3517 The Foundational Laws of P3nis Physics - Call In Show - November 25th, 2016
Question 1: [1:55] – “The term 'patriarchy' today is used almost exclusively in a pejorative sense, and especially so in ideologically biased circles. Could it be, that 'patriarchy' also has an objective & positive meaning? If so, what could it be?”Question 2: [49:44] – “I'm the founder of prereq.org, the e-learning platform that will make education great again. Do you believe that school choice will be able to neutralize the left's dominance in education? And do you think that it's plausible to expand the alternative media movement into an alternative education movement?”Question 3: [1:08:00] – “Within the UPB framework is Donald Trump evil? Are Trump voters immoral for having participated in this election despite his anti-globalist policies?”Question 4: [2:32:13] – “What is it about dating within the military that brings about distrust, uneven morals, and what seems to be an overall social acceptance within the military to being disrespectful towards the relationships built? Could the travel in work involved really be the answer to so many relationships crumbling? OR fear of commitment that is a direct result of this lifestyle? Can a long-distance relationship within the military really endure?”Freedomain Radio is 100% funded by viewers like you. Please support the show by signing up for a monthly subscription or making a one time donation at: http://www.freedomainradio.com/donate
Hi everybody, Stefan Molyneux from Freedom Made Radio.
Hope you're doing well.
Hey, have you ever heard of this little thing called the patriarchy?
Do you believe in such a thing?
Well, I have some fairly strong opinions and really let rip on this general idea based upon the question or two from the first caller.
The second caller wanted to know about the alternative education movement, what can be done, what is of benefit, what are the potential drawbacks, and we talked about that.
The third caller, yeah, I think you really, really want to listen to that one.
What is the universally preferable behavior or UPB argument for voting for Donald Trump?
Why didn't I support Ron Paul?
What the hell is going on with the guy who years ago did the Truth About Voting video and what is he doing now?
That would be me.
And I had a good old chat about that.
And the fourth woman wanted to know why guys in uniform, well, I guess in this case, guys in military uniform, tend to be unfaithful and untrustworthy and...
Well, we kind of dug deep into the archaeology of personal history and I think came up with some very, very useful stuff.
So I think you'll really find this show rewarding.
If you do, please, please help us out at freedomainradio.com slash donate.
Really, really need your support.
A subscription.
You don't need a PayPal account.
You can just use a Visa or a bank card or anything like that.
Please help us out.
We take Bitcoins as well.
And if you've got some shopping to do, please use our affiliate link.
It doesn't cost you anything.
And that is at fdrurl.com slash Amazon.
And before I forget, don't forget to follow me on Twitter at Stefan Molyneux.
Alright, up first today we have Ilyas.
Ilyas wrote in and said, The term patriarchy today is used the most exclusively in a pejorative sense, and especially so in ideological-based circles.
Could it be that the term patriarchy also has an objective and positive meaning?
If so, what could it be?
That's from Ilyas.
Hey Ilyas, how are you doing tonight?
Hello, hello.
You hear me?
Yes.
Okay, fantastic.
It's thrilling to be on the show again.
Thank you.
Good.
Glad to have you back.
Well, patriarchy generally means oppression, which is a statement made by idiots who don't understand evolution or biology or any of these kinds of things.
And that's really important to understand for people.
So, when it comes to understanding the relations between males and females, there are two things that need to be understood.
The first is that eggs are rare and sperm is common, and the second is that women expend a lot more resources in the getting and raising of children than men do.
And this is just basic to understand.
What that means, of course, is that men are disposable And because sperm are more common than eggs, so men are disposable.
And secondly, because women get pregnant, spend nine months getting pregnant, spend a year or two, to a large degree disabled when they are breastfeeding and then probably getting pregnant again.
Because it's important to go back in time and remember just how Little control people had over their fertility.
You know, oral sex, other forms of fertility that don't involve impregnation, well, we're generally frowned upon in many religious circles and so on for, I think, fairly obvious reasons in terms of it's easier to breed than to convert.
And so if you want to spread as an ideology or as a tribe, you just have lots of Of children.
But then, of course, you can see the recent immigrants into the New World for more on that.
So there are lots of sperm.
There are not many eggs.
And women need to get a very strong commitment out of men in order to Have a reliable provider when their sexual market value goes down, which is basically after they have their first kid, their sexual market value.
You know, there's this old thing, you see you drive the car off the lot, its value drops by half.
Well, when women get pregnant, then their sexual market value declines.
And it takes a lot of propaganda to change that and to say, ah, well, you know, men, you've got to, well, she's pregnant.
You know, just raise some other man's kid.
You'll be fine.
You'll be a good guy.
You'll be standing over.
That's kind of crap, right?
The male reproductive strategy is to have sex with as many women as possible.
If men were really in charge, that's what would happen.
Men would have as much sex with as many women as possible, evolutionarily speaking.
There'd be no lifelong commitment.
There'd be no monogamy.
There'd be no marriage.
This is what would happen if men were in charge.
If you look at The cultures where men are in charge, well, what do you see?
You see multiple wives.
You see sex with young girls.
You see lots of things like this.
And so, again, talking about the West as a whole.
And so the reality is that the need for commitment to the female has superseded the male's desire for promiscuity.
And Women have defined what they need and men have provided what they need.
And that's because in the West, there has been a permanent tradition, going back as far as can be recorded, of deference to and accommodation of female preferences.
And that's because in the West, minds evolve to a very high degree.
And if all you want to do is breed some factory worker or some soldier or some cannon fodder or whatever, then I just have sex with a lot of women and, you know, like frog style, right?
I mean, not froggy style sexually, but frog style in terms of just procreate like crazy in our selected ways and just cross your fingers and see who survives.
But if you want to raise a child who is going to be well educated and sophisticated to some degree and a productive member of a sophisticated society, Well, then you need the woman's participation, right?
I mean, just sort of spray and pray doesn't do you much good.
The woman needs to be invested in the child, and the only way she's going to be invested in the child is if the husband is invested in her.
And so, the pair bonding, monogamy, all this, this is all what women want in the West.
And it does produce the best outcome for children in the West.
It doesn't, in other cultures, really produce.
You don't need that much.
If you're an out-mac Australian Aboriginal, you don't need, well, how can you...
IQ is going to peak out in the 60s and it's not like you're going to have a whole lot of investment in your young in terms of abstract education.
So, just this idea that there's a patriarchy and men are in charge and women just do what men say.
I mean, this is just lies.
It's lies set up in the typical Marxist fashion to drive a wedge between men and women.
Because if you can drive a wedge between men and women, then men and women fall...
Away from each other, but that doesn't eliminate the sexual desire.
So men and women will still collide and they'll still have sex and occasionally they'll make babies.
And if you can get men and women to fight with each other and to look at each other, particularly women looking at men as the enemies and as brutal and as mean, then what you do is you reproduce in women's minds the kind of mindset that normally would be associated with or derived from a real patriarchy.
You know, like Islam.
Kind of like a patriarchy.
And there's other cultures as well.
And so if you want women and men in the West to start becoming more totalitarian, then you tell women that men are oppressing them and men are mean and all that.
And women will still want babies, but instead of having husbands, they'll have government.
And thus government gets to be more totalitarian.
So if you convince women that there's a patriarchy, you kind of do end up With a patriarchy in a way, because women are now dependent on the state, which is a largely male-populated and male-funded institution.
And so they are dependent on men in a way that never occurred with a husband and wife situation, because there's mutual dependence there.
So I think patriarchy, I mean, the moment you hear it, you just know someone has been That they have not thought for themselves.
That they've not studied biology.
That they've not studied history.
That they've not studied evolution.
And it just doesn't make it...
Now, why didn't women participate in the public sphere in the past, right?
Up until really the 1950s, 1960s?
Well, because resources were scarce.
And when resources are scarce, you can't waste them On people who are going to leave the workforce to have babies.
You can't.
If you need five doctors in a town and you, say, train two women and three men, and then one of the women quits to have babies, well, you now have four doctors when you need five.
Now, if you trained a man to be a doctor, well, the man is not going to quit if there are babies around.
In fact, he's going to work harder.
That's the thing.
There are two times when a man's income and his dedication and his workaholism tends to escalate.
Number one, when he gets married.
Number two, when he becomes a father.
So if you have a choice in a society between training a man and training a woman, the answer is very simple.
If you train the woman, odds are she's going to bugger off, have babies, and not work outside the home, right?
It's great.
Babies are wonderful.
You need future.
You need people.
It's not like, that's terrible.
It's fine.
It's necessary.
So if you train the woman, odds are she's going to get married, she's going to go off and have babies, and you'll be down one worker, and you'll be down all of the money and time and energy and investment.
That you put into training that woman to do something useful, and she's going to go off and have babies, which is incredibly useful, but you don't need a lot of training.
You don't need a PhD.
You don't need to become a master in something to raise babies, to have and raise babies.
So it's not that complicated.
Well, now that we have a lot of excess resources, sure.
Women can, you know, we can afford to train women and have them vanish into motherhood.
It's a huge waste of time and energy and resources.
It's no coincidence that as women have entered the workforce, national debt has gone up, educational standards have gone down.
Well, sure.
Of course.
I mean, because we're spending huge amounts of money training people who then don't do their job.
What is it, like 40% of the women who got MBAs are no longer working in business at all?
What a giant waste!
What a giant waste.
Now, of course, women like to LARP as professionals, even if they're thinking about having kids, and I can understand that.
Of course, if you can get a law passed that says, oh, it's wrong to ask if you're going to get married, it's wrong to ask a woman if she's going to have babies.
It's wrong to ask a woman if she's going to have babies.
That's unfair.
Unfair is wrong.
Mean.
Discriminatory.
Really.
I don't remember women ever complaining that a man is supposed to swear sexual loyalty to her for the rest of his life.
Huh.
So a woman can ask a man, she wants to get married, are you going to have affairs?
And he has to say, no!
And if he has affairs, she can divorce him and take half his stuff.
So she can have a lifelong commitment from a man to be faithful, to provide for her.
Ah, there's nothing wrong with that.
So a woman can ask a man for the rest of his life, are you dedicated to me?
But an employer can't ask a woman, hey, are you planning on having babies?
Well, that's discriminatory.
Yes, it is!
Yes it is, because there's a finite amount of shit in society and if we shovel it to women who are going to have babies we are down X amount of very, very valuable stuff.
Think of all these 40% of women who had MBAs who aren't even bothering to work in business anymore.
Well, Think of all the jobs that weren't created.
Think of all the productivity that was never achieved.
Think of all the wealth that wasn't generated.
And then you wonder why wages don't go up.
Now, of course, there are women out there who genuinely don't want to have children.
They're not the maternal type.
Maybe lesbians.
May just not be interested in kids.
Maybe just, you know, Ayn Rand, not a lesbian, but not a mother.
And those women don't want to get caught up in the general, we're going to have kids, prejudice against women in the workplace, right?
She's got some young, attractive, 24-year-old woman.
Well, you line up a whole bunch of them.
How many of them are going to end up being moms?
A bunch, right?
Now, the women who aren't going to be moms...
They, uh, they don't want to get caught up in the prejudice.
I understand that, and I don't care.
I don't care.
I don't care about anyone who doesn't want to get caught up in a prejudice.
Do you know why?
Because I've been called a patriarch my whole life, and no one gave a good goddamn rat's ass about me being caught up in a stereotype.
Oh, I've been called white and therefore racist my whole life, so I don't give a good goddamn about anyone who whines and bleats and complains.
I don't want to be caught up in a stereotype!
Yeah, well, maybe you should have thought of that before you put me in a stereotype my whole goddamn life.
Didn't give a shit about me being caught up in a stereotype.
Guess what?
Don't give a shit about you being caught up in a stereotype either.
Could not care less about that.
So this is the basic reality.
If there was a patriarchy, why, oh why, would there be affirmative action for women?
Why, oh why, would men, as Scott Adams talks about this, hitting the diversity ceiling with regards to women and minorities and so on, like, oh, sorry, your career is over.
Now I guess it turned out pretty well for the guy.
He's worth a lot of money and has done a lot of really great stuff that's made people laugh and think in the world.
But if there was a patriarchy, why on earth would men be paying all the taxes to support the state and women be benefiting from it?
I mean, it just takes a moment's thought.
Why would there be the single mother welfare state if there was a patriarchy?
Why would there be family court where men get screwed if there was a patriarchy?
Why would over 90% of workplace deaths be male if there was a patriarchy?
Why would women live half a decade longer if there was a patriarchy?
Why would men get sentenced to longer terms in jail for exactly the same crimes if there was a patriarchy?
Why would there be alimony or child support or no-fault divorce if there was a patriarchy?
See, sex for resources.
That's the deal.
Now, a man must provide for his wife.
If he does not provide for his wife, she can divorce him and take half of his stuff for the rest of his life.
He must, by law, provide for his wife.
Does she have to provide sex to him?
No.
Not at all.
Not at all.
She can get married to him.
And the day after the honeymoon's over, she can say, I'm never having sex with you again.
You can never make a baby with me.
Do not come near me with that tiny pointy thing you have.
Never going to happen again.
What is his recourse?
There's no recourse.
None.
Well, he can divorce her and then she can take half his shit from now until the end of time.
So if there was a patriarchy, why would this deal of sexual resources only be enforced in favor of the woman at the expense of the man?
And the man have no enforceable claims against the woman's provision of sexuality.
It doesn't even take half a moment's thought to realize what nonsense this concept of patriarchy is.
Patriarchy is invented like the phrase white privilege.
It's invented so that people don't feel like shitheads for hating people.
It's invented so that assholes don't feel bad for indulging in petty, vicious, racist, sexist hatred against other groups, white males in particular.
See, you elevate someone to a status of privilege so you can hate them without guilt.
That's all.
You elevate people to a status of privilege so you can hate them without guilt.
In fact, your hate is moral, is good, is right, is healthy, is justice.
Yeah.
Nonsense.
Well, it's okay, because the time of deferral is fast approaching its end, my friends.
The time of deferral is almost done.
We tried.
We tried and tried and tried.
Let's give a little bit.
Give a little bit.
Give a little bit more.
Sacrifice more of our interests.
Take more abuse.
Think worse of ourselves.
Give.
Oh, is there injustice in the past?
We'll sacrifice in the present.
Our group to your interests.
Oh, you just take, take.
We'll give and we'll give.
And don't worry.
Soon after we give, just about, we turn ourselves inside out.
We cuff up a spleen.
We cram some gold.
We shine it up.
We hand it over.
When it's done, when we've handed over enough, there will be peace.
In the valley, there will be peace.
When we have given enough, when we've sacrificed enough, when we've screwed ourselves over enough, when we've harmed our boys to praise the minorities, when we've harmed the boys to praise the girls, when we've given up jobs and income and freedom and political power, economic security, strength, everything.
When we've given enough, everybody else will be satisfied.
The women, the minorities will be satisfied and we shall have peace and they shall be grateful.
And it's not Happening, my friends.
It's not happening at all.
Yes, sir.
Yeah.
The way the word tyranny, sorry, patriarchy is used, isn't it just a bad use of the word patriarchy?
In fact, what they mean is tyranny, whether it exists or not.
But isn't there a natural...
You see, I just like to go back to Aristotle.
And Aristotle says that in the house, a family father, as the head of the family, he has to do what is necessary, not less, but not more.
And it seems that everything that you say...
Actually, seems completely...
How do you say that?
It's conformed what Aristotle says about the father and what for him defines the natural patriarchy, which means, you know, the father, pater, pater, and archer, the principle.
To be the principle is to do what is necessary and providing what is necessary.
That means facilitate.
Sorry, but hang on.
Sorry, you're not adding much to saying do what is necessary.
But the reality is that in ancient Greece there was no such thing as the patriarchy because the majority of men were slaves.
Aristocracy, I agree with you, but not patriarchy.
You know, amongst the free people.
Well, that's important!
That's important!
That's like saying there's the patriarchy because the man who's the slave owner is a man.
He mostly owns men.
I mean, for example, Stefan, when he talks about the Persians, when Aristotle talks about the East, He says they're very different families because the fathers they do not distinguish between the slaves and their own sons.
And that's why they need so much tyrannical power to keep their empire together and said we the Greek We distinguish.
Our sons are free, and we do not owe them.
We give them a moral education, and that for him, the education of free men, defines the position of the father in the family of the free people, you know?
So the father is somebody who is providing service to his sons, educating them.
He's not getting paid for educating them.
So a father's job is to be a free university and to educate his children.
How the hell is that patriarchy?
Shouldn't they just be rubbing his feet and bringing him nubal slaves with which to drape himself?
Yeah, but I think, but it's maybe a detail, a minor detail about the words, but that is for me natural patriarchy, you know?
But why use the term?
I mean, you can't, it's like, you know, you can't reclaim the term.
Well, unfortunately, we might have to invite a new term, but I think it's really sad because it has become so ideologically...
I mean, they've stolen the word, in fact.
They've stolen the word.
Of course, that's what the left do.
First they steal words, and then they steal your stuff.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
We might have made a project reinventing this term, but the nice fathers who are good in their skin, who I've seen, and my own father was amongst them, They would love their family, but they would be kind of a silent, facilitating force, and they would be appreciated by their wives because of that, you know, and by their children, of course, with all the difficulties.
Well, sure, but hang on.
But appreciation comes when there's choice.
Appreciation comes when you don't have alternatives.
Absolutely.
Well, yeah.
Right?
Now, the women have the alternatives to ditch the man and...
Go to the state.
And then the state will take all the money from the man and give it to the woman.
And the woman has to provide nothing in return for the man.
She doesn't have to have sex with him or clean his house or cook his meals or raise his children or be his bookkeeper or run his business or anything like that.
Like somebody left a comment on my YouTube video the other day.
It was kind of a telling comment.
And it went something like this.
He said, so I'm sitting in a cafe in South Africa and I'm listening to these two women talk about where this friend of theirs should get married.
She was from South Africa.
The boyfriend was from Germany.
And they were engaged.
And he said, you know, I'm listening to this conversation.
And the women are saying, oh, I'm telling you, she should totally get married in Germany.
Because if she gets married in Germany, If they get divorced, she gets lots more stuff than if they get married in South Africa.
Because in South Africa, she's not going to end up getting that much stuff.
But in Germany, oh!
Ka-ching!
You've just won the lottery as far as child support and alimony and whatever, right?
Well, that's kind of cold.
I mean, that's kind of cold, right?
How can I get his money?
How can I get his money?
And...
A movie called The Red Pill by Cassie J, which you should definitely watch.
I'm going to just mention a brief little bit about it that's said by one of the men.
I don't know if you've ever remember or seen, there's an old movie called Serpico with Al Pacino.
No, no, no.
Sorry.
So, it's about a cop and everything he goes through in the line of duty, and I think it's okay to talk about a movie that's decades old.
He gets shot.
Now, that's a lot.
It's a lot to go through.
Now, he ended up retiring after he was shot and he got a pension.
He got a pension from New York City, I think it was, New York City Police Force.
Now, some woman, well, she woke up with cash signs floating like laser lights over her nipples and said, ooh, you know what?
I think I'm just going to seduce this guy.
I'm going to get pregnant by his baby.
I'm going to take his pension.
So she did.
She fucked him.
She got pregnant.
And she got over 90% of his pension.
This guy walks the mean streets for decades, taking down bad guys, getting punched, getting beat up, living in fear, and eventually gets shot, barely survives.
Decades of work and danger and fighting and wounding.
Late nights, stress.
That seediness that seeps into you as you stroll the mean streets of 70s New York.
This is like pre-Giuliani New York.
It was like, escape from New York!
Snake Plissken!
It was mean stuff!
So decades, getting beaten up, put in the hospital, finally shot.
That's what he has to do to earn a pension.
And you know what she has to do to get that pension?
Fuck him.
One night.
That's it.
That's it.
She's got the whole pension.
He has to spend decades and end up getting shot.
She gets it.
One night, ten minutes.
Boom!
There's your pension, baby.
And they call it a patriarchy.
Give me a break.
Yeah, yeah.
It's a pity that the word, a natural word, is used...
Because this role of doing the necessary things, even if they're dangerous in society, I think it's natural in men.
They love it.
But if it's not appreciated, it just goes lost.
But they love to do that.
A certain degree of risk and danger, they love to add that to society, this facilitating foundation of society, if you like.
And that's what I would call natural patriarchy.
Sure.
But it has been ridiculed.
I think if we want to give back the taste of life to the guys, we'll have to maybe invent a new word to express what patriarchy originally meant, you know?
And I know lots of women who really appreciate the man for playing this role, and they generally make happy couples.
I would say every totalitarian system is like a metal matriarchy because it just keeps people in an illusion that money grows on trees.
We used to believe that babies come with storks, but now we believe that money grows in trees.
Well, I wouldn't say that because women don't turn to the The trees, to get their money, they turn to the state.
Women know exactly where the damn money comes from.
In fact, what I mean.
It's like a fairy tale.
Nobody's working for them.
No, it's not a fairy tale.
No, seriously.
You don't give women that out.
They know exactly where the money is.
And do you know what they do?
Women, as a whole, this is how progressive and advanced and enlightened and empowered women are.
Do you know what they do?
They nag men to get money and that's called feminism.
They nag men to get money and that's called feminism.
Political feminism is the most retrograde, medieval, primeval, prehistoric Cliched, female disempowering state of mind that can possibly be conceived of.
See, when women are young, they get money through sexual market value.
Feel like pouring some gold on my boobies?
I do, in fact, because hormones.
I get dicknapped on a regular basis as a young man.
That's what you do.
Now, When women aren't attractive, they get money by finding a weak man and berating and controlling him and nagging him.
Now, he's never going to make a lot of money because he's being nagged and ground into dust, but whatever money he makes, he's going to give to her, not to pursue the positive of sexual relations, but to avoid the negative of being nagged to fucking death.
Right?
Nagged to death.
Here, take the money.
Just please.
Shut up.
Just...
Just shut up.
Here.
Go to the mall.
Go to the mall and bitch at the people who are being paid to listen to you.
Go to the mall and complain about something.
Go to the mall and buy something.
Go to the mall and stuff your face with whatever you can find.
Go and eat four pounds of spanakopitas.
I don't care.
Just go somewhere else.
Get away from me.
I'll give you money if you just go away.
I'll give you money if you stop whining.
I'll give you money if you stop complaining.
I'll give you money if you stop nagging.
Stop calling me horrible names.
I'll give you money.
Now, how is that any different than the relationship the feminists have with largely male politicians, with largely male with reporters, with the male media and the male political structure?
We're gonna call you sexist.
We're gonna call you women-haters.
We're gonna call you misogynist.
Unless you give us money, we're gonna nag you to fucking death.
Unless you give us money and power.
Is there anything less empowering Then making screeching, polysyllabic, bat-like noises at people until they fucking clap their hands over their ears and give you shit just to go away.
And that's all that's happened.
This is the social justice warrior thing.
It's just basically that.
I'm going to unleash torrent after torrent of verbal abuse against you unless you give me money.
It's a nutsack tightening shakedown.
Balls in a vice.
I'm gonna fuck you up.
Unless you pay me.
Unless you pay me, give me the money.
Now, it has been noted that a lot of feminists are not the most attractive people in the planet.
I mean, physically.
So, you know, they can't get money at a sexual market value for being attractive.
So they get money out of nagging.
And the fact that this is, like, they call this empowering.
I guess it is, right?
If you don't want to earn your stuff and you're not pretty enough to get it for free, well, then you nag, right?
I mean, nagging is...
An attractive young woman has too many options to end up nagging, but an unattractive woman ends up nagging.
I guess it beats working, right?
And so she wants to set...
Now, nagging is not good enough because, of course, the man can get away.
And so what you do is you nag politicians to make sure the man can never get away.
Can never get away.
Can never be free of your nagging ass.
Can never get away.
Because if he tries to get away and tries not to give you stuff, well, guess what?
You'll nag the politicians until they send the police to go track him down and throw him in jail so that he'll give you stuff to get to stay out of jail.
You could move away from a nag in the past.
Now, you can't.
You can't.
The nag has achieved infinity status.
The nag is everywhere.
The nag is the air you breathe.
It is gravity.
It is light and dark and everything in between.
It is the TV on.
It is the TV off.
It is the music playing.
It is silence.
It is everywhere and everything.
It is the stars.
It is the lava underneath your feet.
It is everywhere.
It is the Alpha and the Omega.
You cannot ever escape.
The nag.
And look, I mean, it's not like all physically unattractive women are an act.
Of course not.
I mean, some wonderful non-physically attractive women who are great and excellent and fantastic.
But it is a basic...
Because not all unattractive women are parasites.
Not all attractive women are parasites.
Maybe a little more in the attractive women side.
But not all unattractive women.
But if you don't want to work for a living, and if you don't...
Feel like running someone's household and you don't feel like being a good wife.
And being a good wife is hard work.
It's hard work.
You know what I'm saying?
A woman's work is never done.
There's real truth in that.
Running a household, keeping things going, there are kids, there's appointments, there's doctors, there's cleaning, there's bills, there's like money management.
It's a skilled...
And it used to be taught to women, right?
Women used to actually learn how to run a household.
It used to be like something they went to school for.
Called home ec when I was a kid.
Learning how to cook, learning how to stretch.
I mean, remember, for most of human history, you didn't have enough dollars to do and get what you want.
You had to learn how to stretch that dollar out.
You know, like Cruciali Spanx, just hanging on by three threads.
Don't bend over.
Don't take a deep breath.
I mean, you're right on the edge.
And it's hard work, and it's juggling, and it's difficult, and it's challenging.
And women used to do that.
That used to be kind of the gig.
But now, if you don't feel like working either inside or outside the home, well, you can, instead of getting resources because you're bringing something positive to the mix, you get resources by not nagging for 20 minutes.
And it's a shitty and parasitical and horrifying way Do you think that because guys generally are hardly educated by their fathers anymore, actually they run into marriage too early?
I mean, I've seen it with my generation and the generations after that, that I thought guys were marrying too quickly.
Maybe not even too early, but without sufficient reflection.
Yeah, marrying the wrong people.
No, we need a brotherhood of dick slapping.
We do.
We need a brotherhood of punching each other in the groin.
I wouldn't use that.
To avoid dicknapping.
Seriously.
We need little clubs.
Ping pong battles on fire or something.
Little clubs.
Wow, she's really hot.
Boom!
She's crazy.
Take one to the nads.
I don't care if it's aversive therapy.
It's still better than family court.
It's still better than alimony.
It's still better than...
Living in a larder and setting yourself on fire.
You know, just boom!
And this used to be how it worked.
Wow, she's hot!
Yes, but she's crazy.
I think I'm going to date her.
Boom!
Straight to the nads.
I'll do that again if you speak positively.
And if I find you with her, I'm taking a cricket bat.
To your testicles.
Yes, yes, yes.
We're going to play Castanets and Newton Machines.
And no, I mean, and same thing for, well, I mean, a bunch of women have called into this show.
And they were with the wrong guy.
He was a really cool drug dealer.
Okay, he was kind of fat, but a lot of charisma.
He seemed to have no fear.
He was never shy.
He never had any anxiety.
Yes, because he's a sociopath.
So...
Yeah, I mean, you just, boom, punch!
Sorry, don't have time.
If you're dicknapped, you're dick slapped.
That's how it has to be.
And we need to watch out for each other.
And I do that on this show.
Run!
You've probably heard me say that a couple of times.
Men are talking about women, or women are talking about men.
From the outside, like when you're not wrapped up in the giant schlong-based anaconda of infinite lust, yeah.
Having the oxygen squeezed out of your brain in order to drop your seed and unholy turf...
Yeah.
So I'm doing this service out there, you know, like updated, like a slender Tom Likas.
Don't do it.
Don't do it.
Your hormones are not your friend unless they're pointing you in the direction of virtue.
So yeah, don't be shy telling your friends to stay away.
Yeah.
And a good father actually does that work.
He can't do all of it because at some stage you become independent.
But I think it's the father that should start this work.
And the mother too, right?
I mean, who can see female evil better than a mother?
Well, absolutely.
You know, I'll tell you that...
Except if your mother's evil, in which case she's not going to tell you anything about female evil because that's a kind that kind of goes off in her cleavage, right?
No, but absolutely.
There's always women swarming around monasteries and male communities that are extremely, well, that are a pain, actually, and that ask a lot of attention.
And actually, it's women that warn me for them and explain to me what it is.
As a man, you're not aware of how A woman can get a split personality where what she wants is something totally different than what she appears to need, you know?
And it's true.
The wisdom of women is very, very necessary in this education.
Oh yeah.
If your mother didn't teach you about bad women, it's because she's a bad woman.
I'm happy with that going down as like a foundational law of penis physics.
I mean, if your mother didn't teach you about bad women and how dangerous they can be, because she's a bad woman.
If your father, right?
If you're a woman and a girl and your father didn't teach you about bad men and how dangerous they can be, it's because he's a bad man.
Of course.
I mean, my, you know, at some point, God help them.
Guys are going to come circling around my daughter.
Yeah.
I'm going to be very clear.
And now what am I going to say?
Well, you know, this guy's not reliable.
He showed up half an hour late and he didn't apologize.
Now, I won't need to tell her that because I generally am on time and I'm generally, if I'm late, I apologize and keep my word.
So, this guy's lazy.
Well, she's not.
Got the example of a lazy father.
So, I won't need to say that much, but I sure as hell will if I think there's any risk involved.
And I have no problem pointing out Immoralities on behalf of other people because I don't share them.
It's not like a bladed boomerang that takes off my own head when I'm trying to decapitate some bad person out there.
Anyone who's not teaching you about bad people is like a lion teaching you, hey, gazelle, you don't need to run.
Just rest.
Have a nice relax.
Fall asleep.
That's even better.
Fall asleep.
Yes, that's wonderful.
Have a nice rest.
Okay.
Yeah.
We need that.
Well, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
And I mean, you know, in the circles of my parents' friends, it's a man who ran off with another woman, which is, of course, a very easy, you know, a very easy occasion to accuse the man.
It's very strange, but my mom My mom, you know, in the majority of cases said that she could very well understand it because, you know, she would say, I mean, honestly, was she really his woman, you know?
I mean, he ran off with another because he was despairing.
It's very odd.
My mother always took the defense of the men who ran off with other women.
Well, this is the funny thing, too.
And this, again, it's just it takes a moment's thought.
Men's fertility vastly outstrips a woman's fertility.
Mm-hmm.
It vastly outstrips.
I mean, a man can, a teenage boy can impregnate six women a day and not even break stride.
I'm literally not even break stride.
Just do it walking.
And, of course, a man's fertility, it's not great sperm when it's later, but at least it's active.
Like, you could be Zorba the Greek and, you know, impregnate a woman in your 70s.
It's not necessarily risk-free, but it's possible.
And so it's pretty clear.
That if it was a patriarchy, what would happen is when a man is 45 and a woman is 45, her sexual market value, like a stuka, without an engine, she's toast.
She's toast.
Her sexual market value is toast because she can't make any more babies.
That's what sexual market value is all about.
Now, a man's sexual market value is going up, up, up, up in a way, right?
Because he's got more resources, got more wealth, got more...
His kids have probably grown, at least his first round, and his sperm is still pretty fresh and healthy.
You know, he's not, you know, you bang a woman in her 40s and you're likely to give birth to a raptor or a stegosaurus as you are to a human child.
Hey, dino eggs!
Let's see what we can get out.
Ooh, there's some...
Paleolithic omelets coming out of there.
But the man is still, you know, he's still hopping.
His tadpoles are still able to swim up a pretty impressive waterfall of time.
And so in 45, if it was a patriarchy, you know what would happen?
The marriage is over.
I'm going to go find a younger woman and I'm going to start all over again because I can and you can't.
That's what would happen if it was a patriarchy.
Why doesn't it happen?
Well, because in the West, men have adapted to supply what women need, and women want a lifelong monogamy, even after they can't become pregnant anymore.
That makes no sense.
From a pure male-spread-the-seed environment or situation, you'd have second marriage would be natural.
I mean, of course, sorry, you're old.
I'm trading you in, right?
I mean, it would be a lease program, not a buy program, right?
But that's not how it works.
So give me this patriarchy crap and this nonsense.
Somehow, man, you know, it's interesting what you say about evolution because all these processes you make You can show, but on the other, something in men that must transcend all this.
It's not denying evolution.
It's saying we have to go further.
There's something in man and woman that wants to transcend this whole evolutional mechanism.
But it's a real transcendence.
It means it's not denying it or destroying it.
It's just...
I personally think that all these things in nature, the more we find out, the more it's a sign of something else.
And listen, I want to sort of point out, I have...
I have no problem with the way things are set up.
I'm not complaining about it.
I'm not saying, well, it would be much better if you could just bang everything that moved with no consequences.
Because all that would do is produce a purely our selected society and it would be hell on wheels and society would collapse, civilization would decay.
I mean, I have no problem with the way things are.
I'm fine with monogamy.
I'm fine with pair bonding.
I'm fine with not trading in your woman when she holds in a sneeze and out comes a dust flume right from her vagina.
I have no problem with any of that.
I think that's fine.
That's called civilization.
But let's not pretend it's a patriarchy.
I'm not saying that, oh, we should have a patriarchy and therefore blah blah blah.
I don't want to live like a frog.
I love being married.
I love a lifelong commitment.
Do you think that the way we deal with fatherhood in the West traditionally, do you think it has to do with reason?
You know, If you say that, you know, for example, Islam, that it is patriarchy, which I think it's, no, it's a denaturalized patriarchy, but okay, let's not discuss, let's not fight about words.
But the real moral position of the father in society doesn't have to very much with the reason, because our Western society is so much a combination of this reasonable, Rational culture together with Christianity.
I mean, they seem, the two of them, have to produce what we are.
Okay, you need to give me a question here, if that's alright.
I don't know where you're going with this.
I'm interested, but...
Yeah, yeah.
Well, maybe we discuss it for the next time, because I think there's people looking, Stephan.
And I just wanted to point out, I have no problem with the way things have developed in the West.
I do have a problem with the welfare state and with the family courts and all of the statist crap.
That is currently taking a wrecking ball to thousands of years of beautifully developed male-female relationships.
I have a problem with all of that.
I have a problem with the state.
I don't have a problem with the fact that there's monogamy.
I don't have a problem with the fact that marriage is a lifelong commitment.
And none of those things, all of those things are perfectly fine.
But let's not pretend it's a patriarchy.
You know, there's an old saying which says, if you want to know who rules over you, look at who you're not allowed to criticize.
Yeah, yeah.
And...
I don't think it's men.
It's not white males because, of course, everybody bags on white males.
They kick us in passing.
They don't just drive the car over us.
They just back it over again, right?
Which is why white males stop being so damn nice.
We're lagging behind in Europe.
Our so-called European Parliament is trying to push laws of censorship.
Oh, yeah.
Especially the French government.
They're still doing their revolution.
They're still trying to change French society.
No, they're not doing that.
All they're doing is appeasing violent minorities.
Because they know that if they pass laws against white males, they won't get violence.
But if they pass laws against other groups, they will.
And it's sad what it's come to.
Everybody who's nice...
I hold myself in this category, but everyone who's nice has a deep and dark suspicion that being nice is a bad plan.
That being nice means that you get treated badly.
In other words, that society responds to those who will cause it the most trouble, not whoever has the best moral argument.
And so, if you're nice, then you're screwed.
Like, you're gonna get hosed, you're gonna get passed over.
Now, in a free market, being nice means that you get rewarded, right?
But in a state of society, being nice means that you get screwed.
And when, you know, as a white male, when you see a whole bunch of genders and ethnicities and all this, all squalling of the government and all getting their needs met at your expense, At some point you're like, ah, you know what?
In the state, in state of society, nice guys finish last.
In the free market, nice guys finish first.
In the state, nice guys finish last.
And so, sorry, you know, white guys, we're going to have to just start making noise and we're going to have to start making things difficult and unpleasant because that's how the system works.
That's how the game is played at the moment.
And if we don't, We're toast.
All right.
Well, thanks very much for the call.
I appreciate it.
Let's move on to the next.
Yes.
Thanks.
Bye-bye, Stephan.
See you next time.
All right.
Take care.
All right.
Up next, we have David.
David wrote in and said...
I'm the founder of prereq.org, P-R-E-R-E-Q dot org, the e-learning platform that will make education great again.
Do you believe that school choice will be able to neutralize the left's dominance in education?
And do you think it's plausible to expand the alternative media movement into an alternative education movement?
That's from David.
Hi, Stefan.
Hi, how are you doing?
Good, good.
Really excited to be here.
Good, good.
I'm glad.
It's a step.
Is it going to solve it finally?
No.
I mean, because the government will still control the curriculum.
And, you know, it's really hard, if not downright impossible, to fire shitty teachers.
And most teachers are idiots anyway.
Um...
Because we just know that statistically because it's the people with the lowest SAT scores who end up going into education.
You know, if you have, I guess, if your intellectual speed is similar to the sap of a tree in February, then off you go to become a teacher.
And so I think the school choice will help that to some degree.
It will shake things a little bit and it might start to open up arguments for more of a free system.
But of course, the reality is the way that it should work.
Is that people shouldn't be taxed at all for this stuff.
They should keep their damn money.
And nobody should tell anybody how to educate their children.
And nobody should tell anybody what the form, content, distance, environments of the educational system should be.
Because I don't know.
I don't know how children should be educated anymore.
We have this model set up in the 1830s.
And, you know, what do you have?
You have a bunch of kids sitting in rows and a teacher up there with a blackboard.
And, you know, 150 years later, more than that, 170 years later, the rest of the human environment is unrecognizable.
Don't use a Pony Express.
You've got instant messaging.
And now, you have, what do you have in the education after the government took it over in the mid-19th century?
Oh, look!
You have a bunch of kids sitting in rows and you have a teacher up there.
Now, I hear...
It's become a whiteboard, not a blackboard.
So, ooh, we'll call that massive progress.
But I don't have any idea how children should be educated these days.
I think it's different.
It's individual.
When you have the entirety of human knowledge available in a tablet that costs $99, it's really tough to say exactly how children should be educated.
And anybody who claims that they know how children should be educated, well, they're just a big stinky butt liar.
And so I think it'll start to help a little bit.
And in particular, I'm interested in how it's going to help the black community and inner cities and so on because there are some studies that show it can help to close the charter schools and help to close the black-white achievement gap, which if that can be sustained, will do more for the black community than any other single thing that could possibly be conceived of.
And so I think that there's great potential, but it is merely a first baby step.
And I'm very glad that at least it's heading in that direction, that there's more choice for parents.
But it's a long way from real freedom in education.
I really appreciate that.
And I think I genuinely agree with you that it is a first step.
And the reason I was thinking to make this goal is...
I just want to make sure that we're not going to pop open the champagnes too early because there's still a lot of work to do in the whole education sphere.
As you said, the liberation of the inner cities is definitely a big step and that's really going to Yeah, the quality of education would be one of them.
And the diversity of ideas, or at the very least tolerance towards other ideas, that would be the other.
And I'm rather...
I'm skeptical as to whether a school choice will be able to do too much towards the second problem because I think that there will definitely be more demand once there's choice.
People will want to send their kids to a school that doesn't make our kids into another brick in the wall.
Education at the moment in the West is shameful.
It is horrible.
It is vile.
It is an abattoir of dismantling the potential of children for the sake of squat fat bastards to sit there and prey upon their captive audience and destroy their minds out of pettiness and selfishness and greed and incompetence.
There is little more vile in the world in the West at the moment than government schools.
They are terrible, horrible, horrifying, destructive.
And it's not just physically destructive.
Making kids who should be active sit in rows day after day after day.
You might as well have them smoke.
Light up some stogies!
Or as Monica Lewinsky said to Hillary Clinton, close!
But no cigar.
And It is unbelievably horrific.
Look in the future.
I'll take the long view of these things.
Look in the future.
They'll look back at this and they'll say, what unbelievable, colossal assholes were these people that this is what they did to their children.
How could they possibly Have had Disney World and government schools in the same society.
How is that even remotely possible?
How could they have had Chuck E. Cheese and state education in the same society?
Let's bring our children pleasure!
Oh wait, no.
Let's get them up way too early.
Let's stuff them in rows.
Fill them with incomprehensible knowledge that's pointless.
You know, facts, facts, facts.
Oh, I know.
I know different types of photosynthesis.
I guess I'm enlightened now.
I can do my times table.
I get no problem with the times table, but what's it all for?
Look, I can do Euclidean geometry.
Can I question and critically think about society that I live in?
No!
Do I know where there's an electoral college?
No!
Do I know how to be an entrepreneur?
No!
Do I know what's legal?
No!
Teaching children about the law is an exercise in Kafkaesque humiliation, mental seppuku, and bottomless embarrassment.
Here, I'm sorry, we can't talk about the law yet because we're still piling up the law books as we have done for the past...
Three days, eclipsing the very sun itself, almost filled the room.
We can have one child left in and we put the law books in that you're susceptible to all the regulations and the tax laws and the federal code and the state code, local code, county code and the ordinance.
Now don't break any of these laws, kids.
Does anyone know these laws?
No!
But you're still susceptible to them because the government needs infinite complexity by which it can tighten the screws on you should you step out of line anyway.
Oh, did somebody step out of line?
Don't worry, we don't need the laws.
All we'll do is drug the living shit out of you.
With SSRIs, causing about a 10% reduction in your brain mass.
Don't worry.
I'm sure you can regrow that never.
That will never happen again.
And they're hostages.
Children are not treasures to be educated by the government.
They're hostages.
They're hostages.
We got your money.
And in order to pretend that we got your money justly, we basically got to hang on to your kids.
Sorry.
It's just there.
Normally you kidnap people and then...
Someone pays a ransom.
Here, they pay a ransom and in order to justify that ransom, in order to make it not look like just another goddamn welfare state for fat, loathsome, spotty-behind pseudo-intellectual, brain-dead non-teachers, you don't want it to be thought of as a real welfare state for these people.
So, in order to justify this welfare state, sorry, they've got to take your kids and turn their brains into tapioca and then turn them loose On society.
I saw this video.
I think it was the day before yesterday.
A real clockwork orange thing.
About a bunch of kids.
30 kids or so.
Early to mid-teens.
Swarming a police officer.
Dragging him down to the ground.
Stomping on his head.
Good job, government schools.
Good job, immigration policy.
I can taste the civilization from here.
It smells like Brain fluids on the sidewalk.
And it gets even worse when we get into higher education and universities, but go ahead.
Yeah, I was just saying that you don't have to convince me about how the system is messed up and how much, you know, it's part of the reason why I was really, why I really want the path that I went, because I genuinely want I really want to fix it.
I want to make education something unlike what you're describing.
So I think that the way I see it, look, I thought a few years back I would have thought that pretty much whether it's the education, whether it's the media, Hollywood, that those are pretty much owned by the left for all intents and purposes.
This is the institutions where The left uses these institutions so that it has a chance to bypass rational arguments.
And honestly, I'm starting to really question The permanence of that stronghold, because after seeing what you specifically and you as part of the alternative media movement have done to not only neutralize the left's stronghold of the media,
but also to really put it to such an extent with everything that was going against Trump, for instance, and The way you guys managed to hold on to objectivity and use rationality to get the arguments to go ahead.
I just want to say thank you for what you guys have done.
It's really impressive.
But I think that we can do a similar thing in education.
I'm feeling rather optimistic about channeling the Channeling the success of taking over the one battleground.
I know the whole education field seems like this one blue state that just never makes sense to campaign there.
But eventually, with the right tools, it becomes accessible.
So what do you think?
Is it within reach?
Is it possible to reform the educational system?
Not so much to reform it, but to actively seek out a resistance that has to come from people who are not necessarily in the educational world, like what's done by the alternative media movement, where people are just fed up with being told lies by insiders, and they prefer truth from outsiders, and use a similar mentality.
You know that there's a government post office, right?
Right.
Do you use it?
Government post office?
Yeah.
Do you use the government mail much?
I'm in Canada, like you, so it's pretty much using the mail.
Yeah, I have to.
No, but not for most of your messages.
Don't you use email and instant messaging and Skype and if you've got something like FedEx or UPS? I mean, you don't use the government mail system much, right?
Oh, absolutely.
Yeah, I definitely don't use it too much for that.
Yeah, I mean the government mail systems exist to deliver you bills and bullshit flyers that you don't want.
This is why you can't opt out because you get your bills online and if you opt out of flyers, if you opt out of advertising, they don't even have...
Again, it's just a welfare state.
The purpose is to get your money and they have to deliver some mail to do that.
Like the purpose is to get your money and they have to pretend to educate your children to do that, right?
It's all a scam.
So you don't use...
The government mail, if at all possible, right?
Right.
You have to find ways around the system.
Like I had to go see a doctor the other day.
I needed a specialist.
Nothing too major or anything like that.
I needed a specialist.
Do you know what the waiting time was?
The estimate I was given?
Ten months.
Yeah.
Ten months to go and see a doctor.
That's brutal.
See, they want my money, and in return they have to pretend to provide me health care.
It's largely a criminal conspiracy to keep healthcare away from people, but that's perhaps a topic for another time.
But that's the reality.
I found alternatives.
I found my own way of doing it.
You work around the system.
You work through the system.
You find alternatives to the system.
But directly engaging the system?
Eh.
You just have to wait for the system to collapse.
It wasn't directly engaging in communism that caused the Soviet Union to change.
They just collapsed.
Ran out of money.
So no, you keep providing alternatives.
You just pretend like it's not there.
I mean, I pay the bastards off.
Sure, I'll pay my taxes.
And then I live like they're not there.
And it works on an individual basis.
I mean, you can find these alternatives as an individual.
But I'm thinking about really making it harder and harder for them to...
Yeah.
They don't care.
Listen, it's not like, here's the thing, right?
I'm being taxed to pay for government schools, right?
Right.
There's no circumstantial situation in which I could imagine my daughter darkening the door of a government school, right?
So they have my money.
Do they care that they're not providing me a service?
No.
Like, has anyone from the teachers' union called me up and said, hey, Mr.
Molyneux, I noticed something.
So we're charging you.
For government schools.
But you're not sending your daughter to a government school.
How are we not providing your needs?
How are we not satisfying your needs?
What's wrong with the school system that we're not satisfying what your requirements are, your preferences are?
Because we feel bad, you see, about taking your money without providing you the service that we're charging you for.
Feel bad about it.
So what can we do?
And of course, I'm not alone in this.
Homeschooling, unschooling, not sending your kids to government school is rising.
As in Chicago, the majority of teachers don't send their kids to government school.
So they've got my money.
If they had a shred of fucking conscience, they'd call me up and say, what can we do?
We feel bad.
We've taken your money and we're not educating your kid.
Well, that's not fair.
What are we not doing or what could we do better?
So that you'd actually send your kid to be educated by us because we got your money anyway.
I will never get that call.
Nobody who doesn't put their kids in government schools will ever get that call.
Why?
Because they don't give a flying fuck.
They don't give a shit.
They don't give a rat's ass.
They got my money.
They don't care.
That's a given.
I understand that the problem is not going to be solved from within.
I mean, they're going to continue milking the system the way they have been.
Milking me?
Well, yeah, you know what I mean.
I basically wake up with fat, retarded teachers rifling through my wallet.
Don't mind me!
So yeah, essentially what I'm saying is I really see the possibility.
I think that my e-learning platform that is still not up and running, but I really see it like it will be a phenomenal tool for people who are also fed up with the system as is and are trying to really create an alternative in the sense that...
Obviously, as you said, it's not going to happen from within.
The system is quite happy to continue things for as long as it can.
And with school choice, it will be a step in the right direction.
I mean, obviously, there will be creative destruction going on and incentives, and there will be demand for some additional choices to go ahead.
You know, so that parents who want to choose a school that happens to be ideologically neutral or something like that, so there will be more demand for that.
But I'm worried that the problem is going to be supply side, which is why there has to be an active movement, an active collaboration, equivalent, you know, in principle to the alternative media movement, only the alternative education movement that Could, in fact, neutralize the left's dominance of it, or at the very least significantly offset it.
Yeah, I mean, you're preaching to the choir here, right?
I mean, I've been teaching people how to think for 10 years now.
You know, what, we got close to 300 million downloads, 275 million downloads of you, something like that.
So I've been teaching people to think for a decade now.
Dr.
Duke Pesta, I have on the show.
He's got the Freedom Project Academy.
And there's other places, of course, that you can go.
So just keep providing alternatives and teach people how to think.
Just, you know, you have to brace yourself for the moral horror of people who wake up and realize that they're not being used, they're not being protected as individuals, they're being used as tax livestock and batteries for bureaucrats.
So, I'm going to move on to the next caller, but thank you so much for your call, and I wish you the very best of luck with your website.
Thank you very much, Stefan.
I appreciate you taking my call.
Thank you.
Alright, up next we have Tara.
Tara wrote in and said, And for the record, this question is also, is Mike evil?
Because I joyfully voted for one Donald Trump.
Welcome to the show, Tara.
Hi, Mike.
Hi, Jeff.
Thank you.
Hi.
Do you want to expand on the question more?
Do you want to just, like, pick on Mike personally?
Either one is fine with me, or both, if you want.
I mean, I'll just go straight out and say it.
Like, I voted for Trump, too.
And I actually, like...
And if we're evil, then we are evil together.
Exactly.
Exactly.
No, I'm fine.
I mean, I really feel like it was the right thing to do.
So, like, I'm fine with being evil, if that's how it goes.
Because, I mean, globalism, horrible.
So...
Yeah, I mean, I definitely think that there's been a big backlash as far as, you know, a lot of people on the message boards have been upset with the direction the show's taken.
Wait, hang on.
Sorry, sorry.
I'm just trying to follow this.
Are you saying that some of the listeners to this show had an issue with the advocacy of political action?
Mike, why didn't you tell me?
I'm not psychic, you know.
I can't guess these things out of nowhere.
I mean, yeah, I mean...
No, it's okay, because I... I'm sorry, the last thing is, I actually went back in time and murdered 2008 Steph.
Just so you know.
It was very much a John Connor thing.
I went back and I just strangled him.
And that's why I still have the scar on my neck.
It's basically for me going back in time and stabbing myself in the neck.
But anyway, go on.
Right, I mean, as long as you want hand-to-hand combat, then it's cool, right?
So, as long as you killed him dead.
But...
That guy was a little porky.
Like, I went back in time, it's like, dude, you got some flap.
You're younger, but I can take you.
Yeah.
Anyway, go ahead.
Yeah, so, I mean, personally, like, from an emotional standpoint and from a preference standpoint, I actually prefer the fact that the show is taking a turn towards political action, because I feel like, you know, A lot of what's being said can be practically applied right away and to me that appeals to me emotionally just from a preference standpoint.
But I wanted to refer back to UPB and to make sure that I understood the arguments and make sure that I could respond to these.
Because I tried to respond a lot on the message boards.
I tried to write back to a lot of these people that were criticizing UPB. And, you know, again, to me, it's like they're criticizing you on the platform that you're providing, right?
And the platform that's being endangered by Hillary Clinton and by her candidacy and by the supremacy of the left.
Because if they get in charge, then guess the first people they're coming after?
It's going to be you.
It's going to be, you know, Alex Jones, Mike Cernovich.
These people are going to be endangered by her candidacy.
And so it just it pissed me off, like, to know To no end that this is what was going on, that people are literally going to go on your message boards and criticize you for what you're doing.
And yeah, so emotionally I felt that.
I also wanted to be able to combat it from, or be able to address it from a UPB standpoint as well.
Right, right.
No, and look, I'm of two minds and I'm ambivalent about it as well.
I mean, I see the benefit.
First of all, I always want people to criticize me to keep me honest.
You know, I mean, as the show grows and I become more and more detached from reality and more and more head up my own egomaniacal ass.
No, I'm just kidding.
Or am I? But no, I mean, I need people to give me the pushback, to give me the feedback, and to make sure that I'm staying on the straight and narrow.
So I have no problem with those kinds of criticisms.
I don't mind them at all.
In fact, I would be nonplussed if they were absent.
So from that standpoint, I'm fine with it.
In fact, I think it's a good thing.
Now, that having been said...
Maybe they could thank me and Mike for playing our part and helping them not get fucking drafted.
You know, do you guys feel okay?
Is that something that you're relatively okay with?
Because, you know, Hillary, you know, she was a little trigger-happy.
And we already know she's got no problem destroying countries already.
You know, I mean, the role she took just in Libya.
Libya, the jewel of Africa.
Yes, he was a crazy guy.
Yes, he was supposed to have underage girls hanging around, which he did nasty things to.
On the other hand, compared to the rest of Africa, the place was a paradise.
Highest per capita income, most stable.
He kept the crazies out of Europe, kept them away from the Mediterranean.
So we already know that she set events in motion and helped orchestrate the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi, who was dragged through the street and killed by having a bayonet shoved up his ass repeatedly.
And she laughed about it.
And she laughed about this.
Yeah, we came, we saw, he died.
Okay, so keeping that person away from the seat of power, I don't think I'm ever going to second guess myself on that one.
I don't think everybody...
Oh, well, you know, I did write that book UPB and in a perfect and ideal world.
Right?
No, come on.
Come on.
Come on.
I mean, seriously.
It's like...
Let's say you have to go...
It's an emergency.
You got a neighbor.
You got a neighbor on your left and you got a neighbor on your right.
The neighbor on your left is a homicidal maniac.
Right?
And the neighbor on your right...
A little religious, you know, kind of pro-statist or whatever.
But you've got to go!
It's a huge emergency and you can't bring your kid.
And your kid knows both these people and your kid likes the one who's kind of religious and she doesn't like the one who's a homicidal maniac.
You've got to go!
Someone's got to babysit your kid!
Well...
Steph, you're an anti-statist and you're an atheist, so what do you do in having a mild religious person and a statist person babysit your kids?
I had to go.
I had to choose one person.
I only had time to choose one.
I'm sorry.
I chose the one who's the least harmful.
I chose the one who's not going to strangle my kid.
I chose the one who's not going to be a crazy homicidal maniac around my children.
Sorry.
I mean, people didn't get mad at me.
You tell me, what was the third choice?
Well, now, if there's another neighbor who's an anarchist and an atheist and down with UPB and all with peaceful parenting, and then I choose the guy who's the religious, okay, you tell me the third neighbor.
Tell me who I missed.
And don't tell me Gary Johnson or I'll come right over to your house and talk to you in person about that.
And, you know, why weren't you in support of Ron Paul?
Ron Paul had no chance of winning, and Ron Paul did not take on the media.
This is why people seem to have a trouble understanding.
Gary Johnson did not take on the media.
Hillary Clinton, of course, did not take on the media.
Why would she?
They're on her side.
Donald Trump took on the media, and I said this from the very beginning, from the beginning of my enthusiasm for his candidacy more than a year and a half ago, summer 2015.
He's the weapon by which we're going to take down the media.
And the media is currently distorting and destroying all capacity for rational conversations in the West.
The media is the violent, vicious, strangling, broken telephone cord that is currently choking the larynx out of all rational discourse in the West.
Now, Ron Paul did not take on the media.
Gary Johnson did not take on the media.
Jill Stein's certainly not doing it.
Mitt Romney did not take on the media.
I'm sorry, who was that?
Jill Stein.
Jill Stein did not take on the media.
And so Donald Trump was the guy, can you imagine, who the hell calls in the media and they're like, oh, he's going to tell us stuff and give us important information.
And he's like, you bunch of pricks.
You bunch of lying, sociopathic, nasty pricks.
But did you see him at these rallies?
He's got like 15,000 people, 20,000 people at a rally.
And he's saying to all the cameramen, why are you just showing me?
Pan around.
Show everyone.
But they won't do it.
They don't do it the majority of the time, no.
Right.
They won't do it.
Look, the media are my natural enemy.
My natural enemy are not violent people because I'm not engaged in the realm of violence.
The natural enemy of the criminal is the cop and the cop is the criminal because they're both engaged in acts of violence.
I'm not engaged in acts of violence so my enemies are not violent people.
My enemies are sophists.
My enemies are liars and manipulators and brain twisters and propagandists.
Those are my enemies because that's the field I do combat in.
So my enemies My enemy is the media.
The enemy of all good, rational, clear-thinking people is the media.
Because it's the media who makes it impossible for you to have a rational discussion about what you think and feel with everyone else.
And we all knew this, right?
We all knew that anybody who had any sympathy for Donald Trump, any sympathy with his position, well, what was it like for you?
What was it like for you going to talk to people you knew about Donald Trump?
Are you asking or is that rhetorical?
No, I'm asking.
Oh, cool.
Horrible.
Yeah, it was horrible.
I've been a follower of your show for a long time.
I've been ANCAP for a long time.
And it was never those views that created the divide.
Because I always thought that's what it would be.
I always thought going to people and talking to them, saying the government is immoral, taxation is theft, those kind of conversations.
People just kind of looked at me like I was nuts and then just moved on.
But the minute that you say that you're conservative or that you're supporting a conservative candidate, It is like that, I forget what the exact term is from the Bible, that sword that comes in and divides...
Sword of Damocles.
Yeah, that too.
But I was thinking actually for a particular Jesus biblical reference, but I can't draw it up just now.
But yeah, it separated family from family.
I mean, it created rifts between...
Oh, Jesus, I have come to set fathers against their sons and brother against brother.
That's exactly what it's been.
I know for a fact my fiance and his brother nearly fell out over this.
My maid of honor in my wedding, she had severe problems trying to get over the idea of it.
Another one of my bridesmaids in my wedding, it basically almost tore apart my wedding, is what I'm saying.
When did you get married, by the way?
I get married next week.
You get married next week?
Yes.
I'm thrilled that you're taking time off from what is undoubtedly a very busy schedule to chat with me.
I'm enormously pleased and massive congratulations to you.
I'm sure you'll be very happy and I'm perfectly thrilled.
All right.
Yes.
And who was – was it because they had watched a lot of Donald Trump speeches and interpreted his words for themselves and had significant problems with what he was saying?
Was that the issue he asked rhetorically?
I'm sorry.
This is just hysteria because the marriage is next week and you've had no sleep.
But anyway, I'm not that funny, but I appreciate it.
It is funny because I don't think they've listened to a single speech.
No, of course they haven't.
No, they haven't watched a single rally.
They don't understand policy.
I mean, I majored in history in college.
My fiancé was a history major as well.
We're both in total agreement over this.
But yeah, people don't get it.
They're not listening to what Donald Trump has said.
They're not listening to his policy.
They don't understand how history works.
No, it's total leftist bullshit propaganda.
There's nothing of substance going on in the objections that I've heard from the people in my life.
And yeah, it's made me double and triple think like these connections that I have in my life and whether or not I even want to continue with these connections because how...
It was just a complete denial of reality.
It's a complete and utter denial of reality.
Well, and it is destroying people's lives.
Like what the media has done with Donald Trump?
Oh, there's mistrust in the media.
No, that's the least of the problem.
I mean, I'm glad that's happening.
But they have destroyed marriages.
They've destroyed friendships.
They've destroyed families.
They've destroyed business relationships.
They've destroyed peace of mind.
They've destroyed civilized discourse.
They've destroyed having the capacity to listen to a different viewpoint, an opposing viewpoint.
Because they have escalated so hysterically and so viciously in this matter, they have pushed everyone to the brink of endurance in their relationships.
The media, I guess many, many years ago now, Once or twice may have accused me of being unhelpful to families, which is kind of ironic.
A, I wasn't, and B, how have they been doing over the last 18 months?
How have they been doing in helping people have rational, calm discourses about their political differences?
Yeah, I don't think they give a crap.
I don't think they give a crap what they say.
They don't care how many people's lives they destroy.
They don't care how many relationships they destroy.
They don't care how many families they bust up, marriages they bust up.
They don't care.
They're openly saying to people, break up with your boyfriend if he's a Trump supporter.
Ditch your friends if they support Trump.
Now that's a cult.
It's not a rational discourse.
If there was some rational argument with reason, yeah, I could understand that.
I don't counsel people to spend a lot of time with evildoers, of course not.
You know, tip, neither does any 12-step program, right?
If you want to quit a bad habit, you've got to stop hanging out with people who have those bad habits.
So, the media have taken a giant combine harvester...
Of state-sucking political addiction propaganda and used it to chew through the delicate wheat of people's relationships.
And they don't care at all.
And now people have to have this desperately horrible choice.
Now the choice was always there.
But Trump brought it to the forefront.
And the choice, as you know, is this.
I can either let my relationships be destroyed.
I can either believe the media And destroy my relationships.
Become a bully.
The media trained everyone into being a bully.
Oh, you support Trump?
That must mean you're a fascist.
You're an authoritarian, a racist, sexist.
Right?
Islamophobic.
They're also throwing around this word xenophobia, which, what the hell does that mean?
I feel like it's always racist, sexist, xenophobia, xenophobic.
It's like they've memorized this, you know?
Yeah, and it's funny because they don't say, you know, a mosque doesn't seem to let a lot of non-Muslims in.
I wonder if they're xenophobic.
Xenophobic.
It's the fear of the other.
You know, this other.
As soon as somebody says the other, you know that they're doing something other than thinking.
Because it's never applied universally.
And the other.
You know, aren't Trump supporters the other for the leftists who they're condemning?
And I mean, the xenophobic.
Xenophobic?
God, go to the New York Times and ask to talk to the closest reporter who self-identifies as a Republican.
No, that's the other.
We can't handle them.
They're the xenophobes.
And the emotional...
Power of the leftist arguments always arises from projection.
Whatever they're accusing you of is what they're actually doing, and that's where they get the intensity to do it.
It just always reminds me of this Orson Scott Card novel.
It's his sequel to Ender's Game, Speaker for the Dead.
It's called Xenocide.
So whenever they say that, I'm like, so are you prejudiced against space aliens?
Is that what you're saying?
That's what always makes me think of, what possible good can bringing that word into this discourse do?
Sure.
Everyone who wants to do you harm sends off signals of danger.
And they can't not do that because they want to do you harm.
And so you get alarm From people who want to do you harm, of course.
And so their best recourse is to say that you're paranoid.
You're paranoid.
You're overly alarmed.
You're afraid of me irrationally.
You're crazy.
Right?
I mean, of course that's what they would do.
Yeah.
I mean, if the mosquito wants your blood, it doesn't stick a javelin through your arm.
It uses that little weird goo that sticks its proboscis in and takes what it wants and you don't even feel the damn thing until you wake up with an itch at three o'clock in the morning.
Yeah.
Right?
So, I mean, that's natural.
Of course they're going to call you paranoid.
You know?
You're afraid of the other.
It's like, you're afraid of some mysterious otherness.
It's like, no, I'm afraid of being robbed or Blown up or run over with a truck.
You know, that's not fun either.
Blown up.
Having my throat cut in the church.
That would be unpleasant for me in general.
So, no, it's not.
Of course they want to say it's paranoia because of course the guy, you know, the guy who's like sidling up to you in a dark alley and you're trying to get away, he's like, oh man, don't be scared of me just because I'm huh or huh, right?
You're just paranoid, right?
Yeah.
So, yeah, and it's a...
So, Ron Paul didn't take on the media.
You know, they called him racist and he just...
Right?
He's kind of faded away.
And so Donald Trump just had the balls to take on the most demonic institution destroying the West.
Far outstripping anything the church ever, ever did.
The media is they're a bunch of Marxist sociopaths hellbent on destroying the last remnants of freedom in service to their own sick and twisted pathologies.
And so Donald Trump took on the media and won, I might add.
And won?
Are you kidding me?
Won against the media?
Who the hell ever wins against the media?
Who?
Who?
I can't.
And I can't.
I can't.
I can't.
Now, if someone is taking down my greatest enemy, what am I going to do?
What am I going to do?
You know, there's an old saying that Churchill had.
Because Churchill was a strong anti-communist.
And, of course, to win World War II, the Allies made a pact with Stalin, right?
And so on, right?
And people say, oh, but you're a strong anti-communist.
And Churchill said, well, if Hitler were to invade hell itself, I'm sure I could find something good to say about Satan.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Now, Ron Paul was never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever going to win.
Ever.
And I said to people, I made all the arguments, right?
All the arguments.
But as I said, my goal with Donald Trump was to destroy the media.
Now, do I think he's going to do some useful things in power?
I do.
Because he's unprecedented.
Ron Paul was a career politician who took lots of money from Washington and gave it to his constituents.
Ooh, what a radical.
Yeah, he wrote great books and he had great speeches and I loved a lot of his ideas and, you know, but he was a career politician who was on a government payroll for decades and took lots of taxpayers' money and gave it to his constituents.
And people say, well, the money was a year marked, it was going to be spent anyway.
That's not the point.
The point is you need to show people how you can achieve political power without bribing your constituents.
Ron Paul did not achieve that.
That having been said, I said, listen, I'm going to make my case and people can go back and listen to this if they want.
It's a four-part series on Ron Paul I did years ago.
I said, look, this is my case.
If you still believe that Ron Paul can do the things that I don't think he can do, then don't listen to me.
Listen to your own Thoughts, your own feelings.
I'm making my case.
If you disagree with me, fine.
Then what you need to do is you need to give 150% of your energies in support of Ron Paul.
And I made the case.
Mike made the case in a beautiful and passionate speech on more than one occasion.
And I followed the advice that I provided to others.
I made the case to the satisfaction of myself.
And I told people, I'm going to make the case against Ron Paul.
If you don't believe me, if you don't accept what I'm saying, that's fine.
Then give 150%.
Just don't go halfway.
Just go all in.
If you're going to go in, go all in.
It's like stepping onto a boat.
Don't do it halfway.
One foot on the pier, one foot on the boat, and you're asked to the drink.
So I just followed my own advice.
I made the case for satisfaction to myself.
And I do view the Democratic Party, and Coulter has a whole book about this called Demonic, I do view the Democrat Party as an infestation of Marxists and Saul Alinsky types and truly pathological people who would be, who would create a literal hell on earth.
I mean, there's no question that that's the case.
Absolutely.
I mean, at least in my mind and what I see...
I mean, I've been through university indoctrination.
I've been through, like, that kind of stuff.
I went to an all-women's college, and there's no question in my mind that that's the case.
They have no desire to—they don't care about equality.
They don't care about promoting equal rights for people.
I even question the degree to which they care about women.
I don't think they give a shit about women.
They care about taking down Western civilization.
They care about taking down Western institutions.
They degrade the quote-unquote patriarchy for the sake of degrading the family, not for the sake of promoting women's rights.
And to be perfectly honest, as a woman, I'm in a conversation with my fiancé earlier today about how we're going to afford having a baby in this country.
In this current climate, I mean, I have to work, he has to work.
What has feminism done for this society?
It's done nothing.
It's made women miserable, it's made their dreams less achievable, and it's forced them into situations that they don't want to be in.
So, yeah, no, the West, the Democratic Party has nothing to offer the West, and the fact that They are still, like, holding on.
I mean, they're clinging on to this idea that they can...
It's not enough to say...
Sorry to interrupt.
It's not enough to say they have nothing to offer the West.
They have poison to offer the West, and they're trying to administer it.
Yeah.
I mean...
Nothing would be okay.
True.
Nothing would be an improvement.
It would be neutral, right?
I mean, personally, I'm worried about this Jill Stein recount situation.
I don't know if you've been following that, but she had just filed for a recount in Wisconsin, and Doesn't matter.
She's not getting it.
And she said she's taking the money for a recount and other things.
You know, girl's got some bills to pay.
It's not all going to go to the recount.
There's no guarantee that all the money she's raising is going to go to a recount.
Yeah.
I mean, honestly, like, yeah, that's what my fiancé's been saying, like, all day.
I've been, like, I've been, like, refreshing the page and, like, oh my god, like, are they gonna pull some bullshit?
Are they going to try and see election for Trump?
Is that even possible at this point?
At this point, excuse me.
No.
No, honestly, no.
Don't worry about it.
Thanks, Steph.
Yeah, don't worry about it.
It's done.
It's done and dusted.
I mean, the guys who vote in the Electoral College are probably a little bit fucking sick and tired of getting death threats from leftists.
No kidding.
Yeah.
That shit is ridiculous.
So I don't think they're all keen on trying to get Hillary Clinton into power.
No.
Her big job is to rehabilitate herself with the American public to the point where she might find 12 people who won't convict her.
Yeah.
That would be on my list of things to do, other than a one-way ticket to Qatar.
But anyway.
No, don't worry about it.
They're not taking the election from Trump.
I mean, that would be the end.
And if they did, if they did, just everybody would secede.
I mean, that would be the end of the republic.
Forget it.
I mean, it would be done.
Sure.
I mean, hopefully, at least maybe that would mean California would secede.
I mean, they've been threatening that, and I'm like, so for that.
I wish they would just go.
Yeah, I mean, that's one possibility, but All that'll happen is they'll run out of money and swarm across the border anyway.
All you'll have is another couple of thousand miles of frontier to...
You've got to take it back.
I mean, it's so weird to think that like Reagan and Nixon that came from California and now no Republican can ever see the light of day there.
But no, I mean, if they succeed, they'll just run out of money.
And, you know, like all the parasites who burn the host, they'll just go try and find a new host.
And that'll mean swarming into America again across the California-America border.
And I mean, it's you just have all you'll be doing is making another Mexico on your flank.
And Lord knows the existing one is tough enough to police.
Right.
Yeah, I did not even think of it that way.
That's true.
We do not need – we don't need two borders full of Mexico.
We have the one border.
We've got the one wall that's hopefully going up soon.
We don't need another one.
So, okay.
As far as – Just end all the amnesty cities.
Enforce the border, right?
Just drain out some of the Democrat voters.
And, of course, you know, Reagan, in one of his true disasters, hey, look, he ended the Soviet Empire and founded northern Mexico in California.
That's insane.
Yeah, I mean, the fact that, you know, this is why, oh, he's no Ronald Reagan.
Good!
Ronald Reagan, he might have done wonderful things for Eastern Europe, but Western America, not so much!
I can't believe that.
When I listened to your show, and, like, you know, because I had never known that.
I'd never known that he gave amnesty to all those illegals.
Like, how...
How is he still hailed as a Republican hero?
I mean, he basically destroyed a lot of the hope of the Republican Party moving forward by taking that action.
But look, he didn't...
But of course, race and IQ are not to be talked about, right?
Of course.
The left doesn't want you to talk about race and IQ because then you might make intelligent decisions about how to secure...
Western freedoms, right?
And as we all know, Hispanics are cooking around mid to high 80s in IQ, which is why they get given amnesty by a Republican and all end up voting Democrat.
Yeah, that's some gratitude for you.
Good job saving me.
I'm not going to punch you in the nets for the next hundred years.
Yeah.
So, no, I mean, California, first of all, the real estate is too nice and the ocean is too pretty.
Don't hand it over.
You know, end the sanctuary cities, end the funding, drop the welfare, drop the minimum wage.
You know, whatever pressure can be brought to bear on the government out there.
And, of course, there are a bunch of...
Democrat, you know, immigrant-sucking vote whores.
But, you know, there's a lot of pressure that can be brought from the federal government out there to renormalize things, you know, to bring Mexico back to...
to bring Western Mexico back to America.
There's things that can be done and should be done.
I mean, Mexico was built by Americans and should not be handed over to Mexicans, in my humble opinion.
Sure.
And, of course, got to end...
Got to end the Anchor Baby clause.
I mean, that's just completely mental.
It is!
It's completely mental.
You did something illegal.
Here's your payoff.
Here's your benefit.
How fantastic, you know?
I mean, you know, if you rob a bank, you don't get to keep the money.
And if you're doing something illegal, you don't get to keep the proceeds.
And if you're in America illegally, how on earth can your children get citizenship?
It's complete madness.
And it was never, of course, in the Constitution.
Sorry, go ahead.
No, I'm sorry to interrupt, but it just makes me so angry that there's all this bullshit about Hillary Clinton won the popular vote and, oh, like, let's audit the vote or, like, whatever.
It's like, okay, let's audit the vote and see exactly how many illegal immigrants voted in this election.
Like, it's got to be in the millions.
I mean, it's absurd, right?
Well, Christ, I mean, Al Gore won the popular vote.
Didn't mean he got to be president.
And I don't remember the—and it wasn't by a couple of hundred votes in Florida like it was in 2000.
Al Gore won the popular vote.
And, of course, I don't remember the Democrats saying, oh, we've got to change it all.
I mean, of course, they were complaining about the recounts and all of that, but they weren't— Talking about all of this, nobody talked about getting rid of the Electoral College when a Democrat gets in.
Well, I mean, yeah, to be fair, now the Electoral College is up on the chopping block because they didn't get their way.
I mean, it's ridiculous.
I read this thing, I don't know if it was on Breitbart or somewhere else, but it's like, you know, Iraq has a democracy.
You know, we have a republic for a reason.
Because you know what will happen is that New York and Los Angeles and San Francisco will get to decide the entirety, the entire fate of the country.
That's why the Electoral College exists.
And people just don't get this.
And it's because they're unhappy that they didn't get their way.
Very, very frustrating.
Oh, yeah.
No, I mean, if you lost and you assume everyone else cheated, then you're just a bad sport, right?
I mean, these are just people who've never played a lot of pickup games, right?
Try being the sucky loser, whiner, complainer, bitter, you know, oh, you all cheated!
People just, hey, let's not invite that jerk to a game because he's a douchebag, right?
I mean, these are just people who've grown up, I don't know, playing video games or with their mommies around and nobody ever lost and nobody, I mean, they just, they don't know how to lose.
And if you don't know how to lose...
You're a loser.
Sorry.
It just means that you've never exposed yourself to risk.
You've never tried things where you could fail.
You've never had to deal with bitterness and disappointment.
And I don't know.
It's all, but, you know, this is what happens when you turn over your education of your children to socialist women.
Yeah, well, and it's what happens when, you know, you institute new false divorce laws and nobody has fathers around to, like, to tell you exactly how it's going to be, you know?
And to be fair, like, I don't know, sometimes you win.
Women act like they always know what's best.
In this country, they always act like they know how to do things and they can occupy these positions of power.
But what happens when Hillary Clinton doesn't get her way?
She can't come out and give a concession speech to all of her screaming fans.
She can't show her face and show pride in defeat.
So what kind of president would she have been on top of the myriad of other scandals and just...
Horrid, horrid things that she's done.
I mean, on top of that all, she couldn't bear, she couldn't be graceful in defeat.
She would have been a PEP, a PEP, and that stands for a planet-ending president.
So, you know, that's just...
It's a pep rally.
It's a planet-ending president rally.
Yeah.
There's no question about that.
Or she's a Pez dispenser.
Planet equals zero.
I could do this all night, so I probably shouldn't.
So that's sort of my clarification around what's going on with regards to my somewhat coy but fairly obvious enthusiasm for For Donald Trump.
Yeah.
It's sort of, where does it fit in UPB? Yeah, because I was thinking, so the main arguments that I've been contending with on the message boards have been that Voting is initiating force, or attempting to take the government to initiate force on the rest of the population.
My counterargument to that was that it's blaming the victim for, because the real party here that's initiating force is the state.
So you can't blame people that vote for responding to that force.
That was one of the main arguments in UPB. What I remember was that you're always in that scenario, oh, well, somebody's pointing a gun at you.
How do you react?
You know, somebody points a gun at you and says, oh, well, if you don't shoot this other person, then I'm going to shoot you.
Well, why are we focusing on the person that's having the gun pointed at them in the first place?
Why aren't we focusing on the person that's enacting the force?
So from a UPB standpoint to me, like, it's the government that's the problem, not the people who, however people vote, however people choose to respond, that's a response to force that's being enacted on them.
That's how I saw it.
Right, right, right.
Now, I'm going to give a big picture view, and then we'll get into the UBB proof.
And I'll try and keep the big picture view short, because you've got, obviously, a honeymoon.
I mean, a marriage to get to.
See, for the woman, it's all about the marriage.
For the man, it's all about the honeymoon.
But anyway, so the big picture is this.
There were two factors involved in the 2016 presidential election that had never existed before, to my knowledge, in human history.
And so, when you have an unprecedented situation, prior principles are open to question, right?
Because, of course, the state is the initiation of force, and that, you know, people say to me, well, are you still a this, are you still a that?
It's like, it's not up to me.
It's up to the arguments.
I follow reason, and I don't sort of pick my views or pick...
That's not philosophy, right?
So, number one, number one factor was that Donald Trump was not a politician and he was rich enough and famous enough to not only self-fund his own campaign and thus not be beholden to special interest groups but also to get enough free media that he could make his case to the people and an amazing public speaker and a passionate guy and a man of absolutely,
to me, seemingly superhuman personal strength.
So that Was unprecedented.
See, Ron Paul was neither rich nor famous enough to become president without owing a lot of people a lot of favors.
He was part of the machine.
Ideologically, of course, far more in common with Ron Paul, I would have far more in common with Ron Paul ideologically than Donald Trump.
But...
To me, if you're going to bet on a horse, you really should bet on a horse that's in the race.
There's really not much point betting on a horse that's not in the race.
And Ron Paul was never going to win, never going to be in the race.
So on the one hand, you had a politician who was able to achieve office.
Without having already been bought and paid for.
And what is it I had said for many, many years?
By the time you get to vote for a politician, they're already owned by special interest groups and are serving the needs of those special interest groups and the preferences of those special interest groups, not you.
That's what had been my big complaint in the past.
Now, for anybody who understood that, which doesn't seem to me that tough to understand, anybody who understood that would recognize that this did not apply to one Donald J. Trump.
That criticism I had in the past of prior politicians did not apply to Donald Trump.
So that central objection would be long gone.
And of course, not only was he somebody who did not owe anyone anything in order to get into office, but he also was the only candidate Who had a solid shot of delivering on the most important issue in Western civilization at the moment, which is immigration.
Gary Johnson was a complete, spineless, squid-eating monster cuck on immigration.
Diversity!
Right?
Because, I don't know if he'd never understand anything about race and IQ, or culture and ethnicity, or however you want to put it.
They don't blend very well at all, right?
And so he got that.
And I want to be able to continue to have a conversation using reason and evidence, which is kind of like a Western civilization value.
You know, in Mexico, a lot of things seem to be decided by the decidedly non-reason and evidence-based approaches of, oh, I don't know, decapitation.
And hanging bodies from bridges and stuffing people into garbage cans and dissolving them in acid and bribing the living crap out of people while at the same time threatening to kidnap their children and mail them home piece by piece.
So, in order to have a philosophical conversation, you need to have a culture around you that at least is grudgingly willing to submit to reason and evidence.
And that is The one thing that Donald Trump was solid on from the beginning has been solid all the way through, and he's been seen walking into Trump Tower carrying plans for a wall.
You know what I think we're going to get in America, or what you're going to get in America?
A wall.
God, I hope so.
Oh, it is.
It's going to happen.
I saw that on the, I don't know if it was the Gateway Pundit that posted that, of the zoom-in of the person carrying that report where it said like a 1,900-foot wall or whatever.
Mile, I think.
Foot wall would either be very tall or not really wide enough in the state of California.
Yeah, and I think a bunch of Mexicans have already volunteered to work on the wall because, you know, a lot of people don't like the fact that their kids are leaving America and not coming back.
Do you know what's also great about this?
I just want to sort of point this out.
This thought struck me and I haven't had a good place to jam it in, so we'll just pretend that this is a good place to do so.
But when the great...
Remigration occurs back when the illegal immigrants go back to Mexico.
Do you know what a great gift that is going to be to Mexico?
Like if you care about Mexico at all, what's happened is you've got a bunch of Mestizos or Hispanics who've come from Mexico and have lived for years or for decades even in America.
They have absorbed American values.
They have absorbed American thinking.
They have absorbed the American way of life, the American political system, the American dedication to the free market.
Western values, post-enlightenment, rationalism, all of this and more has been engorged on, lo, these many years by Mexicans.
And they shall bring these values back with them when they doth return home to Mexico.
Thus bringing a new enlightenment and a sense of wonder and potential republicanism to Mexico itself.
They have been steeped in American values, in Western values, in post-enlightenment values, in limited government values, in free market values.
And they will then bring all of these values back with them and they'll vote for more freedom in Mexico.
And they will vote for smaller government in Mexico and the absorbing of American values by these Mexicans who will then return to Mexico is going to be a glorious renaissance in Mexico.
What a wonderful gift to provide to Mexico and its citizens.
A free education in Western values and a repatriation to bring those Western values home into Mexico.
I just wanted to point that out, that this is not something that I think has been noted by anyone, but you know, it really should be.
So So the one side is you have somebody not beholden to special interest groups who understands and is ready to grapple with the greatest threat to the West, which is immigration.
That's one side of the equation.
And you could argue that's enough.
Now the other side of the equation can be dealt with much more succinctly.
It was that Hillary was going to get us all killed.
Yes, she was.
Yeah, I mean, she wanted war.
People don't recognize that.
Thirsty for war.
And, you know, I don't think that the people on the message board are going to have much to say if they're nuclear goddamn shadows sustaining a wall that's half down.
Because there's no wall that's up anywhere.
See, that's the really crazy thing about it, you know, is because the statement she was making, the The responses that we were getting from Putin were so clear about what was going on and nobody cared.
Nobody.
It was insane.
I was sitting there checking the DEFCON warning system at work.
I was checking a couple times a day to make sure that it didn't switch up from yellow to orange or whatever the next step is from yellow, because it was at yellow.
And people don't get that.
It's like nothing happened.
And that's what's really crazy to me, that people aren't paying attention, that people don't understand the history of United States-Russia relations over years, the fact that Russia really wants to be considered a legitimate nation and has taken steps in the past to make that be so on the international stage.
Well, Russia is a far more peaceful nation than America has been under Obama and under George Bush.
True.
Or ever.
I mean, the United States is the one that has dropped the nuclear bombs.
Russia has never done that.
The United States has destroyed the Middle East.
Unleashed a migrant crisis.
Killed a million Iraqis.
Destroyed country after country after country.
Overthrown legitimately elected officials in foreign countries.
Screwed up Central and South America.
Hillary, can you imagine?
Syria.
I mean, so on the one hand, you had somebody completely unexpected, unpredicted, and unprecedented.
In American politics or any worldwide politics, which is a man who could walk in and be his own man because he wasn't owned by special interest groups, which had been my central complaint about politicians in the past.
That did not apply to Donald Trump.
So on the one hand, you had somebody who represented a great possibility that had never existed before in the history of politics.
That's number one.
Number two is he was running against a woman who was going to get us all killed.
So excuse me for not wanting to fucking die.
Excuse me for having hope in a new situation that I seriously could never have predicted back in 2006.
Obviously.
Obviously.
Oh yes, well you know what's going to happen is, right?
Some guy's going to come along who's going to be so rich and have such integrity that he's going to not be owned by any special interest groups and he's going to be running against a literal wire-haired succubus from hell itself who is going to get us all killed.
Well, people don't like it when you change your mind.
People don't like it when you...
I didn't change my mind!
Facts changed!
Yeah.
Well, not even like...
Well...
Change your mind more like people don't like it when you change your stance in any capacity.
I found this in my own life.
If you say one thing strongly at one point and then you get new information and then you go back and say, hey, actually, I was wrong about this.
There's a new situation going on.
I wasn't wrong.
No, no.
People hate that.
This is why you can't defend it.
I wasn't wrong.
If Trump had been just another politician who was owned by special interest groups, who cares?
Who cares?
Look, when was the last time somebody became president in America who had a history of literally destroying countries and getting their leaders killed?
I mean, outside of direct war.
Outside of Second World War or Vietnam or Korea or whatever.
Who was the last person to get elected who directly threatened war with Russia?
Hell, Ronald Reagan didn't do that.
No.
I mean, I can't think of anything off the top of my head.
On the basis of we might have been hacked?
Are you kidding me?
Now, I don't honestly believe at all that Russia had anything to do with manipulating the U.S. election.
I don't.
What was with her?
Like, why was she so hell-bent on instigating Putin?
Like, why?
What was she getting out of that?
Was that a Saudi Arabia thing?
Does she benefit from the United States becoming a nuclear shadow?
I can't fathom what's going on there.
No, because Putin and Russia are Christian, nationalistic, and peaceful.
Relatively peaceful.
I mean, the migrant crisis is right on the doorstep of Russia, so, I mean, they have a lot of concerns about what Hillary might have done.
But the Russian government is not under the sway of globalists.
They are pretty frank about Islam.
They are pretty frank about their contempt for certain aspects of the United Nations.
And so, just the important thing to remember is the...
Commie-sucking leftists had no problem with Russia.
In fact, were great fans of Russia when it was a communist slaughterhouse.
It's only when it became a white Christian nationalist country that they wanted to destroy it.
You understand?
Yep.
Yeah.
I mean...
Yeah, I mean, they don't really care about the Ukrainian genocide.
I mean, that...
Clearly, they've never read the books about that because, I mean, they seem to continuously, you know, wear the hammer and sickle or whatever it is in the symbol, the flag, as like a badge of pride when there is a body count to this, as a body count to the entire communist name.
Worse than the Holocaust.
Worse.
Holocaust, 6 million according to many figures, and Holodomor was 10 million at least.
And what about Mao?
What about what Mal did?
And people, people like, yeah, it's, uh, it's, it's, it's so unacceptable and They throw around Nazi, Nazi, Hitler, whatever, and I mean, in comparison with what's been done in the name of communism, it's insane.
It's insane that this is even a conversation.
I mean, the amount of death that they are looking over in touting this ideology as good, quote-unquote, good for the world, it's inexcusable.
It's immoral, in my opinion.
Right.
When faced with someone who can save your life and faced with somebody who's threatening the existence not just of your life or your family's life but of the world itself, anybody who says, ah yes, but ten years ago you doubted the efficacy of political action or argued strongly against it,
when neither of those two conditions was present, And that's the thing that you've really, in this conversation that I've really picked up on, is that there are, you know, it's not so much, or it's not at all a change of position from 10 years ago or however long until now.
It's not.
It's a change of conditions.
It's a change of information.
This is not the same.
It's not that I've changed my mind.
It's not that I've altered my position at all.
It's that two new people came onto the scene.
One is a person who fit nothing at all with the characteristics that I had criticized before, and the other of whom was far worse than any human being could ever have conceived of in the past.
So, given that choice, I don't see how anyone could possibly...
Say that I shouldn't have been involved.
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry to those who feel that it is somehow dishonorable for me to strive for the continued survival of myself, my friends, my family, my culture, my civilization, the world itself.
If they feel that that is somehow betraying my principles and I should have turned myself into a epistemologically perfect nuclear shadow, they can fucking think again because it's not going to happen.
And I don't think it should.
No, of course not.
I don't think it should at all.
I mean, I was terrified.
I was thinking, I mean, hell, like, Hillary was for, I mean, it's just, like, yeah, I'm getting married in a week and all I could think about, you know, was my future husband being drafted.
And then on top of that was the fact that Hillary's for universal conscription.
So I would be drafted too in that instance.
Yeah.
Bye-bye, baby.
Mommy can't breastfeed you.
No.
Because she's going to go and get irradiated on the plains of the Ukraine.
Yeah.
And I don't want to fight with Russia.
I'm not interested in that.
I'm not interested in that at all.
I think the world's seen quite enough of white-on-white action over the last little while.
I think we've done enough white-on-white fights.
The 20th century was just about enough, and I think we need to never do that ever, ever again.
My fiancé and I have been watching Band of Brothers recently, and we've been going back through history.
As I mentioned, we're both history majors.
Just the thought of that being reality again, just seeing those bombed-out French towns where they're all having the fights and people breaking into abandoned houses We're good to
go.
How can people tote her as this person that gives a shit about gay rights, that gives a shit about women, that gives a shit about different races, that gives a shit about anybody?
The Marxists hate the Christians, and so the gay rights is simply trolling Christians, and the feminism is simply trolling Christians.
Nothing to do with concern or care.
No.
You know, it's, you know, I mean, it's, they don't care.
I mean, if they did, they'd be all like, wow, it's too bad that Hillary Clinton couldn't win leadership of a Western nation, but hey, Marine Le Pen is running for head of Russian government, so let's get behind her.
But she doesn't count.
She doesn't count those steps.
No, she doesn't count because she's on the right.
No, she's a Republican.
In the same way that Ann Coulter can be called a See You Next Tuesday word 17 times at a Rob Lowe roast, and nobody cares.
Yeah.
Yeah.
That is some bullshit.
She is a great writer.
She's a great person.
She's a role model for all conservative women.
The left just shits on her.
That's not fair.
They are hypocrites.
She's Christian.
She's Christian and she's on the right.
It's got nothing to do with the categories they say.
Nothing at all.
That should be pretty obvious.
The other thing too, a lot of the people who are criticizing me are You're younger than I am.
And I grew up with this fear of nuclear war.
I remember there was a movie that came out called The Day After.
And a lot of it was sort of, in hindsight, pretty Marxist propaganda.
But it talked about nuclear war and the effects.
And there was another one called Threads, I think it was, which was like 13 years after a nuclear war and so on.
I can't even tell.
I remember watching it with a friend of mine's brother.
And I just remember sitting there thinking, like my whole insides were crawling like I'd just come alive with electric centipedes in my belly.
My whole insides were crawling.
I felt so angry and I felt so helpless.
It reminded me of a quote I read about, somebody was talking about the First World War.
And he said, you know, you go to war and you think you're going to be like charging up a hill on a white horse with a sword and all of that.
And it's like, no, that's not war.
That's paintings of war.
That's stories of war.
But war is some asshole 20 miles away pushing a button and you get blown up.
That's war.
And I am old enough to remember the Cold War and to remember what it was like to live with the fear of nuclear annihilation.
That which allows philosophy to continue Is of infinitely greater value than that which causes the destruction of philosophy, of life, of civilization, of everything.
Of everything.
And so, I did not view political action in the past as a choice between the lesser of two evils.
And you know what?
I was right.
It's called the uniparty.
It's the fact that The Republicans, I mean, we see this with the never-Trumpers, with the hostility.
It was a unit party, two sides of the same coin.
And there was no possibility of a Republican keeping his promises to the voters for one simple reason, they were terrified of the media.
And so, in the past, there was no real choice.
Ron Paul wasn't a real choice, he cucked out with the media, was...
Dodgy on immigration.
Was terrified of being called a racist, right?
And therefore couldn't talk about any basic biological realities around human biodiversity and therefore was going to be worse than useless.
Was going to discredit the movement.
So there was no choice in the past.
And so when there was no choice in the past, why throw yourself onto one side or another?
It's an illusion.
It doesn't matter.
You can throw 150% behind the person, which is what I suggested if you believe in them, which is what I did.
Followed my own advice, not hypocritical at all.
But when there was no real choice, arguing that there was no real choice was perfectly rational.
However, in this election, in this election, there was the widest possible gulf between two potential futures that could possibly be imagined.
There was A very, very vivid choice.
And that choice was life or death.
The life of culture, the life of the body, the life of the mind.
What do we get out of bed for?
My friends, my family, philosophy.
All of those would have been threatened, if not destroyed, under a Hillary presidency, the PEP, the planet-ending presidency.
That's not going to happen with Donald Trump.
So I chose life over death.
I chose recent discourse over Hillary Clinton following through on her threats to shut down the websites of people I care about and respect and value.
It's not people who are nitpickers and all that kind of stuff.
I understand where they're coming from.
I do.
And they want to look upon me maybe as somebody who they can perceive as infallible or has the kind of rigidity that when new information comes along continues to maintain the old positions as if no new information has come along.
But if we're sailing in a ship and there's no land, I say don't step off the boat.
There's nothing but water here.
Now, when we get to land, I say, well, things have changed.
Now we can step off the boat.
So, I understand where people are coming from and I sympathize with it.
But all that means is that they don't understand the very stark and bare choices that were laid before us over the last 18 months.
And that which ensures the survival of life itself.
I don't think I need to make a strong case in terms of UPB. For that which allows for civilization to continue is a plus.
That which destroys all life on the planet, or potentially does, is a minus.
I don't think I need to work my philosophical voodoo too much for people to get that, right?
Yeah.
No, I mean, I thought that, I mean, even in asking the question, I really felt like it was not a useful avenue to go down.
I mean, I'm sure that it can be done.
I feel like I have made arguments like on the message boards and just within people, like with conversations with people in my own life that adhere to UPB and make sense.
But yeah, I mean, even in asking the question, I was questioning the question.
How useful is it to be talking about this right now when Donald Trump hasn't even been sworn in as president, when he's still, you know, pretty much legitimizing and naming his base and just getting acquainted with the enormous amount of responsibility and pretty much legitimizing and naming his base and just getting acquainted with the enormous amount of And I admire the hell out of the guy.
Honestly, I think this has been just a massive achievement.
It's an achievement that I can't even think of a person who could even compare with what this person has achieved in the past.
No, look, I have no problem with the criticism.
I welcome it.
I think it's great.
Yep.
But at some point, you actually have to bring up arguments, right?
Just this sort of calling of, oh, inconsistency, and he said this before, with no context, right?
Well, he said, you know, we shouldn't step off the boat.
It's like, well, yeah, when there was water and there's land, yes.
And there was no water visible or historical before.
So, yeah, don't wait for it.
And so I have no problem with people asking the question, but you have to be careful, of course.
When people are expressing concerns and doubts, great.
That's healthy.
That's positive.
Yep.
But I gave a lot of answers.
And this is what annoys the shit out of me, frankly, is that I did not keep my thoughts and motives hidden about any of this.
I explained in great detail repeatedly.
Mike explained in great detail repeatedly.
We had guests on.
We talked about immigration and the deleterious effects of low IQ populations coming into Western countries.
We had the experts on, countless experts, talking about race and IQ, ethnicity and culture.
We had conversations about the uniqueness of Donald Trump.
We had conversations about the dangers of Hillary Clinton.
This was all detailed.
I wasn't pretending I hadn't...
that I was saying exactly what I was saying.
I wasn't pretending nothing had changed.
I wasn't pretending I didn't have new information.
I stepped everyone very carefully and very clearly over what the hell was going on.
We talked about America's involvement With ISIS, the funding and founding, we talked about America's incredible destructiveness.
We got Iraq, a decade of hell, which I went on RT as well to talk about.
Went in great detail about the destruction of American foreign policy.
And Hillary Clinton talked about the email scandals, talked about Obamacare, talked about the disaster.
All of this, all of the reasons behind it were very clearly explicated.
Now, I'm willing to do all of that out of A sense of honor and obligation to the people who support what I do.
I don't want to pretend that I don't have new information.
I don't want to pretend that things haven't changed.
Or I don't want to pretend that I'm sort of just changing randomly.
Not that I changed.
I adapted to new information.
The road turns, you turn with the road.
If you go straight and drove off a cliff, do you have integrity?
So, here's my issue with the critics.
Have they processed the countless hours of information?
Not all of them, I understand, right?
But have they Processed the countless hours of information that I put out about why I was doing what I was doing.
And I have not had a single person who's expressed concern trawling.
And it's concern trawling if they pretend you haven't answered these questions already.
I have not had a single person come up to me who's criticizing me on what I did with regards to Donald Trump who's even aware Of the arguments I put in.
So what that means is that they've got this weird, I don't know, it's like, sperky kind of rigidity.
All deviations from former statements, even with new information, like, whatever it is, right?
It's an emotional, I feel like it's an emotional attachment.
It's just anxiety.
It's anxiety management.
And that's all concern trawling is, right?
Yeah, but at least, like, on my part, I mean, I've...
Throughout this entire process, I've really tried to be aware of where my emotional bias lies.
And as I mentioned earlier in the call, my emotional bias lies towards I mean, despite the fact that I've been intellectually convinced about things that you've put out, emotionally I prefer it this way.
I prefer that the philosophy and that the arguments that you're putting out are things that we can actually grab in the real world, like a vote or like You know just any kind of political action so that is what you know sort of prompted me to ask the question because I felt wary of my own emotional bias that and I think that on the other side there's this emotional bias towards you know purity of the anarcho-capitalist perspective where you know you
are stuck in this framework no matter what happens and there's an emotional I think it might be, you know, the sort of rebelliousness, or I found at least a lot of people in my generation really, really hate their parents, for good reason, for hearing that lack of processing of parental But they really, really hate their parents.
They really, really hate the idea of being, quote unquote, establishment in any kind of capacity.
So I think anarcho-capitalism, at least for the millennials, has provided a refuge from that where they can still comment on things, but they're not really involved.
So then you take this stance where it's different from work.
I know that you had taken issue with me saying that it was different because it's just a continuation of getting new information and such.
But in their perception, it's different than what you had said before.
Then they become emotional about it.
And that's really where I see it because that's what I encounter with friends and such is that they just really...
They just really can't stand being establishment, man.
And I just...
Oh, God.
You know, I just...
I'm so sick of that.
Yeah, because Donald Trump is so establishment.
Like, I can't believe...
Yeah.
Fucking Green Day.
Oh, my God.
Fucking Green Day.
You know why you're green?
Because you're rotten from the inside out.
Green Day.
Yeah.
40-year-old has-beens with dyed hair screaming about fascism.
Oh, yeah.
Being pro-Hillary Clinton?
Ooh, that's so punk, I can't even tell you.
I know, right?
Not as bad as punk as Oscar Wilde and Quentin Crisp, for God's sakes.
It's like, oh my God, they're just such posers.
Oh, God.
We're so punk.
Donald Trump is punk, man.
I know.
Hillary Clinton is the queen.
Yeah, this is crazy.
Like, people, like, all these Democrats, these liberals are like...
Oh, we're so anti-establishment.
We're so rebellious.
And the white people and the men, they just want to take over everything.
And they have control of everything.
They don't have control over shit.
They don't have control over shit.
You guys are the establishment dumbasses.
If white men had control over shit, then we wouldn't be criticized.
I mean, that's pretty clear, right?
I mean, they criticize people because they're the nicest.
And here's the thing.
So for the critics, this is for the critics.
This is addressed directly at you.
First of all, address my fucking arguments.
Right?
I'm not here to massage your spurgy anxiety.
Sorry.
Like, if you feel anxious because of what I'm saying, address my fucking arguments.
Show me that respect.
If you listen to the show, oh, Steph needs to be more into philosophy.
How about you address my arguments?
That's called being into philosophy.
Address my arguments.
Maybe they're flawed.
Maybe there's better information.
Maybe you could help me out with that.
But if you're going to just criticize me without addressing my arguments and then claim that I'm the one not being philosophical, you don't have the first fucking clue what philosophy is.
The first fucking clue.
I know that people say, oh, I've listened to your show for a long time and I think your argument is wrong.
Bye!
No, you haven't listened to my show at all.
You haven't listened to my show at all.
Because then you wouldn't be making bullshit non-arguments and pretending that you know anything at all about philosophy.
So, address my arguments, please.
Or shut up.
But just sort of spouting off, well, it's changed, he said this.
Address my fucking arguments.
Or shut up.
That's my...
Not you, I'm just, you know, for a variety of reasons, I'm a bit more short-tempered tonight.
I'm usually not particularly, but tonight...
For a variety of reasons I am, so I'm just expressing myself.
But, you know, so number one.
Number two is that if you feel that Donald Trump is not the right weapon with which to take down the mainstream media that is destroying Western civilization and preventing philosophy from spreading, great!
Then why don't you take down the mainstream media instead?
I can't do it.
I don't think you can do it on this call, fine young lady.
I don't think Mike can do it.
There's nobody I know who can do it.
Maybe you're the person to do it.
Now, if you can do it and take down the mainstream media, then go ahead and do it, and I won't need to put nearly as much support behind Donald Trump.
That's important as well.
If you can't take down the mainstream media, then shut up.
Because that's the purpose, which I've explained repeatedly and emphatically with every conceivable argument that I can lay my considerable mental muscles upon to produce.
So, address my arguments, If you can't address my arguments or don't want to address my arguments, at least take down the mainstream media and I'll go support you instead.
But if you're not doing that, then shut up.
Number three, if you can prevent, through your own actions, hordes of low IQ populations from migrating to Western countries and basically destroying them, well, then you should do that.
And then I will also throw my support behind you.
It's a basic self-defense thing.
And also, if you have some capacity to create, maybe with some sort of mental love shield, the kind of umbrella over cities that will prevent any effects of nuclear war, then you should do that.
And again, I'll be behind you.
If you can take down the media, if you can control the border so that the civilized conversation about virtue and philosophy can continue, or if you can prevent all the effects of nuclear war, Well, not only while I'm behind you, but I will worship you as a living man, God, and we will start a new religion called you.
But if you can't do those things, then shut up.
Like, just be a mature person and deal with your anxiety.
You're anxious because you perceive that I've changed my position.
Well, you know what?
Let's say that the worst had happened and everything you fear is true.
And I did just randomly change my position.
Maybe I did it for fame.
Maybe I did it for greed.
Maybe I did it because I knew there were going to be no problems whatsoever with changing my position.
Let's say I did that.
Let's say I did that.
So what?
So what?
Do not place your faith in me.
Do not place your trust in me.
Do not let me think for you.
Let's say I've made a mistake.
Let's say I've done the wrong thing.
Let's say I've betrayed everything.
Well, whatever, right?
Well, that's a shame, I guess.
But you still get to have integrity, right?
You still get to think for yourself, right?
So if you're feeling anxious because you think I've made a mistake, it's because you're investing in me and my brain rather than you and your brain, which is the whole point of this damn show, is not to watch me think, but for you to think.
The whole point of the show is not to watch me do my starstruck pyrotechnics of infinite thought, but for you to learn how to think for yourself.
Do not be dependent upon whether I think correctly or not.
I've taught you the principles.
You must think for yourself.
Don't worry about circling back on what I said because what you're doing is hoping that I'm perfect so you don't have to think.
No.
No, a thousand times no.
Do not invest in my perfection so you can avoid the damn responsibility of thinking for yourself.
That is not the point of this show.
It's for you to stare at me and say, well, what does Steph say?
Oh no, Steph may have made an error.
Steph may have made a mistake.
My world is coming crashing down.
I understand it.
I went through a similar thing when I was young with objectivism.
I understand it.
And you know what I should have said to myself?
Don't let other people think for you any more than you'd let them screw for you or digest for you or burp for you.
Think for yourself.
If I've made a mistake, yeah, you can spend some time correcting me.
Maybe I'm open to it.
Maybe I'm not.
But you get to think for yourself no matter what.
And if you have huge anxiety over me making a mistake, That is a signal not that I need to be fixed but that you need to own more of your own life and your own thoughts and your own self.
I am not someone who is in this career, who is in this public space because I want people to imprint upon me like a bunch of ducks trailing after a balloon.
Oh, the first thing I saw when I came out of the egg, I'm going to follow it.
No!
No, no, no.
That's not the point of this at all.
That's the exact opposite of the point of all of this.
Do not imprint upon me.
Do not let me do your thinking for you.
You know what?
I'm going to make a mistake.
I'm sure I already have.
Maybe I'll make a big mistake tomorrow.
You can work to correct me as somebody who cares about somebody else.
Maybe I'll listen...
I can't imagine I won't, but maybe I'd have had a brain injury.
Maybe I have a tumor in my head.
And maybe I go haywire.
That doesn't matter.
That doesn't matter a damn little bit at all.
This is about philosophy, not a philosopher.
Science is about science, not a scientist.
And I'll tell you this, the last thing that's really, really important about all of this.
You may think that your anxiety and your criticisms and your nagging and your concern trolling is somehow entrapping me, is somehow going to paralyze me so that I don't act in any way that's going to give you anxiety in the future.
Let me ask you this.
Do I sound trapped?
Do I sound like I'm just paralyzed?
I'm telling you I'm not.
If you think I've made a mistake and you get anxious and screwed up about it to the point where you're doing all this concern trawling and you don't listen to arguments and you don't think for yourself and you don't give me the space and permission to make a mistake, to be imperfect, Well, I still get to act because I'm aware that I can make mistakes.
I do make mistakes.
I try to correct them as quickly as I can.
But yes, I make mistakes, of course.
I think earlier I referred to Marine Le Pen as trying to become the head of Russia.
Unless she's going to switch languages and citizenships, that would be France.
So, I'm not paralyzed by your terrible fear.
Of mistakes.
But you know who will be paralyzed?
You.
If I don't have permission from you to make a mistake and even to reject that I've made a mistake and even to pig-headedly do something that is continually wrong, if I don't have your permission for that, then you don't either.
You don't have the permission to make mistakes.
You don't have the permission to be wrong.
You don't have the permission to make errors.
That doesn't paralyze me.
That paralyzes you.
You are the one who is going to have to pay in paralysis for the price you are trying to extract from me.
Because I'm going to continue to do what I do.
I'm going to continue to act in the best interest of humanity, in the best interest of the truth, in the best interest of philosophy, in the best interest of peace and freedom and rationality.
And yes, my continued existence and that of my family and friends and civilization and country and culture.
But in trying to throw the net over me, it doesn't exist for me.
If I don't believe in it, then I don't.
But you know who it does exist for and who it is going to ensnare and take down?
Is you.
In giving me the permission to make mistakes, you give yourself the permission to make mistakes.
And if you don't have permission to make mistakes, you have no freedom at all.
Freedom is the freedom to fail.
Freedom is the freedom to make mistakes.
Freedom is the freedom to fuck up royally.
If you don't grant that to me, I know I have it, so it doesn't have any effect on me, but it means you will be paralyzed.
You will be tentative.
You will be frightened of a criticism because whatever you inflict on others, either they believe in it, in which case you're somewhat free for the time being, or they don't, in which case It will take you down.
Because if I am publicly going to make a mistake, and I'm fine with it, and I am.
I'm not perfect.
Nobody should be.
Philosophy is perfect.
Human beings who enact philosophy are not.
Science is objective.
People aren't.
Which is why we need science.
Which is why we need philosophy.
But if I Adapt to new information and clearly recognize choices and am willing to take a stand for which I am perfectly aware that I will be roundly criticized by a lot of small-minded people.
Not that all who criticize me are small-minded, but if you criticize me without addressing the arguments or responding to what I say, yeah, small-minded, petty, anxiety management, nothing to do with philosophy.
The exact opposite of philosophy.
The exact opposite of philosophy.
Because if I'm out there with the permission to make mistakes, if I'm out there, clearly, I did the truth about voting video.
Now I'm talking about voting.
I understand.
And I'm fine with it because I'm following reason and evidence wherever they lead.
And I'm aware of the choices, I'm aware of new information, and I'm willing to adapt.
Of course.
Of course.
When there's no cure for diabetes, Just injecting yourself with shit is bad for you.
When there is a cure, or not a cure, a way of managing diabetes, right?
When there is insulin, well, then you should do it, right?
Of course.
Something new has come along.
You should adapt.
I mean, you don't still use the post office, right?
Well, I used the post office for a long time.
Now there's email.
No!
I'm not going to adapt.
I'm not going to change what I'm doing.
So seeing me out there Advocating things, making choices, taking stands, for which I'm perfectly aware I can be accused of hypocrisy and selling out and backtracking and all the stuff.
I know why I'm doing it.
I've made it very clear why I'm doing it.
I don't consider myself out of integrity at all.
I would consider it insane to not process new information and adapt accordingly.
That would be rigidity.
That would be...
Scholasticism, use a sort of medieval theological term.
So I'm out there knowing that what I'm doing is going to change people's perspective of me in a negative way, some people's.
And I'm willing to do it anyway, because that's reason and evidence.
That's philosophy, you see.
Because I don't fundamentally give a shit that you criticize me.
And you know what?
You shouldn't give a shit either about other people and about yourself.
This warrior wart nail-biting, oh my God, what if people are going to think bad of me?
You're enacting that against me.
But I walk through these prison walls you're building, you're the one who's got to sit there and stare at the stone for eternity.
Don't.
Don't.
You see, my freedom from your negative opinion is a gift to you, if you want it.
Now, you can view it as a repudiation.
But my freedom from your negative opinion is a gift to you that you too can be free of other people's negative opinions.
If they have good arguments, of course, listen.
Take their counsel.
Take their reason.
Take their evidence.
But don't take their worry.
Don't take their nagging.
Don't take their concern trawling.
Don't take their worry-warting.
Don't take their anxiety management.
Fuck that.
Fuck that.
It is giving strength to something that is so fundamentally weak.
It is an inversion of all values that make any kind of rational sense.
You don't starve the health and feed the cancer.
You do the obverse.
You do the reverse.
And so my indifference to the nagging of anxiety-ridden people who are trying to avoid the existential threat to their identity called thinking for themselves is a gift to them.
It's not indifference and I don't care about anyone.
It is because I care about you that I will not surrender My realities, my truth, my arguments, the facts.
I will not surrender philosophy to your pettiness because I care about you and I do not want to feed that which is worst and least in you.
So that's my case.
Do you mind if we move on to the next caller?
Not at all.
Thank you very much and have a great wedding next week.
Thanks, Steph.
I really think I will.
Do you feel a little better?
Do you feel like okay?
I feel totally fine.
I mean, like I said, I was really mentally, emotionally decided about how I felt about this.
I've been arguing for people in my life to vote Trump and to support Trump after the election.
And to really...
Again, I've mentioned this on the message boards before, but I really do feel like infighting is...
Totally useless at this point.
So infighting within this community, I mean, I don't want to discourage criticism, but, you know, like fighting about, you know, whether or not Trump is immoral at this point, again, I just really feel like is useless because, yeah, I mean, there are people that are clearly immoral, like Hillary Clinton or George Soros or John Podesta or all these people that have just proven to be the absolute lowest scum of the very earth.
To ask whether or not Donald Trump is immoral, yeah, I feel like that's not where you should be focusing your lens, so I'm really happy that the show has focused the lens on where it needs to be.
Yeah, I mean, if I was unjustly accused of a crime, and the only witness who could confirm my alibi was somebody I didn't agree with at every conceivable level, would I refuse to call them to testify on my behalf and exonerate me, or would I just go to jail?
I think you would not refuse to call that person.
Right, of course.
Of course.
Well, but he doesn't agree with you and everything.
Yes, but I'm not going to jail.
Yeah, but nuclear war.
Yeah, that's what I'm saying.
A very glowing jail called the afterlife.
All right, well, thanks for the call, and I hope that this was helpful to people, and let's move on to the next caller.
Thanks, Steph.
Thank you.
Alright, up next we have Amanda.
Amanda wrote in and said, Could the travel and work involved really be the answer to so many relationships crumbling?
Or fear of commitment that is a direct result of this lifestyle?
Can a long-distance relationship within the military really endure?
That's from Amanda.
Well, hey Amanda, how you doing?
I'm good.
How are you, Stefan?
I'm well.
So, I'm guessing you're a lady who likes a man in uniform.
So it would seem.
That's all I've been exposed to, really, since I grew up within the military system.
Um...
That's a nice way of saying army brat.
Is that the normal phrase that's used?
Is that used anymore?
Air Force brat.
Air Force brat, all right.
Yeah, no, it's still used.
Yeah, I was going to say that that's what I am, is an Air Force brat.
And so why don't you, you know, for those who don't, Date in this realm.
Why don't you sort of throw up some of the challenges?
I know you mentioned them in your question, but I wonder if you can throw up a couple other challenges that existed in this dating realm.
Right.
So just from what I've gathered, I mean, just to throw this out there before we talk, I don't have anything against our men and women in uniform.
That's not really where this is coming from.
It's just more of just Having an open conversation about some of the things that I've noticed.
So, dating within the military is, from my experience, has been pretty tough.
Depending on the job that the men that I've encountered have, most of them do a lot of traveling.
Being in the Air Force, too, most of them travel to different parts of the world for testing.
And that creates its own challenges on its own because for half of your relationship, the other person isn't really present.
So it's, you know, one, hard to start something with somebody who's constantly missing.
So that's a challenge.
Another challenge that I've just started noticing some patterns is that And because they travel so much, and I hate to say that that's the answer or maybe the reason why, but I just noticed that the men that I've encountered are not trustworthy.
And even their friends aren't trustworthy either.
Just like being in groups, I've noticed Knowing that they are in a relationship and seeing them do things around other people and it just being kind of accepted that this is okay and their friends will have their back no matter what and this is an acceptable thing.
I don't know if that's giving enough detail for people who are listening in but it's just kind of what I've noticed.
Now, are you in the military yourself?
No, I'm not.
My father was for 24 years.
He's retired.
And we did not move around a lot, surprisingly.
We stayed at the same base for like 15 years here in California.
And I think I just had to do a lot with his job.
They didn't really need to move him elsewhere, and he was able to stay here for a very long time.
So having grown up in the same base from kindergarten basically until I graduated high school and then when I graduated high school I got my first job out on the base and things kind of progressed from there and I feel like I have a lot of background in getting to know these people and these patterns within the recent couple years of Still being exposed to the same community and dating within
the military, it just seems like these patterns are arising more and more often, and I'm not really sure of the reason why.
Right, right.
Now, when it comes to dating a military man, if he's going to travel, right?
Your father, I assume, is sort of the exception.
You say he was on the same base for a long time.
Sort of the exception, right?
And may have been a bit more old school.
But you have to be willing to go with him where he's going to go, right?
And if you're married to a military man, then you get a home on the base and you school for your kids and healthcare and all that kind of stuff.
That's the way it works, right?
Right, exactly, yeah.
And you establish those things in the beginning of your relationship, right?
You kind of have to be open to those types of things happening within your relationship from the get-go because you know your man's going to be traveling a lot depending on what his job is.
And some places you may be able to go and some places you may not be able to go, obviously, right?
Correct, yeah.
Sometimes you're not always able to go and you have to be married to them in order to go with them, you know, in order to get those benefits and all the things that come with it.
I mean, I guess you don't necessarily have to be married.
You could always move on your own.
But in order to live on the base and be with them, you kind of have to be.
Yeah, I mean, if you're going to move, you might as well be married, right?
If you're going to make that level of commitment anyway, right?
So you kind of have to be like the tail following the dog, so to speak, right?
I mean, wherever he goes, if you're going to date a military man, wherever he goes, you, as far as you're allowed or able, you go, right?
Exactly.
Which means you can't have much of a life of your own, right?
Right, right.
Outside of the relationship, right?
Right, right.
And, you know, I see a lot of women make it their own, and that's amazing that they do that, and they're able to still...
Sorry, make what their own?
Make a life for their own, you know, not just always follow...
You know, the man around wherever they go, they establish, you know, what they want to do in that location and what makes them happy and continue to do those sorts of things.
So it's definitely doable.
I'm just more, I guess, focusing on the things that I continue to see and the way that I see men act.
And maybe it's more off some of the recent relationships that I've been involved in, but it just seems like...
Yeah, with military men.
But the military standards have lowered considerably since your father's day.
Say that again?
Right.
I mean, so in the U.S., right?
We're talking American?
Yes, American.
Yeah, so a lot of the intelligence requirements or, you know, crime-free requirements that were in the past in America, some of them have fallen by the wayside, and America is scooping much more deeply into the gene pool, so to speak, to grab its soldiers than it used to for the obvious reason that, you know, there's a lot of attrition, there's a lot of exhaustion, a lot of multi-term combat tours and so on, and so they've had to lower their standards.
So I would imagine that on average the quality of Of the men in the military now is lower as a whole than it would have been in your father's day.
Yeah, you know, I would definitely have to agree with that.
I mean, I don't know what it was like for him being younger, but I would imagine that it is a lot different from then versus now.
These men, though, that I'm with, they all have, you know, degrees.
They've advanced in their careers.
They're...
You know, officers within the military, not saying that enlisted are bad because those people are also, you know, great as well.
But it's not that they're not desirable or they don't have things to offer in the relationship because these men are great.
And that's one of the things that I think that I am attracted to is because they're so driven and they have a lot of ambition.
But at the same time, with somebody who is coupled that has all those things going for them, but yet they treat their relationships not so well.
And, sorry, just go over for me, but is infidelity in someone?
Is that what happens or other things?
Yes, like infidelity, men that are married that I've seen cheating on their wives, men that are in committed relationships who cheat, who...
You know, go out and flirt and don't live the lifestyle outside of their relationship that they're supposed to be living, if that makes sense.
Like, you're in a relationship, you're committed, but you're out there acting a different way than maybe you should be.
So you're disrespecting that relationship that you built.
So it confuses me why even take the time to build that relationship in the first place if this is how you're going to act, you know?
And it's not just the American government.
I mean, it's not just the Americans either.
I've had interactions with other governments as well.
And I've dated, probably doesn't make me sound that great, but I've dated, actually currently kind of dating one.
And I've seen friends of his who are out here, TDY, you know, for some...
Friends who were out here, was that an acronym?
Oh yeah, TDY, I'm sorry, Temporary Duty Station.
They were out here just for testing.
And they were out here for a couple weeks and I saw a couple of these guys who were married do things that upset me when I saw them do this.
One of them was just recently married, like just a few months ago.
So it's that kind of behavior that just It's just shocking to me.
And I know that it's not just the military.
I know in the civilian world, the same things happen.
But it's concerning to me that maybe there's a connection between it being so accepted, like that this is just, when men travel, this is just normal.
And their friends seem to think that it's normal.
And it makes me wonder if anybody raises the flag like Do you know that you're acting this way?
Do you know that you're doing these things and do you know that they're wrong?
I'm going to go out on a limb and just assume that your father did not have affairs.
Well, as far as I know, he didn't.
Wait a minute.
I do have my doubts.
Go on.
I do have my doubts about that, but I don't really think I have great evidence to back it up.
It's just little things that I've come across here and there.
What do you mean?
Like what?
Other children?
No, nothing that serious.
Messages, text messages, pictures and stuff that he sent.
Just things like that that me and my sister have stumbled on throughout the years growing up.
I'm assuming not like Anthony Weiner style pictures or anything like that, right?
No, no.
Just like pictures that he would send back and forth between a couple people.
We couldn't figure out if it was a friendly thing or if it was more than that.
We just thought it was kind of odd.
So we kind of just put it in the back burner of our brains.
Kind of moved on.
It did kind of raise some doubts in my mind.
Yeah.
I mean, he's obviously retired now, so I don't know if that stuff is still happening, but as far as I know, I don't think that that stuff has happened.
Right, okay.
But that relationship hasn't really been the best either.
Your parents?
Yeah.
Well, my parents and just my relationship with my dad in general.
What are the issues with your relationship with your dad?
We're just not very close.
Growing up, it was hard.
I was a very, very shy person and he's a lot more, I guess, aggressive than that.
There's just a lot of misunderstanding between the two of us, personality-wise.
He was always yelling.
He was always mad about something.
He's always complaining.
He's just kind of a very generally negative person, probably painting a really terrible picture.
There's things that are great about him, too, that, you know, I still love him because he's my father, but growing up with him, it was rough, and he was very verbally abusive, and sometimes physically as well.
But over the years, that kind of, you know, it got better once I got older, but Growing up, it was...
Well, that's not necessarily better.
That's just because you're bigger, right?
Yeah.
Well, and it still happens, though.
And I'm 28 years old, and it's still the same, so...
And what sort of...
It hasn't gotten better, but...
Yeah, I'm sorry about that.
What sort of verbal abuse...
I mean, physical abuse, I'm incredibly sorry for.
I'm going to assume that's not still happening.
So, it is.
The last incident was maybe like a month or so ago.
And what happened?
Well, the argument was actually between me and my sister, and he does this often.
It was right before her wedding, and so we were arguing about something.
I thought that she said something, and it came out wrong, and I misinterpreted it, and so the argument just kind of got to a place where it didn't need to, and he got involved in the argument.
Like got in my face about it and like slapped me and stuff and I like left home for like a couple days and let things cool down and then I came back and then it just just like any other time it just kind of just didn't really talk about it and just went on.
Wow so your father your father slapped you like across the face or?
Yes.
Wow.
You're 28.
Yes.
I still live at home.
No, I get that.
You said you'd left home.
How often does this happen?
Not very often.
Before that, it was years.
No, no.
I didn't ask.
How often does this happen?
How often do you think?
Not very often is very vague and subjective.
I'm just curious how often this happens Well It's been It's been years It's been a few years since the last...
Oh, since he hit you before?
Yes, yeah.
So it doesn't happen that quite as often, but growing up it was a little bit more than that.
How often would it happen when you were growing up?
I would...
Try to stay as quiet as possible because I didn't ever want it to happen more than it did, which I guess contributed to why I was so shy.
Not shy, scared.
Scared, yeah.
Shy is an internal state, scared is a responsive state.
Is this important because shy is a personality characteristic?
You know, if I'm running away from a tiger, I'm not paranoid, right?
Paranoia is an internal state unrelated to external cues.
Legitimate fear is external cues.
I just want to be very precise about that, that shy, when you're being assaulted, it's not shy, it's traumatized, it's fearful of very legitimate dangers, right?
Yeah, you're right.
There is a difference between the two.
I would say every couple months, few months, It wasn't, you know, like every day or every week.
There was definitely a lot of time that passed between each one, but the verbal abuse, I would say, was a lot harder to take than the physical.
Absolutely, and I agree with you about that in my experience and from the people I've talked to over the years, verbal abuse.
Rewrites your personality to some degree in a way that physical abuse doesn't.
To me, because I've experienced both as well, and to me, physical abuse was sort of like spilling coffee on a piece of paper you've written on.
It's stained, but you can still read it.
To me, verbal abuse was more like scribbling over the letters you've written.
Okay.
It's a lot less, it's more fuzzy.
More intrusive.
And you have a physical reaction to the physical abuse, but the words that attempt to invade and implant in your personality and breed, right?
They attempt to breed and spread and replicate.
It's an injection of a hostile self-image that is, it burrows in a way for me that physical abuse did not.
Absolutely.
Yeah, and you're right.
It definitely rewrites your personality.
There's a lot of things that I wish I could have done differently if I was different about approaching situations.
But over the years, I guess I've just learned how to make that better for myself and not try to rewrite the negative things that have happened and try to make them better.
And it kind of makes me wonder, just going back to the topic, whether or not Dating within the military if these men are men that I'm attracting to myself?
Oh yeah, no, listen, it's funny, and I'm sorry to interrupt you, but it's funny how often people say, like when we're talking about childhood, you're talking about who you're attracted to romantically, and we talk about childhood, and you say, well now to get back to the topic, it's like, we've never left the topic.
We have never left the topic.
We are still rigidly focused on the topic, I guarantee you.
This is 100% topic related, I guarantee you.
Guaranteed.
Now, what sort of verbal abuse would manifest?
What sort of language?
Name-calling?
Stupid?
Asshole?
He would call me a bitch.
He would call me stupid.
He would call me all within the heat of the moment.
He would just, you know, Say, I don't know, just make me feel that I wasn't good enough, no matter what.
I don't treat people well.
I need to be this way or be that way.
You need to learn how to treat people well like your father does.
I guess.
I never really understood what he meant by that.
Well, no, he doesn't mean anything.
Growing up, I didn't have a lot of friends.
Of course.
Of course.
I mean, I didn't really get what he meant.
I mean, if you're that kind of terrible a person, what do you have to offer people, right?
Exactly.
I didn't really have a lot of friends to begin with because I rarely ever talked to anybody.
Sure.
Yeah, he would just say those things to me in the heat of the argument.
He brings out a very ugly side.
In myself as well, and especially growing up.
No, no, no.
Oh, God.
Oh, no.
I can't.
I'm sorry.
I can't.
I mean, I can take a certain amount of defense of abuse because I kind of understand where it comes from.
But, oh, Amanda.
No, no, no, no.
No, no, no.
He does not bring out an ugly side of you.
He worked very hard to create that ugly side of you.
You know, if somebody scribbles over your painting, Your beautiful painting, somebody scribbles over it.
And you look and say, well, I guess I'm not that good an artist.
You're kind of missing something, right?
Yeah.
You didn't have this ugly side of you, which he then, you know, he just kind of brings out.
I mean, call someone a bitch and stupid and all that.
I always thought that the reason why we fought so much is because maybe we were just so similar.
Yeah.
Maybe that's why we butt heads so much.
No, the reason you fought so much was that he was abusive.
Right?
He's the parent, you're the child.
The conflict is his responsibility.
Because you've used this sort of equality argument and you've said a couple of times, in the heat of the moment, like that's any kind of excuse.
In the heat of the moment, like you're both just going at it and no, no, no, he's the father.
He sets the tone.
It's his job.
Yeah.
To make sure there's no such excuse as in the heat of the moment.
Did you ever have that excuse?
Like, let's say you yelled something mean at your dad.
Did you ever get to then say later, well, it's okay, dad.
That was just in the heat of the moment.
Doesn't matter.
No, it wouldn't make me feel less guilty about it.
I still said it.
But would he say, oh yeah, well I understand, it's in the heat of the moment.
We all say things that we regret in the heat of the moment, right?
You didn't have an excuse when you were good, right?
He would never be the one to apologize first and understand.
I know there is always an urge to laugh at these things, but you get that it's not at all funny.
Oh yeah, it's not funny at all, no.
Right.
Well, I am sorry, very sorry, deeply sorry, Amanda, that you were ever treated this way.
This is not how parents should be interacting with their children at all.
At all.
Well, in getting older, I've tried to be more, I guess, understanding of where this comes from.
And knowing his family and, you know, my grandma and how he grew up, and I feel bad for saying this because I don't want to excuse the behavior, but I do understand where it comes from.
No, you want to excuse the behavior.
You do.
And you don't know this right now, but when you listen to this back again, Amanda, you will hear it very clearly.
You don't hear it because it's what you're used to and you're in the conversation.
But when you hear it back later, it's all been excusing the behavior.
Look, I have no doubt that your father had a difficult childhood.
Of course.
Of course.
So what?
Does that mean that all who have difficult childhoods, we just have no moral standards for them?
No, you can change.
Would you give yourself an excuse to be verbally abusive to a child because you had a difficult childhood?
Absolutely not.
Well, why do you have higher moral standards for yourself than your father?
I guess I don't know.
I guess I just try to be really understanding about it.
Is that working?
It's better than being angry about it.
Those aren't the only two choices, right?
To stew in chronic anger or to be, as you call it, understanding.
And also, what has your father done to earn understanding?
Has he been understanding?
Has he owned his actions?
Has he apologized?
You say he doesn't apologize, right?
No, he doesn't.
So he still thinks that you are...
I can't even say these words.
What he said.
Does he still think that it was your fault that he hit you?
Well, the last situation that happened like a month...
I think it was two months ago, a couple months ago...
I remember he just sent me a text as I was driving to my friend's house, and it wasn't really an apology.
It was more of, you shouldn't have done these things to provoke that.
Yeah, so he's passive, and you as his child, you're the moral agent, and he's just passively reacting as the parent.
He has no ownership, no responsibility in the matter.
He's just like a shadow cast by your actions.
He has no volition, free will, or moral responsibility of his own.
He can only serve to react to whatever you do.
You know, like a paper bag blowing in the wind.
Is that the...
I would agree with that statement.
Do you think that that's a valid statement?
I think that it's valid, yes.
Okay, so he actually does, in your mind, Amanda, he has no moral responsibility, no capacity to affect his own choices.
He merely passively reacts to what you do.
No.
No.
Because it's not my fault that he decided to get in the middle of an argument between me and my sister.
You know, I didn't Even if I do say something that upsets him, it doesn't give him the right to slap me at all or be that way or say mean things.
I'm going to ask you a question which is not a judgment because I'm not saying you should or shouldn't.
I'm just curious why at 28 you're still living at home.
Again, I'm not saying you should or shouldn't.
It's just you understand it's a little past the due date for a lot of people.
Oh, trust me.
That's on my mind every single day.
So I was in college for two years.
I moved back home.
Just a background story.
I'll try to sum it up as quick as possible.
But I left college.
I didn't finish my degree.
I moved back home and just ended up getting an internship and working out on the basement.
Ended up into a full-time job.
So I was working up.
I changed my life.
Moved back home.
Working up to making the steps to move out, go back to school, finish my degree.
But then I got fired.
So that changed my plans.
And then I had a couple months of unemployment.
I went through my savings.
I just recently got another full-time job in May.
So right now, again, I'm making the steps to I rebuild that part of my life that I kind of lost so that I can move out.
So it's definitely something that's on my mind and I definitely want to move out next year for sure.
Okay.
Yeah, and I'm not trying to push you one way or the other.
I was just kind of curious of the circumstances.
Yeah.
Do you think that you're in a position right now, let's say you meet some great guy.
He really loves you and he respects you and he cares about you.
And, um, of course, you know, one of the things that happens when you love someone is, uh, how do you feel if you love someone?
How do I feel about that?
Yeah.
If you love someone, how do you feel about someone who does the person you love harm?
Or does harm to the person you love?
Thank you.
I do not like them at all.
So if you meet a great man tomorrow who loves you to death and wants nothing but the best for you, and obviously he's not going to like people who do you harm, how is he going to get along with your dad?
I guess that would depend on whether or not I tell him.
Well, you wouldn't want to lie about important things and you wouldn't want to hide important things from someone you love, right?
Right.
It's kind of hard to be loved if you're hiding significant portions of your life from someone, right?
Right.
I'm not saying like, hey, look at my hemorrhoid or something.
But this is sort of important stuff, right?
Yeah, it is.
It is important.
It depends on how much I trust that person to be able to tell them something like that.
But, you know, it's still my family.
I wouldn't want that to sway them from still being a part of it or getting to know, you know, my father or my mother or my siblings.
Because as broken as it is, my relationship with him doesn't mean that, you know, the person that I love or marry or, you know, whatever can't Still be a part of the family.
Well, that would be your new family, right?
You keep referring to the family like your family of origin, but that's not the only family you're going to have.
You're going to have a new family, right?
Right.
You understand where I'm coming from, right?
You want a great guy, a great guy who's going to love you, and a great guy is not going to be happy if there's someone in your life who is, say, slapping you in the face.
Yeah, I would imagine he wouldn't be.
Because I wouldn't be.
No, of course not.
I mean, if you've got some great guy...
Yeah, if you've got some...
Slapping a woman in the face is the equivalent of punching a guy in the face.
So there's, you know, you've got a great guy and his father punches him in the face.
And then says, hey, you want to come over and have a coffee with my dad?
How would you feel?
I would feel very uncomfortable.
Yeah.
I would not want to go over and engage in conversation.
It'd be kind of tough to do the small talk thing, right?
It really would.
Yeah, because then you're just kind of walking on eggshells around the elephant in the room.
You know of what's going on, but you can't talk about it.
I guess I haven't really thought that far ahead of bringing somebody into that situation.
Well, you're 28.
It's time.
It's time to start thinking that far ahead.
You're not 18.
It's not that I haven't tried.
It's, you know, again, going back to the men that I've encountered.
Well, yes, but we're still talking exactly about that, though, Amanda.
We're still talking about the men that you encounter.
Now, here's the deal.
Look, I don't need to be picking on your dad here.
This is just the first thing we happen to talk about.
Anything could be something else, but this is the example, right?
And you have a difficult relationship with your father.
And, you know, by hitting you, he's actually committed the Crime of assault.
So, that's important.
Now, you go out for dinner with this great guy.
And your dad recently slapped you in the face.
So, one of two things is going to happen.
You're not going to be the same as if you didn't get slapped in the face, right?
Emotionally.
You couldn't be, right?
It has an effect.
Yeah.
No.
Yeah, I wouldn't be the same.
You wouldn't be the same.
Now, either he's going to notice that something's odd, something's amiss.
You're not...
your usual self, right?
So, if he notices that, he's going to say, Amanda, are you okay?
And what would you say?
And this is somebody that I just met?
No, no.
Somebody you are...
Well, okay.
Yeah, okay.
Let's say you've been on a couple of dates or whatever, but he's smart and sensitive enough to know.
Now, you're either going to tell him the truth or you're going to lie, right?
Right.
Well, knowing myself, I don't have a good poker face, so I would probably not lie.
Or if you did, you'd lie badly, right?
Right.
Now, in which case, he's probably going to ask again.
Hmm.
Knowing...
He's not getting the whole story.
He's going to ask again, why?
Because he cares about you and he doesn't want to sit there pretending something's fine when you're obviously upset about something, right?
It's a pretty weird state of mind to sit there and say, well, I know she's upset, but man, this is some good steak, right?
I mean, that's kind of weird, right?
That would not be a great guy by definition, right?
Absolutely not, no.
So he's going to keep asking.
Now, you're either going to sort of stare...
Stone-faced into your mashed potatoes and keep mouthing off the same falsehoods, in which case he's going to understand at some point that you are upset and you've come out to dinner with him.
It's really negatively affecting your meal, but you're not going to tell him what you're upset about, right?
Mm-hmm.
What's he going to think of?
A lifetime of that.
Probably not the most desirable way to...
Probably not the most desirable thing in the world, right?
Mm-mm.
Right?
She's going to be upset.
It's going to really affect me negatively, but she's not going to let me help her or she's not going to tell me what it is.
And...
Oh, boy.
Right?
Right.
Is this how I want to spend my life?
No.
And you're not close to him, right?
Because immediately you're keeping him away from you.
You're keeping him distant from you emotionally, right?
Right.
So you're not close.
You're not connected, right?
Well, it's not just the, you know...
It's more of a trust thing.
I'm not going to tell something that deep about myself if we've only been out on a few dates together.
But if something's bothering me, I'll probably just make something up and say, you know, this happened.
Oh, so you would not just passively lie, you would actively lie then?
You would misdirect?
That's what I... Usually do just to avoid talking.
Again, it has to do with how much I trust you or how good I feel about the relationship in order for me to just tell you something like that.
Why are you concerned about trusting someone else when you're the one who's talking about lying to someone?
How trustworthy does that make you?
Remember, he's interested in trusting you too, Amanda, right?
Because he's a good guy.
So you're very concerned about whether you trust him, but you're perfectly willing, I'm not saying happy, but you're willing to lie to him and make up something.
And then you're concerned about whether you trust him.
I'm trying to give you the view from the good guy side here, right?
Yeah, and I do get that.
I guess I just feel that opening up that quickly and telling somebody something that heavy, I feel like it is going to cause them to be like, I don't want this girl.
She has too much drama.
So when I say that, it has to come from, you know, like, when I have to trust you, I have to know that you're not going to just view it as such and actually, you know, be understanding about it.
So you're hiding.
You're kind of hiding in the early dates, right?
To some degree.
I'm not saying obviously all the time, but to some degree you're playing it guarded and you're not...
And if the person asks, if the guy asks you something that's uncomfortable for you, you might make up something that's not true to sort of throw him off the trail kind of thing, right?
Yeah.
Right.
So then you're going to end up with untrustworthy guys.
That's just how it works.
You're saying, well, why are the guys so untrustworthy?
Well, because of what you're doing.
You're not causing them to be untrustworthy, you understand.
It's just that Untrustworthy people aren't good at intimacy.
They kind of avoid it, right?
And so if you're avoiding intimacy, if you're avoiding honesty, if you're avoiding openness, you're not a trustworthy person in that regard, in that moment, not as a whole, right?
And so you're going to be attracting untrustworthy people.
I can ask people personal questions because I don't have anything to hide.
I mean, I've talked about my history, my life.
You know, people who say, well, he had a bad childhood.
You know, my dad had a bad childhood.
So what?
I had a bad childhood.
I'm a great dad.
Having a bad childhood can be as much of an incentive for you to say, well, wow, I'm never doing that.
Right?
It's like that old thing about two twins, right?
One's an alcoholic and one's not.
To the one, why are you an alcoholic?
It's because my dad drank.
I said to the other one, why are you not an alcoholic?
Why don't you ever touch alcohol?
He's like, because my dad drank.
I saw what it did.
There's no causality in history.
That's just information.
Right, and what you do with it.
I mean, it's like, why are you a Marxist?
Because I read Marx.
Well, hey, I read Marx too.
I'm not a Marxist.
It's just information.
It's what you do with it that counts.
It's not what happens to you.
It's what you do with it.
So, making the causality, your grandmother is not, it didn't solve anything.
And it's not true.
So, you want to know why the men are untrustworthy in your life.
First of all, it's hard to trust your dad, right?
It's hard to trust your dad if he's going to yell at you or call you names or slap you in the face.
It's not a very trust-enabling environment, right?
No, it's not.
And so, you've got a lot going on and you're hiding it from guys and you're lying to them.
So, of course, you're going to have less trustworthy people around there because people who are trustworthy are not scared off by depth.
And not scared off by truth.
But they are generally turned off by being lied to.
Like, people who are trustworthy, by definition, kind of, Amanda, don't like being lied to.
And please understand, I'm not calling you a liar, and I'm not saying you're a bad person.
I'm not saying any of that.
But what I'm saying is that you are in a situation in your life where you feel that the best course of action in certain situations is to lie.
And trustworthy people are going to get that.
And they won't think that you're a terrible person or a bad person or a liar or anything like that.
It's just like, eh, you know, lots of fish in the sea, right?
Right.
Maybe I don't have to be with somebody who I feel is kind of not being honest with me or maybe even lying to me on the first couple of dates, you know?
Yeah, I guess I do get it.
I do understand that.
I don't know, I guess then again, who would want to fish who has that kind of background?
Is that not in and of itself something that's not attractive either?
You mean is it attractive to get involved with a woman whose father hits her?
Not that, I guess, attractive is the wrong word.
I guess I'm just looking at it from the other side, that if I tell this guy all these things, I guess I'm just scared of how he would think.
How would he judge me for all of that?
He would either say, I don't know, this girl has a lot going on, and I'm not sure I want somebody who has a lot of No, you're still thinking about him judging you, but I don't think that's what would be the first thing on his mind.
I can tell you what I think would be the first thing on his mind.
I think I'm a good guy, so hopefully I have some insight into that.
But I can tell you what I would think about.
When you get married, you don't marry just the person, right?
You marry the whole clan, right?
And so it's not just you that would be going through the good guy's mind.
It would be like, okay, so, you know, let's say he finds out about your dad's verbal abuse, physical abuse or whatever, right?
And he's like, okay, so that's what I would be signing up for.
Is Christmases and Thanksgiving and holidays and birthdays and, and, and with this dynamic, right?
Right.
Men are naturally drawn to protect the women they love and the children they protect, right?
And it's a very difficult and frustrating thing for a man to be in a position where Harm is or may be accruing to his wife, his lover, the mother of his children, and he can't do anything to protect her.
Right?
Right.
That's a very difficult position to be in.
If you can imagine being a mom and you can imagine watching your child play near traffic, what would you want to do?
I'd freak out.
You'd freak out and you'd be like, you'd want to go And get your child away from traffic.
Now, I'm not comparing women to children.
This is a very stretchy analogy, but I'm just sort of trying to give it as vividly as possible, right?
But if there is harm accruing to someone that you love and you can't do anything to protect them, it's a very difficult emotional place to be for a man and for a woman as well.
But it's, you know, a little bit different for the male-female dynamic, if that makes sense.
Right.
It does.
No, that does make sense.
So he would be looking to sign up to your whole family dynamic, right?
Right.
Also...
I guess I don't really know how to get around that.
Well, I can tell you, but let's wait for that.
Okay.
Also, a man, a good man, or sensible man, hopefully they're the same thing, but a good man, when he looks at a woman and thinks of marrying her...
He thinks of marrying her so that she would be the mother of his children, right?
And then he looks at the grandparents.
And he thinks of the grandparents around his children, right?
Does that make sense?
It does.
And how would a good man think of your father being around his children?
I don't think that my dad would ever...
He hasn't hurt anybody else.
Well, it did happen with my siblings.
It happened with my brother as well.
But my younger sister, it just never occurred with her.
I don't think that it would ever go as far.
He never hurt your younger sister?
No.
He never hurt her?
Never called her names?
Not that I remember growing up.
Most of the arguments that ever happened were near my brother.
You gave me a blanket statement.
He never harmed my youngest sister.
So he did not call her names.
He did not hit her directly.
This is direct harm.
And look, I don't know.
I wasn't there.
I'm just going by what you say.
I'm a bit surprised, but that doesn't mean you're wrong.
I'm just You already told me you may not tell the truth about uncomfortable things, so just double-check you got this one.
Well, I wouldn't call in if I wasn't wanting to be completely honest.
Okay, so you're honest about this and he did not hurt your sister?
No.
All right.
When your father hit you in the face recently, You said it was because he was intervening with an argument with your sister?
Yes.
Do you think it does harm to your sister to see you hit in the face by your father?
She was actually more mad with me after the situation than my dad.
So when you were hit in the face by your father, your sister was more upset with you than with your father?
Yes.
And you're telling me he hasn't done any harm to her?
Seriously?
With that perspective?
I mean, if he did, it's nothing that I ever saw, but...
Do you think that's a healthy perspective, to blame the victim of assault?
No, I don't.
So, where did she get this unhealthy perspective from?
I really have no idea.
I'm not really sure why she was more angry with me after the situation.
I think that she was just angry about the argument that me and her got into, and she probably thought that that's the reason why all this unfolded.
I mean, I never used to retaliate before, but now that I'm a lot older and that this recently happened, I retaliated.
Right.
Probably not the best thing to do in that situation, but it just is an instinct If someone hit me, I'm going to hit him back.
Probably not the best way to handle it, but she was mad that I did that.
But after that, that's kind of when I packed my stuff and I just left.
There's a family dynamic, which is that you give way, right?
You give up on your preferences, you give way, right?
Yes, I do.
And listen, I understand that.
I mean, I was...
That was my role in the family dynamic as well.
The earlier family, I mean, this is my real family.
This is the family I chose.
This is the family I made.
But yeah, that was my role.
I was the one who had to give way.
I was the one, you know, surrounded by two strong-willed and aggressive people.
And I had to give way.
And when I stopped doing that, well, the family...
Let's just say it did not ride the transition overly smoothly, right?
But what was my choice?
It was my choice to spend the rest of my life giving way to people and not having any say of my own?
Come on.
I can't live the rest of my life like that.
It's not my fault that people can't handle change.
So this is another issue.
So a good guy is going to look at your sister and say, ah, well this is the woman I love.
Amanda is the woman I love.
And she was hit by her father in the face and her sister thinks that it was Amanda's fault.
And is blaming Amanda and defending the father.
See, the problem is not with men.
The problem is what you're bringing to the table, or to be more specifically, it's the family of origin that comes to the table with you at the moment, right?
Mm-hmm.
And that's your choice.
Well, I guess, I mean, I don't really, it's not that I am carrying, I mean, I carry this with me everywhere, but it's not that I, No, we're not going around the intention versus...
It's there, right?
It is, yes.
It's there.
And this is what you would be inviting a good man to spend the rest of his life dealing with.
I guess I would be.
What case would you make for him to do that?
Like, let's just be brutally frank with each other, right?
What is the case for him to get involved in a family structure where you get hit and you get blamed by your sister?
Your father doesn't apologize.
You were yelled at.
You're still getting yelled at.
And your brother was abused as well.
What's the case?
What's the upside?
What makes it worth his while?
Well, I guess I just view that relationship as something that's separate than the family.
Nope, it's not.
As we already talked about this, and hey, Amanda, don't you dodge on me now, lady, because you already told me, remember we said earlier, ooh, it's a good thing I've still got a good memory.
If that ever goes, I'm toast, I'm telling you.
But earlier, right, remember we said that if you're looking at someone you love, then you're looking at their family, you're looking at their grandparents, and you said, I would do the same thing.
Yeah, I agree.
So don't give me this, I can be isolated like someone in a space station.
I mean, no.
He's going to come with his family, and you come with your family.
So no, you can't draw this Chinese wall between history, family, husband, future kids, and all that, right?
No, I guess you can't do that.
Unless I never have him over to meet them.
Yeah.
But that's not really getting to know somebody, is it?
Well...
The family's kind of involved.
I mean, these are all things I'm able to talk about because I had to deal with, right?
I mean, you're not alone in this.
You're not alone in this.
This is not uncommon, sadly.
It's all too common.
So, what is the case for him to get involved?
Not with you.
You sound like a great person.
Honestly, to be perfectly honest, you sound like a great person.
But if he is looking for family involvement, and in general that's what comes with the territory, what is the case for him getting involved in this family structure?
What's the pitch?
I guess I don't really have an answer to that because I can't really, you know, I can't deny that this stuff happened.
You know, this is my family.
This is my family.
This is my life.
This is my background.
These are the events that have happened.
So, I mean, if things were to get that serious with somebody, I can't lie to them about these things.
So I guess it would be their decision of whether or not they, you know, want to be involved like that.
But then it goes back to my earlier question where, I don't know, how am I ever supposed to find somebody who is willing?
There are other choices.
There are other choices.
I mean, you're backed into a corner here, and I'm not trying to back you into a corner.
I mean, I'm just trying to make some of the dynamics as I see them, and which I've had to negotiate with myself, and I've had to negotiate myself.
So I'm deeply sympathetic to all of this, and I wish you came with golden gods of a family structure that would be enticing to all sane mortals, right?
I mean, so I wish I had that too, right?
I wish I had had that too.
Can I make an offer?
A suggestion?
Of course.
It's yours to do with as you see fit.
You want to get married and have a family, is that right?
I'm more focused on marriage right now than children, but Why?
Because you're immortal?
Because your eggs don't age?
I mean, is this something I don't know about here?
Do you feel like you have forever?
The biological clock is also in the back of my mind.
It's more pressure than I need.
I mean, I need to still move out.
Move it to the front of your mind.
Now, move it to the front.
You know your fertility is already declining, right?
I do, yes.
I know that about myself.
Okay, good.
So, it's okay to panic.
Really, it is okay.
In fact, it's healthy.
And is it wrong that I'm not, though?
Because I don't really necessarily know if children are really at the top of my list.
There's other things that I want that are more at the top than having children.
Just right now, I would really like to have a successful relationship.
One that actually gets to a point where we mean something to each other.
Sure.
That's at the top of my list.
But if you have that, right?
If you have that, I mean, I get that.
I mean, when I was your age, kids weren't important to me either.
When you meet the right person, the kids, they come right to the forefront pretty quickly.
They come up.
Yeah, in my experience.
And that may not be a universal phenomenon and so on, but I was never particular.
I mean, I've always liked kids.
I worked well with kids.
I worked in a daycare, of course, and all of that.
But...
It was never an important thing for me.
But, you know, you meet the right person and it's like, bam, okay, breed!
Right?
It's the way it works.
Even if I do meet the right person, pregnancy scares the shit out of me.
So I would have to get over that fear first.
And I say why not because it shouldn't.
I'm just, what is it about pregnancy that is alarming?
How much it changes your body, how painful it is, how your body reacts to it.
All the things that could go wrong.
Well, that's true of your body, whether you're pregnant or not.
I mean, trust me.
I had perfect health until my mid-40s and then it all fell apart for reasons I couldn't figure out.
I mean, I'm a healthy person.
I'd like to think I'm a relatively healthy person, but I would think that my body would go through a normal pregnancy and it would be okay.
It can, but obviously, and this is the time urgency, right?
Because if you're concerned about pregnancy, then you want to do it sooner rather than later because your pregnancy is much more likely to be successful when you're younger than when you get older, right?
Right, yeah.
And listen, I'm telling you this, it does not have to change your body that much.
It really does not...
It does not.
My wife still looks fantastic.
She doesn't have to change her body that much.
You know, just, you know, keep active, keep exercising, and, you know, stay off the couch and Cheetos regimen after the baby's born, and you'll be fine.
Seriously, I mean, it doesn't turn you into, like, an old balloon or something like that.
Yeah, I mean, yeah, I guess kids someday would be nice, maybe one or two, not any more than that, but...
Okay, so I want that for you.
I mean, I want love for everybody, which is why I'm annoyingly strict and repetitive in some of the things that I talk about.
But I want love for everyone, and I'm always motivated by what I think is best for the world, because I live in the world and want it to be great for everyone.
And so, you're not swimming in cash right now.
You said you just got a new job in May?
Yes.
Okay, let me make an offer for you.
Would you let this show pay for some therapy for you?
Would I let this show, your show?
Yeah, would you let me, this show, pay for some therapy for you?
Because the challenges that you're facing in terms of finding somebody to love and with the family structure that you've got are considerable.
And you can do it.
You can find a way to navigate it.
You can find a way to negotiate with it.
But it's a lot.
To do on your own.
I didn't do it on my own.
I took therapy, and that's one of the reasons I'm such a big fan.
Would you consider, would you mull over the possibility that if you could find a therapist, you could send the bill to us?
Well, I've done therapy in the past before.
When I was away at college, I actually worked in a counseling office, and I befriended one of the therapists there, and I regularly saw her And talked about all these things.
But I just...
But you're in a different phase in life right now, and now you're 28 and you say you have yet to have a relationship you would consider to be successful.
Yeah, I can't even remember the last one that I would even consider successful.
Right.
So it's...
Look, you don't just go to therapy once, right?
I mean, in a different time in life, if you're still facing challenges, it's fine to go again.
It's like if you're an Olympic athlete, you don't just go to a coach once, right?
I went for a coach back when I was 18.
I'll never need it again.
No, I mean, if you want to do great things in your life and you want to have something other than where you are, you go back, right?
Find somebody who's got maybe different skills.
I was a bit alarmed when you said I befriended her and then she was my therapist.
I don't think it's supposed to work that way, but again, I'm no expert.
But would you mull it over?
I mean, maybe even just one session and see if there's anything of value or any kind of connection that might occur.
Yeah, I would be open to that.
Okay.
So, that's the offer, right?
Go and find a therapist and if you can't afford it, send us the bill and we'll cover it.
And then go back and send us the bill and you get the pattern.
You understand, right?
Yes.
Good.
Because I think that would be useful and helpful because I don't want you to end up in a situation where you don't have...
Adult love, future love, right?
Yeah.
Because, you know, your family is very important to you right now, and I'm not saying they shouldn't be, but your family is very important to you right now.
But from the perspective of a guy who just turned 50, that family is not going to last your life.
You need a family that's going to last your life, right?
Your parents are going to get old and they're going to die and all that.
And you want to be building for the future rather than necessarily just protecting what's gone before.
Does that make sense?
Yeah.
It does.
No, it's definitely something that I want to strive for, too.
I just don't know how to get there.
Right.
And that's where I think a good therapist...
So are you saying that these relationships that I've had with these military men turned out the way they did because I haven't been fully honest with them or just...
No, I don't think that's the only thing.
I think that the more perceptive they are, the more they look at your family situation and say, do I want to get heavily involved and be vulnerable to a woman who is in a situation where she can be at risk and I can't protect her?
That's a special kind of pain for a man.
So if you can get to a place in your family where you're not Being hit or yelled at or, you know, if you can get to a place in your family where you can be assertive enough or find some way to negotiate or with the help of a therapist find some way to end up in a situation where you're not going to be vulnerable to this kind of threat,
then you can, of course, have a more open conversation with a guy you're dating and he's not going to look at you and say, well, she's going to get You know, hit by her dad from time to time and it's not a damn thing I can do about it.
The whole point of military men is they want to protect people, right?
That's what their thing is.
That's what their gig is.
And if you're in a situation of danger and they can't protect you, I don't think they're going to want that.
That's my thought.
I don't know, for sure.
But that's my sort of...
That's my thought about it.
I don't know if it really explains their infidelity, though.
I'm sorry, say again?
I don't know if that really explains their infidelity.
Because most...
No, but that we went over.
We went over that, that if you're avoiding information with them or lying to them, then a trustworthy guy is not going to be into that, right?
And an untrustworthy guy would be like, yeah, we both have things to hide.
That's fine with me.
Yeah, it's definitely not something that I would want.
No, you don't.
We didn't even talk about your mom, right?
I mean, should she be making your dad apologize for hitting you?
That would seem, even if he didn't get it.
But anyway, that's perhaps a topic more for a conversation with a therapist.
But yeah, so if you'll stay in touch, see if you can find someone, and we're happy to cover it because, you know, you should have love.
I agree.
Yeah, that sounds like a plan.
All right.
You'll stay in contact?
Let us know how it goes, what's going on, and what we can do to help.
Yes, I will, definitely.
Beautiful.
How was the call for you, Mardina?
It was great.
Thank you so much for taking the time to talk to me and thank Michael for me as well.
There was a bunch of Skype issues before.
My phone wasn't working with me, but thanks for being flexible.
Thank you for the conversation, Amanda, and thank you for the honesty.
I really, really appreciate it.
It's a wonderful thing to see, and it's a precious thing to see, and I appreciate that so much.
Of course.
Okay, well thanks everyone so much for a great set of conversations.
You guys are amazing.
I just, I love you all so much.
It's a beautiful thing to be a part of.
And you can help us out, of course, as you see fit at freedomandradio.com slash donate.
Muchly, muchly, muchly appreciated.
And you can, hey, maybe you've got a little Christmas shopping to do.
Maybe you're going to do a little shopping coming up.
You can go to fdrurail.com slash amazon.com.
To follow our affiliate link.
It doesn't cost you anything and throws a few pennies our way.
You can follow me on Twitter at Stefan Molyneux.
And don't forget, if you see a video on YouTube at youtube.com slash freedomainradio, like, share, subscribe, the whole ball of wax.
