All Episodes
Aug. 23, 2019 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
19:58
AMAZON BURNS! Elizabeth Warren, Suicidal Men and Prowling Lions
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
All right, let's sit and reason together, my friends, and unpack some of the more dangerous delusions floating around this world.
From mail lines to Elizabeth Warren to the burning Amazonian rainforest, let us figure out what is going on.
So, first and foremost, Elizabeth Warren, who of course is running to be the Democrat contender for the presidency of the United States next year, recently apologized for falsely claiming To be Native American when she was applying for prestigious university jobs a couple decades ago.
She got these jobs, I would assume, largely because she's female, which she is, and Native American, which she is not.
She had a DNA test done, and she's about one in 1,024th Native, which is actually less than the average population of white people in the United States.
She lied about it, she apologized for it, but she got a very prestigious and well-paying job as a result of this fraud, which is absolutely reprehensible.
To take advantage of people's sympathy for the native population in order to ratchet your way into a high-paying job and then lie about it for decades, well, I mean, it's...
It's horrible. Just think of the actual Native American who didn't get a job Because Lya Watha was speaking with forked tongue.
It is horrible.
It's reprehensible. Listen, I don't like diversity programs as a whole.
I think they're insulting.
I think they're racist. I think they're sexist.
Well, they are, of course.
We're not judging people by the content of the character, but the color of their skin.
So the diversity programs are wretched and horrible, but given that they exist, lying in order to get your way into high-paying, prestigious jobs at the expense of Of an actual Native American is beyond reprehensible.
Now, she's apologized for it, but I'll tell you something about apologies.
Really, really important to understand.
I call them bnaps, or bullcrap non-apologies, right?
So it's the sorry not sorry stuff.
Like Hasan Piker, who said 9-11 recently, he works for the Young Turks, and he said 9-11 recently The America deserved 9-11 and just other absolutely appalling, horrible things.
But, you know, organizations called the Young Turks are named after a genocidal group who murdered between 1 and 1.5 million Armenian Christians back in the day.
Well, can we really be shocked when they say appalling things?
Well, of course not. It's like turning the next page of Mao's diary and saying, Whoa!
More death! Who'd have guessed?
But he said, oh, you know, he was imprecise in his language.
He's like, no, no, you weren't. But this apology, like, how do you know when somebody's really sincere in an apology?
It's a very, very important life skill.
Because if someone avoids what's necessary for an apology, they're basically just promising.
Repetition, right? Excuses for bad behavior are promises of future repetition of said bad behavior.
So how could we possibly know that Elizabeth Warren was telling the truth about sincere regret and ownership?
Well, you know, if you're a kid and a friend of yours, quote, friend of yours steals your bike...
And you say, hey man, you stole my bike, and he finally gets cornered and confronted by the police, or the photographs, or whatever, the serial number, and he's like, oh, okay, yeah, yeah, you know, sorry, my bad, I stole your bike, right?
Well, what do you expect? What would you like him to do next?
The answer, my friends, of course, is give the bike back!
That's what you're supposed to do!
It's what you're supposed to do.
When you're a parent and your kid wanders out of a store with a candy bar, you don't send the kid back in to apologize and then continue to walk out with a candy bar.
You give it back!
That's the point of an apology.
An apology without restitution is just manipulation.
So what Elizabeth Warren needs to do, of course, is to take all of the money that she earned under this fraudulent claim of Native American heritage, And donate it to a Native American organization.
Would it be nice to include inflation and interest in that?
Yes, but at a bare minimum, at a bare minimum, that's what she should do.
Take all the money that she earned from fraudulently claiming to be Native American and donate it to a Native American organization.
A charity would be wonderful. Is she going to do that?
No. Apologies without restitution Not apologies at all, just a manipulation.
Now, I posted this on Twitter, and again, at Stefan Molyneux with the links below.
You should definitely follow me there. It is, I believe, the most fun, exciting, and challenging Twitter account in the universe.
That's, of course, yours to judge, but that's my particular perspective.
So somebody posted a picture of a silverback gorilla guarding his family as they crossed the street.
And I posted this.
I said, men, like male lions, have always patrolled the borders of the tribe to keep females And children safe.
Open borders plus the welfare state have emasculated men's ability to protect their communities.
One reason for male despair, dissociation, addiction, and suicide.
So for those of you who don't know, there's female lions who do the bulk of the hunting.
And what do the male lions do? The male lions patrol the perimeters of the tribal area, of the territory, and make sure that no other particularly male lions come in because when male lions take over a pride or take over a family, first thing they do is kill all of the Male cubs, right? The female cubs, all of the cubs, right?
Of the new, of the mob.
So... Men are pretty good at sensing when society is heading in a bad direction and what we want to do is leap into action to solve it, right?
And, you know, mass waves of immigration and increasing social conflict and stabbings and acid attacks in London and massive crime waves in Sweden and Germany and so on.
Men are like, this is something bad is going on.
Our spider sense is tingling.
We've got to leap into action to do something, but we can't.
Can't do anything, really. I mean, I'll talk about it, and we'll see what comes out of that in terms of a rational conversation and a peaceful political solution, reason until your last breath, hopefully.
But what can men do?
Well, women voted for the welfare state, and asking women to give up the welfare state, which is what is necessary to save the West, is Kind of unlikely.
Men got the vote because they were subject to the draft, right?
That's the deal. You got the vote because you were subject to the draft.
Then the vote was offered to women without any particular sacrifices being required or demanded of them, and women ended up knowing much less about politics and the economy than men do.
And so it's a problem going to women and saying, listen, sorry, ladies, but the welfare state is a giant magnet for a lot of dysfunctional cultures around the world that come to live off benefits, so you've got to give up the welfare state.
They'll say, well, that's really tough.
It's like, it is really tough, and, you know, we'll have to rely on charity, and men will have to step up, and, you know, all this kind of good stuff that could happen that would actually help society.
But women are going to say, that's tough.
And of course, well, yeah, but it was tough for men to get drafted throughout history.
You know, women have this great, well, what am I supposed to do to X, Y, or Z, right?
Some guy drafted a fight in the Second World War, Korean War, Vietnam.
You know, maybe he's running a business, maybe he's whatever, right?
He's like, oh, how am I going to finish running my business?
It's like, well, sorry, men just supposed to suck it up.
And for women, making that case that women have to give up the welfare state in order to protect the West, well, they're unlikely to do it.
Men can't really do anything to protect the communities that they love.
And we think of these poor British men, right, when the Pakistani rape gangs were preying upon tens and tens of thousands of little white British girls, raping them repeatedly, torturing them, selling them out, abusing them, and white fathers would know where they're Little girls were being kept in these rape houses,
and they would go, and they would bang on the door, and they would try and get their children back, and then the police would show up, and they would say to the police, the white British dads, they would say, my daughter's in there, and she's being tortured, and molested, and raped, and handed out like day-old Halloween candy, and the police leapt into action, of course, and often arrested the fathers.
You see, we can't Can't protect.
Your kids can't protect. Your culture can't protect.
So, when men are emasculated from their capacity to protect their loved ones, why are men committing suicide in such record numbers and why are a quarter of middle-aged women on antidepressants?
Because women have lost children and men have lost productive work in the protection of the community.
It's very, very sad.
Now, this is a story from 2018.
Madonna moved, she was saying, from the USA to Portugal to protest.
Donald Trump and all that. A lot of celebrities have talked about it.
But of course, the one thing that you'll notice is the celebrities always want to move to countries which has a higher percentage of white people, right?
So, I mean, the percentage of white people in America is collapsing, and we're just at the beginning of the collapse.
It's still true that there's a lot of whites in America, but, you know, a significant proportion of those whites are beyond reproductive age baby boomers, so they don't really help, right?
The proportion of actually fertile young white women in the world is in the low single digits.
I mean... We are a minority and we are increasingly becoming endangered, right?
So, Madonna is moving from a country where the population of the proportion of whites has dropped enormously over the last generation or so.
And she's moving to Portugal, which is 95% white.
Because, you know, the people who want to leave America, they always want to go to Scandinavian countries, they want to go to Canada, they want to go to Europe.
In other words, they want to go to places where there are more white people while complaining about racism in America.
I mean, I don't remember any celebrity saying, you know what?
The cost of living in Somalia is really cheap.
The cost of living in Zimbabwe is dirt cheap.
That's where I'm going to move.
Everybody knows. Everybody knows.
So... Someone wrote to me on Twitter and said, Maybe, Stefan, if you want women to have more babies, you should not be arguing for hardcore economic libertarianism, something which makes childbearing and rearing more expensive and costly.
Your values are in conflict with your values.
Now, this is a little complicated.
Once you get it, I'm sorry to be annoying and all that, but once you get it, it's really, really important to understand.
So children are a huge cost, right?
We have this... Crazy extended childhood where we don't do anything useful or productive for years.
And it takes a quarter century to grow a male brain to full maturity.
It takes a little over 20 years to grow a female brain to full maturity.
So children are expensive in terms of time and resources.
And of course, if you want to be a good parent, you know, as Don Corleone says, you know, a man who doesn't spend time with his family can never be a real man.
And children are very expensive.
So naturally, because of the expense of children, women are in a free market, right, in a free society, or at least in one where there is not a giant welfare state, a massive redistributionist scheme, pyramid scheme really, that transfers trillions of dollars from the more competent and the smarter to the less competent and the less intelligent on average.
The welfare state is a giant eugenics program.
I oppose eugenics enormously, which is why I oppose the welfare state.
It takes money from successful people and intelligent people and gives them to less successful and less intelligent people.
The average IQ for single mothers is in the low 90s.
It's terrible. It's a massive eugenics program and so destructive to society as a whole.
But children are very expensive.
And because children are expensive in a free society, women are drawn to the most productive and provider-heavy men, right?
Men with the most resources.
So because children are costly, women are then encouraged, so to speak, to marry steady, reliable providers, right?
And to keep their legs crossed and grit their teeth.
And, you know, the swarthy pool boy with the hairy chest comes by and they're like, nope, nope, nope, that's bad, bad, bad, right?
A monogamous civilization, which is really the only civilization that works, is you get a large contingent of young males without an ability to form families and things get pretty wild pretty quickly, right?
Because society tames the wildness in male nature by offering man...
Stability, the rule of law, protection, monogamy, all those things.
When society has nothing to offer young men, young men don't choose to obey society, and you end up with this feral Lord of the Flies situation that we're kind of growing into at the moment.
So the welfare state turns children from a caste into an asset.
This is the most foundational pendulum swing in all of human history.
In other words, children don't cost you money.
Through the welfare state, children make you money.
They make you money.
And that means that a woman does not have to seek a steady provider, because the steady provider is the state.
In other words, other more reliable and competent men are being forced to subsidize her bad decisions with regards to choosing the men she makes babies with, right?
So turning...
Because monogamous civilization is based upon the cost of children, which means pair bonding, which means reliable partner for the man, and...
Honorable and not cheating for the wife.
That's what the men choose. And so if you turn children through the welfare state from a cost into an asset, you undo monogamy.
You undo pair bonding based upon virtue and integrity and reliability, and it's a disaster.
All right, so the Amazon rainforest.
Okay, so first of all, you have to understand that whenever someone who's to the right of the aforementioned Chairman Mao gets elected in any country, the media and the activists and the NGOs and everyone look for any possibility to attack and discredit that remotely right-leaning the media and the activists and the NGOs and everyone look for
And so this is why Pinochet, who certainly had his faults but saved Chile from rank communism and falling into a Venezuelan-style economic disaster hellscape, This is why Pinochet is reviled and...
This is, of course, Bolsonaro now in Brazil has to be attacked.
It has to be attacked, and therefore Bolsonaro is dismantling all the environmental controls.
Bolsonaro is encouraging people to burn down the rainforest.
It's destroying the lungs of the world.
It's 20% of the world's oxygen.
We're all going to die, right?
Because some right-wing guy, or at least not totally left-wing guy, got elected in Brazil.
Now, so whenever there's an attack upon a right-wing figure...
I'm just enormously skeptical.
I'm just enormously skeptical, right?
I mean, you know what's really bad for the environment?
What's really bad for the environment is mass migration from low-carbon footprint third-world countries to massively subsidized high-carbon footprint Western countries.
Terrible for the environment. Government spending is terrible for the environment.
Every dollar of the national debt is a dollar of resources consumed in the here and now, which is stripping nature's scarce resources to the bone.
And so They don't, you know, what's really bad for the environment is, I don't know, let's say Obama dropping 100,000 bombs in the Middle East over eight years.
But, you know, but so anyway, people are freaking out about the Amazon rainforest and it's all nonsense, right?
So, I'll put the website to this below.
You would not guess from these headlines that NASA's description for the original photo says that it is burning at less than average rates.
Bit of a big difference there.
The BBC did mention this, but didn't even link to the NASA page to check, and it's in only two throwaway sentences that's easy to miss.
The U.S. space agency NASA said the overall fire activity in the Amazon basin was slightly below average this year.
The agency said that while activity has increased in Amazonas and Rondonia, it has decreased in the states of Mato Grosso and Para.
U.S. space agency NASA has said that overall fire activity across the Amazon basin this year has been close to the average compared to the past 15 years.
And by the way, I mean, this lungs of the Earth stuff, tons of oxygen in the air.
Even if all photosynthesis magically stop producing oxygen, And every single beast that breathes in oxygen continued to do so.
There'd be enough oxygen for thousands of years.
So anyway, it's just all nonsense as far as that goes.
So again, I'll link to it below.
You can look it up yourself. But when there's a hysteria and it's to do with a newly elected right-wing leader, it's just propaganda.
It's just propaganda. It's just all lies and nonsense.
Bernie Sanders! Ah, yes.
Everybody's favorite. Never had a job.
Bernie Sanders got kicked out of a commune for being too lazy, and that's actually quite an achievement in entropy.
So, Bernie Sanders, of course, wants to increase the number of workers who are in unions, right?
And I have no problem with unions as long as they're voluntary, but when unions have the power to prevent anyone else from replacing them, then it becomes a monopoly, becomes coercive, and so on.
And so... He is looking to create a sectoral collective bargaining system where there are industry-wide boards that would set minimum standards like wages, benefits, and work times.
It would also encourage wage laws at the state and municipal level.
Sectoral bargaining has been among the biggest new ideas from the progressive labor movement drawing on how labor unions operate in Europe.
So these are wage boards, right?
I mean, the cross-industry or sometimes cross-state wage boards that say, here's what you've got to pay people, and so on.
And it's sad, it's pathetic, it's hideous, it's, well, the guy honeymooned in Soviet, communist Soviet dictatorial slaughter fest, Solzhenitsyn hellhole.
So, Saunders, what do you expect from this ridiculous guy who can't seem to find a Way to comb his hair except with a balloon.
So it's monstrous.
Just wage and price controls. It's not a new idea.
I mean, they were tried under Nixon and they failed completely.
And every single time that they failed, they failed.
They just produced shortages. And so it's monstrous.
And of course, the whole point of these kinds of controls is to cover up, is to cover up how desperately terrible government education is.
How desperately terrible that government has a hold of people for 12 years.
Years. And when they graduate, they have the economic value of your average sack of former potatoes, right?
Absolutely, people are useless.
They're worse than useless. They hate free markets.
They hate the system. I mean, one of the things that I, because I was a free market guy from the mid-teens onwards, when I got into RAND and Austrian economics and so on, because I was a free market guy, I loved going to work.
I was enthusiastic. I was happy.
I loved customers. I loved productivity.
I loved being good at my job.
As opposed to all of these surly people who've been told that being a wage earner is a slavery.
Man, you're a tool in the system.
You're a cog. You're a nothing. So it doesn't just make them economically useless.
It makes them economically rancid.
And so to cover all of that up, they have to force wages up for employers.
Employers say government school sucks.
Export Selection