All Episodes
Previous Next
April 17, 2014 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
37:03
2668 How To Have Power In Your Life!

Would you vote for Rand Paul? In a free society, would there be lots of corruption in the court system? What do you think about veiled attacks and insults?

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi, everybody.
It's the Van Malen of the Computer Made Radio.
Hope you're doing well.
So, these are questions sent into Free Domain Radio.
Mailbag at freedomainradio.com.
If you would like your philosophical questions, run through the hopefully rational cheese grater of my neofrontal cortex.
Question.
Do you expect a gradual change into anarchism going through libertarianism?
Or do you think a revolution would take us from status into anarchism?
Would you vote for Rand Paul?
I would not vote for Rand Paul.
Rand, don't take it personally.
Love the name.
But you cannot infiltrate an evil organization and turn it to virtue.
I mean, if you think you can, start off small.
Infiltrate your local mafia, your local organized crime gang, and try and turn them into a charity.
You will find that this will not work.
The government is the greatest gang of criminals.
It is the greatest organized crime syndicate in history.
You cannot infiltrate it And turn it to virtue.
Infiltrating the government and trying to make it good is like trying to infiltrate a shark through its mouth being slowly dissolved in its stomach acids while praying for it to turn into a dolphin.
It will not work.
We will achieve freedom not through revolution, not through working the system from within, but through the practical application of the non-aggression principle In our own lives.
In particular, with regards to the raising of children.
To not spank children, to not aggress against children, to not put them in government schools.
We grow them strong and healthy and free and not speaking the language of subjugation and obedience to a greater coercive power.
Parents or preachers or teachers, you simply raise them not speaking the language of subjugation.
And they won't fit into the state.
It'll be like some weird Aztec god they've never heard of.
It'll be like a curiosity, an anthropological nonsense bit of interest, but nothing that they would be moved by or have allegiance to.
You just bypass it.
So, I hope that makes sense.
Please ask Steph to briefly mention his view on tickling, because say he were to tickle his daughter, she would undoubtedly say, stop, cut it out, and so on, while people aren't enamored with being tickled, for the most part, many people I've met like the bonding from it.
Briefly, you're killing me!
Tickling is great.
It's a great deal of fun to bond over tickling, and I'm actually very good at it.
But...
When my daughter says stop, immediately I stop.
I immediately stop, because it should never be something that's physical dominance or invasive.
It should be something that's sort of mutually enjoyable.
She has become a very good tickler herself.
She asked me to tickle her, and we have a great deal of fun with it sometimes.
But you need that safe word, and you need to stop immediately.
And that way, if she keeps going on with something, when I say stop, I can say to her, what do I do when you say stop the tickling?
She says, you say stop.
I say, do you like that?
Yes.
You get it, right?
I like the idea of the non-aggression principle, but there is one thing I don't understand fully.
If there is a genocide or a tyrannical government oppressing its people somewhere in the world, what do you do about this?
From my understanding of the non-aggression principle, you don't do anything about it.
You just let those people die.
For example, Nazi Germany's Holocaust.
Wouldn't you need some type of minimal government to rid the evils of the world?
No.
No.
First of all, genocides occur after governments have disarmed their local population, right?
So, Pol Pot and Mao and Hitler and Stalin, they all worked to make sure that the people weren't armed, and then they can't fight back.
And so, this is the way it works.
And, my God, I mean, if people are willing to give up their arms, I mean, you know, I guess I can walk...
Naked, covered in marinade through Serengeti National Park, and if I then get eaten by a lion, well, it's kind of retarded, right?
So, if you stay in a country where your right to bear arms is taken away, then you are, of course, putting yourself at massive risk for these things.
If you want to go and help people who are victims of their governments, then you can go and do that.
Nobody in a free society has the right to stop you.
If you want to go and fight the guy who sleeps on 10,000 baby wren feathers in his pillow, Kim Jong Il, I think his son now.
In North Korea, you can go do that.
Godspeed.
Good luck.
More power to you.
But what you don't have the right to do is to kill people who are willing to suffer under their evils.
If some guy has chronic back pain, we don't get to shoot him and say, look, I've released you from your chronic back pain.
We can't externally say what people are willing to suffer or not.
So under Iraq, Saddam Hussein is a brutal murderer, brutal genocidal tyrant.
The majority of people in Iraq chose to live with their tyranny, which of course had been armed and well-funded by America.
So if we stop intervening, if America stops intervening in other countries, stops arming them, then people will have a much better shot at throwing off the shackles.
But we don't have the right to go to a million Iraqis and say, sorry, you have to die to get Saddam Hussein out of there.
Because they're choosing to live.
They're not choosing to have a revolution.
I wrote a story, you can find it here on YouTube many years ago, called Space Aliens from Luxembourg.
And the argument was, if space aliens came down, they would look at, well, who's spending the most on the military?
America, massive, massive, by far the greatest military spender in the world.
Who has the most military bases around the world?
Who has the greatest imperialistic power?
America.
Well, great.
So let's invade America and get rid of its semi-tyrannical government.
And that will cause about the deaths of 10 to 15 million Americans, which would be proportional to the Iraqi deaths.
And another 20 million will have to flee America.
Would Americans say, that sounds like a good deal to me?
Sure, you know, 10 to 15 million of us will die, and another 20 million will flee America, but at least we'll have a new government.
Well, no, Americans would say, no, no.
It's our government.
It's our job to deal with it.
If we can live with it, you can't come and kill us for it.
So, you don't have the right to do that to another country, at least at a global...
And just because people are doing bad things to their citizens on the other side of the world doesn't mean that we then have a government that's allowed to steal from our citizens here, right?
It's like me saying, you know, there's some guy beating up his wife, and I go up to my neighbors and say, so I'm going to beat up your wife, all of your wives, unless you give me money to go and fly over there and deal with him.
It's like, X wrongs don't right one wrong.
So, no.
Two, in a free society, wouldn't there be a lot of corruption in the court system?
It seems like businesses or rich individuals can bribe the judges or whoever runs the court very easily because the court runs off of profit.
I realize there is corruption in our status government courts now, but doesn't this reduce corruption because it is not based on profit?
The government is based on profit.
Come on, the government is based on profit for specific individuals at general cost, right?
You send the bill to the unborn, you send the bill to the abstract taxpayers, you send the bill to those down the road on bonds and debt and all this kind of crap, and you make a massive amount of money in government, right?
So the government is very profitable.
It doesn't mean it's moral.
It doesn't mean it's free market.
I mean, a mugger can be very profitable, right?
He invests in a $10 knife and he can make $1,000 or $10,000 stealing someone's Rolex in a dark alley.
It's an investment and a return.
So governments make massive amounts of money for people.
I mean, $700 billion went to the bankers, if you may remember, and more, really.
So, the government courts are irredeemably corrupt.
It's talking about America in particular.
They are irredeemably corrupt at the moment.
97% of American convictions are the result of plea bargains, have nothing to do with courts, nothing to do with the jury of your peers, nothing to do with the rules of evidence.
They catch you and they threaten you with 20 years unless you plea down to two or three.
And they say, and if you go to trial, your 20 years could turn into 30, and you have a very high percentage chance of losing.
So they bribe you with your own freedom in order to get you to confess to crimes.
It's exactly what happened in Nazi Germany.
They beat confessions out of people.
It's exactly what happened in Stalinist Russia, where you were tortured or you were threatened with massive imprisonments unless you signed confessions.
The American court system couldn't conceivably function With the number of laws that it has and the number of arrests that it has, with 5% of the world's population, America has 25% of the world's prisoners.
The system could not function if even half the people got trials.
If even 20% of the people got trials.
That's why they have to keep it down to like 3%.
So the system couldn't possibly function.
It's irredeemably corrupt.
Irredeemably corrupt.
And people who...
Get people enthroned in jail through false convictions?
They don't go to jail.
They don't get dealt with in any way.
In a free society, the way that a court system would make money is by addressing the problem of corruption.
Come on, this isn't that hard, people.
This is not that complicated.
If you are going to buy access to a court system in a free society, what's the first thing that the entrepreneur who wants to sell you his services has to prove?
We are not corrupt, and here's how, and here's why, and there's caps on how much people can spend, and anybody who gets falsely convicted, all the prosecution goes to jail, which means that they don't pursue false convictions for the sake of numbers.
Blah, blah, blah.
They have to have a whole system set up.
To make sure that the corruption question is dealt with.
That's how they make money.
Not off throwing people in jail.
That's how the current system makes money with its semi-private, basically fascistic jails.
The private profits and the government court systems throwing people in there, left, right, and center.
Stacking them up like medieval court would.
So, we really can't do any worse than what we have now.
If a man murders his boss and is proved guilty of this charge, what happens to him?
You obviously can't throw him in jail because that would be the initiation of force.
So what do you do with him?
Of course you can throw him in jail.
It's not the initiation of force to capture someone who has violated the non-aggression principle.
But I don't think that's how it would work.
Because it's dangerous.
You can't get the wrong people.
He might shoot back.
What you want is for him to volunteer and surrender voluntarily and serve whatever restitution or whatever punishment is meted out to do that voluntarily.
That's what you want.
And the easy way to do that is to apply economic ostracism to the man.
And if you want to live in a city, everybody's got to participate with you.
Imagine trying to live in a city where nobody will trade with you.
Nobody will sell you food or gas or let you walk on their private roads or sidewalks or rent you an apartment or a hotel room or serve you in a restaurant or let you drink from their drinking fountain.
You couldn't survive in that.
You'd have to go live so deep in the woods that basically it's banishment.
So if somebody's found guilty of a crime...
Or even refuses to stand trial, economic ostracism kicks in.
And nobody will deal with them.
And you can say, well, what about a few people who will deal with them?
Well, then nobody will deal with them.
If some guy rents him a hotel room, other people will find out about it.
Right?
And then nobody will deliver electricity to the hotel room.
You can't have people...
This is what will happen.
It's so efficient.
It's so perfect.
So then he's going to volunteer.
If he wants to live anywhere close to civilization, anywhere where he's going to trade with people, if he wants to live not like Robertson Crusoe, then he has to submit himself to...
Restitution.
To do whatever the restitution is going to be.
I have no idea what that's going to be.
Probably some kind of weir guild.
That's what was developed in Anglo-Saxon and Norse common law where you pay for the wrongs that you've done and so on.
Usually in financial way.
Right now the victims get hit a couple of times.
I mean, they get robbed, and then they have to spend a huge amount of uncompensated time processing and dealing with the cops with the robbery, and then the tax bill goes up to pay for the robber.
It's completely ridiculous, but of course it's not supposed to be just.
It's supposed to be profitable and punitive.
Okay, he says, someone else says, I know that gun control does not work, but what is the downside to restricting mentally insane people of their right to bear arms?
I realize that they could just get guns on the black market, but that doesn't denying them the right to bear arms at least help a little bit?
It might stop mass shootings in the future.
No.
Two things cause mass shootings.
Number one is they take place in places where people are not allowed to carry weapons.
So, can't shoot back, can't defend yourself, right?
Somebody takes a gun, they've got 10 people around with handguns, they just shoot them.
James Holmes, the guy who shot up the theater, the Batman theater in Aurora a while back, he drove an extra 20 minutes to make sure he got to a theater where patrons weren't allowed to have guns.
He's not crazy.
Most mass shooters meticulously plan out their attacks for weeks or months in advance.
They're not insane, they're evil, but they're not insane.
Insane people are the guys on street corners shouting at mosquitoes, right?
I mean, they're not out there playing.
These guys plan, plan, plan.
And so that's number one.
Number two is they have these SSRIs, right?
These psychotropic drugs in their system, which have a black box label from the FDA that they cause violent thoughts, homicidality, suicidality, and so on.
But, gosh, I don't know, I genuinely don't know, Bryce, how to tell you this.
There's no easy or nice way.
What makes you think, when you're worried about mentally insane people having weapons, what makes you think That the leaders in charge of the armies and navies, the air forces, the marines, special forces,
black water, that the people in charge of these armies, these weapons of mass destruction, nuclear weapons, biochemical weapons, across the world, what makes you think that these people are not mentally insane?
It's a very, very important question to think about.
George Bush ordered an invasion into Iraq, forget Afghanistan for the moment, just talk about Iraq, in 2003, based upon information that was false, which was known to be false.
This caused the death of over a million Iraqis, with another one and a half million or more fleeing the country.
He never backed down from his assertion that the war was a great idea.
Thank you.
Thank you.
He served out his presidency, won a second term.
I mean, the whole population is nuts, right?
Served four more years, retired, went on a speaking tour, wrote his memoirs, and now is showing everyone in Air Force One, I think when they went to Mandela's funeral or wherever the hell they were all going, He shows them all his paintings of kitty cats because he's become a painter, you see.
The man directly ordered a war which killed over a million people.
He's not troubled by it at all.
There's a White House video where he's making jokes about it.
Hey, are the WMDs under here?
Are they under here?
Huh, huh, huh.
The man has no conscience.
He's a complete sociopath.
There are tons of cops who lie to get people put in prison and sleep soundly at night.
Right?
The prison guards who beat people up go home and sleep soundly beside their wives.
I mean, Tony Blair is laughing and joking.
On Jon Stewart's The Daily Show, as Jon Stewart doesn't talk about any of the war crimes he's committed, the guy's a Catholic, for God's sakes.
Thou shalt not murder, participated in the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, ordered the deaths of tens or hundreds of thousands of people, just chatting and joking.
You know, I upload a video with an audio glitch, I feel bad.
The people who are in charge of all of these weapons are mentally insane, morally insane.
They have no conscience, no mirror neurons.
The 12 to 13 complex ecosystem of empathy simply has not developed.
Well, I mean, read about George Bush's childhood.
He was beaten black and blue by his mother and spent a good deal of his childhood blowing up frogs with cherry bones.
Complete sociopath.
They are insane.
You know, what do you do with insane and evil people in a free society?
Well, my suggestion is let's not give them any fucking armies.
I have noticed, he says, that you say corporations would not exist if it wasn't for the government, but how so?
Because corporations are legal fictions created by and maintained by governments.
Steph, do you have any videos comparing anarchists who say they are socialists to anarchists who say they are capitalists?
I'm new to anarchism and was doing a lot of research.
I came across many articles and books by socialists who claim that they are the real anarchists and capitalism and anarchism don't go together.
Socialism and anarchism does seem like they go together.
What do you think?
Well, I'm...
I don't know.
Maybe it's just, you know, my fundamental decency as a human being.
I'm quite keen on women having exclusive control of their own vajayjays.
I think that's, you know, monopoly lockdown on the hoochie-cooch, I think is job one for moralists.
You know, and should I end up in prison for whatever reason, I would assume, or I would ask for my roommate to respect the same sovereignty with my own buttcheeks.
So...
I have two eyeballs and two kidneys.
And they're mine.
And if you happen to have an accident in which you lose both your eyes, you don't get to gouge out one of my eyes with a rusty spoon.
They're mine.
The same thing with a woman's vagina.
It's not owned collectively.
It's hers.
For a vagina to be owned collectively is an invitation to like a Genghis Khan Mongol horde style of gangbang that will leave her shredded up like water pushed through a Swiss cheese magnet.
So I'm big on people having sovereignty over their own bodies.
A monopoly of ownership over their own bodies.
I think that's great.
So we own ourselves.
And there's no fundamental difference between my kidney and a tree that I plant and laboriously water and help grow, which produces fruit.
Both are things that I have worked to create and maintain, right?
A woman really works to care for and maintain her vagina, right?
She wipes it.
She takes it for walks.
She She does strange things with rose water.
I don't understand to it.
She takes it to a doctor.
She has strange things inserted into it.
She has god-awful pap smears and speculums and crazy crap goes up there, right?
And so she's really working at investing and maintaining her Hoochie Von Coochieville, right?
The Snug Harbor.
No problem with that.
It's hers, right?
If she grants your entrance, have fun.
If she doesn't, step back, right?
So, we own ourselves, we own our own organs, we own the products of our actions.
It's just property.
Unless you're willing to say a vagina should be owned collectively, well, then you're a capitalist.
You're into self-ownership, property rights, the non-aggression principle.
I can't fundamentally see the distinction between something inside my body and something outside my body.
They're both just things that I have worked to create and maintain and grow.
So the hair you grow is yours.
Your singing voice is yours.
So, I can't go to the socialist side because I just can't create these artificial divisions between your body and stuff outside your body.
Right?
I've worked to feed and maintain this little finger and exercise it, yea, verily, these 47 years.
Smart.
You can't have it.
Right?
Right?
What's the difference between my little finger and the things that I produce?
If this little finger is something that I have produced, I could have cut it off and I'd have deleted 20 less calories a day.
I've worked to maintain it.
So, no, socialism is nonsense.
Say, ah, well it's only the means of production.
Well, you know what's a pretty important means of production?
A vagina.
You know what it produces?
More people.
It is quite important, right?
So, no, I'm sorry.
I have to be consistent as a philosopher.
That's the deal.
That's what you sign up for when you're a philosopher.
Universality, logic, evidence, right?
I mean, you just, consistency.
You can't be a scientist and make up arbitrary rules.
Then you're not a scientist anymore.
So, you own yourself.
You own the effects of your actions.
I can't say there's a massive difference between my toothbrush and my kidney and a woman's vagina.
They're all just property that people have exclusive use over.
So, no, I think socialism is just a bunch of money-grabbing from people who don't really like to work.
So, anyway.
I was wondering, says this or this person, if you could discuss veiled attacks.
I can.
He says, I used to have problems with people around me using a kind of phrasing that is implied attacks in them.
It may be better explained by examples.
If you really love me, you wouldn't go bowling.
Bowling.
This implies that seeing as I'm about to go out the door to go bowling, I don't love you.
It is presupposed in the phrasing of the sentence.
Or taking it into almost thought crime land, if you really love me, you wouldn't even want to go bowling.
Even a toddler can understand that you don't play with matches.
Imagine this said to a 40-year-old.
The implication is that a toddler understands this, but he or she doesn't.
Even you should be able to figure out this problem.
So apparently something unspecified about being you means that you can't figure out this problem.
It is usually easier to hear the attack when the person saying it is putting emphasis on words like the really and blah, blah, blah.
It is kind of a denigration, but without saying it overtly.
Well, you trust your feelings.
If you feel like you're being insulted, you probably are.
And you can confront people on it.
The only thing worse than an attack is a cowardly veiled attack.
You know, where somebody...
Makes fun of you in a pretty insulting way.
And then when you find, hey, say, hey, man.
They're like, hey, lighten up, man.
Don't take yourself so seriously.
Laugh a little.
You know?
Well, you know what?
I do take myself pretty fucking seriously.
It doesn't mean I can't have fun.
But I take myself pretty fucking seriously.
And I take my mission pretty seriously.
To bring philosophy to as much of the world as we'll possibly listen.
And to be as engaging and entertaining and thought-provoking and witty and illustrative and metaphorical and brain lively as humanly possible.
You can't achieve anything great in your life if people around you are putting you down.
You can't.
You can't have a goal higher than the most derisive person in your environment.
You can't be taller than the shortest person around you, metaphorically.
So, I just got those people out of my life.
I mean, I've always had high ambitions.
And as a kid, I wanted to do great things.
When I met my wife like 12 years ago, before she was my wife, I was writing novels.
Wrote novels, wrote novels, wrote novels.
Incredibly well-reviewed novels.
One of my novels was called The Great Canadian Novel.
And then I could never sell them.
This is the greatest thing I've ever read.
Not buying it.
Now I know why.
And I'll get into that another time.
So basically the world core.
I wanted to be a novelist.
So I said to my wife, I said, three people in the English language.
I want it to be Shakespeare, Dickens, Molyneux.
Right?
I had high ambitions.
High goals.
Why not?
I mean, why not?
You're going to die either way.
Aim high.
We all land in the grave.
I want to land in the grave like bang!
With an impact like the Arizona crater because I went so high.
And why not for you?
Why not for you?
I mean, how inspiring is it?
Go for the bronze.
No!
Go for the gold.
So, I don't have people like that in my life.
People who are scornful, or skeptical, or lazy, or boring, or unmotivated, or indifferent, or just blur people, the pudding people, right?
The yes-but people, right?
The problem creators, the nitpickers, the trip you up every time you sail into your flash dance pose of infinite dancing.
Fuck, life's too short.
I'm sorry.
I mean, I wish I could in some ways have a parallel life where I could not upset them by overstepping the sun as they hide in the wrinkles of their own foreheads.
But this is my life.
I've got one life to live and I want to aim high.
So I want to be the greatest philosopher the world has ever known.
I also want to be the greatest philosopher the world will ever know.
And it's insane.
It's completely right.
I get it.
So what?
I still want it.
I want this show to be insanely great.
Insanely great.
And I try.
I'm always experimenting.
I'm always saying, I'm going to try it better.
I'm going to try and do better.
Let me tell you a secret.
Not that secret.
Not that if you will it, the wind will bring it.
This is the secret.
You have this thing called the unconscious or the subconscious.
Subconscious, better word.
Now, very rigorous scientific studies have shown that the unconscious, part of your brain that all operates below the neofrontal cortex, conscious mind, It's about 6,000 or 8,000 times faster and better at processing than your conscious mind.
Conscious mind is great.
It's like a laser.
It's great for very particular tools.
But when you're navigating through the future, when you're planning your life, it's like walking through a pitch black wood, a forest.
Now, when you're walking through a pitch black forest, you don't want a laser.
You know, wave that thing around and you're still going to Have random branches shredding your eyeballs, right?
That's the conscious mind.
Great, very specific things.
Focused.
Laser-like.
Now, the unconscious mind is like a big giant full moon in a cloudless sky.
It doesn't illuminate anything in particular, but it illuminates everything.
From miles around, to soft light, to dim light, but it sure as hell is enough to navigate by, even at a fair clip.
Once your eyes have adjusted.
And your unconscious is passive.
It's torpid.
It's lazy.
And what happens is, your unconscious, every now and then it goes, huh?
We doing anything?
Anything going on that you need the infinite energies of the universe for?
Anything?
No big ambitions?
No...
Lions running at us, no revolutions, no giant wars, no...
Okay.
Going back to hibernation.
Right?
That's the unconscious.
It's like this big, giant, steroid-drugged, torpid bear.
We'll just lie there.
And it will be startled occasionally.
Right?
Shit, we're gonna die.
Fuck.
You know we're gonna die, right?
We're gonna die.
Death's approaching.
We're mortal.
I don't know if we need to play this video game again.
We're gonna die.
We're gonna die.
Are you sure?
You sure you don't want me to do anything important?
You sure?
You don't need all of these incredibly infinite cosmic supernova energies to get some crazy, great, wonderful, fantastic, mad shit done.
No?
No?
Are you sure?
Because we are gonna fucking die.
Are you sure?
No?
I'm okay.
I'm okay.
Go back to sleep.
And then you feel lazy, right?
You feel like you can't really get anything done or anything like that.
Let me tell you something though.
If you really pull that bow back and you shoot That skyhook up to the tallest cloud, the tallest skyscraper, and you say, that is only the beginning of my ambition.
If you just rocket that thing up, you get this Zeus-farting, squat-shouldered, Saturn rocket blast detonation of upward lifting.
Because then the unconscious is like, whoa, whoa, what the fuck was that?
Did you hear that?
I heard some creaking.
What's that?
Oh my god.
We're not doing that, are we?
No, no, no, no, no.
We're not.
Really?
Are we doing that?
Seriously?
The greatest philosopher ever?
Are you kidding me?
Well, that's got my attention.
All right, motherfuckers.
Yeah!
And away we go.
It will rise to meet you.
Your unconscious will wake up and rise to meet you based upon how high you're going to shoot that grappling skyhook of mad ambition.
If you don't plan for anything, you plan for nothing.
You achieve nothing.
If you plan for insanely great, wildly optimistic, foot-stamp Arizona crater imprint on human history, well, you get that too.
There is nothing remarkable about me except the size of my ambition and the degree to which I have accepted the help of all the parts within me in the achievement of this ambition.
And the ambition to be a great philosopher, the greatest, It's not for vanity.
I'm going to be dead.
I could be dead next year.
I had cancer last year.
I could be dead next year.
I might live another 40 years.
But either way, I'm going to be dead.
Right?
And then, you know, some people who dislike me will still come and piss on my grave, right?
But I'm dead.
What do I care?
I will know as much about the 22nd century as I did about the 19th century.
Precisely squat.
But what I care about is lighting the lightning in people's spines, straightening their shoulders, raising their chins, infusing their eyes.
Yours, really.
Clapping them to wake up.
Wake up!
Isn't that what the world is saying?
Isn't that what the future is saying?
Aren't we so glad that we woke up from feudalism, that we woke up from subjugation, that we woke up from slavery?
And isn't the future saying, wake up from the state, wake up from war, wake up from central banking, wake up from the predatory, counterfeiting, fiscal, vampire, leech-sucking, blood-inhaling financial system?
That is drowning us in the unsung blood of the unborn.
Wake up!
It is saying.
Don't sleep through and hand all of this sick, bloody, jello, mucousy, membrane inertia of dead human history.
Don't roll it forward.
Don't roll it forward.
Wake up.
The more people I awake, the better a philosopher I'll be considered.
And therefore, the more people I can awake, the more confidence I get.
The more money I get, the more I can advertise, the more I can build these studios, and the more I can travel, the more I can speak to more people.
And that means more people have woken up.
More people have started to think.
More people don't have, you know, these jelly, spineless backs.
They have rocket launchers.
They have jetpacks.
They can think.
They can challenge.
They can grow.
They can pursue self-knowledge.
They can commit to virtue.
They can throw off all this shit of history and really fly on the wings of reason.
But it's your birthright as a human being.
We didn't develop all this shit to watch desperate housewives follow orders and drown in debt.
We got this with which to rocket around the universe, defy evil, conquer corruption, and build a cathedral of peace called the future.
That's why we have this stuff.
Titsa for breastfeeding brains.
Of a flight.
So if you have these pissy little shitty people around you, you can't light their fire.
▲
Export Selection