3553 Wanting Western Civilization To Die - Call In Show - January 4th, 2017
Question 1: [1:30] - “The UN Agenda 2030 and the UN World Population Prospects-Revision 2015 clearly state that legal migration from developing nations into Western nations is expected to be roughly 2.6 million people per year, every year for the next 34 years, and that population increases in Western nations over this period will be 80% due to immigration. And, of course, the Western nations will pay for the support of all these immigrants, many of whom are illiterate, have few if any employable skills, are ignorant of law and order, and bring with them totalitarian ideologies. Could you discuss this redistribution of the global population as it relates to our Western values of self-determination and individual liberties?”Question 2: [1:21:10] - “Is it necessary to have discussions about fundamental matters in person rather than through social media platforms like Facebook?”Question 3: [2:00:32] - “I am soon due to start training for the British Army, and I must ask if this would be a bad decision for me. Has coming from a Mormon family given me a misguided sense of self-worth now as an atheist? Is this perhaps why I'm finding the idea of selflessness and loyalty in army life so desirable?”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
Hey everybody, Stefan Molyneux from Freedom Aid Radio.
Have you been around the internet for a while?
Have you heard something about the Kalergi Plan or UN Agenda 2030?
Do you think maybe they're just conspiracy theories?
Well, a lady calls in who wants to know the truth and we go on a deep diamond drilling dive into the depths of these ideas and what they mean for the West.
Very, very urgent and important stuff for you to listen to.
The second caller was a lady who wanted to know why I thought it was better to have sort of important value-based conversations face-to-face rather than typing away online, on social media.
I was a little confused as to why it was such a pressing issue for her until we got into her history.
And then, well, let's just say the lights were switched on and all became clear.
The third caller...
I wanted to know, should I go into the British army and what does it mean to take orders in this way and point your guns in this way?
So we had a good and thorough rummaging around his conscience with regards to this whole issue and What had happened in his life that ended up with him in this?
Situation so this is a fan molyneux.
Please remember follow me on twitter at stefan molyneux and please help out the show at freedom in radio.com Slash donate All right up first today.
We have dory and Dory wrote in and said, The UN Agenda 2030 and the UN World Population prospects slash revision 2015 clearly state that the legal migration from developing nations into Western nations is expected to be roughly 2.6 million people Per year, every year, for the next 34 years.
And that population increases in Western nations over this period will be 80% due to immigration.
And of course, the Western nations will pay the support for all these immigrants, many of whom are illiterate, have few if any employable skills, are ignorant of law and order, and bring with them totalitarian ideologies.
Could you discuss this redistribution of the global population as it relates to our Western values of self-determination and individual liberties?
That's from Dory.
Oh, hey, Dory.
How you doing?
Hey there, Stefan.
Good.
Thank you.
And you?
Well, that's quite a question.
So it's a challenging set of information.
To look at.
Is there anything you wanted to add to what it is we're going to discuss based on the question?
Well, maybe just a hint of a background about how I happen to be asking that question.
Do you think that would be good for listeners?
Okay.
For me, it started about a year and a half ago.
I have a daughter that lives in London, and I... I was reading the BBC so that I'd be on top of things.
I could talk with her about what was going on in London.
And I began to notice the migrant crisis.
So this was midway through 2015.
And there were a few articles.
There was one about hundreds of thousands of migrants going to Sweden.
My husband is Swedish.
My daughters are dual citizens, USA and Swedish.
So I wanted to find out more about that.
Could find out virtually nothing on BBC. So I ended up internet searching and found the Gatestone Institute and got hooked into Ingrid Karlqvist in Sweden who was giving information about what was going on in the ground in Sweden.
That's what I wanted to know.
I looked at these pictures and the pictures were supposedly people fleeing war but they were Almost all men, and I began to wonder what is that going to be doing to Sweden, all of these young men coming into Sweden.
Surely you remember in 1939 when all of the men in Europe and in the UK fled to Saudi Arabia.
No wait, sorry, that didn't happen.
Go ahead.
Exactly, exactly.
So at any rate, I began to find out what was going on in Sweden on the ground there.
Is this going to be too long?
Should I shorten it?
No, no.
It's Western civilization.
We don't have to break for commercials.
We have some time.
Okay, okay, great.
The first time I was in Sweden in 1983, I asked a family member who was a policeman, you know, what's the murder and rape like in Sweden?
And he said, he worked in Stockholm.
Five years ago, there was a murder, and two years ago, there was a rape.
So that was 1983.
And if we look at Sweden today...
You know, I can hardly count it all on my hand what's going on there.
Honor killings, murder, drug gangs, fights, riots, car burnings, no-go zones, health system falling apart, schools falling apart, housing crisis, pension system failing.
The elderly dementia patients are, I would say, kind of effectively being euthanized.
Law and order failing, rampant censorship.
So, you know, I kind of started to clue into this, and this was over a period of time, and I began to wonder, I can see what's going on in Sweden.
Why is the Swedish government continuing?
And then I started looking at what was going on in our country and hooked into a bunch of sites like Jihad Watch, Atlas Shrugs, Barenaked Islam, Religion of Peace, Creeping Shari.
I was looking at essentially the immigration of Muslims here because a large portion of our immigrants are Muslims.
Anyway, looking at what was going on in Sweden and across Europe, I mean, we can look at Germany, France, the Netherlands, Belgium, the UK. It just...
I could not understand why our government was allowing it to continue.
So that started another exploration.
So I did quite a bit of exploration about Islam and that question.
Then I started to look into...
I kept reading about the progressive left, and I thought, well, what the heck is the agenda of the progressive left?
So I started looking into that.
I got keyed into the policy network in the UK. It's a think tank, progressive left think tank.
And they had been warning for 15 years back.
I read all their immigration and Integration articles and publications, they'd been warning that unless strong measures were taken, that there was going to be a populist uprising.
But there were never strong measures taken, and of course now, thank God, there is some kind of a populist uprising there, or beginning to be.
But anyway, that led me to essentially begin to explore the left agenda here in this country, And globalization.
And I started reading David Horowitz, his Black Books series, read various books, Post-American Presidency, Red-Green Axis, Refugee Resettlement Here, things like that.
And then it dawned on me that, oh my gosh, this is socialism.
This is Essentially that.
So then, I discovered your radio show about two months ago, and it's just been absolutely wonderful to hear some of my own thoughts and discoveries that you talk about and folks on your show talk about.
But then I started reading the UN publications, and that's where things got really scary.
Looking at Agenda 2030 essentially is asking for the global government ownership and control of land and utilities and food production and food distribution and healthcare and education and law enforcement, economy, technology,
trade, the redistribution of wealth by redistributing people, the breakdown of private ownership, breakdown of the family, breakdown of gender and masculinity, breakdown of nation states, breakdown of law of order and the erasure of History and the white race.
So that's what brought me to this call.
To me, this seems huge.
And now that I've been mobilized, now that I've woken up, now that I've taken whatever color pill it is, the one that wakes you up, I can't remember, blue or red, I find myself realizing that this is the time for my feet to hit the ground running and stand up.
So I was curious about your thoughts.
You, of course, can't answer what it is that I'm grappling with, you know, my action.
But I'm curious on your take on some of these things that I've talked about and your take on the dire situation that I believe we're in right now.
I mean, I followed most of it.
There was a bit of a jump at the end, which...
I think people will have trouble while you talk about the erasure of the white race.
I wonder if you could help people understand at least your perspective on that.
Okay.
Okay.
And, you know, maybe I was a little bit over-speaking, but at one point I ran across a name, Ricard Koudinov Calgary, who was a European aristocrat who lived in the 1920s.
He wrote two books, Pan Europa and Practical Idealism, And in practical idealism, oh, I should say he was an aristocrat, and he is considered by many as the father of the EU. And as a matter of fact, the EU gives out a prize every year called the Charlemagne Prize.
Every other year they give that prize out, and people in the past who've won it, let's see, Kissinger has won it, Bill Clinton has won it, Winston Churchill has won it, Angela Merkel has won it, lots of folks.
So anyway, I thought, okay, I want to read those two books this man wrote.
If it's the origin of the EU, I wanted to know what it said.
I couldn't find it in English anywhere.
Which is odd if this is the father of the EU. And it wasn't available in German either on Amazon at the time.
So I spent hours looking.
I eventually found a German PDF of these two books, which I converted to Word, which I plugged into a translator and ended up reading them that way.
And one of the things he talks about very, very clearly, and he, you know, I'll give him credit.
There are a lot of really great things he said about, you know, Europe, the European states coming together, and that would reduce the amount of fighting, infighting among European states, which had been a problem.
But essentially, what he said was that his ideal for the future Would include, he was talking at this point mainly of Europe, essentially a blending of all of the brown and white races so that there would be one race and he called that race,
I can't remember, but it would be essentially brown and he likened it to the ancient Egyptians.
And that this would essentially reduce the average intelligence which would make that group more easily controlled by this larger organization of people that he deemed would be spiritually superior to the general masses and could hold the fort down for the general masses until they developed enough to, you know, whatever.
So that's why I said the genocide of the white race.
So in his book, Practical Idealism, this is from 1925?
1923, I believe it was published.
I'm not going to swear to it.
So this is from Wikipedia.
he describes the future of Jews in Europe and of European racial composition with the following words, quote, the man of the future will be of mixed race.
Today's races and classes will gradually disappear owing to the vanishing of space, time and prejudice.
The Eurasian negroid race of the future, similar in its appearance to the ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals.
Instead of destroying European Jewry, Europe, against its own will, refined and educated this people into a future leader nation through this artificial selection process.
No wonder that this people that escaped ghetto prison developed into a spiritual nobility of Europe.
Therefore, a gracious providence provided Europe with a new race of nobility by the grace of spirit.
This happened at the moment when Europe's feudal aristocracy became dilapidated and thanks to Jewish emancipation.
Is that sort of similar to what you're talking about?
Yes, exactly.
Okay.
All right.
Right.
And, I mean, it would also be the eradication of the genetics of the races who came as well, right?
If it's all going to be one big blend, then it would basically be the end of all races, right?
Yes.
And you're really right about that.
And I was being sort of centric.
I thought everyone liked the diversity.
Yes.
Yes.
Right.
I mean, if you mix all the colors together, you have no particular colors, right?
Yes.
Yes.
Right.
Just before we get into it, how's your daughter doing?
Well, she's doing really well.
I've tried to talk with her a little bit about some of these things.
You know, I'm kind of kicking myself a bit.
We didn't have money for private education of any sort, so the best I could do for them, she participated in the International Baccalaureate program in high school.
Unbeknownst to me, at the time, the curriculum was really a curriculum that is sort of a global curriculum that supports a You know, very, very many of these ideas that are being espoused in the Agenda 2030.
And then she went on to do a master's degree in colonial literature, so looking at writings of people who were colonized in Africa and the Middle East.
So, you know, I hinted that I might be voting for Trump and You know, all hell broke loose.
So, you know, that's kind of personal, but she has a lot of the ideals, I think, without any clue what it's going to mean as far as how this works out for her.
And, of course, I'm a mom, and I'm reading that Islam and ISIS have said they're going to be using chemical weapons in London, and of course that's a bit scary.
But she's fine.
She's good.
She's healthy.
She's working.
She's got a great relationship.
She has friends.
So she's good.
Long answer.
Okay.
All right.
Friends won't help her against chemical attacks, but I know what you mean.
I know what you mean.
It's good that she has friends.
All right.
So...
I'll...
Give you my thoughts.
Okay.
And then you can let me know what you think of my thoughts.
The disparity between the West and other...
Sorry, let me start this again.
The disparity between high IQ and lower IQ countries, civilizations, cultures, whatever you want to call them.
Because you can't just say the West.
You know, I mean, Japan, other than its massive debt, is, you know, fairly civilized.
And it's going through that...
High IQ, hollowing out of the demographics, right, as the young people just don't want to have kids and all of that.
China is becoming more civilized and in some ways is freer than certain areas in the West, right?
This book that you were talking about, there was a European publisher who wanted to publish a copy and the police descended and grabbed the only copy they had and, you know, all that.
So not particularly...
Free.
So, since the cultures first began colliding into each other a couple of hundred years ago, there has been this immense frustration, this staggering frustration.
Why is it not possible to transfer Western culture to other cultures, right?
I mean, why?
The goal of a lot of colonialism from the Western powers, it was called the white man's burden, which is like, wow, we happen to come across all of these wonderful things or discover all of these wonderful things or inherit all these wonderful ideas, you know, free market, science, separation of church and state and private property and the rule of law and common law.
We have this treasure!
And the goal...
It was not perfectly executed, of course, but the goal was to go out and share the goodies with the rest of the world.
To go to India, to go to Africa, to go to other places, China, and to share these goodies with the rest of the world.
There was Christianity involved in the motivation for that transfer, but there was also benevolence, and there was, of course, some reprecious and predatory aspects.
But generally, where the British powers went, and it's the only one I've studied really in great detail, where the British powers went, there was an improvement in the local circumstances.
So there's this idea that we were like Rich children just happen to inherit a whole bunch of money.
There's poor people around.
Let's just go and, you know, help these poor people.
Right?
That the only difference between the rich cultures and the poor cultures is the money.
Right?
It's like this old saying or exchange between F. Scott Fitzgerald and Ernest Hemingway.
I think...
I can't remember who said what to who, but one of them said to the other, the rich aren't like you and me.
And the other one said, well, yeah, they have more money.
That is such a foundational question.
What is the difference, say, between sub-Saharan Africa and Western Europe?
And is it possible to transfer all of the good stuff from Western Europe to sub-Saharan Africa?
And for the past few hundred years, and in particular over the past 60 years or 70 years there has this been this massive effort to take the goods of the West and give them to the world to hand them over to help set up the structure to help you know massive transfers of intellectual property massive transfers of capital and an investment in technology and and patents
and medicines and you name it you back up the truck Of Western glory.
Pour it into the gaping mouths of the third world.
And what's happened?
How has this all gone?
Trillions and trillions of dollars poured into the third world.
For what?
And this...
It hasn't really solved the problem.
At all.
Now, there is improvement.
And...
The improvement is...
In particular, I'm thinking about China and India, right?
You've got 50,000 people a month coming into the middle class.
So there have been some improvements.
But the problem is...
Human biodiversity remains, I think, the most significant barrier and danger.
A lack of recognition, right?
The fact that there is human biodiversity at the moment, and by this I mean that not all ethnicities have the same levels of what is traditionally measured in the West as IQ, which is fairly predictive of success individually and as a culture.
And it doesn't It doesn't transfer in the way that we want.
Now, whether the IQ differences are genetic or environmental, at this point doesn't hugely matter.
Because there's nothing that we can think of doing that we haven't already tried.
So, the West has been unable to replicate itself in other cultures, in other countries, in other continents.
And the question is, why?
Now, there used to be an answer, which was fairly well understood, which is that, well, you know, the races are different, right?
Some are bigger, some are stronger, some are faster, some are smarter.
And of course, you would expect, separated by, you know, 50 to 150,000 years of evolution in wildly disparate environments, that there would then be A difference, a branching, a difference in specialization.
This used to be accepted and understood.
And then the left came along and said, now it's all environmental.
Number one, they said, it's all environmental.
We're a blank slate and we are molded and shaped by our economic environment.
That's it.
They also said that the rich are rich because they steal from the poor.
They exploit the poor.
The capitalist with his big fat belly and his monocle and his gold watch and his cigar and his top hat is stealing from the workers.
He has a million dollars because a million workers each have one dollar less.
Now, when you combine the dominance Of the left intellectually.
And this really has been going on for about 150 years.
I mean, it's accelerated.
Obviously, it's reaching its fruition at the moment, which is why these culture wars are erupting so ferociously.
But the left, I mean, there's kind of an iron rule of organization.
All organizations drift to the left incessantly.
And sometimes it feels irrevocably.
I think this is driven by the state, which is one of the reasons why I have my beliefs about it.
But this idea that everything's environmental and that the rich are only rich because they've stolen from the poor, when you look at the world through that lens, then you look at the West as evil and predatory and exploitive and that sub-Saharan Africa would be exactly like Denmark, except that the Westerners came and stole all the resources, right?
Just parachuted in, grabbed everything, and took it all back to Europe.
And that's why Sub-Saharan Africa is so poor.
And that's why Europe is so rich.
They stole it all!
Now, Of course, the fact that sub-Saharan Africa wasn't exactly swimming in wealth before the Europeans came along, and the fact that the life expectancy has increased, the population has increased, the GDP, while under European rule, increased, all the stuff I've talked about many times before, the fact that new technologies and new wealth, new investment, new opportunities, railroads, roads, medicine, cars, you name it, was all brought there, doesn't matter.
And this Frustration.
Oh, my God.
It's like we're drowning in this delusion, this frustration.
And I understand.
It's very painful.
Human biodiversity is one of the most painful, jagged little pills that I've ever had to swallow.
And the before and after that is night and day.
Yeah.
Mm-hmm.
So this incredible frustration, looking at the wealth of the West, looking at the poverty of the Third World and saying, they stole it from us, they owe it back to us, those bastards, right?
Like there are people who genuinely believe that the wealth of America was built on slavery.
I mean, built on slavery.
Madness.
I understand where it's coming from because you look at the black community in America and you see the, you know, high crime rates and the low income and low savings and so on.
And then you look at the whites or the East Asians and say, well, they're much richer because they stole from us.
That's what happened.
We were ripped off.
The white devils came in, pillaged our resources, pillaged our gold, pillaged our people.
Pillaged our land.
Stole from us.
And this creates an enormous amount of rage and frustration and anger and hatred towards the Europeans, towards the Western, towards the whites.
It's like Iago just whispering in people's ears saying, well, you're poor because those pale devils over there are rich.
They stole from you.
Now, are you just going to sit there and take it, or are you going to go and get it back?
And that is, I believe, where things stand at the moment.
That Europeans are thieves, predators, devils, genocidal, murderous, Pale necked, deep in blood.
And they owe the world.
Redistribution of wealth.
Redistribution of wealth.
Now, the phrase redistribution of wealth is one of these very sinister phrases because of course it implies that the wealth was somehow distributed to begin with.
No.
The wealth was created.
The wealth was earned through people operating in a free market which respected property rights.
And redistributed, well, you inherited it, we're just going to carve it off.
No, it was created.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I mean, if we talk about the redistribution of sexual access, we would understand we'd be talking about institutionalized rape.
Because, you know, vaginas weren't distributed, like, handed out like clamshells at the beginning.
You got some extra.
Share it around, right?
So, if As the leftists believe, it's all environmental.
Then, of course, when you take people from the Third World and put them in the First World, their children will grow up just like First Worlders, right?
If you take people from the Middle East and you take them to Sweden, then their children will grow up in Sweden and will be just like the Swedes, the native Swedes.
Yeah, go ahead.
As a matter of fact, they're finding that second and third generation immigrants are actually more radicalized, more angry, more violent than their parents and grandparents ever were of the immigrant population across Europe.
And this is exactly what you would expect from human biodiversity, which is that the smartest immigrants will come across to the West, but then their children, if they're a genetic basis to disparities in intelligence, the smartest We'll come to the West.
Let's say that the top 1% of Somalians will come to the West, but then their children will be a regression to the mean and will be much more like the general population of Somalia than the outliers, the exceptions to the average who came across to the West.
I mean, I've talked about this before.
You've got some extraordinarily tall Chinese guys who come over and play basketball.
Now, their children are taller than average, but they're not as tall as their parents.
And it's a regression to the mean.
This is sort of natural and helps very intelligent parents understand that their kids may not be exactly like them.
All this kind of stuff, right?
And we've seen this in general, right?
We've had Dr. Jason Richwine on the show a number of times.
He's done significant analyses of multigenerational patterns within the Hispanic community that comes into America, of course.
And he's found that there is a regression to the mean, that the parents don't do as well.
The kids do better, but the kids' kids do worse, right?
The parents don't do as well because they're new, less educated, language barriers and so on.
Their kids do better because they have all those advantages, but then there's a regression to mean in the third generation, which then it declines.
And...
All of this is god-awfully true.
It's horribly true.
I mean, I'll tell you this.
I would tell you this.
There is nothing I would rather be wrong about than human biodiversity.
Yeah, yeah.
I mean, every time a study comes up, I'm like, please, Jesus!
Can a brother get an equalization?
Can a brother get a not regression to the mean?
It's welfare usage, right?
First generation uses some welfare.
Second generation uses less.
Third generation uses more.
Regression to the mean.
I would love to be wrong about all of this.
As would I. Because if I'm wrong about this, fantastic.
I mean, then things can go relatively nicely.
If I'm not wrong about this, and so far the evidence is accumulating to the point where it seems like it's starting to doubt gravity to think about it.
But...
It means that diversity plus proximity equals war.
Yes, yes.
This is what it means.
Sorry, go ahead.
I was going to say there's another point too and this is true of so many people that I know in Europe.
So many people have a really good heart and they really want to help and they really believe that bringing these folks in is the best way to help them and They're sort of their own worst enemy that way.
We are.
I've said for years and years, I gladly, and I do, share my wealth with people who are less fortunate.
But what it's looking like now in Europe is that the life of law and order and values and safety and education and those kinds of things are getting crushed Yes, but this is not the fault of the immigrants.
And fundamentally, it's not even the fault of the governments.
The governments are going to do what governments are going to do.
They're going to try and win brownie points in Virtue Signal, and they're going to avoid negative attention from the press.
Politicians are pathologically hypersensitive to negative opinions from...
People they fear.
They don't fear white people.
I mean, they fear journalists.
But here's the thing.
The West has only appeared to be strong.
It has only had the illusion of strength.
Because the West has not been the West for 150 years.
What we're seeing now...
It's like this giant mansion.
You only see it from the outside.
It looks strong.
It's been there for hundreds or thousands of months.
But inside, the termites have been working away, and the termites have been chewing, and the termites have been undoing and breaking down all the load-bearing walls.
And then what happens is somebody gets drunk, falls against the wall, and the whole thing falls down.
And we say, it's the drunk guy's fault.
No.
No, it's the lack of maintenance.
It's the fact that nobody dealt with the termites for 150 years.
That's the problem.
It's not what's happening now.
It's what has been happening before.
This is the end result.
You know, it's when you crack a whip, right?
It's that last little at the end that makes the sound.
Right?
But it's the whole arm.
It's the whole whip.
And then you get this one little thing at the end.
And this whip, what we're seeing now is the crack, but the thing's been in motion for 150 years or more.
Since the governments took over education and currency, it has not been the West.
It has been the fall of Rome.
It has not been the West.
The West is dead already.
This is the twitching of the posthumous corpse.
So we can't say, well, the West is failing.
What happened?
Well, we gave our children to the government to be educated.
And of course, then the government teaches all the children how wonderful the government is and how amazing redistribution is and how taxation is essential.
And then you raise all these people who look not to themselves or to freedom or to their community for solutions.
They look to the state.
Ah, the big, giant, glorious Gabriel...
Bloody tunic state is going to solve all our problems.
It's going to control the currency.
It's going to control the children.
It's going to control the environment.
It's going to regulate.
It's going to manage the roads.
It's going to manage the plumbing.
It's going to manage the water.
It's going to manage...
Oh, and as Lennon said, once you get the government to take over health care...
Yeah.
Well, once the government has health care, what are you going to do?
What are you going to do?
What are you going to do?
But it's really the control of the currency that is the fundamental reality.
If the government didn't control the currency, then there would be this successive drag on the ever-ascending helium balloon of government power.
There would be this drag of mathematical reality pulling it back down to the ground.
But because the government can print its own money and borrow an infant item and set up unfunded liabilities deep into the future, there's been no check on the power of the state.
So, it was 150 years ago or so that government education came in for the most part.
It was a little over 100 years ago that central banking, government control of the fiat currency came in.
The West was dead since then.
There was no more free market.
You know, the socialists say they want to control the means of production and we think it's factories.
No, no, no, no, no.
It's not factories.
It's not capital equipment.
It's not machinery.
Control over the means of production.
It's controlling the money.
The currency is the means of production.
Once you socialize the money, once you turn the money into a central planning, communistic, fiat monopoly, toilet paper factory, once the government controls the money, the culture, the civilization, the liberties, the freedoms are already dead.
For the last 150 years, There has been but three words to describe the West.
Dead man walking.
So why do we have a migrant crisis?
Because people surrendered the autonomy of their states to the central planners in Brussels.
That's only one part of it.
But the fundamental reason we have a migrant crisis It's because of warfare and welfare.
The warfare welfare state has produced the migrant crisis, number one, of course, by the endless wars in the Middle East destroying and destabilizing the countries and Boy, you think we've got a problem with exploding migrants.
How about the Middle East, which has drones and exploding bombs and the destruction of their healthcare system and the destruction of sanitary systems in a very hot climate.
Good God!
I know.
Good God!
I mean, what is being done unto the West is very little compared to what has been done unto the East.
Oh no, somebody drove a truck down.
Terrible!
Terrible, but at least they're not bunker busters falling from 20,000 feet up in the air.
So the warfare state destabilized the Middle East, destroyed the cultures, destroyed the countries, and the welfare state then created a giant vacuum of free stuff, which pulled all of the people from the destabilized countries into the West.
How can you blame them?
In Iran, you make one-tenth to one-twentieth a month than you can get for free in Germany, in the welfare state.
So the warfare state destroys the countries, and the welfare state brings in the people.
The young men.
And I understand, yes, of course, there's something in Islamic teachings around, you know, it's a very virtuous act to go to new countries and attempt to move the needle towards Islam, and I get all of that.
But that's been the case in Islam for a long time.
Still never worked in Europe.
So once Europe, once the West...
Gave up our children to the government and gave up our currency to central bankers.
Everything that has followed is inevitable.
They can afford these endless wars because they can print the money.
They can afford to have these endless wars and a welfare state because they print the money.
And until we can gain control back of the money, the lifeblood.
Money is civilization.
Money is what it is to have a culture.
Private money is the only way a culture can survive.
Because it's the only way it can push back viscerally against being lied to.
Because people like you, like me before...
We woke up.
We sought our everyday pleasures, and we kind of figured that we were in this general inertia of lackadaisical improvement that was going to go from here to eternity.
Exactly.
Yep.
And then when we find out about the demographic winter, when we find about the Marxist penetrations of feminism, when we find out about fiat currency, find out about the warfare welfare state, find out about the rampant vote-buying Colloquially referred to as democracy, we begin to wake up.
Now, you do that because you have a daughter who you believe may be in harm's way.
I do that for my own particular reasons and purposes.
But the reality is most people won't wake up until a disaster is upon them.
And it's like this old Farside cartoon I've talked about before.
One caveman is a big giant wall of ice.
Like three feet from a cave and one caveman looks to another and says, say, is that wall of ice look closer to you today?
They're still three feet from the cave.
And so when are people going to wake up?
Well, they're going to wake up when the government runs out of money.
And when the government runs out of money, there will be no funds with which to pay.
The welfare state.
And when there are no funds with which to pay the welfare state, there will be riots.
And when there are riots, the government will have a choice.
The government will either crack down on those riots and attempt to restore significant order and there won't be any more of these 55 no-go zones in Sweden or anything like that, which is basically, it's not Europe anymore.
It's not Europe.
There are massive areas in Europe.
They're not Europe anymore.
No, it's true.
The police don't go there.
There's no control.
There's no, I mean, it's Sharia law.
I mean, it's not Europe anymore.
It's not Europe.
And when they run out of money, they will end up paying Those they consider the most dangerous.
Like, if you have $1,000 left, and you owe $1,000 to a nice guy, and you owe $1,000 to the mafia, who are you going to pay?
Yeah, the mafia, naturally.
Right.
Right.
So, the most peaceful in society are going to get the services cut the most, and the groups that the government is most afraid of are going to get paid the most, and this is going to, at some point, provoke spillover tensions.
Of course, it is my hope and my goal that this stuff can be resolved peacefully as times go by, and the European government, they're doing the Insane things that governments do.
It's perfectly sane in the pursuit of the immediate drug called power.
So they consider not the migrant crisis to be the problem, but any questions or concerns about the migrant crisis.
That's the problem.
That's what needs to be attacked.
That's what needs to be policed.
That's what needs to be thrown.
Those are the people who need to be thrown in jail, right?
And...
They know that because if they try to go and enforce Swedish law or German law in these no-go zones, what's going to happen?
It's going to be a little Mogadishu all over again, in my humble opinion.
So they don't want to do that because then you see there are pictures in the newspaper of people not doing well.
And there'll be white policemen and there'll be non-white People on the receiving end of police power and it'll be splashed all over the newspapers.
And racist and Islamophobic and I don't know, whatever other kind of stuff can be thrown.
And then everybody will be shocked and appalled and horrified.
It just happened over this New Year's in Germany.
I forget which city it was, but maybe Berlin.
The police were trying to keep order and essentially they were profiling, that is, they were not letting certain folks in who were known to be dangerous, who were known to have criminal records and that sort of thing.
And there was a huge backlash, huge backlash about the racial profiling and the racism and Islamophobia, etc., etc.
I don't know if you've read about that.
Oh yeah, no, no.
And where was it?
Someplace in Europe that a thousand cars were set fire to you.
But it's just economic warfare.
So why are they setting fire to cars?
Well, because it harms the economy of the host nation.
And, you know, from the Middle Eastern perspective, I dare say from the Muslim perspective, if somebody said to me, well, you can escape this poor country with...
You know, either being bombed or armed or, you know, even if it's not being bombed, there's always that threat.
And you can go to the country that has been bombing your fellow Muslims and you can then sit on its welfare and help to destroy its economy because when its economy is destroyed, there won't be any more bombings in the Middle East.
I can really, really understand that perspective.
If you got to go, it would be the most boring Star Wars movie ever, but if the Death Star had big giant welfare programs and when they run out of money, they couldn't fire their giant lasers and blow up planets, yeah, a lot of Luke Skywalkers would be like, Luke Couchsitters.
Luke, hey, let's get a free MacBook Air.
You know, surf websites.
They would go over and they would drain the resources off the Death Star so that the Death Star would stop its deadly march through various star systems.
So I can, you know, I can perfectly understand.
But it's the West.
We betrayed our own values.
We betrayed everything that made the West the West.
And we've done it over the last 150 years.
And we have put sentimentality ahead of reality.
We've put delusion ahead of truth.
We've put government power ahead of cooperation.
We have surrendered more and more of our lives to the power and coercion of the state.
We have more and more regulations.
We have an insane tax code.
We have an absolutely unnavigatable legal system.
We have decided to sell off the futures of our young in order to buy peace in the here and now.
Because it only takes one generation of the welfare state for any solution to the welfare state to be rife with violence.
Because once you get that second generation growing up in the welfare state, if you start to reduce the welfare state, they're going to riot.
They're going to burn things down.
It's going to be blood in the streets.
And politicians, what they want is five more minutes of not being called racist.
They want five more minutes of pretend peace.
That's all they want.
And...
It is the betrayal of those who came before us that has handed us this corpse that we are now trying to shock back into life.
But no, the West has betrayed its values, all the values that made it great.
And yes, I will include Christianity in that in many ways.
So the West has betrayed its values for many generations.
And now a lot of people are complaining that things don't seem to be going well.
Well, it's not one cigarette that kills you.
you it's 30 years.
Hmm.
Yep.
I'm going to have to say that I agree with you on that.
Your image of the whip and it's the very tip of the whip that makes the sound and is the part that cracks and injures the body.
That actually makes Makes a lot of sense.
You know, I think a lot about Sweden.
I actually know a little bit more about Sweden than I do about my own country here.
And they've had this welfare state now for quite a number of decades.
And although in my husband's grandparents' time, they were all farmers and they traded food and they traded fish and they traded handwork and they They cooperated with one another, so they did have a real solid base of a society at that time.
Well, I'm sorry to interrupt, but here's the challenge.
First of all, the welfare state is much better done in private charity.
Because private charity has standards.
And private charity can differentiate between people who've just had bad luck versus people who are just stupid and doing bad things.
So somebody who gets ill unexpectedly and just didn't happen to be covered for some in their health insurance, okay, help those people, absolutely.
But some guy who takes his paycheck and goes and blows it, betting on the ponies and getting drunk, you don't want to subsidize that.
This question of the welfare state is, for one thing, privately you need to do it because you don't want to subsidize bad behavior, but you do want to help people who genuinely need it, and only private charities can do that.
But that's not even, to me, the most important aspect.
Even if you have the governments running the welfare state, the problem is that The welfare state is very appealing to people, I would guess, IQ 85 and below.
Because IQ 85 and below, you're more likely to make more money off the welfare state than you are going to get a job.
And, and, if you're IQ 85 or below, the jobs you're going to get, they're not going to be great.
You're not going to be designing a lot of skyscrapers, and you're not going to be running a lot of reality shows.
It just Not going to get great jobs with that level of intelligence.
So, if you have a high IQ population, then there are very few people who fall into that category of IQ 85 or below.
And that means that the welfare state, while negative and a kind of slow dysgenic drag on society, is not particularly quickly catastrophic.
But If you have a population that is coming in that is, and again, I'm just IQ 85 or some arbitrary thing.
It could be higher, it could be lower, whatever.
It's just, we need a number.
But when you have a bunch of people coming in who fall at or below that, then you have a problem.
Yeah.
Right?
Because they're going to come in and sit on welfare, and we can see this.
So I've got the truth about immigration and the welfare use by Europeans is vastly below the welfare use by Hispanics and so on and blacks.
So this is the problem that the people who are less intelligent need more immediate cues and have a tougher time saying to themselves, well, you know, I can go on welfare now, but I'm going to be kind of sitting at the same income in 10 or 20 years.
And what if the welfare state runs out of money?
And what if I get bored and so on?
Well, you know, you and I would probably get very bored sitting around with nothing to do all day.
But if you're IQ 85 or lower, it's a pretty good time.
Not a lot of complaints.
Not a lot of people saying, I can't stand welfare.
It's too boring.
I'd rather have any kind of job than that, right?
And so this is part of the human biodiversity again.
So Japan has a welfare state, right?
But they don't have a lot of people on the welfare state because the average IQ in Japan is well north of 100.
But if they brought a bunch of people in, like Australian aboriginals with, what, IQ 67?
How many of the aboriginals would end up working at Mitsubishi or Sony or whatever it is as product engineers or designers?
Well, virtually not.
And very quickly they would have a lot of kids, right?
Because you have the welfare, right?
More kids, more welfare.
They have a lot of kids.
And so the welfare state, although immoral and bad and wrong, It's relatively not as disastrous in a high IQ population.
But this is the great horror and tragedy of what's going on in the West at the moment, which is this, that at a time when automation is stripping opportunities out from under the noses of lower IQ people, The West is massively importing low IQ populations of all the time.
You know, if it was some big giant agricultural society, okay, it would sort of delay automation.
It would delay, you know, combine harvesters and stuff.
But at least, I mean, what's going to happen?
I mean, in Japan, insurance underwriters are being replaced by robots.
It's not just menial labor anymore.
Even white collar jobs are falling.
To automation.
At a time when society has enough of a challenge figuring out with increasing automation, which is being accelerated by all the barriers to hiring people effectively and efficiently and all the ways in which governments artificially raise the price of labor and all that.
At a time when we desperately need fewer lower IQ people in an increasingly automated society, what are governments doing?
Come on in!
we have no jobs for you now but we'll have even fewer jobs for you next year and that's very true in Sweden I always come back to Sweden, a country that I've loved very, very much in my life.
But there are no jobs for these people.
There was a riot this past week in Sweden at one of the asylum centers.
Folks saying, number one, we're mad because we didn't get houses and we're We're in these apartments, but number two, we don't have jobs.
And without jobs and a house, we can't get girls.
And without jobs and a house and girls, what's life worth living?
So they burned down the asylum house and kept the folks working their hostage.
It was a big mess.
Anytime you have a large group of unmarried young men in your society, you have trouble.
Absolutely.
You have trouble.
And this has been very, very clear all throughout history.
You could not design a system more perfectly calibrated to destabilize society.
I know.
It's almost funny, except it's tragic.
But you're right.
It couldn't...
It couldn't have been planned better for destruction and decimation of society if we had tried on purpose to do it.
Well, and a lot of it needs to be laid at the feet of women.
Women are consistently voting for larger and larger government.
Women consistently, in general, vote for open borders.
If you look at the breakdown of votes for nationalistic or sovereign movements in Europe, significantly more men than women vote for sovereignty and control over immigration, and significantly more women than men vote for open borders and Bigger and more government and open immigration and all that.
I know.
I have, you know, all of my liberal friends who know, some I haven't told because I'm getting tired of losing friends, but all of my friends who know I voted for Trump aren't my friends anymore.
They don't want to have anything to do with me.
Like you're in league with the devil, right?
I'm in league with the devil.
I'm a racist.
I'm going to be joining the stormtroopers, coming to get them in the night.
And these are mostly female friends?
Yes, female friends, yes.
And they all believe in open borders and welfare, and the more immigrants we can take in, the better, and et cetera, et cetera.
Exactly what you just said.
So I find myself...
Why?
You know, I have to say that I was there myself a few years ago.
I wasn't awake enough to see what was really going on.
And it's very easy to move into that space where you just want to help people.
Well, sure, but I mean, why does helping people mean moving them to your country?
I know.
I mean, why doesn't helping people mean helping them relocate in the vast expanse of Saudi Arabia or any of the other Muslim countries where I think they'd be much more at home and wouldn't be so frustrated, I mean, that there are women there apparently who can marry them.
Yes, and in fact, we can help, I think, with the UN figures and things, we can help 12 people in place for every one that we move to the West.
So it's actually more helpful to help them in place than to move them to the West.
But, you know, what can I say, Stefana?
These are smart women.
You know, they're college-educated.
Most of them have master's degrees.
Well, that's why.
I mean, they've just been exposed to so much more lefty propaganda, right?
Yeah, that could very well be.
And, you know, I feel for my daughter.
daughter, she's been exposed to a lot of this propaganda.
I've got to tell you, I mean, it's I think I can speak for more than a few men.
In this area.
As a white male.
For many decades.
Being told.
That I'm.
Sexist.
Misogynistic.
Patriarchal.
Privileged.
And that I need to have.
More.
Respect.
For women.
I need to treat women better.
All of that.
And having been at the receiving end of.
Massive, shrapnel-filled cannonfuls of scorn and hostility from certain segments within the female community for being unenlightened and being a male chauvinist pig and just that and the other.
I gotta tell you, this is not so much for you, but for the ladies out there.
I gotta tell you, it's a little frustrating.
Seeing women welcome, after scorning white men for so long, seeing women welcome with open arms, a truly medieval doctrine with regards to women's rights.
Yeah, I know.
I know.
It's unfathomable.
I mean, that, I don't understand it.
I don't either.
I don't understand.
Like, I cannot fathom it.
Seeing the left, of course, oh, gay rights, gay rights, gay rights.
Fantastic.
But then, listen, bringing a lot of people from Saudi Arabia, are you kidding me?
Like, what?
Where they hang gays.
Literally.
No, it's literally like the hottest woman in town, you know, just won't date you because she heard you may have once said something harsh to a woman.
Not true, but let's say she heard that she won't date you because you got to treat women with respect.
And you know who she ends up marrying?
The guy who beats her up.
I don't understand it.
I fundamentally, I can't fathom it.
I don't know if you can either, but...
Well, on the personal scale, I would say it might be family of origin issues.
So, a woman who chooses somebody who beats her up, I would say there are issues from her family early on that she's not dealt with.
But on the larger cultural scale is where it's unfathomable to me.
I don't understand why the folks who say they're for equal rights for women and gays and minorities and Jews and Christians and all of that are bringing in people Who trample on those very rights.
Why isn't all criticism of white men pushed back against as patriarchy-phobia?
Yes.
Don't be such a patriarchy-phobe!
Don't be such a masculophobe!
Don't be such a penis-phobe!
I could do that for about 20 minutes, so let's keep moving as best we can.
But why?
I mean, why?
Why is it that if there are criticisms of, you know, some pretty repressive aspects of us, oh, that phobic, but why is it that when white males are criticized, nobody pushes back, and it's like, that's all true, it's all valid.
I mean, women couldn't try...
If they want, like I sat down and draw out one of these Kologi plans, they couldn't sit down and design a plan that would make men dislike them more than this.
Because at some point, it may well happen that women don't like the new things that are going on.
Oh, it's definitely.
And then who are they going to run to?
Yeah.
Save us, men!
And I gotta tell you, I mean, reading the comments, there are a lot of men who are like, nope!
No thank you!
Because you had family courts eviscerate us, you divorced our dads, you took them for everything that they had, you're sitting pretty on alimony and child support, and you're bad-mouthed men all the time, and you refuse to stand up for us, and we got thrown in jail more, and we got broken up more, and bad things happen to us, and you let everybody insult all the men in your life.
Why the hell would we fight for you?
Yeah, yeah.
And now, I think I saw your tweet today, but I saw the article before I saw your tweet about that class in Wisconsin for young men in college, essentially brainwashing them about how awful their masculinity is.
I think it was Wisconsin.
Right, so if patriarchy is bad, Why is criticizing patriarchy in Islam called Islamophobia?
Because I think it's fairly safe that there might just be a shade or two more patriarchy in Islam than there would be in the contemporaneous West.
Just, you know, I'm no expert, but just going from what I've read and heard, just a little, maybe just a coat or two more of paint of the patriarchy.
But we all know.
I mean, so I don't...
The betrayal of the women, that is the downfall of the West, fundamentally.
Men get it.
And why do men get it?
Because if there's going to be conflict, it's the men who are going to be drafted.
Right?
So women are like, oh, you know, we'll just get pregnant.
Whatever, right?
I mean, so this betrayal of the West by women, in particular, I think is, I mean, women, it's still a democracy.
Women live longer, they outvote men, they vote more reliably, and they vote more towards the left, they vote more for open borders and bigger government.
What can men do?
Yeah.
Can't...
Right?
I mean, I've had these messages from people in Europe saying, oh, we'd love to fight, but we can't fight everyone.
We can't fight the academics.
We can't fight the government.
We can't fight the women.
We can't fight the media.
We can't...
Like, at least the people who went off to World War II, they had the support of everyone at home.
Oh, they did.
Oh, gosh, I remember.
Not that I was alive then, but what I've read about it, they did.
Right.
They did.
Yeah, so this just of those will...
Trending.
Universities work to purge male students of their toxic masculinity.
I wonder why that's a picture of a white guy.
Why isn't that a picture of an imam?
Because, you know, toxic masculinity.
I wonder why they're not...
Campuses hosting training sessions, group meetings, lectures and other programs to effectively cleanse what many campus leaders and left-leaning scholars contend is an unhealthy masculinity in young men today.
Now I don't understand that at all.
Because women have been in charge of raising men for the past two generations at least.
So how could there be toxic masculinity left when single moms and daycare teachers and primary school teachers, women, Women have been raising men for two generations.
If men are so toxic, I don't understand.
See, if men are still toxic after women have been raising them for two generations, guess what, ladies?
Masculinity is not environmental and can't be fixed.
But if it is environmental, then men are toxic because they've been raised by women.
In which case, more nagging probably isn't going to help the problem.
Oh, and I also wonder, if men are so toxic, gosh, you know, if men are so toxic, I'm sure that women are going to boycott calling the police when they get in trouble.
Because, you know, you can't call a policeman because he's a man.
He's so toxic.
It's terrible.
Yeah, or a fireman, or an aid worker.
Yeah, what women need to do is boycott stuff made by men.
Just boycott it all.
Running water, roofs, plumbing, cars.
Just boycott it all.
It's so toxic.
It's got all this testosterone all over it.
You could get poisoned.
Just stay away from everything that men have produced.
Just go.
Go wherever it is.
You can find something not invented or maintained or built by a man.
And be free of all this toxic masculinity that, I don't know, has bears not chew your boobs off on a regular basis because you're in the woods.
I mean, I get you don't need thanks every morning.
Oh, man, thank you for building the civilization that keeps us safe.
Just maybe not taking this giant menstrual dump on men on a regular basis.
That's all I'm asking for.
Just a little bit of a cessation of that.
Or, good Lord, most taxes are paid by men.
You better boycott government money because that's also tainted.
Yeah.
With masculine money.
The money's got testosterone on it.
You're going to get cuties.
No welfare, no child support.
And child support and alimony payments, the laws were passed by men.
It's generally enforced by men.
The men are arrested by other men.
It's just a big giant cog in toxic masculinity.
You've got to boycott not only the stuff that's built and maintained by men, but government money, the welfare state, alimony, child support, all masculine, all patriarchally enforced.
Boycott it all.
Yeah, I'll be waiting for that to happen.
Yeah, it's a really weird dynamic.
It's a very, very difficult, unfathomable dynamic actually.
It is chilling how easily most women can be turned against the men in their society.
Like, whatever happens in society in the future, this can't be unseen.
This can't be unpilled.
There's no going back.
And this, because there's the internet, because there's the manosphere, because there's men's rights movements and so on, this knowledge is spreading in a way that it never spread before.
That women are just turning against white men and attacking and undermining and siding with the enemies and inviting in the enemies and This can't be unseen, whatever happens in the future.
And that the cultures and societies...
I'm sorry, what was that?
I missed it.
And the cultures and societies that treat women like crap are winning.
That can't be unseen either.
So, I don't know what's going to happen, but whatever is going to happen...
I think men are going to have a very tough time in the future saying to women, yeah, let's give you a lot of political power because you did a great job with it last time.
Yeah, you know, it's the funniest thing.
In my earlier years, of course, feminism was something very different many, many years ago than it is today.
So I'm 60.
So, you know, it was very different way back yonder.
Well, and, sorry, no, no, you were, sorry, I thought you'd finish your thought, please go on.
Yeah, I was going to go on with that, but no, you go ahead.
Well, I was just going to say that in a free society, the general social trends would be determined by ambition.
By resource acquisition and resource management of wealth and so on and all of that.
In a society men would still have I think a little bit more influence because there would be men would accumulate more wealth because men would be out there gathering resources for the women who were having children you know as in ye olden days.
So I think men would have a little bit more influence and I think it would be proportional to the danger but this sort of one for one thing where women have power without responsibility I don't know that that's going to be replicated in the future.
Either way, that's not going to last.
I mean, either some other ideology takes over and women's rights are out the window anyway, or, you know, after a sort of bitter struggle, the people who reshape things in the future are going to have learned some kind of lesson, but...
And I don't blame women for this at all.
I mean, it's natural.
I mean, men have had sort of massive consequences in political action for tens of thousands of years.
You know, you get the wrong leader, he takes you to war, and you die like a dog in the ditch.
You know, but women have had political power for really less than a century.
And they've used that political power to shield themselves in general from consequences.
Oh, did you choose the wrong man?
Oh, well, that's okay.
You can divorce him and we'll just give you welfare or we'll get him to pay you alimony and child support and so on.
Oh, you're dissatisfied in your marriage.
Oh, did you get pregnant out of wedlock and the guys run off?
That's fine.
We'll take...
Right, so women have generally used the state, and I'm generalizing here enormously, but women have generally used the state to escape consequences when...
They can.
And that is perfectly natural as well.
It's not like women are bad or anything.
It's just this is the way that things have gone down for various reasons.
But that is this sort of betrayal, this feeling that you can't trust your women, that you can't understand where their allegiances are, you can't understand why your women treat you with such contempt.
While worshiping groups that would treat them a thousand times worse than the worst thing they've accused you of?
And it's like, it's gross and very disturbing.
And again, it can't be unseen.
And there are some men now beginning to stand up.
Which has been really beautiful to see and be proud of their masculinity and their manhood, just like they're Americans now who are proud of being Americans.
So some kind of tide is shifting that way.
It seems slow, but it does seem to be shifting a bit.
And maybe in part to folks like you and some of the other folks who put a lot of their work and energy into bringing these facts to the wider audience.
Yeah, and people need to shield their children from toxic academia.
I'm acutely aware that if my daughter goes to college and she goes into some artsy field, And things haven't changed by then?
It may only be eight years from now, right?
I know exactly what she's going to be taught about me.
I know exactly what she's going to be taught about me.
What kind of person I am, as the result of my race, as the result of my gender.
What is she going to be taught about the moral content of my character based upon collective concepts like race and gender?
I would view that as Extremely toxic.
Oh, yeah.
A toxic substance to expose her to.
You know, if she wants to become a doctor, then there's things, you know, she has to go through to become a doctor, and I think that's, you know, natural.
But I'll tell you this, I mean, I will strongly counsel her to stay away from The social sciences and the arts these days, they are not about education anymore.
They're about brainwashing, programming, and you're basically being absorbed into an ivory tower kind of cult that is just teaching you to hate an entire segment and race and gender in the population.
And I would view that as an extraordinary...
And the letters I've gotten from people whose kids have gone off to college and have We've fallen down this infinite well of leftist hatred and abuse and so on.
It's heartbreaking.
You know, what happened to my little girl?
What happened to my little boy?
You know, they come home, I don't recognize them.
They're full of all these weird ideas.
They criticize everything about me.
I can't get through to them.
I can't, you know, everything that happened before has vanished.
I mean, it's chilling.
It's chilling.
And I think we bloody well got to keep our kids away from these indoctrination camps.
Yes.
Well, and my daughter, who hates the West, you know, Her IB program and her degree in colonial literature.
She hates the West.
She thinks the West is just as good destroyed.
Better off destroyed.
Tragic.
Well, she doesn't really want to be free then, right?
Because if the West is destroyed, women's rights are destroyed.
They're not around in the non-Western countries in particular.
So she's just like, well, I tried this freedom thing.
I don't really think it's for me.
And this, of course, is particularly enraging because, of course, the women say, well, we don't want to have anything to do with patriarchy.
So we're going to work very hard, as hard as we can, as hard as possible to destroy the least patriarchal, most egalitarian society the world has ever seen and replace it with what?
It beggars the mind.
It just really does.
It does.
Well, this, of course, it goes back to the old suspicion that people have had for a long time.
And again, this is generalizations, but the suspicion that women confuse feeling for thinking, and that thus are more easily programmed to turn against their men.
And their culture, and the culture that...
I mean, did she think she'd get to go to college in Iraq?
Right.
Well, she spent three months in Egypt by herself studying Arabic a few years ago.
Well, she came out of that experience and said, I never thought I was racist before, but she was sexually assaulted every day on the street.
Men groping her every single day.
She felt smothered.
But she still wants the West to be destroyed, and she still wants people from Egypt to come.
I don't quite understand.
Does she miss it?
Yeah, and she's a bright young thing, too.
Wait, so she went to Egypt.
She was groped every day.
Yep.
And she's...
She's a pro-migrant.
I guess some are coming from Egypt.
And she's against the West, where I assume she was not groped every single day, at least not by white males.
Right, right.
You know, I wish I could explain it, Stefan.
Does she miss the groping?
Seriously, does she miss the groping?
You know, I think I'm going to have this conversation with her because I've actually been thinking about it recently.
And I'm wondering what her experience in London is.
Well, it depends where she goes, right?
Yeah, that's very true, actually.
Depends where she goes.
You know, I made this argument, I think, more than a year ago, that if Angela Merkel is very keen on having all these Middle Easterners come in, it's no problem.
All she has to do is go and live in one of the no-go zones with a GoPro.
Yeah.
Some are attached to her and then just broadcast stream for two weeks and just everyone can see what a wonderfully culturally enriched experience she's going to have.
And I think that would put a lot of people's minds at ease.
Wow.
Yep.
Wow.
Now, so she has a problem with Western men, and I assume that she thinks that Western men are sort of patriarchal and misogynistic and this and that and the other.
Oh, you know, I'm going to say no on that one.
Oh, good.
And she's in a lovely, lovely relationship with a very lovely, hardworking young man.
And she appreciates and loves her father, and she's...
I wouldn't say anti-feminist, but she hasn't bought into that bit, at least.
Oh, good.
I'm thrilled to hear that.
That's absolutely wonderful.
Yes.
But she still wants the West to die.
You know, everything's our fault, right?
So, it's the propaganda that she got in the education that I arranged and paid for, for her.
Right.
Yeah.
Yeah.
It's kind of a bitter pill to swallow too, isn't it?
It's a very bitter pill to swallow.
Well, if she gets her way, if the West ever rises again, it will be a never forget moment that it was the treachery of women that had a lot to do with the downfall of the West.
And that is something that I think we're all going to need to have a long chat about.
At some point.
But speaking of which, I should get on to the next caller, but I really, really do appreciate the call.
Yep, thank you very much.
And most enjoyable, most engaging, and I hope we can talk again at some point.
Okay, thank you, Stefan.
Thank you.
Bye-bye.
Right up next is Afton.
Afton wrote in and said, Is it necessary to have discussions about fundamental matters in person rather than through social media platforms like Facebook?
I believe this question is response to a recent call-in where a woman was having an extremely emotionally volatile discussion with her close friend who'd kind of gone off the rails via text on Facebook and you said, That might not be a great idea.
So welcome to the show, Afton.
Thank you.
I'm very happy to be on the show.
Oh, thank you for calling in.
It's a great question.
Can I elaborate a little bit on the question?
No!
Yes, absolutely.
But only on Facebook.
No, I'm kidding.
The reason the comments stood out to me is because I often hear people say that they choose not to discuss matters of importance on Facebook because it always turns into a debate.
Which is kind of funny.
But then I took the liberty of asking people whether or not they thought it was necessary to speak face-to-face.
And everybody that I asked said that they do think it's necessary to speak face-to-face about fundamental matters because when you're speaking through text you can't read people's emotions.
So I just think the real question is, when is it necessary to have discussions about fundamental matters in person rather than through Facebook?
And if I can elaborate a bit more, I'd like to.
Yeah, go ahead.
So I did a little bit of research and reflection.
So there are some pros and cons for social media.
communication like some of the benefits are efficiency because you can you know post things and then you have this sort of relative subject matter to have the discussion about so there are these you know healthy boundaries and then there's like anonymity which is nice right so you can speak freely without having any of the negative consequences of people sort of You know,
personifying you as being not accepted in a social context.
I'm sorry, that got a little bit too circuitous for me.
Can you maybe boil that last one down a bit?
I lost the thread a little there.
I just want to make sure I'm following what you're saying.
Okay, so anonymity is a benefit to communicating on social media because you can say whatever you want.
Feel like saying, and you're not going to be sort of personified as being socially unacceptable based on what you're saying, right?
So if I want to talk about my support of Donald Trump, but I'm afraid that I might lose my job or whatever, I can easily still speak about those ideas and maintain my anonymity by doing it through Facebook or other social media platforms.
Is that, am I still kind of Okay, so I followed that.
The downside, of course, with anonymity is internet courage and the general abuse that flows out of, you know, stuff that people would say to someone on text that they would never say to that person's face because they'd be afraid of the repercussions.
But okay, I can certainly get that.
But go ahead.
Right, and then there's like the collaboration, right?
So people can...
All come together and have a discussion about things more efficiently than if they were to try to do that in person.
And also, with the accountability, there's a record of everything that's said, for the most part, online.
So even if you don't have a person to hold accountable for saying something offensive, what they've said is still on record and it can still be analyzed by the audience and people can still have a discussion about whether or not what was said is True or accurate.
And then I guess like the cons of social media communication is like a lack of human connection.
And this is an interesting subject because I think a lot of people interpret human connection as in some ways being able to know what a person's thinking or feeling and I'm well aware that we you know for the most part can sense what people are feeling but we can't really read people's minds consistently and so I started thinking about you know why people actually want to have face-to-face communication and and I found that
a lot of the time it has to do with this sort of Implication of the threat of speaking to someone face-to-face.
So when you want to have a serious discussion, you want to speak face-to-face because you really want to hold that individual accountable for what is being said.
Wait, wait.
Why wouldn't they be accountable online if they would be face-to-face?
Well, they could be accountable online if they were giving up their identity, but they have the option to not do that, right?
Like my Facebook doesn't have my actual name on it.
And if people want to ask me about my information, they can.
But, you know, for the most part, what I say is associated with this Facebook entity and not me as a person.
So it's like, you know, I'm not going to run into someone on the street who's like, oh, hey, you, you said this thing on Facebook and, you know, I'm upset with you about it.
I mean, that's not going to happen unless I consent to giving up my identity.
Does that...
Okay, so your avatar would have accountability, but you yourself wouldn't.
Right.
Well, the whole idea that I think I'm getting at is that it's always more about, you know, what's being said rather than who's saying it, right?
So people can think whatever they want about the avatar, but, you know...
They've really just got the statements to reflect on.
And I think that that's really effective because a lot of the time when people are having face-to-face communication, there's this fear factor, right?
And I think it fundamentally boils down to you're afraid of the threat of physical violence happening, right?
So you're having a discussion about a heated subject, like you might be speaking to Somebody about Black Lives Matter and, you know, you're worried about saying certain things because you don't want that person to hurt you, essentially.
And so you either run the risk, right, or you kind of manipulate and you either don't speak the truth or you kind of try to, you know, work your way around it.
And so In terms of face-to-face communication being more accurate, a more accurate representation of what a person's feeling, I'm not sure that that's really the case, because I'm not sure that we can actually read each other's emotions.
And I think that when you're speaking in person, there's this temptation to sort of personify what the person is saying and saying, oh, like, what you're saying is about You, and not really about what you're saying, whereas when you're just typing something on Facebook,
the statement's just there, and you can't really, you know, manipulate and say that you didn't say what you said, or, you know, you're kind of, the statement's just out there, and so I think it's more effective, actually, to speak about fundamental matters in person, but obviously, you know, I don't think that social media can replace You know, face-to-face communication.
Sorry, sorry.
Did you just say that it was better to speak about important matters person-to-person?
No, I said that I actually think it's better to speak about important matters on social media because you have the protection of anonymity and you also have the record of what's being said.
And I just think that there are certain things that are necessarily communicated face to face, like, you know, romantic things and aesthetic things, things that don't generally...
You know, cause conflict are more beneficial to communicate face to face, right?
Because what's life if you're not actually interacting with people in the real world?
But when it comes to fundamental matters of importance where what people are saying is very important, I think it's better to have that record and to have that record be public and to allow, you know, Large numbers of people to engage in the discussion and share their opinions about,
you know, what's being said, as opposed to, let's just say, going to a conference and having, like, a 15-minute question period or going to a cafe and, you know, striking up a conversation with an individual.
And I think, just to finish on my elaboration of the question, that, you know, Takes away the option to express oneself physically, right?
So you're limited to using words to defend yourself, and it's impossible for you to actually get physically hurt.
And has this occurred to you, Afton, that you have been in a conversation about Politics or something like that.
And you've been threatened with physical violence in your life?
Certainly as an adolescent.
But in my adult life, I've never necessarily been physically threatened.
But I have had moments where I'm having political discussions with people and they get very frustrated with me and they look like they might want to hit me.
And they kind of...
Are more able to make it a matter of my identity rather than what's being said.
And in my experience, when I'm having these conversations via social media, I mean, everything I've said is on record, right?
So I don't...
So, sorry, you said as an adolescent, you were physically attacked for political or philosophical discussions?
Yes.
And what happened?
Um, I think simply, you know, adolescents kind of have less...
No, no, no.
What actually happened?
Not what happened in some sort of an analytical sense.
What was the physical thing that happened?
Um...
Well, there were a lot of things that happened because I'm 27.
So when I was an adolescent, it was kind of in the gangsterism age where, you know, rap was really big and violence was really big.
Maybe it always has, but I don't know.
So, you know, there are many situations.
What happened?
Stop giving me the analysis.
What happened?
What was the physical thing that happened?
Just so I can understand.
Because when I have too many words of abstractions, I kind of fog out after a bit.
So I'm just trying to make sure I understand viscerally what you're...
Emotional and physical experience was of being attacked for your political opinions or your social perspectives.
Okay.
So give me the conversation and what played out.
Okay, well, it was quite a long time ago, but I can think of one situation where I was in conflict with another person over some trivial matter, and she happened to be African American.
And I was accused of...
Being racist.
And I attempted to defend myself by saying that I would never, you know, dislike somebody because of their skin color and so on.
And I was essentially just accused of lying and then was, you know, beat up in the schoolyard.
But that's just like one...
You were beat up by blacks in the schoolyard because...
No, not by blacks.
No, it was a group of...
I mean, Canadian, right?
So it was a group of multicultural kids.
But my conflict was with somebody who was African-American.
Oh, so a bunch of different ethnicities beat you up because they thought you were being racist towards the black woman?
Well, I think it was more for fun.
Like, I think that they didn't even really care whether or not I was racist.
It was just sort of...
Like entertainment for them and I guess you know that's the thing like when you're interacting with people in person you can't really you know end the conversation the way you can by a Social media, right?
So on social media, if you have a discussion, a lot of the time people say crazy things, right, that are totally absurd and threatening.
But, you know, there's no actual threat because they're just online.
Whereas when you're having these discussions in person, if you allow it to escalate, it can get out of hand.
I mean, just today, actually, there was...
No, no, hang on, hang on.
Sorry, just before we get to today.
So, Afton, what happened...
When you were assaulted at school, I mean, what did the school do?
What did your parents do?
I mean, that's astounding to me.
Well, that's a whole other story, but essentially nothing.
Nothing in the, you know, the conflict escalated.
What do you mean?
The school knew you'd been physically assaulted, but didn't call the cops, didn't...
I mean, I'm not sure I understand.
I think the way it worked from my recollection is that there was a large enough group of people that not one person...
One single person could be held accountable.
But you knew who it was, right?
Yeah, I did.
So they would ask you.
It's not like everyone gets off scot-free if a bunch of people beat you up.
It doesn't dilute that way.
So I'm just kind of curious what happened after you were physically assaulted.
Well, in that situation, I was harassed a lot as a child, but in that particular situation, that particular conflict, it continued to escalate.
The threats continued to escalate.
I became fearful for my life.
I was in constant communication with the staff at the school and my parents about the issue.
And my mother...
But what happens, though?
I mean, I'm very serious about what you're saying here.
I mean, you're fearful of being killed.
Yeah.
And I'm not saying you're wrong.
I mean, I understand these things can escalate.
I'm not trying to minimize what it is that you're talking about, but...
I mean, that's really quite...
I mean, so you told the school about this wilding or this assault or this mass attack, and did they say, well, we can't do anything about it?
Um, they, it was very complicated.
Like, what happened was the initial attack happened, and then there was kind of this general announcement to the class about bullying and whatever.
And then threats continued, and then, like, the kids were following me home after school and chasing me and whatever.
And then the school didn't really communicate with me very much about it.
They started communicating with my parents.
But what actually ended up happening was before any of the adults could figure out What they desired to do about the situation.
No, I'm sorry.
It's not that hard.
You were assaulted.
You called the cops.
And people get Charged with assault, and they go to trial, and if they're found guilty, I don't understand why it's that complicated.
I mean, if I go and beat someone up at a mall, I mean, people don't sort of wring their hands and say, gosh, what are we going to do?
We need to be in lots of communications, and there aren't general statements about bullying in malls.
I mean, they just don't...
I mean, maybe I'm missing something completely here, but...
I don't think I thought of that as an option.
Like, I really...
But no, it's not up to you.
You're the victim.
You're the kid, right, in this situation.
It would be your parents and the school.
But in particular, your parents.
It doesn't matter who.
Anyone, like you, would say, okay, we've got to go down and talk to the cops.
We've got to figure out who assaulted you.
And of course, you know.
And I'm just, why didn't any of that happen?
I really can't speak for the people that were employed at the school.
I assume that my parents didn't call the police.
Because, I don't know, maybe they couldn't be bothered.
I mean, I did endure...
No, I don't think...
I mean, come on, they couldn't be bothered?
I'm not really sure what their opinion truly was about the way people treated me.
Right?
What do you think may have been their opinion that would have them think that there would be too much of a bother to try and do what was necessary to...
I mean, okay, let's say that they didn't want to go down the route of calling the cops and...
Figuring out who assaulted you and dealing with it that way, I mean, wouldn't they pull you out of that school?
Well, my parents had, you know, split up and at the time they were actually living together.
My mother had moved back in with my father and I think that they just were spending too much money on alcohol and cigarettes to be able to afford to put me in any quality educational facility.
So I was just going to the public school that was a walking distance from where I lived.
Well, I'm not saying that they had to put you in some very expensive private school, but they would switch schools, right?
Well, that's not what happened, and I really don't know why.
I mean, I was just focused on getting out of the unpleasant situations.
No, I'm not.
I'm not.
I'm not trying to...
Sorry to interrupt.
I'm not trying to put anything on you.
Again, you're the victim.
You're the kid.
You're just struggling to survive in this pretty feral environment.
But I just...
I'm just telling you, I'm...
Sort of, maybe I'm shocked because you're not or whatever, but this seems like kind of in the realm of normal for you.
And I'm telling you from the outside, it's really not.
Well, I don't think that it's normal, healthy behavior, but I do think it's common.
Why?
Why do you think it's common?
Because, I mean, you know, bullying is an epidemic that's spoken about at schools.
There's lots of Different forms of bullying that goes on.
People commit suicide.
People are murdered.
I mean, just today, right?
Well, that's not common, right?
I mean, people getting murdered in school is not common.
Well, I didn't get murdered.
No, I know.
But you're talking...
I'm just trying to denormalize this stuff for you a little bit.
That's all.
Well, I mean, there's a difference between thinking that something is appropriate and thinking that something is normal.
I think it's inappropriate, but I think it happens enough that...
Sorry, what's inappropriate?
I think that what happened was inappropriate, but I think that...
No!
No!
No, this is what I'm trying to get to you, Afton.
It's not inappropriate.
It's illegal!
It's immoral.
It's assault.
You could have been killed.
You know, when you get swarmed and beaten up, your head can fall and hit the concrete.
You can hit a curb.
You can go into a pole.
Somebody can hit you in the nose and the nose bone goes into your brain.
Someone can accidentally gouge out an eyeball.
Like, really terrible things can happen when people are doing these crazy physical assaults.
So, no, inappropriate is, you know, I'm showing up at the opera with white socks on, you know.
This is not in that realm.
Well, all right then.
I mean, you know, but I do think that this kind of interaction is normalized, and it doesn't only happen with adolescents, it happens with adults.
I mean, there was a lot of documentation of people who are resisting the Donald Trump supporters during the elections, and, you know, they're, you know, mashed.
Well, the left is violent.
Yeah, we know the left is violent.
But you say this stuff gets normalized, and I'm telling you, stop normalizing it.
Do you think that I'm normalizing it?
I do.
I'm not saying you're saying it's okay, but you don't even know why your parents didn't call the cops or get you to a place of safety.
I mean, you had been physically assaulted and they sent you back with no protection.
What's the protection?
Oh, it's okay.
They had a speech about bullying.
Yeah, that'll help, right?
I mean, that's not good.
So do you think I'm normalizing this behavior by acknowledging that it happens commonly and therefore it's a normalized aspect of our current society?
Like, what should I say about it then?
How should I describe it?
Like, what place does it have in our society?
I mean, I understand what- You were failed.
Theoretical- You were failed.
You were failed by the school.
You were failed by your parents.
You were failed by your community.
You were failed by your extended family who should have damn well sat down with your parents and said, oh, she got beaten up.
You better do something about that because violence is really terrible and she's your daughter and it's your job to protect her and it's your duty as parents to make sure she's safe and is not being sent back into some ultra-violent hellhole where she's going to get assaulted again and where she's fearful of being murdered.
Well, I guess, you know, some people give a shit and some people don't.
I'm trying to get you to give a shit about you as a teenager.
I feel like I give a shit, but I can't speak for the adults who are responsible for my social development through my adolescence.
I don't know.
Are these things that you haven't heard of happening commonly?
I know you're very, you know, up to date with the news.
How would you, how do you think I should describe it to myself if it's not something that's been normalized and it's not something that I should acknowledge as...
It's a horrifying betrayal of the primary job that your parents and your school and your society had, which is to protect children, well, protect everyone from violence, to protect children from violence.
That's the primary job of the society.
And in particular, your parents.
Right?
That's their job.
Do you think that people can rely on society to protect them from people who are attacking them?
Oh my god, you're so abstract.
I'm talking about your life and your parents.
I'm not talking about society as a whole and what do I think of general patterns in violence and demographics.
I'm talking about your life after your childhood.
Can I tell you another story I'd really like your opinion on?
It's a short story.
I'm willing to be distracted, but I'm bookmarking where we were, but I'm willing to be taken in a new direction.
Go ahead.
Okay.
I'm going to keep it short.
I was about 13 years old and I smoked cigarettes like my parents did, which I don't anymore.
And this guy who had this, this, I grew up in Ottawa, and there were Somalian refugees there, but none of us knew what it meant to be a refugee.
None of us understood that anyway.
So this guy who had previously assaulted me, walks up to me and- Wait, wait, wait, was he, he wasn't the guy who was involved in the previous story?
Because that happened later, right?
Yeah, yeah.
No, there were women, actually.
Okay, well, then we need to start with the first assault, because I don't know what that looks like or what that means.
Well, I just really want to, just please.
Okay, so this guy walks up to me and he says, give me a cigarette.
And I say, no, fuck you.
And he grabs me by the throat.
He's about 18.
I was about 13.
Grabs me by the throat, slams me up against the wall.
Now, I'm downtown at the Rideau Center in Ottawa.
There's hundreds of- Sorry, was this the Somali?
Yes.
Okay.
And he starts, you know, just telling me how he'll, you know, whatever, hurt me.
And I'm there off the ground in this guy's hand, right?
But I'm thinking that somebody is going to stop him because there's hundreds of people around.
And I remember this lady walked by us.
Who looked about the age of my school teachers and she looked directly into my eyes and she just kept walking and it was at that moment that I realized how alone people are.
And anyway, he just finished telling me what he had to say and stole my pack of cigarettes.
And so that's an example of how disassociated people are from each other and it's a nice idea to think that society owns the responsibility of defending people against the initiation of coercion.
But the reality is often not that.
Well, I think, and I'm incredibly sorry that this happened to you.
I mean, that is a terrifying experience, of course.
And it doesn't end when he lets you go, because he's around, right?
Right.
Or innocent bystanders who are just apathetic to that and are just...
Well, I gotta...
Tell me if you think this is true, and I'm sorry to interrupt, but tell me if you think this is true.
If he had been a white...
Do you think anyone would have done anything?
You know, that's a really good question.
And maybe if that woman who looked me directly in the eye felt that the person who was attacking me was closer to her and reminded her more of people that have respect for her, maybe she would have attempted to intervene.
But I'm not sure.
There are videos on YouTube that sort of Not formal experiments, but just sort of thought experiments that people do, where they have a woman hitting a man, both white.
The woman is hitting the man, and everyone's sort of snickering and laughing and all that, and just rolling their eyes and walking past.
But the moment that the situation is reversed, and they're roughly equal in size, the moment the situation is reversed and the man is hitting the woman, everyone like swarms him and stops him and, you know, threatens him and, you know, call the cops and you're an abuser and all this kind of stuff, right?
Well, I've seen, yeah.
Yeah.
Because in both of the situations of assault that we're talking about here, there was race involved to some degree.
I mean, the incident with the black woman was racial, and it was a multiracial group who attacked you, and then there was a Somali guy.
It's funny, you know, because I think a lot of times that people don't intervene, it's because of fears of being called racist or whatever it is, right?
I mean, there is, I think, a challenge for this kind of situation.
I agree.
I think that...
You know, violence has become normalized in our society, and people don't really associate horror with violence.
They associate violence with power and freedom, and it's totally, you know, backwards thinking.
And so I think that, you know, it's important to protect yourself when you are Speaking about fundamental matters because a lot of the time those fundamental matters are requiring people to change the way that they see the world and the way that they interact with it.
And for some people like that old lady who walked by me and couldn't be bothered to help me, you know, for people like that, they really only care about their own well-being and they don't realize that, you know, The wellbeing of the people around them affect them.
You're saying violence is becoming normalized.
I'm just curious what your perceptions are in Canada.
What do you think the youth crime rate, let's just say from 2000, since 2000, what do you think has happened to the youth crime rate?
I think it probably, you know, swelled and started to decline around 2010.
But I think that, you know, the West Coast is very different culturally from the East Coast.
And I'm not really sure why.
I'm currently living in Vancouver and there's a lot less violence here.
And people have, of course, they're actually, they say there's a lot more violence here because there's this gang stuff or whatever, but I don't see any of that.
I'm actually in the city.
And the people I speak to, their stories of childhood are nowhere near my stories.
I mean, I can't tell most people about some of the stories from my childhood because it would scare them, right?
And I've spent some time in Edmonton, and I think there, there's a lot more violence.
And I think it, you know, had to do with the fact that when the boom happened, You know, people could get their driver's license at 14 and you could work at McDonald's and make, you know, 20, $25 an hour.
So a lot of people just dropped out of school and you had these people who are, you know, highly uneducated and very wealthy.
And so they were, you know, doing a lot of things that were, you know, contributing to...
No, no, no.
No, I'm so sorry.
Okay, first of all, youth crime has fallen 42% since 2000.
And that's a steeper drop than the 34% decrease recorded for the overall crime rate.
A 51% decrease in the rate of youth accused of property crime.
Break and entering, theft under 5,000.
Youth crime has fallen significantly.
And listen, it's not because people make good money at McDonald's that they become criminals or that they become violent.
Violence arises out of specific family situations.
And I've got a whole presentation series and a whole bunch of interviews with experts.
You can go to bombinthebrain.com.
And I appreciate these explanations, but...
You're kind of flailing and saying, well, you know, there was a boom and people made good money at McDonald's and they could get driver's licenses at 14.
I mean, this is not what causes violence is child abuse in general, as a whole.
I mean, there are other minor factors of brain damage and tumors and things like that.
It is.
And so, you know, my concern is that when you were talking about your parents drinking and splitting up and getting back together and smoking and not protecting you and so on, I hope that you will listen back to the way that you talk about these things.
It appears to me, it seems to me, and this is why I'm glad we're having a conversation rather than typing on Facebook, that there's not much of an emotional connection.
I'm not saying that's true.
I'm just saying that's my impression of talking with you.
You're talking about it like a grocery list, eggs, milk, alcoholic parents, no connection and getting beaten up and all that.
Very emotional.
I'm sorry?
The emotional impression is very emotional.
I mean, in order for me to associate, to connect with those emotions and speak to you about this, it would be impossible.
I would just be crying.
What's wrong with that?
Well, because then you wouldn't be able to understand what I'm saying.
No, I don't understand what you're saying when you have no emotional connection to it, and it's very rambly, and it's hard to connect with at a sort of very human level.
And so I do think, in my particular opinion, I'm just obviously some guy on the internet, but I do think it's important to connect with the emotions about our histories, not to normalize them.
I mean, look, your language skills are fantastic.
You're very...
I think it also allows you to talk yourself in and out of stuff pretty fluidly.
And I think it means that you kind of disconnected from some of the emotional truth of your history.
And this may be, and the reason why I'm saying all of this, and again, please understand, it's just my opinion.
So if it doesn't make sense to you, if it doesn't fit for you, just, you know, toss it out.
But, um, I think that this goes back to why you may prefer social media platforms.
Because social media platforms are about information, not about connection.
Not about tone.
The vast majority of human communication is non- It's eye contact.
It's a slight coloring of the cheeks.
You know, in Japan, they're so afraid of shaming, you can actually get an operation that prevents the blood vessels from making your cheeks go red when you're embarrassed from working.
So you can't be physically, visibly shamed, so to speak.
And so it's gestures, it's tone, it's emphasis, or as the old saying, don't put the emphasis on the wrong syllable.
But, you know, whether something's put forward as a statement or as a question, whether it's emphatic, whether it's tentative, Whether the pauses are significant, the space between language sometimes can be as significant as the language itself, you know, like you get through a mountain through the hole.
And you may prefer social media platforms because it is less emotional, it's less connected, it's less human.
And look, I've got no problem.
I mean, I never said don't talk about politics on – I mean, I have a Twitter account for having to say don't talk about politics, don't talk about anything important on Facebook.
This actual conversation came out of a woman whose friend had gone kind of nuts and – It was not the intellectual content of what they were discussing that was the problem.
It was the fact that the person seemed pretty unhinged, and that's not a good topic.
When there's very high and volatile emotions in a friendship, you don't do that stuff.
I mean, if you want to share information online, of course I do that a lot.
And I'm not saying don't do that, of course.
I mean, it would be ridiculous, but I've got a message board.
So I'm not saying that at all, but what I am saying is that when it does come to very important emotional topics, when it comes to saving a friendship, you don't do that by typing.
I mean, in the same way, we would understand you don't break off an engagement in a text message, right?
When there's important things to be talked about, the face-to-face communication is the best chance you have of avoiding escalation, of avoiding misunderstanding.
We are...
You understand, we develop...
All of these non-verbal capacities for communication, we developed them As a species, long before there was any such thing as typewriters, let alone...
I mean, letters used to be the challenge for this kind of stuff as well.
And it can still be online.
I mean, the face-to-face might be Skype.
It could be Google Hangouts.
Whatever it's going to be, where you at least get some eye contact, some tone in the voice, some facial expressions, and all of that.
It's easy...
To not be vulnerable and connected on social media, with typing.
There is a brutality to text, in my humble opinion, that when people type stuff, it just sits there on your phone or in your inbox or on your pop-up, whatever it is on Facebook.
It sort of sits there and it kind of burns itself into your brain.
So you say, well, it's good to have a record.
Yeah, and I think for some things, I think, you know, if you're having complicated discussions and people, you know, can't backtrack because you've got their earlier things, sure, I think that's important and that's helpful.
But there is a wonderful fluidity to human conversations where...
Something can be upsetting to you in the moment and you talk about it being upsetting to you and you move on but it's not sitting there on your phone forever and you will occasionally look at it and it comes back.
We're designed to be fluid in our communications.
There was no record of our communications through most of our history.
And this is why I think the more face-to-face time we have, the better we get at not going too far and having to backtrack, the better we get at empathy, the better we get at curiosity, the better we get at connection.
And I'm somewhat concerned the degree to which typing is replacing conversations with They're just different parts of the brain.
They're different skills to develop.
And they don't...
It's fine for the exchange of information, for even the exchange of arguments about abstract topics.
But when it comes to personal topics, when it comes to a human connection to yourself and to others, there is no substitute, I think.
And of course, you wouldn't want...
You know, if somebody said, well, you can watch...
The whole movie or you can watch, you know, a movie you really want to go and see.
You can watch the whole movie or you can watch 10% of the movie.
I think you'd say, well, I want to watch the whole movie.
And in the same way, when we communicate merely through text, we're losing about 90% of the context of what's going on.
And I think when it's really, really important, don't hide in the manageable and controllable.
But arid and antiseptic biosphere of text, it is time to break out the feels, get the eye contact and really try to connect with people.
Yeah, I totally agree with you in what you're saying.
I understand...
The importance of body language, but the fact is that we can't really consistently read a person's body language.
I mean, there are certain, you know, meanings that we associate with certain gestures, but a lot of the time, it's really...
It's important to give people the respect to tell you how they're feeling about something rather than just sort of assuming things about how they're feeling.
And just as you said, you know, speaking about abstract matters is fine online.
And then when you need to speak about things that have to do with emotions, It's better to be face-to-face, but, you know, taking the example...
Yes, but you'll get...
Sorry to interrupt, Afton.
You'll get better at reading body language the more you do, the more you have vulnerable, connected conversations face-to-face.
So saying, well, we can't perfectly read body language, that's a false standard, right?
That's a standard of idealistic perfection.
But you can certainly improve how you read body language.
You can certainly, you know, through trial and error.
And we're very good at that.
You know, dogs can do it, you know, and dogs are very good at body language and, you know, Animals have all of these, you know, cats make themselves look bigger and all of that.
So I think it's definitely worth practicing because I still hope, of course, for most people that, you know, the majority of my interactions occur offline.
I mean, I do a lot of stuff online.
I have these conversations, you know, I do a lot of stuff online.
But the majority of my contacts occur with, you know, friends, loved ones, family, wife, daughter.
They occur offline.
And one of the reasons I'm good at this conversation stuff is because I do and have done so much of it offline.
And I just really wanted to sort of make that case for people.
When you have a challenging conversation with someone you care about, not just some anonymous person on the internet or whatever, you're probably not going to say that Skype or whatever.
But if you do have a challenging conversation, it is tempting to want to go to the keyboard because it's a more managed and controlled environment.
But I think you're going to fail more than you're going to succeed.
As you continue to have more meaningful conversations with people, you'll get better at it and it gets more efficient.
So thanks very much.
And listen, I appreciate your honesty when I sort of took what may have looked like a bit of a left turn in terms of going into your history.
But I'm always kind of curious why these topics are very important to people.
And I really understand.
Where you're coming from in terms of fears of physical violence.
Couldn't quite understand that to begin with, but that's why I kind of needed to know the history.
So I really, really appreciate you sharing that with me.
That was very powerful for me and really helped me to understand where you're coming from.
So thanks, Emil, for the call.
I appreciate it.
I hope we can talk again, and let's move on to the next caller.
Alright, up next we have McKay.
McKay wrote into the show and said,"'I am soon due to start training for the British Army, and I must ask this if it would be a bad decision for me.
Has coming from a Mormon family given me a misguided sense of self-worth now as an atheist?' Is this perhaps why I'm finding the idea of selflessness and loyalty in army life so desirable?
That's from McKay.
Hey McKay, how are you doing tonight?
I'm fine, how are you doing?
Good.
So you've already enlisted, right?
Yeah, I'm due to ship out in just under a month now.
Why are you calling me now?
I mean, seriously, I need to know.
I didn't really think about the morals and ethics of it until now, and the army's kind of been my last resort.
No, but Mormon!
You're supposed to think about ethics.
I'm not Mormon anymore.
I'm an atheist now.
Oh, you're an atheist now.
Sorry, okay.
Well, I don't follow all those.
But that would have...
I mean, you didn't totally abandon...
Well, no, no, no.
The Mormon beliefs have given me a very strong sense of what's good and wrong, and I do thank my upbringing for that and my parents, but I think their lack of respect for intellectualism...
Has kind of maybe confused about purpose of life and all these other big topics and it's kind of got me a bit lost now.
It wasn't until I recently saw one of your videos about you talking to a father whose son was at West Point and he said that your material helped him leave.
And it wasn't until I saw that video about a week ago now that I started thinking about my own life in the military.
And I come to this position because I basically failed in the free market.
I went to university for two years.
I dropped out.
What did you take in university?
Games design and games journalism.
And why did you not like it?
I didn't like game design because I realized everything I learned there, I could be learning online for cheaper and without the very lefty, liberal environment.
Let's design Depression Quest 2.
I didn't like journalism because I learned how corrupt and how repetitive the journalism industry is.
All they do is they get press releases.
Wait, wait, wait.
Sorry.
Game design and journalism?
Well, I did one year of one course, didn't like it, tried the other one, and then I left after that.
And what was it like in journalism?
Which was the more lefty, program-y one?
Journalism, definitely.
I had a couple good professors there, but they basically read out press releases and then rewrite them.
One of my lecturers actually told us to go to BuzzFeed.
She actually said that, and one of the first lectures she gave was like, oh, this is a good website.
Yeah, you should use this for information a lot.
And it was like, I paid nine grand a year to learn this shit.
It's unbelievable.
Right.
Now, that doesn't mean that you failed at the free market, because academia, not the free market.
Yeah, no.
But then after that, I worked at Subway for a year, and then I worked in...
Wait, the sandwich place?
Yeah.
First of all, they make good sandwiches.
Second of all, Subway?
Fast food?
How come?
I mean, a year.
I spent five months living with my partner at the time, and they pressured me to get a job, and the only thing I could find was Subway.
Okay, partner?
Now, see, I... Feel free to break that out for me, because that's just one of these words.
It could mean tennis partner, dance partner, are you gay?
I mean, I just want to know.
PC language.
No, it was my boyfriend at the time.
We'd been living together for about five months, and he was tired of me scrounging off him, basically, which is what I was doing, to be fair.
And he encouraged me to get a job, and I looked around, and Subway was the only place that was hiring for some reason, so I worked there.
I promise, I absolutely promise not to make a joke about a footlong.
Because that would be so insensitive, I couldn't even tell you.
So I promise not to do that.
So he said, get a job, so you got a job at Subway.
Yeah.
I mean, you're a smart guy.
Everybody who listens to this show gets both the blessing and the curse of me assuming that they're just very smart.
That's just the way it rolls.
Even with the occasional YouTube comment.
Anyway, so you worked at Subway.
I mean, were you looking for other things at the time?
I dropped off about 20 CVs and they were the only people that got back to me within a month.
So...
Even looking online for jobs, that was the only thing I could find because all the other stuff required you need degrees and you need this or experience.
But didn't you say that you already know how to look things up on BuzzFeed?
Isn't that pretty much the same damn thing?
So you did the subway for a year and then what happened?
Um, he, me and him had a bit of a breakup because I, well, he kind of had an emotional breakdown because he was basically emotionally mature as a quadriplegic brick.
And, um, he had a breakdown, his parents.
Wait, you might be turning on him a little bit here, my friend.
About as emotionally mature as a quadriplegic brick?
Yeah, it's not my, uh, it's not my simile, but yeah.
You just noticed this after a while?
Well, I mean, honestly, the reason I moved in with him is because he was the only way I could get out of the university life without having to move back in with my parents, because I had no other prospects at the time.
So I kind of used him to get out of that, which was a bit using of me and not fair in me, and I admit that now.
But I hoped I could make something of it, and I did for a while, but eventually it just fell apart for various reasons.
Well, how did it fall apart?
Infidelity?
No, I admitted to him that I wasn't sexually attracted to him because he was quite overweight and he wasn't willing to help himself with that at all.
And I just got sick of it and I told him, unless you do something about it, we can't work.
And instead of doing something about it, he got all upset and drank a whole bottle of whiskey, then took all his antidepressant pills and ran outside and ended up in hospital.
Yikes.
So did he try to kill himself?
I don't know what that combination does.
I don't know.
At that point, well, I tried...
And you always had the George Michael boyfriend experience.
The thing is, his parents later then came and blamed me for that.
He went into the kitchen initially and I had to drag him out of the kitchen and put him in his bedroom where he was safe because there were knives and stuff in there.
I was worried about him.
He physically pushed me away and made it quite obvious he didn't want me anywhere near there.
So I kind of left him to it.
And then later his parents come back and blame me for letting him go.
So, I mean, I can get his whole female side of the family was very emotional and very agitated and not very rational.
And I can see where he gets it from now that I've met them.
And was he this unstable throughout the time that you were with him?
When I first started dating him.
No, no, no, not funny.
No, no, no, let's not do the ha-ha.
I'm laughing at how ridiculous it is because I didn't see it at the time.
When I first started dating him, he'd been off work for six months due to depression.
All I wanted to do was get out of university.
I wasn't thinking about, is this a good thing for me to do?
That's how I ended up with all that.
Right.
Now, I'm going to assume that your parents are still Mormons, and are they bothered, I guess, equally or unequally by your atheism and homosexuality?
For them, we have another gay family member, an uncle, and they have this sort of thing, if it's something we don't agree with, we just kind of ignore it whenever the topic comes up.
We'll be nice to people, but we're not going to address the topics ever, because we can't have anything threaten our beliefs or our dogma, or we can't intellectually...
Because I will admit, I'm smarter than both my parents, and I don't even think I'm super high IQ, and they just can't intellectually engage with me on any of these topics, and that's another issue, I think.
Right, so your parents are emotionally avoidant and you ended up with an emotionally avoidant guy?
Uh, yeah.
Well, yeah.
Alright.
Well, is that an unfair way to carry?
I don't want to tell you your life, I'm just, this is all what popped into my head.
No, no, that's fair enough.
I mean, I'm glad he's gone now and I've been single for almost two years now, so that's good.
Right.
Now, single for gay men sometimes means a little bit different.
Single means I'm not in a relationship, but I'm still doing the casual sex thing?
I haven't been with anyone for a while, and I'm bisexual, sorry, not gay.
So I love a woman.
Wait, you had choice of the entire spectrum of human sexuality, and you chose the hysterical fat man?
I've just not, I've never been good at finding women.
I don't know why.
It's just, I don't know, I've always been bad at making friends.
Because you like hysterical fat men?
That might have something to do with it.
I think it's...
My parents don't have many friends outside of their religion, so they never taught me how to make friends outside of the people you happen to meet in your kind of small world, and that's something I've never known how to do.
Oh, to meet new people?
Just to make friends with people.
I've never been taught how to do that, and I've never been good at it, and I've always been socially isolated my whole life.
Do you find this conversation difficult?
No, not really, because it's intellectual and it's engaging, and I can deal with that.
It's intellectual?
We're talking about your family, your atheism, your gayness, your hysterical whiskey and antidepressant swilling boyfriend.
I don't know that it's that abstract yet.
Maybe we'll get there.
That's why.
I have no one else who's interested in this stuff.
That's a shame.
Everyone is fascinating if you listen.
And how do you know that you're bisexual?
I've dated women.
I like women.
In this current political climate, it's hard to find someone that agrees with your rather conservative beliefs.
Right.
Especially in the LBGQXOX community.
A little on the left side, if I remember rightly.
Which is why they all love Milo so much.
So you're still in contact with your parents, but you avoid the topic of your sexuality, right?
Yeah, that just never gets brought up, ever.
I mean, I do visit them once a week.
I live in the same town as them now.
And I go over there and I try to talk about their religion.
I try to talk about their upbringing with me and saying, you never respected my individuality or my thoughts or my ideas.
All you wanted me to do was be part of your religion.
And once I rejected that, you kind of rejected me in a way.
And I try to bring this up and they just go, well, we did what we thought was best for you.
And that's all I can get out of them.
They don't want to talk about it.
And I bring up the topic of Islam and how it's, you know, the plight on Western civilization that it is.
And they just, they kind of laugh at me now because they have a bet going among all my family that whenever I bring up Islam, they have a bet to see who wins something now.
It's just a joke to them.
They're not interested in these topics.
And I don't know, I've sort of at this point just given up talking to them about it now.
Hmm.
Yeah.
That's a...
That is a challenging conversational environment because you're kind of there but not there.
That's, I'll tell you this, just between us.
I mean, it's the state of mind that bothers me the most.
I'd rather have like my wisdom, I still have my wisdom teeth, I'd rather have my wisdom teeth out than be in that null zone of being around people but not there.
Like being this sort of empty, floaty, ghostly, conformity bot where I'm just sort of desperately trying to have anything.
It doesn't always have to be deep, deep stuff, but where I just can't be spontaneously myself.
I view that, just my own sort of personal experience, I view that as literally time subtracted from my life.
You know, like that's just like I might as well be dead.
As far as that goes.
Because at least if I'm dead, I'm not bored.
I'm just telling you that my particular anathema is being in this environment where I... I thought about this this week.
Maybe thinking about this conversation.
Maybe not.
But many, many years ago.
Oh, in a land far, far away.
I... A friend of mine had a roommate who had a wife.
No, he was engaged.
They weren't married yet.
A friend of mine had a roommate who had a wife who was religious.
Now, my friend and I, atheists of course, and he was horny.
So he was just, you know, whatever I got to conform to to get it, I will.
And We were, I don't know, we weren't talking about his wife and his wife was on her way over.
Sorry, his fiance was on her way over, but she wasn't there yet.
My friend and I, we were just sort of chatting about stuff and the topic of religion came up.
I can't remember exactly how or why.
And his roommate got really tense.
Really tense.
And he's like, guys, guys, guys, I need you to cool it with the rhetoric.
I always remembered that phrase.
It was so intense.
I need to cool it with the rhetoric.
Don't cock-block me with facts.
Don't cock-block me with arguments.
Don't upset my fiancé with reality.
Penis needs Sky Ghost for access to eggs.
And I just, I remember the, guys, guys, guys, don't, you gotta cool it with the rhetoric.
First of all, Kulit was projection because he was upset we weren't.
Rhetoric is just a wonderful way of describing people's...
It was just that moment where I was like, wow, this is a guy I can't be myself around.
And his wife is someone, his fiancée at that time, is someone I can't be myself around.
Now, I'd actually gone on vacation with these two guys.
We went to someplace really nice and warm for like two weeks and it was really quite a nice time.
Ah, so annoying though, this guy.
I had...
For video cameras.
And all of the pictures and the video of that trip, which I really, really wish I had.
He just put it through security and it got wiped by the magnet.
Whatever they do in security magnets, the x-rays or something.
Anyway.
Oh, well, another piece of archival footage from my youth.
Gone, baby, gone.
Because I have a lot of photographs from when I was younger.
Because when you're young, you never really think you're going to need them.
But when you get older, anyway.
But that was...
I just remember that night.
Just thinking like, okay, so...
I can't...
You know, even if there's just one topic that you can't talk about, then you have to self-censor and you have to sort of make sure that the topic doesn't go in that direction or it doesn't come up or, you know, and it's just like, ah, who cares?
I can't be bothered.
You know, when I was younger, I guess it mattered more.
But now that I'm older, I'm like, you know, this is who I am.
If you like it, you like it.
If you don't like it, well, sucks to be you.
You're losing out on something really great, but that's your choice.
And that is...
It just sort of popped into my mind this week.
And this question of socialization and how you socialize.
I do think a lot of people go into the army because...
It's guaranteed companionship, right?
Yeah, that's one of the reasons.
I'm hoping to find a life partner there.
Yeah, I don't know if a lot of people go into it because it's like a well-armed dating site, but I do think a lot of people go into it because it's If you're socially awkward and everyone's ordered to be together and go through all of these extreme situations like basic training and so on, although I think it's gotten a lot nicer since the ladies came on board, but I think that there's this kind of bonding that happens simply by proximity 24-7 and exposure to extreme situations.
You're just going to bond with people, right?
You don't really, in a sense, have to earn their proximity in the free market.
They're just with you, stacked up like cordwood, and they go with you where you go, right?
Yeah, I suppose.
I mean, I've always tended to make friends with people around me, it's just that those tend to die once you leave that position, and in the army that's kind of a given, and people expect that anyway.
What do you mean?
In the army, from what I've read, the friendships you make there, they're tough as nails, and they're a brotherhood there, but once you leave the army, you're not expected to stay friends for years afterwards.
It's just what happens there happens.
That's from what I've read.
I don't know if that's going to be my case, but that's what I've read.
Maybe.
I mean, I know more about Second World War friendships and so on, and they seemed to last longer, but...
Now, where...
I mean, are you going to go on the front lines?
Do you have any idea?
I mean, are you going to pull triggers and kill people?
I mean, what's going to happen?
I'm following my ancestors' footsteps and joining as a tank crewman.
So I'll be in a tank shooting at Muslims at some point.
Probably.
We'll see.
What do you think of that?
I think about what specifically.
Doing that?
Killing people.
If it has to be done, it has to be done.
It's a regrettable necessity, I suppose.
I mean, if it has to be done, it has to be done.
I mean, that's not an argument, right?
I mean, that's a tautology that means nothing.
What do you think about killing people?
Now, please understand, I'm, you know, if it's self-defense and some people pouring across the borders and, you know, not legally, quote legally, right, then that's a different matter.
But if you're going to be sent out to I'm not trying to goose you.
I'm just Curious, genuinely curious.
What do you think of that?
I have thought about this.
I just think someone who's read UPB and listened to it as well, I think I'm better in that position to make those decisions than people who haven't thought about ethics and morality before.
You won't be in a position to choose that, right?
You have to take orders, right?
If they say, blow this guy up, you've got to blow the guy up, right?
Yeah, that's true.
I mean, all of your ethical theories, I think, kind of fail in the face of the chain of command.
With, of course, the significant exception that if you're ordered to do something against the rules of war, against the Geneva Convention or that you consider immoral or illegal, I think that you do have a duty as a soldier to, I don't know where you're going and don't tell me or where it is, but I think you have a duty as a soldier to push back against those illegitimate orders.
I mean, that's true.
I mean, the IDF and the British Army particularly are two of the most ethical armies in the world because we have a values and standards code that says appropriate threat makes appropriate action.
Like if a guy is running at you with a baseball bat, you don't shoulder your rifle and shoot him.
You hit him in the head and you try and arrest him, you know.
It's about...
The British Army particularly has a very strong ethical code of not causing damage where it doesn't need to be done.
And the Israelis have a similar thing as well.
America not so much.
And I think that's one of the problems that America gets the reputation of killing people so much in the Middle East is because they're a bit more trigger happy than the Brits are anyway.
Well, and a bit more aerial and droney and kind of Now, of course, I mean, the UK was part of the coalition of the killing that began to dismantle Iraq, right?
Yeah, yeah, Tony Burdick's into that, and it's not the good.
No.
Now, that, of course, could happen again, and if that happens again, and you are ordered to shoot people, those would be legitimate orders, and I don't think that you would be able to legitimately disobey them.
I guess you could claim a conscientious objector and try and get out that way, right?
Yeah, true.
I mean, normally if you're in a tank, you're normally shooting at your infantry first.
Well, yes, but if you're invading their country, that doesn't make you the good guys, right?
I mean, the French were shooting back at the Germans in May of 1940, but that didn't mean that the Germans were the good guys.
Well, I mean, I think that's part of being a soldier, is you have to give up some of your personal choice and ethics and put that in the hands of your superiors, and that's just a choice you have to make.
Yes, but the superiors aren't in your head when you try to sleep at night.
Will you be able to do that?
That's the big question, right?
I mean, there's been studies on this, like the Milgram study, which showed people can do things they wouldn't normally do when they're ordered to.
Doesn't mean they're happy about it.
Doesn't mean it's good for them.
No.
But, um...
I don't know.
I guess I can't say that for sure, can I? Because I haven't experienced that and I don't want to make the pretension of saying I know what that feels like.
Do you think that the government is going to send you to kill people consistently, justly, fairly, morally?
I mean, isn't England, Britain, wherever you are, I mean, part of NATO and have to defend Turkey, you could end up at war with Russia?
Hopefully with Trump in power, that's not going to happen.
Well, Trump isn't going to be in charge of you, though.
No.
What if you're sent to shoot Russians to defend Muslims in Turkey?
What if you're sent to shoot Christians to defend Muslims?
That's a very, very conceivable scenario under the existing treaty obligations.
I guess I have to do what the soldiers have over tooted and just...
Will you be able to do that?
I'm concerned for your conscience, right?
I mean, if this is where you're heading, you need to know what the potentials are.
Will you be able to do that?
I think so, and that's part of what training is for, is to get you to be able to do that.
So I think by the end of training, I'll definitely be able to, yeah.
But how I feel about that is hard to say at the moment.
Why?
You can picture the circumstance, right?
You're told to shoot Christians to defend Muslims.
I mean, I know that you're an atheist, but does that mean that you're indifferent to Christians versus...
Christian ideals are superior to the Muslim world overall.
I mean, just look at our two civilizations.
I guess at that point I have to put the morality in the hands of my superiors, because it's not up to me.
Which you cannot do.
Nobody else can own your conscience.
It's like saying, well, I'm really starving, but I'm going to have my superiors eat my food so that I can get some nutrition.
Your conscience is yours.
You cannot hand it out.
It's not like a kidney you can give to someone.
someone, your conscience is yours and yours alone.
You would be potentially, if you defend Turkey, aren't you defending a culture that might throw you off a building for being bisexual?
Yeah.
Yeah.
Pretty well.
I mean, it could be me there.
It could be some dumbass, ADIQ guy who's never had a job in his life and was just doing that because he had no other prospects.
I don't know where.
What do you mean?
I'm just thinking, like, if a person's got to be in the army and he's got to be killing people, I mean, not all the time, but there are going to be situations where my morality is going to help save lives, hopefully, at some point.
Oh, so, I mean, to take an extreme example, if there's some criminal gang, you should join it because otherwise some real psychopath might join it who would do more damage.
I'm drawing more parallels to how a lot of the German generals felt during World War II when they were told to round up Jews and send them to concentration camps.
Some of the more moral good ones managed to help a lot of them escape.
Whereas if they'd given that position to someone else, they would have just sent them all off to the camps.
So now you're talking about disobeying orders.
So you're going to join the army in the hopes of disobeying illegitimate orders and therefore preventing disasters that somebody who doesn't have your conscience wouldn't prevent because they would just obey those orders.
If I can get away with that, I suppose, yeah.
Yeah.
I'm pretty sure the army is not aware of this thinking in your mind.
I mean, no one joins the army to kill people.
That's just part of the job, you know.
Oh, come on.
I'm not saying they do it to kill people, but you didn't go and work at Subway to avoid sandwiches, right?
I mean, that's the whole point of the joint, right?
I went there because I wanted money.
I'm joining the army because I want a career and I want to follow in my ancestors' footsteps and finally have something I can be proud of instead of working with immigrants.
What do you mean instead of working with immigrants?
That's basically what working at Subway and Warehouse was.
Full of immigrants.
Because that's Britain now.
All the lower end jobs are full of people that barely speak English.
And do you feel that in the army you won't have to work with any immigrants?
It's 95% white people from what I've seen.
And most of them are quite well educated.
Compared to the people I've been working with anyway.
So it's already looking better for that.
If you had an opportunity...
Because, I mean, your parents you can't genuinely connect with, if I understand it right, and they're rejecting your sexuality.
You know, your college sucked, the job market sucked, your relationship sucked.
Is this like the last resort?
Yeah.
Yeah, this has been my plan B for a while.
And, yeah.
And you understand that you're willing to be paid To kill people in order to avoid failure, in order to avoid the possibility of failure.
I suppose that's one way of looking at it.
Yeah.
Tell me how I'm wrong.
Because, I mean, chances are I won't even be deployed, because...
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
Come on, you...
You can't.
That's like Russian roulette.
Chances are I won't blow my brains out.
The question is, why are you playing at all?
Because someone needs to defend our country.
You need a standing army.
No, no, no.
I'm sorry to be so annoying.
That's not your motivation!
Right?
Otherwise, you would have done it before.
Your motivation, as far as I understand it, is you're lonely, you've got no success in the free market, your education was not good, was not good for you, right?
It was not good quality education.
And you want companionship, you want to find a man to settle down with, or a woman, I guess, perhaps.
It wasn't, I wish, to be the shining wall against all enemies, foreign and domestic, right?
I mean, if you go back a bit, actually, that was originally my plan.
When I was coming out of high school, I was like, I want to join the army.
And they said, no, you haven't lived here long enough.
So I'm like, okay, fine.
So I'll go to university, because that's what you do, right?
And now that that's failed, I've come back to this plan that I want to do in the first place, now that I've been here long enough.
Right.
So, yeah, I haven't lived here long enough for a while.
No, okay.
So, if you are...
Uh, comfortable with the moral question, uh, surrendering your conscience to a hierarchy.
Um, you know, I, I gotta tell you, just, you know, dude to dude.
Um, maybe the women won't particularly understand this, or maybe they will.
I do believe that Europe is going to need some fighters.
And... Naomi are out of it.
No, in the army.
I think that Europe is going to need some soldiers.
I think that Europe is going to face a lot of conflict.
I think sooner rather than later.
And I think it's going to be very sudden when it happens.
And so, I mean, I don't tell people what to do, obviously.
And I'm not the army.
I don't give orders, right?
I'm just asking the tough questions to make sure that you've got those bases.
Covered in your mind.
If you are willing to surrender your conscience to external authority, and if you believe that authority is going to put you in the right place at the right time, pointing at the right people, then that's your choice.
And I'm not saying do or don't go, right?
That's not up to me.
And it would be pointless.
I mean, it's your life, right?
I'm just making sure that you've got your As they say, your T's crossed and your I's dotted when it comes to understanding what you're stepping into.
Yes, thanks for that perspective.
And it's given me a lot to think about.
All right.
Well, I appreciate...
I appreciate your call and I appreciate everyone's call.
What a wonderful privilege.
What a wonderful privilege.
I mean this incredibly sincerely.
What a wonderful privilege it is to have these conversations with you about these most important issues.
I thank everyone who calls in and opens up their hearts and minds to these questions and these perspectives.
It is endlessly fascinating and enjoyable for me.
I really, really want to ask you for your support in this new year for everything that we want to get done this year, which is quite a lot.
Let me tell you.
So please, please, please go to freedomainradio.com slash donate to help out the show.
it's absolutely essential that we grow and bring more reason and evidence and philosophy in these challenging times to the world as a whole so freedomainradio.com slash donate to help out the show you can of course follow me on twitter at stephan molyneux you can find me on gab and also fdrurl.com slash amazon if you have any coins left over from christmas and go shopping we would Thanks everyone so much for a wonderful, wonderful show.
