I apologize.
	Did you have another point you wanted to make?
	No, that's all.
	And thank you so much again for everything you've done for this phone call.
	And thank you very much.
	And what I meant to say in terms of practice was that if you have abusive people in your life and they happen to be your family of origin, which is generally the most abusive, and if you are already putting into practice your values...
	Yeah.
	then they can't be in my life.
	Then you are already putting your values into practice in a way that your mom just didn't.
	Right.
	Your mom kind of did the opposite of what she was preaching.
	And you are actually acting in consistency with, I think, rational and healthy values.
	And so you are already acting with integrity.
	And that's what I mean by sort of practicing for parenting.
	So that I would mention.
	Okay.
	Oh, that's really helpful.
	Thank you.
	Yeah, thank you.
	I thought of that a few minutes ago and I'm like, oh, shouldn't let you go without mentioning that.
	So I just wanted to mention that.
	Thank you so much for your call.
	And I'm very sorry to hear about what's happened with your family, but it sounds like a reasonable decision to me.
	So good for you.
	Yeah, and the future looks bright thanks to the work you've put in and the work I've put in.
	So thank you so much again.
	Yeah, and remember, sex sells.
	So keep talking about how the bump and grind is a magnificent Krakatoa of orgasmic bliss now that you're living with that kind of integrity.
	Good for you.
	I hadn't really thought of that, but good for you.
	All right, Mr.
	Mike?
	Okay.
	All right, Gareth, you're up next.
	Go ahead, Gareth.
	Hi there, Steph.
	Can you hear me?
	I can.
	How are you doing, Gareth?
	Well, I'm a little nervous, to be honest with you.
	I've been listening to you for many, many years, since my boy was very little, basically five years ago.
	And, yeah, you've had a lot of influence over me with him.
	But the reason I'm ringing is because of issues that happened in my childhood.
	My mum and dad hit me, but they deny it.
	And that's kind of really messed me up.
	Particularly my dad likes to think of himself and indeed in most ways he presents himself as a very honest kind of guy.
	He's like an armchair philosopher but he ain't really.
	But the thing is I always looked up to him and I kind of believed him when he told me that he didn't hit me but I remember him doing it and I feel like I've got this big pull in my head because I know he's done it But I kind of can't believe that he's done it either.
	And also, I mean, I was hit at school as well, and they've told me that, they've admitted that they allowed the teachers at school to hit me.
	They just won't admit it for themselves, and it's actually messed up a little bit, if that makes any sense.
	Oh, there's no doubt that enlightened witnesses to a harmed history is essential.
	This is not my particular idea.
	This is Alice Miller and lots of other people that, and this is really, I think, one of the Realities of long-term therapy is that an enlightened witness to your history is very important.
	Within families, it's you and your immediate family who are witnesses to your history.
	And there's no videotapes.
	There's no third-party cameras.
	You can't call up the NSA if you're under 15 or over 15 and get the records of everything that happened on your parents' iPhones.
	So if...
	A history is denied from the only other, and particularly the adult witnesses, it is extremely disorienting.
	It's hard not to feel just that little bit crazy.
	Like, did I dream it?
	Did I make it up?
	Is it like, what the heck, right?
	Yeah.
	It's like there's a crack or a crevice there, and not only there in my history, but it comes up to now.
	It's like, I feel my perceptions now are somehow nullified.
	Like, I don't...
	I'm no good with people.
	I was actually diagnosed with Asperger's when I was 21.
	However, I'm very different from that.
	I've come an awful long way myself.
	I run a business.
	I employ two or three people.
	I deal with a lot of people, so the surface is getting much better.
	But underneath it all, I don't trust my perceptions.
	Recently, I've just lost two and a half thousand pounds.
	My girlfriend at the time, well, I lent a lot of money afterwards.
	And a part of me, because she has a kid, you see, and I wanted to be his dad.
	I mean, you know, he called me pretty much dad.
	You know, and I love the little kid.
	And we split up, but I gave her some money for a house for him, and she promised that she'd pay me back.
	And she'd come around and clean.
	But there are very similar things happening in that she's just turned.
	She's just turned on a sixpence.
	She's basically not communicating with me.
	I plea with her, you know, for emotional connection and what on earth has gone wrong.
	It's the same sort of denial, and I've got hugely angry thoughts inside me.
	I am going to therapy, like you say, a long-term therapy.
	I'm going to see a guy, and we're working through it.
	It's really brought back this denial from my dad.
	I really want to get rid of these angry thoughts, but I am trying to look at it in a silver lining way, because it is another opportunity to rerun what happened to me, I guess, and sort it out this time.
	Does that make sense?
	Yeah, do you want to try a role play where I'll be you and you be your dad?
	Because I'm trying to sort of understand what his defenses are.
	Well, I'll tell you what his defenses are, and it goes in this order.
	Don't be silly.
	Don't be stupid.
	Don't be ridiculous.
	It's all in your head.
	You're making it up.
	And I actually took them to a family therapist.
	It took me two years to drag them there.
	And I then sat them down.
	I mean, I was like 19, and it was a massive thing for me to do.
	I was really proud of myself.
	And I said, you know, well, why did you hit me?
	Well, we just didn't.
	They said, it's all in your head.
	I said, well, why did you give Mr.
	Park and the teacher's permission to hit me?
	I was dragged out of the class by the pupils.
	The teachers told the pupils to drag me out.
	I'm a big guy and there was two at each leg and one or two on each arm, I forget.
	And they were literally dragging me out of the classroom to take me to the head teacher's office where I had to lay my pants down and be spanked.
	And I was saying to them, why did you give him permission to do that and you didn't do it yourself?
	And, you know, she wouldn't, the family therapist wouldn't force the issue.
	But no, and in his defense, now he'll just say, come on, you'll say, what can I tell you, Steph?
	I can't fix it.
	I tried very hard.
	He used to report and psychotherapy sessions and go back and say, Dad, listen to this, just to try and break the wall and communicate with him because he's emotionally not there, you know.
	But it didn't work, man.
	Right.
	And do you know how often your parents are, on what regularity your parents hit you?
	Not terribly infrequently.
	I can't remember what it was for either.
	I wanted that confirmation from this to find out what it was for.
	But in terms of how often they hit me, I would suggest possibly once a month or...
	I'm a little hazy on that.
	When I was, say, up to puberty type, you know, from...
	I would love to get the specifics tied down, but as they won't admit it to me, it's a bit hard to do that.
	Okay, so once a month for like five years?
	Yeah, yeah, around about that, and I used to prefer one to the other, but I can't remember which one it was, because one used to hit me hard, but only three or four times, and one used to hit me like 10 or 15 times, because I used to have to go upstairs, take my pants down, lean on the bed, I remember screaming at the top of my lungs, stop, stop, please stop, and then, you know, nobody came from the outside, and And I didn't.
	Wow.
	Yeah, wow.
	So these are very specific and clear memories.
	Was it pants down bare butt?
	Yeah.
	And so it was kind of like a ritual, like you had to go up, you had to pull your pants down, and then you would get smacked, I assume, open hand on the buttocks, and this would happen.
	Was it your father who hit you harder and your mother who hit you less hard?
	Well, this is a weird thing.
	I even said in family therapy that I can't remember which one was which, but I remember there was a difference.
	Right.
	I've just told you that, and I hope you can hear my voice, that it's real to me.
	I mean, I'm coming alive now, or I won't come alive in weeks because I don't connect with my emotions, so it's kind of real to me.
	I have no doubt in my mind, no doubt whatsoever, that what you're describing is absolutely real.
	Completely true.
	I have no doubt.
	I'm just telling you that.
	I completely accept and believe what it is that you're saying.
	You know, if you said, well, you know, one time I was half asleep or, you know, whatever it was, then it'd be like, well, you know, maybe there's some doubt about veracity and so on.
	But, I mean, if you have specific and repetitive memories of an entire ritual and where it occurred and the manner in which it occurred and the frequency in which it occurred, well, I mean, you can't have more certainty than that, right?
	Right?
	Yeah.
	Yeah, I guess.
	And then, you know what?
	What happens now?
	So, this is the frightening thing.
	I guess I'm frightened of my anger.
	But when I actually come to really believe it, and believing in people, emotional content, when you believe or when you feel things, that's a two-way street.
	And so, basically, I only speak to my dad once every other month, which actually suits me quite fine.
	When we do speak, we're all very sort of nice, but it's so destroyingly nice.
	But actually, it's not real.
	It's all bullshit.
	And I guess I've got a lot of anger.
	I mean, I'm a tree surgeon, which helps.
	I can take it out on the trees.
	I can smash down the sheds and the fences.
	That's literally cathartic.
	One of your podcasts really helped me about saying the boxer.
	He was drawn to dangerous situations so he could control the dangerous situation.
	When I climb trees it's obviously quite frightening but I do feel like it's a frightening thing I can master.
	I've been listening to you for a long time and you've made a big impact and I appreciate what you do.
	Okay, so when you talk to your, thank you, but if you talk to your father and you say, I assume you have, or if not, what would happen?
	If you said, well, I remember these specific things about the ritual, I remember how it happened, I remember where it happened, I remember my feelings about it happening, I have all the symptoms of it happening, would he still say, you're making it up?
	Yeah.
	Okay, then the question would be, Do you think that I know that I'm making it up, or do you think I don't know that I'm making it up?
	In other words, do you think I'm consciously lying, or do you think that these memories are somehow within me, and I don't know that they're false?
	My dad would go down the route of that I'm not intentionally making it up, but they're not real.
	I don't think I'm lying, but it's just not real, and he can't explain it.
	And he would tend to do it in a little chuckle.
	You know, he minimized everything, you know.
	Okay, so then he would have no explanation.
	Sorry, go on.
	So then he would have no explanation as to how these very specific memories...
	And this isn't when you were three.
	I mean, this is when you set up to puberty, so 11 or 12 or 13 or whatever, right?
	So you have very specific memories of very specific actions in very specific places that are repetitive and detailed...
	How could he possibly explain that you would have all of these memories that are very specific when it didn't actually occur?
	Yeah, no.
	It doesn't.
	But our family has all been trained.
	My mum's there now.
	But my family, me, we were all trained to not see the elephant in the room.
	To talk around it, our wellbeing depended on it.
	Have you ever read Watership Down?
	Yes, a long time ago.
	It's a tangent.
	Okay, so you remember that when they went to the rabbits that were fat and they were well fed, but the rabbits couldn't say where the trap was, where the farmers had put the trap.
	So the forced impact was that the rabbits were well fed and well looked after, but every so often one of them would be killed and they wouldn't talk about it.
	As soon as anybody started a sentence with the word were, I mean, where is such and such a thing?
	They would all change the subject.
	It was taboo.
	And it's kind of like that.
	I've got a crate or a crevice in me now from childhood that I just can't see.
	But you can get him anyway.
	I don't think it's existential.
	I think it's a profession.
	Sorry, my friend.
	Sorry, you can get him anyway.
	You don't need anything to do with him accepting or proving the past.
	You can get him anyway if you want, and I can tell you how.
	It's the little chuckle.
	That you can corner him on, right?
	Because he said, first of all, if he says, you're making it up, you don't know, it's crazy, it never happened, and then he laughs a little, that is incredibly cruel, right?
	Because let's say that this is somehow a memory that was implanted in you by space aliens, right?
	If my daughter came to me with a scary memory that I'm certain never happened, I would not laugh at her.
	There would be no chuckling in me because I would recognize that she would be very scared about that memory, that that memory would be extremely disorienting to her and unnerving.
	I would not chuckle.
	Do you understand?
	Yeah.
	That's where you can attempt to get some truth out of the situation, right?
	Yeah.
	Like, Dad, how on earth can you chuckle about this?
	Either it happened, in which case chuckling is insane, or it didn't happen, in which case I have a significant mental problem.
	How on earth can you just dismiss it with a chuckle?
	Either way, this is staggeringly serious stuff.
	Do you see what I mean?
	Mm.
	No, no, I do see what you mean, Steph.
	I do.
	Yeah.
	So you can talk to him about his reaction, regardless of the truth or falsehood of what he believes or doesn't believe, it is in the reaction that you get the conversational topic.
	He is laughing at something that is either true and brutal or false and terrifying.
	That is how you know there is defensive falsehood and a lack of empathy that is downright cruel in his response.
	Do you understand?
	Yeah.
	I keep hearing this this phrase come back to mind which is an evil cradling, an evil cradling.
	An evil cradling, did you say?
	An evil, yeah.
	Anyway, because the more I look at how my dad is, what you just said is what a caring individual would act like, but then my dad isn't like that.
	But the perversion of it all is that everything was supposed to be nice in our family.
	We were all supposed to present ourselves that way, and I kind of believed it.
	I couldn't get the real world outside.
	It didn't make sense to me.
	Why wasn't everybody like us?
	And now as I kind of move over to the real world, and I look back on the family, I realize how perverted some central aspects of it were.
	Right, but you understand, sorry to interrupt, but I'm sure you understand that the cruelty of laughing about your memories of having been hit That cruelty is entirely in line with the sadistic act of ritualized spanking.
	It's perfectly consistent.
	And the fact that your existing emotional needs are being sacrificed to your father's defensiveness is perfectly, to me it's more confirmation than it is rejection of your memories.
	But I would talk to him, forget about what happened in the past, I mean, in the conversation with him, but if you wanted to talk about this with him, I would strongly suggest talking about his reaction in the moment.
	How can you laugh at something like this?
	But now I think what he'd do is he'd say, oh, it's actually going, Gareth, haven't we talked about this?
	Or, oh...
	Yes, no, look, it's all in the past.
	It would be, again, a dismissive thing.
	Well, no, no, see, but if he says it's...
	Wait, wait, wait.
	If he says it's all in the past, then you can say, okay, well, if it's all in the past and therefore it's not a problem or anything to be discussed, then why was I ever punished as a child?
	Because when I was a child, whatever I did by the time you punished me was all in the past, right?
	Right.
	And so if you have a philosophy where everything that's in the past should not be discussed or should not come up as a topic, then why was I ever punished as a child?
	Because by the time you were punishing me, whatever I did was all in the past.
	So if when I was a child, what I did in the past was important enough to punish me, then you damn well sit down and listen to me now.
	And don't tell me there's bullshit about it all being in the past.
	Because that's not how you dealt with me when I was seven.
	So I'm damn well going to deal with this now that you're 40, in the same way that you dealt with me when you were seven.
	And you either admit that the past is important, in which case you're damn well going to deal with this me net with now, or you say the past is unemployment and you owe me about 50 million apologies for punishing me as a child for things that I had done in the past.
	I don't go ahead.
	If you feel it would be cathartic for me to do it, to go through the exercise and No, no.
	Look, I can't tell people what to do.
	Look, I am not in the business of telling people what to do.
	I'm simply pointing out that the defense called It's In The Past is for parents who ever punished children The parents cannot rationally claim that something that is uncomfortable should not be brought up because it's in the past.
	Because that's not how they parent it.
	And you cannot parent one way, and then when your child grows up and comes with you over the problem, claim to have the opposite values.
	So whether you talk about this with your dad or not is up to you.
	What I'm talking to is with your inner dad, the dad who's in your head, right?
	And the important thing is that you recognize that the chuckle is very cruel and you also recognize that all the defenses that are used to not talk about things are completely invalid based upon how he parented and are mere hypocritical avoidance mechanisms.
	Whether you talk to him or not is completely up to you.
	But it's important that you get that clarity one way or the other.
	Yeah, I mean, I would love to have real relationships with other people, but I don't think that's the place to start with.
	It's like if you've ever learned to drive, of course you must have learned to drive, and the driver, first of all, when he's telling you to change the gear, he will say, right, now what you need to do is put your foot on the clutch, or unless you don't use a fixture for the course being Canadian, but put your foot on the clutch, put it in gear, and he would go through it all, and then, you know, the next time he'd tell you a little bit less, but he He'd give an indication.
	And before you know it, after you've done it 100 or 200 times, all he'll do is just move his finger a little bit.
	You'll know.
	You'll go through all the sequences of what he's ingrained into you and what he's told you.
	With my dad, it's kind of like that.
	We have such deep grooves of conversation, such as it is, that would take us away from that.
	So I'm trying to make it real in my head now and then going forward with other people.
	I need to deal with it.
	But I don't think I'll be speaking to my dad about it directly.
	There's no fruit there.
	I've said goodbye to that relationship.
	But in my heart, the effects of it still You know, need exploring.
	Right.
	And this is why I'm sort of pointing out that you need to get clarity on the defenses.
	Because people will try to present their defensiveness to you as an objective moral principle.
	Right?
	So, for instance, if they do not satisfy you in terms of a topic, in other words, if they're not connected and present, In a conversation about something that is emotionally essential to you, then you will keep coming back, right?
	You will keep coming back to that topic until you achieve satiety, until you achieve closure, which is just certainty, right?
	Until you feel heard, until you are connected, right?
	And so when people do not satisfy you by being connected to your topic, you will return to that topic.
	And then they will pretend that you are obsessed with that topic, or you can't let it go, or that they did satisfy you, but you can't accept it, right?
	Exactly.
	Right, so let's say that I run a computer store, you come and buy a computer from me, and it doesn't work.
	And I take the computer back and I say, come back tomorrow and I will give you a refund.
	And you come back the next day and I say, You didn't bring a computer back.
	I don't owe you any money.
	Are you just going to let it go?
	No.
	No.
	You will be coming back to me and saying, listen, here's my receipt.
	Here's where I brought it back.
	Here's what you wrote to me.
	You need to give me this refund, right?
	And I will say, oh, it's all in the past.
	Forget about it, right?
	And you say, well, no.
	It's in the present.
	In the present, I am out $2,000 for that computer.
	Right?
	It's not in the past.
	Right?
	A meal that I had when I'm two is in the past.
	If I didn't get vitamin C and I've got rickets, my rickets is in the present, based upon what happened in the past.
	And if you have emotional difficulties based upon abusive or neglectful parenting, it's in the present.
	Sorry parents, it's in the present.
	It's not in the past.
	The past is the cause, the present is the symptom, and the future is the catastrophe.
	I'm sorry?
	What about the computer?
	It actually made me feel slightly uneasy.
	Of course, as long as you've got the receipt there and you can present your case...
	No, no, hang on.
	Forget that.
	Sorry, forget that.
	Forget that.
	I understand what you're saying, but we already talked about that.
	You have the chuckle.
	So you have the receipt.
	And you have the hypocrisy of it's in the past.
	So you have the receipt.
	Now, if you keep coming back to try and get your refund for the computer that didn't work that you returned where the man promised you a refund...
	Does he get to say, well, you've just become obsessed with me.
	You just can't let this topic go.
	What's the matter with you?
	And you'll say, no, the matter is unresolved.
	And until the matter is resolved, I will keep coming back to you about this matter.
	And I also fully recognize, if you come to me, I'm the computer store owner, I fully recognize that you have every incentive, economically, in the short run at least, to cheat me Out of my $2,000.
	Because if you return the $2,000 to me, then you're down $2,000.
	So all of this thing about, well, you're obsessed by it, or you can't let the past go, or, oh, you're not back again, are you?
	Is all just because you want to keep my $2,000.
	It's all nonsense, right?
	And the self-interest of a parent who has done wrong to a child in denying the child's lived experience is clear.
	It's much more than $2,000, right?
	So what I'm pointing out is that if you are unsatisfied with the interactions you've had with anyone, you will return to that topic.
	Of course you will.
	And if somebody just makes up a whole bunch of excuses or nonsense, particularly if the truth about your experience puts them in a negative light, then the clear self-interest of denying the topic and the irrationality of denying the topic Is essential.
	If your father had not chuckled, if he had reacted with sympathy and curiosity, even if he felt you were wrong, then you wouldn't be making progress, right?
	And we revisit topics that are unresolved.
	We continue to limp until our leg heals, right?
	We revisit topics until we get closure.
	Now the closure, sorry, the closure is either the truth in the content of the situation, in other words, your father admits and talks to you about everything that happened, or the truth is, the closure is that you will never get the truth from that situation.
	Either one of those is a kind of certainty, right?
	It's better to have the former, but the second is essential to you.
	Well, the second, it's going to be the second unless he's on his deathbed.
	That's where I am now.
	He's not going to come forward with it.
	So it's me.
	I need to make that choice to believe myself and my emotions rather than just minimize it with my head.
	Okay, but let's say he comes up with it.
	No, no.
	Let's say he comes up with it on your deathbed.
	On his deathbed, let's say he tells the truth on his deathbed.
	Right?
	That will still be for him and not for you.
	It will not change the pattern.
	You needed the empathy when you were a child.
	You need the empathy now.
	If he confesses his, quote, sins on his deathbed, it will still be for him and not for you.
	The pattern will remain unbroken.
	He will be unburdening himself to make himself feel better rather than because he has caring for you.
	Yeah, that's something I look forward to.
	It's not something I'm going to look forward to, but I'm just saying that's the only time he's going to crack open and say, this is what we did.
	I'm so grateful that he's admitted to allowing the teachers at school to hit me, because that kind of gave me this attitude.
	It doesn't make any sense for that to happen if he didn't want to hit me.
	So I know it's happened.
	He's not going to admit it.
	I've just got to keep going with the therapy.
	It means he has no problem with you being hit, right?
	Well...
	He approves of you being hit.
	I thought it was for my own good.
	Yeah, he approved of me being hit that I needed to be hit.
	I don't know what it was that I did.
	Right, so if he approves of you being hit, but he himself did not hit you, then he is by his own definition a bad parent.
	If hitting was good for you and he did not hit you, then he is a bad parent by his own value.
	It doesn't make any sense.
	Absolutely.
	Okay, now listen.
	I need to move on, but let me tell you something.
	You are a very intelligent and very verbal person, right?
	Thank you.
	Oh no, hugely thank you.
	They're the best guests.
	You are having a great deal of trouble connecting with any of this emotionally, right?
	And I don't mean this as a criticism in any way, shape, or form.
	I just need to give you my honest feedback.
	I think I feel stronger about it than you do.
	Right.
	And I don't...
	There's no switch.
	You can't push a switch.
	But it's important to recognize that you are very unlikely to gain clarity or closure out of this as an intellectual process.
	And the intellectual process is important.
	You need to Have a map before you can get to a destination, and having a map and plotting the course is an intellectual exercise, which is great, but you actually need to have the journey too.
	And my concern is that you have partly developed your intellectual capacities as a substitute for emotional connection.
	I know a little bit about that one too.
	Right.
	And, you know, but that's like software rendering as opposed to hardware rendering on a GPU, on a graphics processor.
	You can do it.
	It's just pretty laborious, right?
	And so I would really focus on the emotional connection.
	And the lack of emotional connection your father has with you means that you are unschooled in emotional connection.
	We're all born emotionally connected.
	We cry when we're upset.
	As babies, that's natural.
	Well, for the most part, if we have any kind of caring At all.
	But I just wanted to point out that that I think is the most important aspect of where you're heading, is to really try and connect with the injustice.
	I agree.
	I agree with that.
	Yeah, being laughed out about that, which is essential to you, is very cruel.
	Sure.
	No, absolutely, really.
	And I appreciate you've got to get on.
	I am on that journey with what you said about trying to feel things.
	I've cried at the Wizard of Oz because of the Tin Man with no art.
	I mean, literally.
	At least I'm crying, right?
	I'm on that journey.
	I really, really am.
	And I've come an awful long way.
	I appreciate what you've done with your radio show and the time you've spent talking to me now, and I will continue to listen.
	Good job, man.
	Well, thank you very much, and thank you for your call, and I'm very sorry for what happened to you into the past and for the failure of your father to, even if he disagrees with you, to show empathy.
	For what is occurring for you mentally at the moment.
	I'm very sorry about that.
	That's truly tragic and unjust and cruel to you.
	Parents must sacrifice even their own emotional comfort for the health of their children and he owes it to you.
	To be honest, and even if he's confused, to be empathetic about your experience.
	I'm very sorry that is not happening.
	It should happen.
	I would not hold my breath for it, but there's still a lot you can do to process the fact that it's not happening, and that your father is still choosing his comfort over your truth, and I'm very sorry for that.
	Take care, man.
	All right, take care.
	Meg, let's do Uno von Wann more.
	Alright, Charles.
	You're up, Charles.
	Go ahead.
	You're up, Chuck.
	Hello, can you hear me?
	I can.
	Go for it, brother.
	Can you hear me?
	Yes.
	Oh, okay, great.
	Thank you.
	Well, I think what my question is is that I have quite a bit of anxiety about 2014.
	I made some decisions that I want to know why I made them.
	And I think I have more anxiety about this phone call talking to you.
	I've been listening to Free Domain Radio all of 2011.
	I met you at Liberty at the Pines, and that was really exciting.
	And so I've learned a lot, but I'm kind of in a transition right now.
	So in 2014, I'm switching jobs.
	I'm also, and I'm switching jobs to be part of a family business as an accountant, but I'm also going to be completing my CPA test because I just completed the requirements,
	the education requirements, and so I'm going to be focused on getting through the CPA test this year, and I'm going to be focused on You know, converting over to this kind of accounting career.
	And I just had some questions and some anxiety about it.
	A number of different things.
	So the first thing would be, I guess, the accounting profession in general.
	I have some philosophical anxiety about mainly just kind of like doing tax work.
	I believe that When you're doing that kind of job, you're kind of making a promise to your clients that you're going to protect them from the state somehow.
	I think that promise is kind of a lie because you can't really protect someone from the state.
	And it actually makes sense a lot because the company I'm working for is my family, my aunt's, she's a defense attorney.
	And so she kind of does the same thing.
	I mean, she protects people from the state, you know, in her work.
	And so I just, I see a parallel there.
	And I don't, maybe I should talk to her and see how she gets through it.
	But it's just, I just wonder if you had any comments on that?
	So, you're concerned that you can't protect people from the state?
	Well, of course you can't, for sure.
	But you can help them, right?
	I mean, you can certainly, I mean, in studying the tax laws and in helping them stay on the right side of the tax laws, then you can help with that, right?
	I mean, it certainly is useful.
	And, of course, you may include in your services that you will deal with the IRS should they come a-calling or whatever, right?
	I mean, those things are all...
	We're all fine, right?
	So you can certainly help them.
	I mean, you can't say, I will protect you from the state, because you can't, right?
	Any more than my doctor can say, I can protect you from all illnesses.
	Well, she can't, but she can promote healthy practices in me, right?
	She can say, eat well, exercise, whatever, maintain a healthy weight.
	So then it's just a matter of being honest with your clients about what you can do, basically, right?
	Yeah, you can minimize their chances for trouble with the state.
	You can, of course, keep them legal.
	And you can testify and deal with the tax departments on their behalf, should there be any problems.
	And that's, you know, that's pretty good, right?
	Yeah, okay, okay.
	Okay, and then the other thing is...
	Family businesses?
	I know that it's all dependent on what the family is, I guess, but do you have any advice for, I guess, how to handle that?
	Yeah, I mean, the important thing with family businesses is to have a functional set of family relationships.
	Like, if you have a functional set of family relationships, then your family business, I think, has a huge chance of succeeding.
	Because you have the bond, you have the history, you have the trust and you have the lifelong future relationship which is going to be more important than any disagreements you have about immediate policy.
	So if you have functional and healthy family relationships then you have I think an incredible capacity for efficiency and positive interactions in your businesses.
	You just have the kind of trust, the kind of history, the kind of connection, the kind of Future investment.
	If things blow up with a business partner, you may go your separate ways.
	But if you're committed to a lifelong relationship with your family, then you really are going to stick and stay and work things out, right?
	Yeah, yeah.
	And as far as that goes, you know...
	I think that it's pretty good, but I guess we did have some problems with boundaries in 2013.
	I mean, there was even a few times I wanted to call it a show and discuss those.
	Yeah, look, but if there are problems, sorry, business relationships make your relationships more of who they are?
	It just amplifies them.
	So if you have a good family relationship, I think that business relationships may make them better because now you appreciate, respect, and love each other in another dimension or a different dimension as well, right?
	Right, right.
	On the other hand, if you have dysfunction, mistrust, lack of integrity in your family relationships, you can sort of stagger along with that crap for as long as you want.
	But you really can't get away with it in the business world.
	So if you have – it's sort of like parenting, right?
	Like I love my wife even more since I became a co-parent with her.
	But if I had become a co-parent with the wrong person, then I would love them less-ish, so to speak, right?
	Right.
	So whatever you have will be magnified.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	And so make sure that your family relationships are as strong as possible and that you are fully committed to working out differences and that you will not let business interfere with the long-term benefit to your family.
	I say this as somebody who did a lot of business with family.
	It is important to get that stuff worked out ahead of time.
	Okay, okay.
	So then...
	I probably could talk to you all day, but I'm trying to make it good for your show, you know, so I have actual questions.
	So the other question, I guess, is that, well, anxiety that I have about the whole thing is just like my, the pace that I've gone through my life in general.
	Like, I mean, I'm 32 and I'm kind of just now Well, I'm going to be 32.
	I'm 31.
	Hey, man, you're an accountant.
	You've got to get these numbers right.
	Sorry, go ahead.
	Don't approximate, man.
	At least four decimal places.
	Exactly.
	That's why I have anxiety because I don't know how good of an accountant I'm going to be.
	And especially because I kind of just fell into it.
	I kind of just allowed myself because, you know, my dad was a CPA and he kind of just chose this path for me.
	I mean, I did a lot of accounting work when I was young and I just didn't really have any other...
	It's the thing that drove me into something else.
	I don't know how else you can support that.
	I'm just talking at the seat of my pants here.
	I don't know if there's something you want to learn about my family or my history, but I have some anxiety about my own competence going into this new job.
	I don't want to ruin a family relationship.
	And I don't want to let them down.
	And I want to do, you know, I want to provide value, enough value that, you know, more value than they give me, basically, through my salary.
	Right, right.
	Well, I mean, I can't tell you that.
	I can tell you that if you are not certain of your profession, competence is going to be a little harder, right?
	I mean, I'm certain of what it is that I'm doing.
	And I, you know, have been certain ever since I stopped being a waiter and crap like that.
	I mean, stuff that I've been doing has almost always been enjoyable and challenging and interesting and all that kind of stuff.
	So if you can find a way to love and find value in what it is that you do, then you're going to be continually improving it and getting better at it and all that kind of stuff.
	But enjoyment and long-term competence go hand in hand, right?
	Like, I mean, to be a good actor, you need to really like acting, right?
	To be a good writer, you really need to like writing and all that.
	And so if you can find a way to really like it, I think that's the best guarantee of competence.
	I know it's a very anti-Protestant, but I think nonetheless hedonism in professionalism is the gauge of excellence.
	And so I would definitely follow that approach.
	As far as providing value, you don't have to guess, right?
	I mean, just keep asking people, am I providing value, right?
	Am I providing value?
	Don't guess in relationships.
	I ask that of my family.
	I ask that of my listeners.
	You'll often hear me say, how was that call for you?
	Was that useful for you?
	Was that helpful to you?
	If I can't, generally tell.
	I can usually tell.
	But if I can't, then I need to ask.
	I have the donations.
	I have the support.
	I have the invitations and the reinvitations to speak and be on people's shows.
	Am I providing value?
	Value.
	Well, I showed up in the best of Joe Rogan 2013.
	We're doing another show on the 6th.
	So I know I'm providing some value to the guy.
	He's certainly providing value to me and I really enjoy conversations with him.
	So, you know, the Kaiser reports, I think I was providing value to them until I was skeptical about global warming and then quite considerably less so.
	And so, yeah, so, I mean, you find out whether you're providing value.
	You don't have to guess that kind of stuff.
	You just have to keep asking, right?
	Can I just say something about that?
	The most controversial thing, because I say a lot of controversial things, as you do, and it seems like global warming is something I get the most lash back on for some reason.
	I'm like, really?
	Anyway, that's a soft topic.
	No, I was talking to this woman the other day, and she was saying...
	She doesn't want to have kids because human beings are a plague on the environment and, you know, we are, you know, it's that matrix beats where cancer and kind of stuff.
	And I was saying, well, what if your kid is...
	If you imbue your kid with environmental sensitivity, your kid's obviously going to be smart because you're smart, at least likely, and therefore your kid could be the guy who invents the Kindle or the flash drive or the next great thing, which solves a crisis, right?
	And so, who are you to say that you could be denying the world a solution to an environmental crisis by not having a child?
	You can't really predict these kinds of things.
	But it didn't matter.
	It didn't matter because it was her personal sense of apocalypse that environmentalism was feeding.
	It didn't have anything to do with environmentalism fundamentally.
	Everybody knows that the West is dying, that freedom is dying, that our culture is committing seppuku.
	With alarming regularity and increasing intensity.
	Statism is dying, the economy is dying, and so on.
	And people project that onto the environment as if it's not the mind environment, the cultural environment, the matrix of other people's irrationalities that is strangling the jugular of the future.
	Because that way they can Not confront people fundamentally, right?
	I mean, if it's statism that's dying, then confront people about statism.
	If it is child abuse or child neglect that is causing society to deteriorate, or at least it's not slowing down the deterioration, then you can confront people on that.
	The environmentalism is just a nebulous bucket with which to project all of the actually empirical catastrophes that we know are approaching.
	And it's just a convenient way to paralyze us into indecision.
	And, of course, it serves state power for there to be fears of environmentalism, environmental problems, because the state, despite its massive contribution to environmental problems, is always considered to be the port of last call, the sword of last resort when it comes to dealing with environmental issues.
	But the more I've talked to people, they don't have any clue.
	They don't have any reality.
	You could solve, even if global warming were real, which it may be, I don't know, but even if global warming were real and even if it were an entirely man-made cloud whitening, getting a bunch of sea vessels out there, spraying up salt water to coat clouds could undo the entirety of environmental damage caused by the worst estimates of man-made global warming for less than 100 million dollars.
	It's a solution that is scientifically validated and you've never heard of because it doesn't serve the interests of those in power.
	So, yeah, environmentalism is...
	When you push back on people's emotional defenses, you get enormous volatility and environmentalism is just people's emotional defenses for the known apocalypse of increasing power and surveillance, the surveillance state.
	And this is not to say that there aren't environmental problems, blah-de-blah-de-blah.
	It's just that that's not what people are...
	The purpose that it's serving people psychologically is a way of avoiding action in that sort of James Taggart kind of way because people would rather choose death than integrity.
	They would rather choose the demise of their culture than rational independence.
	And that is a tragedy that speaks to their childhoods.
	But anyway, go ahead.
	Oh, yeah, that's just really interesting, because, yeah, you can have a conversation or some about certain topics that would be controversial with other people, but they're not controversial with them, and you're like, okay, cool, maybe I can just talk about it anyway.
	And then you talk about something, like, you know, that you wouldn't think would be controversial, like, I'm skeptical about humans' ability to predict the weather, and it's like all of a sudden you triggered something.
	But, yeah, anyway.
	Back to Do you think you can find happiness being an accountant?
	Is that going to be an exciting and positive way to spend your life?
	I don't mean that skeptically.
	There is that cliche of accountancy, like the most boring thing in the universe.
	I don't mean that at all.
	I don't mean that skeptically.
	I'm genuinely curious about that.
	Right.
	Well, my philosophy all along has kind of been, well, accounting is this good, stable thing that I will add to my toolset and then it'll be like my fallback where, you know, if I can then pursue whatever I want to do after that, but I'll at least always have accounting and I can always go anywhere and do accounting somewhere.
	And so that's always been my philosophy.
	But I've gained more appreciation for it just in the last year because of all of the learning that I've done about entrepreneurship and economics and just stuff about business in general, where I really like the fact that I am a I'm a necessary component of business in general.
	I just support the free market in my own special way.
	So I do find some passion just recently, but I've never really had that going into it.
	Well, I mean, if you feel the need for a plan B, basically, which is what you're saying, this is your fallback position.
	I find that plan B's rarely work.
	There's very few people who say, well, I'm going to be an accountant, but I really want to get into acting.
	But I'm going to be an accountant in case acting doesn't work out.
	I've never known anyone who does that who then becomes an actor.
	I'm sure it happens, but it seems to be very rare.
	I made this decision years ago when I was considering doing this full-time rather than doing it on the road and part of my commute.
	I was offered part-time work at the place that I was working for some pretty good coin, just to come in sort of three days a week.
	And then I would have, you know, four days a week to do FDR. And I thought of it.
	And I thought, that's not going to make me panic enough.
	You know, I'm a big one for life is short, be all in.
	If there's something else you want to do, plan B's are usually not the way to get there.
	Because plan B's very quickly become plan A's, particularly being an accountant, particularly if you have anything entrepreneurial going on.
	If you have something else that you want to do, I would suggest go do it if you're happy with account.
	But I would not make the majority of my life's work something that was a backup plan.
	If there's something that you really want to do, then get your degree in all of that, but then throw yourself into doing it.
	I knew that I was going to do a much better job on FDR If I was all in, right?
	It's just natural.
	You know, if you're going to do something, then do it.
	Yeah, and I guess I've had passion issues or motivation issues in my life where I don't really...
	I mean, like I say, accounting is my backup, but I don't even have an idea of what else I would do or what I would want to do.
	I mean, I don't know maybe what you're doing, but that's even harder.
	No, no.
	Everybody should want to do what I'm doing.
	Everybody should want to do what I'm doing.
	I mean that.
	Look, this is the best job in the world.
	This is the greatest and most incredible job in the world.
	Everybody should want to do what I'm doing if you have even the remote capacity for it.
	And I encourage everyone to come and do what I'm doing.
	It's not like I've got all the people in the world.
	You know, there's still 5.9999 billion people out there.
	You know, people who speak Gujarat or Urdu can go and do free-domain radio in those, or philosophy shows in those languages, or Portuguese, or, you know, whatever it is, that African clicking language that sounds like Morse code and hiccups.
	You know, whatever it is, if people want to do a philosophy show in magic, Tablet raising braille.
	I don't know, right?
	But everybody should be out there trying to talk philosophy with people.
	It's not a bad way to spend your life.
	In fact, I think it's a great way to spend your life.
	I'll tell you what the aim is for me.
	At some point, they're going to figure out how to make people immortal, and I want everyone to say, that Steph guy is the first guy who should have it because we need him the most.
	That's my plan.
	And try to make yourself indispensable.
	Yeah, try to make yourself indispensable to the world.
	And if you can do something like what I'm doing, or you have any desire to do it, then, you know, do the therapy, do the philosophy, polish your speaking skills, learn how to walk that tightrope and all that.
	It's, you know, I encourage, you know, I've done shows helping people set up their own podcasts and giving them tips and advice and All that kind of stuff.
	I help other podcasters if they ask for help and advice.
	And, you know, I really want to build this space.
	You know, I am not at all concerned.
	I would welcome lots of competition in this space.
	It can only make everything better for everyone.
	So that's a, you know, don't just necessarily, I'd like to do what Steph does, but I'm not Steph.
	It's like, yeah, which means you might do it even better.
	Right?
	Why not?
	I feel like I'm just joining a conversation.
	It's just great.
	I was so happy when I found that there was a philosopher that was living in my day that kind of stems from The first philosopher that I was happy about was Ayn Rand.
	You go from that tradition, but you're definitely unique.
	The fact that you have a billion things on the internet, like content, the lore, it's like, wow, I could just listen to this for the rest of my life.
	I'll never run out.
	Yeah, for me, it was either going to be content galore or pussy galore, and I found that that was already taken by a Bond villain.
	So content galore is the way to go.
	I completely threw you off there.
	Sorry, please finish your thoughts.
	No, no, well, yeah, I mean, so that's, you know, I'm a happy gold subscriber, and I recommend that to anyone, though.
	To support this show, I'm a big fan.
	I'm just really glad that I got to talk to you, especially on New Year and stuff.
	There are times when I wanted to call in, a few other times, but I didn't know what I wanted to talk about.
	But this was, I think, a good introduction for me to kind of join the conversation.
	And if I could ever follow in your footsteps in any way, that would be awesome.
	And that is something I have a passion about.
	Sorry, you garbled that for a sec there.
	You said, if I could ever what?
	I really felt that was important.
	I said, if I could ever follow in your footsteps, so to speak, as far as contributing...
	Contributing to this discussion, the great conversation of philosophy, then that would be fantastic.
	But I feel like I'm not joining the conversation.
	So I'm just trying to soak it all in and get all that information that I can.
	Well, I appreciate that.
	Look, your subscription really does mean the world to me.
	I get paid for almost nothing in this...
	In this conversation.
	I mean, I think that's important, right?
	And, you know, people have asked about monetizer videos.
	And, I mean, you know, people can trust my decisions in that or not, but it always colors my perceptions of other people's videos when they are monetizing them.
	It tells me that they're not focused exclusively on the listeners, but they are focused to some degree on the advertisers.
	And I know the advertisers are random and this kind of stuff and all that, but I don't want to also punish people who are Donating, right?
	I mean, if you're donating, then you shouldn't have to watch ads, but I can't make selective ad watching.
	And so it's subsidizing those who aren't donating, and it's punishing those who are donating.
	And I don't...
	I don't really like that particular approach.
	I just want to stay focused on the listeners.
	I don't get paid for speeches.
	I never charge for listener conversations.
	I don't get charged for consulting.
	I don't get paid for anything.
	I make a couple of bucks off books just because they cost money to print.
	But the books are all free.
	The podcasts are all free.
	I don't charge anyone for my time.
	And so it's donations are best.
	And so I hugely appreciate that.
	And I think it is integral to the success of this conversation that I stay focused exclusively on that, which provides value to the listeners.
	So I just wanted to sort of point that out.
	And that it's much less intrusive for me to ask for donations once in a while than to watch ads.
	You know, three million views.
	A month and, you know, let's say 30-second ads, right?
	That's 1.5 million times 30 seconds of life I'm eating up for my listeners as opposed to a little bit of conversation about donations here and there.
	It is much, much more efficient for the listeners.
	The amount of time that is wasted is wretched if I'm doing that kind of stuff in terms of ads.
	So I just wanted to mention that.
	Thank you so much for your support.
	Yeah, that's why it's so overwhelming, because I see someone like you with so much integrity and so much knowledge and information, and the fact that you don't get more donations is like, wow.
	It's like, okay, that's why it's so overwhelming.
	For me, someone that would want to do it, it's just like, okay, I better get a real job, and then maybe I can start doing some YouTube videos on the side.
	But I think it'll change for you.
	I think you're going to get a lot more donations in the future.
	Yeah, I just did the rough calculation.
	If I put ads on videos and podcasts, it's 520 person days of listener time will be consumed every month.
	That's That's no good, right?
	And I think that's 12,500 hours of listeners' time will be consumed with ads.
	And that's assuming just one ad in like a three-hour, half-hour show.
	If I put a couple of ads in, that goes even higher.
	So yeah, 125,000 hours, that's a lot to take from listeners every month for the sake of people who aren't donating.
	and then it also removes from people the understanding of philosophy that comes from donating and living the value and paying value for value and all that kind of stuff.
	So again, I'm open to the case, but so far I haven't been able to make it and I'll leave the, what, 50 to 70K on the table to continue to focus on the donation model, which I think keeps me closer to the listeners and doesn't end up with me punishing the donators and rewarding the freeloaders which I think keeps me closer to the listeners and doesn't Doesn't end up with me punishing the donators and rewarding the freeloaders.
	Anyway, so is there anything else?
	Listen, feel free to call back in any time.
	I certainly do appreciate the conversation.
	These are interesting and challenging questions that you're facing, but it sounds to me like you have a...
	A pretty good approach to what you're doing right now.
	Just make sure there's not any lingering stuff going on with the family.
	You know, just ask people, is there any lingering stuff that's going on that we need to fix or work on or anything like that?
	And do all of that stuff before, you know, you fix the plane before you fly it and you parent before the crisis and you certainly deal with family issues before the family business is underway.
	So that would be my suggestion.
	Thank you.
	Thank you very much.
	Yeah, we try not to have any elephant in the room kind of thing.
	So, I don't have any more questions.
	I appreciate you talking to me.
	Well, thank you very much.
	And thanks, of course, to Mr.
	Mike for running the show as always.
	One more thing.
	I was looking into it recently just because a lot of people have been talking about putting YouTube ads on and suggesting we should do that.
	I've looked at several people that do have YouTube ads and the actual rates they get for advertising, it's incredibly random.
	It's hard to really plan.
	So, Charles, you have a subscription.
	That's immensely helpful for us because now we know, okay, we can kind of count on your $20 a month.
	So when it comes to future planning, we have that to go by.
	With growing the show, what we're going to do, traveling, other things we may have lined up for the year.
	With the ad rates, it's so random that it would be very hard to count on.
	Oh, we're going to have X to work with every month to grow the show or work on.
	So that's another element that I haven't heard people talk about.
	And the other thing that's true is that if people are subscribers too, we also know what our travel plans are.
	Because if people cancel their subscriptions, then we show up usually around 2 to 2.30 in the morning in their bedroom with a flashlight and some questions.
	So that's...
	It's a roach motel you can check in.
	And if you check out, we will come for a little visit.
	And it's excellent because you really should see Michael DeMarco in a catsuit.
	It is a sight for sore eyes.
	Sorry, listener, you had a question.
	Comment?
	As a paying subscriber, can I request that we get that documentary out, man?
	I've been waiting on it for too much.
	Yeah, it's a challenge.
	I'm sorry about that.
	It's well worth an update.
	We lost our animator for the summer for reasons that I still don't quite understand and could not predict at all.
	And so he's refunded the money that we had banked with him.
	And we have got some new animators to finish up.
	I just, I don't want to stuff footage into some, you know, like our documentary footage or text sort of cookie cutter footage just to fill up space.
	There's still some animation that I need.
	And Mike and I have to sit down and finish up.
	We've got a script of all the animation, but we want to make sure it's all still going to be concurrent with what we've got.
	We do have trouble taking the existing animation and blending it into new.
	I don't want there to be two obviously different styles of animations and so on.
	So I'm sorry about the delay.
	Plus, you know, I still have to pull the I Got Sick Desperately this summer card.
	And there have been some things that are more time-consuming.
	Yeah, there are things that are more time-consuming.
	Preparing for some of the biggest shows, the TV appearances, the debates and all of that has been quite time-consuming.
	Which, you know, as you notice, I'm not doing sort of a lot of sit-down-off-the-cuff shows these days.
	It is all massive preparation time.
	So we are...
	And then, you know, Lost Power for six days.
	God help us.
	So yes, I fully accept that.
	Thanks to the people who are donating for the documentary.
	I promise that we are going to get to work on it this month.
	And I'm hoping, I'm not even going to offer you a date, but I'm hoping it's going to be out relatively soon.
	We haven't forgot about it.
	The music is done.
	We've got about 80% of the movie done.
	But we still need to do the remaining animation.
	And we need to find a way to blend it into what we've got.
	So that is a challenge.
	And thank you for bringing that up.
	And I'm sorry that it's taking so long.
	I'm looking forward to it.
	Thank you.
	You've kept me entertained, though, all year with all the other content, so I'm not complaining too much.
	Excellent.
	Excellent.
	Okay.
	And, you know, we're growing.
	What did we get?
	Like 25,000 new subscribers on YouTube in the last couple of months, so that's all great.
	Mike, want to do that list of the top shows from the new server system?
	I was really kind of interested in the top non-call-in shows that we did.
	Do you have that list?
	I think I can dig it up if you don't.
	Yeah, hold on one second.
	Let me just scroll up and get it.
	It's amazing with podcast downloads, the call-in shows are far and above anything else, like by orders of magnitude compared to some of the other shows.
	But since we moved to the new server...
	Sorry, I'm just still working on the bit of rage about that.
	So basically when I'm interrupted continually from my monologues, people prefer that massively.
	I really like that singer when he's not singing.
	Hey, the call-in shows are still some of my favorites, so...
	Well, you know, I think that my nickname should be Betty, because it's bitter and petty.
	Together, I think, make Betty.
	How did you know that's what I call you, Steph?
	Because I answer that 900 number sometimes.
	Oh, I've got the list.
	Okay, so the number one podcast download, and this is from the new server, and number one is Joe Rogan.
	The second is the Peter Joseph Debate Review, which I find interesting.
	It was even more popular than the Peter Joseph Debate, perhaps because it didn't involve...
	Oh, what's his name?
	I can't remember.
	Four, the death of the dollar.
	Five, the Adam Kokesh debate or conversation.
	Six, the philosophy of TV. Seven, the daters of dating a single mom.
	Eight, male disposability, which is how a man's heart is murdered.
	Number nine, the shift debate.
	And number ten, the truth about Bitcoin, which I thought was interesting.
	I just wanted to mention that.
	Mike, do you have a list of my upcomings?
	Just so we can toss that up before vanishing.
	Yeah, one second.
	Let me just pull it out.
	But we got a lot of upcoming speaking dates.
	I got a lot of upcomings.
	Yep.
	We're actually creating animatronic staff to stand around just to see if we have any conflicts.
	I haven't been doing yoga for a while, so actually robotic movements work really well with my style.
	Alright, you're going to be at the World Affairs Conference.
	That's February 4th at Upper Canada College in Toronto.
	Also got you booked for the Texas Bitcoin Conference, which is Thursday, March 6th.
	In Austin, Texas.
	And then I'm really excited about this one.
	You're going to be at the Next Web Conference in Europe, in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, actually.
	And that's April 24th through 25th.
	Next Web.
	Yeah, nextweb.com.
	And that's in Amsterdam, right?
	I'm going to be talking.
	It's my biggest story so far.
	Yeah, that's a huge non-libertarian conference, and you're going to be up there talking about Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, so that's a huge opportunity to talk to people that otherwise would not hear from you, so it's pretty exciting.
	And also Capitalism and Morality, which is in Vancouver, July 26th, and I believe you're going to be debating Walter Block on the effectiveness of political action.
	I'm not sure if Walter is 100% confirmed for that.
	He had some other stuff going on.
	I don't know if he could commit yet, but that is the plan.
	If your five-year-old is about to walk off a bridge and fall into a voting booth, I think that's his general approach.
	I'm tentative confirmed for Toronto Bitcoin Conference 11th or 13th.
	Yep, that as well.
	April 11th or 13th.
	And Jeff Tucker and I will be there.
	So if you want a mutual back rub, donations are certainly welcome.
	Jeff, I think, will be only wearing a bow tie while he works on your quads.
	So that's very nice.
	Whereas I won't even be wearing a bow tie.
	So don't open your eyes, whatever you do.
	Coming up in about a week, Joe Rogan Experience on the 6th.
	I'm looking forward to it.
	It's going to be broadcast live.
	Joe does a live broadcast for all his in-studio stuff, so you can watch that live on Ustream.
	So that's going to be pretty cool.
	But we can edit it later to make me look better, right?
	Yeah.
	Oh, I'll find some way.
	Okay.
	Fantastic.
	Well, thanks again.
	We hope to see you up.
	It's just freedomainradio.com forward slash speeches.
	I think we've got a list of those coming up.
	So let's make sure we keep that up to date.
	I look forward to meeting everyone there.
	Love to meet with people.
	Oh, what's happening with the meetup here in sunny California?
	Yeah, we're putting together something for Saturday, which is the 4th.
	So there's a Facebook group that we're putting together to see how many people are going to be interested in going, and then we'll find a restaurant or a venue that can accommodate everybody.
	All karaoke all the time.
	Oh, you again with the karaoke.
	Yeah.
	Grit your teeth.
	Hope for some philosophy because bad music is coming your way.
	All right.
	Okay, well, have a great, great week, everyone.
	Isabelle is here, but she's not doing her bad philosophy show, right?
	No.
	All right.
	Have yourself a great week, everyone, and we will talk to you soon.
	Thanks again to all the callers.
	Thanks to Mike.
	Thanks to the subscribers and donateers.
	I will talk to you soon.

▲