All Episodes
Previous Next
May 22, 2019 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
29:54
Get the F#!$ Out of the EU!
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
So I don't do drugs.
I've never smoked marijuana or done cocaine or LSD or mushrooms or anything like that because, well, my reasoning has always been basically kind of simple, like when I was given the offer to have an affair with a married woman.
I said the same thing.
I said, look, either I don't enjoy it, in which case why do it, or I do enjoy it, in which case I'm opening myself up for one hell of an addiction.
And I had the same thought when I first began to plan for becoming the host of the world's, what turned out to be the world's largest philosophy show, this free domain show.
I said to myself, look, if I'm going to be A public intellectual, if I'm going to be a public philosopher, people are going to look to me for answers to some degree, right?
Especially because I started doing call-in shows where people call in, as you know, with the most personal questions and they want me sometimes to tell them what to do.
Now I wanted to shun that kind of power, and everything that I have done as the host of this show has been to avoid the temptation of power.
So I resolutely refuse, and this was the plan and the principle from the very beginning, I resolutely refuse to tell people what to do.
Because I don't want them substituting my authority for their own judgment.
I mean, it's one thing to teach someone how to play piano.
Here's the techniques.
Here's the music.
Here's how to read it.
Here's the practice stuff.
And it's quite another thing to strap your fingers to theirs and pretend that you're teaching them how to play piano if you just move their fingers for them.
So while I do want to have influence in encouraging people to think for themselves, I don't want to tell people what to think.
I want to teach them how to think, not what to think, which is the opposite of philosophy.
That's authoritarianism.
So avoiding this kind of drug, which also had to do with not monetizing my videos, with not taking advertising, because If you're in the business of delivering truth to the audience, which is sort of my business so to speak, as it stands, that's an honest relationship that fosters integrity.
If you're in the business of delivering Your audience to the advertisers, that changes the equation.
Plus, of course, it's an Achilles heel.
It's a weak chink in your armor where if people dislike what you're saying, they can target the advertisers.
Which is why I've not told people what to do, and I've not taken advertising, and I've not also not taken think-tank money, right?
I've been offered money over the years from time to time, some of it quite considerable.
But the problem is when you have a centralized source of income, you then are in the business of pleasing that person rather than staying in the clean and clear business model of delivering truth to you, the audience.
So everything I've done has been based upon the recognition that power is a hell of a drug and we want it no matter how virtuous we are there's a draw towards power and you have to grit your teeth and resolutely say no to power because you want to remain honest and you want to not end up being addicted to the drug of power.
I mean that's not even a metaphor.
Power releases endorphins.
Power over others, control over others releases endorphins in our system.
It is an addictive behavior.
It is an addictive relationship, which is why human beings, although escalations of power over other human beings continually results in massive disasters throughout human history, we're still drawn to it.
Just as a drug addict, although he knows the drug is going to destroy his family, his career, his money, his home, his life, is still drawn to it.
Because it's easy, so easy to get addicted Because, you see, power, of course, in the short run, we evolved in a situation that had nothing to do with the free market, right?
We evolved in sort of tribal dog-eat-dog, so to speak, competition against each other for scarce and limited resources.
It was win-lose.
If I ate the buffalo, you didn't eat the buffalo.
And if I got the woman pregnant, you didn't get the woman pregnant.
So sort of win-lose.
battle throughout most of human history.
The idea that competition and the free market leads to ever-escalating wealth was utterly foreign and remains fundamentally utterly foreign to our DNA, to that which drives us, which is why we're aggressive, which is why we're sometimes hysterical, and we mask our basic biped mammalian thirst for resources in all of this eerie fairy cumulus cloud abstract platonic
form of virtue and caring and ideals and so on but it's a base grasping for resources and you know that of course because the people who most rail against any change in society are those currently profiting from the existing structure of society which means that what they're after is profit.
And not profit in a healthy capitalist or free market sense, but profit in just that they get more resources under the current system.
So if you want to privatize something the government does, the people who scream the most are the people who work for the government in that area, right?
If you want to transfer destructive government welfare to helpful private charity, the people who run the welfare system, the people who rely on votes from welfare recipients and the welfare recipients themselves are the ones who rail most against that change because they are currently, quote, profiting from the existing structure.
Now, once you understand this, that 99.9% of ideology is simply a fancy cover to the base mammalian biped clawing for resources, you can understand.
You just don't listen to what people say.
I mean, look at their motivations and look at what's driving them.
If you want to privatize the hellscape of indoctrination known as government education, who's going to scream the loudest?
Well, all the people like the teachers who don't have to work too too hard and the lesson plans are handed to them and they get summers off and so on so it's those people and of course the left which gets Money, through the teachers forced union dues, through the union to the coffers of the left, and also has a stranglehold on leftist indoctrination camps that drive people into voting for the Democrats or the Labour and so on.
They'll be screaming the loudest, right?
And it's the same thing with immigration.
All the groups that benefit from immigrants coming in who generally vote left They will scream blue murder if you talk about restricting immigration.
Why?
Because the immigrants vote for them.
It's got nothing to do with inclusion or diversity or anything like that.
It's not.
When they say diversity is a strength, what they mean is everyone who we import to the country who votes for us makes our political party stronger, which is indisputably true, but not moral, right?
So people will always try and distract you from the base resource lust that is underneath the superstructure of lies known as their ideology.
You know, like there's that anglerfish deep down in the ocean.
The anglerfish has a bright light and you're drawn to the bright light because it's pretty and right?
So the ideology is just a bright light, but it's the consumption of resources, the eating of you, that is fundamentally driving what is going on.
And once you understand that, then you can stop listening to the ideology.
See the ideology is designed to disarm you, to make you feel guilty.
So for instance if you're in a wealthier nation, said nation being wealthy because of a free market that was fought and bled and killed and died for for hundreds and hundreds of years and if you have a wealthy country because of a free market then other countries can become wealthy in a similar manner by importing the free market.
If they can't import the free market There could be a wide variety of reasons for that.
There could be ideological, there could be the well-known intelligence differences between various ethnicities, there could be cultural traditions, there could be any number of things that could be occurring that make a country hostile to, or you could say, stony soil for the infinite seeds of the free market.
But if your country has become wealthier, Because of the free market and other countries are not willing to adopt the free market because mostly because also Existing power structures are profiting from how the society is set up usually socialistic or authoritarian in some manner Then how do they get access to your resources as a wealthy country?
Well They have to make you feel guilty right?
How do they make you feel guilty?
Well what they do is they say to you well your country is wealthy because it stole from my country and Right?
Your country is wealthy.
You are wealthy because you stole from my country because historical injustice, the legacy of slavery, imperialism, colonialism, you name it.
The only reason that your country is wealthy is because you stole from my country.
Right?
So you can just think of this.
You know, you're, you're a kid, right?
And if you're like me, you got a job pretty early on.
You worked very hard.
And maybe you could afford a bike, right?
Maybe you can afford a bike.
So you mow your lawns, you deliver your newspapers, you have your lemonade stand, and lo and behold, you end up being able to afford a bike.
Now there's some other kid who plays video games, you know, the grasshopper and the ant stuff.
He learns how to whip a mean frisbee and he learns how to perfect his double flip dive off the increasingly scarce, because of lawsuits, diving boards in the world.
And he can't afford a bike.
But he had a lot of fun while you were weeding the gardens of your neighbors and sweating your way through the initially pleasant but eventually unpleasant stench of fresh-cut grass and so on.
So you have a bike and he doesn't have a bike.
Now he says it's not fair that you have a bike.
And you say, well no, I work for the bike.
I was looking over at you while you were learning how to perfect your front crawl in a swimming pool on a hot day.
While I was rolling tar on a road somewhere, I was looking and saying, well, that's not fair.
It's not fair that I'm working and you're not working, but you know, I get the bike and you don't get the bike, right?
And that's fair.
That's reasonable, right?
There's nothing wrong with perfecting your dive and not working hard to buy a bike.
It's just, it's wrong to then say that I deserve the bike, even though I didn't work for it.
Now imagine this scenario, though.
Imagine that You have some reasonably moral neighbor, but the kid steals your bike.
Now your bike, you have the serial number, you have the receipt, and the kid goes and steals your bike, right?
So then what you do is you go with your parents over to your neighbor's house, you knock on the door, and you say, you know, I'm sorry that this is the situation, but this is the situation.
Your son stole my Daughter's bike, right?
And they'll say, come out here, oh, she lent it to me!
It's like, no, no, I didn't lend it to you, and here's the receipt, and here's the serial number, and it's our bike, right?
But then, of course, the bike should be given back to your daughter, right?
Because the guy stole.
So you understand, if you can make people feel that whatever they have has been unjustly acquired, then it becomes sort of greedy, mean, and selfish to keep it, right?
So this is the fundamental.
You're wealthy because you've exploited the workers.
You're rich because you've stole from the third world, right?
This is generally false.
But if you believe it, then you lose everything.
Then, of course, there's another aspect as well of how you take down a nation, which is you convince the moms to go to work, right?
And now for women in general, if you've got kids going to work, is dumb.
I mean, it makes no sense.
With very rare sort of Sheryl Sandberg style exceptions, in general, you're going to end up as a midwit, middle-level manager, and you're going to be taking your after-tax income and pouring it into child care, not really making any money, contributing massively to the stress of your family by racing around all the time trying to get to the daycare through traffic, and it's just horrible around, the chores never get done, and you end up
not cooking healthy meals and and eating fast food or frozen food and so on where generally the nutrients have been sandblasted out by the permafrost process of transportation of below adequate foods, but most importantly You take your children and you put them in in daycare or other care in general and in daycare No cultural values are transmitted.
Daycare is just wrangling the Lord of the Flies combat at the lowest common denominator sociopathy that tends to run through daycares.
I mean, I know, I worked in one for years.
So what happens is the cultural values in the West that took thousands of years to nurture, to prune, and hundreds of wars, and millions of deaths, and you name it, right?
The cultural values that took thousands of years to nurture and develop can be eradicated in one or two generations simply by having the mothers go to work.
Because who transmits values?
Well there's two ways the values gets transmitted explicitly and Implicitly, right?
So the way that cultural values get transmitted explicitly is through the mothers, right?
Because the mothers raise the children and the mothers promote the cultural values through constant repetition in the children's lives by teaching them how to resolve disputes and so on.
That's how cultural values, whether they're religious values or philosophical values, that is how cultural values get transmitted is through the mothers.
So once you take the mothers out of the equation and you dump the kids in daycare or other care, the cultural values are no longer transmitted and It really doesn't take very long.
Look at how languages die out.
Just fewer and fewer people speak them and eventually there's just no momentum to get them back in common parlance.
Now the way, of course, that cultural values are transmitted as well is implicitly, and that's through the father in general, most commonly, going out to work and producing all of this value that sustains the family, right?
All of that remains under threat.
It's directly under threat in the West.
And this power over others does require that you strip them of pride, independence, security, and it's also very, very important that you strip people of a sense of their own brain's efficacy.
If you can make people feel helpless, if you can make them feel like leaves in a swirling dust storm of environmental impact like stuff just happens hey you're born poor you're just going to stay poor man you're born rich you've got a silver spoon in your mouth and you're going to be rich forever you know if you can get people to believe all of that stuff which is empirically Completely false.
Even in the remnants of the free market we have now, there's a constant churn.
Hard work generally pays off.
Intelligence generally pays off.
Taking reasonable risks generally pays off.
And laziness and inattention and self-indulgence tends to cost you enormously.
If you don't like the current structure of a free market environment, just wait half a generation and it will change almost completely.
So, if you tell people that they're helpless, Then they will want the endless insurance of government.
Social safety news is safety nets.
Sorry, I keep using the accurate term rather than common parlance.
So make people feel helpless.
Make them feel that everything that they have has been stolen from other people.
And then say that, you know, diversity is a strength and so on, and you have to welcome endless waves of immigrants from the third world because Diversity is a strength.
Now, of course, when someone says something to me like, diversity is a strength, and this is something that comes out of the left, first thing I do is say, okay, well, where does the left have the most control?
Right?
Because if diversity is a strength, then the places where the left has the most control should be the most diverse.
Right?
Now, diversity is not fundamentally about race, ethnicity, or gender.
Diversity is about belief systems, right?
So if you look at the places where the left has The greatest control, you can look at places like the media, newsrooms, academia, places like that.
You could say government schools as well.
It's kind of a stranglehold of leftist ideology, particularly on the schools that train the teachers.
So just look at academia where the left has control.
Do they welcome diversity?
And again, if you think that diversity is race, That's racist, right?
Because you're saying that all races have different beliefs that are intransigent and the only way that you can get diversity is importing different races and having different races.
So that's saying that race is the prima facie determination of the content of someone's mind.
In which case you're completely justifying racism and I don't think people want to go there.
I certainly don't.
So it has to be a variety in belief systems that's the foundation of what is called diversity.
So where the left has the most power Do they welcome diversity of belief systems into that mix?
Of course the answer, as we all know, is...
Absolutely, ferociously, and sometimes violently, not.
So if you go to some sociology department, or what is it in the psychology world?
It's like 14 to 1 liberals versus conservatives.
If you go to a sociology department as a conservative or a libertarian or, heaven forbid, a voluntarist or a narco-capitalist, and you submit your resume, will the leftists people, the leftists in charge of hiring, will they say, my goodness, we really don't have any libertarians.
We really don't have any conservatives.
Conservatives are like half the population in this country.
We don't have any conservatives or we have only one out of ten or one out of twenty conservatives.
We need to bring those numbers obviously because conservatives are significantly, vastly, enormously underrepresented in our department or our movie studio or our television writers pool or our comedy writers or you name it, right?
They're enormously underrepresented.
We say diversity is a strength, so we've got to go out proactively to hire conservatives, libertarians, whatever, right?
But that's not what they do.
Of course that's not what they do.
And it doesn't matter your race.
I mean, if you look at the fact that, according to recent reports, Facebook has a sort of naughty list, which includes Candace Owens, who's In charge of trying to, well, one of the things she's in charge of, of course, is trying to get the blacks to not automatically vote for Democrats, for the left in the United States.
She calls it black-citizens.
It's a powerful and interesting and moving phenomenon, right?
And certainly the government's never going to respond to the concerns of blacks if they just automatically get their vote, right?
I mean, so she's called a white supremacist and all these other terrible terms and Her race doesn't matter.
It's her ideology that they hate.
And again, diversity of ideology is the only diversity that really matters.
And wherever the left has the most control, they relentlessly clamp down on any dissent.
And if you are a non-leftist or an anti-leftist, and I've experienced this myself in going to speak in New Zealand or trying to and being bomb-threaded out of having a venue.
Same thing happened in Canada, in the West.
of Canada.
So where's the diversity?
I mean, I have good arguments, I have scientific data, I've interviewed hundreds of subject matter experts around the world.
I'm a pretty good repository of things that are valid and interesting.
And so the left should say, well, we welcome this diversity, because we've never had, I mean, I'm a voluntarist, I never had a voluntarist speak at the campus before, you know, and we welcome diversity.
Well, they don't, of course, right?
So that's just a cover.
That's just a cover.
And once you realize that, then you realize that they're not into diversity.
They're not into justice.
They're just using their ideology as a cover through which to gain resources, right?
So that's really foundational to understand.
So what's coming up, of course, in Europe, you've got Irish elections coming up.
You've got the European Union elections with Nigel Farage's Brexit party and so on.
And for the people on the left, they want open borders so that they can easily import demographics that will reliably vote for the left.
I mean, that's all it is.
It's all it is.
If you are a drug user and your drug of choice is power, then you want more access to that drug.
You want a more reliable access or pipeline to that drug.
And the left love power.
They love dominance.
They love control.
They're addicted to it.
And if they have open borders, they can easily import people who are overwhelmingly going to vote for the left.
It's just the way it works.
Now the causes for all of this, I've gone into a million times, I'm not going to bother about it here, but just understand.
So the European Union facilitates open borders, and facilitates open borders not just between European countries, but from outside Europe, to Europe as a whole.
And why do they want to do that?
Because the people who will come in, particularly from the third world, the people who will come into Europe, are a reliable current or future voting base for the left.
That's all it's about, you understand.
Now, the fact that it may very well destroy European civilization, again, addicts don't process information that way.
They don't, I mean, every smoker knows that smoking is enormously dangerous.
Fifty percent of smokers are going to die from smoking.
But each individual cigarette is more pleasurable than quitting.
And the future disaster is a long ways off, and the current pleasure is right there in front of you immediately.
So once you understand that it's about resource grabbing,
and it's a confession of you don't have a good argument like if you've got to put you know if you have to drug your opponent in a boxing match you're kind of confessing that you're pretty sure he can beat you in a fair fight so it's cheating in democracy of course uh... but the left see this is a funny thing too like one day we'll actually listen to people because the left say they want power openly and and clearly and vividly they say we want power By any means necessary.
By any means necessary.
They say we want power.
Now, call me crazy, but I actually believe what people say when they're talking to me.
I take the radical stance of accepting the basic facts that people give me about their motivations and their ethics.
Right?
The left say we want power By any means necessary, right?
They attempted a coup in the United States through their Mueller report and they'll continue to do it through probably some sort of impeachment proceeding.
They are openly willing to flout and disobey and support
the disobedience and breaking of immigration laws in particular they have sanctuary cities uh... they they want to give welfare benefits undue to people who are in the country illegally so i mean they clearly have no respect for the rule of law and they have clearly stated that they will get power and keep power by any means necessary which means they're willing to lie to use violence to make threats to de-platform they've openly said this
And then, of course, every single time they do something that's immoral, people are shocked and appalled.
And it sort of does become kind of ridiculous after a while.
Like if you're a husband and your wife is a drug addict and she says, listen, I'm never going to quit.
I love these drugs and I will do anything.
I will break any rule, disobey any law, violate any moral standard in order to get my drugs.
And then the husband is like, wait, she stole from me again?
I can't believe it.
I've got to tell people that she's stealing from me.
It's terrible.
And of course the people are saying, listen, we were right there when she said, like you had an intervention and she said, no, I want these drugs.
I love these drugs.
I'm never going to quit.
And I'll steal, lie, cheat, use violence to get my way.
I mean, it's not a mystery, right?
This is not some weird smoke signal, hand signal, skywriting in vague clouds of Esperanto.
This is like they openly state this.
We are the resistance.
We will use violence.
We will lie.
We will cheat.
I mean, look how they got Obama through, Obamacare through.
I mean they just eviscerated a bill, stuffed another one in and they managed to get Obamacare through because the Somali immigration into Minnesota gave that one extra vote that you need.
So they got Obamacare through by rigging the system with mass migration, by gutting a bill and inserting it into a bill that had already passed and I mean by any means necessary.
Now, unfortunately, people don't want to process what it means by facing an opponent who says they'll do anything, without any restraint, without any restriction of morality or honesty or integrity or virtue.
They will do whatever it takes to gain power.
People don't like looking at that because that really escalates tensions.
Well, guess what, folks?
The tensions are going to be escalated anyway.
All we have to do is start listening to people and it becomes pretty damn clear what they want.
And what they want, of course, is the joy of power.
And so you already have how many layers of government above you, right?
You've got your city, you've got your municipal, you've got your state or your province, you've got your federal, and then you have this other layer of the European Union, right?
Another layer of bureaucracy, another layer of government.
That is just the fog in which the power lusters can hide themselves and pay themselves and everything becomes very abstract.
The European Union is about power and it is about control and it is about dissolving the nation states so that European countries don't ever compete with each other because you see where you have competition between governments you have an incentive to restrict immigration, you have an incentive to lower taxes, you have an incentive to have more economic freedom, you have an incentive to cut regulations so that people will come and do business in your country versus other countries.
So this downward pressure On the ever-increasing power and size of the state, the downward pressure is competition.
And the EU, by imposing more uniform standards, reduces the competition, which allows each government to increase its control over the economy, over people's lives, over people's free speech.
It allows them to increase that in a very powerful manner, without any downward pressure or with very little downward pressure.
from competition.
So the way it used to work, of course, is that if a state overspent, like Greece, then it would have to pay more interest and that would reduce people's desire to lend to Greece, which would cause the government to have to cut back and so on.
And what they laughingly call austerity is like some guy who eats 10,000 calories a day going down to 9,800 calories a day and saying, Sinister outside forces are starving me to death.
It's like, no, you're just, your body's going to get some meals from your man boobs over the next couple of months.
Well, probably a couple of years.
So there used to be this competition between states.
And so all corrupt governments at the local level want to have another layer of bureaucracy and legal structures above them, which is going to diminish competition from other local governments.
And this is going to go all the way up as they want to sort of one world government and so on.
So that's all it's about.
It's about the enablement of corruption.
It's about having another fog bank in which the predators on human souls can hide and feast without alarming people.
So when it comes to voting, you want your politics to be as local as possible.
Now, politicians don't want it to be as local as possible because then they are... well, they have to be responsive to the needs of the people.
So you want your politics to be as local as possible.
The politicians want it to be as abstract and distant as possible.
So of course you've got to get the fuck out of the EU.
Like of course you have to get the fuck out of the EU.
I don't swear that much, but you really need to get this branded into your brain.
Of course you need to get out of the EU.
Of course you need to close your borders.
If you want to understand whether somebody from, say, Somalia is going to integrate into your country, All you need to do is imagine that tomorrow you move with nothing to Somalia.
How long would it take for you to fully integrate into Somali society?
Well, it wouldn't happen, of course, right?
It's not supposed to happen.
The integration is not supposed to happen.
It's not supposed to happen.
You understand?
Diversity is strength for addicts.
▲
Export Selection