Sept. 8, 2018 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
01:42:54
4189 Live Stream Q&A; with Stefan Molyneux
5:26 – What are your thoughts on the Tommy Robinson situation? 7:33 – What are your thoughts on leftist opposition to freedom of speech?14:45 – What is your favorite programming language?16:11 – Would you recommend leaving Twitter and other social media platforms? 18:48 – Do you think the way SJWs dress is a marker for anything?21:15 – Do you think the shift towards totalitarian on the left is part of a natural cycle? 22:57 – My toddler won’t sleep or play on his own – any tips for young children? 26:56 – What is your stance on social media regulation? 33:24 – What do you think is going on with Jeff Sessions? 37:06 – What are Your thoughts on Q? 39:19 – Can you give your thoughts on studies where researchers send out resumes and white sounding names get preferential hiring? 42:27 – Who are more dangerous neocons or democrats?46:50 – Do you think its accurate to refer to Russia as the first post-postmodernist state? 48:55 – Can the European Union return from its current migrant state? 50:55 – Do you ever worry that political movements founded on a religious base could be diverted from principles to support religious fanatics? 53:36 – What is your favorite anime goth girl?56:00 – Can somebody be virtuous and work for the state? 58:19 – Is authoritarianism needed to at some point achieve a minimal state? 59:03 – What would a crisis in Mexico mean for the United States? 1:01:17 – What are your thoughts on rising our child as a Christian even though we are more agnostic? 1:03:12 – What do you think is the one thing men can do in the west to save western civilization? 1:04:15 – I enjoyed your DOOM review – do you have plans to do anymore playthroughs?1:05:26 – How do we eliminate the welfare state?1:06:29 – Do you think Disney movies are healthy for children?1:08:19 – I’ve heard you speak on the differences in IQ – what pro-and-anti sources would you suggest? 1:11:38 – Is there any reason to find out your IQ? Should parents have their children’s IQ tested?1:13:48 – Can you talk about Jair Bolsonaro being stabbed?1:14:26 – What is the best way to refute the statement that the poor need the state?1:17:03 – What are your musical preferences and why? 1:21:35 – What can somebody do to become a man; such as obtaining leadership skills? 1:24:58 – Where does Venezuela go from here? 1:25:30 – How did you turn out alright describe being raised by a single mother? 1:28:39 – What impact would artificial wombs have on the world? 1:30:25 – Would you ever make a truth about Ronald Reagan video? 1:30:50 – If you know that we are ruled by a feminist gynocracy, why does he advocate men have children? 1:31:34 – Would you like to see Rand Paul as President of the United States?1:31:49 – You talk about the dangers of dating a single mother, what about a single father?1:32:44 – Could egalitarianism have ever evolved without violence? 1:34:00 – How would it be possible to have a decentralized defense force in a free state when other countries are not playing by the same rules?1:35:00 – What do you think of Internal Family System’s (IFS) therapy?1:35:15 – How can we get to full libertarianism given the flaws in human nature?1:35:50 – Do you believe UFOs are extraterrestrials or government space craft? 1:38:16 – What do you think about Chelsea Manning being banned from Australia? 1:39:17 – Any thought on how to deprogram lefty friends and family?Your support is essential to Freedomain Radio, which is 100% funded by viewers like you. Please support the show by making a one time donation or signing up for a monthly recurring donation at: http://www.freedomainradio.com/donate
We're trying a little live streaming going on here.
And first time for everything.
Let's give it a shot.
I'm not even sure if I need my earpiece.
I may not, in fact, need the earpiece.
But just saying hi to everyone.
Hello to all of the people coming in on the chat.
Welcome. Welcome.
This is so cool to be able to see everybody in real time.
And wait, I've got to look at the camera too.
And look at the chat. And look at the camera.
This is more multitasking.
Oh, you people are typing too fast.
Stop typing so fast.
I need you to all slow down.
Oh, look at that.
And we've got a super chat going on.
How exciting. Shall I just ramble or pop our chat?
Okay, here we go. Here we go.
Well, it is really great to meet you guys.
OG stuff.
I really, really appreciate that.
So, hi, everybody.
It is a great pleasure to chat with you.
And if you want to hit me some questions, I'm happy to take some questions and step in and discover super jets.
Trying to get banned. Do I love you philosophically?
I love you philosophically.
Long time. So...
Yeah, I mean, we'll see how this goes.
I would really, really like to do more of these and chat with you guys, get some real-life questions going.
Mike the Magic.
Am I pregnant? No, I'm just over 50.
What can I tell you? We met in Melbourne.
Very nice to meet you. And should I click on the show?
Of the show? Hi, this is also new to me.
You'll just have to give me all of the news and the date.
All right. So, I'm going to start with a little topic here.
Mike, the magic producer, is going to gather some questions.
Let me start with a little topic.
If you want to talk about this topic, that's great.
If you want to do something else, I'm happy to go back and forth with you.
But this is an interesting question, and it was written recently.
I think it was on YouTube. And it goes like this.
If I took back the very car from the son of a man who stole that car from my father, then who is right and who holds the moral ground?
Surely the son of the man who stole the car would realize that the true owner is the son of the man who the car was stolen from, thus freely giving up any rights that he believed that he has to that car.
And that is very interesting.
And you've probably heard this kind of thing as well, which is, if someone steals a famous painting, gives it to their child, does that mean the child is the rightful owner of the painting?
No, of course not. And therefore land stolen by previous generations and handed down to the generation who owns them today, or am I mistaken?
That's a very interesting question.
And I'm not going to be oh too glib about it.
And I also don't want to just be, well, it's impractical.
It can't be done. Every country's been occupied by someone else somewhere, somehow, and therefore we can't untangle everything.
And who's the original owner and what's the owner of the previous, like, what's the previous owner of Just and his ownership of that product?
But I will say this. There's this giant gravity well that tries to suck and hoover people down into history.
History is a very safe place with which to try and get upset at people's disagreements.
Who owned Wyoming 300 years ago is probably not going to get you in a whole lot of trouble, but property rights violations in the here and now through fiat currency, through debt, through Taxes.
You know, that's something that actually has impact in the here and now.
The history is a very safe place to disagree with people.
I talked about this when I was on the tour in Australia and New Zealand.
Asterisk did not include New Zealand, tragically, but...
The leftists often wait for people to die before they start slandering them, and it's a lot easier to try and establish property rights in the past than it is to interfere with people's property rights in the present.
So that's number one. It's really easy, very tempting to be pulled into history because when I think about the unjust transfer of property, I try not to really think about Wyoming 300 years ago.
I try to think of things like The welfare state in the here and now.
The military industrial complex in the here and now.
National debts in the here and now.
Bonds and inflation and fiat currency in the here and now.
That's where the real property violations are occurring.
And frankly, I couldn't give a tiny ass behind about who owned Wyoming 300 years ago, given the amount of predations that are occurring in the here and now.
Just try and drag people out of history and talk about property rights violations in the here and now.
It's a little more volatile, but I think a whole lot I'm going to do some questions from the audience.
It's going to be pretty short. And you know what?
I'm going to get an aneurysm from being short.
You guys know that, right? I mean, you know, this is, again, without 12,000 metaphors and tangents, I can't answer the question.
All right. Super tech question.
What are your thoughts on Tommy Robinson's issues?
Well, Tommy Robertson's issues have been an absolutely egregious violation of basic human rights and legal norms.
If you read what the Supreme High Court in England had said about how Tommy Robinson's case was adjudicated and solved in a terribly unjust manner, if you look at his multi-month incarceration where he was too terrified to eat food prepared by the prison because there had been rumors that he was going if you look at his multi-month incarceration where he was too terrified to eat food prepared by the prison because there had been rumors that he was going to be poisoned, he had like a can of tuna a day, that he begged to have the capacity
There was people spitting at him from outside because he was not that far from a mosque as far as I understand it.
There was people spitting at him.
This is brutal.
And this is designed to terrify anyone and everyone into shutting the hell up about problems in England, multicultural problems in England, religiosity problems in England, grooming gang, pedophile rape gangs in England and so on.
So absolutely unjust.
And it's one of these things with Tommy where you look at...
Amnesty International, you look at various human rights agencies, they should be all over this.
This is a first world, titularly, a first world country that is basically, at least as far as I can see, grabbing someone as a political prisoner and subjecting them to torture and starvation for months.
This is Mugabe-style injustice.
And the fact that the supposed human rights That organizations are silent on this issue, is absolutely reprehensible, and shows the bias that they actually represent.
So I think Tommy is heroic.
I think that what was done to him was unjust to the point of actual and outright torture.
And the fact, of course, that nobody's going to jail, who's sent into jail, tells you everything that you need to know about the biases that are going on.
All right, here's another question.
What's your opinion on the leftist government trying to change our freedom of expression in the United States?
Well, this is a huge issue, and we just saw, of course, that Paul Joseph Watson got his 12-hour Twitter timeout, Alex Jones, PermaBand from Twitter.
Of course, he's already off Facebook, already off YouTube, already off a wide variety of other platforms, although apparently there's a website called Pornhub where you can still get his material.
I confess I haven't gone to look for it because it sounds like the kind of site you don't want to mistype something into.
They can't compete.
They can't compete.
The mainstream media cannot compete with alternative media.
We tell the truth. We're unshackled.
We're free. We're committed to the ideology.
We're willing to be ridiculous, so to speak, and we are willing to tell the truth.
We're not constrained, especially those who are self-funding.
Like, I get my funding from you guys.
Thank you, everyone, again, so much.
Freedomainradio.com slash donate.
It is you who keep me free.
You know, I have a certain amount of freedom of movement.
I have a certain amount of freedom in politics and economics.
But it is you guys, in particular, specifically, who actually keep me free to tell the truth about the most important issues in the world.
And I think we all know that this is the place where the most dangerous truths are spoken.
I... Blindly rush in where fools rush in where angels fear to tread.
I kind of blindly rush in.
Well, not blindly, I suppose. Intelligently rush in to deal with topics that other people just completely freak out about and back away from and then, I guess, try to undermine me for talking about families.
Family volunteerism, race and IQ, stateless society, non-aggression principle, genetics of personality, you name it, we're all over it like white on rice because it's a short life and I don't want to spend it lying if I can at all avoid it.
So what's going on with the media?
Well, the media can't Shut you up using the law.
And this is not just true in America.
Of course, we've got the First Amendment.
But it's also true in other countries as well, that if you're not promoting hate, as I don't, you know, I'm safe and secure in what it is that I'm doing.
So they can't shut you up legally.
So what do they do?
Well, it seemed very clear that there was a coordinated attack from the mainstream media on Alex Jones and Infowars.
You could see this because the mainstream media was reporting it at exactly the same time as Twitter was.
So, of course, there was a mainstream focus on Infowars as not just a test case to see if they could get rid of Infowars, but also as a warning to everyone else to not stray into the kind of topics that Infowars It goes on.
Now, I also noticed this when I was in Australia and New Zealand, right?
So there were interviews with me that were all designed to be...
Interviews, I shouldn't say, with me.
With me and Lauren Southern, of course, to give credit where credit is due.
She was great in these interviews, too.
There were these interviews where it was like, gotcha!
We're going to hit you with the nasties.
We're going to try and paint you as the most terrible person.
And that's not just in the interviews.
Afterwards, you know, there's the...
There are these two people coming from Canada.
Dum, dum, dum.
You've got like the Darth Vader music.
I expected to see our heads mounted on the front of a Death Star, you know, sailing into the Aldebaran peace planet of Australia and New Zealand.
So they sat with us and they tried to grill us and they tried to burn us and they tried to corner us and they tried to make us look as bad as humanly possible.
And what happened? Well, their hit pieces, there's one that was, I don't know how many people saw it on television, but I saw it online.
I checked it out online. One hit piece, I think it was about 18 minutes long, had 20,000 views.
Oh, and by the way, and by the way, the comments under those 20,000 views were all like, you guys suck.
You're liars. This is not true.
I saw the actual interview.
Now, When we were being interviewed by the reporters, we had our little cell phones up and we were recording what was going on.
And just to take one of those, which was this bearded guy who was, you know, trying to tie us to all white nationalism and KKK this and that, whatever it was, just a bunch of white supremacist garbage.
So we filmed that.
I don't think that ended up even being written about, but podcasts and downloads, like a million people saw the actual interview.
It's the same thing with the New Zealand film crew that came to interview us in Australia.
Their hit piece seen by 20,000 people, the actual interview seen by hundreds and hundreds of thousands of people.
So 20 to 30 times more people are seeing the actual interview than are seeing the hit pieces.
I don't think it's possible for you guys or maybe even me to understand just...
What a mind frack this is to the mainstream media that they simply don't have the power to take people down anymore.
Their attacks discredit only themselves and elevate us.
You know, if you're told, this guy's a Nazi, this guy's a racist, this guy's a whatever, right?
You're like, wow, he's got to be crazy.
He's got to be terrible.
I'm going to go and see what he's got going on, right?
And you go over, and what happens?
Well, you see me having reasonable conversations, dancing around a little bit, yelling a little bit, but, you know, interviewing Dr.
Richard Howe of the intelligence journal, well, of the journal on intelligence called Intelligence, me interviewing Dr.
Flynn from New Zealand, me interviewing a wide variety of people.
And it's all reasonable and it's all professional and it's all well executed with great questions.
I actually regularly get questions.
Enormously praised by people after the fact for the interviews because they're not used to people who've actually read all the material and come up with some good questions.
So the media, in trying to sniper shoot us, well, the gunpowder just goes off in their own face.
So what can they do? They can't out-compete us.
They can't slander us into oblivion.
And they can't shut us down legally.
So what are they going to try and do?
Well, they're going to try and de-platform us, right?
That's the inevitable next step.
Now, how that plays out?
A lot of that's, I mean, a lot of that's up to me.
Like, don't do stuff that is just obviously going to get you banned, which, of course, I wouldn't want to do.
But it's also up to you.
You know, when we got the two strikes, like, boom, boom, on the Freedom Main Radio channel right after we got back from Australia, man, we were just a hair's breadth away from having thousands of videos and 12 years of work just erased and unplatformed.
But you guys... You guys stood up.
You stood firm with us. You tweeted respectfully and positively.
And it was all reversed.
So it's a collective endeavor.
I have to not screw up.
I'm working on it. And you guys, in supporting what it is that I do and what other content producers do, you keep us alive.
And it is that hope.
If we get deplatformed, I mean, this is a funny thing.
This is just my entrepreneurial side speaking, but if we get deplatformed off places like YouTube or off places like Facebook or whatever, we'll just go to the alternatives and you guys will come with us.
It's a blow, don't get me wrong, but it will end up with those guys suffering more than anyone else.
All right. I hope that helps.
What's my favorite programming language?
Oh, please don't ask.
Oh no, don't ask.
Okay. Oh, gosh.
Okay, so my history with programming languages, I actually counted up once.
I think I know 14 computer programming languages.
Beginners applied symbolic instruction code.
I'm afraid it's BASIC. I know if you're over 12, you're not supposed to be using BASIC. I did try machine language and machine code assembler, it was called.
It's too boring. It's too boring, too much typing.
I like BASIC, and back in the day, it was really, really slow.
I'm talking like player missile graphics from the Atari 800.
It was too slow to make video games, but I made text-based games like Zork and things like that.
Blood Priests was one of my characters in the...
In the text-based games, and you could do those in BASIC. Nowadays, well, for the last 20 years or so, people liked C, and I worked a little bit in C, I worked a little bit in Java, but for the most part, BASIC compiled to machine code.
In other words, it was not an interpreted language like Java or like it used to be.
I really like BASIC, and it's what I'm best at.
And again, I've tried a bunch of other ones.
I mean, they're all pretty much the same fundamentally, because it's just different ways of interacting with a computer.
But I am going to destroy my neckbeard cred by just saying, yeah, sorry, it ain't once and zeros.
It's a whole lot of typing.
Less typing than COBOL, though.
I started working in COBOL 74 on a tandem computer, and then COBOL 85 with a big upgrade.
This was in the 90s. And Kobo was all right, but way too much typing.
All right. Somebody asked, would you recommend leaving Twitter or sticking it out to support the pro-freedom influencers that are still active on there?
Yeah! You don't give up the field.
Don't give up the field. You stand and fight.
You don't give up the field.
Of course. I mean, sorry, I don't want to say of course, like it's just obvious.
I think there may come a tipping point if they get truly dictatorial where it becomes...
I'm very much into freedom.
So here's the interesting thing.
The restrictions that are currently being put on people on social media don't...
They touch me in terms of people I like, people I respect, my friends are being hit and all that.
So it kind of touches me like it touches my heart.
I care for people and I want them to do well.
I don't want them to be banned.
But it doesn't touch...
What I do on the platform.
And that's really important to understand.
So I don't sit there every day and say, well, I could talk about it this way, or I could talk about that, but I don't want to get banned.
It's not like that for me.
I mean, tell me if you think I'm wrong.
I don't think that I've changed a lot of what I've done because there's this new censorship in place.
I'm still doing the same stuff that I've always done.
I mean, I'm still doing all the topics.
I haven't pulled back from the topics.
In fact, I've dug in deeper on some of the more controversial topics.
I'm enormously pleased. Let me tell you a couple of things I'm very proud about.
UPB, Universally Preferable Behavior.
Great. I'm very, very happy and proud of all my books.
I'm very happy that it has been largely me and this show and you as the audience that's responsible for bringing race and IQ back into the mainstream discussion because it is such an important topic.
It does need to be talked about.
And it was like four years ago plus that I began really digging in and providing the data.
I'm very, very pleased about that.
I'm still talking about it. I'm a little bored of the topic, and I hope other people pick it up in an effective way so that I can move on, but until they do, because it's so important, you've got to keep talking about it.
It doesn't change what I'm doing online for there to be this new blowback and this new censorship.
I won't leave because my freedom has not been impinged yet.
Alex Jones goes and berates a reporter for, what, like nine minutes?
I'm not going to go and berate a reporter for nine minutes.
I question the wisdom of it as a whole.
Alex Jones is a very smart guy.
Wouldn't be my choice about how to approach things.
So, I'm just not, I'm not going to go and do the things that are getting other people banned.
I have no desire to do those things, so it doesn't really impinge upon my freedom.
So, again, I'm not saying it's right that they get banned, but I just really wanted to point that out.
Here's another question. Do you think...
No, never. Only on weekends.
Do you think the way social justice warrior slash feminist dress code, colored hair, crazy makeup, wild outfits, etc., are subconsciously designed to appeal to the state for resources like women used to be hot for men?
Ah, that's interesting. So it is our selected, right?
So for those who haven't followed this, I did a presentation a couple years ago called GML. We're back!
Oof! Good thing I wasn't talking about censorship when the stream died.
Boy, that would be an odd coincidence, don't you think?
All right. We're back.
I broke everyone's Bioshock in argument.
Actually, it wasn't that great a game, in my humble opinion.
I like me a first-person shooter, but that was not it for me.
All right. All right.
All right. Let us get back.
I just want to make sure my producer's back in here.
I'm back. All right.
F5 saves today.
All right. Have I read Anarchy, State, and Utopia?
I think so.
Boy, I'm pretty sure I have.
But all right.
Let us go back to where I was.
I was just starting a new question.
And I'm going to get to the Super Chats.
I promise you. Yeah.
So the question was, Social justice warrior, feminist dress code, colored hair, crazy makeup, wild outfits, and so on.
Is this designed to appeal to state for resources like women used to for men?
Yeah. It is a marker.
So people have markers. And the marker is usually to do with R versus K selection.
Are they promiscuous or are they responsible?
Are they able to defer gratification or do they just seize I'm not down with capitalism because I'm trying to make myself as unemployable as humanly possible.
When they have lots of piercings, they're saying, well, I'm really interested in signaling my nuttiness in the here and now rather than presenting myself in a sort of normal way so that people can understand that I I'm responsible about myself, my future, and so on.
So it's a lot of signaling.
And when people signal their helplessness in the economic realm, they're definitely begging the state to declare them victims, step in and help them and make them dependent.
So I think that's a very... It's a very good comment, very good question, or more of a statement.
Here's another super chat question.
I feel like I need to read this with a cape.
The left changed from a liberal ideology in the 60s to suppression in 2018.
Sue, we might end up in jail for blasphemy.
Do you think this sudden change is a natural cycle or an artificial one?
No, it's... When a group, when a dictatorial group is small in number, they will use freedoms, they will demand freedoms, they will support freedoms so that they get to have their voice.
And then when they gain enough power, they shut down those freedoms so that other people don't have a voice, right?
So this is sort of very typical.
Why was the left into free speech in the 1960s?
Because they were small and they were just beginning to emerge and all that communist stuff that was being pointed out by Richard Nixon and Joseph McCarthy.
It was a small and emerging movement.
Now, you know, they dominate the media, they dominate academia, they dominate the tech companies, they dominate in many ways in government.
And newspapers and magazines.
So now because they're dominant, they don't want free speech anymore.
They only needed free speech when they were small.
Now that they have gained power, they don't want free speech for others.
So I don't think it's natural.
It's a natural way that you kind of gain power.
So a Super Chat question.
Graduating with a BS in physics.
Soon, any advice? Well, You are number one.
I bow to you in terms of average IQ. So the highest IQs are in the physics department.
The second highest are in the philosophy department.
So I guess I would include that fact in my resume if I were you.
And then anybody who understands IQ understands that you'll be able to do a great job with just about anything that you put your hand to.
Another question, Steph, I'm committed to peaceful parenting.
Good for you. I'm committed to peaceful parenting, but I'm having trouble getting my toddler to sleep or play on his own.
I'm tempted to follow Peterson's chapters on parenting.
Any tips for very young children?
You can't get your toddler to sleep.
Trust me, if you've had a kid in this kind of situation or environment, my daughter...
Does not like to go to bed, does not sleep, but that's okay.
I'm kind of the same way.
Look at me, 9.30 at night and chatting away with the greatest audience in the history of the known universe.
So don't try to get your toddler to sleep.
There are things that you can do for a soft landing with toddlers, like dim the lights, conversations and chats, exercise during the day and all that kind of stuff.
But if the child feels connected and happy, they're much more likely to sleep.
A toddler will not...
Play on his own or her own in general.
And just, you know, I hate to say it, you know, whatever you got to do to make that time for your toddler, make that time for your toddler and be with that toddler, play with them.
They don't really have much Capacity to self-stimulate in terms of, like, coming up with imaginative play with little tiny dragons and creating farms out of...
Like, they don't really have that capacity, so they are really going to need your participation, your interaction, and I don't know that there's...
I mean, why would you play with them as much as you want?
It's a time that goes by very fast.
You know, my daughter's just at the age now where...
She's just tailing off from going to parks.
We go to a park, it's very enthusiastic.
We go back. It's like, yeah, it was okay, but...
And I got a little tired to go into parks, and now I'm like, we've got to go to a park again.
I miss it. It's the most wonderful thing.
So enjoy that time. It'll pass soon enough.
But I think expecting toddlers to play on their own or go to sleep according to your schedule is unrealistic.
And also, I'll tell you this. If you have a smart kid, most likely they're going to be a bit of a night owl.
It's just the way things roll.
So you can look at your kid and say, I can't believe you won't sleep!
Or you can look at the kid and say, not sleeping is a good mark on the IQ test of toddlerhood.
Also, if they're physically fussy about, you know, like...
If they've got to have the tags cut off their clothing because it bothers them or seems bother them, or for me when I was a kid, everything but one pair of pants itched my legs or whatever, that sort of hypersensitivity to stimuli is also indicative of smart stuff.
All right. Will you ever come to Australia again, even though the media here treated you so poorly?
Of course! Why would I ever let the media define a country for me?
The media are outlier sociopaths of the first order, for the most part.
A couple of exceptions. You know, I love you guys.
But no, I would never imagine that the media would characterize a country.
The media, in general, is at war with the country that they infest and inhabit.
That's why it sometimes ends up like that.
So I would absolutely come back to Australia.
I love the people in Australia.
I love the sense of Australia.
Just passionate and powerful and committed and earthy people.
Earthy people, you know, because I'm an empiricist and earthy people to me are the best.
All right, super chat message.
I discovered you within the last year and I sincerely appreciate your take on things and your tone.
And I could listen to you say the word, understand.
Over and over for years and never tire from it.
All the love, Steph. Thank you so much.
That is wonderful. If you want to, you know, have you seen this one?
This is like goofy non-philosophy time, but oh, there's a movie parody site, a movie trailer parody site, and there's a guy and they give him weird things to say in his movie announcer voice.
And if you guys want to give me some of that stuff, it could be fun.
Steph, what is your stance regarding social media regulation, and what do you think about conservatives clamoring for regulation?
It's tough. It is a tough call.
I get the argument which says that social media is like the telephone.
It's like the roads. It's like an essential service, and you would never want a telephone company to cut off your telephone service just because you were conservative.
But of course, What's different about social media, it's pretty obvious, of course, you guys get this, but I just want to explain it anyway, because I'm pedantic.
But social media, it's searchable, right?
So when you had people plugging in and out of phones, you couldn't monitor everyone's phone calls.
But now, social media is searchable.
And, therefore, you can figure out who's conservative, who's liberal, who's on the right side of history, who's on the wrong side of history, which is completely boring and not an argument.
So, this kind of power, now that you can figure out the content of people's communications automatically, and you can write code and algorithms to filter or approve or disapprove of that, that is a really unholy power, and it is a power That hitherto has only been reserved for dictatorships.
Like in the Soviet Union, yeah, your phone calls were monitored and your mail was ripped open.
So it's only dictatorships that have had this power in the past to monitor the contents of people's communications.
The fact that it's now technically not only possible, but as efficient as you could imagine, in a relatively free society, that's unprecedented.
You have a totalitarian set of monitoring tools in a generally free society.
Boy, I don't know.
I mean, I don't have a good answer for that one.
I can understand that maybe they should be regulated as common carriers and say, it's just like the phone company, they can't cut you off for your political opinions.
But policing that and monitoring that would be a job that I would never give to the government because all the competent people are already working for the tech companies as a whole.
So I wouldn't give that job to the government because The tech company, you know, they're going to have their black box of coding, and they're going to say that they don't do it, but maybe there was an accident, or maybe there was a rogue employee.
They'll find some way to do it, and the government is going to play whack-a-mole and is never going to catch up.
I will say this, though. Libel and slander laws really need to be changed in America.
They are mental, absolutely mental, and they are really designed to give huge cover to the media.
And particularly if you're a prominent person, if you're a public person, if you're a known entity, your odds of winning any kind of libel or slander case, virtually nil, because you have to prove malice.
And of course, because they know that, well, they won't record any malice and they'll deny it.
So that is crazy.
What I would say, though, is that right now the tech companies have immunity from the content of They're websites.
If you write something horrible on Facebook, death threat on Facebook or whatever, then Facebook is not liable because they say, hey, we're neutral.
We're just a platform.
We don't have editorial control.
We don't have editorial restrictions over what gets published.
Now, they are skating a very, very close to the edge, thin line situation here because The moment that it's proved that they are exercising editorial control, in other words, the moment that it's proved That they're pro-leftist and anti-conservative, then they're no longer a neutral platform.
They are a publisher, not a platform.
Platforms are immune to the content that is put there, but publishers are not.
So if the newspaper publishes a death threat, then they've chosen to do it and they're responsible for that and all that.
But if somebody writes a death threat on Facebook, Facebook is not responsible because they're just a platform.
If it turns out that somebody can prove that there are publishers, And in my opinion, they're really, really close to that, if not already there, because they're exercising such political, politically focused control over particular sites.
Like, what is it? 90 plus percentage of traffic to conservative sites has been eliminated by Facebook.
And you know, the mistakes only ever go one way, like it's only ever conservatives that are suppressed, never liberals and so on.
And when you see that Alex Jones has lost his Twitter account, but Hamas still has their Twitter account, you have Sarah Jong also has her account and so on.
I mean, it makes no sense, right?
I mean, from a... A neutral standpoint, neutrality standpoint.
So I think that what has to happen is they are going to...
Well, first of all, the tech companies should just stand up to the social justice warriors in-house.
They should just stand up to them and just fire them if they have to.
Well, that will mean firing a lot of women and maybe some minorities.
But just have to stand up to them and say, we're not doing this.
We're not doing this. You sit down, you have a big company meeting, you take everyone off-site.
I mean, I've been a business leader in a smaller company, admittedly, but you take people off-site and you say, here's the big picture of what we're doing.
You know, we are responsible for hundreds of billions of dollars of shareholder value.
We are responsible for facilitating communication around the world, and we are not going to put our fingers on the scale.
We are not going to start playing politics with the content of our users' posts and messages and videos.
We are not going to do it.
Not only is that wrong, and it's an abuse of power, but also it exposes us And there will be a court case, and probably more than one, there will be a court case saying, you guys are publishers, not platforms.
And when that happens, if they're found to be publishers, they're done.
The tech company's value will evaporate almost instantaneously because they will be subject to so many lawsuits that it will be absolutely impossible for their business model to continue.
And that's the fire. That they're playing with.
If the tech executives allow social justice warrior employees to turn them from a platform into a publisher, they're going to destroy those companies.
And, well, dinosaurs and mammals.
We've seen this story before.
So I think I would prefer for it to go that way because government regulation is terrible.
All right. Super Chat questions.
What do you think is going on with Jeff Sessions?
Do you think the Trump admin is waiting for an opportune moment to pursue the Hillary corruption?
Oh, guys. No.
Hillary is not going to jail.
These guys aren't going to be prosecuted.
In my humble opinion, it's not going to happen.
The reasons why it's not going to happen are not particularly relevant, because it's not going to happen.
It is terrible. I mean, Trump could declassify all of this stuff.
He could, I mean, certainly with all the FISA stuff, you know, it turns out that the government says, oh, we don't have any FISA warrants.
It's like, okay, well, that means pretty much that Barack Obama approved it, because if there's no FISA court warrant for surveilling people, then it has to go through the president, in which case, well, Obama approved the spying Using government power on a rival political campaign, which is truly third world crap.
So I don't know what's going on with Jeff Sessions.
The lack of progress on something like The war on immigration.
I mean, you guys saw this video, I'm sure.
Like 25 minutes of guys in uniform and guns streaming across the US border.
That's not a legal immigration.
That's just an invasion.
Straight up. Straight up invasion.
And so...
You've got to build the wall because it's a matter of national security.
And Trump, as the head of the military, I believe, could just make that happen.
And, you know, it would be a crap storm, but you could make that happen.
So, I don't know.
You know what I think it is, probably?
You know, some people say, do they have something on Jeff Sessions?
I don't know, maybe. But I think it goes like this.
So every day that you wake up and you go to work, it's a little bit easier to go after marijuana users than the Clintons.
Because, you know, as we all know, there can be some blowback when you go after the Clintons.
And I'm not just talking about mean articles.
So each day...
It's just a little easier.
Now, ideologically, you want to, and you want to do the right thing, and you want to control immigration, and you want to build the wall, and you want to...
I'm not just talking about Jeff Sessions.
You want to go after the Clintons.
But each day, it's just a little easier to not do it, and a little easier to go after other people who don't generate the kind of blowback that the Clintons would.
But it's also bowing to the power of the media.
Of course, the media, if somebody went after the Clintons, the media would go absolutely mental.
I genuinely believe that they would send pretty strong messages for civil unrest, if not outright insurrection.
The level of hysteria that's out there regarding Trump, to the point where that woman, she does this symbol on her arm and everyone thinks she's a Half-Jewish, half-Mexican, white supremacist, Nazi.
The level of just genuine derangement out there, the media still has a bunch of matches to throw on the powder keg of society.
And maybe they've got information about what would happen if they went after the Clintons.
Maybe there's some kind of poison pill that the Clintons have.
I don't know. But it's pretty tough.
It's pretty tough to know.
We may never know. We may never know, but I still regret nothing.
It's the best chance we had. And it's better for Hillary to not be put in jail than for Hillary to be put into the White House.
So I'm still with that one.
Okay. Let me see here.
No, I can't get you, Lauren Southern's sister's number, I'm afraid.
What are my thoughts on Q? Wait, the guy from Star Trek?
He was a good actor, actually.
The next generation. So my thoughts on Q... So I don't know much about Q, and I've never read anything directly.
So this is all just stuff that I've heard tangentially.
So please take it with a grain of salt.
So my understanding is that it's QAnon, right?
So Q has...
Some theories about this master chess game that's occurring with Mueller and the deep state and Trump and so on.
I think it's engaging and probably hangs together fairly well and it's interesting and it's entertaining as far as the actual proof goes.
That's the big challenge.
If you want people to do good things in the world, if you want people to do the right things in the world, crossing your fingers and hoping that the unicorns align and everything that appears bad turns out to be good, I think is a form of anxiety management.
If you want, say, Nike to not have a cop-hating guy like Colin Kaepernick, Be the poster boy for their Just Do It campaign, then obviously you give your Nike shoes to the homeless people.
And then if someone in your friendships, your families or whatever has their Nike shoes, you sit down, talk with them and say, this is horribly offensive.
This is nasty. Do you see what they're doing?
You just talk to people. And then if it's some friend or acquaintance and they're like, you get into this and they won't change their mind based on reason and evidence, you cut them the hell out of your life.
You ostracize, as I've said a million times before.
That's how you get people to do the right thing.
Focusing on potential elaborate theories about what's really going on behind the scenes, I think it's just a form of anxiety management that has just like going to 300 years back to figure out who owned Wyoming and who's responsible for currently owning Wyoming or whatever.
It's just a way of avoiding the necessary...
Moral confrontations that need to occur in your life among the people you know in order to make the world a better place.
Everybody wants to outsource their ethics and their solutions to world problems.
It doesn't work.
Super Chat question. Can you please give your thoughts on those studies where researchers send out the same resume with different names and the white-sounding names get way more interviews?
Love your work. I've heard of those.
I have not read any of those in detail, and I certainly haven't looked at the source data.
I guess my question would be, let's say you're in China, and there's a bunch of Chinese names, and then there's Bob Smith.
Do you think Bob Smith's going to get a lot?
No, it's going to go to the Chinese people, Chinese-sounding names and so on.
That's sort of one thing. So maybe just a bunch of people who it's like, you know, they say white privilege, at least for now, it's just majority privilege.
I mean, it's just majority privilege. You know, if Japan, strangely enough, seems to be well-tailored for Japanese people, you know, the heights, the subway cars, the low tables, the haircuts, you know, where they're all working with that wiry East Asian hair and so on.
So yeah, funnily enough, you know, your doll's house is made for dolls.
It's doll privilege, right?
I mean, it's ridiculous. Japan is made for Japanese people, and do you call that Japanese privilege or just majority privilege?
Of course, right? You understand.
But I will say this, that let's say that you're in America or Canada or other places, and you get a name that seems black, right, and a name that seems East Asian, right?
Okay. Okay. Well, if you've got any smarts as a hiring manager, you know that in some circumstances, the East Asian, let's say the Japanese guy, well, his marks were suppressed to get into college.
So he's probably smarter, on average, not by individuals, on average.
He's smarter than your average bear, because they mark down East Asians for getting into some colleges, right?
Now, if you look at the black person's resume, Then you know that through affirmative action, through the raising of some of these scores, that he may have gotten into school because of his scores being inflated.
So it's not that hard to figure out who you would be slightly more likely to choose to come in for an interview.
And as a hiring manager back in the day, hired all races, hired all genders, and...
You could see where the affirmative action could be used to explain some things, some outcomes.
So get rid of affirmative action and then see, because then everyone's being judged by the same standard, but people have to price in affirmative action when it comes to their hiring decisions, especially because if you hire, let's say, a black man, And it turns out that he's not as smart as you'd like him to be or is not as smart as the Marx would indicate because he got through on great inflation and affirmative action.
It can be even more difficult to fire him because there could be civil rights problems.
There could be accusations of racism and so on.
So again, I don't blame the hiring managers.
I would look at affirmative action, which goes all the way through from very early on, all the way through.
Ah, let's see here.
Who is more dangerous, neocons or Democrats?
But you repeat yourself.
So, I'm disappointed today.
I'm disappointed today because Trump has reversed his stance on Syria, right, for years.
He's like, let's get out of Syria.
What's the point? And now he's signing, I think, the 2,000 permanent troops, U.S. troops staying in Syria forever.
That's terrible. It's terrible.
But Trump's fundamental mistake is in hiring, right?
He's... I don't know.
I mean, he's got to be good at hiring in the free market, although he's probably got a bunch of people around him who've been around him for a long time, and they do the bulk of the hiring.
And when he was in The Apprentice, he's got a bunch of people at NBC that take care of all of that.
But he's not great at hiring.
For Trump, when he got into the White House, It should have been like night and day.
Fire everyone, replace them with your own people, right?
You didn't have to wait to fire James Comey.
You should just fire James Comey on day one.
Hey man, nothing personal, but...
It's a revolution, and I'm unprecedented, so we're cleaning house.
And if you just bring in the fire hose, just clean everything out, scrape the paint off, sandblast everything.
It's an empty house.
And he should have done that.
And he shouldn't have gone to people who have ties to the deep state.
He shouldn't have gone to the never-Trumpers.
And he did, discouragingly so.
Maybe he thought he was going to build bridges.
That means he doesn't understand the hatred that people have for him.
So he should have just gone in and fired absolutely everyone he could lay his hands on, and then people couldn't say, oh, it was for political purposes.
Oh, it was for this or it was that.
It's like nonsense. Nonsense.
So he should have just gone in and fired everyone and then hired people who had supported his campaign and hired people.
And I don't care who they are. They could have been anyone.
Anyone who's smart and competent and just have them come in, and then he would have had a real phalanx with which to take on the deep state.
But by hiring people that were so compromised, He's got his will and he's got his force of personality, which is truly a force of nature.
But even the elephant can be brought down by mosquitoes if they're patient, persistent, and numerous enough.
So the neocons and the Democrats, they're both committed to war.
The neocons are committed to war because the purpose of the U.S. military, I'm totally stealing from Ann Coulter here, but the purpose of the U.S. military apparently is not to protect America and Americans' borders and America's sovereignty as a nation.
The military is to go and violently impose democracy on countries that desperately don't want it.
And so it's pretty tragic and pretty horrible.
They're both terribly dangerous because they both profit from war.
And I just really, really wanted to remind you guys, hoaxedmovie.com, H-O-A-X-E-D, hoaxedmovie.com, Mike Sternevich's amazing project, which has me and Scott Adams and Lauren Southern.
Like a bunch of other great people and some really fantastic dramatic footage, great music, and a great ending if I do say so myself.
Just check that movie out because it talks a lot about how much money the media makes when there's a war.
When there's a war, people tune in to watch the same stupid rocket flying off the deck of a U.S. Navy ship somewhere in the Persian Gulf over and over again.
They're glued to their TVs, advertising rates go through the roof.
They are blood vampire profiteers.
The military industrial complex makes a huge amount of money.
And politicians usually get their syndicat pretty strong.
You know, don't change horses in midstream, as the saying goes.
So politicians benefit by staying in power.
The media benefits by having a license to print money.
The military industrial complex benefits enormously.
Leftists benefit because it's mostly Christians and Southerners who get killed, mostly Republicans who get killed in wars.
And it's just, it's terrible all around.
So the Democrats profit demographically and the neocons profit financially.
And both of those are horrible motives.
Please feel free to submit war questions.
This is actually quite a...
Quite a lot of fun. So, another Super Chat question.
Do you think it's accurate to refer to Russia as the first post-modernist state?
The first post-post-modernist state.
I don't think that it is true because Russia seems to have a lot of foundational values, a lot of which I don't agree with, but it has a lot of foundational values, and I don't think that Russia...
Because it is ethno-nationalist and still remains significantly Christian, and because it has both the Depression—I mean, this is sort of an Eastern European, Central European, Eastern European, and Russian thing— All of the countries in the Eastern Bloc plus Russia have the depression of, you know, 40 to 70 years of communist rule, but they also have the health of the defense system against totalitarian dictates like Sharia law or socialism or communism.
So sad people are the strongest people in the modern world.
All the giddy happy people are extraordinarily vulnerable.
You know, all the welcome refugees, little hearts with the women like you ended up bloodied in a back alley.
So I do think that Russia is not a post-modern state.
Canada is vying to become a post-modern state and that there's no identity.
There's no Canadian identity, no Canadian values, nothing we stand for, just open arms, welfare state, and being submerged.
So let's see here.
What do we got here? I'm just looking for other...
I'm a mad whore for the Super Chat people.
Okay. Thank you so much for answering my question.
It's relieving and I'd say he must be smart.
I have a daughter coming this fall in large part due to your discussion of female fertility windows.
Thank you. Oh, I appreciate that.
That's wonderful. You know, and I get, you know, I saw a comment.
What was it? After my interview with Ann Coulter where it's like, oh yeah, but Steph and Ann Coulter have like one child between them.
And it's like, that's true.
I'm afraid the Jurassic Park of Eglets closed a little bit soon in the window that I had.
But, you know, we've certainly encouraged a lot of people to have babies.
I listen at work most days.
Can the EU return from their current migrant state?
So I think what you mean is can Europe return?
Return from the current problems with migrants.
It's a challenge.
It's a challenge. I mean, the big wave that was poised has not actually occurred quite as badly as some people thought.
And they're somewhat due to the work of Lauren Southern and others in exposing the NGOs and the human traffickers that are ferrying people across the Mediterranean into Europe against law, against international law.
If they start enforcing their laws, Okay, there's a possibility.
If they start deporting people who are criminals, that will help.
They still have a large embedded population that is having a lot of kids.
And demographically, that is going to be a disaster in the long run for Europe.
I mean, if you like Sharia, I guess it won't be a disaster.
But if you like Europe and say Western freedoms, it will be a disaster.
As I've said before, the great sacrifice of the 21st century is the welfare state.
The welfare state has to go.
It has to go. It is the spilled honey that brings the ants, so to speak.
And women are going to have to give up the welfare state.
You know, I actually have got notes for a speech that I would give if I were ever a politician saying that, you know, men had to go get their heads blown off.
Men had to go walk into mustard gas.
Men had to chew their way through barbed wire and crawl forward into machine gun fire.
You don't have to do any of that, ladies.
You just got to give up free stuff.
Are you with me on that? Can you do it to save Western civilization or will you never get to vote again in any future iterations?
Well, I don't care about whether women vote or not.
I mean, I don't like voting as a whole.
Everyone should get to vote. Who contributes to the economy?
Because if you're on the receiving end of government money, you can't possibly be objective about the spending of said government money.
So, all right.
Do you ever worry?
That political movements founded on a religious base have an inherent danger of being subverted away from original ideal virtues into dogmatic movements to serve religious fanatics.
You know, of the worries that I have, and I'll be frank with you, my friends, it's not a few worries.
Of the worries that I have, You've got to divide religions into two groups.
There are religions that stress universality.
In other words, the moral obligations to people not part of your religion are equivalent to those who are part of your religion.
And when I say religions plural, I basically mean Christianity.
Christianity says your moral obligations extend to non-Christians in the same way that they extend to Christians.
Judaism and Islam do not have Those same universalizations.
So I don't like to put all religions in the same category because they're not.
That's the reason why universal human rights came out of the Christian Western tradition.
Pastors, you know, the Greek or Roman and so on, which were very, very important.
So let's see here.
Superchat, I once gave $75 to the Young Turks.
I have been a donator to Free Domain Radio for the last six or so years.
My shame for the Young Turks donation haunts me.
Keep up spreading truth.
Hey, come on. Listen, I mean, changing your minds about particular political movements, political groups, it's all perfectly fine and valid.
As I've said before, I was a socialist in my teens, and You know, you live, you learn, you grow.
And my beliefs, you know, it's funny.
If you do change your beliefs, people call you a flip-flopper.
I used to be able to speak. If you do change your beliefs, people call you a flip-flopper.
Like, I've evolved from beliefs that I had 10 years ago.
Now, of course, I've got a public record of all my beliefs from 10 years ago.
And so people can say, how do you dispute Steph today?
Well, you just quote Steph yesterday.
It's like, well... Beliefs evolve.
So if you don't evolve, you're dogmatic and close-minded, you reject new information, and it's terrible.
If you do evolve, you're called a flip-flopper because people say, well, he doesn't agree with me.
So 10 years ago, I believed something different.
You go back 40 years ago, I believed in Santa Claus.
Does that make me a hypocrite?
No, you learn and you grow.
I wouldn't say that it should haunt you.
Okay, maybe you live. No, no, no, it shouldn't haunt you.
It shouldn't haunt you. Okay.
Ah, Stefan, what is your favorite anime goth girl?
Elvira? No, I'm afraid I don't really follow anime.
I do know that apparently there's a lot of anime crossovers when I interview people that other people like.
I did, oh so gosh, this is a bit of a personal story, but probably about, I guess about a decade ago, back in the very early days at the Freedom Aid Radio message board, Our little Facebook of philosophy back in the day.
There was a listener who said, man, you gotta get into Studio Ghibli Productions.
And I was like, okay, I can try that.
And I did, and I downloaded one, and I started watching it.
I gotta tell you, my friends, it freaked me the hell out.
Like, it really did, like, ah!
Not boo scary, but just deeply, deeply unsettling.
Like, you know, little kids lost in a world of strange, unconscious monsters.
And it was just like, oh man.
It was like when I was a little kid, maybe if anybody ever remembers this, let me know, but...
There was a movie, it had some theme song, call me a cannibal, I can't die, kill me if you can, I'll never lay down dead, or something like that.
And I remember seeing, I was sitting there with my mom, it's like, it's so inappropriate in hindsight, but there were a bunch of guys shuffling sort of head to ass naked through a room, and it's just like, just weird, creepy stuff.
Like, why do I want to see this? Why would I want this?
So... If you have good recommendations, hey, you know, I think Japanese culture is very interesting.
I know it's not just Japanese and so on, so I would be happy to look into it some more in the, like, eight-minute spare time I have every day.
So, yeah, it kind of scared me off.
Like, I remember when I was 12, I ate a banana, and it was like rotten at the bottom, and I didn't eat a banana for like years.
It's just one of these things your body does.
No banana! Something that The Amazing Atheist should have done, but it was...
It's kind of scared me off, so I'm happy if there's recommendations, I'll check them out.
But Studio Ghibli was not my cup of boiling tea.
All right. Can someone be virtuous and work for the state?
Yes. We're all involved in the state to one degree or another.
I think that when it comes to things like, I was just chatting with a friend of mine who's a musician, and he has, I guess, except for one time when he was younger, he's resisted taking any kind of government grants because of our sort of shared beliefs.
Meet people through the show.
They're the best people, best listeners, best friends.
But If you are tempted to get a grant, that, to me, is very optional.
You know, if the only way you can get a decent job is to work for the state, you know, assuming at some point you're trying to not work for the state, move on, move somewhere else, and so on, yes, you can be virtuous and work for the state.
In particular, if you're doing a job that would be done if there was no state, right?
I mean, so tax collector is kind of one thing.
But if you're a cop, yeah, there would be peace officers in the absence of a state.
If you work for the government...
Making roads, whatever, right?
Designing sewage systems, these things would occur in the absence of the state.
So it's a little tricky.
There's a bit of a gray area, but I would not say that anybody who works for the state is immediately immoral.
And if it's any consolation, gosh, when was it?
I worked for the Board of Education in Ontario about 25 years ago, no more.
Close to 30. Oh God, I'm getting old.
You know you're getting old when enter date of birth.
Spin, spin, spin, spin.
And like online.
But yeah, I was typing up union agreements and making sure that they all stayed up to date and all of that.
And yeah, helped me to write a book on an anarchist.
So yeah, it's fine, I would say.
All right. As a molly-gendered, amexual 56% goblin, I'm a huge supporter of Molyneux.
The only word I see there is huge.
So, good. I'm glad that they call you the tripod, and I'm glad you're pointing in the right direction.
All right. Authoritarianism is needed for anarchy to not progress Okay.
Change my mind. How about you tell me the right question?
I think I can parse this out.
Authoritarianism is needed for anarchy to progress to the ultra-minimal state.
Change my mind. Yeah, I'm afraid of that question, to be honest with you, Kes.
I hope not.
I hope not. You know, I hope not to step into that meme, The Time for Arguments.
Has passed. I hope not to step into that meme with me in the hat.
So I would say that I'm still hoping for recent evidence, and the fact that we're all gathered here chatting about philosophy on a Friday night is, I think, a good part of that.
Super Chat, what would a crisis in Mexico similar to Venezuela mean for the US? Well, we know that to some degree already because when the Mexican peso crashed some years ago, America rushed in to prop up the regime and spent untold amounts of money propping up the peso and so on.
You know, the second article, and this is way back in the day on lewrockwell.com, he was kind enough to publish my first article, which was my first podcast, The Stateless Society and Examination of Alternatives.
And then I sent him an article arguing that worse is better.
You know, do you get Trump without Barack Obama?
Do you get, for all of his moral failing, someone like Pinochet without an Allende, without a The communist attempt to take over.
So maybe, you know, there's an argument to be said, worse is better, because worse wakes people up.
And so if there was a catastrophe in Mexico, the socialism imploded and so on, and people just started streaming across the border en masse, would that be enough to wake people up for the need for a war?
I don't know. It would be nice to think that people could make their rational decisions before catastrophe occurs.
And certainly, we have the first chance to try to achieve that with social media and this amazing communications technology.
But it's, you know, I'm telling you, man, I mean, I like every day, every day, I think about it every day, it concerns me, sometimes very deeply.
And every day, I'm like, what can I do?
What can I do to Try and stem this tide and turn it back and try and stop it and wake people up.
I know we all think these things probably daily.
I try to keep it out of my mind at 3 o'clock in the morning because Steph needs his beauty sleep.
But I don't know.
Is worse better? Can we prevent it from escalating?
I don't know at the moment.
But because I don't know, I'm doing everything as if it can be stopped.
by reason and evidence alone so all right thank you for your videos thoughts on raising our child as a christian despite our beliefs being more agnostic what an interesting question boy would have been a pretty easy answer for me a mere five years ago but uh I know some pretty nice Christians, to be honest with you. I don't know a lot of really nice atheists.
So, here's what I would say.
The challenge, if you're more agnostic, but value the values in Christianity is something like this.
Philosophically find and extract the values in Christianity that make sense, that are logical, that are good, and then use philosophy to bring those values into your children's hearts and minds.
Saying God said it, it's written in the Bible, virtue comes from God is a disastrous shortcut over the chasm of developing a rational system of secular ethics.
So I would say step up to the challenge, find the values and virtues in Christianity that you like, which I like too, and find ways.
Like, I didn't just come up with some system like UPB. I had the four challenges, had the four challenges, which come out of Christianity Thou shalt not assault.
Largely come out of Christianity or sensible moral systems, right?
Which is no murder, no theft, no assault, no rape.
And so I didn't sort of invent, you know, well, what possible systems could we have?
Well, those were the systems that I grew up with, and I needed to find rational ways to justify those without gods, without governments.
So I would say that...
Find the values that work for you.
Find ways to extract those values and transfer them philosophically.
So, hey Steph, great live stream.
What do you think is the one thing men in the West can do to save civilization?
Sex robots, artificial womb.
No. Wrong channel.
One thing men in the West can do to save civilization.
Speak philosophically.
You know, One of the things that I learned about researching IQ is finding ways to talk to people about philosophy in a way that works for them, in a way that impacts people in their hearts and their minds, gives them tangible actions to take.
Talk to people about truth, reason, and virtue, and wake them up from this dream that hidden, smoky, smoggy violence is going to solve everything in the world.
It's not. It's going to make things worse.
Wake people up to the gun in the room, or wake people up to peaceful parenting, wake people up to fiat currency, and find ways to do it that is not hugely antagonistic.
See, I punch myself because occasionally I'm hugely antagonistic.
I'm trying, people. It's hard.
It's hard. So I would say that.
Super Chat, I enjoyed your Doom 2016 review.
Oh, you know, every now and then.
Every now and then. It's not that often, but a little bit here and there.
Every now and then, my friends, I sit there to myself and say, you know, I've done a lot of work in philosophy.
Maybe, just maybe what I could do is...
Do tech reviews in video game playthroughs.
You know, just for a while.
Nobody can say I haven't done a lot for philosophy.
But, you know, I mean, it's just a dream.
It's just a dream.
Just a dream. So, yeah, I like me some video games.
Don't really get much time to play these days.
And I love new tech.
Oh, it's my crack.
Like, it's literally, I have to...
My wife will, like, spread out these, like, Best Buy and staples.
Like, spread out, here, honey.
And it's like, enabler!
Because she knows, like, oh, I can try this.
So the unboxing is on one.
It's like, oh, I could do that. I could just boot stuff up and play around with it because I love doing that stuff.
But it's like, no time! Must do philosophy.
So anyway, I appreciate that.
It was a fun review to make.
And I don't think...
Okay. Super Chat, how to eliminate the welfare state without violent reaction and strategy in...
General. You keep pounding the ethics of it.
You know, read up on the abolitionist movement, right?
The movement that ended slavery for the most part around the world.
Read up on that stuff. Slavery ended in every country except for America peacefully.
And, you know, you've seen my stuff about...
We're going to do a presentation on the Civil War.
And... If you've looked at the stuff I've done on Abraham Lincoln, you'll know that the whole argument about the Civil War being primarily about slavery is dicey.
But talk about the ethics.
If you talk about the ethics, the taxation is theft, the welfare state is exploitation and predation, then The welfare state will fall away from people once they understand its immorality, just as slavery did.
And it doesn't need to be some big giant insurrection revolution if we can communicate to people about the ethics as a whole.
Super Chat, do you think Disney movies are healthy for children?
It's a big question.
It's a big question.
I think that they are...
If you use them to talk about themes with your children, right?
So, you know, I did this big review.
It's actually been very popular.
It's a big review of the movie Frozen.
And some of that review came out of me having conversations with my daughter who liked the movie Frozen.
And we were talking about, you know, the men work to create the ice.
The women are just pretty and the ice magically appears and so on.
And so I would say that...
What your children consume that's age-appropriate is less important than the conversations you have about what they consume.
And so I don't think...
You have to be really careful with what your children consume if they consume it unintendedly.
Sorry, it's not even a word.
But if they consume it without you engaging with them.
But in general, movies...
I don't watch a lot of movies these days, although Billions is good.
I know it's not a movie, it's a series. Billions is very good.
Aim to have a conversation about the movie at least as long as the movie, and hopefully longer.
And I don't think that it's unhealthy.
See, if you keep all, like let's say there's unhealthy messages in movies and you keep your kids away from them and don't talk about them, and then they get exposed to them later when you're not around, they're going to be more susceptible to them.
You know, teach them the ninja defense moves that they need to stay away from Studio Ghibli movies.
Now, teach them the ninja defense moves that they need to process.
Hostile or difficult or anti-rational views in culture.
So, you know, arm them and prepare them for the culture wars up ahead.
All right. Steph, I've recently heard you speak on the differences in IQ. Obviously, I'd be a fool to accept this at face value.
What sources would you suggest that are both pro and anti this position?
Well... James Flynn and Charles Murray had a very good debate about IQ differences in ethnicities, whether or not they tend to be more genetic or whether or not they tend to be more environmental.
Dr. Thomas Sowell has rejected, I believe, almost out of whole cloth, any genetic explanations for differences in ethnic IQs, particularly between black and white.
And he says that it's environmental and He says that for mixed-race kids, well, the reason they have a higher IQ is because he's got a white father and a black mother in the slave time.
So, of course, the white father would have more interest in the mixed-race kids because half his.
There's a lot of differences, a lot of good explanations, a lot of different explanations.
So, the differences in racial IQs are indisputable, indisputable.
And again, never judge individuals.
We're just talking about general. Trends.
No dispute, no question about this.
And where they are now, they really haven't changed a huge amount since the 70s.
There was a little bit of closure. Now, the cause, I mean, this is from the bell curve.
Ernstine and Murray said that they remained resolutely agnostic on whether it's environment or genetics.
85% of IQ is genetic by the time you're in your late teens.
Are we going to say racial differences in IQ can't be at all genetic?
I think that would be a foolish position.
Can we say they're 85% genetic?
I don't know. I don't know.
And it kind of doesn't matter in a way.
Because even if we say, okay, IQ difference is 100% environmental, we still don't know how to change them.
Because let's say that you have a parent with an IQ of 85.
Well, what kind of What environment are they going to provide for their child?
Well, not a very highly stimulated and stimulating environment because they're going to watch kind of dull TV shows.
They're not going to be a lot of books, if any, books around.
The conversations are all going to be very shallow or non-existent.
There probably is going to be impulse control problems to do with addiction or abuse and so on.
It's just, it's really, really hard to budge.
And given that we don't really know how to budge it, whether it's genetic or whether it's environmental is not to me the fundamental question.
The question is, we just need to be aware of it to reduce hatred against whites and hatred against East Asians, because that is a very, very dangerous force in the world.
And if you believe everyone's equal, but East Asians and Caucasians are just richer because they're mean and racist and steal and exploit and You're going to get mass murders.
You are going to get mass murders going on.
And it is going to be absolutely brutal.
And IQ gives the explanation.
It answers the question.
And it gives us avenues of conversation that can revolve around something other than race baiting and race blaming, which we desperately need as a society.
All right. Superchat, do you feel that as an adult, is there any reason to find out one's IQ? Should parents have their children's IQ tested?
That is an interesting question.
Oh, is my webcam blurring out here?
It just got blurry there, didn't it?
Hang on a sec here. Like I'm doing some makeup tutorial.
Hey, welcome to my fingerprint. There we go.
All right. I've not had my IQ tested.
I've no particular interest in getting my IQ tested because I'm succeeding enormously in my chosen occupation, in my chosen field.
I mean, I'm very happy, very proud, very pleased.
I really don't know how I could have done it much better than what I'm doing it.
And again, massive thanks to everyone out there for making all of this possible.
I love you guys so much. I don't want to get too emotional, but I do, and I really, really appreciate it.
But I would say that if You feel that your intellectual ability should give you greater station than you have achieved.
Then it might be worth testing.
So maybe you were raised around a bunch of people who were IQ 90 and you're IQ 105.
Well, you're going to be a lot smarter than the people around you, but that's not very high IQ. So maybe what you do is you look at the people around you and say, man, I'm a genius, right?
And then you go out into the bigger world and you really don't succeed that well.
Maybe you struggle through college, you can't get into post-grad or whatever, and Is it because you're a conservative and everybody hates you because they're leftists, or is it because you don't like communism, or is it because you're a race realist?
Who knows, right? But it could also be because you're just not that smart.
And so if you are not succeeding relative to what you feel your capacities are, I would say it's a reasonable thing to get your IQ tested.
If your IQ is high, then you've got to figure out what emotional barriers are between you and the success that you want.
If your IQ isn't that high, then okay, you can adjust your expectations so you don't live a life of frustration because aiming too high makes a very miserable life out of things.
All right. Hey, Stefan, can you talk about Bolsonaro getting stabbed?
Okay, this is the guy.
Yes, I did a whole video.
It was almost an hour on it today.
It was going to be shorter, but boy, Brazil is fascinating.
And I'm not just talking about the glitter thighs, although that may have been a sidebar, Your Honor.
But yes, you can check the video that I did today on that.
And I would say that you should go and check that out.
All right. Stefan, what's the best way?
I'm blurring out again. Hang on a sec.
You know what I'm going to do? Here's what I'm going to do.
Oh, I don't know if I can do it.
Ooh, I don't know. Now, if I start messing around and make it fixed, I don't know if it's going to screw up the Super Chat.
Anyway. So, Stef, what's the best way to refute?
This statement, the poor need the state, the welfare state is necessary despite being anti-ethical.
Congratulations on your channel, XD. Well, XD back to you, my friend.
The poor need the state, therefore the state is necessary despite being anti-ethical.
I don't know how need Trump's ethics.
I mean, I have no idea how need Trump's ethics.
I mean, I talked about this in the Colin show recently.
You remember that Afghani migrant in Germany who raped, I think he was a 10-year-old boy, in the change room of a public swimming pool because he had a sexual emergency.
He needed, you see, to rape that boy.
What does that mean? How can need Trump ethics, the whole point of Ethics is that they're absolute and universal, and need don't count.
You don't get to steal because you're hungry, like you don't.
The ATM is not working.
There's a vendor with some street meat out there.
It's only three bucks for a hot dog.
You got no money. You don't get to steal it, even though you're really, really hungry.
Need doesn't trump ethics.
So, the poor need the state.
How do we know the poor need the state?
We don't know. It's like saying, well, we can't get rid of slavery because the slaves need their owners because some of the slaves are old and some of them, it's all they know and they don't know how to negotiate.
Come on. You can just make up anything.
You don't know what the poor need.
I don't know what the poor need. That's why we need freedom.
I don't know what people need.
I don't know. You don't know what they need.
The poor may say that they need the state, but the state is actually choking and killing off their opportunities and You know, I mean, if you look at the poor in the Rust Belt states, you know, I mean, the states, there was the welfare state, which helped destroy the families, and then there was terrible trade deals that moved manufacturing jobs offshore at the rate of 50,000 a month,
and then there was illegal immigration that brought in an opioid and fentanyl and drug crisis, and then, you know, like, I don't know what the poor need other than freedom, and so saying that you know what the poor need and therefore it should be provided by the state is an act, is a statement of ridiculous arrogance, so... No, she's not.
Blonde in the Belly of the Beast is in the chat.
Hello! Hope you're doing well.
I appreciate your comments, which I see on the YouTube channel from time to time.
And people, if you want to check out, you know, I absolutely...
The Fire of Thousand Suns.
But Blonde in the Belly of the Beast has got a great channel.
You should go in and check her out.
All right. Here's a good question for you.
What are your musical preferences and why?
You know, I was really shocked.
Although I can understand why Scott Adams recently tweeted that he doesn't listen to music because he's afraid it's going to program his mind.
It sounds like a little nuts, but I can understand where he's coming from.
So, my musical preferences So because I have a sort of very abstract and frothy brain, I like earthy music.
I like blues.
I like growling, bass of the testicles, plowing your way through life despite all obstacles, woman ate my dog kind of blues.
I like that. I have brushed across the country and Western scheme, but when I worked up North with some people, there was only one radio station they could get.
It was all country all the time.
I do remember a long weekend of, we're counting down the top 800 country and Western songs of all time.
She got the gold mine, I got the shaft.
Although I did like the one, get your tongue out of my mouth, I'm kissing you goodbye.
But never got that much into the country stuff.
Quality. I just, I love quality.
Like Stevie Wonder's voice, Ella Fitzgerald's voice, Sting's more somber songwriting can be fantastic.
Look at him, his solo stuff in Secret Policeman's Other Ball is fantastic.
Queen, some of the most amazing musicians this planet has ever disgorged, and Freddie Mercury's voice is just one of these forces of nature, like, what, I can do that too?
Oh, come on! I can barely hit a falsetto twice in one day, and he's like all over the place, warbling in Cool Cat.
Yeah, I do like rock.
I like pop. Heavy metal never got into it.
Death metal not really got into it that much.
And I like me some jazz.
More in background than listening to focus.
The same thing with classical. I don't usually sit down and listen to classical, but I like it sometimes when I'm writing.
And... So I never got into the modern classical that much.
You know, what's that old joke?
You know, I had a Philip Glass record, but the record got stuck and I didn't notice for three days because, you know, it's very repetitive.
I went through a long phase of musicals, loving musicals, all the way from the old Gershwins to Chess to Les Mis to Phantom of the Opera, although the second half of that's kind of garbage.
So it's a very sort of wide musical taste.
Wherever there's commitment and passion and excellence, I will take inspiration for that.
I'll give you an example here. This you can't see.
You can't see in my studio.
Look at you. Look at me opening up the whole studio.
But I have this Freddie Mercury.
Um, statue in my studio that I look at for, like, sometimes inspiration before I do a big, uh, a big piece because, man, that guy committed, man, all the way back, you know, look at him doing, like, White Queen way back in, like, in the 70s in the Rainbow Room.
And, man, that guy committed to his singing.
He committed wholeheartedly to his, um, emotional and artistic expression.
In his performances, and I try to learn from that.
And so whoever's passionate, whoever has very high quality, whoever's really committed and has staying power, I have a lot of respect for that.
And I liked U2 for a while until Bono thought it was edgy to fly an EU flag in his latest tour.
Good riddance voice.
Great singer, though. Great singer.
And his stuff with B.B. King was great, too.
Gospel, soul, love that stuff.
Even way back to Sam Cooke and the Soul Stirrers, I love that stuff because, again, there's that Christian passion and commitment to the musicality.
I used to just listen to music all the time.
It gets a little tougher to find time for it now.
My brain did get a little bit blown out by some of the Tiddly Winks music that goes along with having a kid who's very young.
Yeah, Supertramp, also great.
Roger Hudson's wailing banshee voice is really quite good.
And I remember being quite moved by...
Oh, not the logical song.
Jimmy Breen was king, his brain was always winning.
I can't keep track of mine.
It's really quite a joke. Asylum.
That's right. Asylum is a great song about self-knowledge.
And the mortality of the identity that occurs with the revolution in thinking.
It's really, really good stuff.
All right. Couple more.
Couple more. You guys having fun?
You enjoying the back and forth?
It's a different kind of format.
I kind of like it.
All right. Super Chat.
What can someone do to become a man?
Listen to B.B. King. What can someone do to become a man?
By this I mean achieve courage and self-discipline and group slash leadership skills.
I've been recommended the army or martial arts.
What are your thoughts? Okay. It's a very big question.
I've been mulling over doing a series on this because I was raised by a single mom and manhood masculinity was not the most innately easy process for me to achieve.
So The problem is that men get kind of two messages, and one's kind of displaced in the other.
So the first message about manhood is, you know, the death wish Charles Bronson Crap that you're like some steely, spock-faced guy who can saw some other guy's head off in an act of cold-eyed vengeance and never feel a thing.
Basically, you're a sociopath.
Masculinity is being a sociopath, fighting, kicking ass, taking names, moving on.
Serious Sam, I'm done with all this.
I want a steak, a hot tub, and a massage.
I don't care about all the people.
So that aspect of manhood is manhood that is useful.
To the sociopaths in power.
It's not useful for you as a man.
It's terrible for you as a man because you're emotionally inaccessible to your wife, to your children, and you may be a good protector, but you can't provide the emotional sustenance that keeps your family alive.
So assertiveness is the big challenge for manhood.
Being coldly comfortable with violence is not the same as being assertive.
It's just elimination rather than negotiation.
Elimination of the enemy rather than negotiation with the enemy.
Hopefully you'll find a way to make them, at least if not a friend, some sort of non-enemy.
So I think it is really all around assertiveness, and it is around positivity, and it is around leadership.
And you can either be a leader, and this is just terrible...
Lenin, Hitler, Mussolini thing, you can either be a leader by saying those people over there are responsible for every bad thing in everyone's life and we're going to go and kill those people, we're going to get those people, we're going to expel those people, and then everything will be great.
In other words, you identify an enemy, you marshal people's worst instincts and you go down and chase that enemy until they drop off a cliff, or Instead of hating often an imaginary evil, you can love an actual good, and you can try to inspire people through your love of virtue.
And that's a tougher row to hold, but has much more productive rewards in the long run.
So being positive, being confident, being...
Loving virtue and being unafraid to confront evil is a very important thing and I don't mean foolishly unafraid like you go walking into some criminal den or whatever I mean just when people are being malevolent in a verbal sense having the commitment to stand up to them and stand against them and you saw some evidence of this I think for me in in Australia New Zealand and so on and I'm sure some more will be coming along at some point but Let's see here.
Where does Venezuela go from here?
Kids play in huge piles of worthless paper cash, incoming economic miracle, and subsequent world war.
Well, they die or they become free.
That's all there is to it.
I mean, where does it go?
I don't know. I mean, I know where I want it to go.
I know where I would make it go if I could, but can't snap my fingers and make the world free.
So they either learn and become free, or they don't learn and they die or they flee.
So, let's hope they choose what's behind door number F rather than door number D. How did you turn out all right being raised by a single mother, Stefan?
Well, philosophy.
Philosophy and therapy. Philosophy taught me to think critically and rationally, which meant opposing the craziness of my immediate familial environment.
And therapy taught me to process my emotions rather than merely analyze them from an intellectual standpoint.
You have to experience your emotions in a deep and vivid sense.
Your emotions want to help.
Your emotions want to keep you safe.
Your emotions want to protect you and they want to empower you.
But they are alarming.
And the longer you hold your emotions down and keep them at bay, the more aggressive they get.
The more aggressive they get.
And then what happens? is you then become frightened of your emotions because they seem so insistent and then they show up in dreams and if your emotions become toxic against you they will undermine your success and we've seen spectacular flame outs of successful people on a regular basis in society and I assume that's because they've rejected their emotions in pursuit of some soul squelching ideal like status or fame or money or power or something like that so if you let your emotions out if you let your emotions inform you if you listen to your emotions You know,
I've got this concept called the MECO system, and thanks, I did see the comment about my free book, Real-Time Relationships, The Logic of Love.
I appreciate that. People say it's changed their lives, and I think you should check it out.
It's free. You should. Audiobook as well if you want.
But in the MECO system, no one's in charge.
Everyone gets a seat at the table of the personality, but no one's in charge, right?
So I have an inner mother who can sometimes be scary to me.
But my inner mother is there to protect me from the real mother out there who was very dangerous, a very dangerous person.
Like she, I've mentioned this before on the show, like my mom when I was like two or three years old and trying to run away from home, she picked me up, she beat my head against a metal door.
Like I really could have died or got some terrible concussion or brain damage and something.
So she was a very dangerous person.
So I had to create an inner mother alter ego that kept me back from Confronting or inflaming or angering my mother because that could have been fatal.
And so sometimes that internal mother can be kind of overwhelming to me, but I have to remember that she's there to help me and to protect me.
And she's got very strong insights about crazy people in the world that she's there to help protect me from.
And so she doesn't get to dominate me, but I also don't get to reject her.
Everyone gets a seat at the table.
Every part of my personality, however I may have some opinion about it, every part of my personality gets a seat at the table, and we all agree to negotiate, and we do not dominate.
And that's why, because I don't dominate a part of myself, it's very hard for other people to dominate me.
Because I don't bully myself, it's very hard for other people to bully me.
But also because I don't bully myself, I don't have any particular desire to bully other people, right?
So if you have a vulnerable side of yourself that you're crushing and bullying and keeping down because you find it humiliating, often what you'll do is project it onto some weak kid around you and bully them, right?
But if you're not bullying yourself, you don't end up bullying others.
If you don't bully yourself, the great gift also is that you don't end up being bullied by other people.
So can you speak seriously for a moment?
As to what impact artificial wombs would actually have.
I would love to hear your take on that.
Well, I don't imagine they're close, so I'm not sure it's something we'll have to worry about or think about in the near future.
Well, if artificial wombs empower men, and we still live in a feminist-dominated democratic gynocracy, they'll just be banned.
I mean, when there was talk even of a male contraceptive, women feminists were up in arms against it.
So what impact will artificial wombs have if they actually get through in society?
Well, if they get through in society, it will be because we're no longer being ruled by a feminist gynocracy, and therefore the demand for artificial wombs will be much lower because relations between men and women will be much more productive and positive because there won't be all this crazy status interference into the gender Into gender relations, so they're either going to be banned or we won't need them, so I'm not sure they're going to have much impact.
My Myers-Briggs personality type, what is it?
Many years ago, it was blue, if I remember, but this is when I was 19, so it may have changed a little bit since then.
I can't remember what blue was, but I remember going to a libertarian conference at Glendon College when I was in my teens, I think.
Late teens. And I took the test, and it was about how to communicate ideas of freedom to different personality types and so on.
And I remember reading, it was blue, and I'm like, wow, that really does hit me very deep as far as an analysis of my personality.
But again, I haven't taken it since. Superchat, will you ever make a truth about Ronald Reagan video?
Good, bad, ugly. How he beat the commies abroad, but lost.
But not in the culture. Yeah, it's a tough one, you know?
I mean, I have some admiration.
He still was. I mean, it's very powerful against communism, but, you know, did turn over California to Mexico.
So it's very, very tough.
If Stefan knows that we are ruled by a feminist gunocracy, then why does he advocate men to have lots of children?
Is that not going to work against them?
You can't find a good woman, can you?
You can't find a woke woman.
Blonde in the belly of the beast was right here in the chat.
So you can find the right woman.
Just because the state gives people power doesn't mean that they're going to use it against you.
If a woman loves you, she's not going to drag you through family court.
All right. One or two more.
Looking for one here. In future elections, would you support a candidate similar to Donald Trump or Ron Paul?
I'd love to see Ron Paul as president, to be honest with you.
I would love to have seen his father as president.
How it works, I don't know, but it would be a fascinating thing to see.
And, you know, Ron Paul has some absolutely wonderful ideas.
His father has absolutely wonderful and powerful ideas.
All right. I hear you talk about the dangers of dating a single mother.
What about dating a single father?
Well, keep your wits about you.
And if you are... A woman, why do you want to pour resources into raising a child who's not your own?
It's kind of anti-biological, you understand.
It's kind of anti-evolutionary.
And we can do that stuff to some degree, but I don't think we want to take it too far.
So, look, I understand the criticism.
I say that, you know, we shouldn't have a welfare state and single moms should learn how to attract a man.
And then I say to men, don't date single moms and so on.
First of all, there are always betas who will date single moms.
And secondly...
You can date a single mom if she's gone through the whole self-knowledge process, if she's really gotten woke, if she's a great mom, and so on.
You know, great. I wouldn't do it if she's past childbearing age or doesn't want other kids, but, you know, that may be just my particular tastes.
All right. Could egalitarianism ever have developed to the prominence it did during slash after the age of revolutions without violence?
Well, sure, egalitarianism is a fantasy that's only sustainable through violence, right?
So, there is no such thing as natural egalitarianism at all.
And so, in order to sustain the fantasy of egalitarianism, you need massive redistribution of state resources.
I don't know if it's true or not. I was reading the other day that male doctors see up to twice as many patients over the course of their career as female doctors.
And so are you going to have egalitarianism just in being doctors?
Well, you have to have affirmative action.
You have to work for pay of equal value.
You have to make it illegal to not hire a woman because she's going to have a baby, or so you have to make the woman's job has to be available to her after she comes back from maternity leave.
You have to have all of these violent interferences into the free market to create the illusion of egalitarianism.
You have to have all of these injustices like affirmative action, which is just institutionalized racism, In order to create egalitarianism across different IQ groups and so on, so you couldn't possibly have egalitarianism without violence.
That's not how the free market and nature itself works.
How is it possible to have a centralized defense force in a free state when other countries are not playing by the same rules?
Do you not know about the Middle East?
Do you not know... that both russia and america have been defeated in the middle east well the russian empire was defeated in in afghanistan and it was one of the things that triggered the downfall of the entire soviet empire and america with all of its astounding spending has been defeated by what is effectively a free market security force right i mean this is what eric prince was talking about the guys in the back of a pickup truck in flip-flops are defeating A giant navy,
B-52 bombers, nuclear weapons, satellites, and Stinger missiles.
I mean, you just have to look at warfare as a whole.
I mean, the founding of America was a free market defense force against the institutionalized British army and so on.
So, no. It's much more effective.
What do I think about IFS, internal family systems therapy approach in psychotherapy?
I like it a lot. And I actually had the author of internal family systems therapy on the show to talk about it.
You should definitely check it out. I think it's very, very good.
Superchat, how can we get to full libertarian heaven given the multiple flaws in human nature?
It's because of the multiple flaws in human nature that we need a full libertarian heaven.
Human beings are always corrupted by power, which is why you can't have a state.
Human beings, in general, will seek to get something for nothing, which is why you can't have a state.
I mean, just look at the tech companies.
I mean, they can't resist the urge to put their fingers on the scales of power and tip it the way that they want.
So because human beings have these flaws, that's why we need...
If human beings were perfect, we wouldn't need a state, but if human beings are imperfect, therefore we can't have one.
Do you believe UFOs are extraterrestrials or government spacecraft?
I believe that they're neither.
I believe that they are made up or hallucinated or fantasized about or faked or anything like that.
I certainly have no doubt whatsoever that there's intelligent life somewhere else in the universe, but I don't believe that what we have as now what we call UFOs are real.
I mean, I made this argument some years ago very briefly.
When I was a kid, People said they saw UFOs.
There were these blurry photographs.
And so I remember thinking, even at the time, what we really need is really high-definition video and audio recording devices in the hands of just about everyone in the world so we can finally get a glimpse of these UFOs.
And we haven't.
So sorry. Everyone has high-def recording devices, and there are no UFOs.
There are space aliens out there somewhere.
And if they are really, really advanced, we don't even know that they're here, but the flying sources stuff?
No, I don't believe that stuff is occurring at all.
I mean, if they're really smart, why are we seeing them?
Because they'd be smart enough to hide themselves.
And if they're not smart, they wouldn't be smart enough to travel interstellar differences and distances.
And of course, given the speed of light is unbeatable, at least according to current physics, and I'm not sure that's going to change, then how could they even travel these kinds of distances?
I mean, it's 4.3 light years just to the closest star, and the odds of that star are having...
The other thing, too, you think of the billions and billions of years, what is it, 14 billion years, the age of the universe?
The idea that we're going to have...
Other creatures, like, you know, in Star Trek, everyone's got kind of the same level of development.
You know, everyone's got, like, warp drives and impulse power and photon torpedoes or something.
Everyone's kind of real similar in their states of development.
But that's not how it'll be in the universe, given 14 billion years.
I mean, even if it's just 1,000 years, either way, I mean, there's not going to be much to talk about.
Even on Earth, civilizations that met each other were vastly different in terms of development.
Just look at Europe hitting Africa and so on.
All right. Any other last easy questions?
Any other last? Just scrolling down to see.
Scrolling down to see. Chelsea Manning is coming to talk in New Zealand after her visa was rejected in Australia.
It comes straight on the back of your tour.
Yeah, well, there was a lot of money floating around the topic of my speech.
I think there was like $100 million, $150 million for some native project, and I was talking about native issues and so on.
There is a lot of money floating around these issues, so yeah, they don't want it there.
Another reason why they would want to keep someone like me out, someone like Lauren out, is because It's easier to lie about people if they're not there.
It's easy to say they're Nazis, white supremacists, whatever, cult leaders.
It's easy to lie about people if they're not actually there and people can see them and they'll be interested in the speeches and to confront them in the studio and so on.
It's easier to just type about people who never show up.
So that's another reason why they don't want people around because it makes the media look pretty bad.
Any thought on the proper way of deprogramming full lefty friends slash relatives?
Wait, wait. No, I'm just kidding.
Yeah, it's a good question.
I don't think I'll dive into it now.
It's a big one. But, okay, I will.
Because I was actually just thinking of doing this video today.
I got sucked into the Brazil hole.
That sounds like something from Pornhub.
But anyway, I think, I mean, leftism comes from a lack of confidence, a lack of confidence.
You don't believe that you can succeed in the free market so you feel addicted to the government.
People who have social anxiety will often self-medicate with alcohol or weed or something like that.
Maybe Elon. But if people are confident, then they'll welcome freedom.
If they're insecure and they feel like victims and they feel like they're the big sinister forces destroying their lives, then they will...
Feel the need for a protector.
They'll feel the need for guaranteed money.
So help raise people's confidence that they can succeed, that they can do well, and they'll do better in a free market.
And, you know, appeal to their greed is a pretty good one like that.
All right. You don't deserve a question like this one, Steph.
Love the work. And it helped me to grow up a person, but are traps gay?
You mean the muscle traps?
I assume you don't mean bear traps.
I don't know.
If I have them and they're well-defined, then they're not gay.
That's all I can tell you.
All right. I think we're going to close off for the night.
So hey, let me just throw on the old glasses here and tell me what you think.
What did you think? How was it?
How was it? How was it?
Keck. That helps.
What did I miss? Can you summarize the importance of peaceful parenting?
Love. Ah, you didn't read my chap.
It's fantastic. Nice. Beautiful.
I can't read this. Stop typing, everyone.
Hang on. Can I slow this down?
Oh, and thank you, everyone who donated.
I guess we're just taking a little bit And yeah, I see some of those sums.
But I mean, they do take a fairly chunky chunk of this.
So if you do feel like donating, freedomainradio.com slash donate is a bit easier because PayPal doesn't take that much, but YouTube and Google take quite a lot.
I think it's like a third or more.
So, you know, I really do appreciate that if you want to donate at freedomainradio.com slash donate, it's even better.
But is Michelle Obama a man?
So Lauren is hot, set us up.
I can't really help you with that.
So yeah, going too fast, but everybody seems to be enjoying this, and I really liked it.
Have I played the Civ PC series?
Not in forever, since I was in my teens or whatever.
But hey, how was your Friday night?
Did you guys have fun? I enjoyed myself and great, great questions.
Really, I love you guys.
I can't tell you. I kiss you, kiss you, kiss you.
But yeah, looks like everyone had a great time.
Thanks everyone for your support.
We'll post this and if you liked it, let us know on Twitter or if we post this or when we post this on On YouTube, and we'll do it again.
You know, I mean, this is fun. It's a nice change from the call-in shows, and I think it's good practice for me on being short and succinct to the point.
So, obviously, it's going to take a bit of personal work for me to get there.
