All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 25, 2017 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
01:00:30
3570 Is America Headed For Civil War? | Mike Cernovich and Stefan Molyneux
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi, everybody.
It's Sven Mullen from Free Domain Radio.
Hope you're doing well.
Back from the front lines, our good friend Mike Cernovich, organizer of the deplorable U-Boat Commander of Periscope Excellence and soon to be on Right Side Broadcasting with a new podcast called Right Mindset.
Mike, how are you doing?
Doing great, man.
Good to be back and to be...
Who knew that in 2000, you know, the current year, the jokers...
Who knew in the current year I would just be glad to be home safe?
Okay, so...
A lot of stories are swirling around the deplorable.
We've talked about some of the stuff that happened on this show.
Can you give me the one-stop-shop synopsis of what happened, you know, the soup to nuts, as they call it, the A to Z, from getting ditched from the first venue to pulling off one of the most successful social coups of the century?
Yes, of course.
So some friends and I, we had a kind of grassroots social media activist thing called MAGA 3X. Which was based on Grant Cardone's excellent book, The 10X Rule, which has become a meme in and of itself, which is 10X Your Life.
Now, I don't think 10Xing Your Life is realistic because people think, well, I'm going to do just 10 times more than I did today.
10 is a lot.
I go, how about 3X? MAGA 3X is realistic that each person could get three people registered to vote.
You could get three people to the voting booth.
And then share three articles or post through a hashtag three times a day, MAGA3X. So we started that in, I don't know, July or so.
And it really started hopping and took on a massive life of its own.
The trending hashtags, we got worldwide trending hashtags.
That was all part of MAGA3X's grassroots activism.
We had people register to vote who had never voted before.
And we had people going to the ballot box who had never voted.
So then here's what occurred to us.
There's all these new people in politics who don't necessarily have the connections to get tickets to events.
So for those of you who are listening and don't really know, getting a ticket to the inauguration or the inaugural balls is pretty easy, but you have to have a hookup.
But if you're new to politics, you don't really have a hookup.
Jeff and I were talking, my co-organizer, and we were thinking, why don't we just do something fun to reward the people for the event?
And we go, all right, we'll just have a small event Little party, we'll charge $30 a ticket, and it'll be at the Clarendon Ballroom.
Cool.
Turnkey, no big deal.
Tickets sold out in 24 hours.
We thought, oh man, we should have charged more for the ticket.
Because it wasn't a profit-making venture.
It was actually a ticket price that wouldn't cover the venue price, but we knew larger donors would kind of step in and cover the Delta.
So we go, man, this is pretty crazy, 24 hours.
And cool, great, though we'll have 500 people.
So the Clarendon Ballroom got cyber harassed by Hillary Clinton supporters.
He goes, how can you allow this hate group in your venue?
And they go, we don't know anything about the venue.
So then the Washington Post is calling me saying, hey, are you guys like ripping people off?
The Clarendon Ballroom is saying that they don't know anything about the deplorable.
So you know me.
What did I do?
Thank God for social media.
I went on Twitter, Periscope.
Here's a screen cap.
Here's a proposal.
It's $32,000.
Here's the person we talked to.
So then a lot of people didn't like that, and they called to complain, quite civilly, I might add.
But you know what came next?
We're harassing them.
We're threatening them.
Because if the left throws a brick at us, that is activism.
But if we leave a bad Yelp review, we're terrorists, you know, committing threats.
It's just the landscape now, right?
So then we said, you know what?
And Jeff and I, we kind of share this mindset of just like, Living well is the best revenge.
We're going to really show you.
We're going to F you.
We're going to show you what's up.
So we go, we're going to have...
So it went from a small little party to we are going to have the biggest, hottest, most in-demand inaugural party, and we're going to have it at the press club because of our sort of acrimonious relationship with the media.
We like the meta of it.
I thought, man, this is going to be a lot of fun.
So we said, okay, we're going to have it at the press club.
The press club was a lot more expensive than the Claritin, but...
You know, you got to have that MAGA mindset, believe in yourself.
We said, all right, so we're going to have it at the press club.
We released another 500.
By the way, we honored the $30 tickets.
And we said, okay, you know, in hindsight, we should have refunded those and resold them.
But whatever, all is well, it ends well.
So we, all right, we're going to honor the 500 tickets.
And we're going to sell 500 more.
These next tickets were like 99 bucks.
They sold out in like an hour and 40 minutes.
We go, oh, wow.
Okay, well, we...
And then it was like drama, city.
From then on, Mike, can I have tickets?
Can we have tickets?
Why aren't you giving me tickets?
Nobody's answering my emails.
We had people who were kind of part of MAGA 3X and was working with me or working for me, however you want to word it.
You know, they wanted to do sabotage.
Unconsciously, a lot of people...
You know this because you've done a lot of work on yourself.
A lot of people unconsciously don't believe that they deserve success.
So then what happens is they begin to self-sabotage to remove themselves from a situation.
It's a very common human foible.
And we had people begin to self-sabotage due to low feelings of self-worth.
And of course that was unfortunate.
But as you know, you have to do a lot of work on yourself.
Because I've self-sabotaged before too.
This isn't a unique thing.
And we had just drama city.
But we...
Focus on the prize, right?
Because here's what happens.
When you get into drama, you start to think about the drama.
Okay, we have people sabotaging us, we have people trawling us, we have people attacking us, and you lose sight of your vision.
So Jeff and I, we just kind of shook each other, and I go, dude, we have the biggest, hottest inaugural ball in D.C., 200 media outlets wanted to be in.
Guess what?
Good luck to those 200.
They want it.
Everybody wants tickets.
We had VIPs like Sheriff Clark, who we knew were going to attend, but we didn't want to announce in advance the security hazards.
I said, what an amazing opportunity this is.
We can now redefine not only the new movers and shakers in town, not only are we rewarding and celebrating the people who made all this possible.
But we are saying we can define the new right to mean whatever we want it to define now.
Because as you know, life is in position of will.
So I said focus.
We have an amazing opportunity.
We are going to impose our will on Washington, D.C. We are going to define the right on our terms.
So we got in the right mindset.
Next thing you know, James O'Keefe, a great American hero, citizen journalist, Project Veritas, reported that This group Disrupt J20, a terrorist organization, wanted to put acid into the ventilation system.
And now we have another, not only a PR crisis, now we have an actual safety crisis.
So we implemented procedures to match tickets to get the names of people who are ticket holders.
Well, as it turns out, Four members of the terrorist organization, Disrupt J20, had indeed bought tickets.
So this threat was not idle chatter.
It wasn't goofing off.
It wasn't them playing a prank.
It was a sincere, real threat.
So we said, all right, this is Major League.
Because that's another thing we learned over in 2016.
Who's ready for the big leagues and who's going to be the big leagues?
And our mindset is major league players.
We're the majors now.
So I said, all right, we're going to get this guy arrested, this Scott Green or whatever alias it is.
I don't care.
We're calling the police.
We're going to get restraining orders.
You know, I've been talking about civil lawsuits.
I've retained a lawyer.
I said, we are going to bring the heat on these.
They're not picking on some little Bush League organization.
This is major league.
We're going to send a message to the terrorist organizations and to everybody who wants to do us harm.
So we got the guy arrested.
Criminal charges.
One of the terrorists is facing criminal charges.
The other terrorists are being searched for now.
There's a manhunt.
Well, I don't want to overstate it as in federal marshals kicking down doors, but the police are looking for them.
They're in the system.
And they are in for an unpleasant surprise because they were on Twitter kind of taunting me, saying nothing's going to happen.
And I said, all right, just so you know, you're in the matrix.
So we got terrorists.
So we had...
So let's go back.
We'll go back.
So we had...
We had a small party, no platforms, bigger party, self-sabotage and drama, PR crises.
Now we have terrorism, terrorists trying to come into our venue.
We haven't even had the party yet.
So the party hasn't even happened.
We thus developed a very intense strategy of security with the press club.
So that there was no in and out privileges, including me.
I tried to leave to cover the protests outside, and they go, you can't get back in, sir.
And I said, but I got the band.
I got the red band.
They go, this is the line, and if you leave, you can't come back.
I said, all right, man.
My own party.
But I liked it, though, because I knew if they're going to be hardcore on me, they're going to be hardcore on everybody.
So we go in, and of course, they're massive.
I don't even want to call them protests outside because they aren't.
The Million Woman March, I have nothing, even though I disagree with them politically, I have nothing but good things to say about that 3 million or whatever woman march.
Why?
Because I'm not anti-protest.
I support people going into the street and expressing their political opposition.
I might think it's vulgar to have 12-year-old girls talking about vaginas.
I might not think that's good parenting for little children to be talking about vaginas and vulgarity like that.
I might not think it's good parenting.
But I definitely support that right, and I don't have a beef with that.
But what was happening outside our event, straight on riots.
They were throwing bottles at people.
One guy got his head cut open.
He was hit by a flagpole or something like that outside the deplorable.
So riot police were there.
They were ready.
There was this line of people.
On the one hand, you had the press club.
Then there's the line of the police, and then behind them is the protesters slash rioters.
Ultimately, they had to be pepper spray to be dispersed because they had completely lost touch, right?
So me, the whole time, there's only a few people who can even leave the venue because once you're in the party, you can't even get back in, right?
So by the way, those of you listening, I apologize for boring you with details, but I'm just trying to let you know because we've had some criticism about the deplorable.
The security was so tight that if you went to the event itself and you walked out That was it.
You couldn't go outside to smoke or anything.
There was no in and outs because we didn't want anybody to get hurt.
So I'm one guy with a red band and I'm running down and I'm like, alright.
And I'm so in the zone and people are like, Mike!
Mike!
And I go, I didn't think so many people would recognize me.
I thought a few people would here and there.
And I was like, oh, okay.
So I'm trying to manage the protests, the security, the ticket issues, the ticket drama.
Meanwhile, I'm supposed to speak.
We're supposed to have programming.
And it's one of those game time decision things where the programming was supposed to start at 8.30, then 9.30, then finally 10 o'clock.
Programming started, so we're running around.
There's protests outside, but inside, man, people had the best time.
And I'll even sort of tell you what happened at the very end.
At the very end, I'm talking to the press club people, and I said, thank you.
And they go, no, thank you.
And then I just looked the guy in the eye, man to man.
And I go, no, look, I know that you dealt with a lot of drama.
I'm sure that you got a lot of pressure.
I'm sure that you had to withstand a lot of criticism for having our event, and I want to just sincerely thank you for everything you did.
He goes, you know what?
To tell you the truth, you guys are welcome back any day.
I know that we don't agree politically, but the professionalism was so high that I'm actually glad that you came and that we were able to come together as a people.
And that was how great the press club was, and that was how great the people inside were.
There was no drama inside.
Even if you have a gathering of a thousand people, you're necessarily going to have bad behavior just by the law of large numbers, right?
A thousand people in church, you're going to have something.
Nothing.
No drama.
Everybody was just there to have a great time, to celebrate the event, to meet people that they only knew from Twitter.
I ran into a lot of people who are big fans of your show.
So it was very, very high vibes.
Very, very, very...
Good time.
Even the media couldn't hate.
It's kind of funny.
Even the media couldn't really hate on us.
I've never gotten good media coverage in my life.
But the media coming to the floor ball was like, uh-oh.
These guys are a real kind of packed ballroom, big crowd.
The people loved me.
They were cheering for me.
So there was no way to even spin it as negative towards me.
So oddly enough, the event got...
I don't know.
I guess I linked to the articles was the only thing I knew how to do.
The James O'Keefe thing must have come as a big shock.
And this, of course, to me, this is the kind of stuff that the mainstream media should be doing rather than chasing down people they consider a new right and making up nonsense about them.
They should be trying to infiltrate – this is how journalism used to work like a long time ago, you know, when people actually cared about getting the facts down.
But that – what was it like for you to see people – We're planning on disrupting.
Now, people say, oh, you know, it's like a stink bomb.
No, no, no, no, no, no.
It's much more serious than that.
Much more serious than that.
This stuff, you know, if you have trouble breathing, if you have asthma, I mean, this stuff can mess you up.
If I remember rightly, this kind of acid in the vent system, if it hits open flame, can be combustible, can be flammable.
I mean, this could have been a very, very big disaster.
All around.
And what was it like just looking at these videos?
Because, I mean, this kind of hit you by surprise, as I did think all of us.
Looking at video of people planning this kind of stuff at a party you're throwing.
And moreover, they wanted to set off the sprinkler system, and one guy was a firefighter.
So I'm actually going to report him to the Maryland Firefighters Association.
I'm going to destroy these.
I went into warfare mode.
I went into, you know...
F you.
This is war now.
You want to commit terrorism on me, on my event.
You want to attack.
I knew a friend of mine had a pregnant wife.
What if during that stampede of people when fire alarms going off, acid is in the ventilation system, carnage and chaos, and there's a bottleneck of people, there could have been babies murdered, right?
There could have been a miscarriage.
I took this as a threat to the lives of everybody who was going to go there, and I treated it that way.
And I was livid.
So again, but I have enough legal experience.
I went into lawyer mode, warfare lawyer mode, contact with the FBI and contact with local D.C. police.
I hired my own lawyer.
And we got it.
Again, that's why we had no events in there.
They're shook up now.
That's why they didn't come to my brunch.
I had a kind of a fun little friendly brunch two days after the deplorable.
And they didn't show up.
Because they're realizing that you come to my events, if you want to threaten us, you're going to end up in prison.
And we are pursuing federal charges.
The FBI is aware of it.
They don't think it's funny.
The Attorney General Jeff Sessions personally knew people, pregnant people, who were at that event.
And they don't think it's funny at all that this is Rep J20 people wanting to potentially have an unborn child.
Maybe that's their thing because they're pro, you know, partial birth abortion.
But we don't think that's funny at all.
We don't consider it a prank.
They haven't even begun to realize that a ton of bricks is going to fall on their head.
Well, I feel this with the left as a whole.
The feeling I get, Mike, is that they've kind of gotten away with a bunch of stuff in some ways.
You know, they've not been pursued.
It's been sort of wink-wink.
You're just protesters.
You're kids who don't like things and you're expressing yourself and so on.
And again, I'm like you.
I'm like free speech to the max.
Free speech, 150%.
You know, I can list just about anyone make any case because I can think for myself and rebut bad arguments with good arguments.
So I have nothing to fear from language.
I have nothing to fear from free speech.
But this stuff, this is pure viciousness.
And I think your work, the work of James O'Keefe, has got to be doing something to begin to paralyze this infrastructure.
Now they don't know.
They don't know who might have a hidden camera on them.
They don't know what might drop next.
They don't know how they might be found out or how they might be infiltrated by.
This is a paralyzing set of events, I think, for some of the feral left.
And good, good.
I mean, that is not free speech.
That is the very opposite of free speech.
That's threatening people with dire physical and financial consequences for the mere exercise of freedom of association.
Yeah, it's terrorism.
It's the definition of terrorism.
And people said it was hyperbole.
To say, oh, you're saying they're trying to kill you, they were just, no.
If you create a situation that causes a bottleneck of people, actually in fires, that's how most people die, is they actually stampede over each other while they're running to the doors before anything happens.
We've seen it at soccer stadiums where there's a big stampede of people, people die.
It was literally, it was attempted murder and it was domestic terrorism, and we're treating it that way.
And yeah, they are shook.
And I'm not going to announce it now because I want them to just live in dread.
But there's more coming their way legally, and it's going to be devastating, of course, once that hits.
Once that hits, we'll talk about that.
And it just bothered me, and I talked about this with Lauren the other day, but I wanted to mention it here as well.
I'm torn.
I mean, what these people are doing, absolutely horrendous.
I think about some of the young kids, how much they've been indoctrinated by their educators, how much they've been manipulated by the media into think that they're on the side of angels and light facing satanic Hitlerian forces on the right, how much they've been misled, how much they've been pumped up.
pumped up.
And of course, their educators don't get fired.
And the media have their comfortable air-conditioned offices and often multi-million dollar salaries, and they just retreat back to those.
But these kids, some of these kids who are being arrested, are facing, what, felony rioting?
10 years, a quarter million dollar fine?
I mean, their lives could conceivably be utterly destroyed.
And I really, it bothers me how much wiser, better connected, more educated, maybe even more intelligent people, seem to just be using them as pawns and just tossing them aside.
It's very exploitive in my opinion.
Oh, 100%.
It's a violation of any kind of personal ethics and human decency because if I wanted to, I have a lot of younger men listen to me.
As you know, younger men can be impressionable.
If I wanted to, I could have them doing things.
But I would never do that because I'm actually the opposite.
Sometimes they get mad at me because they're like, come on, Mike, we need to be a little bit more hardcore.
And I'm saying, no, no, no, I want you guys to not be.
Because I know the legal implications of what can happen.
I know that one bad decision can follow you around for the rest of your life.
I have a fiduciary duty to the people who listen to my stuff and watch our videos and everything to keep them out of trouble.
Now, of course, people have free will.
And they're going to do as they want.
But my duty is to say, no, no, no.
Above board.
Keep it legal.
We don't do things like they do.
But these professors and the media, the media too, they rile these people up.
They tell people the other side are Nazis.
And then they write articles saying, oh, but it's okay to punch a Nazi.
It's okay to kill a Nazi.
And then they define everybody as a Nazi.
So they are inciting mobs, and I've said that American media acts in many ways like an ISIS type of terrorist organization.
Yes, so the media is defining everybody as a Nazi who voted for Trump or supported Trump.
And then the media is saying that anybody who wants to punch a Nazi is morally justified in doing so.
But then when there actually is violence, the media says, we're not responsible for this.
What are you guys talking about?
What are you saying?
We're just innocent people.
They are using these young people as their useful idiots and as their foot soldiers and as their pawns.
And it's atrocious, morally speaking, ethically speaking, that the media does this.
Now, with regards to this whole question of violence, I really want us to be on the record as far as this goes, because there's an old theory of bad neighborhoods, ghettos and so on, that one broken window leads to some graffiti.
The graffiti leads to needles.
The needles lead to criminals.
The criminals lead to social decay.
And there's this idea that if you fix the stuff at the beginning, repair the broken windows, take down or paint over the graffiti and so on, that you're going to prevent this kind of snowball from occurring in neighborhoods and dragging them down to the sort of very pits of hell that they can inhabit as we see In modern American cities and in many places.
And to me, pushing back hard and legally and peacefully, pushing back hard against these initiators of force is a way to stop it, to nip it in the bud before it snowballs and gets out of hand.
And I think people don't really see that very clearly, right?
They see a strong response, which is new, which is new.
I mean, I've attended conferences which have been under threat of bombings and so on.
And I've given speeches under those threats.
And I mean, the media generally doesn't care because it was, you know, this one in particular was about men's rights and they don't care, right?
But I think people don't understand that pushing back is how you decelerate this kind of escalation and hopefully keep everyone talking, which is kind of what is necessary for us to have that crazy little thing called civilization.
Yeah, you're exactly right.
Traditionally speaking, the kind of old mainstream right and even with the MRAs, there was a lack of kind of will and there's also a lack of maybe legal knowledge and legal support.
And moreover, let's be honest, there's a lack of money.
We don't have George Soros' money coming in.
If I had a million-dollar budget, the things that I could do would be way more than the $100 million budgets all these think tanks have.
So there are those three kind of things lacking, but now you have me, and I have the will to fight.
And I have the legal knowledge and expertise to handle this and the legal network to handle it.
And now we have kind of like crowdfunding.
So I don't have a billion dollar sugar daddy backer, but I have like 10,000 little tiny, you know, $5, $25 backers.
And that's why we're able to fight back.
And you're right.
Because here's what I tell people.
I go, I can see where all this ends.
And here's where it ends.
We are stronger than they are.
If we take to the streets, we could steamroll in 12 hours.
But as you know from following any kind of mass movement like the French Revolution, you don't just say, oh, we won, now let's stop.
Once you've set a precedent, said, okay, this is warfare, this is violence, and then you form an army, what happens is you begin looking for other enemies because everything acts according, as Aristotle would say, to its nature.
And the nature of an army is to fight.
To fight wars.
And that's why, of course, the Founding Fathers opposed the concept of a standing army, because you're going to look for wars.
So if we formed an army like the left has, we would steamroll the anti-faw people in hours, maybe even minutes, right?
But then once you have an army, that army is going to say, okay, let's find some other enemies.
Let's find some other people.
And then you've unleashed a potential civil war in America.
So that's why I said I disavow political violence.
Now, the political violence is happening in primarily urban areas and left-wing areas because the Democrat police will issue a stand-out order.
So then what happens is then civilians have to have their own defense squads.
But with Trump, I'm more optimistic that there will actually be a federal response to these kind of crimes.
And it's 100%.
Like, I'm pursuing people at the local level, at the federal level, and we're going to let them know, hey, if you want to hold a sign calling me a whatever...
Come to my event.
Hold your sign.
Tell me I'm a terrible person.
I 100% support that.
But the minute you violate the non-aggression principle and you initiate physical violence, then one of two things can happen.
Either my side can respond to violence, which I don't want to happen, or the state, which in theory has a monopoly of violence.
And that's what's interesting where it ties together with a lot of these philosophical theories.
We've given the state a monopoly of violence.
What happens is when the state becomes...
Taken over by these left-wing organizations.
They have that monopoly of violence, but then they don't use that state violence to actually defend all of its citizens.
They let the thugs attack people that they don't agree with.
And then when that happens, the people on the other side form their own groups.
And then they fight the other side, and then they fight the state, and it becomes very messy.
And both of us have daughters.
This isn't something that we would like to see happen.
That's where all this ends.
So, yeah, I've always said...
Disavow all political violence.
I will work within the legal system, but I will also exercise my right to self-defense.
So if people do show up and they try to kill me, then I will use the reasonable force necessary to get rid of that threat.
And this, I think, is significant diatribes on this equivocation that happens, right?
This equivolization.
Well, Well, you know, there's lots of people, there's bad actors on both sides.
And if you take a lot of large numbers, as you said, if you get a bunch of people, there's going to be a few bad people here and there.
And I don't see it.
I don't like when when Obama got elected both of those times, where were the people on the right throwing bricks?
Where were the people on the right who were threatening to disrupt inauguration balls with acid attacks and sprinklers and panics and human carnage and stampedes and so on?
Where was it?
This idea that there's just, well, you know, it's basically the same but there's a few bad apples on both sides seems to defy everything that I've read and I've kind of kept up to date on this stuff over the years.
Yeah, the way I put it is our side throws out mean tweets, their side throws out bricks.
Right.
The two aren't equivalent.
Yeah, I've always said, I've even said, you know, I've offered like $10,000 rewards.
I've said, Here's the limousines burning.
I would give anybody $10,000.
If you can find the alt-right, which is some boogeyman, go find the alt-right burning down limousines and I'll give you $10,000.
Because I know that's the safest bet I'll ever make.
Nobody can show anything like that coming from even the fringes of the right, let alone the more mainstream, conventional right.
It just doesn't happen.
Now, why that is...
I mean, you and I both know why we both studied history and we studied these...
The concentration camps in the Soviet Union, Mao, left-wing, Lenin, left-wing, Stalin, left-wing, Pol Pot, left-wing, the most bloodiest body counts, the most massacres happened from the left.
Now, why that is?
Probably because, you know, that would be probably a whole subject for another podcast.
Probably because the collectivist mindset would say that anybody who doesn't fall into this collective has to be That is a great topic for a podcast, by the way.
We'll do that another time.
I'm just dipping into it.
The one thing that has struck me with all of these things is that it's really tough for the right to compete, not just because they don't get this massive funding from the sort of globalist open border types, but also because you got to get up and get to work.
You know, like, I think the people on the right are interested in smaller government because people on the right generally are pillaged the most to pay for all of these big giant government programs that sweep across the landscape, like some property right erasing tsunami.
And so when you're in the free market, when you're facing customers, when you have to deliver value, you got to get up early, you got to research, you got to work, you got to negotiate, you don't have as much time.
Whereas if you're getting a bunch of grants or if you're getting paid off by people or if you're on welfare or if you're getting Pell grants to go to school or whatever… You're not facing the market.
You don't have that discipline, that focus.
And so you can go more feral.
You know, go feral in the free market.
People would just stop buying your stuff and stop coming to your website.
Go feral on the left.
Seems like you get a raise.
Yeah.
And there's also the issue of, you know, one of the common things they say now is, well, look at the Trump inauguration crowd versus the left crowd.
If we go out, we can get killed.
If they go out, you can have 3 million women in the street, and I was there the whole time, and I didn't do anything.
Just took pictures.
But if we had a Trump rally like that, there would be mass shooters, people throwing bricks, all kinds of stuff.
Again, because of left.
And it's also there...
I don't know.
I gotta be careful how I say this, because I don't want to insult people and non-profits, but people like us, our dream has never been to run a non-profit.
But those non-profits become massive...
Collections of wealth, they have massive assets, they're able to do a lot.
So in a way, we do need more right-wing people to say, hey, why don't you be a little bit less productive economically and entrepreneurially, and why don't we start thinking about our own non-profits, where we could fund our own actions.
But that goes against sort of, you know, everything in the right of mind.
People have offered me to be like, hey, you want to start a non-profit?
I'm like, no.
Why?
Because, man, that goes against my entire entrepreneurial drive.
That's toward judgment though and that's where we also have to recognize how we can improve and we need to start thinking about having our own impact-based non-profits.
I think that's true and to me, voluntary non-profits are perfectly part of the free market.
As you know, parenting is a voluntary non-profit situation.
You don't charge your kid rent or ask them to pay for their food or whatever.
So I have no problem with the non-profit approach.
And I do think it's important.
And I've said this for years.
Put your money where your mouth is.
Spend some of your money in order to protect your property.
Because if the left steam rolls over, I don't really see how there's going to be a whole lot of property rights left.
So spend some of your money.
You may go out and buy a home security system.
It's like, well, yes, but you're spending money in order to protect your property.
This is what we need now.
We need this kind of activism.
We need these kinds of resources.
There's a lot of talented people out there who may not have your money-making ability, may not have that kind of passive income that you have.
Very talented people who are out there looking for the opportunity, and if we have ways to fund them and get behind the talents and charisma that they may have, fantastic.
That, to me, is a perfectly sensible part of free market activity.
Oh, I'm pro-nonprofit.
What I mean is that there's an impulse, and again, this is a whole separate podcast.
There's just a different impulse that are driving people on the right versus people on the left.
We're not managerial types.
Probably the dichotomy would be between managers versus entrepreneurs.
And most of the leading figures on the right are going to be more like an entrepreneurial type.
Like, I want to go, I want to start something, I want to create something, then I want to move on.
And I want to go start something else and I want to move on.
And with a non-profit, you need a managerial type to kind of come in and mine the place.
And our side has a shortage of that.
Well, and of course, most of us are individualists and that's not that easy to herd.
And so that kind of collectivization is a challenge.
Now you've talked about with this Disrupt J20, of course there's the criminal activities that are going to be investigated and I think brought to the fore, but you're also talking about some civil actions, some civil approaches.
What are you hoping to gain through discovery and in particular the examination of funding sources and what might come out of that?
So speaking of non-profits, I have a media sort of non-profit called Servish Media, which is a Patreon, and the way it works is that if people donate money to it, I don't pocket the money for whatever, because my books do so well, I unfortunately don't need to, but I just fund activities, right?
So it's like a slush fund.
And we have a slush fund, and I go, hey, there's this law student involving Jeffrey Upsteen.
A woman who was a sex slave had sued a woman who she claimed was one of Jeffrey Epstein's madams and helped shuttle in underage girls and everything.
And I don't know if the case is true or not, but I do know that in a civil lawsuit in America, especially where it's filed by the victim herself, and thus there's no privacy concerns as to her, she wants the public.
It was filed under seal, which is, we don't have secret courts in America in theory.
We don't have star chambers.
So I thought, man, I don't like The idea that there's this case involving these rich, powerful people, especially what involves underage girls, pedophilia, I don't think that this should remain private.
So I talked to my group.
We had a weekly or a bi-weekly call, and I said, hey, are you okay with me hiring a lawyer and funding this?
And they said, sure, we did it.
So we filed a lawsuit.
Well, it's not tech.
I use lawsuit because that's how people understand it.
It's a motion to intervene in an existing lawsuit.
And as part of our motion to intervene, we want to unseal.
The court documents.
The lawsuit is sort of a heuristic so that people actually understand what's going on.
Where if I said, I filed a motion to intervene.
But we hired a real lawyer.
It's a real deal.
Legal system.
There's going to be a court appearance and a hearing.
And we're going to find out what is in this motion.
Now, it might be a very boring motion.
We don't know.
But it could be something good.
And thus it was worth it for us to go see what's in there.
Right, right.
Okay.
Now, when it comes to this question of the – you've referred to them as feral left.
Some people call them the alt-left or the new left or whatever.
I think it is important for people to understand that the left does have a history of escalation in these kinds of areas.
And I think one of the big differences is that the right – It's comfortable with free speech and over-dedicated.
Sometimes it seems almost to free speech to the point where you let people get away with slander and stuff like that.
But there is a free speech commitment on the right.
There's less of a free speech commitment, in my view, on the left, which is why they escalate and why they get aggressive.
But they don't have the tools to fight back, or maybe they're kind of in the wrong.
And this is why there's this massive escalation of like civilization splitting rhetoric of, you know, we're perfectly moral and nothing we ever do is wrong.
They're perfectly evil and everything they do is immoral.
And there's really no negotiation when you polarize to that degree.
And there are, of course, some concerns that the traditional left has that I share.
I would love for poor people to do better and to find their way out of this welfare swamp underclass.
I would love for there to be less, you know, foreign interventions by the American government.
You know, there are countries the world over who are overjoyed at the prospect that America might start putting its own interests first, which means it's a whole lot less interfering in other countries.
And there's lots of ways in which some elements of the left, I mean, thinking, you know, the reasonable elements of the left, the Dave Rubens and so on.
We can all work together to achieve goals that we're all going to consider good no matter how we're going to approach it.
You can get to Las Vegas from the north or from the south.
If you've got the same destination, you're going to end up at the same party.
But for that to occur, there has to be a focus on the left of tamping down its own aggressive elements.
And this is what I think is important because it's not that there's a minority.
Of course, the majority of people who are protesting were not violent on the left.
But it's the reaction of the media and the reaction of the left as a whole.
As you point out, if people on the right get violent, should that ever occur?
I mean, people like you and I will be tamping down on that hard and pushing back against that hard.
I don't see that same impulse as strongly on the left to tamp down and try and claw back their own more aggressive elements.
Yeah, and that's been to their detriment.
So what she said, there's so much to unpack.
One is the reason the left is so out of control traditionally is because It's a counterfactual position.
Collectivism is counterfactual.
The current cultural Marxism is counterfactual.
Saying that white people are evil and responsible for all the ills of the world is counterfactual.
And when your ideology is counterfactual, you're necessarily going to react to violence because reality isn't going to agree with you.
You can't persuade people of something that isn't true.
So that's one issue.
Another issue is that the left developed this norm of don't punch left, let your ferals run out of control.
So then a lot of people on the right go, well, we should be more like the left.
Don't let the, we should never punch right kind of thing.
But what is happening is the left wing, by never punching left, they're actually imploding.
So there was a recent, this happened yesterday or the day before.
The DNC now, they held a meeting and they go, the reason we lost the election is because white people talk too much.
And a white woman was saying this, that she needs to stop white people talking.
I can think of one switch on a mic that could help that right now.
I fully support these white people in the DNC right now talking.
So the norm of not punching left, they're actually starting to own this.
And that's why when people go, Mike, quit punching right.
I say, look, I've watched what happened with the left.
The people who want to throw up Nazi salutes are a freaking liability, not only to any progress they're doing, but to my own personal safety to get even looped into that kind of crazy stuff.
So yeah, the left, they have turned the other eyes, turned the other way, right?
While their little foot soldiers did all that stuff.
But now there's limousines being burned down, and the limousine that was burned down was owned by Muslim immigrants.
Talk about the law of unintended consequences and unintended victims, which is again why I'm a fan of the non-aggression principle, because I know that if my guys went to the street the way they did, then we would have unintended victims, and I don't want that to happen.
Let's minimize casualties as much as we can, right?
So let's just not do that.
So now, though, the left is faced with this issue.
Trump won.
The new riot is taken over.
Their little foot soldiers are burning down limousines, rioting, looting, committing crimes, assaulting people.
And now the DNC is debating how much should we tell white people they suck.
They're hurting.
And that's going to hurt them even more in 2018 and 2020.
Well, this, I said this for about a year and a half before the election, that it was winner take all.
This election was winner-take-all.
And the social justice warriors who seem to have taken over significant swaths of the Democrat Party, pushing out the more sensible elements, either to non-political, apolitical, or even pro-Trump activities, They're making a lot of noise, and they don't seem to have the capacity for basic reality feedback loops.
You know, we lost, we were rejected, we were vilified, and all they have is escalation, and that to me is...
I hate to see this happening to an institution that did have some value to offer to American society, but at this point, this escalation is going to go the way of the Whigs.
I mean, it's almost going to scrub their entire influence from American life, not just for a while, but potentially forever.
Yeah, there's going to be a return of the new, it's going to be a new middle and a big middle.
So people like Dave Rubin are actually going to be almost far left now because the left is so loony over here that even people who might not be that far left are actually far left.
Me, I'm going to be like moderate right wing, even though under a traditional understanding of right, like I would be pretty far out there because the crazies on the left, rather because, you know, the Overton window, people view the Overton window as only one way.
They think if you shock troops on the left or fighting left, then they're going to make us go left.
And then the people on the right go, just let the right wing lunatics push us right because I'll switch the Overton window to the right.
But there's a point where you go too far, which the left is done, where rather than move the Overton window left, it is now swinging right and swinging to the right because people are thinking, well, wait a minute.
Liberalism is riots.
Liberalism are cars being started on fire, flashbang grenades, bricks being thrown.
So rather than keep moving the Overton window left, these far right groups have actually swung it in our direction, which is fantastic.
Sorry, the far left groups?
Yeah.
Far left.
Okay, I just wanted to make sure we get that.
That's the thing.
There's a counter reaction.
So people, you know, if you have a very simplistic understanding of humanity and human movements, you think, well, just let the people on the left hit it real far left because that's going to shift everything to the left.
That's true until you hit so far that people think, whoa, whoa, whoa, there's riots in the street now.
Cars are on fire in the middle of Franklin Square in D.C. So there's going to be a massive counter-reaction to the right, which is what has happened.
And that's the left's fault.
Right.
And for me, for decades, I have seen this left trend.
And I've got to tell you, Mike, I was this close to giving up on the possibility of a backswing.
And fortunately, I think because the Internet is out here, And we're able to deconstruct these media narratives in real time.
We've given people the information that otherwise would have been hidden or suppressed or avoided to be able to help stimulate this kind of – I don't want to say blowback because that sounds like a bit too aggressive, but this sort of correction.
I guess you could say correction to what's going on because the three mainstays that are propping up the left, the media, academia, and the paralysis of law enforcement I think that has occurred against leftist agitators under Obama and under the previous attorney general and and the paralysis of law enforcement I think that has occurred against This is all corrected.
Like the left is out there with these face masks and doing all this crazy stuff like there ain't no new sheriff in town, but I think they're going to find out pretty quickly there damn well is.
Well, and that's what I told people about the J20 or Disrupt J20 terrorist group.
I go, set aside morality.
Whatever you want to understand people, a lot of times you set aside morality and just look at it in terms of incentives and rationality.
If you viewed it that way, It's perfectly rational for them to think that they're going to come in and put in acid in the ventilation system, set off sprinklers, and kill people.
Why?
Because they've gotten away with it for 20 years.
Because Obama, remember when the Black Panthers had baton bats in a pulling station in Philadelphia?
They were prosecuted by the Department of Justice.
And the Department of Justice had said, this is wrong.
They issued an injunction against him.
One of Obama's first acts of president was, he said, dismiss the case, even though DOJ had won it.
So that's real intimidation.
So Obama had said, hey, if you go to a polling station, you've got a billy club and you're in a military uniform.
Well, if you're on the left, that's perfectly okay.
So it was actually rational for this corrupt J-20 group to engage in terrorism because they'd gotten away with it.
But now they're, you know, reality, 250 of them are in jail now, 10 years in prison.
It won't be a rational decision.
Life is ultimately public policies about incentives, and the incentive structure is going to change.
The incentive structure is going to say, if you want to debate like the Women's March did, hey man, it's going to be great.
If you want to commit actual violence and terrorism, though, you're going to end up in federal prison.
Adjust accordingly.
Right, right.
What do you think is going to happen?
I've been following Spicer and the media and these press conferences and the shock and horror of the left-wing media being called out on falsehoods.
He started his first press conference with, okay, here's a list of falsehoods I saw over the last 24 to 48 hours, so clean up your act.
They're talking about having remote Skype dial-ins for the press conferences and so on, and they're giving press passes to alternative media.
I have a feeling there's going to be a fairly big bypass of the mainstream media, which is going to cripple the mainstream media even more than has been occurring before.
Yeah, that has definitely happened.
They cried yesterday or the day before because Sean Spicer asked the New York Post, or let them ask the first question.
It's a long-standing tradition that the first question is always asked by the Associated Press.
New sheriff in town.
I think the first question went to live set today.
I don't want to get the details wrong.
But these questions now are going to alternative media.
Jim Hoft, who's been on your podcast, a great man, of Gateway Pundit, announced at the Deplorable that he now has a White House correspondent, which set him off.
So the media is definitely freaking out.
And the way I can kind of tell that a lot of them are freaking out is...
I'm watching the press coverage of me go from, I'm just the most monstrous person in the world, and be like, you know, Sernich isn't like, he's got his problems, you know, I'm not saying we like him, but he's not quite the Frankenstein.
So again, everything is about incentives, which is, if you are going to just lie about Trump and lie about people in the movement, then you're going to get snubbed.
And I think the deplorable is actually a wake-up call for a lot of the media.
Usually, if CNN says, I want to cover your event, you're like, come on in.
And we said, no, actually, CNN is deliberately blacklisted from our event because they are fabricators.
They won't even tell the truth.
And they're thinking, oh, wait.
So if we want to cover the big stories, we better not try to maybe set these guys up the way we would otherwise.
So they're responding to a new incentive structure, which is based, again, on social media and going direct to the media.
We can live stream our events.
Traditional media to write about.
And same thing with you.
You're more hardcore than I am.
I turned down 90% of media, and you turned down 100%.
So now the media's thinking, well, wait a minute, if we want to cover the new people that the public actually might be interested in and want to read about, then we can't just lie about them.
We can't make things up.
We have to give them kind of a fair shake if the incentive structure is changing.
Oh, yeah.
No, I mean, I get lots of people, oh, you should talk to the media.
You should get a job as a professorship at a university.
It's like, yeah, let me do that right after I go back to the 14th century and start living in a monastery and copying out the Vulgate Bible by hand.
I mean, this is new technology.
Why would I want to...
I mean, this shifting landscape is really fascinating and I sort of view the media as You know, record companies in the age of the internet.
I mean, it is becoming progressively more challenging for them to find the value that they had, even if they were delivering the news straight.
You know, I mean, it would be like, hey, Mike, here's how we're going to do this interview.
We're both going to get other people.
I'm going to ask questions, and then they're going to ask your guy the question.
Your guy is going to relay the question to you.
Then you're going to relay your answer to that guy, he's going to relay it to my guy, and then he's going to relay it to me, and I'm going to...
Like, how inefficient would that be?
If you could speak someone's language, you don't get a translator.
And even if the media was accurately representing what was going on in politics, they would be extraneous to the situation, given how much they're distorting, compared to, I think, the relatively direct information that's coming out of a lot of the alternative media, which, of course, has its problems, necessarily.
It's going to Always have problems, distortions, biases, errors, and so on.
But it appears to be relatively self-correcting as far as that goes, at least in the center part of the alternative media.
What the hell does the mainstream media add other than bias and spin and manipulation?
It's really, really hard for me to sort of answer that question anywhere affirmatively.
Another big issue, too, from a market perspective is you have 100 people taking the same picture of the same event.
I see this whenever I cover them.
Small trash can fire.
Some of these idiots took a trash can and they burned a Trump hat.
And you can even find this image.
There's a hundred reporters all circling trying to get that image.
All you need is a drone to fly over.
Here's what's happening now.
Snip, snip.
You don't need a hundred people all vying for that one sort of iconic image now.
So there's a lack of differentiation just from a market standpoint.
You're all kind of telling the same story from the same left-wing audience.
Why would anybody need a hundred of you to do that?
And we need to fight with Russia for the Ukraine because somehow I'm supposed to care about the Ukraine.
And meanwhile, Syria this and they, right?
We don't need them both from a market standpoint.
They're both covering the same turf.
I know that you do a lot of work on marketing.
And if we could just spend a minute or two talking about one of the most short-lived media campaigns in history.
Hashtag fake news.
Boy, oh boy, it did not take long for that plane to be commandeered and flown back against.
That bombing mission turned around pretty quickly, and I know you had something to do with that.
I mean, that was extraordinarily rapid.
They were coming out full bore with this term, going to bring down the alternative media, fake news, and within a couple of days, Yeah, that's what I thought was funny is the Washington Post that they're now writing saying don't use the term fake news.
Yeah, they didn't realize that we are entrepreneurs and they aren't.
So the minute you try to apply some kind of marketing label on us, we're just going to apply it to you and we study this issue too much.
That they've actually written more fake news than any of us have ever had because none of us deliberately deceive.
I've been wrong before and I've been like, you know, I've said that and it turns out I was wrong.
Hey, that's life.
I issue a retraction.
Fake news media, they don't do that.
They just double down on it.
So we have way more, and also just by virtue of their institutions.
So if you publish a thousand articles, we can find one or two that are going to be fake and then we define your...
Because again, this is persuasion, this is marketing...
Then we define that entire institution by those one or two kind of fake stories.
And then, because there are so many of us, people found that the New York Times had written fake news about Stalin.
There was actually a guy who won a Pulitzer for the New York Times.
Walter Durante, yeah.
There you go.
So we can even say, wow, fake news is going back all the way to the Times of Stalin from the New York Times.
And then now they're confronted with their own failures and shortcomings.
And then rather than say...
You know, you're right.
I need to do better.
You are right.
I need to do better.
Can we talk about this?
They said, oh, I get to run and hide.
You know, you shine that mirror in their face and rather than say, oh man, you know, gained a little weight here.
You know, I'm looking a little chubby.
Maybe I ought to do a little cardio or something.
They go, ah, get that mirror away from us.
And the last thing I wanted to mention was, and this is a little bit outside what we can directly affect, academia.
I view academia as this relatively venomous spider draining the future out of the young by filling them full of dangerously anti-market misinformation, loading them down with debt, so making them less saleable in the marketplace while at the same time raising their demands for wages by loading them down with massive amounts of debt.
And really feasting off the history.
You know, it used to be, of course, in the past, well, originally you could have IQ tests and then they got rid of those because they were discriminatory.
And then you had this big, giant, expensive IQ test called an undergraduate degree.
And then they just expanded.
Anyone can go to college.
It's like, no, no, that's not...
Anyone can be a basketball player.
Anyone can be a headliner singer at Carnegie Hall.
No, no, you can't.
And so they jammed so many people into this conveyor belt, loading them down with debt, and of course had to dumb down the curriculum and appeal to the lowest common denominator and churning out people.
Like there's a study that shows that you know less about economics after studying economics in college than before you went in because any last vestiges of common sense have been scrubbed free by all of this leftist nonsense.
Do you think there's going to be a move on the part of the administration to try and limit the massive amounts of government money that is flowing into these institutions that I think are working as hard as they can, like termites at the base of a giant tower, to undo everything that has been built up over the past few thousand years in the West?
Yeah, there are a lot of smart people who kind of get it.
So I always prefer an indirect attack versus a direct attack, especially when you're a guerrilla of warfare.
And that is if we just cut federal funding to the higher education or we made them co-sign every student loan that is issued, right?
So rather than say, oh, we're going to war with higher ed, I would just say, you know what?
All these college kids have way too much debt.
The universities need to co-sign that debt.
That's going to have the actual same effect.
And it's also going to help these people because you and I might disagree on this.
I don't know, maybe with some of your listeners, but I think that it is Well, you probably agree in sentiment at least.
I think it's appalling that 50-year-olds told 18-year-olds, sign this contract with me for $100,000.
And then when those kids are broken 24, say, oh, you signed the contract.
You don't deserve bankruptcy protection.
Oh, you signed the contract.
Deal's a deal.
I think that is completely duplicitous and outright evil to create a bunch of debt peons.
So in that regard, I'm also sincere.
So yeah, we got to do something about...
I'm higher education.
Also, to higher education, the worst thing you can tell someone is to create an unrealistic view of the world.
Because then when their life doesn't match that view of the world, they become quite angry.
You need to tell people, hey, find your talent.
Not everything that you want to do, you can do.
But if you look long enough, you'll find what you're good at.
When you tell people, hey, go to college, get a degree, you're going to get a six-figure job right out of college...
Those people are going to be angry when reality hits and they go, no, they aren't going to get any jobs, actually.
Well, I agree with you about the 18-year-olds signing massive documents that put them into one of the few debts on the planet, at least in the West, that can't be discharged through bankruptcy.
I mean, that is a financial ball and chain that's going to follow them around for decades.
I've talked to people on my show who are like, it feels like I owe more now than when I started paying.
It limits their opportunities.
It lowers their sexual market value.
It delays them getting married and having children and so on.
I mean, it is catastrophic to – and of course, the smarter the person in many ways, the more enthusiastic they are for college and the more they think they're going to get out of it.
And so I think it is reprehensible.
I mean, yeah, okay, they're 18.
You say, well, they're adults and so on, but they've been raised in government schools and don't know their ass from a hole in the ground.
They've been propagandized.
Like we talk about higher education, but the propaganda starts – In kindergarten sort of onwards, so they don't know the sensible infant.
They're not being given the right information, and they're being given the wrong information by people that their parents tell them are entirely credible and have their best interests at heart, and they get it all from the media.
You know, you've got to go to college.
You're not going to go to college.
You're not going to make anything with your life.
And so I do have a lot of sympathy for people who get into these kind of debt treadmills because they're not being given the right facts and they're not being given a good education.
I mean, you could invest in education if it's going to pay off and it may pay off not directly financially but indirectly in terms of quality of life or wisdom.
But they're getting a negative education.
It's not only not preparing them for life, it's preparing them for absolute failure.
I mean, if you're taught to hate the marketplace and having a job as being a slave and it's exploitation to – I want robot mommy cities to take care of my every need.
I want all this.
It's going to make them fundamentally...
Unemployable.
And employers don't want people who feel that they're showing up at a slave farm or descending into the salt mines of Kessel every time they show up to do a job.
We want people who are enthusiastic, who want to give value, who understand what it means to give value and to exchange value in the free market.
And certainly in the arts degrees, I mean, engineering and doctors, you've got to have that kind of license.
But in the arts degrees, they're being turned fairly and rabidly anti-market.
And then they graduate with all this debt and a hostility towards the only Free market mechanisms that are going to be able to help them pay off that debt.
I think it is really a form of modern serfdom.
And the fact that they're illegal adults when they're lied to about this stuff, I completely agree with you.
Maybe you can't throw people in jail with it because it's a voluntary contract.
Fine, fine, fine.
That doesn't make it right.
Yeah.
All right.
People want education.
They got to listen to podcasts.
Well, here's...
Oh, this is...
Okay, one last thing.
So this is something that I've really noticed.
So I did a show recently talking about, you know...
How angry I was that people I care about and people I have strong affections for and alliances with, yourself and Gavin and Lauren and other people, were attacked in these kinds of feral ways.
And a night of joy turned into a night of joy and anxiety, which is not as much fun as a night of joy.
And I ask people, what are you doing when you're not...
There's so many people who are unemployed.
I did this in the presentation on Obama's presidency.
You know, 94 million people out of the workforce.
What are you doing?
Now, I know it's a self-selecting group.
It's not a statistically relevant survey, but it's interesting nonetheless.
So many people are out of work at the moment and what are they doing?
They're going to YouTube.
They're going to podcasts.
They're getting themselves educated.
And I think that's really fascinating because it hadn't really occurred to me just how having people out of the workforce and having them frustrated and having them not knowing how to get to the next phase in their life, how much that is turning them to look for answers outside of the answers they've been provided by the media, by the educators,
by the I think it's actually this sort of pause of people being out of the workforce, I think it's helping them turn to alternative media, to alternative explanations, and I think factual understanding of what is going on in the world.
And it is really fascinating to think, you know, that the welfare state funds people who want more of the welfare state, the unemployment funds people who want more unemployment.
But among those who are willing to examine alternative information, this pause being out of the workforce, I think is arming them with a lot of facts they might not otherwise have gotten.
No, 100%.
So it's weird, you know.
Maybe the messed up systems are actually going to be what raises people to a new level of human consciousness.
We can hope.
We can hope.
All right.
Well, I just wanted to remind people that if you want to follow Mike on Twitter, and if you're not, I have no idea what you're using your computer for, so follow Mike on Twitter at twitter.com forward slash Cernovich, C-E-R-N-O-V-I-C-H. His excellent blog, You want to subscribe, of course, to that.
You'll get a lot of it through the Twitter, but get it anyway.
Dangerandplay.com, off an old Nietzsche quote.
And Mike, you both Periscope Master, as I mentioned already, at periscope.tv slash Cernovich.
Thanks for everything that you're doing.
I think that we can hopefully tamp down on these eruptions of aggression and get back to having a civilized conversation as best we can.
There's no way forward except that.
And I think you're doing an essential, essential job in trying to keep civilization on course down this road of conversation rather than, you know, words, not bricks.
It seems like something you shouldn't have to say, but apparently we do.
So thanks so much, Mike.
Always a great pleasure.
I'm sure we'll talk again soon.
▲
Export Selection