Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

Dec. 17, 2016 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux

02:48:13

3532 The Secret Virgin - Call In Show - December 14th, 2016

Question 1: [3:06] - “I am a 32-year-old female, whose never been in a romantic relationship. I have had two offers all my life and politely turned them down. The first was when I was 20 and in college. I have always wanted marriage to be the end result of a romantic relationship and just didn't see that happening. The next offer came from a good friend in medical school and again I knew that we would not be compatible. I am now older, have established a career for myself and have just come through a horrible diagnosis of cancer. I feel like the 'most compatible' guy probably doesn't exist. I want to share my life and feel I have so much love and support to offer. I also need to mention a friend who I have liked for the longest time who I feel is waiting for me to make the move for whatever reason. I always figured the right guy would come along but I am now terrified because I am attracting an older group of men who have 'baggage' i.e. divorces, children. I almost feel my being a virgin and must be kept secret. How can I not compromise my values but yet find a good match?”Question 2: [40:12] - “Is the dogma that all races are the same, and that intelligence is determined solely by culture/education, bad for people of color?”Question 3: [1:10:53] - “As an international student from Brazil attending college in the US, I am constantly targeted for supporting Trump. My peers, especially other international students and new immigrants, don't seem to understand that Hillary stands for everything they fled when they came to America. My question is, how can we better communicate with the immigrant community and help them understand that they are only voting for what they fled? If America represents a new life for them, why would they vote for the same type of corruption they left behind in the first place?”Question 4: [1:41:11] - “What do you think of the current Sexual Education policies of mainly the United States?”Question 5: [2:22:24] - “How will humanity survive as a species unless we address our pandemic addiction to belief?”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

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello, hello everybody.
	Stefan Molyneux from Freedom Main Radio.
	I hope you're doing very, very well.
	So, what a set of corners we had tonight.
	The first was a young, brilliant, eloquent, well-educated, professional woman.
	She's 32 years old, a virgin, and just can't find a way through to get into the family life that she wants, getting a man to settle down and become a mom.
	And all of that kind of stuff.
	And we had a great conversation about the causes and what could be done about this situation and I guess the urgency thereof.
	So it was a great, great call.
	The second caller wanted to know, is the dogma that all races are the same and that all intelligence is determined solely by culture or education, is that bad for people of color?
	It's a fascinating question.
	And I do talk about multiculturalism and my desire, strong desire, to try and find a way to make it work and my thoughts about that.
	So I think that was a very, very important call for me, at least.
	I think it will be for you as well.
	The third caller is a Hispanic caller.
	He's called in before, and he wanted to know why most of his friends and family were kind of stuck in this blame the system, blame white people kind of mode, whereas he was achieving great success in America.
	And we had a long conversation about that, which I thought was great.
	And I really appreciate it.
	The honesty and the openness and the directness which we can talk about these things, which I massively appreciate and thank him for that.
	The fourth caller wanted to know why is the government involved in the sexual education of children?
	And that's a great question.
	I thought about it for many, many years.
	And we had a good conversation about all the dominoes that kind of had to fall down for the government to feel that it was very, very important to start teaching sexuality to children and that that should not be...
	A family thing that the government should have nothing to do with or anything like that.
	So that was a great call.
	And please express your outrage openly about that.
	You may be surprised at some of my perspectives there.
	A fifth caller, a brave man.
	He's got a bit of a speech impediment, but called in, which I appreciate and I respect him for doing that.
	And he wanted to know, how are we going to even survive?
	As human beings, let alone civilization, how are we going to survive unless we can find a way to address our addiction to belief without evidence?
	And of course that cuts right to the core of everything I have been talking about lately many years, so I appreciated that call enormously as well.
	Please don't forget to help us out, this being the merry month of Xmas.
	Please help us out at freedomainradio.com slash donate.
	And also, of course, you can follow me on Twitter at Stefan Molyneux.
	You can use our affiliate link for free for you at fdrurl.com slash Amazon.
	Alright, up first we have Anna.
	Anna wrote in and said, I'm a 32-year-old female who's never been in a romantic relationship.
	I've had two offers all my life and politely turned them down.
	The first was when I was 20 and in college.
	I've always wanted marriage to be the end result of a romantic relationship and just didn't see that happening.
	The next offer came from a good friend in medical school and again I knew that we would not be compatible.
	I am now older, have established a career for myself, and And I've just come through a horrible diagnosis of cancer.
	I feel like the most compatible guy probably doesn't exist.
	I want to share my life and I feel I have so much love and support to offer.
	I also need to mention a friend who I've liked for the longest time who I feel is waiting for me to make the move for whatever reason.
	I always figured the right guy would come along, but I am now terrified because I'm attracting an older group of men who have quote-unquote baggage, i.e.
	divorces, children, etc.
	I almost feel my being a virgin must be kept secret.
	How can I not compromise my values, but yet find a good match?
	That's from Anna.
	Oh, hey Ana, how are you doing?
	I'm doing all right, thank you Stefan.
	Thanks very much for taking my call.
	It's much appreciated.
	Oh, my pleasure, my pleasure.
	A fascinating, fascinating question.
	Now, I don't mean to probe and don't share anything you don't want to.
	I wasn't sure what you meant though by a horrible diagnosis of cancer.
	Usually the horrible part about cancer is not the diagnosis, but the actual cancer.
	So, what happened with that?
	So, just partying along with life last year around May, April and I felt a lump and I, you know, based on my medical background, I thought, okay, well, I probably need to get this checked out.
	It's probably nothing.
	And along the way, everybody was reassuring me and saying, everything's going to be okay.
	You have absolutely no risk factors.
	And before I knew it, I was given the diagnosis that it was cancer and that I, given my age and my high risk, that they suggest that I have all the treatment processes, so chemotherapy, several surgeries, radiotherapy, and I have come out of that.
	So really for me, it was traumatic to actually receive the diagnosis.
	I somehow got through it.
	I have no idea how from the great support of my family and my close friends.
	I'm on the other side of things now, transitioning back to work and really just having a reflective moment about what changes I can make because above all, I've seen that time is not promised and sort of maybe before I was more passive and waiting for things to happen My life and especially things that were important to me.
	And so now I want to make an effort and put my best foot forward if you'd like.
	Right.
	Okay.
	Well, my obviously deep, deep sympathies for that horrible thing to go through.
	Yes, you can get some good things out of it, but nobody does it for that reason.
	So it sounds like you've got the right approach.
	And I just wanted to extend very, very deep sympathies for that challenge.
	It's an incredible thing to go through.
	And...
	Now, why do you think, Anna, that you didn't date when the man asked you when you were 20?
	Because I feel as though I had a vision and something which I was aiming towards.
	I always felt that I would get tied down in a relationship.
	I'd never seen one work in a good way.
	I still haven't seen one work in a positive way.
	And so for me, I thought it was something which I will have to go through.
	But at that point, I felt I wasn't ready.
	I was quite young.
	I was trying to get through my education and establish a career for myself.
	So that took precedent and priority at that point.
	When you say that you'd never seen a relationship work, what does that mean?
	Your parents, family, extended family, aunts, uncles, anyone in the neighborhood?
	Like, never!
	Never, ever.
	I've never seen one work where I felt as though what was put into it was benefited.
	I always felt that it was always drama, a lot of problems, and heartache.
	I'd never seen any people who were in a relationship in harmony, and maybe what I aspired to work towards.
	So yeah, so my parents, my mother passed me when I was quite young and my dad remarried very early on and it was a chaotic setup for us after that and so yeah, I definitely knew that that was not what I wanted and I was always waiting to meet somebody who I felt was compatible because I felt that's what I noticed that a lot of these people weren't compatible with each other and that was what was creating a lot of A lot of problems,
	yeah, and pain.
	Yeah, well, I can certainly understand.
	You know, we do get a lot of propaganda about relationships, which sometimes doesn't exactly match what we see in the relationships of those around us.
	And that is something that's really important to remember.
	I did actually have, and I mentioned this before, a A marriage that looked good to me in my neighborhood.
	And, you know, I'm the kind of guy who's like, I'm like MacGyver with tiny slivers of good information.
	Like I can fashion an entire spacecraft from a spork and a piece of gum.
	And so I did have that one positive example.
	And of course, if you didn't see that at all, then, yeah, it looks like a lure into like psychosexual drama from hell if you don't see that sort of positive experience in the people around you.
	I would agree with that, yeah.
	Yeah, well, I mean, empirically you have, right?
	I mean, based on your dating history.
	So, and then you said it was, was it in your early 30s that you had round two or second offer?
	Yeah, so it was around when I was 24, 25.
	I was in university then and So a lot of my friends have actually told me that I'm someone who's quite difficult to approach.
	They think I appear standoffish, but when they get to know me, then they know that I'm pretty chilled and a good person to be around, because I do have very close friends.
	And so this chap started out as a good friend of mine, and it took him about two and a half years to tell me how he felt.
	I'm sorry, did you do something to move away from the mic?
	You just got a little muffled there.
	Okay.
	Is this any better?
	Thanks, if you could.
	Hold on.
	Yeah, thanks.
	Okay.
	So as I was saying, I don't know which part of it was muffled, but it took him about two and a half years to approach me that way and then say, you know, I have these feelings for you, Anna, and, you know, how would you feel if we took it further?
	And again, at that point, because he was my friend, I knew he's good side and I knew he's bad sides, if you will.
	And I thought, I don't really.
	And again, his family, I wasn't happy about his, you know, the setup with his parents.
	And I thought, oh, that looks like some baggage to me and I don't feel so I want to take that on.
	And I did value his relationship as a friend and I made that obvious.
	I said, you know, I wanted to be friends and that's important to me, although I don't want anything more.
	And yeah, he just cut me off from then on and we never actually spoke.
	And that really hurt me deeply because I valued our relationship and wanted to see it blossom really and that never happened.
	So that was the second offer and the only offer that I've ever had.
	There's rarely any retreat back into the friend zone.
	I know.
	I mean, the woman was like, well, let's just pretend this never happened.
	And, you know, in a sense, but for a man to sort of, I don't know, as the old phrase goes, to make his intentions clear in that way, you can't, you know, you can't go back.
	It's like going back to grade two after you've graduated from grade three.
	It's tough.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Now, tell me a little bit about the guys around when you're in your early 30s, right?
	And you sort of talked about guys with baggage, guys with kids, guys, I don't know, maybe with STDs, guys with divorces, you know, shattered, alimony, pillaged remnants of former masculinity.
	I mean, what's floating around?
	If you were to think about trying to settle down at the moment, what are the pickings like out there?
	So...
	I spend a lot of time at work and so the people who I work with I feel fall into two categories.
	A lot of them are either in long-term committed relationships and the ones who aren't, like myself, I feel it's a very stressful environment.
	And for me, it's difficult for me to look beyond them as colleagues, as work colleagues.
	And I believe if I did put in effort, maybe something would blossom with some of them.
	But I feel...
	I don't know.
	I feel as though we're very, very different.
	And...
	And because of that, I feel the relationship would, it would be very challenging.
	And when I say I'm different, I mean in terms of my values and what I would prefer and what to strive and work towards.
	You know, a lot of people are happy with, from my friends and from the people I work with, I've seen that, that they're happy with just casual relationships and just to see how it goes.
	Whereas I... Would like to go into something where I know that they are looking towards commitment and looking towards marriage and stability.
	This is what I want more than anything else.
	And I feel as though having a casual relationship, it won't fulfill me or it won't meet my needs and therefore I won't make it a priority.
	And that's probably where I haven't been opening myself up.
	Does that make sense?
	It was a fairly elegant non-answer, but I'll take it for what it is.
	Of course, if you're in your early 30s, the time has passed for casual relationships if you want to have a family, right?
	I mean, if that's at all of interest to you.
	Eggs are getting dusty on the shelf and time to get those puppies rolling into action if they're going to be doing anything, right?
	So, you know, the best before date is looming.
	And so, yeah, I mean, it makes perfect sense that you wouldn't want a casual relationship at this point.
	But the question that sort of You had mentioned that the guys who are more interested in you now tend to be older and with, I guess, a few strikes against their sexual market value?
	Yeah, so things like divorces and things like children from previous relationships.
	And yes, and again, that's not really appealing.
	It's like, oh no, I have to take on somebody else's unfinished work and now I have to make it work.
	And I feel, yeah, it's tough.
	Yeah, you get to hang with the ex-wife, maybe.
	While you try to parent her children.
	Exactly, and be a stepmother.
	Oh, no.
	Yeah, and I've been on the receiving end of that, and I feel it's a very difficult job, and it shoots to fail.
	Yeah, I mean, I'm sure I'm going to get flack from step-parents, and I'm sure there are wonderful ones.
	A wonderful one out there.
	But it's a thankless, impossible, masochistic task, in my humble opinion.
	Now, if the kid is like a baby when you become the stepmom, and that's a different thing.
	But especially after the age of sort of three or four or five, you can't ever be the disciplinarian because you're not my mom.
	I mean, you can't do it.
	It's a thankless, thankless task.
	You pour more time and energy and resources and emotions into parenting than the actual parent, Would ever need to.
	And it doesn't get you the kind of loyalty that blood bonds get in general.
	So it is a brutal and thankless task.
	And, you know, the Franken families, I don't know.
	I don't think that they work super well.
	You know, there's this sitcom modern family where there's, I guess, one of these Franken families, right?
	Like there's the guy, Jay, and then his curvaceous playboy bunny of a wife and her brother.
	I don't know, sort of gay son.
	And she's from Colombia, and he's white, and it's just, I don't know.
	It's just a man.
	He's really old and she's, I guess, in her 30s or whatever.
	And Sofia Vergara, I think, is the actress's name.
	And, you know, it's a cute sitcom.
	But, of course, you know, goofy dads and smart wives and all.
	I mean, it's all the usual garbage.
	But, yeah, these Frankenfamilies, I think it's something that the media likes to portray as positive to...
	To, I guess, up the sexual market value of single moms?
	I don't know.
	But I don't think, you know, call me old-fashioned.
	Call me an old-fashioned mammal.
	But, you know, why not just fall in love with someone, get married and have kids and stay with them?
	I mean, it seems like that's the really positive thing to do.
	And, you know, so many of us have seen your, you know, unfortunate case, of course, with your mom.
	And if your mom died young and you get a lump...
	That's a pretty alarming scenario, of course.
	And it doesn't work.
	It's sort of my upside.
	You can sort of hang it on together and you can stitch around things and you can kind of make a go of it.
	But I don't know.
	Evolution worked because of blood loyalties.
	And I think it's really tough to substitute that with Franken-family ideology.
	So, yeah, I can understand your hesitance about wanting to get involved.
	And especially because it's not just the kids, right?
	The guy's been through a divorce.
	He's going to be kind of gun-shy.
	The ex-wife can drag him back into court at any time for more X, Y, and Z. You know, she may poison the kids against you.
	You know, he may poison the kids against her.
	I don't know.
	You could get wrapped up in all this ancient historical family bloodthrone disaster, Game of Thrones hell.
	And I don't know.
	It just...
	Why?
	Why?
	Why would you want that?
	Yeah, and especially as I feel, I've been very careful not to get myself into situations where they didn't look good at the initial stage, so I've kind of kept my slate clean, and I feel as though I probably would be better off with someone who's maybe,
	I have no idea what I'm trying to say, but all I'm saying is that I don't want to get myself into a situation from the get-go that I know will be Very challenging or a hopeless case.
	Well, I mean, especially you don't have experience in this area.
	Yes.
	And, you know, that has its strengths, of course.
	I think that really has its strengths for the stability of a relationship with somebody else who doesn't have a lot of history or baggage.
	But, you know, I don't...
	I don't get into grandmaster chess challenges because my chest is not that great.
	My chest is not that great.
	And so you don't want to get into the most complicated aspects of relationships coming in as kind of a newbie, right?
	Now your, and I hate to use this term, sexual market value, obviously it's kind of coarse, but that doesn't mean sex.
	That just means partnership, marriage material, wife material, mother material, and so on.
	It's very high.
	It's very high.
	And I sort of want to put this out there Not just as a sort of ad for you, Anna, but also just...
	We've done this...
	The Truth About Sex presentation and the more marriage partners a woman has, the more likely she is to divorce whoever she marries.
	And it's dose-dependent.
	Oh, yeah.
	No, I mean, if you marry a virgin, your odds of staying together for the rest of your life are extremely high.
	You know, once you start getting into, you know, 15 or 20 or more sexual partners the woman has had...
	Your odds of getting divorced are very high.
	Very high.
	So, you know, you bring a great treasure to a relationship.
	This, of course, is not talked about because it goes against leftist hypersexual narratives or hypersexualized narratives.
	And also, you know, we can't have women feeling bad about their choices ever, apparently.
	Men have to feel sorry about an imaginary patriarchy until the end of time, but women can't ever be faced with the potential for regret about anything that they've ever done because, I don't know, equality?
	Who knows?
	So I just wanted to...
	I just want to point that out, that the fact that you haven't had sexual partners makes you a highly desirable partner in terms of stability.
	However, of course, you know, the lack of romantic experience, and I'm not talking about sexual technique or anything, but just sort of, I was going to say the ins and outs of romantic...
	That doesn't help me either.
	But, you know, the sort of thrust and parry, no, that doesn't help either.
	The complicated machinations that sometimes can occur in all relationships, I mean, that you have less experience with that.
	And I would imagine that finding a less experienced man in your age category, not to mention older, is...
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	If not downright impossible.
	Now...
	In a scale of 1 to 10, Anna, how much do you want marriage, family, kids, that stuff?
	Yeah, I'd say maybe a 9, 9 or 10.
	Oh, good.
	Okay, good.
	Good.
	All right.
	And that's only going to go up, right?
	Your body is going to be like desperately producing all baby misty sobbing hormones.
	It's so weird.
	You know, where was I at the other day?
	I have to invent some excuse as to why I was thumbing through a celebrity magazine.
	What was it?
	Oh, yes.
	Yes, that's right.
	I was at a gym and there was a celebrity magazine there and I was flipping through it.
	And I came to the back.
	I don't know if you've ever seen these, but there's like these really heartbreaking ads in the back of these magazines.
	And they're kind of new.
	I don't remember them when I was younger.
	And the ads are like, Rosie is a realistic baby.
	She moves like a baby.
	You can have her smell like a baby.
	This is not a toy.
	This is a collector's item.
	And it's just like all...
	You can cuddle...
	A robot baby.
	And I was just thinking like, oh, how sad for the birth rates of the West to the point, have plummeted to the point where you don't have any grandchildren.
	Are you serious about that?
	No, I'm serious.
	You don't have any grandchildren, but what I can do is I can sell you for $200 a very realistic baby simulacrum.
	A robo baby can be yours for the low, low price.
	And it's like, that's so sad.
	That's so sad.
	You don't see that with cats because people actually have cats.
	In fact, the few of the babies often, the more the cats.
	But there is, you know, that is rough.
	That is a rough situation to be in, to want the kids and to not get them.
	Now, of course, you're still young enough.
	You can make it happen and turn it around.
	Now, I can't tell you The mechanics of how to land a man.
	I can tell you some of the things which you know.
	I mean, we're a smart woman, right?
	You know.
	Spending all your time at work.
	Probably not a good thing.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	Right.
	Yeah, it's like a guy I knew when I was younger.
	His mom wanted him to get married.
	You know?
	Wanted him to have kids.
	I want grandchildren.
	Get me some grandchildren.
	I want grandchildren.
	And then...
	She'd phone him up and she'd say, hey, I just cooked some hamburger helper.
	You want to come down and eat it with me?
	And then he'd go down and she'd like, oh look, Murder She Wrote is on.
	Do you want to watch it with me?
	And this would sort of go on and on.
	And, you know, there were lots of places where there were young ladies that this man could have approached, but none of them were in his mom's apartment.
	And that...
	You know, and I see you saying, he's like, I'd like to date.
	You know, it's like, well, then you have to resist the urge if your mom's cooking.
	You have to, you know, bite the bullet and cook some hamburger help yourself and then go out and fight someone.
	Yeah.
	So, yeah, all your time at work, you know, work romances, as you know, they're dicey, they're complicated.
	Yeah.
	And they may well be frowned on in significant ways by the organization.
	And, of course, if it doesn't work out, it's, well, you know, I don't have to tell you any of that.
	So, yeah, spend less time at work.
	Now, how you go about meeting people, I assume you have hobbies or interests or things that you like.
	And you can, of course, join groups to meet other people who have, you know, those selfsame kind of interests.
	And so, you know, just trying to find like-minded people.
	I don't know much about internet dating.
	But I think if you're a woman on the internet, you have a significant edge, just in terms of interest.
	You're one of the three real people on these dating sites who's actually a woman.
	You just have to go out and you have to state your objectives, right?
	You don't get the raise 100% of the time if you don't ask for it.
	Usually, right?
	And so, you know, you go out, you see a guy you like, you say, hey, want to start a family now?
	You see a guy you like.
	So what are your thoughts?
	What are your thoughts about scaring people away by that, i.e.
	coming across as being somebody who is, I don't know, maybe needy, maybe desperate, which I feel...
	Honest.
	Yeah?
	Honest.
	No, listen...
	Here's the lowdown.
	And listen, I spent some time in the dating world.
	I'm very happy to not be in that dating, but I spent some time in the world.
	Here's the reality, Anna.
	What you want to be is direct.
	And the wonderful thing about being direct is it drives complicated people away from you.
	It's like verbal mace.
	Because there's nothing more complicated and nothing more depressing than spending your whole life trying to guess what the hell's wrong with someone who won't tell you.
	You know, like, come here, slam some cupboards.
	What's the matter?
	Nothing.
	Oh, great.
	Here we go again.
	Now I get to play 20 questions.
	I get to play insanity archaeology.
	And I get to try and figure out what is going on with this person that they won't tell me.
	And it's so boring.
	And it's a way for people to get attention through negative economics, right?
	Through being difficult rather than being...
	Being positive.
	And so, yeah, if you go up and you're clear-eyed and direct.
	Now, sure, you will scare some people away.
	Absolutely.
	And that's great.
	So, you know, people who love this sort of Jane Austen fog of indirectness, yeah, they all bugger off as soon as you come up and you're direct and straight and honest with them.
	Good.
	That means you don't have to waste time on dates to find that out, right?
	Okay.
	You be how you want to be in a relationship and whoever likes that We'll stick by you.
	And whoever doesn't like that, well, you've just saved a lot of time.
	You've just saved a lot of time.
	Just the facts, right?
	State the facts.
	I had this, I don't know, this is an odd lesson to mention, but when I was, I guess, in my teens, I lined up all night to buy some Michael Jackson tickets.
	And I wasn't a Michael Jackson fan, but I sold the tickets.
	And when people would phone up I think they were on the 16th row or whatever.
	And I would sort of say, oh, the 16th row is still pretty good.
	You can see everything.
	You can do this.
	And people were like, I don't know.
	And why?
	Because I was like, not just being direct.
	I wasn't just saying they're in the 16th row and letting them make the decision.
	Trying to oversell.
	Just give the facts.
	Just give the facts.
	And here's the other thing that is important to know.
	Let's say, if you scare off everyone but the person you want, you've done a great thing.
	All of sales is getting past the nose to get to the person who's going to say yes.
	Any sales, like if you're trying to sell something big and complicated, you've got to talk to 100 people or maybe more before you find someone who's eventually going to buy it.
	And if you could say to a sales person, I'll get you past the 99 people, get you to the 100th person, people are like, whoa, that's great.
	Especially the people who pretend that they're interested and suck your time up and all that.
	So, yeah, you want to scare people away who aren't interested in your directness, in your honesty, in your bluntness.
	And that's number one.
	And number two is that if you scare men away, then you're actually in exactly the same position as you are now.
	What have you lost?
	Right?
	I mean, you don't have a man in your life anyway.
	You're not on a trajectory towards becoming a wife and a mother.
	So if you scare a man away, what have you lost?
	Well, you basically have exactly the same amount of sperm proximity as you have now.
	I think one of you has.
	I made you gain more experience in trying to defer any future ones as well.
	So I would have gained nothing but experience, which isn't a bad thing.
	It's a pretty good thing, I think, yeah.
	Ah, you know, 95% of success in life is just not giving a damn if you're rejected.
	You know, and it's easy for me to say, you know, I'm happily married and all that.
	But, you know, that didn't all come about.
	On its own, you know, just getting over the fear of rejection is very important.
	And what about using this illness as a liability and being viewed as though that's, I don't know, what are your thoughts on that?
	Well, I mean, it kind of is, right?
	I mean, I don't think there's any way because it's one of these illnesses that may recur, right?
	And, you know, the chemo and the radio are themselves carcinogenic, right?
	So it is a challenge.
	And that's, in a way, the challenge for you then to be that much more wonderful.
	Like, I mean, the stuff that I put out there in the world is, you know, somewhat controversial and difficult for people and sometimes makes their lives more difficult.
	So my challenge is, well, how do I get people to listen to want to talk?
	Well, I just have to be really, really good at getting it across, you know, entertaining, engaging, charismatic, whatever, jokey, whatever it takes to get the message across is what counts.
	So the fact, I wouldn't be nearly as good at what I do if my message wasn't as controversial because I wouldn't have to be.
	So you have to be a great enough potential partner that somebody will say, yeah, I'll take that risk.
	Okay.
	It's a challenge, right?
	It's a challenge to become greater, not take me as I am with the subtraction of a cancer history.
	But I have the cancer history.
	Stack that against all these great attributes and make your decision.
	And just keep adding to the great attributes until the decision becomes pretty clear.
	Fair enough.
	Fair enough, yeah.
	Because I feel as though I am a fun-loving person.
	Some interesting hobbies.
	I have, you know, I know how to form good relationships, not romantic as such, and so I feel it's more about trying to make myself vulnerable and be open to rejection or be open to failure or going into a relationship which may not work, but at least I have given it my best shot and have opened myself up because,
	you know, in my 31, 32 years, I definitely have seen that many of the things I have succeeded in have come after I've Put myself forward and open to failing.
	And so I suppose it's also being able to see that as, apply that maybe in this aspect of my life, yeah.
	Now, it's interesting because you used the word needy and you used the word vulnerability.
	And I gotta tell you, let me give you a short rant and then...
	You can tell me what you think.
	I tell you, Anna, I'm really, really beginning...
	It's not because of you.
	Nothing to do with you.
	I'm really beginning to dislike this word vulnerability.
	Because it's talked about like it's some great thing in a relationship.
	And...
	Vulnerability, like, you know, I'm an open wound.
	I don't mean it in that sense.
	I mean it more that I'm a complete person and I do have some defects, you know?
	I've had this illness, but at the same time, I am so strong in other aspects of my life.
	I have overcome, even apart from the illness and before that, I have overcome so many things.
	And despite that, I'm not bitter and I'm not angry and I'm taking that under my chin and I want to progress.
	And above all, honestly, for me, I feel as though I have a lot to offer.
	I have a lot of love to offer.
	I have a lot of positive things, which I feel can only be better if I share it with someone, apart from my friends and my family.
	Okay, well then that's not vulnerability.
	Now, if you mean by vulnerability, stating your desires openly, that opens you up to rejection, but so what?
	I mean, it also opens you up to acceptance and love and, you know, all of these wonderful things, you know?
	And, you know, every time you drive, you might get into a crash, but what is your alternative?
	To hitchhike and risk somebody else driving?
	So, yeah, just the vulnerability aspects...
	Maybe I'm just sort of reacting to the intense girlification of the culture, but when I was growing up, male vulnerability, oh, you've got to express your feelings, you've got to be vulnerable, and it was just this propaganda that was sort of shot like soft, fuzzy, puffball, cheerleader, baton, and poofball cannons at the male heart.
	And, you know, men are not particularly good at vulnerability.
	Or to put it another way, throughout history, men that were very good at vulnerability tended not to breed very much.
	And I don't...
	Vulnerability...
	And again, it's fine.
	You know, from time to time we all stumble and we all need to be picked up and there's nothing wrong with that.
	But vulnerability is a virtue.
	I just...
	I'm just thinking of Melania Trump or whoever it is, Margaret Thatcher, people that you, where was their vulnerability and so on?
	Does that mean they don't have feelings?
	No, but I don't know, just this idea that to be vulnerable is somehow a positive thing.
	It seems to me that the idea of vulnerability was put forward so that sadists and mean people could figure out where they could best hurt you.
	Tell me where it hurts so that I can hurt you more.
	I'm always concerned about this question of people who hold vulnerability as a very high value.
	And again, I understand what you're saying.
	It's not exactly what I'm saying, but I can't stop mid-rant.
	I'll dislocate my jaw.
	So, yeah, just the vulnerability thing.
	No.
	Don't be vulnerable.
	Be successful.
	I mean, if Donald Trump had cried, would people have voted for him?
	Come on!
	It could be this vulnerability thing.
	Yeah.
	So, you know, be strong.
	Be powerful.
	Be a warrior.
	And, you know, there's no reason why you as a woman can't do all of that as much as a man.
	But just, you know, be honest.
	Be direct.
	State what you want.
	State what you need.
	And give people the perfect freedom to say yes or no to you.
	And you'll be really surprised when people have the freedom to choose you.
	You know, in other words, you say, well, you know, you could go up to a guy if you've known him for a little while and say, well, I would really like to...
	I would like to take you on a date.
	I want to take you on a date.
	And I find you very interesting, very compelling, attractive, and all this that and the other.
	And I'd like to get to know you better.
	And then you go on the date and you talk about your damn values because that's what matters at this age, right?
	That's what matters at this age, not what they took in college or what their favorite color is or how many pets they had.
	It's like...
	What are your values?
	Because if we're going to make a homebrew new human being, it would be nice to do so with some synchronicity in what we believe about things that matter.
	So those would be my suggestions.
	And you have to, if you want it, I suggest, Anna, you have to make it like this is it.
	This is your job.
	Your job, find a man, get married, get pregnant.
	No, seriously.
	You didn't wait for your education to happen, did you?
	No.
	No, you studied your universities and you sent off your applications and you did your interviews and you made it happen.
	You didn't just sort of say, well, maybe some books will drift through my window and fall open and I'll find them interesting or whatever.
	You made it happen.
	And when it comes to love and to romance and so on, I mean, first of all, of course, throughout history, a lot of times we were just paired off, right, with other people.
	And this still happens a lot in the world.
	You know, there's horrible stories about these kids betrothed to each other at five years of age in other cultures or other countries and so on.
	So we're not necessarily very well constituted to figure out who our best partners are.
	But, you know, as an intelligent woman, and you view this as this is it.
	This, you know, family is to your 30s what education was to your 20s.
	You would...
	You make it happen, right?
	Gosh, I've never thought of it that way, but yeah.
	Yeah, it does make sense.
	You know, human life, the creation of human life is a little bit more important than just a degree.
	I'm not denigrating education or anything like that, but Make it your job.
	And of course, we don't tell people this.
	And it's a real shame.
	We don't tell women this in particular.
	Women should be hearing this like a steady drumbeat from their early teens onwards.
	Fertility declines.
	Fertility declines.
	Make it your life goal.
	Make it your life goal if you want it.
	And I look at my familial setup and I look at my mother and her sisters and my siblings and it's...
	I won't say the relationships were arranged, but they were directed.
	And I feel for me, and for my generation, it's very different in that I find myself, I don't have a lot of guidance, and I'm meant to make sense of it all.
	And all I see isn't what I want to get to.
	And so I'm confused in a way.
	I know what I want, but I don't see it around me.
	And so it feels like I'm aiming for something which I haven't even visualized.
	Yeah.
	Well, I mean, you know, you have a vision of what you want, right?
	A man who loves you, a baby sleeping in your arms and all that kind of stuff, you know, with compatible values and all these kinds of good things.
	So you know what it is that you want.
	And, you know, we're built for that.
	And we've been built for that for billions of years, unlike higher education, which kind of grafted onto us more recently.
	So we've got good instincts around all of that.
	And if you have a network of friends...
	Which I'm sure you do.
	I do, definitely.
	If anyone in the world likes you in any way, use your friends.
	Say, you know what?
	Anna's ready to breed.
	I'm nesting.
	I'm limbering up.
	I am taking photos of my boobs so that I can remember what they look like in the before picture before I trip on them.
	Anna's ready to breed.
	And I need your help.
	Because, you know, I need you.
	You know my values.
	You have other men that I've not been introduced to.
	You know their values.
	You know, help me out.
	Help me to get together with someone who's going to be great for me just as I'll be great for them.
	And that's, you know, make it not just your mission, but make it your tribe's mission, your family's mission, your friend's mission.
	You know, I mean, we give a lot to friends and you've I'm sure bought a lot of birthday and Christmas presents in your time, so maybe they can, you know, bow tie up your husband and ship one over.
	Sure, sure.
	Yeah.
	All right.
	Is there anything else you wanted to ask or chat about?
	No, that's all.
	That's all.
	Thanks very much.
	I've definitely gained a lot of clarity from it, so thank you.
	Make it a plan.
	You know, you've got a project at work.
	You draw it all up.
	You put it in Microsoft Project or whatever.
	Make it a plan.
	Give yourself a schedule and, you know, You'll be able to make it happen.
	So thanks.
	And you'll let us know how it goes?
	I will do.
	Thanks very much, Stefan.
	Much appreciated again.
	Thanks.
	Great chat.
	All right.
	Bye.
	All right.
	Up next, we have Al.
	Al wrote in and said, Is all the dogma that all races are the same and that intelligence is determined solely by culture slash education bad for people of color?
	That's from Al.
	I have a color.
	It's pink and spotty.
	Hey, Al.
	How you doing?
	Hey, Steph.
	How you doing?
	I'm well.
	I'm well.
	How you doing?
	Pretty good.
	Would you like some context to that question?
	Never!
	Yes, yes, of course.
	Please, context me away.
	Yeah, okay.
	So I tried to put it as blunt and abbreviate it as possible for the sake of easy digestion.
	But basically, I would like your advice because I don't entirely think of myself as an intellectual.
	But nevertheless...
	I want to make it my ascribed life's purpose to participate in ending anti-racist dogma, which I see as the great evil of our era.
	And maybe you're very well aware of this, but There's a strong tradition we have at this point of banging our heads against the wall, getting embroiled in these scientific, rationalist disputes with mainstream academics.
	And so, because of this, I've sort of developed this shtick in my head about how to unlock the hearts of the masses to wean them off the dogma simply by Appealing to a universalist moral argument for dumping the dogma, which I see as being basically an open secret at this point that it's false.
	So I was wondering if you could maybe riff on this and tell me is this insane or what?
	So your goal is to end The presumed egalitarianism of racial characteristics that matter, right?
	Everyone accepts certain races are taller and shorter and so on.
	But you're talking about IQ and cranial capacity, brain size, brain weight, white matter, the stuff that counts more in the free market.
	Is that what you mean?
	Sure.
	For me, my big fixation is on...
	The uneven distribution of traits which induce, for example, tendencies of cooperation and empathy and altruism, which I see as important markers for adding value to society and success succeeding in life.
	Right, right.
	Now, which are the ones that you think are the most egregious, right?
	Do you sort of pick your battles?
	Which are the clichés or the tropes or the misinformation that you would most like to overcome?
	I mean, I would say simply the entire locus of social, cultural, and institutional structures which are predicated on the idea that, as you know, The idea that basically meaningful evolutionary differences stopped in the human population like 50,000 years ago.
	Right.
	But that's a general category, but which specific?
	Say that there is variation in tendencies towards unconditional cooperation or effective empathy.
	Right, okay.
	Well, you know, this question of, it's a fallback position, and it's not yours, but to just speak generally, I get this question a lot.
	Okay, so there's truth X, whatever it is, right?
	And people will initially say, well, you know, truth X is false, and then you sort of take them through, and okay, it's true.
	But is it helpful?
	Is it useful?
	Is it positive?
	Is it kind?
	Is it nice?
	And I don't follow that.
	I kind of get why people would want to say that.
	Because these kinds of truths can be uncomfortable for people and it can be difficult for them to deal with the emotionality if they've been propagandized and into believing things that are false when the truth comes along.
	And again, I don't want to sound too repetitive, but it seems kind of girly.
	Like, I never...
	When I was younger and I would come across startling truths, I never once thought to myself, is this nice?
	Is this helpful?
	So it just seems like a backup defense.
	Like, what you're saying is false.
	And now I prove that it's true.
	Well, it's not helpful.
	Who the hell are you to say what's helpful and what's not?
	And when it comes to something like racial egalitarianism, yeah, it's kind of important.
	And I don't ever remember anyone saying when, you know, this stuff comes up about, you know, white privilege and, you know, whites are racist and, you know, white culture is racist and all that.
	I don't remember anyone either, A, trying to prove that it was objectively true, or B, asking whether it was helpful or productive or nice to white people to say that.
	Yeah, but what I'm sort of getting at is, I mean, could we maybe make some perhaps utilitarian argument for dumping the dogma on the basis that, you know, these anti-racist cultural institutional structures are rewarding maladaptive traits and, you know, in essence keeping them on life support where they'd otherwise be, you know, gently expelled from the gene pool at a more like a gradual rate?
	Oh, you mean like, so the welfare state pays less responsible people to have more children while taking away resources from more responsible people?
	So you're talking about, like, without the addition of government money, Then sexual market value of people would decline without the additional government money that they're getting and then over time they would have fewer kids voluntarily and peacefully and all that kind of stuff.
	Not to mention affirmative action and certain double standards of etiquette and so forth which are rampant in our society.
	Right.
	Well, I think unquestionably it's bad For groups to be pandered to.
	I mean in the long run.
	But the problem is of course that groups that like to be pandered to don't generally think of the long run very much.
	Yes.
	That's one of the challenges.
	To be more specific, and we've talked about this before on the show, but the destruction of the black family under the welfare state is horrible and has robbed black children of a stable and productive environment, have robbed black children of their potential in many cases.
	Now, an intact black family may not do an enormous amount to close The IQ gap between blacks and Ashkenazi Jews or blacks and East Asians or whatever, it may not do a lot to close it, but it's okay in a way because emotional intelligence, emotional maturity, the capacity to defer gratification, they're not solely based on intelligence.
	If you grow up in a sort of stable family, Then you're more likely to be successful.
	That's the old thing.
	Would you rather be a smart person with crazy parents or a person of average intelligence with great parents?
	Well, in terms of life happiness, I think the latter would be the way to go.
	And so it's not all about how much money you make or whatever life happiness.
	I'd rather be of average intelligence with great parents than of high intelligence with terrible parents.
	Not that that choice is going to be revisited upon me.
	It is, of course, terrible if you look at women.
	So single moms, statistically there are some indications that they tend to be less intelligent than the average woman.
	And if you are less intelligent, you need more clear social cues on what to do.
	On how to live.
	So you need Praise and punishment.
	You need reward and ostracism from your society if you're less intelligent so that you'll make better decisions.
	Because you can't see around the pretty proximate hill of consequences to what comes afterwards.
	So you kind of need all of that, right?
	Which is why in the past you would say to young men and young women, no, you have to get married before you have sex.
	Because...
	Because this were a lot of reasons.
	We all kind of know why.
	So you have to get married before you have sex.
	And if you don't do that, like if you go and sleep around, then you'll be unmarriable and your life will be ruined.
	So the carrot we have is a happy marriage and the stick we have is ostracism and destruction of your sexual market value and this general Victorian slide down into the gutter.
	And you needed that reward and punishment system because a lot of people who aren't so smart will read the social cues without really understanding why and just say, well, I don't want to be ostracized and it's painful to be rejected and so I won't do it.
	I don't really understand why, but I just won't do it.
	And so you need those guides of approval and disapproval that come from society in order for less intelligent people to make better decisions.
	Now, when the government steps in and starts handing out money, like candy on Halloween, to all the people making irresponsible decisions, what happens is they completely short-circuit and shut down social ostracism as a method for enforcing better decisions among the less intelligent.
	And that is the great tragedy for society and for the less intelligent because then they end up miserable.
	And if you've ever known any single moms, happy in general they not be.
	And it is very harmful for them because Without the accumulated wisdom of smarter people guiding us to make better decisions, which means we have to have private, voluntary ostracism and reward as the method of enforcing better social decisions.
	Without that, people just act on impulse, you know, the old saying, act in haste, repent at leisure.
	People will just go and make these terrible decisions, you know, like having A kid or kids with an unstable guy who's not able to provide or going to the prison or whatever it is.
	And then, by the time the consequences of that accrue, then it's so much of a disaster that's so unrecoverable from that I think we've really taken advantage of Those less intelligent people, we've bought their votes in return for ruining their lives by removing the social cues that would have helped to make much better decisions.
	Okay, so that's very interesting.
	What I'm sort of trying to understand though is if our objective, sincere empathy for these more maladaptive individuals could be used to Like, disarm the cultural elites and the trendsetters and the moral authorities of our civilization.
	Because I feel like...
	Oh, but man, no, no.
	No, they don't.
	I'm sorry.
	No, it won't work.
	It won't work.
	I don't think it'll work.
	But don't they...
	No, no, no.
	I'm sorry.
	I'm sorry for being such a dick.
	But this is important.
	I mean, continue.
	No, and I'll tell you why, and then you can tell me if you think I'm completely wrong.
	Which I could be.
	Yes.
	But I'll tell you why.
	Listen.
	The elites are not motivated by compassion for blacks.
	The elites are not motivated by compassion for gays or for women or anything like that.
	The elite are motivated And the political elite in general.
	And I think there's a countermeasure to this.
	I'm talking about the general lefty collectivist stuff and including the rhinos and all that.
	And I think there's a movement.
	I'm not including the Trump.
	I've got to have the asterisk.
	I never used to have the asterisk before Trump.
	And now there's an asterisk.
	There's Trump and there's other people in Europe.
	Marine Le Pen and so on.
	They're motivated by sadism.
	They're motivated by hatred.
	They're motivated by loving the fight that they are creating.
	Look, think of someone like Angela Merkel, if you dare.
	I mean, Europe as a continent is preparing for war.
	In Sweden, prepare for war.
	In France, prepare for war.
	This is perfectly predictable and has been predicted by many people.
	So why would they set up the conditions where this kind of conflict seems virtually inevitable?
	Well, for the same reason that people who like watching cockfights put two angry cocks in the same arena.
	They love to watch the fight for the same reason that people who want to go and watch other people punch each other in the face, go to see boxing matches or MMA or whatever.
	Yeah.
	Now, that's all voluntary.
	You know, that may be driven by excitement, but this political thing where it's actual war that's being provoked, it's because they hate us and they love watching us suffer and they love watching us fail and they love watching us fight each other.
	It's fun for them.
	It's fun for them.
	It's what gives them their kicks.
	It's what gives them their...
	I don't know if it's sexual.
	I don't know if it's emotional.
	I don't know.
	I don't know what it is.
	But they are not motivated.
	Now, they know we're motivated by concern for the less fortunate.
	They know we're motivated by protecting women, and so they'll use that.
	But the empirical evidence is piled up so much that they don't care about these things.
	Look, if you cared about the poor, why on earth would you be bringing massive reams of third-world immigration into the country if you cared about the poor in your country?
	Because it's driving down wages enormously, destroying opportunities.
	If you cared about homosexuals, why would you be bringing in rabidly anti-homosexual ideologues into your country?
	Why?
	It would make no sense.
	If you cared about the poor, wouldn't you at least think about revisiting the welfare state, which has not solved the problem of poverty, but made it far worse.
	It's made it now permanent.
	Poverty used to be a temporary thing, in general.
	I mean, you know, for people who are still mentally.
	You make some bad decisions, you blow some money on wine, whiskey, and song, and you need some help, and then you get back on your feet.
	Because the whole point of that charity was to help get you back on your feet!
	Now it's become a permanent underclass of people who've been stripped of all human dignity, of all human potential, of all of the necessary skills of being able to survive in a marketplace.
	Done and dusted.
	Scoured.
	You'd think they'd be revisiting that.
	They don't care.
	You'd think the 20 trillion dollars in debt in America, 10 of which were accumulated under Obama, though not all because of his decisions, but a lot of the spending that's not open to anyone's choice, right?
	Non-discretionary spending and all, right?
	But you think that, of course, right?
	You know, when the banks are teetering on the edge of disaster, when the European Union is shredding itself, when Europe is facing the greatest existential threat in its history, in its history, you think people would be...
	No!
	No!
	They love watching us suffer.
	They love it.
	They can't stop.
	It's an addiction.
	This kind of Pan-civilizational sadism.
	They are very disturbed, hateful, and destructive individuals in general, the political elites in particular.
	And yeah, they love it.
	I mean, what kind of sadism can you imagine it takes in a human soul to bring a bunch of violent people into a country And then, when the violence is committed, act most aggressively against those who have a problem with that violence.
	That is exquisitely, like talk about putting you in a corner in a no-win situation.
	You know, rapes in Sweden through the roof, violence in Germany through the roof, violence in Austria through the roof because of the migrants, because of the welfare migrants.
	And rather than say, wow, what a terrible mistake, we better get these people back to their home countries as quickly as possible, because it's not working out here.
	Instead, you pass more and more laws and prosecute people more and more who point out basic facts about the reality of the situation.
	Facts have become the enemy.
	That is so sadistic.
	It's literally like locking a man in a room with a tiger.
	And then saying, if you show any fear to the man, you say, if you show any fear, I'm going to shoot you in the leg.
	This is not politics.
	This is not democracy.
	This is not governing.
	This is like a Saw movie of impossible choices.
	So no, pointing out that the elite's policies are not helping women or blacks or Muslims for that matter.
	No, that's the whole point.
	They don't want to help.
	They want to watch the world burn.
	What if signaling compassion is the articulation of power in the language of, you know, taking power?
	What?
	I don't know what that means.
	What does that mean?
	I mean, for example, okay, so they pay lip service to the idea of, you know, making the world better for everyone, equitable, minimizing human suffering.
	What if pursuing this angle is like staring them in the eye until they look down?
	And they need to make us happy, otherwise they lose their power.
	How do they lose their power if we're not happy?
	I mean, they're in power because they add economic utility to all of our lives.
	I mean, isn't that how people get rich?
	The elites are in power because they add economic utility to each of our lives?
	To what we think is economic utility.
	Okay, that's not the same thing, right?
	What we think of and what something is.
	Yeah, maybe it's smoke and mirrors, but I feel like, nevertheless, that us thinking that it's a zero-sum game and we're trying to spit upwards at our oppressors, I feel like this gives us guilty consciences and therefore sabotages our efforts to prevail.
	Because we feel guilty.
	We feel like we're, you know, pariahs when really we're trying to fight something very evil for everybody.
	So we feel that we're guilty because if, let's say, we trim back the welfare state, that people dependent on the welfare state might suffer for a time?
	Is that what you mean?
	I suppose, yeah.
	I mean, with, for example, the alt-right, they feel like, you know, it's a zero-sum game and There's not enough to go around.
	We don't have enough in our pockets in terms of psychosocial capital to fight on behalf of all mankind.
	We feel like it's us trying to fight our way out of the corner.
	And this is, I feel, a self-defeating, self-sabotaging mindset.
	We feel guilty.
	I don't know that I've...
	I'm no expert on the alt-right, but I don't know that I've ever heard anyone say that, you know, boy, if we had more resources, we'd be happy to be the world's policemen or to pursue globalism or anything like that.
	I think it's not a matter of we're limited by resources, therefore we must regretfully withdraw from globalism.
	It's just that globalism is the ultimate collectivism, and a nation-state is much more individualistic than this sort of one-world government...
	Globalist fantasy, you know, Europe survived wars, you know, whether it survives the European Union is questionable, right?
	So it's not, well, if we had more resources, we'd love to have sort of one world government.
	I don't think that's the argument that they would make.
	More resources don't make the impossible possible.
	Yeah, but they're sort of saying, I mean, it seems implicit and dispositional that to...
	To feel like we're fighting for, you know, white people, Western Civ, is a zero-sum game.
	Cooperation is not going to get us anywhere.
	Not resource sharing, per se, but cooperation.
	And, you know, fighting is a...
	Wait, sorry.
	Cooperation with who?
	With what?
	I don't know what that means.
	With our other races, for example.
	In terms of ending...
	Cooperation with...
	Yeah, to end the anti-racism.
	To end the dogma.
	Right.
	Yeah.
	Well, look, I mean, there are certainly many very, very intelligent blacks who decry the welfare state as solidly as, you know, the most fervent libertarian.
	So, you know, that's...
	But, I mean, the general reality is that the ideas don't matter as long as the money's still flowing.
	The ideas are just in preparation for when the money stops flowing.
	Money flows according to images, right?
	What people think...
	No, money flows according to math.
	No, no.
	Money flows according to math, right?
	So when the money runs out, and it will, and not long, right?
	When the money runs out, then we have to be prepared for a different world.
	And we have to have laid the foundation, I think, we have to have laid the foundation for what's supposed to happen when the money runs out.
	Because when the money runs out, things can either get a whole lot saner, or they can get a whole lot crazier.
	Yes, they might be forced economically.
	Yeah, look, you can either go Venezuela or you can go some other route.
	Like, you can either go late Roman Empire or you can go some other route.
	Like, in the late Roman Empire, the government hated its own money so much it wouldn't even take it in payment for taxes.
	So, yeah, so we have to just lay the foundation for, okay...
	When the money runs out, which way do we go, right?
	Do we double down, which is the leftist reaction?
	Or do we get saner?
	And everyone knows, like, this is one of the things that motivated, I think, people to look towards Trump is, like, everyone knows, another eight years, like, how could the U.S. sustain a $40 trillion debt on a $15 trillion economy?
	I mean, that's post-Japanese style, right?
	But without all of the multicultural money hogs that Japan at least doesn't have to face, right?
	Japan has to face underpopulation, not multiculturalism.
	So, yeah, I don't think any particular ideas are going to change much.
	The minds of the people in power, what's going to happen is, you can't, mere words don't stop the tsunami of free money that comes out of the Fed.
	And free money makes people insane.
	Free money just makes people mental.
	And, you know, just go to any neighborhood and just start sprinkling $50 bills around and see what happens.
	I mean, people will go crazy.
	You think we just have to sit and wait until a year's zero?
	Did I say sit and wait?
	What did I say?
	Well, I mean, what can we...
	Do we just simply wait for the...
	No, what did I say that we should do?
	I don't know.
	Point our fingers at the elite?
	No.
	I said that we have to put out the right ideas so that when the state runs out of money, we make better decisions.
	We move towards reality.
	I agree with that.
	But, I mean, I'm almost wondering if...
	This is simply us being emotionally addicted to our, like, emphasis on direct, rational arguments without understanding different psychological factors, some of which are biased in favor of the dogma of racial sameness, into being inert in regards to changing things.
	Maybe we're addicted to, you know, Shouting upwards and pointing our fingers upwards rather than trying to communicate and cross semiotic gaps.
	Well, sure, yeah, listen, I mean, I put good arguments and good information out there in the world, and I do that because I think it's going to make a real positive difference and help things out and so on.
	Yeah, but, I mean, just think about it from the elite's perspective.
	Right, I mean, what American politician would ever want to open his mouth about differences between ethnicities?
	Nobody would, not in 2016.
	No, good lord.
	I mean, why?
	Why would you bother?
	All that'll happen is you'll be attacked, condemned, ejected from power.
	Your reputation will be besmirched and vilified.
	I mean, look at Joseph McCarthy.
	What does everyone think of Joseph McCarthy?
	He was a crazy anti-communist who imagined things that weren't there.
	No, he wasn't.
	He was right.
	He was right in very significant portions of what he said.
	And this has been revealed since in the 90s under the Venona Project, as Ann Coulter talks about in the book Treason, great book, you should read it.
	The Soviet cables have been partially decrypted and a lot of the people that were accused by Joseph McCarthy of being Soviet spies were, don't be shocked, Soviet spies.
	Right?
	So, I mean, people have, and this is, you know, the FBI was for years trying to get someone in politics to do something about Soviet infiltration of The American government, particularly the State Department, right?
	I mean, and nobody wanted to touch it.
	And then what happened was Joseph McCarthy took it on.
	And they basically hounded him into an early grave.
	He died in his 50s.
	And his name has been smeared and vilified for the past 60 years.
	So why?
	And that wasn't even as explosive as differences between ethnicities.
	So why?
	Yeah, this is much more loaded.
	Well, yeah, I mean, and then, well, can you blame the voters, right?
	Because who controls the narrative right now in society is the mainstream media.
	Educational establishments and the mainstream media control the narrative.
	They can make or break people as they see fit.
	What if we're just like the...
	No, go ahead.
	I mean, two points here.
	So what if you're comparing us to McCarthy, but what if, you know, what if history has sort of turned on its axes and we're the ones who were like the underground communists of the late 40s?
	And moreover, what if the elites are imperfect and what if they're actually kind of like us, just only there at the top?
	What if they're not sadists?
	What if they're only sadists in as much as everybody's a sadist?
	I don't know.
	We can play the what-if game forever, but we're not like the communists in the 1940s, and the communists in the 1940s already had Russia.
	And we're about to get China in the late 40s and Eastern Europe after the Second World War and then Cambodia and then they had to go for Vietnam and all of that.
	So yeah, we're nowhere near as close to the power structures that they had.
	But no, that's just my basic point is recognize that the leaders are who they are.
	And don't have any preconceptions.
	I try not to.
	Well, if I was looking at this, as I've mentioned before, I was very impressed by writing that I read many, many years ago around the time of Voltaire.
	And this is partly because they brought these sort of people over from the natives over, or the indigenous population over from the New World.
	And they tried to sort of describe the French court and French society and British society through the eyes of these...
	Well, I guess they would call them savages from the New World and so on.
	And it's a great way to look at your own society.
	It brings a lot of creativity and objectivity to that.
	It's a mental exercise.
	Just saying, okay, and say, well, if you were a space alien and you were an anthropologist studying your society and looking at the decisions that were clearly disastrous, clearly disastrous, and yet endlessly defended and so on, well, why would you do it?
	Why would you do it?
	Well, you know, the CIA really, really hates it when anybody interferes with American elections, but the European Union was to some degree the brainchild of the CIA and so on.
	So, yeah, you would just look and say, okay, well, what would the motivations be of people creating these kinds of disasters and looking as hard as they could to prosecute anyone who criticized any of the root causes of these disasters?
	Well, clearly they want the disasters to happen.
	Why do they want the disasters to happen?
	Well, what kind of personality inflicts pain and suffering Unnecessary pain and suffering on other people.
	Who puts them in impossible and dangerous situations and then punishes them for complaining.
	If that was a parent, right?
	If it was a parent who put a child in a very dangerous situation and then punished the child for complaining about it or wanting things to be different, I think we would recognize that that would be a pretty sadistic parent, right?
	So just look at it that way.
	You know, maybe I'm wrong.
	Maybe I'm wrong.
	But that's certainly...
	How I would approach things.
	So I'm going to move on to the next caller.
	Thank you so much for your call.
	It's a very interesting topic.
	Have a good night.
	Thank you.
	Bye.
	All right.
	Up next is Renan.
	He wrote in and said, As an international student from Brazil attending college in the United States, I am consistently targeted for supporting Donald Trump.
	My peers, especially other international students and new immigrants, don't seem to understand that Hillary Clinton stands for everything they fled when they came to America.
	My question is, how can we better communicate with the immigrant community and help them understand that they're only voting for what they fled?
	If America represents a new life for them, why would they vote for the same type of corruption they left behind in the first place?
	That's from Renan.
	Oh, hey, how you doing, man?
	I'm good, how are you?
	I'm well, I'm well.
	So what kind of stuff are you getting from these international students?
	What's the general narrative?
	Well, I guess the general narrative is that, you know, why would I support someone that, you know, wants me not in this country or that says that Hispanics are, like, bad people and shouldn't come here?
	And I just, I really just don't buy that narrative.
	Right.
	And what do you think they want from America?
	I assume it's America, right?
	Right.
	Well, I think what they want is, you know, just from, like, just from my perspective, you know, like in Brazil we have Um, like free healthcare, I guess, you know, if you want to call it and we have like free education or whatever, we have free colleges.
	So a lot of people that I know from Brazil will come to the United States and they will support people such as, you know, Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton, because they think that, you know, they can believe that in the United States you pay so much, you know, intuition and you pay so much in healthcare.
	And I just, you know, my thought, like every time I'm, um, Every time I'm talking to one of those people and I say, you can't have the best of both worlds.
	I don't think that you can choose to come to the United States and still want to have all the things that you left behind because you left all those things behind because you gave so much power to those governments.
	Now they have so much power over you and that power has corrupted them.
	That's why you came here.
	So why would you want to give the same type of power to the US government?
	And what do they say?
	They just, you know, they don't understand that.
	They say, but well, you know, like, there's just so much money available.
	You know, the United States spends so much money on, say, you know, the military, and I really think that, you know, the rich can afford to pay for, like, people like me to go to college for free or to subsidize my health care and other things like that.
	Right.
	So, there's this feeling of just, like, infinite resources, and why should American taxpayers pay for the foreigners to come in and take their money?
	Yeah, that's exactly it, you know, and I keep telling the same thing to, you know, all my friends and family back at home, because, you know, the idea in Brazil is that, you know, I'm sure, you know, I've seen your video when you went to São Paulo and gave a talk there, and, you know, I'm sure that you saw the communities there where, you know, the rich are pretty much, you know, excluded from everybody else in their gated communities and all that stuff.
	So the idea in Brazil is that we pay so much in taxes, we pay so much in tariffs that we should expect good education, we should expect good health care from the government.
	And, you know, people just, you know, they don't think that, you know, maybe if we didn't pay, like, any money in taxes, or if we just decrease, like, you know, all the taxes that we pay by, say, 5% or 10%, then maybe we wouldn't want, like, you know, we wouldn't expect all these things from the government.
	Like, we shouldn't expect all these things from the government.
	But, you know, that's the idea that people have there, and it's just, it's never going to happen.
	Right.
	So white men, I guess the majority of taxes paid in America is paid by white men.
	So white men are just this infinitely productive resource that they should get stuff from, right?
	Yep.
	That's the idea here, yep.
	Right.
	Is there any sense of reciprocal obligation?
	Is there any sense of like, well, you know, I'll take this money now, but I'm going to work to create businesses or create jobs or whatever to...
	Make up for the money that I'm taking now?
	You know, everyone that I talk to or people that I used to talk to, I never heard them say, you know, like, yeah, I guess I'll take some money now, but I give it back later.
	You know, it's always like, you know, you've got the white people who are, you know, supposed to be like the, you know, the greedy people that, you know, take all the money from everybody else.
	And, you know, they were just, you know, they were born with, you know, all this like wealth because, you know, it was stolen.
	Right, okay, so it's like Robin Hood, they're stealing it back.
	Yeah, yeah, pretty much, so it's like it's justified, you know, like it's justified that we should take it back from the white people or whatever.
	Right, yeah, and this goes back to sort of the earlier topic we were talking about where the question of why are some countries rich and Why are some countries that are poor?
	Well, the general Marxist or socialist answer is that white countries are rich because white people, white men, of course, exploited and robbed resources and overthrew governments and took all of this wonderful stuff, all of this wonderful wealth from other countries and that's why.
	And so, you know, it's sort of reparations, right?
	You come back and you take stuff from white men because in the past white men took stuff from your ancestors and that's the only reason there's a wealth disparity.
	Is that how it generally would go?
	Yeah, pretty much.
	And it really frustrates me because I chose to come to the United States because I wanted to get a better education and I still want a better life for me and for my family when I decide to have one.
	And when I see all these people talk about how it's the fault of the white men because they have too much because they inherited all this wealth.
	And I'm thinking, that's just not the American idea.
	That's just not how This country was founded.
	If you chose to come here, then you should just work hard to get what you want.
	For me, that's the American idea.
	It's just working for what you want, not really expecting the government to provide it for you.
	Well, of course, but then that challenges the narrative, right?
	Oh, absolutely.
	Because if white males got money, some white males got money by working hard and being productive, then the question is, for people who don't have money, why didn't you?
	Yep, absolutely.
	Right.
	And then that leads people to, well, other cultural differences, other brain differences, their IQ differences, or whatever, and that is...
	That is a challenge, right?
	I mean, I don't feel that I got robbed of a ballet contract at any point in my life, you know?
	There are men who go out there and get ballet contracts, and they do that because they're really good at ballet.
	I am not good at ballet, and I don't think that they stole my ballet from me, right?
	Yep, that's exactly right.
	I mean, fortunately, I've been really successful throughout my journey here in the United States.
	I came here about four years ago, and I decided to study accounting.
	And, you know, I just, I got really good grades and I got really good internships.
	So for me, it's worked out really well because I just, you know, I put my mind to it.
	I put all my effort in and so far it's worked out really well.
	But that just, that's just not how, you know, other people seem to see the United States, especially immigrants and other international students.
	Right.
	Right.
	You know, I don't know.
	I don't know.
	Like one answer could be that we try and find some way to communicate to people I guess the people that you know and get them to understand something about the world that it would be very costly for them to understand.
	Right.
	I mean, if you want stuff for free because you think you deserve it because your ancestors were robbed by the ancestors of the people who have money now, the white males or whatever, and then if that narrative is taken away from you, then you have to go out and compete.
	You have to go out and try and...
	Right?
	And if you...
	If you could compete, probably what you would have done is do what you do, right?
	Which is to go out and compete, right?
	Right.
	That's exactly right.
	So, if they could compete, they would have competed.
	And the reality is they can't compete.
	Now, if they can't compete, what's going to happen if they don't get lots of free stuff?
	Then they're going to go broke or they're going to go bankrupt.
	They're going to be out of a job.
	And are they going to say, well...
	I guess I made a mistake about the source of wealth, and so I'm either going to go back home, or I'm going to knuckle down and work, or are they going to do that?
	Wait, I'm sorry, can you repeat that one more time?
	Well, are they going to say, well...
	I'm not able to compete because I'm not particularly good at what it is that I'm doing, so I'm either going to have to go back home or I'm going to have to knuckle down and really learn how to be good at something so that I can compete effectively in this new environment.
	Right, exactly.
	They're going to have to learn something new and try to compete with other people so that they can stay here and survive, I guess.
	Or are they going to scream racism until they get what they want?
	Right.
	That's exactly it.
	I mean, that's usually what ends up happening.
	There's not enough, say, black people in this master's program that I'm in.
	So it must be that we're racist.
	We're not admitting enough black people into the program.
	But the reality is that are there even enough people that want to be part of this program, that want to pursue this program?
	Is the labor force there?
	There's just so many variables that people don't look at, especially when you talk about women and women not being able to find jobs or not being paid as much as men.
	And there's just so many variables that go into the equation.
	And the first variable that people look at is, oh, women, they don't get paid as much as men do because we're racist, because we're just a racist society.
	But the reality is, like you say in most of your videos, a lot of women, they just choose to have a family or maybe work part-time.
	And people just don't seem to, you know, look at all these different variables anymore.
	Look, I mean, if I could nag people and have tantrums and people would give me job opportunities and keep me employed and give me bonuses and raises and free money and free stuff and, you know, it's the old thing, you know.
	If you're a parent and your kid has a tantrum because they want a candy bar in the store and you give in to that tantrum, And give them the candy bar in the store, you're paying the child to have a tantrum.
	And whatever you buy, you tend to get more.
	Whatever you pay for, you tend to get more of.
	And so, yeah, I mean, if people get more resources by having tantrums and screaming racism and sexism and phobia this and whatever that, okay, well, then you're going to get more of it.
	I mean, because people respond to incentives.
	Yep, that's exactly right.
	So, you know, until those incentives change, I don't know, you know, this is back to the earlier caller's comment, you know, until the incentives, until the fundamental financial incentives change, what does it matter what people say?
	It doesn't, because they're just going to keep doing what they're doing now, and the incentives are going to be coming, you know, the fund is going to be coming to the schools, and it's just never going to stop.
	Yeah, so like if I were to say to you, like let's say you order something for me from Amazon, right?
	And I say to you, hey man, I can either have this delivered to your house or I can have it delivered to the post office 50 miles away.
	And it's the same price for both.
	What would you say?
	I'm going to say have it shipped to my house.
	Of course!
	It's the same price.
	And you get much more benefit.
	And so, yeah, people respond, there's not one person I can imagine who's saying, who would say, no, no, no, I'd love to drive 50 miles to go pick this thing up and you're willing to drop it off at my house for free.
	So if you can get stuff for free, you'll take it.
	Why wouldn't you?
	Now, if I say, you know, it's an extra 500 bucks to deliver it to your house, or you can, like, then you might weigh it or whatever it is, a hundred bucks or whatever it is, right?
	But, you know, if you get much more benefit for the same price, of course, right?
	And if you can just have a tantrum, And you can get free stuff.
	What's the point of arguing against free stuff?
	It's like saying to someone, no, no, no, you should really go pick it up for the post office.
	No one's going to do that, right?
	Yep, that's exactly right.
	Today I feel like there's this idea that anyone and everybody can go to college and they can just get whatever degree they want and they can come out of college and find a $70,000 job straight out of college, but Look at some of these majors that people are graduating with nowadays and it's LGBT studies or you call it history.
	They complain that they can't find a job and then they blame it on, again, the fact that student loans are too high.
	They can't pay them back, so they're going to go bankrupt.
	We need to take more money from the white people because, again, they're the ones to blame.
	I just feel like it's just a vicious cycle.
	Yeah, and the lies are sustained by lies.
	The lie of fiat currency and the lie of infinite government debt and the lie of infinite resources is sustaining the lie of absolute egalitarianism between ethnicities and cultures and genders.
	You can't fight against well-funded lies because people follow incentives.
	We're designed to gather resources.
	We're not designed to pursue the truth.
	And if you get a bunch of free stuff for believing in certain things, well, then you're going to believe in certain things for the most part, right?
	Now, you are smart enough to get more stuff by competing than by being on the receive again, so you're doing that.
	And I'm not trying to say that there's no reward or no honor in what you're doing.
	There is.
	There absolutely is.
	But the reality is that there is incentives behind what you do as well.
	Absolutely.
	I know that we're all looking for the magic words that can change people's minds and have them act against their own incentives.
	As I get older, which I know is not an argument, but I'm just telling you As I get older, I don't think those magic words exist.
	I think you have to lay the foundations, wait for the house to collapse, and move everyone someplace new.
	It seems to be the only solution that we have, because I have a lot of friends, a lot of American friends, I studied abroad in Germany and England and Italy.
	They all come back with this idea that, oh my gosh, America is so bad.
	I can't believe that I have $50,000 in student loans.
	Everyone in Europe, they go to college for free and they get all this stuff for free.
	Why can't we be more like them?
	It's so frustrating for me because I left Brazil to come here to pursue a better life.
	And yet, all these people are like, no, we need to get more free stuff.
	We need more government.
	We need to tax people more.
	Because it's justifiable.
	Because they do it in other countries, so we can do it here.
	And I always try to bring up the fact that if you look at the major companies that have been created, most of them were created here in the United States.
	And I feel like there's a reason for that.
	There's a reason why half of the world wants to come here.
	But none of them seem to realize what it is that's so special about Yes, and the great tragedy is that, first of all, of course, Europe is not exactly flourishing because of its free stuff, right?
	Free stuff for migrants!
	That's not helping Europe much at all.
	So I think Europe at some point is going to recognize that there's a reason why no successful culture has had a welfare state since The end of the Roman Empire.
	And since the welfare state contributed so strongly to the end of the Roman Empire, well, Let's just say that it's just one of these lessons civilization has to learn every couple of thousand years that it seems like a good idea to have a welfare state, but it will destroy your entire civilization because it just creates so much wealth for people who come in who don't share your culture that your culture gets diluted and all the principles which maintain your freedoms get dissolved into the asset of neediness of other cultures and other approaches and so on.
	And so, yeah, Europe is, you know, not, I don't think it's going to look like such a great thing in a couple of years or maybe even sooner.
	So that's important.
	The other thing, too, is that by offering all this free stuff to people, you're diluting their potential.
	You're taking away the cues which would have had them work better.
	Stronger.
	Work more effectively.
	Work more efficiently.
	And of course you're taking their productivity and creativity away from their own countries and bringing it to your country where it gets dissolved in the acid of free goo.
	So it's tragic all around.
	It's just that people still associate it with kindness and we have this kind of girly inability to see people suffer anymore.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	And, you know, when we can't see people suffer in the short run, then they'll suffer a lot more in the long run.
	You know, it's like the parent who says, well, I can't take, you know, my child has a toothache, but I don't want to take my child to the dentist because the dentist will cause my child to suffer.
	It's like, well, then what happens is what?
	Well, your child is going to suffer a lot more, right?
	I mean, the rot could go into their jaw.
	It could, right, go into their heart valves, you know, the bacteria or whatever, right?
	So, It's a lot worse, you know, and you have to accept the little death of suffering to avoid the big death of massive suffering, and we've kind of become so squeamish now that we simply have lost this ability to see people suffer, except men.
	You know, if men get drafted into a war, well, that's just noble and fine and right and how things should be and so on, but we have kind of We've gotten soft and we don't want to see people suffer.
	And so because we don't want to see people suffer, we will end up with a lot more suffering in the long run.
	And again, that's just the kind of lesson that people have to learn.
	You know, dieting is suffering.
	But if you don't diet, you know, you die of a heart attack sometimes.
	And so a little suffering is essential to prevent the big suffering.
	And we've just kind of forgotten all of that.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	And I think that's an important distinction to make between, you know, immigrants that are coming, or I guess I should say refugees, you know, certain immigrants that are coming to the United States today, and the type of immigrants that were, you know, they used to come to the United States, say, in the 1950s, because, you know, like you said, in your previous videos, before immigrants would come to the United States with the idea that, you know, they would work hard, and they would, you know, They didn't come here with the expectation of getting free stuff.
	And that's such an important distinction to make because today we have the welfare, like you said, and a lot of people want to come to the United States because they know that the moment they arrive they can have five, ten kids and they'll get a bunch of welfare, food stamps and other benefits.
	So for them it's a win-win situation.
	You can't say that because immigrants were coming here freely back in the 1950s or the 1850s or whatever, that it's the same thing as people coming in now.
	But you see, a welfare state only works with a high IQ population.
	Correct.
	Because a high IQ population, as you know, May take welfare state in an emergency, but they know that in the long run, their high IQ will get them far more income in the free market than they can ever get from the welfare state.
	Now, a low IQ population is very different.
	A low IQ population knows that they're going to get far more money from the welfare state than they ever could get from the free market.
	And it may not even be low IQ, it may just be language differences, cultural differences, whatever it is, right?
	And so when you have a welfare state, it's bad enough, though not the end of the world, In a high IQ population.
	Because there's also the regression or progression to the mean, right?
	So let's say you have some woman who's not too smart, you know, has an IQ of 85 or 90.
	And let's say she's an East Asian woman.
	Well, her kids are more likely to be closer to 100 in IQ. In the same way that they'll be less intelligent than the average, but more intelligent than her.
	In the same way that a genius's kids are usually more intelligent than the general population, but less intelligent than the genius.
	Like a tall guy's kids are taller than the general population, but shorter than the really tall guy.
	And so, in a welfare state, there is a natural progression to the mean.
	So, let's say someone's so dumb that they end up in the welfare state, well, their kids are going to be likely more intelligent and therefore get out of the welfare state.
	But if you have a low IQ population where the average in the population of IQ is like 85 or 90, then those kids are still going to grow up and say, well, I'm going to get more money.
	It's probably an unconscious process, but I'm going to get more money out of the welfare state than I will out of competing in the free market.
	Right.
	So the welfare state with a high IQ population is not great, and it's definitely dysgenic, but it's sustainable for a lot longer.
	But when you get masses of low IQ populations coming into a welfare state, it drags the whole damn thing down.
	Because the rational calculation is always that...
	The rational calculation in general...
	Is that it's more profitable to stay on the welfare state.
	And this is one of the reasons why multiculturalism can't work.
	I think multiculturalism can work among groups that are similarly constituted in IQ. Which is why, you know, among white people where there is on average 100 IQ, white people can sort of all move to America from, you know, Spain and Greece, Portugal and the Netherlands and Switzerland and France and you name it, right?
	So all white people have the same average intelligence as a whole.
	And so they will come to America and they'll generally end up with a society that has similar IQs and therefore you've got multiculturalism because Lord knows there's lots of variety of languages and cultures and customs and histories and all that in Europe.
	But when you get disparate groups then what happens is unless the disparity is understood then you end up with all this tension, right?
	So if you look at sort of...
	East Asians, Koreans and so on in black neighborhoods, right?
	Well, the black neighborhoods, like the ghettos, right?
	Well, the convenience stores, the dry cleaning stores or whatever, they're owned in general by the East Asians.
	And that's considered to be a bad thing because the IQ disparity is not understood.
	So there's a lot of resentment.
	People who don't understand East Asians, you know, high IQ in particular and in particular fast reflexes and even more in particular...
	Spatial reasoning, very high.
	It's one of the reasons why there are so many Chinese and Japanese and Korean engineers and mathematicians.
	Spatial reasoning skills are very, very high.
	Unlike Ashkenazi Jews, where they're very high verbal skills, lots of writers and cultural icons and so on.
	But spatial reasoning is not that great, which is why there aren't that many in architecture and engineering and so on.
	And so if you understand these differences, then you can look at the disparities between racial groups.
	And you can say, okay, well, this kind of makes sense.
	I don't resent it, if that makes sense, because, you know, it's just, you know, if you don't have a great singing voice and someone has a great singing voice and they end up with a career as a singer, you don't resent them because you understand that they have a better singing voice than you.
	I mean, you might resent them, but it wouldn't really make much sense.
	Correct.
	But if we're told that everyone's equal, then when the natural disparities among groups of different IQs and different abilities and so on When those naturally start to play out in the free market, everyone starts screaming bigotry and society collapses eventually.
	And so this is why, you know, when I talk about group differences in ethnicities and so on, of course it's not meant to tell you anything about an individual, of course, right?
	But I say this because I wish to, you know, we're all jammed in here together.
	We're all cheek by jow.
	We're all in the same areas at the moment.
	You know, lots of different ethnicities, lots of different groups.
	Now if we don't start to figure out these group differences, we're going to tear each other apart.
	This is a plea for peace.
	This is a plea for understanding.
	This is a plea for facts.
	I want us to be able to get along.
	Because if we can't get along, there's going to be a whole lot of unpleasant not getting along going on for a whole long time.
	And so we need to get these facts across.
	I know it's painful.
	I know it's difficult.
	But this is the little suffering that is much better than the big suffering that's going to come afterwards.
	I am desperate for multiculturalism to work because I don't think it can be undone or how that could even possibly happen.
	So we're stuck in this multicultural, diverse environment.
	And the only chance that we have to find a way to even remotely make it work is to understand the differences between groups.
	Maybe we can work to remediate them.
	Maybe there's things that we can do to fix it.
	I don't know.
	But the first thing you have to do to solve a problem is to admit that you have a problem.
	And if we can understand group differences between ethnicities, between males and females, right?
	Then we have a chance to live together where different groups are going to be doing different things at different levels of abilities, right?
	Then at least we'll look at that and say, well, there's some reasons for that.
	Yeah, okay, women get paid less than men, but a lot of women choose to stay home, and therefore their husbands are paying their bills.
	They stay home with kids or whatever.
	Their husbands are paying their bills, so they're actually getting paid a lot.
	We just don't see it.
	Right?
	So...
	Or, you know, okay, so there's more men than women at the highest levels of intellectual achievement, but that's because the male IQ bell curve is flatter, right?
	I mean, there's more men at both extremes of less intelligence and greater intelligence, and women are clustered more around the middle.
	So we can say, okay, well, so there are more men at the highest levels of intellectual achievement, and there are more crazy homeless men.
	Right?
	And so if we can sort of look at these group differences and say, okay, I can understand this.
	It's not all racism, sexism, bigotry, whatever is going on.
	Then we have a chance to live together in peace.
	And that is called enjoying differences or at least accepting differences.
	But if we think everyone's the same as the left wants us to believe, everyone's the same and all group discrepancies are the result of bigotry, Well, then we are toast and multiculturalism is going to dissolve into the same civilization, destroying disasters that it always has in the past, but we have a chance now for the truth that can bring not necessarily immediate comfort, but the potential for long-term peace, which I am desperate for.
	Yep, I completely agree with you, but I just feel like, do you think, given the situation, you know, Donald Trump being the president, which, you know, I'm really happy about, do you think that we'll ever get to the point where we can actually Understand those differences between, you know, groups and men and women because it just seems like everybody is just so divided right now.
	You know, if you can't even, I mean, I don't know how it is in Canada, but here in the United States, you know, you can't even, the moment you bring up politics and, you know, you bring up either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump or a conservative or liberal, you know, everyone is just like up in arms and they're screaming and yelling at each other and it's like you can't even have a conversation.
	Right.
	I don't know.
	You're asking me to predict a future I'm trying to shape.
	All I can tell you is that I'm trying to be as honest and as helpful as possible to the world.
	I can't control whether people will listen.
	I can control what I say.
	I can control how engagingly I put it and place words in people's minds, what they do with that afterwards.
	That's up to them.
	And you're asking me to predict the consequences of free will.
	And all I can do is work as hard as possible to bring as much peace as possible to the world.
	And whether people listen or not, I've done everything I can.
	The rest is up to the ears of the people around.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	And I think you're doing a fantastic job.
	I've shaped a lot of my opinions on globalism and multiculturalism.
	Culturalism just by listening and watching your videos.
	I try to get the idea across to people that we're not all the same and that there are differences and we can't just bring everyone into America and expect us to all work together and function together.
	I mean, here at my university, there's this big, I mean, especially from the international office, there's this big push for, you know, we're all equal, we're all the same, you know, doesn't matter where you come from.
	And, you know, to an extent, I do agree with that because, you know, I do come from a different country and people have accepted me, you know, who I am and where I'm from.
	But, you know, I also believe that I share a lot of the same values and beliefs that a lot of Americans have.
	And I think that's what's helped me be so successful here in the United States.
	But a lot of people, you know, they come here And they want to be treated equally, but they just don't share the same values and beliefs that a lot of Americans have.
	And I think that that's a problem.
	I think the diversity of color or where you come from is not as important as what you value and what you believe.
	If you come here and believe in Sharia law, if you come here and think that if I don't believe in Allah, then my head needs to be cut off, then we have a problem.
	Yeah, I guess you could say.
	I don't think that they want to necessarily be treated equally, though.
	I think that they want free stuff that other people have to pay for.
	That's not wanting to be treated equally.
	Well, listen, I hope that helps.
	I appreciate the question and the comments.
	It's always a good thing for people to understand sort of why it is that I think these topics are so important.
	I am desperate for The greatest potential for diversity and multiculturalism to work out against all the evidence of history.
	And the only way that's going to happen is if we accept the true differences between groups and drop the cries of bigotry and resentment wherever these differences show up.
	Otherwise, we're just going to tear each other apart.
	And so thanks very much for your call.
	I appreciate it.
	Let's move on to the next.
	Alright, up next is Sean.
	Sean wrote in and said, What do you think of the current sexual education policies within the United States?
	That's from Sean.
	Yeah, yeah.
	I don't know.
	What do you think, Sean?
	Well, uh, let's just put it this way.
	My school actually wasn't too terrible.
	Um, but, uh, it's, uh, It's something that's always kind of been in the back of my mind as far as something that could be improved as far as education.
	But the main problem with, say, sex ed is right now, I would say most people are in public education.
	Since that's run by the government, how good a job could they really do?
	Yeah, I remember being in sex ed, right, in Canada, and it was gross.
	It was really, really gross.
	And I won't sort of get into the details about it, but it's...
	Well, now you got me curious.
	Oh, do you want to hear?
	I mean, I can tell you.
	Yeah.
	I had to leave the class at one point.
	I was so grossed out.
	Well, because it was all...
	I don't know.
	Okay, here's a story I remember.
	I remember a story being told in sex ed about a woman who got some sort of venereal disease and sprayed Lysol on her labia and fused the skin together.
	So yeah, it was pretty gross stuff.
	And it's wrong all around.
	Sexuality...
	This is absolutely, in my very strong opinion, is absolutely not something that the government should be teaching to your children.
	I would completely agree with that.
	This is something that is the job of the parents.
	It's the job of the parents.
	It's the job of the parents.
	And I don't know what the hell the government is doing in there teaching kids about sexuality.
	I mean, of all the, you know, it's such a powerful and foundational part of life that the idea that the government would be teaching it to your children, I mean, I don't even, I don't even teach the government, I don't trust the government to teach children history, let alone sexuality.
	Oh God, I know.
	So it is, yeah, sorry, go ahead.
	Well, I was going to say, with history, when I was in school, one of our teachers when I was in high school, it was almost like one Friday, she didn't want to teach, so they asked for a, she was like, you know, how about a student teacher?
	And so that was usually my sleep period, because I'm fairly good at history.
	And so all the kids, well, all the teenagers in my class picked me, and I'm like, oh, come on, guys, I want to take my nap.
	Yeah.
	But they all wanted me to teach the following Monday because they learned more with me than they did with her.
	Right.
	Do you know that the World Health Organization advocates that sex education should teach masturbation to children as young as four?
	Ooh.
	That's a little young in my opinion.
	Yeah.
	You think?
	Well, first of all, what the hell is the government doing teaching masturbation?
	Secondly, who the hell needs to be taught how to masturbate?
	Thirdly, four, this is like, to me, this is like, it's close to pedophilia as a health, quote, health program.
	In 2013, Chicago was the biggest U.S. city to mandate sex education for every grade level, including kindergarten.
	Yeah.
	I mean, I can understand, say, middle school or something like that, but kindergarten...
	No, why?
	Why?
	Geez.
	Why should the government be teaching children about sex?
	Well, and the big problem I kind of have with that...
	When it comes to parents teaching their kids about sex education, there's both a...
	They can do it very well or they can do it not very well.
	But I mean, yeah, I agree.
	It's up to the parents.
	But if the government's going to teach them sex education, I mean, what the heck are they going to teach them?
	I mean, they can, if it's like And that's why, actually, I'm kind of excited about some of the ideas Trump has about education, which I didn't even think about this election until he actually brought it up in one of his speeches.
	When it comes to, say, them teaching kids about sex, if it's a Democrat or left-leaning or something like that, they're just going to tell them...
	You know, stuff about being maybe too promiscuous or, you know, having kids when they're way too young to have kids or when they're not ready.
	And then they get attached to the state and, you know, that helps their voting base, for one.
	But they can just make them a slave to the state, which, I mean, that's one of the reasons I kind of posed this question.
	Well, let me sort of...
	Give you a little rant, a little Christmas rant on sex education.
	Yeah, because I've had a chance to mull this over all day.
	And as a parent, right?
	I mean, it's just like the idea that some virtual stranger would be teaching my child about sex.
	Anyway, it's gross.
	It's gross.
	So, look.
	60% of pregnancies in America are unplanned.
	I don't even know what to say about that.
	Like, I don't even know what to say about that.
	But here's the thing.
	Society, the question is why do children need to be educated about sex?
	Well, and the answer is because they're having sex, right?
	And, you know, 23% of, you know, I think it's 15% of 15 year olds are having sex and 23% of those are not using contraception and so on.
	So my question is, excuse my French, why the fuck are 15 year olds having sex?
	Where are their parents?
	I mean, I know, I know, I know that we are mammals and we hit puberty and puberty is our signal to stop making more mammals and all of that.
	But dear God alive, where are the parents?
	Well, the parents are divorced, the parents are working, the kids are in daycare, or you've got this wonderful flesh pit known as the latchkey kids, right?
	Oh look, I've come home At 3.45 in the afternoon, my mom won't be home until 6.30.
	We have almost three hours unsupervised, and legally we can be left alone from the age of 12 onwards.
	Hmm, I wonder.
	15 or 16-year-olds, unsupervised.
	What could possibly happen?
	It's because the parents are gone.
	Right?
	It's because the parents are gone and the parents are gone because everyone said, oh, you see, well, becoming a mother is so boring and so pedestrian and so bourgeois.
	I want to go out and instead type numbers into a keyboard under fluorescent lights and that's my real fulfillment, not the nurturing and bringing up of human brains, human life and the cultivation of the human spirit.
	No, no, no!
	Minimum wage and customer complaints for me.
	So, the parents are gone, and that's largely the result of feminism and government programs designed to push women into the marketplace and so on, which hasn't raised family wealth and hasn't made women any happier since feminism came along.
	Women have become steadily unhappier.
	There's a reason why one in six Americans now has been on some kind of psychotropic drug at some point in their life.
	I mean, what the hell is wrong with this country?
	I mean, my big concern with Trump is, is there anything left to save?
	I think so, but it's a concern.
	So the parents aren't around, right?
	And when the parents aren't around, of course the kids are unsupervised.
	I mean, what kid, who under 40 knows what the word chaperone even means anymore?
	What it used to mean is that if you went on a date as a young man or a young woman, someone would come along.
	They'd be fairly unobtrusive, but they'd make sure that you wouldn't be having sex now.
	There was a rule in dormitories that you had to have a door open and the woman had to keep at least one foot on the floor at all times.
	It was an expulsion offense if you broke it.
	Society used to have A lot of control over teenage sexuality.
	Over teenage sexuality.
	And...
	So, that would be the province of the family.
	Maybe a little bit of the church in terms of teaching about sexuality.
	And this, of course...
	Was important.
	That's how it should be transmitted.
	Sexual value should be transmitted by the family, of course.
	Of course.
	I mean, the family, that they're only kids because of sexuality within the family, and therefore, you know, this is not, to me, that complicated.
	But here's the thing, right?
	So, in order to get women to go out to work, right?
	If women go out to work, and then they're, let's say they have a daughter, right?
	The women go out to work, and their daughters are unsupervised, and their daughters have unprotected sex and get pregnant.
	Oh boy!
	How does that career look now, mommy?
	Now that you have to spend a quarter million dollars raising your granddaughter from your 16-year-old daughter's loins, right?
	Suddenly it doesn't seem like such a good deal.
	They actually have a show about that in the United States.
	The teen moms thing?
	Yeah, yeah.
	Like 16 and pregnant teen moms.
	It's really embarrassing.
	No, I should grip my teeth and have a look.
	It might be...
	It doesn't look good.
	Let's say there's some woman out there.
	She's pulling home, I don't know, 30 grand a year after taxes, right?
	In five minutes, her daughter, who's unsupervised, can take 10 years of her salary to raise a child, right?
	$300,000 or $200,000, whatever it's going to be, depending on where you are.
	So suddenly it doesn't seem like such a good deal for the financial value of the family for the mom to go out to work and leave the child unsupervised.
	If the child ends up having sex and getting pregnant, then boom!
	Suddenly, you know, not so great.
	Not only does she have to raise a child, which costs a lot of money, but also her daughter is going to be Unmarriable.
	But that's how it used to work, right?
	Yeah.
	Because, and for two reasons.
	One, of course, is that she comes with a child and a liability and maybe an ex-boyfriend around who's surly and pimply and whatever it is, right?
	But secondly, because a failure to plan for pregnancy indicates that you're stupid.
	Now, it's not 100% correlation, but it sure ain't zero either.
	It means that you lack impulse control.
	It means that you're not smart.
	And therefore, it's a sign, it's an indication that you will not be a trustworthy partner or a high-value partner to have children with a lot of intelligence genes to pass along the mother's side.
	And so, every father to be, every potential father, wants A smart woman.
	Oh, men are threatened by smart women.
	No, no, no, no.
	Dumb women are threatened by smart women.
	But no, men want smart wives because then you have smart kids and your smart kids will do well.
	And smart kids are easier to raise.
	And smart kids are more obedient.
	And smart kids think things out better.
	And smart kids are healthier.
	And smart kids need less supervision and blah-de-blah-de-blah.
	So your job as a parent becomes easier if you have a smart kid.
	And to have a smart kid, you need a smart mom.
	And a woman...
	Who got pregnant without being married is, you know, indicative of low intelligence.
	And that, you know, again, it's not 100%, but what in this life is, right?
	So, I mean, you have to take your statistical odds where they are, and that would be a pretty strong indicator.
	So, in order to get women to go out into the workforce, which meant leave their teenage daughters unsupervised, the government had to say, oh no, don't worry, we'll take care of the kid.
	See, you can go out to work, and if your daughter gets pregnant, we'll take care of the kid.
	We'll pay.
	We'll pay.
	And then the beautiful thing that happens, and by beautiful, I mean god-awful, right?
	Yeah, because that always goes so well.
	Yeah.
	So what happens is, instead of...
	In reality, children are a massive financial liability.
	And that's how it should be.
	Because that's how it is.
	And that's how...
	We tried to make the world more intelligent in the past was children cost money and therefore people who have more money should have more children because if you have more money you're more likely to be smart than people who have less money.
	And this is how society improved.
	This is how people got smarter rather than now as we've had a recent expert on the show talking about people seem to be getting dumber.
	And, you know, we have an entire human population sustained by very smart people, and if those smart people run out, we will end up with a much smaller population and a whole lot of suffering.
	But that's not a topic for the here and now.
	So, when the government comes along with all their magic money printing press shit, what they do is they come along and they say, oh no, you see, children aren't a liability, they're an asset.
	You see, because if you have a bunch of children, which in reality cost you money, We will turn them magically from a liability into an asset because otherwise your sexual market value would go through the toilet and parents would panic and then the women would quit to be home with their teenage daughters and we'd lose all that juicy tax revenue.
	Right?
	So they need to turn unwed mothers into assets not liabilities so that they can keep women in the workforce and so they can continue to destroy The nuclear family and have people turn to the state for their salvation.
	So that is another reason why sex education has been taken from the family, is that unsupervised teenagers get up to all sorts of hijinks.
	How do I know?
	I was an unsupervised teenager.
	So this is the way of the world, right?
	Yeah, just watch the ice storm.
	But, I mean, the movie, not the thing that might happen outside your window any moment it looks like here in Canada, but...
	And so why does sex education even need it?
	Who cares about sex education?
	The only sex education that matters is don't have sex until you have a committed relationship.
	Don't have sex with people who are dumb.
	Don't have sex until you're married.
	Don't have sex until at least you're in something that could potentially lead to marriage.
	Don't have sex without protection, right?
	I mean, good God!
	This is not wildly complicated stuff.
	Don't put knob A into slot B until certain conditions have been met.
	Yeah, but that's not to say...
	Or at least two sexual activities that can't result in a non-divine intervention way in pregnancy or whatever.
	So, yeah, why has it been taken over by the state?
	Well, because it's been abandoned by the parents.
	And the reason it's been abandoned by the parents is because when...
	I was just writing about this in a new book, so I'll just keep it brief.
	And thanks for your patience here.
	I'll be done in a sec.
	Morality, in general, is crystallized wisdom designed to help people avoid making really bad decisions that they usually can't see ahead of time.
	And there's nothing like lust to blind you to the consequences of your behavior.
	I mean, lust has got a special category all its own to make people do completely crazy things and, you know, spend the next 20 years regretting them.
	And so, when those negative consequences vanish, morality looks just like Irrational prudery.
	Sexual restraint is important.
	It might be very valuable to hold off having procreative potential sex until you get married, right?
	Well, there were damn good reasons for that in the past.
	Because children are a huge liability, not an asset.
	They become an asset later, a liability for the first quite some time.
	But when the government steps in and takes over and children go from a liability to an asset, then sexual restraint looks ridiculous.
	Oh, you're so square, man.
	You're so stuck up.
	I'm so Victorian.
	Just like, let it loose, let it hang out.
	Make love, not war, you know?
	I mean, of course, because once you get the welfare state, then the negative consequences of having children, you know, they accrue later.
	They accrue later when as a single mom you realize you can't get a quality man.
	When as a single mom you like sob with loneliness into your pillow every night.
	When as a single mom you fear deep down that not having a father around is one of the reasons why your children are behaving so badly.
	It is one of these things that by the time the emotional regret shows up, It's usually too late to fix.
	And that's the cruelty of it, right?
	I mean, that's the cruelty.
	We need ethics to prevent people from making these kinds of decisions.
	And if the cues, the social cues, the economic cues in particular are taken away, then people still make those terrible decisions.
	But the drug of money prevents them from realizing just how bad these decisions are until it's too late to fix them.
	And the other reason why, of course, children, well, girls who grew up without fathers, we know, start to menstruate a year or two earlier than girls who grew up with fathers.
	You know, for obvious R-selected reasons, which I talk about in the excellent presentation series, Gene Wars, G-E-N-E Wars.
	And so, yeah, the state has kind of stepped in for a bunch of reasons.
	One, it hypersexualizes childhood, which is kind of an R-selected phenomenon.
	And also, they...
	The disasters of having Untended teenagers.
	And it doesn't just come from untended teenagers.
	I'm not saying all teenagers who are untended are going to have these kinds of problems.
	But if your kids were dumped into daycare pretty early on and grew up in institutions and so on, then they're going to have a loneliness.
	They're going to have an ache.
	They're going to have a sense of incompletion.
	They're going to have bonding issues and so on.
	Like the stat I've mentioned a bunch of times before, babies in daycare more than 20 hours a week suffer the same symptoms as babies actually physically abandoned by their mothers.
	And so, if you've got this hunger for connection, this dysfunction that comes out of being raised in daycare by a series of relatively uninterested and underpaid people, then, you know, sexual collision, our selected behavior...
	Brain-destroying lust impulses of the moment.
	They're all going to be rising up.
	For men, it often arises in compulsive criminality or rule-breaking.
	And for girls, it often shows up in promiscuity.
	I mean, both of these are impulse control problems that show up Differently for men than for women.
	For men it's violence or criminality.
	For women it's promiscuity and pregnancies and STDs and all that kind of stuff.
	All marks of highly dysfunctional mindsets.
	So yeah, the government loves to sexualize childhood and to take over sex ed because they'd rather have the parents out there working and paying taxes.
	And you know, To hell with the destruction that that wreaks on young people's lives, on pregnancy, and on the children.
	What do they care, right?
	I mean, and of course, once they have a whole bunch of single moms around, then they've got a reliable voting base for bigger and bigger government, right?
	I mean, I have yet to see the single mothers reduce the national debt organization.
	It doesn't exist, and I doubt it ever will.
	Married women want smaller government because their husbands pay taxes if the married women are staying home, but single women, they don't They don't pay taxes.
	They're massive net recipients on average of government largesse.
	So why the hell would they care about smaller government?
	I mean, it would be the complete opposite.
	Would you ever go into work and demand that your wages be lowered?
	No, of course not, right?
	It's not likely.
	So for all of these reasons and more, we've ended up with Teachers in the ungodly position of trying to instruct children about sexuality.
	It is beyond wrong at every conceivable level that I could imagine.
	If there was ever a good reason to keep your kids away from the brain-destroying vats of miseducation known as government schools, a lot of it would have to do with...
	Sexual.
	Education on sexual matters.
	It's not their goddamn business.
	You know, reading, writing, and arithmetic, that's all I want them to deal with, but they can't ever be limited to that and never stay that way.
	Yeah, they always seem to branch out in ways.
	When you were talking about single moms and kids being reliant on the government, all I could think of was the movie WALL-E, where they're always talking about big and large, the caretaker of your life and stuff like that.
	I don't know, it just made me laugh.
	But what would you say about...
	What would you say to parents who want to talk to their kids about this kind of thing?
	Which kind of thing?
	We've covered a lot of topics.
	That's true.
	Just about, you know, I guess sex in general, stuff like that, because, I mean, it's almost ingrained in culture at this point, you know, to have sex early and blah, blah, blah, and, you know, Not to participate in abstinence and things like that.
	So you're almost looked down upon by friends and things like that if you haven't had sex.
	So what would you say to parents?
	We'll tell parents to talk to their kids about...
	I know it's up to the parents, but what would you think would be the best way to go about it?
	Do you mean sort of teaching kids about sexuality as a whole?
	Yeah, yeah.
	Because, I mean, when it comes to any topic, really, the more information you have, the better judgment calls you can make.
	Yeah, I mean, I don't know.
	And I'm going to have to beg off on this one.
	I have had some thoughts about it, but not enough to give anything...
	That would be particularly useful.
	So, you know, I mean, obviously, age-appropriate honesty is the key.
	And, you know, kids don't need to know stuff ahead of time.
	I mean, you know, I'm not going to have my daughter go through my taxes or anything.
	So, yeah, I don't know.
	I don't know as yet.
	I'm still mulling that one over.
	So, you know, rarely for me, but I will have to beg off on that one.
	But, um, there is this kind of thing, you know, like where if, if the government isn't doing it, people sort of think, well, well then it, it, it can't possibly get done.
	Like it won't get done.
	Right.
	I mean, so people are saying, well, you know, uh, because there's no government education on sex, we've got 15 year olds who don't even know what menstruation is.
	It's like, what, why, why don't, don't their parents talk to them about these things?
	I don't know.
	I mean, I think that's kind of the job of the parents.
	And, you know, I'm sorry if the parents aren't doing that job.
	But why, you know, the children of responsible parents should be exposed to shocking information, inappropriate, I assume inappropriate information, because there are bad parents out there.
	I don't, that doesn't make any sense.
	Just get the parents out there to do a better job.
	Yeah, but it does boil down to IQ levels a little bit, too.
	Because parents and kids with lower IQ, they're going to make worse decisions on average than parents and kids with higher IQ. So it's hard to come up with an answer for things like that.
	I understand that.
	That's kind of why I asked the question.
	I wanted to see if you had any input on it.
	No, I don't as yet.
	This stuff also as a whole ties into the abortion debate as well, which is why do teens in the U.S. do so badly?
	Teens in the U.S. have higher numbers of sex partners than those in the Netherlands, France, and Germany.
	High rates of unplanned pregnancies, rates of curable STDs are higher in the US than any other industrialized country and even some developing countries and so on.
	And of course, none of this is normalized for IQ, right?
	I mean, none of this is normalized for IQ. And if it was normalized for IQ, I think it would be Would be different.
	And again, it's just one of these things that because people won't normalize for IQ, they assume there's a disaster and the best way to solve it is somehow to have government take over these things.
	Yeah, so as far as how to teach your kids about sexuality, I don't even know if there's a general approach.
	Is it different for boys or girls?
	Is it different before puberty or post-puberty?
	And is it different depending upon the child's particular personality and characteristics?
	I don't know.
	It could just be one of these individual things Between a parent and a growing child that may not be susceptible to specific instruction other than be honest, be appropriate and all that kind of stuff.
	Yeah, and I think the approach, say, between girls and boys is also going to be different, and also between age groups, that's going to be different.
	Younger age groups, of course, you're not going to divulge as much information or be as graphic, whereas older kids, you would be a bit more graphic, but...
	Yeah, and another problem that I actually ran into personally was if you're talking to a group of, say, older kids about sexual things, just anything, they were more prone to actually have a laugh, make fun of it, stuff like that, because that was just kind of the norm.
	So it's easier to kind of be more serious one-on-one with something like that.
	And it's just because you're one-on-one, you know, the person you're talking to can take it more seriously than you could in a group.
	So that was, I don't know, that was kind of my take from it, but...
	Right, right.
	Yeah, I mean, parents need to be aware of who their kids are associating with.
	Model good behavior, model healthy relationships as parents, and be aware of who your children are interacting with.
	Don't let these R-selected jerks sniff around your sons or your daughters.
	But that takes a lot of time and attention, and parents have fallen into this trap, I think, of just being Well, you know, we're busy.
	We've got careers.
	We've got this, that, and the other.
	And, again, that's only possible because the government has taken away the financial liability of children and turned them into this mysterious asset that now having a kid makes a woman money.
	I mean, how completely insane is that?
	Completely backwards.
	But, yeah, so...
	I think that parents need to, you know, get involved and stay involved and model good behavior, be honest about sexuality, and the pluses and the minuses, you know?
	Like, I mean, there's this sort of argument that says, oh, you know, well, if you teach children abstinence, that's really bad.
	And, of course, there are problems with abstinence, and kids who are taught abstinence end up, if they have sex, using less protection and so on.
	But...
	I don't know.
	I mean, there used to be all of these controls on youthful sexuality and youthful aggression, and they have largely been relinquished for reasons of very clear economic alterations in the fundamental fabric of society.
	Once you start messing around, once you start turning kids from a liability into an asset, I mean, you've changed absolutely everything about society.
	All of the reasons why these rules were in place before just completely fall by the wayside.
	And that is, I mean, that's beyond tragic.
	And again, until the money runs out, you know, saying this, that or the other.
	But I just, like, I can't imagine that's such a, it's such a personal value-laden thing to talk about that turning it over to some government teacher, who may be some, our selected lefty lunatic, right?
	You know, sex is something to be celebrated.
	Never be ashamed.
	There's no such thing as unhealthy sexuality.
	There's no such thing as like, you know, that's a lot of values that I think is kind of being transmitted that I think are problematic.
	I mean, this is something that parents can teach their children.
	I mean, the children are only there because the parents had sex.
	I think the parents can teach them.
	Yeah.
	My brother, I kind of learned a bit about sex kind of off my brother, just because he's four years older than me.
	He had a kid in his early 20s, so I was able to kind of learn off that.
	It's like, okay, I don't want to do that.
	I want to You know, have a job, get a career, and, you know, try and start building some money before I start doing this.
	Because he actually had a kid with an ex-girlfriend at this point.
	And fortunately now she's married, she has another kid, he's married, he has another kid.
	So the focus for...
	Her, well his, in this case the kid, his mother is actually on the new child rather than the old one as far as, say, raising him and stuff like that is a little more focused on the new child.
	And so he's been able to actually kind of free up some of his time, his money, things like that with her.
	Uh, because, uh, she is more focused on this new kid, but I learned off of that, uh, saying, okay, you know, I want to actually have some money and things before I jump into, you know, having kids or anything like that.
	Um, but, uh, yeah, I, it's, uh, it's one of those things where it's, uh, It's not covered very well by the government.
	I think maybe for a reason.
	But I know my parents never actually really had that kind of a talk with me.
	I just kind of figured it out on my own.
	But fortunately, I had good teachers in my brother and then my first girlfriend in college.
	I had a decent teacher there, I guess.
	Right, right.
	And there is some vaguely positive things occurring in sort of teen pregnancy rates have dropped, you know, down 10% from 2012 to 2013, 26.5 per thousand women.
	Uh, but, uh, it's still a lot higher than other industrialized nations.
	Of the 34% of teens who said they'd had sex in the previous three months, about four in 10 said they didn't use a condom in their last encounter.
	And, uh, nearly half of the 20 million new sexually transmitted diseases contracted each year are among young people ages 15 to 24.
	Now, sexually transmitted diseases, um, That's the result of promiscuity in general.
	And if people were virgins until they got into a sustained relationship, and if that didn't work out, they got tested, I mean, it'd be virtually very little or virtually none.
	And there are some pretty problematic aspects to STDs, right?
	right?
	That can lead to infertility and weaken your immune system and other things that can occur.
	But again, can we normalize this by IQ?
	Can we normalize this by race?
	That's never going to happen.
	So again, I mean, America just gets this bad reputation because there are certain groups that are more promiscuous than other groups and so on.
	I think that's not a big shock to anyone who's been out in the world.
	But yeah, it's...
	When you screw up with the incentives, you end up playing whack-a-mole with all of these effects.
	America, like a lot of the West, has really messed up the incentives.
	It's just terrible.
	If you had the incentives back, In the right way, if children were liabilities rather than artificial assets, then people would start controlling teenage sexuality again, which is how society worked in the past and why we have a civilization to begin with.
	Until the incentives are fixed, I don't know, it just doesn't seem to me to matter.
	We can make this case here and there.
	It has to be fixed.
	And, you know, it will once government runs out of money.
	And I guess we've got a theme for tonight.
	But that's, I think, where it goes.
	The gatekeepers' parents should be involved.
	But that takes parents out of the workforce and out of the tax rolls and all that.
	So, yeah, it's a problem.
	Yeah, and as far as the parents go, I mean, my...
	My dad, he worked full-time.
	He owned his own business.
	My mom, she actually worked part-time at a bank.
	But she was there for most of the time.
	Occasionally, when my brother was old enough, it was him watching me.
	I mean, there's stuff that I learned how to do fairly early on.
	I learned how to cook fairly early on.
	I started cooking about the age of seven or eight, stuff like that.
	I paid attention to what my mom was doing when she was in the kitchen.
	They were around enough that, I mean, I'm fairly close to my mom.
	Not as much my dad, but I think that we're kind of fixing that, I guess, because I actually work with my family.
	I work at a business that my dad owns.
	My brother works there as well, so does my mom.
	But yeah, I'd say I was closer with my mom when it comes to parental bonding.
	On stuff like that.
	But what would you say to parents who try and teach abstinence and things like that?
	I mean, I don't know that I really consider that a great way to teach kids about sexuality, especially the way things are today in today's world.
	I don't think that's a good way to actually teach kids about sexuality because there's so many things that they're willing and going to try that you You want to tell them some of what to do.
	I mean, you can't just leave them to their own devices.
	Right.
	Yeah, look, one of the reasons why teenage sexuality was discouraged was an instinctive understanding of the basic neuroscience, like the part of the adolescent brain that is used for decision-making, problem-solving, and basically understanding the Future consequences, which is called the dorsal lateral prefrontal cortex.
	Well, it's pretty anemic.
	It's pretty underdeveloped in teens.
	And it doesn't fully mature until they're in their 20s.
	So they're impulsive.
	Teens are impulsive.
	They're literally missing a part of their brain that is still growing.
	Teenage sexuality is kind of like You've got an eight-year-old and you ask her to help you bring the new ping-pong table to the basement.
	They're not big enough.
	They don't have the muscles.
	They don't get it squished up against the wall like a bug.
	And so this reality that we have sexual maturation close to a decade before brain maturation, that's important.
	In the U.S., Young people between the ages of 15 and 24 get an STD every three and a half seconds.
	And that is important.
	That is important.
	And, you know, girls who are sexually active, they have an immature cervix, much more vulnerable to infection from viruses and bacteria.
	And, you know, the sort of basic facts is really, really important to understand.
	So this is, it's a mess.
	And the government shouldn't be having, in my view, anything to do with it.
	The government shouldn't be having anything to do with much at all.
	But in this particular issue, it's so value-laden.
	And it's a recipe for such conflicts between what the kids are being told at school and what the parents may believe that it's just such a mess.
	Yeah, and I agree.
	Government should not have their hands in most things, because just about anything they touch kind of explodes or implodes on itself.
	So, yeah.
	Well, I don't want to take up too much of your time, because I know you've got one more caller, so...
	All right.
	Thanks for the call, man.
	I appreciate it.
	And, you know, please, of course, everybody, let us know how outraged you are about all of this and tell me if I've gone astray and, you know, help set me on the right path if I'm off.
	But I appreciate the question.
	It was very, very interesting.
	Thank you.
	Yep.
	Thanks for the talk.
	All right.
	Up next is Don.
	Don wrote in and said, How will humanity survive as a species unless we address our pandemic addiction to belief?
	That's from Don.
	Hi, Don.
	How are you doing tonight, man?
	I'm doing great, Steph.
	Can you hear me?
	Yeah, I can hear you fine.
	I can hear you fine.
	I think you'll understand this very well since on a number of occasions you've said never bring feelings to a fact fight.
	I like that.
	But even more so due to the fact that I heard you say you can't reason a person out of belief.
	And my contention is that that is a problem that we're faced with now.
	Precisely because the future is coming at us so rapidly now that we can no longer have the ball and chain of belief tied around our ankles.
	It was only a century ago that we used to think that our galaxy comprised The known universe.
	The physics of the universe worked like a giant clock.
	Solid objects were undeniably separate.
	The space between these objects was empty.
	The physical objects themselves were all that mattered.
	But today we find out that there are billions of galaxies, that the physics of the universe works more like a thought or perhaps more like a desire, that objects we think are solid are actually constructed mostly of space, that there is an intrinsic connection between separate objects irrespective of space-time,
	that the space between these so-called objects is full of the stuff from which objects are made, And that what really matters, what really counts, cannot be acquired by our five senses alone.
	These discoveries should have altered the way that we view our existence in the cosmos and our relationship with each other, but because our beliefs have yet to catch up with these new facts, we remain blind to the implications of a new model of the ideal that these facts require.
	Because of this blindness, we remain unfamiliar with the ideas necessary to rescue us from the swirling vortex of history into which we are about to disappear.
	This staggering rate of the influx of new facts also reveals a staggering rate of the obsolescence of existing facts.
	This rate of obsolescence suggests that Belief no longer enjoys the near infinity of the present that it once needed in order to support conclusions that we've made that would never face...
	No, sorry.
	I hate to interrupt, but I just need to know because it's generally not a show where people call in and read essays.
	So I think I get the general gist.
	Is there anything you wanted to close off with before we start discussing?
	No, no, that's okay.
	I thought it would help me not to stutter so much, but...
	Yeah, no, no, that's fine.
	I don't have a problem with the stuttering.
	I sympathize.
	It's a challenge.
	It is indeed.
	So, yeah, I really sympathize.
	And good for you, right?
	I mean, it's not the easiest thing to do to call into a show like this if you know you have that speech challenge.
	So, you know, well done.
	Good for you.
	That's excellent.
	So, the sort of rewording of the phrase that I have used, and I didn't originate it, is you can't reason A man out of a belief he was not reasoned into.
	And what that means, I'm sure we all know, but just sort of to reiterate, what that means is that most people end up believing things for tribal reasons, for reasons of religiosity or culture or history or prejudice or whatever it is.
	And the way that beliefs are transmitted is through bribery and punishment, right?
	Whenever you have A belief system that must be enforced through emotional pressure, that's usually the degree of irrationality that it possesses.
	If you're skeptical of religion and your parents will get angry at you for not going to church or withdraw affection or whatever it is, then that's not an argument.
	An excess of emotion is almost, by definition, a giant vortex of not an argument.
	It doesn't mean we can't get passionate about our ideas, but it means that When we promise people rewards for conforming to our belief systems and we threaten them either directly through parental or teacher punishment or through a third party like going to hell or whatever, whenever this occurs we're in the presence of not an argument.
	And the primary place where people used to look For this, myself included, was in religion, which is a very obvious place where there is the bribery of heaven and the punishment of hell, and also that the conformity to the religion is often, though not always, it's often transferred from parent to child via emotional withdrawal, manipulation, punishment, threats, bribery, and so on.
	And that to me, that's not the primary issue in the West at the moment.
	The primary issue in the West at the moment is, you know, this leftist indoctrination, social justice warrior stuff where, you know, we've had a number of people call in and we get these messages all the time.
	Sort of goes something like this.
	Well, I really don't agree with what my professor is saying.
	I think there's a lot of indoctrination going on.
	But I'm scared to argue back, to argue against What my professor is saying because I'm afraid of getting a bad grade.
	I'm afraid of getting a bad reputation.
	I'm afraid of being punished in some manner.
	And that's, you know, tragic.
	And it's indicative of just how low Western academia has fallen to the point where the whole point should be that you should be able to challenge your professors.
	Of course you should.
	Because they should be so much better at thinking than you are that you The black belt, if somebody wants to rush at the black belt, like someone new to judo or karate or whatever, if they want to rush the black belt master who's teaching them, the black belt master should be like, yeah, come on, bring it in, bring it on, right?
	Happy to demonstrate.
	Because they should be so much better at kung fu than you are, at martial arts than you are, that they should have no problem with you coming at them with all you've got.
	And this is Not what's going on in academia these days.
	In academia, people put forward these outlandish, outrageous arguments.
	And what happens is they then get hostile or angry towards anyone who questions them.
	Lauren Southern from Rebel Media, she's been on the show a couple of times.
	She's working, I think it's just finishing up a new book called Barbarians, How Baby Boomers, Immigrants, and Islam Screwed My Generation.
	And, I mean, it's a great book to read.
	And her description of what it's like to be a thinker in a modern university academic setting is kind of chilling.
	And this was not going on.
	As I've talked about, it just was starting up when I was So that, to me, the real indoctrination has nothing to do with religion anymore in the West.
	There's certainly nothing to do with Christianity.
	The real indoctrination is happening at the sort of leftist, Marxist identity politics, collectivism crap that is going on.
	And that, to me, is where the media, of course, the media with its sort of false news and fake narratives and manipulations and lies and all of the crap that they pull just about every day with, you know, I guess after a while, if you keep hearing a fire alarm, you stop hearing the fire alarm.
	But to me, the real indoctrination is coming from the left these days, through the media and through academia, not from the right.
	And that is one of the reasons why I sort of focus on what I'm focusing on, where the real dangers seem to be coming more from religion.
	I'm focused on that.
	And as events have transpired over the last 10 years, and things have really changed in academia over the last 10 years.
	Then it has become more to that.
	Now, how do we overcome this?
	Well, for me, I was kind of hoping, you know, that we were in this pendulum of irrationality.
	The pendulum, think of sort of this weight, right?
	Like a pendulum.
	You take it up to one side.
	And then it swings.
	Now, I view it as kind of silly and potentially destructive and harmful.
	To have the pendulum swing far back and swing far back and swing.
	It's exhausting and it's debilitating and it's chaotic and it's expensive.
	To me the point of philosophy is to rather than swing from one extreme to another to try and get into that pendulum's arc beating your Icarus wings and try and slow it down so it comes to rest sort of in the middle.
	I don't think that's how it's going to go.
	I've mightily beat my wings For many, many years now, I don't think it's going to shake out that way.
	I think the way it's going to go is that it's going to have to go from one extreme to another.
	And right now, of course, the reality is that the right, the conservative, have finally sort of found their mojo, they found their spine, they found their fisticuffs, and they've dropped their Gentlemen's rules of combat and they're doing what the left does, punching back hard.
	Kellogg drops ads at Breitbart.
	Breitbart hits back with never Kellogg and gets 400,000, 500,000 signatures against Kellogg.
	So the right is punching back and is fighting back and I think that's how it kind of has to go.
	It's kind of how it has to be.
	So we are of course going to have to work very hard to try and figure out How to deal with this indoctrination that's occurring from the left.
	And you can't really fight something that is so heavily funded by irrational money.
	That is a big problem.
	You cannot fight something that is so...
	Sometimes you just have to wait for communism to collapse.
	Sometimes that's what you have to do.
	You can talk about it and so on, but until it collapses...
	We are in such a state At the moment, that there's just no way it's going to happen without some sort of collapse in a local economy, right?
	So trying to get leftists out of academia is not going to work.
	They've got tenure, they're stuck in there, and they're pretty useless outside of academia, so they're going to hang on like grim death to all of this stuff.
	But what you can do is you can sort of make the case that you should try to end these massive subsidies towards academia.
	And then that's the way things work from there.
	And it's the same thing with, can you really fight feminism when all of the economic incentives are around making men disposable and having the government replace the father and the family?
	Well, you can't really.
	I mean, you can talk all you want, but When it's the old phrase, money talks and bullshit walks, and even if it's not bullshit, it's still going to take a defunding to change it.
	What changed ACORN? Well, James O'Keefe went in there, exposed some stuff that was considered pretty bad, and it got defunded, and then it went away.
	So, this I think is really important to understand.
	That it's not going to come out of arguments alone.
	The arguments can't be, well, leftism is crazy, and leftism is wrong, and collectivism is wrong, and Marxism is evil, and identity politics is divisive, and all of that kind of stuff.
	We can make that case, but that's not going to budge a single spotty behind of a Chubby blue-haired professor out of academia because they've got their contracts, they have their tenure, they have their summers off, they have their lovely trips to overseas destinations, they have their sabbatical years.
	I mean, you can't talk someone out of any of that.
	But what you can do is say, you know, we should not be pouring massive amounts of taxpayer money into universities.
	Now, of course, people will say, well, but education is very important.
	Then it's important to be able to make the case that it's not education, it's indoctrination.
	That's an important case to make.
	But you can't...
	You know, there's another old saying that you can't make a man understand something when his income depends upon him not understanding it.
	And that, I think, is important as well.
	So I would say that...
	Keep focusing on the source of the funding because the terrible ideas are following the funding, right?
	The more money gets poured into an institution from the state, the less it actually has to hand out anything of value to society as a whole, right?
	I mean, I think we can sort of all understand that.
	So that's sort of my, you know, go for the source of the funding while reminding people that when it gets defunded, it's not like We're losing education.
	We're losing indoctrination.
	It's the same thing with the media.
	To defund the media simply requires don't give them money, don't click on their ads and use whatever legal mechanisms and peaceful mechanisms you can to deprive them of income.
	Talk other people out of having a subscription to whatever it is and just make sure that you start to cut off their source of income.
	Because bad ideas fester in the shelter of income.
	So I would say that is the best approach to take, the best approach to make.
	You're never going to be able to go to the mainstream reporters and say, ooh, you know, you should be more fair and more even-handed because they're, well, they are the way they are.
	It's not going to matter.
	But you can, of course, you can Try to work on their source of income and remind people that if, you know, the mainstream media runs out of money, it's not like we're losing essential information that people need to be able to make good decisions in a free society.
	We are just getting rid of, you know, it's the old thing, if you don't read the newspapers, you're not informed.
	If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed.
	Well, now there's the internet, right?
	So I think that's the approach that I would take.
	I guess trying to take a bigger picture and suggest that...
	If people weren't so...
	people weren't weren't if if we all realize that that the beliefs that we have that drive us came
	from other people and they're and they didn't originate with us then maybe we would be more inclined to to think our own thoughts instead of take up the cause of of those who for thousands of years have told us what to think and have taught us what to believe.
	If we could only shed that addiction to belief and begin to think for ourselves and to think dynamically, then maybe we could You know, bypass the fear of that professor who we're afraid to offend and say, you know, I think that I can do this.
	I think that I can get away with this.
	I think that I can make my position known and I think I can argue with this guy regardless of whether or not I think he's going to give me a lower grade.
	I don't have to believe that he's Superior to me.
	I don't have to believe that he's smarter than me.
	I don't have to believe that he knows But if you don't believe those things, then why on earth would you pay him money to instruct you?
	This is the fundamental question.
	Because we can say to the government, stop funding these colleges and let them face the market and provide value to society.
	But the other thing we can also do, and I believe this and I've made this case for many years, unless you actually need that specific piece of paper to do your job, like if you want to be an engineer, you've got to get your engineering degree or whatever and get that little ring.
	But if...
	If we can also convince people that the arts education, it's not exactly the trivium, it's not exactly the classics, it's not exactly reason and evidence anymore, it's indoctrination.
	So why would you pay to go to come out dumber, more frightened, less able to think, more confused, more resentful, more angry, more bitter, less marketable, less employable?
	Why would you go and spend all that time, pay all that money, end up with all that debt that you can't discharge through bankruptcy in order to be really, really badly programmed, or I guess well programmed with bad ideas?
	So that's another thing as well.
	Now if student enrollment goes down in arts courses, then of course that is going to help to, it's going to help support the case as to why the government should cut funding.
	Not that many people around anymore.
	And of course funding the government doesn't make education more accessible to anyone.
	It just raises the price and makes it more subjectivist and collectivist and indoctrinated.
	So that's sort of my big question to people who are in the arts world in colleges.
	Are you getting a good education?
	Are you getting a good education?
	Particularly when that good education is kind of free out there on the internet.
	I mean, I think that people can learn how to think well through shows like this.
	You know, just about everybody and their dog's lectures are on YouTube and even their PowerPoints and stuff like that.
	So, are you actually getting a good education?
	At the moment, is it worth, you know, because it's just this train track, you know, finish high school, you got to go to college and so on, right?
	Are you getting a good education?
	And if not, why are you there?
	Like if you're afraid of your professors, can you imagine being afraid of getting a bad grade from someone who's supposed to teach you how to think?
	It's their job to get you enthusiastic to teach you how to think.
	And of course, by the time you get to college, you should have already known how to think for many, many years.
	But that's not, of course, what government schools are into either.
	So I think it's really important for people to just say, yeah, am I getting a good education?
	Is this worth it?
	You know, the hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars in deferred income, the massive amount of debt, the risks, particularly for men on campus with sexual allegations and so on.
	Is it really, really worth it?
	Are you getting your money's worth?
	That's a really, really important question to Same thing with the media.
	I mean, are you getting your money's worth?
	Are you being informed?
	Are you getting the truth?
	Are you getting facts?
	Or are you being controlled and manipulated?
	And I would say that the answer to that for me is pretty clear.
	I think my question referred more specifically to the survival of our species, not necessarily to a student in college.
	And my thought is that unless and until we recognize that we are force-fed things that we are supposed to believe, Unless we decide that we're going to think for ourselves and we're not going to listen to the propaganda anymore.
	That we're not going to march in their wars anymore.
	We're not going to let Russia be demonized anymore.
	We're not going to let anybody push us around to pay attention to the mainstream media and to avoid fake news and all that stuff.
	I see all of this as pushback.
	And the reason why the pushback and the propaganda works is that we have become addicted to Believing everything everybody tells us instead of thinking about things.
	I think it's essential if we're going to survive as a species that we begin to think, but also that we stop believing.
	Yeah, no, I agree.
	But I think it is important in terms of where the future of society is going to go to figure out what's happening with the media and higher education.
	We don't experience things directly.
	I've never been to Syria.
	I can only rely on what people tell me.
	So, a couple of days ago, there was an Orange Coast College professor named Olga Perez, Stable Cox.
	Strange name, anyway.
	And she just started going on this rant.
	You know, she called the election of Donald Trump an act of terrorism, and Trump's a white supremacist, and Mike Pence is one of the most anti-gay humans in the planet.
	And...
	One of the campus' young Republicans, Josh Raquel Martinez, hit record on his cell phone and posted this rant on Facebook.
	It's not appropriate, right?
	Unless it's an anti-Trump course, which who would bother taking?
	You could just turn on the television.
	It is pretty insane.
	Now, of course, they're threatening to expel her.
	Sorry, this young person.
	I think it's a young man.
	Yeah, the young man who recorded this.
	Josh, right?
	They're going to expel.
	They're threatening to expel him.
	Threatening to sue him for an illegal recording.
	And, of course, this is all designed.
	The leftists are terrified right now.
	They've taken over the campuses.
	And Milo Yiannopoulos talks about this too, but they've taken over the campuses and they're terrified that their crazy, nutty rants are going to make it to the general population.
	And the general population is going to say, whoa, I'm not sending my kid into that brain on fire rat's nest of collectivist dogma.
	And they're also afraid that if the crazy leftist rants are going to make it onto the internet, then alumni are going to see it and stop donating.
	And that the government's going to see it and say, whoa, whoa, whoa.
	This is not helpful.
	Well, the government's starting January.
	We don't want to pay for indoctrination.
	We'll pay for education.
	We don't want to pay for indoctrination.
	So they have to threaten to sue people who are pointing out or bringing the facts of what's going on in higher academia.
	They have to threaten to sue, to expel all of these people in order to make sure that they keep the facts away from the public.
	And that, I think, is something pretty important to To remember.
	So yeah, there's an attorney.
	He's representing the young Republicans.
	And he said the student who shot the video is afraid he may be suspended or expelled with only a week left in the semester.
	Quote, every student knows it.
	If you stand up to your professor, 90% of the time, the professor is going to punish you.
	Said Steele.
	That is the lawyer.
	That is the opposite, of course, of what education should be all about.
	Punishing for dissent is Soviet.
	It's indoctrination.
	It's totalitarian.
	So I do think it is important that the media and higher education get dealt with because they're currently standing in the way of a reasoned debate about things in society.
	But thanks very much for your question.
	Appreciate your call in.
	And we're going to move on to the next caller.
	Okay, Steph.
	Thank you for your patience.
	Thank you.
	Well, thanks everyone so much for listening and for chatting and for calling and for supporting the show.
	It's Christmas time.
	Ten days to go, I suppose.
	So please think about Free Domain Radio when you are allocating your resources for things that benefit the world.
	Put us in your love stocking.
	That's what I'm basically saying.
	You can do so, of course, at FreedomMainRadio.com slash donate.
	Please help us out there.
	Follow me on Twitter at Stefan Molyneux.
	And got some shopping to do?
	I imagine it's the season for that too.
	So please go to FDRURL.com slash Amazon to help us out with that too.
	Thanks everyone so much for the greatest show in the known universe.
	Have a great, great night.

▲