Jan. 28, 2017 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
01:25:37
3573 Resistance Creates Strength | Vox Day and Stefan Molyneux
Resistance creates strength. Stefan Molyneux joins Vox Day to discuss the escalating emotional and physical resistance from the feral regressive leftists against those to their political right. Vox Day is a multiple-time Hugo Award nominee who writes epic fantasy as well as non-fiction including “SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down the Thought Police” and “Cuckservative: How "Conservatives" Betrayed America.”Vox is also a professional game designer and maintains a pair of popular blogs, Vox Popoli and Alpha Game, which average millions of pageviews each month.He is the lead designer of next-generation Wikipedia replacement Infogalactic and also runs Castalia House publishing - which just released Mike Cernovich’s new book “MAGA Mindset.”Vox Day's Books: http://www.fdrurl.com/vox-dayVox Day's Blog: http://voxday.blogspot.comCastalia House: http://www.castaliahouse.comInfogalactic: https://infogalactic.comVox Day on Periscope: https://www.periscope.tv/voxday/SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down the Thought Policehttp://www.fdrurl.com/SJW-Always-LieCuckservative: How "Conservatives" Betrayed Americahttp://www.fdrurl.com/cuckservativeFreedomain 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
He is a multiple-time Hugo Award nominee who writes epic fantasy as well as nonfiction, including books that I highly recommend, such as Social Justice Warriors Always Lie Taking Down.
The Thought Police and Cuckservative, How Conservatives Betrayed America.
He is also a professional game designer.
I believe he came up with Ping Pong and he maintains a pair of popular blogs, Vox Populi and Alpha Game.
He is the lead designer of Next Generation Wikipedia replacement, now with Facts, Info Galactic and also runs Castalia House Publishing.
We will put links to all of his vital statistics and web presences below.
Mr.
Day, how are you?
Very well.
Good to see you.
I'm curious.
I've been asking everyone this.
Are you tired of winning yet?
Can I tell you how strange it is?
You know how Michelle Obama said, this is the first time, like when Barack Obama got into power, it's the first time she felt proud of her country.
I am so unused to reading the news without a biohazard suit on, without crash protection, without being curled into an anime-style little ball in a corner, sucking my thumb and holding my binky saying, please don't let the news be too bad today.
I can't tell you, Fox, how weird it is to wake up and look forward to reading the news.
I can't even.
Literally shaking.
Well, the thing that cracks me up is that Is watching the way the media is trying to figure out how to spin the report on the first set of actions, and before they've even figured out how to do that, the second one hits them.
And while they're reeling from that, then they get punched in the face again.
I mean, it's like watching an NFL player beat up a junior high football player or something.
I mean, it's amazing.
I coined a term to refer to it, third-generation politics, because it's like watching the U.S. Marines go through the Republican Guard.
It's just incredible.
This is a remarkable phenomenon, and people...
I guess we're always wondering how it is that I knew so much about what Trump was going to do before he did it, and maybe you feel the same way.
But for me, it's like, well, I've been an entrepreneur now for 25 years.
I know how stuff gets done, and I can recognize people who get stuff done.
And of course, he's a far more successful entrepreneur than I am.
So yes, you know that he's going to be busy.
And he's the kind of guy, he gets into office and starts doing stuff.
And it kind of makes you wonder, what the hell were all these other presidents doing?
What the hell were they on about?
Because this is how much you can get done if you're prepared to execute.
And I think it's taking even the left by surprise how much is happening, how quickly.
Well, what I noticed is that I think he's someone in his administration, probably Steve Bannon, is incorporating some concepts that we've covered earlier.
One thing he's definitely attacking is Mike Cernovich talks about the media cycle, not the 24-hour news cycle, but the actual media cycle where first they report the breaking news, and then they do the context, and then they do the analysis, and then they report on the reaction to the original reports.
And I think that what he's done is he's inside.
Newt Gingrich talked about the OODA loop.
Colonel John Boyd's OODA loop.
It's a concept from fighter pilots.
It is very clear that Trump is so far inside the media's loop that he's acting and hitting them two or three times before they've even decided on how to react to the first thing.
It's exciting.
It's energizing people across the right.
You can even see that A lot of the really kucky Dennis Prager, Rod Dreher, Jonah Goldberg types, they're all suddenly wanting to warm up to Trump.
They're wanting to kind of edge over and get back on the winning team.
And so it's fascinating to see.
I'm of two minds about this, which is why I'm not in politics.
But part of me is like, sorry, You were kicking over the ammo box in the thick of the fight and not bringing us the water when we needed it, let alone helping out in the thick of the fight.
You don't get to line up for a medal afterwards.
No forgiveness, no forgetting, blah, blah, blah.
On the other hand, I guess you have to build a consensus to get things done.
So I'm probably kind of half and half about this kind of stuff, like seeing how Paul Ryan is kind of getting in line, but of course remembering all the stuff he did before the election.
I don't know.
Where would you stand along that continuum of...
No retreat, no surrender to the traitors.
On the other hand, building the consensus is kind of how you get things done.
Well, I think that, first of all, there's a difference between the politicians and the media.
Trump has to work with Ryan.
He has to work with McConnell.
In fact, he did a really good job of schooling them today.
It was beautiful.
He talked about how he wanted his Commerce Secretary confirmed, and he felt that he should have been confirmed.
Except for the fact that he made a reference to the fact that they're slow with the pen over there.
And he's talking about the House and the Senate, just saying they're not fast enough.
And so here he has to go and meet with the Prime Minister of Great Britain and talk about a trade deal.
Theresa May is primarily there to talk about the trade deal.
And he said, I have to go and do it without my Commerce Secretary.
And then he just smiled, that sort of smug, happy smile, and said...
That's okay.
I'll do it myself.
And the thing is, you know that everyone is thinking, oh my gosh, get this guy confirmed tomorrow.
The last thing we want is Trump deciding that he wants to negotiate that, you know, we end up with London or Westminster Abbey or something like that.
You know, who knows what Trump's going to negotiate.
So, you know, he's definitely working on Those politicians that he needs to work with.
He's putting pressure on them, but he's doing it in a lighthearted way.
He's doing it without putting too much pressure.
The conservative media, on the other hand, I don't think that we can trust them to be opinion leaders again.
I don't think they should be trusted because clearly their judgment is poor.
Their They're just really not trustworthy.
And, you know, why should someone...
I mean, a number of people have said this to me when I've been doing these Periscopes.
They've said, you know, why should we trust people that were not on our side?
Why shouldn't we listen to people like Cernovich and Milo and you, Stefan?
People who were clearly on the side of the Trump, who were on board with the Trump train long before it became obvious that he was going to win or had won already.
And that's a valid point.
I'm not saying that we should kick these people in the teeth and treat them like SJWs.
They're not.
But I do think that they should not be expecting to run to the front of the parade like they want to do.
I just want to see some abasement, that's all.
I mean, I'm perfectly willing to forgive people who've made mistakes, but I need for them to own that mistake.
I need for them to root around in the cellar of their soul and figure out what caused all these rats to scurry out and chew down the flagpoles of the new dawn.
That's what I need.
I need some soul searching.
I need some reflection.
I want to see them come out of a confessional booth with spiritual bruises all over their head.
I need them to figure out what the hell they did, how the hell it went so wrong, and then, and only then, in my particular opinion, are they welcomed back in the fold.
Call me a little Old Testament, but that's how it rolls in my neck of the woods.
Well, I think that there is an interesting situation evolving here because, you know, on the one hand, you've got people who are more extreme like me.
You know, the alt-right.
And then you've got the people that are, you know, somewhere in between the conventional conservatives and where we are, you know, what I call the alt-right.
And, you know, obviously there's good relationships between those two, but like next week I'm going to debate a guy named Jack Murphy.
Originally he was going to debate Richard Spencer.
Didn't work out for whatever reason.
And so I volunteered.
One of the Castelli authors, Ivan Thrawn, is hosting it.
And it's going to be interesting, but You know, I strongly feel that the alt-light is those who are not yet ready to fully accept reality.
You know, they're still clinging to some of the myths of civic nationalism and some of the things that, you know, frankly, I mean, things that I believed in, the things that most of us believed in.
But, you know, as time has gone on, you know, we all believed in free trade before NAFTA delivered it for us.
Now we know what it really is and nobody wants anything to do with it.
And that's why we're seeing the popularity of Trump's moves against it.
I think with a lot of the civic nationalism issues, the tribalism issues, the identity issues, I think that the conservatives and the alt-right are eventually going to move over to the alt-right position simply because those are the only ones that actually correspond with It's kind of funny because I don't know ever where I'm heading ideologically except towards the truth and reason and evidence as best as I can discern them and as
much as I can will myself to move in that direction, which is, I think, fairly considerable.
But I know that there's a lot of people out there, perhaps I can just speak to them directly for a moment, who feel that getting me to their particular position is like feeding a nervous squirrel with perhaps human scraps.
I don't know.
But because they're all like, oh, he's made this.
He's getting closer.
He's made this point.
He's taken this now.
He's criticizing this particular thing.
He's getting closer.
Be patient.
He's coming in.
And I don't know, like they're just trying to catch a sparrow or something with their bare hands or something.
It is fascinating to think that however radical I may feel, I am relative to where I was in my youth, boy, there's a lot of people a lot further out who are looking at me as if I'm coming along.
And again, I don't know exactly what their journey is.
Philosophy is reason and evidence until you can stop doing reason and evidence, which means you're dead.
But it is fascinating to see those people who are ahead turning around and leaving some breadcrumbs to see where they can get people to go.
Well, see, I don't really like that attitude because it is a sort of expression or a posture of superiority that I don't think is justified.
Because all of us are in process.
And there's not a single human being who understands the truth, small t, or the truth, capital T, in its fullness.
I mean, for me...
One of the most meaningful verses in the Bible, which I apply to my secular philosophy as well, is where Paul says, now we see as though through a glass darkly.
Now, this is somebody who, according to the scriptures, actually did have a direct face-to-face encounter with Jesus Christ.
Now, I haven't had that.
Most of us haven't had that, and I don't know anyone who actually claims to have had that.
And yet this guy still said, hey, I don't understand.
I don't get it.
What I see is obscured.
And that's true of all of us.
If you look at what you believed 10 years ago, if I look at what I believed 10 years ago, my thinking has transformed considerably because I have more evidence to sift.
And it's not just that I have more evidence to sift.
Things have happened.
For me, it's very frustrating when I talk to economists who are spouting Ludwig von Mises, who's a great thinker, a great man, extremely perspicacious.
And yet, if you're reading a book from 1927, things have changed since then.
Human nature hasn't changed.
But technology has changed to the point that we can actually test out some of the things that were only theory before.
And that's another important concept that I always like to apply, which is let reason be silent when experience gainsays its conclusions.
You can reason all you want, but if after you test it out, that reason just doesn't work, you've made a mistake somewhere, and you have to accept that.
Well, that's the basic scientific method that the experimental results trump the theory every single time because it's supposed to be describing reality.
And if I have a theory about how to get to Las Vegas and we end up in Anchorage, Alaska, it doesn't really matter what my theory was.
It just took us in the wrong direction.
Now, one of the things I think that's come out of this election process, which I find fascinating, it was not too surprising to me.
Those who've studied history know It's not just...
That there are these lunatics out there, you know, these black-clad lunatics with their face-kerchiefs.
Ooh, so edgy.
You know, they're smashing things and people and setting fire the limos and so on.
It's the fact that there seems to be a significant contingent on the left who are like, yeah, I'm fine with that because they're Nazis.
So because they're Nazis, we can hit them in the head with a bat.
We can punch them in the air.
We can sucker punch them.
We can do all of this.
We can threaten to release acid into their ventilation system when they're having a party because they're Nazis.
And I think a lot of people are beginning to understand something.
Let me sort of give you a little sort of personal history about my thinking along these lines.
When I was a kid, my mom would have a bad temper sometimes.
And when she'd come home and be in a bad mood, she'd kind of stalk around the house and she would look for things to be upset about.
Like you can't just go in and yell at people because then you just look like a crazy person and no one gives you any legitimacy, right?
So you have to find something.
Ah, I asked for this to be put away and it wasn't put away.
And then you can escalate from there every single time.
You can crank yourself up into a morally self-righteous fervor.
And then you can get angry, you can blast people and so on.
And it gives the veneer of legitimization.
And so a lot of people think that...
The left does an analysis, calls people Nazis, and then justifies their violence, and that's wrong.
It's wrong to justify their violence based on the fact that they're Nazis.
I don't think that's the way it works at all.
I think they want to unleash violence, and so they use the word Nazi to give it a justification.
I mean, my brother and I had very different opinions on this.
My mom would come home in a bad mood.
Well, before she'd come home, he'd be like, well, what if she's in a bad mood, right?
We've got to tidy, we've got to clean up, we've got to make sure everything's spit-spot, right?
I was like, it doesn't matter.
If she's in a bad mood, she'll find something.
It doesn't matter.
We can't take ownership of what's going to happen that way.
I think this aspect of the violence of the left, they wish to intimidate, they wish to brutalize, they wish to terrorize, and therefore they invent all of these racist, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic terms, not because they believe them and would be reasonable if they were talked out of these adjectives or these descriptors, But because they really want to do some serious damage, and the way they do it is to justify it by generating these labels as a cover for the violence they're going to enact either way.
Well, I think that's part of it.
I think that that certainly describes it for the fairly small minority that wants to engage in that kind of violence.
I mean, the thing that's interesting, Mike Cernovich and I were talking about this, is that Both he and I have heard a lot of threats over the years, but nobody's ever punched us like happened to Richard Spencer twice the other day.
Maybe it's because we both lift weights and I did martial arts and he was a boxer.
They're not completely out of control and outrage.
It's very clear that they're doing what they think they can get away with.
Well, I'm sorry to interrupt, but if James O'Keefe hadn't unmasked these people who wanted to drop the acid in the ventilation system instead of the sprinklers, he would have got much worse than a punch, I would argue.
Oh, yeah, you may well be right.
But like I said, there's a lot more lefties running around calling people Nazis than there are lefties who actually want to get into any sort of physical violence.
I mean, look at them.
Most of them are either severely overweight, drug-addled, psychological wrecks.
I don't care how much they talk about violence and that sort of thing.
These are not people who actually want to engage in it.
They might have some fantasy of it, but they're not going to do that.
There are a few But I do think that what you're talking about, the psychological construct that you're talking about, is correct because their goals go well beyond violence.
Their primary goal is to intimidate people into not defying them.
They may be interested in violence, but their primary goal is submission.
And so if they can get...
Maybe somebody might like to punch you in the mouth.
I'm sure there's a few lefties who would, but a lot more of them would really like you to stop doing podcasts.
They're much more concerned about the fact that you have an influence over hundreds of thousands of people.
You've influenced my thinking, and I influence others.
They want to stop that process.
That's the main thing that they want to do.
Maybe the more extreme of them are willing to go to those levels of violence that you talk about.
Obviously, that's a huge mistake because, let's face it, there's more than a few people on our side who are kind of looking forward to the gloves coming off.
That's something that is obviously something that People are concerned about because when our side takes the gloves off, we just tend to steamroll everything because we don't like to mess around with the posturing and all that.
But the most important thing that they're trying to accomplish with calling everybody a Nazi is to try to convince people that we should not be listened to.
I get called a Nazi all the time.
It was kind of funny because I was actually interviewing yesterday the former deputy speaker of the Israeli Knesset.
I don't know how to pronounce it.
And it was sort of amusing because I had to warn him.
I said, you know, hey, you'll look it up.
You'll probably find that I get accused of being a Nazi from time to time and whatnot.
And he kind of laughed and said, yeah.
We sort of assume that if you're willing to interview me, that's probably not the case.
But the important thing is that they want to silence us.
And maybe some of them do want to actually inflict violence and that sort of thing.
And if that's the case, we'll be ready for it.
But...
And we have to be ready for it.
You know, one of the things that I criticize Richard Spencer about with that whole thing is, you know, why are you giving an interview in the street?
You don't even have your back to a wall.
You have no spotter.
You have no bodyguards.
People want to hurt you.
There are people who threaten me.
And so it doesn't mean we have to be afraid.
It just means that we have to be ready.
And so, you know, Roosh was very good about that when he was on his tour.
And everybody who is on the right, whether you're someone who's a public figure, or whether you're just somebody who works with people who are batshit crazy SJWs, need to be aware of the possibility that these people are unhinged, and some of them are definitely prone to violence.
Well, sure.
And I recognize that there's a tiny minority of people on the left who would be willing to engage in that kind of violence.
But to me, it's the implicit permission of not the explicit disavowal, of not the infiltration of your own groups.
I mean, if there were people on the right—and again, I don't know where I landed this particular continuum—but if there were people on the right who were organizing these kinds of things, there would be people on the right who would be like, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
We are not at that place in society world of change.
We are going to work with reason.
We're going to work with evidence.
We're going to work through legal channels.
And I think that there would be a very strict and strong disavowed rejection and dismantling of those particular aggressors within the movement.
And so to me, it's not so much the people who want to do the violence.
I mean, they'll be there.
But it's all the people who are like, you know, I'm kind of okay with that.
Yeah, you know, deep down, I don't mind that this guy got punched.
I don't mind that they're threatening this deplorable with all of these activities.
I don't mind that they're going to chain up the subway.
I don't mind that they're going to turn on the sprinkler systems and drop acid into the van.
I'm okay with that because they're just so evil.
And to me, it's those enablers that really need to be viewed clearly and coldly.
And that's partly because it's the right thing to do, right?
I mean...
Violence as a manifestation of other people's implicit acceptance and support of that violence is a really, really key ingredient.
It's a little bit of spice that makes the soup taste a particular kind of way.
A lot of the ingredients of the soup are kind of inert, but it's that little pinch of something or other that gives it its particular flavor.
Given that it's wrong in general and also given, of course, that the left is continually demanding the people on the right disavow this person and disavow that person and reject the actions or the approach or the strategy or the rhetoric or of this or that person, where's all of this disavow going?
Where are the people on the left saying, no, no, no, we're going to root these people out.
We're going to find their funders.
We're going to make sure that this is not how this debate is going to be conducted in society.
There's not much of that that I can see going on among the left.
Well, there's none, and there will be none, because if they weren't hypocritical and incoherent, they wouldn't be on the left in the first place.
And so, you know, I mean, the thing is, is that there's no, you know, the call of the cuck-servative that we like to make fun of is, you know, Democrats are the real racists.
And, you know, this is supposed to be effective dialectic that, you know, that That all the moderates, all the moderate Republicans and all the cuck-servatives, they're constantly trying to cite some facts and figures and prove to the left that, in fact, they are the real racists.
Well, that doesn't do any good whatsoever because they don't care.
They don't see themselves that way.
They don't define themselves that way.
And so, therefore, that's not true.
They don't pay any attention.
They're not philosophers like you.
They're totally ruled by emotion.
They're the type that Aristotle described as being only convinced or being incapable of being convinced by information.
They can only be convinced by emotion.
And I think it's Anonymous Conservative who's done the best work on this.
He's traced it back to the amygdala and the way that it gets trained in To react.
And most SJWs, the more extreme leftists, they tend to be utterly ruled by emotion, and they're utterly ruled by attempting to avoid emotional pain.
That's why they're constantly talking about how much they care about this and how much they care about that, and they care more than you do, and that makes them a better person, all that sort of thing.
All of it is about constructing this This huge web of deceit around themselves in an attempt to protect their sensitivity.
If you notice, an awful lot of these people are also on various drugs that are meant to provide an alternate mechanism for doing the same thing which is protecting them from emotional pain.
Now, this is why the alt-right is fundamentally much more effective than conservatives, because, you know, instead of trying to convince them of anything, we are successfully able to change their thinking by inflicting more emotional pain on them.
That's why people that's why here's what you're going to see.
Here's a prediction.
Some of the crazier lefties are going to be fans of Donald Trump within three years.
I mean, people that were that totally hated Donald Trump, hated everything about him because it doesn't make any sense from a rational perspective.
But the reason is, the more popular that Trump gets, the more emotional pain and the more cognitive or the more emotional dissonance it's going to cause those people, and they're going to flip.
It's like an off switch.
It'll flip, and then suddenly they will love him.
It happened with Ronald Reagan.
I remember it happening with certain people that People that talked about Ronald Reagan and how he was going to destroy the world and all this sort of thing.
And by the time he came up for re-election, they were voting for him and putting Reagan-Bush stickers on their car.
And I remember at the time thinking, how is that even possible?
And now, thanks to the anonymous conservative sort of RK, Amygdala, blah, blah, blah explanation, at least you have a functional predictive model.
That explains the behavior and actually offers us a chance to predict this happening.
So in a couple years you can call me back on it and we'll see if that prediction played out or not.
But it is a useful perspective and I think it's one that bears looking into for people.
Yeah, I've got a whole presentation.
Of course, the Anonymous Conservative book is excellent.
I've got a whole presentation called Gene Wars, which goes into some of the left-right paradigms around this.
And also in the research I'm doing for a book I'm writing on how to make an argument, which I probably should have started my entire career with, but better late than never.
Do you have a publisher for that yet?
We'll talk.
The more estrogen you have, the more your brain reacts in a stronger emotional way to negative stimuli.
And the more testosterone you have, the more your analytical brain responds to negative stimuli.
So you try and puzzle it and figure it out, figure out the principles and figure out not just emotionally reacting to it, but how to minimize it for the future.
And given that there's been a fairly catastrophic decline in male testosterone in the West, it's been measured since the 80s and it's gone down about 20%, which is kind of significant, I think.
This is one of the reasons why we have...
This very strong emotional reaction where people say, I'm offended, I'm upset, that's inappropriate, that's shocking, I'm pulled, can't breathe, you know, all this kind of...
They're simply confessing that negative stimuli is provoking such unmanageable emotions within them that it's like if someone comes up with, you know, like a blender straight in your face, right?
I mean, they're just recoiling.
But the good news is that you can train yourself out of it.
You know, progressive exposure, right?
Like if you've got a fear of spiders, you look at a picture of a spider, then you look at a spider under a glass, and then eventually you can let the spider walk in you, and then you wake up screaming.
No, wait, that's just me.
But this progressive exposure, I think, to shore up what you're saying, Fox, as they get exposed to negative stimuli, Trump is going to...
Cut funding to NPR and PBS and the 700-station web of leftist propaganda is going to have to either go dark or meet up at the free market or donors or something like that.
This is the worst thing ever.
You get this apocalyptic feeling and a lot of these celebrities have been talking about this stuff like, I don't know how to get out of bed in the morning now that Trump is one.
It's like, you know what?
You'll get out of bed.
A lot of people felt there was going to be a lot of disasters when Obama got into presidency.
And we all got out of bed and we continued on with our lives and we worked to make things better.
As you get exposed to these negative stimuli, you learn how to manage them in a better way.
So you're being trained out of your reactive hysteria by being exposed to opposing viewpoints, opposing information, assuming you don't double down and go full on evil with an axe handle or something.
So I think we are helping people learn how to reason better by exposing them to negative stimuli.
It is the pain, you learn how to manage the anxiety, and you learn how to think afterwards.
Because the more people get emotionally triggered, the more their neofrontal cortex shuts down, they go dark, they go primitive, they go simian.
But you can be trained out of that, and I think that's one of the things that the Trump presidency is going to do for people.
Yeah, you know, I mean, I really think that...
That makes me feel good about myself and what a good person I am.
I'm not a sadist, I'm just helping you.
Exactly!
I'm actually thinking of requesting that my loyal vile-faceless minions refer to me as the Supreme Cuddly Lord.
Because we're all about the hugs and the love and the stimulating the neocortex.
We are training the amygdala to develop a bit of a hide, a bit of an armadillo skin, a bit of an exoskeleton, a bit of a force shield.
And that way you can walk through life without feeling like you're a pinball bouncing off the negative exposures you're getting.
And you don't end up having a – they say, well, why do people need this echo chamber?
It's not just confirmation bias.
That's part of it.
A lot of people who are this kind of hypersensitive reaction overlords or underlords, I guess, they need an echo chamber for the same reason that they try not to stick forks into electrical outlets because the shock, the unpleasantness, it can cause them to spiral out of control for a long time.
I can't imagine if I boot up my browser, I read something, I'm like, I have to go back to bed, I can't get out of bed for a week now.
I mean, that would be a pretty debilitating way to live.
And of course, a lot of people are like that.
You've got a Hollywood producer saying, I'm putting on 30 pounds because I'm stress eating because Donald Trump is president.
Like, if my entire weight rhythm, my health was all dependent upon this stuff, I mean, I'd be pretty hysterical too, and I'd also only want to hang around people who reflected my own opinions, because alternative opinions can be existentially destabilizing for me.
Well, it is interesting to see the converse effect, because it's very clear that the god-emperor is energizing the right.
I mean, you know, it's amazing how enthusiastic people are.
It's fun.
I like it now when I get phone calls from people about stuff that has nothing to do with politics and they just have this high energy to them and there's no other way to phrase it.
And it's always funny because whenever I get a call from somebody like that and they're all kind of pumped up for no reason, they will always, you know, we'll be talking about anything from a book we're working on to a game that's in development or this sort of stuff and then suddenly you'll be like, Did you see the latest executive order?
These are people who don't follow politics at all!
And it's just the energy and the confidence is almost forming a sort of virtuous circle that there's more success, more people are inspired to do stuff, and It's because we're so used to getting pounded on by the media.
We're so used to the elections and referendums and all these sort of things not going our way pretty much since Reagan died.
And promises being made that you're a sucker to believe in.
Well, yeah.
To be honest, for me, that was much more painful.
The Bush years...
We're much more painful than the Obama or the Clinton years, because you don't expect anything out of a Bill Clinton or a Barack Obama.
And the thing is, you know better than to expect something out of a George W. Bush, but you kind of hope, anyhow...
I mean, I never voted for the guy, but...
I voted Libertarian, but you still kind of...
You hoped.
Because he would say things like...
We need to have a humble foreign policy and all this sort of thing.
We're not in a nation building.
No, no.
Not us.
Next thing you know, we're invading seven different countries and occupying three of them.
And you're like, what are you supposed to do?
I mean, on the one side, you've got the enemy.
And then on the other side, you've got this person who says some of the right stuff and does exactly the same thing the enemy does.
And so that's why I think that the right is so giddy.
And is so energized is because for the first time, pretty much since Reagan, they have a leader who actually does what he says he's going to do rather than try to curry favor with the left.
And you and I both know that currying favor with the left is just pointless because no matter what you do, no matter how many steps you make, no matter how many compromises you offer, they always want more.
Because again, what they're seeking is total submission.
They're not looking to compromise.
They don't even understand the meaning of the term.
Getting back to what you were talking about, the negative impacts on them, one of the things that we need to do if we want to help them is we need to up that pressure.
I would encourage all your listeners, somebody asked me, What do I do with my friends on Facebook?
I've got these left-wing friends, these liberal friends on Facebook, and they're always saying stupid stuff about Trump.
What do I do?
And I said, it's really simple.
All you have to do is, every time you refer to Donald Trump, you refer to him as the God Emperor.
It is amazing how that just stops them Dead in their tracks.
I mean, I've actually seen...
I was talking to someone the other day, and I mentioned that because it was a...
I think Dutch, but anyway, a European.
And they were, you know, saying, isn't this terrible about, you know, the election of this Donald Trump?
I said, you mean the God Emperor?
And I said, what did you say?
I said, the God Emperor.
And their jaw literally went...
You know, and that just basically issues that shock that you're talking about because they don't even have a context to deal with that.
They have no insults.
They have no comebacks.
Yeah, you can't say the god-emperor of racism.
I mean, that would become completely incomprehensible.
Right, yeah.
And so it's, you know, just keep triggering them because that's how they're going to come around to your way of thinking.
You know, Constantly trying to reason with them isn't going to work.
I mean, what's up they say?
You can't reason somebody out of a position they haven't reasoned themselves into in the first place.
And you really can't do it when you're dealing with people who are highly irrational, extremely emotional, and very, very sensitive to psychological pain.
The only way you can flip them is to administer more psychological pain.
And it's not the kind of pain like calling them ugly or fat or whatever.
I mean, that...
It can be appropriate at times, but in this case, you want to look at what's upsetting them.
We know what's upsetting them.
It's Trump.
I love wearing this Trump slide shirt.
It's so funny because when people see it, they either get this big smile or they just get this stricken Horrified look in their face.
And either way, to win, every good general knows you want to increase your morale and you want to lower your enemy's morale.
And that's what we do.
They will conform to the strongest elements in the room, in general.
This is true of most people.
We have a great capacity, you know, for obviously tens of thousands of years of survival instincts.
We figure out, we get into an area, we figure out who has the most power, and we conform to them.
And then afterwards, we'll say, well, it's because they're the best people around.
But it's like… The left has had all the power.
They have been dominating the right.
They've dominated media.
They've dominated the academic institutions, the universities and so on.
They've dominated Hollywood.
They've dominated publishing, as you've sort of written about vociferously and rightly so.
And the fact now that there's a power in the room that they...
Have always been told it's vaguely satanic, but they've never really seen.
Now it's manifested and it looks fairly friendly, fairly energetic, fairly positive.
It's achieving some results that I'm sure they could agree with.
It's hard to say it's really terrible that he's bringing all these jobs back to America, which he was doing before he even got into the White House, which to me is remarkable.
You remember Barack Obama saying, well, how is he going to create all these jobs?
Does he have some kind of magic?
It's like, no, he has a phone call.
He has phone calls.
He has arguments.
He has charisma.
He has energy.
He has dedication.
He has experience.
He has negotiation.
He's not a community organizer.
He can get things done.
He can build things.
You can blow things up, 20,000 bombs a year, but he can build things.
And that, I think, is remarkable to people that the devil they've always been talked about but they've never seen is now manifest and doesn't look anything like they were told.
That does shake people's worldview, opens up a few cracks where the light just might be able to get in.
That's absolutely true.
But, you know, the thing is, is that, you know, one of the reasons that I started InfoGalactic was for precisely the reason that you're talking about, and it's the same reason, you know, I think that you've created this alternative media of your own, and that's because we need to give people the alternatives to those things.
We need to give people...
It's not just about teaching people, and it's not just about Transferring information, but it's also about allowing them, giving them a place where they can not be under assault all the time.
One of the reasons why there are some people on our side who are, let's say, not very nice people or something, is because they're some of the only people who could handle the pressure.
Let's face it, there's a lot of nicer people in the media than me.
I'm not a particularly nice guy.
I mean, there's a reason why my own supporters call me Supreme Dark Lord, right?
But that was necessary.
And one of the responsibilities that we have is to provide an umbrella to those people who will be able to come out and maybe even do more than we can without having to endure The constant barrage of negativity and hate and anger that you and I have both experienced for the past 10-15 years.
Let me ask you something else.
We both come from a libertarian background, and I never really thought I'd ever ask this question.
Fox, what the fuck is it with libertarians?
What the fuck is it with libertarians?
I'm not going to mention too many names.
Drew Carey's a big libertarian because, you know, it's really important to be a libertarian when you sell your soul to speak into a penis microphone on The Price is Right.
But Drew Carey, big libertarian, his son is out there cussing out the president and setting fires and stuff like that.
A young kid, and I feel sort of more sorry for him than anything.
He's not exactly got an adult's independence or anything like that.
Gary Johnson.
What?
The high just got 10 feet waller.
I mean, why, why, why, why am I seeing his tongue in interviews?
Why, why, why, why?
Reason, Doc, why, why, why?
What is so wrong with a guy who wants to cut the federal government by 20%?
What is so wrong with a guy who wants to simplify the tax code and slash taxes considerably?
What is wrong with the guy who wants to get out of NATO? What is wrong with the guy who wants to substantially cut America's ties to the United Nations?
What the hell is wrong?
What is wrong with libertarians that this is a big, giant problem for them?
And a lot of them were eyeing the cankerous sorescape of Hillary's empty vessel called a prior soul.
Like, what the hell is wrong with libertarians?
I just...
I don't even feel better, but I just feel a little purged.
It was impressive.
I could have done that for about three days, but I decided not to, so go ahead.
The main problem is that they're not libertarians.
I mean, not in any meaningful sense.
You know, libertarian these days largely means I'm a Democrat, but...
I'm a white Democrat, but I don't really want to sign on for all the really extreme craziness.
And, you know, I mean, Gary Johnson...
If you looked at his voting record and stuff, it wasn't particularly libertarian.
For the most part, the only libertarian principle that they're any good on is the legalization of drugs.
At this point in time, libertarian is little more...
I'm sorry.
I mean, I'm for the legalization of drugs.
I've never actually taken any drugs in my life, but I'm for it for a variety of non-initiation of force reasons and the fact that the state gets to be passive rather than actively hunting people and it saves money and it doesn't destroy people's lives with useless jail sentences and it diminishes illegal crimes power and it corrupts the police force and the politicians to some degree.
So I get all of that.
But if you're not consistent, isn't it just because you want easier access to drugs?
I mean, it doesn't seem like a very moral position for a lot of people.
It isn't.
I mean, I'm also pro-legalization.
As everyone realizes that he didn't issue any similar caveat.
But...
A lot of people who claim to be libertarians, especially as related to that issue, they could not tell you what the non-aggression principle is.
They have no idea about anything related to free trade.
The average libertarian is pretty outdated anyhow, because they're still hung up on the free trade stuff from The 1950s, if not before.
You know, I was talking to one libertarian who was getting on my case about my position on trade, and he was citing Henry Hazlitt, which was kind of amusing to me because I've written a very detailed critique of Hazlitt's entire chapter on trade.
The book is Economics in One Lesson, for those who want to go look it up, but sorry, go ahead.
And I believe I specifically identified 13 significant flaws in his argument.
And what was funny about it was that I finally got fed up with it.
I said, you know, maybe you'd like to read something newer than 1952 or whenever it was published.
I mean, yes, there's wisdom in the old stuff, but this was something that was written before the current free trade regime.
He just didn't have a tremendous amount of information that we have.
And with a lot of libertarians, I think that they tend to be the sort of folks who are very hung up on theory and don't necessarily pay a lot of attention to the second part of the process.
They like to find a hypothesis that attracts them, but they don't actually want to test it.
They just want to keep playing with the hypothesis.
I was actually quite convinced that the word libertarian was Greek for demographics are invisible to me, because that seems to me the big divide.
And that certainly was the 20,000-volt Frankenstein jolt to the base of my brain was learning about the demographics, the sort of – Demographic winter, the breeding rates of various ethnic groups, IQ, all this kind of stuff.
That to me was like, holy shit!
It's time to get out of the ivory tower, people!
It's time to stop theorizing.
There's no point writing a book on firefighting when your very fire building is on fire!
So that was one of the things that kind of got me up and going.
on, but trying to get libertarians to wake up to basic realities like demographics, like culture, like history, like human biodiversity, like race and IQ is like, I'm sorry, the patient died four years ago and you're still trying to do some CPR to them.
That, to me, has been the biggest barrier.
And for a group that claims that they really are into empirical evidence and facts and all that kind of stuff, they just back away from that topic like it's a ghost they claim doesn't exist, but they won't go anywhere near it.
Well, you know, they've got a mild case of what we're talking about with the SJWs.
It causes them pain because their identity is in question.
And I understand that.
It was very difficult for me to...
I mean, I was going with, what do I even call myself?
I'd identified myself as a Christian libertarian for a long time.
And it was actually kind of funny when When I announced that I could no longer call myself a Christian libertarian, of course, you're like, you're not Christian anymore?
You are half right.
But the thing is, we were talking about borders and free trade.
I mean, I would have thought that they would have understood implicitly that that would go to the libertarian side.
You know, I don't really recall Jesus spending a lot of time talking about tariffs.
Anyhow, I was like, well, maybe I'm more of a national libertarian, that kind of thing.
But the more I kept looking into it and stuff, I realized that it doesn't even fit anymore.
I'm still a libertarian idealist.
There are people who don't Who understand that communism is not a viable economic system who are still communists at heart.
They refer to it saying it's a beautiful dream, it just won't work.
I get that.
No, it's not my dream, but the libertarian dream to me is something that it would be great to be able to believe that, but I'm no longer able to believe that because of The demographic issue, because of the logical issues that apply to a libertarian state.
And basically, libertarianism is as fundamentally utopian and as fundamentally impractical as communism or as feminism.
If you follow any of those ideologies to their logical end, it's very clear that a feminist society, a communist society, or a libertarian society cannot survive.
A libertarian society might be okay in a bubble, but we don't live in a bubble.
We live in the real world, and so it's not possible.
I know what you mean.
I would say that there were two major sort of painful intellectual transitions for me.
The first was recognizing that objectivism was a smidge limited in certain areas.
Areas which for me were kind of the whole point of philosophy.
To me, everything is, you know, the whole point of medicine is health.
The whole point of philosophy is ethics and virtue because that's reason equals virtue equals happiness.
I think that's a pretty good equation to work with.
And recognizing that Ayn Rand did not have the answer to ethics was the first great question.
Pain.
But with that pain comes great opportunity.
Then I got to write a book on ethics and backfill what I saw as catastrophic gaps in a belief system.
That was very painful, but out of that pain came an enormous amount of creativity and an enormous amount of certainty.
And I'm enormously glad.
Let me just use the word enormous one more time, if that's all right with you.
But I'm enormously glad that I went through that transition before.
I became a public intellectual because I've had a kind of consistency from that perspective.
So losing objectivist ethics, metaphysics and epistemology, I'm still pretty much down with it, but the ethics part was not there.
That was very painful for me.
And I remember I said to a friend of mine, like, I feel desolate.
I feel, you know, I have turned myself into a A lunar desert of hope.
It was a very, very, very tough transition, but out of it came some enormously positive stuff.
And you learn that when you are brokenhearted over the loss of an illusion, that is where the rain comes in and things can actually grow.
Real trees, not ghost plants of the imagination.
That was number one.
But then you can also understand why it's so hard for them to enter into that process.
I mean, they're avoiding...
The pain that you subjected yourself to.
That's their problem.
Go on with your second one.
My second one was human biodiversity, race and IQ, demographic.
Winter, this was to me, and this one remains, if there's one thing that I could wish disproven, it would be things like the bell curve and all this.
This, to me, is the most painful aspect of the knowledge that I have gathered.
And this all started a couple of years ago for me.
I actually had read The Bell Curve in the 90s, but it went past me, you know, oh, this is not my luggage, and around it goes.
And it just kind of came and went.
And then circling back and, of course, interviewing Charles Murray and other people.
This basic reality that...
If you want to have a free society, you need at a bare minimum a floor of IQ 90 and significantly above that is considerable.
And for reasons that are environmental or genetic or most likely some combination of the two, there are massive swaths of population in the world that don't get to IQ 90.
That to me is, you know, that wisdom, philosophy, Universalism, all of the stuff which we treasure in the West is not as transferable as we might think.
In fact, it doesn't seem to be transferable under current bell curve statistics at all, at all.
And of course, it explains a huge amount of history, but that to me, it remains the biggest heartbreak and the one thing I wish were different and would give my eye teeth to get disproven, although the data does seem to be beyond reproach.
People who say it's all environmental.
I've had criminologists.
I've had professors of every stripe and hue, and they all come down to the same thing.
Human biodiversity is real.
The bell curve is real.
IQ is not evenly distributed in populations across the world.
That, to me, is the biggest heartbreak.
But out of accepting that, some wonderfully creative dedications and possibilities emerge.
That I just sort of wanted to pass.
I understand when people face these intellectual challenges that seem to undo the very foundation of your belief system, but grit your teeth and hang on because what's on the other side of that is real clarity and real solutions.
Well, I can understand that.
For me, free trade was difficult.
I grew up a free trader and grew up on Milton Friedman's But I think it was perhaps a little bit easier for me to make some of the changes because, you know, I did not...
For me, the difficult thing was becoming a Christian, which I did almost unwillingly.
But, you know, it's one of those things where, you know, I went through a transformation that in some ways is kind of similar to what we're seeing Lush go through.
As a hedonist, because that was essentially my philosophy in my youth, suddenly you realize the point that the highs keep getting lower.
It got to the point where I had, as a hedonist, had...
Shaved my head and thrown myself into a very heavy contact martial arts.
And I realize now that I had done that simply because I was so frustrated and so emptied out by the whole play in a techno band, chase models, all that sort of thing.
It was almost like you needed to get punched in the face in order to feel something.
Maybe because of that experience, I almost welcome now that intellectual pain you feel when you have that niggling doubt about something.
You think you know the truth, but you're almost a little bit afraid to investigate that loose thread because you're afraid if you pull it, the whole sweater is going to come apart.
But I've gotten to the point now where if I see a loose thread, I can't wait to pull on it.
Because, like you said, the value, the pleasure that comes of it later, of going through that pain, it's kind of like when you lift weights.
When you first start lifting weights, and it hurts, and you don't see any benefit from it, it sucks.
There's a reason why so many people...
Go into a gym, and they work out like a week or two, and then they never come back.
Now I hate that January, oh, everyone's got their New Year's resolution, so I can't get a machine forever.
And then three weeks later, it's like, whoo, tumbleweeds.
Yeah.
I'm actually kind of excited.
Our gym just, like, redid everything.
And then, so tomorrow we get to find out what they did.
So, you know, I'm all psyched.
I wonder what new machines are going to be.
My wife is what I would call a gym skeptic.
So, you know, she's like, I just know they're going to screw this up or they're not going to have this mission.
It's kind of interesting to see the psychologies that work here.
I don't know if anyone's ever studied the psychology of having your gym rearranged, but it might be interesting.
But the pain is more than worth it.
Because, you know, before long, you're sitting there flexing in front of the mirror going, hey, check out, you know, I've got actual muscles.
I didn't know I had muscles.
I can move my nipples without jumping up and down.
Woohoo!
Here, let me show you.
Just kidding.
But it's the same process at work.
You know, it's the same no pain, no gain.
And if we're not going to...
You know, I hope that if we're doing this in 10 years...
That we're going to reach a greater understanding of the truth than we have right now.
And I expect that we will because...
And one of the reasons that I think that the alt-right is going to continue to grow and become more and more influential is because it's the only political philosophy right now that is actually in harmony with what we're seeing with regards to the human biodiversity And trade and all these controversial issues, we're not hung up on the dogma.
We're willing to say, you know what?
Yeah, that sucks, but it's true.
So this wheel of history I've sort of talked about at this big presentation on...
The fall of Rome, the sort of wheel of history, this sort of 10 generations kind of thing that goes along.
Or, you know, as the old saying says, you know, hard times breed strong men, strong men breed good times, good times breed weak men, weak men breed bad times.
It feels, it's a terrible way to start an argument, I think.
I think that it may be possible because of this amazing technology.
because of the fact that you and I are able to have this conversation, which goes out to upwards of half a million people over time, just in the short run, and we'll go to millions and millions more over the long run, that there is a way of stopping this inevitable cycle.
I mean, I'm convinced that the Trump revolution is the internet revolution.
It's a bit of a cliche to say it, and it's not particularly insightful.
But without alternative media correcting and haranguing and nagging and nipping at the heels of the mainstream media, the facts wouldn't have come out.
Just as the facts that are ruthlessly suppressed by the mainstream media are kind of seeping around the edges, they're bleeding around the edges of the mainstream media dominance.
You know, like the mainstream media is going in front of the sun, and we're like this diamond ring that comes off the edge of it.
And I think this has the capacity to arrest this cycle of history and perhaps prevent Western civilization from going into the ash can, as was, it seemed inevitable, not even five, five years ago.
I think that power, the technology has given us the power perhaps to arrest the cycle of history.
To me, civilizations fundamentally die because they make so many compromises that truth becomes their enemy.
And whenever you make truth your enemy, you're not long for this world.
I can fly!
You know, it just doesn't work very, very well.
But the fact that we're able to keep truth and bring truth to the masses, bring reason, evidence, and arguments to the masses does give us not a big shot, but a strong shot To be able to arrest this giant wheel of history that has ground down so many civilizations before us.
Do you think that it's possible?
Do you think that what you're doing, what I'm doing, what other people are doing is going to be able to stop it or at least slow it down enough for some other solution to come across to you?
It doesn't feel inevitable anymore the way it did in the past.
I think that Western civilization is going to survive.
But I think that the political structures that we currently see will not.
You know, I think that what we're doing is more planting the seeds.
I don't think that we're the gardeners.
I think that times are going to get considerably harder and that they're going to, you know, our sons, our grandsons, Are going to be the hard men who can rebuild.
And I think that they're going to be willing to do things that men like you and I would not be able to do.
If you look at history, the great men have always been decisive, intelligent, and violent.
The Whiff of Grapeshot that Napoleon talks about, which launched his career when he had to disperse a crowd, just fired cannons at them.
The Whiff of Grapeshot.
And then through that, he ended up building an empire.
Right.
And I think that those are the people that are going to defend Western civilization.
The Charles Martells.
If you look around, who is the Charles Martell?
It's none of us.
We're talkers.
We're thinkers.
We're not doers.
And it's going to take doers and it's going to take people that believe that they are justified in doing what they're doing.
But we're laying foundations for that justification, which I think is important.
Precisely.
And so, you know, if you want to use the flip side as an example, We're more akin to the Marx's and the Gramsci's than we are to the Lenin's and Trotsky's.
But the Lenin's and Trotsky's of the right will come because they're going to be continually under pressure.
Donald Trump is going to help tremendously.
If Marine Le Pen wins, that would also help tremendously.
But the one thing that we know about the left and the one thing that we know about evil is that it has to be defeated.
And it's not going to be defeated by words in the end.
And I don't know when...
Right now, we're still pretty fat and happy.
No one across the West really lacks for much.
Maybe you can't afford a PlayStation 4, But you're not starving.
Just look at the people and how fat and overweight they are.
We're literally physically soft.
And so when the hard times come, and they will, and Donald Trump can probably help very much in that regard because he actually has the will to help build the infrastructure And help actually deal with the issues, so maybe when the crash comes, there won't be as far to fall.
But at least he's not going to go out there and make things considerably worse.
But we're at the peak of a colossal expansion.
This is one of the greatest expansions of wealth and peace and population, just numbers of people.
That we've ever seen in history.
And so what that means is that we are way, way overdue for some sort of cataclysm, for some sort of black death or whatever else.
Now, I realize that's kind of depressing.
But that's part of the...
It's not something to be feared for itself.
It's part of the natural cycle of history.
If you boil it down to the simplest possible level, if we were a herd of deer in the forest and we bred to the point that we've bred, anyone would look at that situation and go, well, the population is going to crash.
But the important thing to do is to keep focusing on the truth, whatever it is, because the more that we understand the truth, The more that we can take the right actions, the correct actions, to the benefit of ourselves, our family, our tribe, our friends, and people in general.
And so I don't disagree with you.
I do think that there is a possibility of...
I don't think there's just a possibility.
I think that Western civilization will be saved.
I think that Western civilization will survive.
I just think it's going to be a much more...
You could be right about that.
I mean, when the crisis occurs, there are men and women of action who will leap in to achieve particular goals.
Those doers are not the theoreticians.
And as I've always said, the point of the theoreticians, of the educators, of the people who can teach people to think critically and who can bring right evidence and reason to bear on these kinds of problems, You want to make sure that the men of action are pointed in the right direction.
When the crisis occurs.
That to me, because in the past, crises have occurred as they did in Germany in the 1920s and early 1930s, and as it did in France in the 18th century, and as it did in Prussia.
So it's always happening.
These crises will occur for, it's not just Malthusian reasons, but just generally, the more successful a society gets, the more parasites you attract.
The more parasites you attract, the weaker society gets, and then when it collapses, there's a huge problem.
Or another way of putting it is that smarter people get in charge of a society which causes a great organization of resources which raises the population levels.
And then the Marxists come in and say, well, the smart people are exploiting you and it's terrible and you've got to drive them out and they're horrible people and they're racist and they don't like you and they're the capitalist class and the bourgeoisie.
So everyone gets angry.
This is what's happening in Venezuela.
They drive out the smart people.
They drive out the competent people and then the population begins to go back down to its original levels because it's not swelled by the steroids of intelligence anymore.
And this is happening in South Africa.
It's a terrible, terrible cycle.
But my point has always been educate people so that when the crisis occurs, and you're right, I don't think it's going to be One election or two elections that's going to solve it, although hopefully it's a softer landing.
When the men of action decide to really make things happen, we want to make sure that we get the founding fathers and not the aforementioned Lenin and Trotsky, so that we can get people moving in the right direction.
The crisis will occur.
We want people to understand it is not freedom that has failed.
It is force that Well, I couldn't agree more.
And I would actually say that, and this touches on something, there's so many people that want us to, like, get into a debate on religion someday.
And this is not that day.
I'm sure we will at some point.
But this actually does go to where why you want not just good men, but you want good God-fearing men to be the men of action.
Because the one thing that you do not want is the men of action or the man of action who believes he's a god.
You know, the one thing that I think I can convince any atheist of the desirability of...
Religion in general, Christianity in particular, is that at least if a man worships a god, he will not believe that he is a god.
And that may sound ridiculous.
No, not at all.
If you look at the number of people throughout history who have committed some of the most heinous acts and stuff, it's amazing how many of them, in their insanity, Proclaim their own divinity at some point in time.
You know, it's almost like a, you know, obviously Stalin never did.
But even something like Hitler, who never proclaimed himself a god per se.
He wanted a church of Nazism.
Well, he did want a church of Nazism, but he did definitely take on the metaphorical role of things like, you know, the father of the nation.
And so, you know, Stuff that is symbologically, semiotically divine.
And that clearly, above all, is the one thing that we absolutely want to avoid, which is, you know, have a sense of humility.
That, I think, is key.
And I'm sorry to interrupt, but humility is the fundamental virtue.
Because if you are arrogant enough to think that you are the measure of all things, you are...
destructive.
If you want to build a bridge, you have to surrender yourself to the reality of physics and tensile strength and load-bearing, whatever you need.
And if you think that your mere willpower is going to keep the bridge up, you're going to send people down a deep, deep chasm.
And I know that atheists dislike the reality that Marxism was specifically atheist and anti-Christian in nature.
But the reality is...
Let me sort of give you a little...
Synopsis of what I think and let me know what you think.
The one thing I think where the Marxists did believe that they were God is the Christians, of course, you believe in the soul that man was made in God's image and that to attempt to make man into something he is not is a sin.
It is a rejection of the divine not to say, let us anticipate and understand what man is and design society in accordance with man's nature.
That man is not infinitely malleable.
There are, of course, environmental influences.
You know, if you grew up in a Mandarin-speaking culture, you'll speak Mandarin.
That's all fine.
but human nature, human morality, human identity, the fact that we all respond to incentives, the fact that a lot of us fear death, all of these things are foundational to human nature, and it's immovable.
It is as immovable as God's nature, because man is in God's image.
And so there's this humility that you need to design society around a human nature that is inviolate, and to violate that is a grave sin.
It It is to reject God.
It has a false God before God, which is an infinitely malleable human nature.
I'm probably way out of my depth theologically, but to sort of close off this particular perspective, one of the things that I've always felt enormously hostile towards with regards to socialism in general, central planning, but Marxism in particular, is this idea that we can just create a new man.
See?
We just make this society, and he was called the new Soviet man.
We're just going to make a new man.
When we change our relationship to the means of production, we get a man who is no longer selfish.
We get a man who's going to surrender all of his self-interest to the good of the collective.
We're going to get people who are going to love to work even though they don't even get paid.
We're going to get a new kind of man.
We are infinitely malleable when you're poured in, like water, you pour it into any container, it becomes a shape of that container.
Now, Christians understood this as a foundational sin.
But the Marxist, by having no God above them and by having no absolutes in human nature, felt that they could redesign human nature to suit their ideological conceptions.
Now, that theory alone is wretched enough.
However, they were so dedicated to their theory that when people didn't fit their theory, they destroyed people rather than alter their theory.
You know, like kids, you see this when you have kids, right?
You see your kids working on a painting or a picture and it doesn't go the way they want it to and they just crumple it up and throw it away.
And this rage at the inability, or they would perceive it as the unwillingness of human nature to alter itself towards their fantastical conceptions of what society should be and what human beings should be, they destroyed people by the tens of millions rather than admit the they destroyed people by the tens of millions rather than admit the theory That to me is an arrogance.
And if it takes a belief in the divine for people to stop forever thinking that human beings can be endlessly engineered according to the whims of central planners, by God, sign me up for a front seat in the pew.
I'm going to lift up my voice and make a joyful sound.
No, I could not possibly have said it better.
I mean, honestly, that was probably the best sermon I've heard in two years.
Oh, the irony.
But it's true, and you saw the same behavior out of Hitler at the end.
He was so disenchanted with the failure of the German people to live up to his expectations that he refused to surrender.
He wanted them to be exterminated.
Because they had failed his vision.
And that is the madness of the genuinely arrogant.
I mean, you're often accused of being arrogant.
I'm often accused of being arrogant.
And, you know, in some contexts, those accusations are true.
Speak for thyself, brother.
I'm as humble as the day is long.
But sorry, go ahead.
But where it counts, you know, I mean, Cernovich gets the same thing.
Hmm.
And Milo, absolutely.
But the interesting thing about all three of you guys is that where it counts in terms of where your genuine spirit is with regards to your understanding of the world and your place in it, you guys are all very humble.
And I suspect, actually, that even the god-emperor is considerably more humble in that sense Despite the fact that everything is always the best this and the best that and everything's going to be successful and stuff.
But if you look at his actions, you can see that he doesn't believe that he's the measure of all things.
I mean, I was really startled during the inaugural address when he talked about how we shouldn't fear because we're protected.
And we're protected by the men and women of the armed forces.
I was like, okay, great.
And then he said, and also we're protected by God.
I mean, I've met Donald Trump.
I've known about Donald Trump since high school.
And this is not a religious man.
Not someone that struck me that way.
But what that told me was that this is somebody who, upon being elevated to power...
Was more cognizant of his own limitations.
And that is the real test of a man, is when you give them power, when you give them influence, when you give them fame and attention, does it go to their head and cause them to start behaving more like an animal, thinking they can get away with whatever they want?
Or does it cause them to suddenly become more philosophical and more reflective and more cognizant of their actions and the significance of their actions and the harm they can do?
I have no proof of this.
It's just my thought.
But I know that in order to gain the presidency, he had to meet with a lot of religious leaders.
There seems to be a spiritual element coming off the man that I have not seen in the past, and I'm not sure that he could do what he's doing based on his own will alone.
I believe that he is surrendering to what he would consider or may directly call a higher power.
I'm no proof for any of that.
It's just my gut feel, so take it with as much grain of salt as you want.
But the reality is, of course he's humble, because he's not telling you what to do with your life.
He's trying to get other people to stop telling you what to do with your life.
He's trying to get other people to stop taking your money.
He wants to reduce regulations by 75% or more so that people with guns aren't constantly telling you what you can and can't do.
Isn't that humility, the very fundamental humility to say, I don't know what is best for you to the point where I'm willing to pull out the weaponry of state power?
You must decide for yourself.
I'm going to stop with all this taxes.
I'm going to stop with all this social engineering.
I'm going to stop with all this wealth distribution or at least some of it because you must be the master of your own destiny.
I cannot live your life for you and I cannot force you to be good because in the forcing, good evaporates.
You cannot force people to be good any more than you can rape someone into loving you.
So I think that there is a profound humility, and this is what is so tragicomic about all the people who say he's a fascist.
It's like, assholes, he's reducing the size and power of the state.
If that makes him a fascist, who the hell was before?
Who made the state so much bigger?
Isn't that much more fascist?
How can he be more fascist than the people who grew the state?
It's getting smaller.
It got smaller by a bunch of people in the State Department just today.
Well, I'm not convinced that you're not secretly a theologian, because you also just concocted a really effective argument for the existence of free will.
Well, Oh, I've done free will up the yin-yang on this show over the years.
But it is an interesting point, and to be honest, it is the same response that you would make to the idea of God as a divine dictator.
I mean...
If God is a divine dictator, then, you know, why would he give you the option of choosing?
Why aren't we in a celestial prison?
Why aren't we in the deific equivalent of the Gulag Apikalago?
I mean, why aren't we Alexander Solzhenitsyn?
I mean, yeah, God turns us loose in an empty universe and gives us all the free will we can handle, and then, what, gets accused of being a dictator?
No prisons around here.
It does seem a bit strange, but it's precisely the same thing.
And I do think that it does behoove us, as people look to us, saying, what do you think?
What do you think we should think?
It does behoove us to remember that that doesn't make our thinking any more correct.
It doesn't matter whether one person is watching your podcast or 500,000.
That has no impact on the correctness of your thinking or my thinking.
And so, if anything, it puts more of a spotlight on us and puts more of a target on us for the critics, which actually I kind of find energizing myself because the more that I know people are looking for me to screw up, the more I'm motivated to, you know, Run through that thought process one more time.
Or, you know, go ahead and make sure that all the I's are dotted and the T's are crossed.
Because I know that there's going to be 500 people looking for me to screw up.
And that's just my fans.
That's just my family.
No, and it's funny.
It's like you're bench pressing and people are like, well, I'm going to go stand on his weights so that he can't do what he's doing.
It's like, wow, that's really hard, but you know what I'm going to get out of this?
A whole lot stronger because these muscles grow through resistance.
So, of course, you want people to oppose you.
I mean, what fun is it playing tennis on your own?
And you want...
The best people to oppose you so you get better at what you're doing, and you want to be soundly beaten so you're enthusiastic to come back.
It gets boring if you win all the time, so yes, match your witch against the strongest and then see what you can do.
Well, now we're getting into the social-sexual hierarchy because obviously that thinking is so anathema to the lower-ranking source, the gammas, the ones who are Prone to SJW. I'm working on a sequel to SJW Always Lie right now.
SJW's always doubled down.
And one of the things that I found that I have to get into...
Sorry, it's also because you've doubled the number of books on it.
Just doubling down yourself.
But go on.
But what I realized was that in this book, I actually have to get into the psychology of the gamma a little bit because that's what's so often driving the SJW. When we're looking at the psychology of the gamma,
obviously this does not cover the female SJWs, but going back to what you said about the levels of testosterone dropping, one thing that we've observed is that the male gamma thinking is essentially feminine in a lot of its mechanisms.
And so I think that hopefully through examining that psychology on the male side, it can relate to the female SJWs as well.
I don't know yet.
I'm still working on that.
And this is not a massive tome or anything, so it's not like we're going to be going into huge detail.
But it was interesting to me to realize that even though I didn't intend to get into it, it was necessary just so that we could build a predictive model for what SJWs are going to do in certain given situations based on what we're witnessing.
That's right.
Well, I really want to express my appreciation for the conversation.
As always, the time flies, and I wish we could keep going, but I just wanted to remind people, I mean, Vox's books are great.
Social Justice Warriors Always Lie, Taking Down the Thought Police, now more relevant than ever, and Cuxervatives, How Conservatives Betrayed America.
I'm glad to see that title in the past tense.
We'll try and keep it deep in the rear view.
Also check out his blogs, very thought-provoking, very stimulating Vox Populi and Alpha Game.
And of course, if you need any game design, he's your guy to go to and check out InfoGalactic, which is Wikipedia not run entirely by Social Justice Warriors or even partially.
If I understand this correctly, and Castalia House Publishing, check out their books.
