Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Jan. 21, 2021 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux

01:58:27

Wednesday Night Live: SAVE YOURSELF!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Good evening, good evening everybody.
	Hope you're doing well. Stefan Molyneux from Freedomain.
	I don't know what was going on there. Apparently I am a Formula One car when starting my voice.
	Hope you guys are having a great evening.
	It is the 20th of January 2021, and I guess I'm glad I don't live in a check-based economy now because it used to be, how long did it take for you guys who are older than me?
	How long did it take for you to finally figure out it was a new year when you were signing your checks and putting your dates in and all that kind of stuff?
	Well, hopefully not as long as it took me, but good evening.
	It is a great pleasure to chat with you guys tonight.
	And boy, there's a lot to talk about tonight.
	I did promise some life-saving information.
	I will deliver, come rain or shine, come sleet or deplatforming.
	I will deliver.
	Deliver the goods!
	And I hope you guys are having a great night.
	So let me just double check here, make sure everything's cooking along, technically, the way that we like it.
	And let's see.
	Hello from Houston! Keoria from New Zealand.
	Well, welcome. Good evening.
	We're live, baby, live.
	Howdy from DC. Oh, yeah, stay safe, stay in.
	Steph, haven't been with you since the YouTube days.
	Nice to be back with you.
	Yeah. You know when my YouTube troubles started was when I gave a speech at the European Parliament about the dangers of big tech censorship.
	Well, it's always good to be wrong, isn't it?
	It's always good to be wrong.
	All right. And I will be checking in on the server to see if there are any questions coming in from there as well.
	But I do have a couple of things to talk about this evening.
	And I do want to get your thoughts as well.
	And of course, your questions, I will be happy to run them through the giant philosophy brain of moi.
	And hopefully that will help.
	Hi Steph, is it better to run than to fight when you are in danger?
	Well, the reason we have fight or flight is because sometimes we're bigger.
	Sometimes other things are bigger.
	So when you're bigger and you have a reasonable chance of success, stay and fight, if they're way bigger than you, you know, he who fights and runs away lives to fight another day.
	Skeeven says, been peaceful parenting my two kids for about nine years.
	Well, hopefully they're nine and under.
	If not, Well, I'm glad for that anyway.
	That's right. Have you ever heard of Daniel Quinn, the author slash philosopher, wrote Ishmael and Story of B? It's funny because there was a bondage and domination novel went around when I was a kid.
	Oh, my mom had some creepy reading, let me tell you that.
	Called The Story of M? The Story of Q? I can't remember what it was.
	Something like that. Well, hello to you as well.
	And we'll be throwing out some cheddar and cheese soon.
	Hello, Steph. And stream viewer says magnitude 33.
	Thank you very much. Appreciate it.
	Hello from Utah. Hello back.
	Hello back. Let's see here.
	Hit me with some of that philosophy.
	Oh, lube up, my friends.
	It is going to be a rather prison delivery of philosophy tonight.
	I will tell you that for sure.
	The story of O. Yeah, it was the story of O, right?
	That's right. Or, if you're a female, the story of O, O, O, O. The Marmarath says, hello, Stefan, and chat.
	Hello, hello. And yeah, freedomain.com forward slash donate.
	Love to get your help.
	Share, share this video link.
	That's right. It's share all the time, like Sonny Bono.
	Alright, let's, should we get started?
	Let's, yeah, what the heck, let's get started.
	Alright, so a couple of things I wanted to talk about with you guys tonight.
	Very interesting stuff. So, the first is...
	I'll save the life-saving information until the last bit.
	So the first thing to me is really interesting.
	People haven't been talking about this at all.
	Do you know what kind of a baby bust is occurring just in America over the course of COVID? There are estimates that three-quarters of a million, I would say probably closer to a million babies, aren't going to be born because of COVID. So are we going to count that in the loss of life?
	Literally loss of life.
	So we're not talking about some elderly person who sat around when communists infiltrated everything and thumbed their nose at all of the people warning the sheep that the wolves were coming.
	So we're not talking some 80-year-old person who had a good, long, productive life and has been leeching off the unborn for 15 years straight.
	We're talking about the people who never, ever, ever Got to be.
	People are postponing getting married.
	People are postponing having children.
	People are postponing their dating, of course.
	And I would say, just in America, a million-plus babies, like last year and this year, won't be born that otherwise would have been born.
	It's a million people dead.
	Now, what's the American death count at these days?
	400,000 and change?
	Bad. Bad.
	But in terms of Person, years loss of life.
	The people who aren't even born are a bit more of a tragedy than people who die of COVID when they're older than the average age of people dying as a whole.
	You got three comorbidities, you're 85, you die of COVID. That's very bad, but you got 85 years!
	You know who's not getting 85 years?
	All the children who aren't being born.
	You know how many years they get?
	Bagel. Big fat goose egg.
	Big fat ostrich egg.
	Zero years.
	They get zero years. Average life expectancy of 80.
	We got 80 million years.
	80 million years.
	Loss of life because babies aren't being born.
	Is anyone talking about that?
	80 million years loss of life.
	That's the loss of life that takes you halfway back to the fucking dinosaurs, okay?
	80 million years loss of human life.
	How many geniuses, how many great songs, great singers, great mathematicians, great artists, great people?
	How many people aren't being born?
	And you know, you know for sure That it's the smarter people who are making those considerations.
	Oh, you know, COVID, economic uncertainty, who knows how things are going to shake out, a lot of...
	I mean, there's the high IQ people who aren't having the babies, so we're talking about a million lopped off, probably the top third of the IQ bell curve, right?
	Not being born.
	Somebody who's 85, probably going to die within a year or two.
	A couple of hundred thousand of those.
	Let's say 300,000, two years left.
	There's 600,000 person years lost.
	600,000 person years lost.
	Old age people dying of COVID in the US. 600,000 person years.
	80 million person years.
	600,000.
	700,000 person years versus 80 million person years of people who aren't going to exist.
	Oh, God. I wish schools were better.
	I wish people were smarter. And I wish you could talk about these things.
	COVID is Chinese old people leading the young.
	The seen versus the unseen, right?
	It's a baby bust. It's a baby bust of the smarter people for sure.
	I'm having my third child in two weeks.
	My God, your vagina must be exhausted.
	Boom! Dead joke 101.
	Congratulations, by the way. That's fantastic.
	We saved old people in exchange for fresh new lives.
	Amazing. Wow, that's quite something, eh?
	We got 11 million illegal immigrants about to get legalized.
	Oh! Do you really?
	Do you really fantasize that it's 11 million?
	It's probably going to be closer to 30.
	Advanced 3D Warning says my baby was born two months ago.
	He's amazing. Babys are absolutely incredible.
	Babies are absolutely anti-fragile celebrating one month's sub-streak!
	Thank you very much. Thank you very much.
	So, yeah, that is the first thing.
	Okay, I'll take a couple of questions.
	We have a couple of questions here. What have we got?
	I got six kids.
	Get rutting. Yeah, right.
	Could we be seeing an example of Hegelian dialectic currently in politics?
	Okay, the Hegelian dialectic is hypnotic Marxist bullshit designed to have you never take a stand on anything in this entire goddamned existence, alright?
	So, this is the Hegelian thing.
	Thesis, capitalism, antithesis, communism, Synthesis.
	Democratic socialism.
	It's exactly the same as the left-right spectrum.
	On the left, we have communism.
	On the right, we have fascism.
	So, why don't you just hang around in the middle of the road so you can get hit by traffic from both sides?
	No, Hegelian is...
	Oh, the pendulum, thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, it's all complete bullshit.
	It's an embarrassment to intellectuals everywhere, and it's ridiculous that it's become even remotely popular.
	But the reason you can talk about it is because...
	Because of government schools and because of multiculturalism, you can't teach anything that has any moral content.
	You can't teach anything about truth, logic, reason, virtue, values, philosophy.
	You can't teach any of that stuff because it's going to offend nine-tenths of the class and the other one-tenth of the class don't matter.
	So Hegelian dialectic, which is total bullshit.
	Oh, people propose one thing, then people propose another thing, and the truth is somewhere in between.
	That's... I mean, that's crazy.
	I mean, it's not how we run the justice system, right?
	I mean, he murdered someone.
	No, I didn't. Oh, well, the truth is probably somewhere in between.
	It's like, oh, he murdered someone and he didn't, right?
	So now. And it's based upon somebody saying, two and two make five.
	No, no, no, two and two make three.
	Well, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle, so two and two make four.
	It's girly, feminism, weak-kneed, compromise stuff, which is, well, let's take a little from column A, a little from column B, we'll synthesize the two together, ha-la-la-la, right?
	I mean, can you imagine? Somebody says, okay, I can give you...
	One healthy meal. I can give you one meal with poison in it.
	And you're like, well, okay, so the thesis is healthy meal.
	The antithesis is poison meal.
	Let's do the synthesis, which is half poison.
	Yeah, that's reasonable.
	Let's do that, because that's totally sensible, and that's what we should do.
	So no, Hegelian dialectic is total bullshit.
	When are you going to write your memoirs about this political phase that you experienced, thanks for everything you have done?
	Well, here's what's interesting.
	I hope it's interesting anyway.
	So I actually have.
	I started writing my autobiography some years ago, but, you know, there's people in my childhood, people in my youth, and so on.
	It'd be pretty easy to identify them.
	It's not their fault that either A, I became somewhat famous, and B, I became somewhat infamous because of opposition to communism, right?
	So, I don't know whether I want to do all of that.
	I'll do it probably at some point.
	Do you think COVID pandemic is as much as a seminal event as the Great Depression which led to World War II? Okay, so there's seminal events, and then there is made-up stuff that exploits tragedies.
	So, right now, we, of course, having a Right now, I mean, because we're losing a lot of liberties and people are, you know, here in Ontario, it's like 15 million people are basically nodding and smiling and putting their nose in the government trough with basically house arrest.
	And they're saying, well, you know, if you want to fly in, you got to have a COVID test.
	It's like, why the hell weren't you doing this back in February?
	Why? See, the government failed to protect its borders.
	Government failed to protect its people.
	The government had close to a year To build up healthcare to the point where it could deal with this stuff, it didn't.
	It's incompetent.
	It can't protect you. It constantly puts you in danger.
	And because they're terrible at what they do, you can't see the sky.
	Because they can't protect you, you've got to live like Gollum gnawing on raw fish at the root of a mountain.
	High IQ unless you're having less kids.
	Yeah, they are. My youngest daughter keeps waving at you.
	She thinks this is face time. Hello, hello, hello.
	Welcome to philosophy.
	There are no roots.
	Will almost ever be available in print?
	Yes, it will. Yes, it will.
	Do we judge society by how well off the rich are or how bad off the poor are?
	See, here's the thing. I don't care about judging society.
	I'm not a collectivist.
	I would judge individuals, but judging society as a whole, I don't care.
	It doesn't mean anything.
	How do I stop caring about politics, especially since you explain politics as a diversion to confronting people in our life?
	So the way – listen, I understand.
	I understand the addiction.
	And trust me, I understand the addiction.
	So the way that you wean yourself off politics is – So, for example, right?
	Trump put out his list of pardons.
	And, of course, everybody was hoping for Snowden, Assange, Ulbricht, I think his name was.
	And none of that happened, which is pretty predictable, right?
	And so what happened was some rapper got a pardon.
	Some corrupt Democrat mayor who robbed, apparently robbed the people blind by all reports.
	That person. The rapper who had a video wherein a Trump supporter was strangled, he got a pardon.
	But not Snowden.
	Not Assange. Steve Bannon got a pardon.
	None of the people who went into the Capitol, none of them got a pardon.
	There's not even a... A fund set up, and the amount of money that went poured into fighting the election, quote, fraud, what they claimed, the amount of money that went into that, was truly staggering.
	Truly staggering.
	Hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars.
	Where did it all go? Where did it all go?
	Ah, Jared! It's so predictable.
	I hate to say it. It's so predictable.
	Yeah, so Trump, all of this stuff came out, right?
	About this, you know, and he released some FBI documents, but they were so ridiculously redacted that they're completely useless.
	And, you know, you get people, Tim Poole, Cernovich, Wilt Chamberlain, and so on, all out there thundering and pounding their chests, talking about, oh, Trump went out like a little bitch.
	He's such a coward.
	It's such a ridiculous... Pardon list, it's, oh, you know, he's got no spine, blah, blah, blah, right?
	I get it. You know, when you see someone else doing something that you consider below your very high standards of courage, it's easy to sit there and say, oh, he's going out like a little bitch, he's a pussy, and blah, blah, blah, right?
	Where were these guys when I was bringing up all this really controversial stuff, right?
	All the stuff that I was bringing up.
	Um... Were they front and center?
	Listen, I like a lot of these guys.
	I'm not trying to bag on anyone.
	I'm just saying, okay, you guys can turn at Trump.
	I'm not going to sit there and say Trump's going out like a little bitch.
	I don't know what they threatened him with.
	I mean, the General Flynn, they threatened to prosecute his son, didn't they?
	You don't know what the guy's being threatened with?
	Probably quite a bit. And people weren't standing with me on some of the most essential topics of the day.
	Some of the stuff that really did undermine the Marxist case for the interpretation of society.
	The bell curve stuff, IQ stuff, a variety of other things as well.
	So, I don't know. It's just easy to bitch at Trump and, oh, he's such a coward and blah, blah, blah.
	Hey, you know, the guy's making his decisions based upon pressures.
	You or I don't know what he's facing.
	And if the same pressures were to bear, were to come down to bear on all the people bitching at Trump, what would they do?
	Not hard to guess.
	Not hard to guess. So, what you do with politics is you can go and read...
	the articles right and you can go and read the articles and you say this terrible thing is happening this maybe good thing is happening this awful thing is happening blah blah blah blah right and you sit there and say okay how do i feel how do i how do i feel how's this how's this sitting with me how's this going for me how do i feel about it and you'll feel scared anxious negative right and then you say okay Does any of these negative feelings,
	do any of these negative feelings propel me into action?
	Action that I can take that's peaceful, that's legal, that's not going to make my life a whole lot worse.
	Now, if you expose yourself to this political news, and it makes you feel bad, and you can't do anything about it, that's just self-abuse, right?
	It's just self abuse. You may read it to enjoy the shit show.
	You may read it to say, well, people are now going to get what they voted for.
	Okay, you know, black community, they're going to legalize tens of millions of illegals who are going to compete with blacks for...
	Housing, education, healthcare, jobs, income, wages, welfare, government spending, pensions, you name it, right?
	And it's going to be pretty, really tough on the black community.
	Really tough on the black community.
	So, okay, you get what you voted for.
	You didn't listen to Candace Owens or whoever, right?
	And now you're going to get what you voted for.
	I mean, Joe Biden is doing what he said he was going to do.
	First hundred days, going to legalize.
	Trump went on his way out, also gave amnesty to thousands of Venezuelans in America, I think, illegally.
	And okay, that's, you know, who knows?
	Who knows what they had on him?
	Who knows what they threatened him with?
	So, yeah, just look and say, okay, this is a negative feeling.
	I can't do anything about it.
	So what am I doing? What am I doing?
	There's things in my life I can affect for the better.
	Things in the world I can't affect for the better, right?
	It's just the reality. It's just the reality, right?
	So imagine that there was a TV station which was everydeathintheworld.com, right?
	And what it did was it flashed I don't know, the last second of everyone's life as they were dying.
	I don't know how many people die all over the world, but let's just say it's one a second, right?
	So this is like the last second of everyone's life all over the world, and you could tune into that every death in the world channel, a website or something like that, right?
	Okay, so let's say you could tune into that and you could stare and see, you know, 60 deaths a minute, 3,600 deaths an hour, whatever it is, right?
	Could you do anything about it?
	Well, no, because these are people who are in their last second of life.
	It's not a whole lot you can rush over and CPR them into health, right?
	Can't even push them out of the way of the oncoming train.
	Would you tune into that?
	Wouldn't that be kind of sick to tune into that, to just watch endless parades of death that you couldn't do anything about?
	Wouldn't that be kind of paralyzing and horrible and horrifying?
	We know it's happening for sure, right?
	Would you tune into that? I wouldn't.
	So, whenever, as long as I felt I could have an effect in politics, yeah, I'll go in and analyze, I'll do truths about, I'll interview people, I'll write books, I'll break things down, I'll do my true news, and yeah, of course, absolutely, yeah.
	But, you know, when you can't really do much about it, why would you want to get involved in it?
	It's like the All Deaths All The Time channel, right?
	All right, let's see here.
	Let's see here.
	you Wasn't Cernovich with you on the hot topics?
	I'm not trying to bag on the guy.
	He's done a lot of great good. He's a good dad.
	I like him a lot.
	No, not particularly.
	All right, let's see here. Is GDP an accurate measure of growth?
	What does it not include? GDP is a terrible measure of growth.
	Because it includes some economic activity.
	So if somebody breaks their legs and get it fixed, then that apparently makes everyone wealthy.
	It's prey to the whole broken windows fallacy.
	And it excludes – it's like inflation, which excludes a lot of the stuff that's high in the inflationary index and so on.
	So no, GDP. And what do you care about the growth of a country?
	What do you care? GDP is just – it's a political number, which means it's total bullshit.
	I mean, nothing means anything in politics anymore, right?
	I can't change this alone.
	You can organize and peacefully protest.
	Can you these days? I don't know.
	So, if you organize and you peacefully protest, let's say you organize and you peacefully protest, and let's say you get a large number of people coming out there.
	Well, you know who's going to come out?
	Who's going to come out is leftist activists.
	They're going to dress up just like your people, and they're going to do terrible things, and then you're going to get blamed.
	It's not that complicated, right?
	It's like the extraordinary incuriosity of the media to find out where QAnon came from.
	I don't think even the FBI is looking into where QAnon came from, in which case you kind of know where QAnon came from, right?
	So... Venezuelan women are pretty hot, to be honest.
	Well, they certainly have done a lot to solve their obesity problem.
	Last year had record levels of spending but little growth.
	Is the depression inevitable in the next few years?
	Well, you just have to look to history for that, right?
	So, on history, and a lot of historians have done work on this, so the average country, the average civilization, the average empire even, lasts about 250 years.
	America is, what, 246 years old.
	On average, it's got four years to go.
	On average, it's got four years to go.
	So, you know when it's talking about the last second of people's lives?
	Yeah, it could be. It could be, right?
	All right. Any advice for a long-lasting relationship?
	Choose someone who's rational, who's sensible, who's dealt with their history and does not have abusive people in his or her life.
	What do you think of prepping?
	I think it's pretty essential.
	What if 80 million Americans don't pay taxes to an illegitimate government?
	It would shut down the deep state.
	Yeah, but I mean, what if 80 million Americans suddenly have a heart attack tomorrow, right?
	I mean, statistically, it's possible.
	Practically, it's impossible, right?
	You can't protest without being labeled a terrorist.
	Sure you can. Just protest the right and you'll be fine.
	How much can the U.S. go into debt before the camel's back breaks?
	We are at $30 trillion. Oh, it's much more than that.
	Include the unfunded liabilities.
	U.S. is well over $200 trillion.
	Well, if crypto begins to supplant the dollar as the world's reserve currency, then it won't last particularly long, right?
	Billions more people would have heard your truths about parenting and violence in governments if you didn't talk about IQ. Billions?
	Really? I don't think billions of people speak English.
	You may be overstating the case a little bit.
	Organize and peacefully protest.
	Okay, someone clearly doesn't know about Charlottesville.
	Well, there was some pretty violent stuff in Charlottesville.
	What do you think about constructionism like Piaget?
	Piaget the child psychologist?
	I don't know enough about it, sorry.
	Let's see here.
	Peaceful parenting is about IQ. No, peaceful parenting is about the non-aggression principle.
	Would you consider America an empire pre-1913-ish?
	Well, it depends, of course.
	I mean, if you count California as having once belonged to Mexico, being taken over by America as being part of an empire of expansion, if you count the Monroe Doctrine that Central and South America are all part of the U.S. interests and so on, I wouldn't consider America a specific empire prior to...
	I mean, it really came into its own after the First World War with the Woodrow Doctrine and so on, right?
	I saw an article the other day on how China's economy grew 2.3% last year.
	You've got to hand it to them. They get results.
	I mean, they don't have multiculturalism in general.
	And they don't have a completely corrupt media that's very much against the survival of the country.
	So they've got a couple of jetpacks.
	But anybody who believes communist numbers, I don't know what to tell you.
	Did the schools and hospitals just save a ton of money by closing down And still taking our money.
	Well, only in the socialized. A lot of hospitals in America have had pretty horrible fiscal results as a result of all of this.
	All right. 200 trillion.
	Read it and weep. Yeah, yeah, no kidding.
	I love you, Steph. Thanks for all that you do.
	Well, thank you very much. I love you guys as well.
	Thoughts on Owen Benjamin's criticisms?
	Of me? I don't know what Owen Benjamin's criticisms are of me.
	But, I mean, do you see me criticizing a lot of people who are somewhat fellow travelers?
	No. So, you know, people who have been on my show, who are focusing on me and my deficiencies and so on, it's like, they're saying that the most important people to criticize are the people who aren't going to do anything to harm you directly.
	Okay, super courageous there, dude.
	Super courageous. Sounds like in your book, Almost, when the family was talking about communist Russia.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Yeah, you've got to check out the book, freedomain.com forward slash almost.
	Just started. Should police officers be segregated, policing only their own ethnic neighborhoods?
	You're asking me about a government policy?
	I could care less.
	I could care less. I don't care.
	I don't care who polices only, who what's there.
	It doesn't matter to me. It doesn't matter to me.
	Is there anything that you would like to do if you had the funding and follow what you once had?
	Or is that a moot point now?
	Well, yeah. I mean, I loved traveling.
	I loved giving speeches. And I loved meeting the listeners and so on.
	I would love to be doing all of that stuff.
	It was great. It was great.
	But those aren't the choices that I made.
	Those aren't the choices that social media platforms made.
	And I'm sure that they don't regret their choices.
	And I'm certain that I don't regret my choices.
	You were getting millions of listeners to your philosophy and methodology pre-IQ. And so?
	What are you saying? Are you saying that I should give up talking about an absolutely essential topic to understanding the world because of followers and money?
	Is that your idea?
	I didn't take on the IQ stuff because I'm a masochist.
	I took on the IQ stuff because it's the antidote to Marxism.
	You understand, right? Because the Marxists say all group differences result from exploitation.
	Is there exploitation? Absolutely.
	Does IQ answer everything? Absolutely not.
	Is it more essential than exploitation?
	Kinda. And so, your argument is that if I had given up explaining to people the way that the world worked honestly and courageously and accurately and scientifically, if I had taken people's money...
	And lied to their fucking faces about what's important in the world, then I would be a grifter, right?
	Then I would be kind of a con artist, right?
	I took... I was happy to take support from people, and in return for that support, I promised to talk about the most essential, important, honest, and valuable facts in the world.
	And of course I knew it was the third rail.
	Of course I knew that. And that's what people paid me for.
	That's what people supported me for, was to tell the truth about important issues.
	That's why I don't regret it.
	That's why I would have felt dishonorable to avoid such an essential topic.
	It would have been nice, of course, if all of the courageous people out there on the interwebs had picked up the topic and said, yes, well, it does explain this.
	Okay, well, there's a disproportion of this and that.
	Okay, well, this is explained to a large degree by this.
	It's not the only explanation, but it's a pretty important one.
	And there's a reason why you can't talk about it.
	And the reason why you can't talk about it is not, oh, it hurts people's feelings or it upsets people.
	I mean, they don't care about upsetting people.
	They're hurting their feelings. I mean, they're just calling half of America terrorists, for God's sakes, right?
	The reason you can't talk about it is it's the sunlight to the vampire of Marxism.
	That's the only reason you can't talk about it.
	What your enemy doesn't want you to talk about is probably a pretty good thing to talk about.
	So, I don't know what sort of weird free shit you're dangling in front of me.
	Like, are you trying to provoke some kind of regret?
	I shouldn't have taken on this topic, right?
	Is that what you're trying to say?
	That I shouldn't have taken on the most essential topic in explaining the world that pushes back the most against the rising tide of leftism?
	Should I not have done that?
	Then I would have bought myself a little more time, maybe, sure.
	But only at the cost of looking into the camera and standing in front of people and opening my mouth and knowing that I was lying and avoiding.
	It's not how I'm made, man.
	It's not how I'm made.
	I want to tell the truth about important things.
	And maybe what you can do is take people's money and kind of lie to their faces by omission, right?
	Maybe what you can do is take people's money and support and then lie by omission.
	And maybe what you can do is say, well, I'm not really going to have any effect on people's understanding of the world, but I'll claim to be some big philosopher who's committed to telling the truth and I'll just take people's money and then I'll avoid a central topic that's essential for understanding the world.
	Maybe you can do that. Which I think is gross.
	I can't. And even if I could, I wouldn't.
	Okay? So, nice try.
	Dangling fame and money in front of me.
	All you have to do is lie to people, you see, and you'll still be popular, and you'll still make a lot of money, and you'll still have a lot of views.
	All you have to do is just not tell the truth, and here's some money and some eyeballs for you.
	You sophist, you devil.
	No, not being remotely tempted.
	What sequence should I learn your books in?
	Okay, so the books are not designed to be read in sequence.
	They're not like Lord of the Rings or...
	Infinity of Wings of Fire.
	The books are designed to be read in what you're interested in.
	If you're interested in a general introduction to philosophy, go with essential philosophy.
	If you're interested in how to debate better out of the argument, it's really great.
	If you're interested in ethics, universally preferable behavior is really good.
	If you're interested in theology, Against the Gods is fantastic.
	If you want something engaging and entertaining to share with people, The Handbook of Human Ownership is really fun and funny.
	If you're interested in how we build a free society, start with Everyday Anarchy, go to Practical Anarchy.
	If you want, you know, deep explorations of the human condition, go to my novel, The God of Atheists.
	You can get that at fdrurl.com forward slash T-G-O-A for The God of Atheists.
	Or you can go to freedomain.com forward slash almost to get the audiobook of almost.
	And so, whatever it is, whatever it is you like.
	Will Russia become more fertile after climate change?
	I don't know. Love your book almost.
	Any other works of yours you're going to do a reading of?
	Oh yes, I have another novel that was set in 18th century England about a woman who's born a genius, a girl who's born a complete genius in the rural middle of nowhere and how she struggles to try and find any kind of life.
	So that's wandering, right?
	Read UPB first, I'd suggest.
	Now, there's a really good summary of UPB in Essential Philosophy.
	You can get that at EssentialPhilosophy.com.
	His criticisms of your non-aggression principle doesn't prevent a consenting underage person from sexual activity with an older person.
	Well, of course it does.
	Jesus Christ. Excuse me.
	Sorry. I don't mean to take his name in vain, but of course it does.
	Oh, my God. Okay, let me give you an example, right?
	Does the non-aggression principle prevent you from getting somebody who has an IQ of 60 from signing away all of their future labor in return for a candy bar, right?
	Let's just ask yourself that basic question, right?
	Let's say somebody is mentally incompetent, like really low IQ, right?
	60 or whatever it is, right?
	Somebody who is...
	We used to be called an imbecile, then developmentally delayed, then retarded, whatever it is now.
	I don't know, right? But developmentally delayed to the point where they can't live alone.
	They can't function. They can't cook.
	They can't go to the grocery store.
	They really, really don't have any intellectual capacity at all.
	So let's say you go up and you say, I will give you this candy bar.
	Just sign right here. Sign right here.
	You get a free candy bar. And then it turns out that what they've done is they've signed away any future productivity, all of their future, and then you just own them or whatever it is.
	You own them like a slave or whatever it is.
	Or everything that they make is now yours.
	Or they owe you a million dollars and if they can't pay, you get to enslave them.
	Whatever, right? Now, is that a violation of the non-aggression principle?
	Well, of course it is. I mean, you'd have to be retarded to not see that.
	Of course that's a violation of the non-aggression principle.
	Why? Because the person who's signing the document with the IQ of 60 doesn't comprehend what he's signing.
	He doesn't comprehend what he's signing.
	In the same way, if you don't have a translator, you can't sign and be legally held liable for a document in a language you don't understand.
	Somebody puts Japanese in front of me and says, sign here.
	I'm like, I'm not signing. I don't know what the hell I'm signing.
	I can't read this. I can't process, comprehend, and understand what the hell I'm signing.
	Sexuality is adult.
	It's an adult's business.
	It's an adult game. It's an adult's occupation.
	Children are physically, intellectually, emotionally, spiritually unable to consent to sexual activity because they're children in the same way they can't rent a fucking car or sign a lease or take out a loan because they don't understand.
	There are children.
	God.
	So when someone cannot consent to sexual activity, it's rape to have sexual activity with them.
	If the woman is passed out, you can't have sex with her because that's rape.
	If someone's unconscious, you can't have sex with them.
	What if somebody's hanging from a balcony and you lean over, a woman's hanging from a balcony, you lean over and you say, I'll lift you up, but you've got to give me a blowjob.
	Is she honor-bound when she gets on the balcony to give you a blowjob?
	No! Because you kind of had her by the short and curlies.
	She had no functional capacity to say no.
	So children can't do adult things.
	That's how we know they're children. They can't be drafted.
	An eight-year-old can't drive a car.
	They can't drink alcohol. They can't sign contracts.
	Children don't do adulting.
	That's how we know they're children.
	That's why we have this concept called children.
	Sexuality is an adult game.
	It's an adult business. It's an adult occupation.
	It's the one consolation for taxation.
	All right, you're going to get taxed at 50%, but man, those orgasms are going to be great.
	Yeah, it's kind of true. So the idea that the non-aggression principle doesn't cover An adult having sex with a child is ridiculous.
	It's ridiculous. If a man offers a toddler a bag of candy in return for a promise to work for free for 10 years, no court in any sane universe would ever, ever, ever honor that contract.
	I mean, if you have an older brother who says to the younger brother, Give me half of your allowance and I will tell you a joke a day for the rest of the year or something like that.
	Something that the kid enjoys, right?
	If the mom finds that out, what's she going to say to the older brother?
	He's going to say, give him his money back.
	Come on. He doesn't understand the value.
	If he's four years old, don't take candy from a baby.
	Don't take money from a four-year-old.
	I don't even know how this is complicated.
	You have to work really hard, really hard to imagine that the non-aggression principle doesn't protect children from pedophiles or hippophiles.
	Children cannot consent to sexual activity because that's an adult activity.
	They don't have the physical or emotional capacity or intellectual or moral, spiritual capacity to consent to sexual activity.
	They don't understand STDs.
	They don't understand pregnancy risk.
	They don't understand the damage that adult sexuality, sexual activity could have to their organs.
	They don't understand the emotional ramification.
	They don't understand! So they can't consent!
	So it's rape!
	How is this complicated?
	I don't understand. You've got to work really, really hard.
	Now, listen. I get Owen Benjamin is very, very keen on protecting children from pedophiles.
	And I admire him for that.
	I really, really do. I really do.
	But if you want to protect children from pedophiles, you've got to be a voluntarist.
	You've got to be an anarcho-capitalist.
	Because the welfare state creates the explosion of single mother households, and while many single mothers are very noble and hardworking, there are tragic numbers of children who get sexually abused, raped, exploited, preyed upon by sexual predators in single mother households.
	Vastly higher rates than in two-parent households.
	So the welfare state leads to single mother households, which facilitates all too often child sexual predation.
	Children are forced into going to government schools or the parents are forced to pay for government schools and the rate of sexual abuse of children in government schools, both by staff and by other children, the rate of sexual abuse in government schools is hundreds of times higher than the rates of sexual abuse by,
	say, Catholic priests. So government schools, the welfare state, you name it, all of these contribute To the epidemic of childhood sexual abuse that is occurring at the moment.
	So the idea that a free society somehow is going to lead to terrible rates of childhood sexual abuse, even though it goes incredibly against the non-aggression principle.
	All right.
	Let's see here.
	Is there an objective by which you can declare a person is able to give consent?
	Well, sure. I mean, we come up with some standard, right?
	And the standard has traditionally been the age of 18.
	And I think that's fairly good.
	You could say...
	Maybe you could say...
	Women's brains stop maturing in their early 20s.
	Men's brains stop maturing in their mid-20s.
	But I think that you can't wait for a quarter century to have sexual activity.
	It's got to be younger than that. Somebody says...
	let's see here IQ is the most solid thing in all social scientists as You can't talk about it. No, you can.
	You can. You just got to pay the price, right?
	Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.
	Don't do it! All right, what else we have?
	I provided real-time relationships to my sister to help her marriage.
	They've been having petty fights so far as helping, and she enjoys it.
	Thank you, Steph. Fantastic. I love it when you speak with Duke Pesta.
	I agree. I agree.
	He's great. How do you feel about using violence against those who hurt children?
	Well, if the only way that you can stop someone from hurting a child is to physically restrain them or use violence against them, then you are acting in self-defense on behalf of the child by proxy, right?
	That's how it goes, right?
	So, yes. Now, you know, I mean, it would be far better to not use violence in the prevention of child abuse, but if that's the only way to do it in the moment, sure.
	I have no problem with that. All right.
	The line is blurry as to when a person can consent, which I agree that it is.
	I'm not sure what that means. Okay, of course there's blurry stuff.
	Oh, my God. You know, I mean, this is stuff that you can do forever, and it's really boring.
	I'm not talking about you guys. I'm just talking about people in general.
	It's really, really boring, right? So the line goes something like this.
	Okay, at 18, you can vote.
	Or at 18, you can sign a contract.
	And you say, oh, so at 17 days, 17 years, 364 days, 23 hours and 59 minutes, I'm not capable.
	And then, bing, one second later, I am capable.
	What changed? Nothing's...
	Okay, I get it. It's a continuum fallacy, and it's really, really boring.
	You've got to come up with some standard as a whole.
	You know, most young men under the age of 25 can't rent a car, even though they can legally drive and probably been able to legally drive for like nine years.
	Can't rent a car. Why? Are you saying that the moment the young man turns 25, he magically becomes a lot?
	That's just that boring, right? And yes, there are children who have sex, of course, right?
	There are children who have sex.
	They're both 16. What is the legal status of that?
	Well, the legal status of that is they shouldn't be having sex.
	And the way that that would be solved in a free society is you would have regular scans for brain development, and you would make sure everything was going well, and you would obviously inform children about this kind of stuff, and you may, if one person...
	Well, of course, if there's claims that the sexual activity was forced, then it would be rape, no matter what their age, right?
	If it was claimed to be that it was both consensual, then you would...
	We would socially shame the parents for raising children to view the value that they could add in a relationship to be mere sexual access.
	And then, oh, well, what if one of them is 18 and one of them is 17?
	Okay, well, yeah, okay, these are interesting issues.
	Statism doesn't solve that problem, right?
	Statism contributes to molestation in terrible ways.
	And so, yeah, I'm happy to take my chances about these things being worked out at a free market.
	Call me crazy.
	All right.
	Would non-aggression cover labor value being stolen?
	I'm not sure what you mean by labor value being stolen.
	Do you mean feeling underpaid?
	We're all feeling underpaid.
	I should be getting a billion bucks an hour.
	Everybody feels underpaid.
	I don't know what you mean by labor value being stolen.
	I mean, if you are...
	Willing to work for $20 an hour, $15 an hour, whatever, then you're not being stolen from.
	If you want more, you can negotiate for more.
	You can up your skill set.
	You can start your own business.
	You can do a lot of different things, right?
	But I don't know how labor value being stolen.
	I mean, if somebody steals the product of your labor...
	Well, that's straight theft, right?
	If you chop down a tree and you create wood to burn and somebody steals all that wood, then they've just enslaved you for the amount of time that it took for you to cut down the tree.
	So, yeah, that's immoral.
	That's right. Let's see here.
	I think a 16-year-old can understand where is the line, the problem.
	No, that's not important.
	It's not important. Look, there's clear signs.
	You've got a 40-year-old son of a bitch sexually preying upon a 10-year-old child.
	That's not a problem, right?
	Hopefully it's not a problem out there that this person is one of the greatest moral monsters in the world, right?
	The 40-year-old guy preying on the 10-year-old.
	And we got that, right? 30-year-old guy preying on a 10-year-old, really, really bad.
	20-year-old guy preying on a 10-year-old, really bad.
	16-year-old guy preying on a 10-year-old, really, can we get that?
	Can we at least get that far?
	Now, some of the edge cases, the blurry cases, who cares?
	I mean, I get that people care and it matters and all of that, but holy crap have we ever got bigger fish to fry.
	We got a lot of bigger fish to fry.
	Getting lost in these edge cases, these are things that are worked out in a civilized society by precedent, by science, by understanding, by testing.
	There's a wide variety of things that you can do to figure out the edge cases.
	But there's an old saying is that, you know, bad cases, edge cases make bad law.
	Edge cases make bad law.
	And getting lost in the edge stuff, when we have so much clear and present injustice in the world to deal with, is just a way of paralyzing yourself.
	I can't deal with that because in a future society it might be kind of complicated if a guy who's A day past 18 has sex with a girl, a woman who's a day prior to 18.
	It's like, come on. I mean, that's what you're paralyzing yourself with, is the 1 in 10,000 cases 100 years in the future that that's why you can't act in the here and now?
	Come on, it's bullshit. Just be honest and say, I don't want to act in the here and now, but don't pretend that you're exploring some edge bullshit.
	It doesn't matter. All right.
	Not that I'm defending it, but I was sexually active at 17, consensually.
	I think a lot of us were.
	Sure. Sure. But not with a 40-year-old guy, I hope, right?
	16. If you think a 16-year-old can fully understand sexuality, you're on another planet.
	Yeah, and generally they can't, right?
	And also they're given terrible information.
	Young people are given terrible information.
	How many times are women told these days, girls told when they're growing up, that the more sexual partners they have, the more likely they are to never be able to pair bond, to get divorced and direct their adult life?
	Are they told that? Are they told that?
	More sexual partners you have.
	Divorce is dick dose dependent.
	D is DDD. Divorce is dick dose dependent.
	More dicks, more divorce.
	Guaranteed. And it's dose dependent, which means more dicks, more chance of divorce.
	So... If women, if girls, aren't even given the correct information about how much they're destroying their future capacity to maintain a happy family or to stay married, if they're not even given the right information, how the hell can they consent to sexual activity when the results of that sexual activity are hidden from them and not explained to them?
	I mean, if all of society says, oh man, smoking is fantastic for you, we're going to morally blame a kid for taking up smoking?
	It's healthy, it's wonderful, looks cool, it's good for you, makes your lungs stronger, right?
	If that's what everyone says, are we really going to get mad at a kid for smoking?
	No, the kid's been given really, really bad information.
	Really bad information. So, no, 16-year-olds can't consent because they're lied to, abominably, abominably.
	All right. You won't even rent a car.
	Yeah, 24 euros, you can't rent a car, right?
	Depends on the maturity of the adolescent mind.
	Are you really going to test everyone to figure out their maturity?
	That's how you're going to run things?
	All right. Have you ever heard the book The Strange Death of Europe?
	Yeah, I had Douglas Murray on my show, and then Sam Harris yelled at Douglas Murray for being on my show.
	I don't know. It's just so weird.
	Why do liberal leftist whites want to replace their population?
	So yeah, I mean leftists have out-group preferences.
	White leftists have out-group preferences.
	The reasons for that we can go into another time, but yeah, for sure.
	Age seems arbitrary.
	I have met 17-year-olds more mature than 25-year-olds.
	Shrug. Oh man, I don't know if this is the channel for you, man.
	I really don't. You're just throwing clatter-headed bullshit into the argument to just fuzzy it up and confuse people.
	What do you mean to say that women are shorter than men?
	I know a tall woman. Oh my god.
	Age seems arbitrary.
	Great, I guess you can live to 4,000 then, because it's just arbitrary.
	Do I need consent from myself to masturbate if I'm drunk?
	That's a handy question.
	Sam Harris seems to be totally brainwashed with Trump derangement syndrome.
	Right? Right?
	Well, I mean, yeah, yeah, I get that.
	I get that. Militant atheists like Sam Harris beat up on Christianity while communism takes over every institution, right?
	Yes, well, that's kind of by design almost, right?
	You cannot consent while drunk, so it's technically rape.
	Hey man, that's a 950-year-old guy in the Bible.
	It ain't necessarily so.
	Alright. Age is literally just a number.
	No, it's not. It's decay, man.
	Trust me. In my mid-50s, age is more than just a number.
	I was at the park just this last summer with my daughter and I'm swinging around and I'm like, oh, what about my knees?
	Oh, what about my... Sorry, man.
	It's more than just a number.
	It's more than just a number.
	If you got drunk and paid a webcam girl all your dollars, did she rob you?
	Oh, it's an interesting question.
	If you got drunk and paid a webcam girl all your dollars, did she rob you?
	Now, that's a tough one, right?
	That's a tough one. So, how is she supposed to know if you're drunk?
	Now, if you're vomiting and you can't see straight, then of course she should cut the feed, right?
	And if she takes... It's sort of like there are bar owners who are supposed to cut off Patrons, if the patrons are obviously too drunk to make decisions about whether to have more to drink or whatever, right?
	So I think that...
	But if it's kind of subtle, if you're one of these kind of just mildly dissociated drunken people and so on, then that's a tough call.
	Now, if you say, well, but if you say later, I was drunk, she's got to give you your money back, then everybody will just pretend to be drunk at the end and then get all their money back.
	So that's a complicated question.
	And I suppose...
	It would be up to the discretion of the owner of the webcam site.
	And, of course, if you were doing this repeatedly, they would just ban you from the site, right?
	That's interesting, right? It's interesting.
	Outgroup preference would be a good conversation.
	Yeah, yeah, I appreciate that.
	What happened to your YouTube channel?
	Ah, it got a terminal case of truth, I'm afraid.
	What if you're married and your wife jerks you off when you're sleeping and you enjoy it, but don't know it's her?
	Well, I believe it's time for flowers and chocolate at that point.
	It's not a bad way to wake up, man.
	Not a bad way to wake up.
	You know, it's good to wake up a little stiff.
	So I wanted to mention something here.
	Media movies give horrible advice for approaching.
	Suddenly stalking and surprise visits are amazing, but in reality you get reported.
	Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah.
	No, you never ever want to take dating advice from Hollywood.
	I mean, these are people who consider often roofing to be a good dating strategy, as the Me Too movement showed.
	So, yeah, you don't want to take dating advice from Hollywood.
	Hollywood will often teach you that a woman will simply Love you.
	If you have abs and you're a stalker and you have money, then it's wonderful.
	Like, you can't beat a woman up unless you have a helicopter, play piano, and do sit-ups, Jamie Dornan style.
	And then apparently it's just really romantic, right?
	So, yeah, you'd never go to anything to do with Hollywood for dating advice.
	That stuff would get you thrown in jail or killed or be alone.
	So, Cyberpunk 2077.
	I've not played it. I watched a couple of bug videos.
	I find it quite interesting because I used to manage big software projects.
	So not video game ones, but big software projects I managed.
	Oh boy. Dozens and dozens of pretty big software projects.
	Not as big as this one, but some of them were a million dollar plus US. So yeah, pretty big software projects.
	So I probably have one of these rare, like, windows of insight into what happened with Cyberpunk 2077, because this thing's been in the works for, what, eight years?
	They've been talking about it for eight years.
	It's been delayed a couple of times when it came out.
	The underperformance on the older Xboxes and PS4s was underwhelming.
	There were a lot of bugs, and a lot of sort of the promised features weren't really there, and it's kind of a Go through the rails like a train, pursue stuff.
	You can't really go off and do other things.
	And they went kind of nuts, like a thousand NPCs with their own cycles and stories and habits and things like that.
	But they missed obvious stuff, like if you park in the middle of the road, even in an old Lego animation game, the cars would go around you.
	But now they just sit there and stay, and that produces a lot of backup in the coding stuff.
	So people are getting all kinds of angry at the company.
	And I understand that.
	I understand that. I mean, the hype was there, and the hype didn't live up to it.
	It still wasn't as bad as No Man's Sky, which sucked, by the way.
	I was kind of looking forward to that.
	I love it being a good space game.
	I really do. It's one of my big weaknesses.
	You might want to check out Stellar Wanderer on iOS, and it's actually pretty good.
	But anyway, so yeah, what happened?
	Everybody, of course, is rambling on about...
	Was it Project Rekt?
	What was it? I've got to look this up.
	The name of the actual studio.
	But everyone's like, oh, these guys are just a bunch of scam artists.
	And they are getting sued now. CD Projekt.
	Yeah, CD Projekt. Okay, so I will tell you, with no internal insight, no knowledge, pure theory, this is what happened.
	Just, you understand, because it's philosophically important.
	So, what happened was...
	These guys made Witcher 3, which I played maybe 10 minutes of before realizing it was going to be a huge time sink and I had books to write and parenting to do.
	So the company, it's a Polish company, right?
	So what happened was they had a couple of big hits and then the Polish government gave them $7.5 million.
	American, right? So it's $9 or $10 million Canadian, right?
	Or four Bitcoins this time next year, perhaps.
	So... I'll tell you what happens.
	You get all this money from the government.
	And then everyone assumes, oh my gosh, we got all of this subsidy.
	It's a huge amount of subsidy.
	It's a big subsidy, man. $10 million Canadian.
	It's a big-ass subsidy, right?
	And they say, oh man, because we got this giant subsidy, we can hire more people and we can expand the scope of what it is that we're doing.
	Now, I used to get this Way back in the day.
	So way back in the day, it won't provide any details, but we used to customize the software that I'd written for particular clients.
	And these customization jobs could be quite big, quite intense.
	It was wiring up to existing systems.
	They'd want certain things changed in the software itself and so on.
	So we customized, right? Now, I ended up with an estimate of an undoable number of I mean, there was only one person higher up, the CEO. So the CEO said, we can do X amount of dollars, and that meant basically I'd have to do one of these customized systems every week.
	Every week! And that was not feasible.
	Answer to this when I said, no, that's not technically feasible.
	We're working to make the software so you don't have to customize it, but we've got to kind of get there, get a whole bunch of feedback from different customers who are willing to pay for it, right?
	And the company was doing pretty well.
	We had like 35 employees, and I was chief technical officer.
	And I was working towards software that either would customize itself, and I did that, like you could program software.
	The software to change itself and it would automatically generate an entire web interface no matter what you did.
	It was really, really great software.
	But I said, no, it's not really feasible.
	And then he said, what is considered to be the magic word in management, which is, hey, just hire more people.
	That's not... Always a very good idea.
	What is it? Three people made among us and all that.
	So just hire more people is not really a very good solution for a lot of complex stuff.
	Of course, look, if you want to dig ditches and you need to dig more ditches, you can hire more people.
	Because digging ditches It's hard work.
	I've actually done it. It's not complicated, though.
	You don't need a lot of training.
	And if somebody drops out, you just hire someone else to move the shovel.
	Digging ditches, even if you want to build a wall, you just hire more people and you can build a wall.
	But the problem is, and I tried to explain this until I was blue in the face to people, I said, look, software is not a thing.
	Software is like an ecosystem.
	So, it's like saying, oh, we have too many mosquitoes, so just throw a bunch of frogs in there.
	And toads, right? They'll eat the mosquitoes and everything will be fine.
	It's like, no, no, no. Because once you...
	Like, there's the butterfly effect. Once you start throwing the frogs in there, maybe they'll eat the mosquitoes.
	Maybe they'll adapt to something else, right?
	Maybe they'll eat so many mosquitoes that they'll run out of food and then they'll start turning on each other or they'll start turning on the minnow larva or whatever it is and then you've got no fish, right?
	So you can't just... It's a multivariate situation.
	So you can't just hire more people And have complex ecosystems work.
	Now, the software that I was creating was complicated in a different way and certainly not as complicated as the massive ambitious scale of something like Cyberpunk 2077.
	But if you say, oh, okay, so we can have more NPCs, we can have a bigger map, we can have more complicated dialogue, we can have more options, because we've got more money.
	But the problem is, everything you touch in software has a ripple effect on everything else, right?
	So, in one scene that I saw, right, somebody parks their car, like, perpendicular to traffic, and the traffic just stops, right?
	Okay. But that's what you can see.
	There's traffic being generated, traffic moving around in the game, and so...
	What happens to all of that traffic when the current traffic stops?
	Well, in the real world, I guess people say, oh, there's too much traffic.
	I'll stop leaving my home. I'll postpone my trip.
	But, you know, so the whole domino thing, what happens if the traffic stops?
	What happens if somebody decides to open a door that you weren't expecting them to open?
	What happens if they come to the edge of the ocean and they always do this?
	People are like, I'm just going to swim as far and as down as I can possibly go.
	When do you stop them? And what happens when you stop them and what's down there?
	And what if they take a bomb that's waterproof down to the bottom and then, right?
	They blow up. Sorry, this is getting at me all kinds of NSA people.
	I'm just talking about a video game here, right?
	What happens? And so everything, particularly in a first person, right?
	Everything interacts with everything else.
	And that's why if you've got something like Minecraft, it's pretty simple.
	You know, you've got blocks, you've got things.
	It's not that complicated, right?
	And Minecraft doesn't have NPCs who do anything other than go around going, right?
	But if you've got big complex stories with choices that are supposed to have ripple effects and then people can do whatever they want and they can climb up the outside to build it, you can't possibly test for everything.
	And so every feature you add has impacts on every other feature.
	You've got one feature, you add another feature, those two interact, right?
	You add another feature, you've got three interactions, three times three.
	It is an exponential growth in complexity.
	And so you've got to top out at a certain number of features.
	You've got to top out at a certain number of features because you've got a thousand features and the next feature has to interact with all those thousand features.
	And each one of them may interfere with the other one.
	So it could be a million different interactions just for adding one more feature.
	So what happened, I'm guessing, is they got all this money, got all this hype, got all this investment, and they thought more money makes for a better game.
	And it kind of makes sense from an engineering standpoint, if it's just physical engineering, right?
	Because if you add a new bumper to a Lamborghini, it doesn't affect the engine.
	Software is not like that. You touch one thing in software, the ripple effect on everything goes insane.
	It goes insane.
	Plus, you're developing for multiple systems.
	Oh, we added a new feature.
	Well, is that really going to work on an Xbox One or a PS4? Is it really going to work that well on those things?
	What about a low-end PC? And so software is an ecosystem.
	It is not a thing.
	It's not a thing. If you hang a pair of dice from a Camaro rear-view mirror, it doesn't affect how the air filters work, really, right?
	It doesn't affect the acceleration.
	But everything you touch in software affects absolutely everything else.
	And so they kept adding features, thinking that it's linear, right?
	But it's not. Feature complexity in software is...
	Not only exponential, it's asymptotic.
	You never touch perfection.
	The more features you add. Now, you can go back to some of the Grand Theft Auto stuff where they dropped $100 million and it took forever and, you know, you eat more, you get fat and, like, all of this kind of stuff, right?
	Or, I mean, some of the detail in those games is crazy.
	Like, if you are listening to the radio and you drive past a cell tower, the radio will get distorted.
	Like, really, really wild detailed stuff.
	Or Red Dead Redemption 2 where, you know, you can have creepy little Easter eggs like a story is told in one part of the map and in another part of the map you hear whispering in the wood that tells the same story and...
	And all of that, right?
	So... But this kind of game...
	Like, the moment somebody says open world...
	I mean, I guess you could say Minecraft is open world, but it's not very complex.
	The moment somebody says open world...
	Every action you take affects everything else in the game.
	It's like, oh my god.
	Like, that's so ridiculously complex.
	It's untestable. It's untestable.
	Now, if they had chosen fewer features...
	Then they would have achieved more game.
	But because they chose so many features, I can guarantee you, from my perspective, what happened was they chose all these features, they tried to implement them, they found them unworkable, untestable, and then in order to make due date, they just had to strip stuff out.
	Now, what happened was they kind of got a tumor, so to speak.
	Like, they got investment that isn't growth, like, yay, like muscle, it's growth like a tumor.
	And so when the government poured money in, investors then poured in, and they got so much money, and it's like, just hire more people, and we'll have more scope, and we'll have a wish list, and all of that.
	And hiring more people in software very often makes things worse, not better.
	And if you've never run, and I spent, I did this for many, many, many years, run really complex software projects.
	And hiring more people is not an answer.
	Nine times out of ten.
	Because you end up training people, and the people who are more experienced end up having their code impacted by somebody who's less experienced, and you end up with a multiplicity of testing scenarios that becomes...
	Impossible. There are so many iterations that can occur.
	Your testing pathway, your testing robots, and so on simply cannot.
	Unless I wrote tons of code to test the software, I wrote tons of code to double-check everything.
	I automated as much as humanly possible in the software, and what we shipped was pretty stable.
	But, yeah, more features is unless everything's fully automated...
	And in this case, it can't be, because you have an open-world scenario where anyone can do anything with anything.
	You've got all these items, and you can do just about anything you want.
	And what happens if somebody sets off an explosion at the top of a building just as a helicopter is taking off?
	You know, they had all these things like back in the Grand Death Order days, games I've never played.
	I've just seen some videos. But back in the Grand Death Order days, if you committed a crime in front of the cops, the cops would arrest you.
	But in Cyberpunk 2077, you can commit a crime right in front of the cops and arrest you.
	And I'm sure they wanted to have that.
	And what happened was they, oh, the cops should arrest you.
	Maybe there should be a trial.
	If there's a trial, do you have a lawyer?
	Is there bail money? What are the laws?
	Like you can just go on and on and on.
	And the more complex you make things, And everybody wants to create a world that's so vivid and absorbing it's like the real world, but you can't!
	More money doesn't help, more people makes it worse.
	So I, you know, I used to say, I used to say, listen, if you want it done faster, I need fewer people, but I need a more narrow scope.
	Because everything you ask me to change impacts everything in the software.
	And so, I can get by with fewer people, but I need a more narrow scope.
	A narrow scope you can achieve, but if your scope extends to the point where you've got to hire a lot more people, you'll almost never make it.
	All right, so I just wanted to mention that because I thought it was kind of interesting, and it does sort of go on my history in the business world, which some of you may know, some of you may not, but I just wanted to mention it.
	Still doing the Peaceful Parenting podcast?
	When it comes up, for sure.
	The cops have shot me in Cyberpunk so many times.
	Yeah, it does happen for sure, and sometimes it doesn't, right?
	All right, let's see here.
	I was freaked out by the game Myst 25 years ago.
	I never played Myst myself.
	Cyberpunk was bragging about the huge female developer team.
	From your experience in the field, what were female developers like?
	So... So female developers, in my experience, were – it's the tortoise and the hare.
	Like, you know, the old story of the tortoise and the hare.
	The tortoise is the slow and steady wins the race, and the hare is just dialing all over the place.
	So the women were, in general, predictable, dependable, and would get their stuff done.
	But come 5 o'clock, they were out of there.
	The males would often – you know, we'd stay, we'd play some Quake – We'd bat around some ideas, we'd whiteboard some stuff, and they'd come up with cool ideas on the weekend, which they'd test out and bring back.
	And I remember one project that I had.
	We had to record everything that was being done in the database for auditing reasons, because the software that I created managed environmental health and safety issues to ensure regulatory compliance and reduce pollution and so on.
	And we had to store everything.
	Every time a record was changed, somebody had to enter a note, why it was changed, who they were, the date, and we had to store absolutely everything.
	And it also had to have a very accessible interface for all of that, right?
	Now, I'm sure that there's lots of mirroring software now that can do that, but back then you couldn't.
	So I had to use a make table query to go from all the join queries that underlay the forms.
	I'd just make a table out of all of that.
	We'd intercept before the save, store all the code, throw it over into the other place with the note, and it was all pretty wild.
	And we also had to have in that...
	A printing mechanism that was RTF-based, not forms-based, or what was called active reports back in the day.
	One weekend, I went and I figured out this whole replicate the tables – replicate all the queries with a make table – sorry, replicate all of the tables joined with queries into a make table query, capture the data before it was saved, throw the old values into the bucket table with a comment and all.
	And I figured that out in a weekend, which was a really fun technical challenge to do.
	I love it when you can automate this stuff too, by the way.
	It's fantastic. And a friend of mine who I was working with, he was working for me, he came up with how to figure out the placement of the controls on the form and then create it in an RTF-based report that we could spit out right away, which was brilliant. And the way he came up with it was really cool.
	So guys would come up with that kind of stuff.
	The women never did.
	The women never were like, oh, on the weekend I had this wild thought in the shower.
	Let's talk about the women in the shower.
	I had the wild thought when I was at the beach and I went home and I tried it out and this works and blah, blah, blah.
	So the men would come up with these amazing solutions, very creative, very powerful, and often reproducible and reusable, and the women generally wouldn't.
	However, the men would also sometimes get trapped into the niggly-piggly details of trying to make this tiny little thing work a little bit better and miss the big picture.
	So the curse of the smalls and the stars, as the old Phafford the Grey Mouser story went, is that they either get consumed by details and they have to kind of yank the back of their ponytails up and say, big picture, big picture, right?
	So that was the challenge.
	And women never got niggled by those kinds of OCD details.
	But the men would also come up with really, really great stuff.
	Sometimes on their own time, get really enthusiastic.
	The men wanted to come with me on sales and negotiation and technical calls.
	They really wanted to come, but the women never did, because they wanted to go home and be with their families and stuff like that.
	So yeah, there were some differences. Maybe they had a big female development team, in which case I wonder about the sort of buy-and-burn mentality that they had, like the crunch time that just went on forever.
	I think for more than a year they were working the same hours, and I don't think that would be the case.
	Alright, what else?
	Working on the weekends. Most companies have work-life balance.
	This company just has work-work balance.
	What? My God, you're terrible at listening.
	Do you not have any input or is it basically just when sounds hit my prejudice, it activates them and I pretend that I've been listening.
	I never said that he had to do this on the weekend.
	I said I was working on it on the weekend.
	He happened to work on it on the weekend.
	I never told him he had to. I never said you've got to solve this by Monday.
	He decided to solve this problem because, as dudes, we love to solve problems.
	The more complex the problem, the more elegant the solution, the more dopamine and serotonin we get.
	So I never said that he had to do it on the weekend at all.
	So I don't know. You're just not good at listening.
	You're not good at listening. All right.
	Let's see here. How long did you spend in the desert before finding friends who think like you?
	Where do you find quality friends?
	Well, I find quality friends in general through the show at the moment.
	How long did I spend in the desert?
	Definitely a year or two. Yeah, definitely a year or two.
	Games shouldn't attempt to simulate real life.
	People play games to escape real life.
	The medium is better suited to teach, convey...
	No, but people want to get into an alternative world that's really absorbing, and so you want it to...
	Have the richness of...
	The richness and complexity of life in a fantasy setting is very addictive, right?
	Which is why they promise an alternate reality that doesn't really happen.
	And if you don't want games to simulate real life, I would recommend not checking out a game I can't believe that was made, which was a flight simulator where you just play the passenger and coach.
	That's all you do. That's all you do.
	It's just wild.
	All right. Can we...
	What have we got here live?
	Stream channel? Sorry, I think they've just changed their interface!
	What have we got here? My channel!
	Alright, shall we kick out some...
	Voxday has completely lost his mind with this Q&A stuff.
	He's still pushing it. So sad.
	I'm sorry, I mean, I don't...
	I can't really comment on that.
	I mean, I think it's a shame if that's true, but I can't really comment on that.
	You'll note, I never push the...
	There's a plan.
	There's QAnon stuff. I think it's a bad idea.
	It's a very bad idea.
	All right. Let's throw out some lemons, shall we?
	Distribute rewards. That's basically my entire business model for philosophy.
	26 seconds. Be sure to sub.
	You'll get some lemons.
	QAnon is a psyop? Yeah, I wouldn't be at all surprised if QAnon came from intelligence agencies.
	I would not be at all surprised.
	Is it worth playing cyberpunk?
	I don't want anything violent and gross either.
	Like, I don't mind, I mean, I played Doom Eternal, which is totally cartoony violence, but I don't want to be shooting people who look like people, like torture, that kind of stuff, right?
	I don't want anything really like that.
	All right.
	Never met anybody that thinks like me.
	Well, you don't want people who think like you.
	You want people who think, right?
	Because the way you might not be correct, I might not be correct, right?
	All right. What else do we have here?
	Can you explain what functional free will is?
	No. I don't know what the term means.
	No one. All right.
	What do we got here? I think I'm Cyberpunk's biggest fan, no regrets.
	Alright, well, good. Good.
	Alright. It's insanely violent and gross, to be honest.
	Yeah, I wouldn't want that.
	I wouldn't like Dark Souls.
	But isn't that fighting demons or something like that?
	That's not so bad, right? Try racing games.
	Yeah. Do you think government will ban alt tech and Bitcoin?
	I don't think it'll be as strong as...
	I mean, they'll try and just regulate it and slow it down in general, right?
	Any new games you have played?
	I'm not playing any new games.
	I mean, I'll play Among Us with my daughter and friends, so...
	Oh, it wasn't for me, the one about free will.
	Is that right? Doesn't the against argument mean you can only be friends with ANCAPs?
	Well, I don't know whether you want to say ANCAPs or not, but I would say that it's really tough to be friends with people who want violence used against you for peaceful activities, right?
	They'll probably try to tax it.
	Well, but they do tax cryptos, right?
	How do I donate money on this site?
	It's too complicated. I don't think you can.
	Just go to freedomand.com.
	It's like... Do you not look at the...
	It says freedomand.com forward slash donate.
	Just go there. Just go there, please.
	Do you like Nintendo games like Mario, Breath of the Wild, etc.?
	I don't...
	I don't mean... I've never...
	I've never really gotten into the Japanese video game stuff.
	Yeah, I've just... I've never really gotten into the...
	I can't think of a single Japanese game that I've really gotten into.
	So maybe it's just a cultural thing or something like that, but...
	I sub at Free Domain.
	Easy peasy. Yes, that's true.
	Yes, that's true. The Soulsborne series is awesome.
	Best story in gaming. It's just brutally hard.
	Yeah, I mean, philosophy can be frustrating enough.
	I mostly go to video games to turn my brain off as much as humanly overwhelm myself with stimulation to cool off the neofrontal cortex.
	It's like a big water on the wetware to cool it down.
	Any other questions? Because I've got another thing to talk about.
	Ever try VR gaming?
	Oculus Quest? Wow. I've not played Kerbal Space Program, though.
	I've heard about it. I will tell you that VR gaming is alarming to me.
	Okay, so, you know, I was at a mall with my daughter once, and they had like a Minecraft, and you could put it in VR and look around and stuff like that.
	I am alarmed by it.
	And I'll tell you the particular combo that for me would be a deadly time sink would be Skyrim plus VR. Oh, man.
	That would probably not be...
	It would be insanely fun and very absorbing.
	But here's the thing. So when it comes to VR, I have to keep this, like, wall between myself and believing in the world because I think it could kind of make you crazy because it's like lucid dreaming with all of the detail and functionality of a video game programmed world.
	So I have a certain amount of hesitation in the same way, like I've never wanted to take drugs, like marijuana or anything like that.
	I've never wanted, because, you know, if I like it, that's bad, right?
	Because then I've got a whole complicated and often legal situation on my hands.
	It's messy and dangerous.
	And I've got to take all this stuff supplied by criminals.
	That's not good, right? Yeah.
	So if I like it, that's no upside to me there.
	And if I don't like it, well, why would I bother?
	And if it's neutral, who cares, right?
	Why take the risk? And so with me, with VR, I'm just like, oh, man.
	Like I had the helmet on and I was looking around in Minecraft and there was a joystick to walk around and stuff like that.
	It's a kind of out-of-body experience to have your brain believe that you're walking without your legs moving.
	It's kind of like being a ghost.
	Or somebody in a levitation paralysis chair or something.
	It's kind of weird. And I do have a certain amount of nervousness just around...
	I love Skyrim.
	I think it's just about the greatest game ever made because it happens to accord with my medieval Dungeons& Dragons sensibilities that I've had since I first read The Hobbit when I was like 12.
	And I think that Skyrim...
	And I love to explore.
	And one of the great tragedies in life is that...
	The plan has pretty much been explored by now, mostly by Google's robot cars.
	But, so to me, Skyrim is very absorbing because there's the exploration element, there's quest-y elements, there's fight-y elements, there's, you know, strategy elements.
	It's a really, really great game, and you can do just about everything with everything, and the graphics still hold up for me, particularly with the DLC add-ons, pretty, pretty well.
	I know people have done crazy stuff to Morrowind as well.
	But... I would be concerned about the effects on my rational empiricism to absorb myself considerably into a world that was wraparound, that was fully interactive in that way.
	I would have concerns about...
	I mean, I'll tell you, so when I was writing Almost, and the novel that I just recently spent this summer and fall reading is a giant audiobook like 99 chapters, hey, Almost 100...
	When I was in that world, it was so vivid to me.
	I could see the people. I could see every detail.
	I could see the kind of rugs that were on the floor of the characters.
	I could see the moles on their face.
	I could see every part of their hair.
	Everything was so vivid to me.
	It's kind of deranged going into a world that is so different from your own because the world is set from the First World War to the Second World War in various places in Europe.
	It's pretty, it can be pretty destabilizing to allow the full flood of imagination to take over your connection to simple empirical, the simple empirical world.
	So it's one thing to do that for the sake of plumbing the depths of human consciousness and emotions for a powerful story like Almost, but, you know, to go riding dragons in VR. I've got to tell you, I'm not entirely positive it would be super great for mental health.
	Now, maybe it doesn't affect other people as much, but given I have a history of significant madness on both sides of my mother and my father's family, I have to be kind of careful about this kind of stuff.
	For torture, I play Skyrim exclusively on Legendary Difficulty.
	Oh, interesting. Let's do some 7 Days to Die, Steph.
	I have several servers. I don't know what that...
	What is 7 Days to Die? I haven't tried VR. Yeah, they have Skyrim VR. No, I know.
	I know. I know. I don't know, man.
	Can confirm Skyrim VR has driven me insane.
	Yeah, I don't know. VR gaming is too physically exhausting to become addictive?
	Really? Is there a lot of exercise in VR? I thought you just joysticked and looked around.
	Am I wrong about that? Hitman 3 is in VR 2.
	Some nice cityscapes. You know, I gotta tell you, fooling your brain into really, really...
	Like, it's one thing to have something on a screen, right?
	But fooling your brain into thinking that you're actually shooting people?
	I don't know, man. I don't know.
	How many ANCAPs are appealed to by the eugenics nature of the free market?
	Okay, like, with all due respect, my friend, I don't want to diss people who are coming here, but no.
	No. No.
	Eugenics is a government program.
	The free market is not a government program.
	Eugenics is coercive.
	The initiation of the use of force, a violation of the non-aggression principle.
	The free market is the exact opposite.
	It's like saying, how many ANCAPs are appealed by the rapist nature of voluntary lovemaking?
	It's like, no, no, no, this doesn't...
	By the theft nature of charity.
	No, it's...
	Eugenics is a government program.
	Eugenics doesn't mean anything which affects reproduction.
	Otherwise, lipstick is eugenics like the Nazis, right?
	Eugenics is a specific government program where you make people infertile, you force people to have sex, you violently control their fertility and reproductive systems.
	There's nothing like that in the free market.
	Stop conflating these two things.
	Learn that words have a meaning and they matter.
	Sorry. Alright.
	I read Hobbit in paperback at 8.13 and grew up on D&D using pewter figures.
	Yeah, I remember painting those little figures as well, right?
	Alright. What else?
	Is it possible to justify objective morality from an atheistic point of view?
	Yeah. Absolutely.
	Absolutely. Absolutely. Hey, you know, if there is anyone out there, by the way, if there is anyone out there who's good at making mobile games, my daughter and I have a great idea for a mobile game.
	My programming is...
	End-user GUI and databases and all of that.
	So I did do video games way back in the day, but that was like playing Missile Graphics on an Atari 800 and ASCII on a PET-2K computer.
	I think things have changed just a little bit.
	So send me an email, operations at freedomain.com if you're good at mobile games, because I've got a really great idea.
	My daughter and I have a really great idea for a mobile game.
	All right. Let's see here.
	To justify objective morality from an atheistic point of view, yeah, for sure.
	Morality has to be universally preferable behavior, and generally it is the avoidance of particular kinds of behavior, such as rape, theft, assault, and murder.
	Now, you can't argue against universally preferable behavior.
	Because if you argue against universally preferable behavior, in other words, you say, the arguments for universally preferable behavior are false, and therefore you should stop making them, then you just displayed universally preferable behavior.
	In other words, you should not make false arguments, you should make true arguments.
	So the only people who could possibly object to universally preferable behavior are people who will never ever argue against it.
	So they're never part of the conversation.
	Like, you can never be beaten by somebody who never shows up to the tennis court, and you can never lose an argument to somebody who never shows up to argue.
	So the moment somebody corrects you about universally preferable behavior, they've just affirmed universally preferable behavior, right?
	So this is a basic logic 101 thing, which people seem to have trouble with for, I can only assume, emotionally ridiculous reasons.
	And so once we understand that universally preferable behavior is a valid concept, the question is, okay, what constitutes universally preferable behavior?
	Okay, so your first question is, let's look at theft.
	Can stealing be universally preferable behavior?
	In other words, can everyone steal and be stolen from at the same time?
	And the answer, of course, is no, for two reasons.
	One, it's practical.
	You can't both steal and be stolen from the same item at the same time.
	And number two, logically.
	So practically, it's not possible, and logically, it's certainly not possible.
	Because if stealing is universally preferable behavior, Let's say you have an iPad, right?
	If stealing is universally preferable behavior, then you want someone to steal it from you.
	But the moment you want them to take your property, they're not stealing anymore because stealing is when you don't want them to take your property.
	So stealing, both from a practical and a philosophical, a logical standpoint, stealing can never be universally preferable behavior.
	Look at something like assault.
	Well, assault is when you don't want someone to injure you.
	Because if you do want someone to injure you, It's surgery or it's boxing or you're at least willing to take that risk or hockey or, you know, whatever, right?
	And so assault is when somebody injures you very much against your will.
	So assault cannot be universally preferable behavior.
	You can't want to be assaulted because then it's not assault.
	The category evaporates if it becomes universally preferable behavior.
	It's a mirage you can never reach.
	Same thing with rape and with murder.
	And so rape, theft, assault and murder can never be universally preferable behaviors.
	And so then the question becomes, okay, well, what's the status of property rights?
	Okay, well, they're protected by the fact that theft cannot be universally preferable behavior.
	And if somebody says you don't own what you create, right, let's say you put forward the argument and say, we own the effects of our actions.
	Whether it's we sang a song, whether it's we punched someone, whether it's we cut down a tree and turned it into a courtroom, we own the effects of our actions.
	Now, if somebody says to you, your argument that we own the effects of our actions is wrong, you say, boom!
	You just affirmed my position.
	And they say, what are you talking about?
	Well, you just identified the argument as mine.
	In other words, I own the argument, the argument being the effects of my actions of speaking or writing the argument.
	So the moment somebody says to you, you made...
	A bad argument about owning the effects of your actions.
	You say, well, how do you know it's my argument?
	Well, you just said it. Do I own the effects of my actions?
	Yes. Okay, so you just affirmed it.
	So let's move on to saving the world.
	Nobody wants to do that last part, though.
	VR chat would be interesting with Steph as a girl.
	laughter That's going to keep you up tonight in more ways than one.
	All right. VR is controlled by moving your body, mostly upper, but ducking, turning, walking a little.
	Oh, don't tempt me with VR being exercise.
	It would be so cool if VR had a full room for physical feedback so you could get exercise.
	How did you manage not to have any girlfriends similar to your mother?
	You're assuming I didn't have any girlfriends similar to my mother.
	Not that bad. Not that bad.
	But I started...
	Oh, gosh.
	I started the self-knowledge stuff...
	Pretty early on. I mean, I was reading Nathaniel Brandon stuff in my sort of mid to late teens, and I started really working on my emotional stuff at about 18, and so I really have done a lot of work on self-knowledge and understanding myself, and that's what's allowed me, I think, to take such risks and come out as robust as I have and so on, right?
	So just really know yourself.
	Ah, hurt my neck playing a VR castle defense game.
	Oh, is there such a thing? All right.
	I'm a mobile engineer.
	Okay, do you know how to make mobile games?
	Let me know. Let's talk.
	All right. I say some of the zombies were strippers, so you could see a nipple here and there, and some people faint at that.
	What, zombie nipples?
	Really? Is that like the zombie guy who has sex with the prostitute and says, I left a tip?
	Oh, that's an old joke.
	That's an old joke, man.
	Alright, what have we got here?
	If sharing information online isn't theft, there's no physical removal of information, is piracy moral?
	That's an interesting question, right?
	So I'm not a big fan of intellectual property rights as a whole.
	I mean, everybody knows, I'm sure you know, that I give away all my work for free.
	I give away all my books for free, with one exception, the art of the argument, for various reasons I couldn't.
	And so I'm not a big fan of intellectual property rights.
	Now, for really good arguments against intellectual property rights...
	The person to go to, his name is Jeffrey Tucker, T-U-C-K-E-R, like the Carlson, of the Carlson variety.
	Jeffrey Tucker, J-E-F-F-R-E-Y. He wrote a book called It's a Jetson's World that's really good on a variety of things.
	He's a very elegant writer. And did I read that as an audiobook?
	I can't remember. I did something with it.
	Anyway, so, yeah, Jeffrey Tucker's very good, and you can look up some of the arguments against property rights from an ANCAP perspective.
	They're really worthwhile looking at.
	One of the Democrats is going to have the Nuremberg Unity Trials.
	Well, it won't be long.
	It won't be long. Did you do some IFS, Internal Family Systems?
	Yes, I did a lot of that stuff.
	I kept an entire journal during my years in therapy with wild conversations with various parts of myself, so...
	Ah, let's see here.
	I asked my father, may he rest in peace, once, if he thought all women were BSC? Basically sucking.
	He said we're all crazy.
	Find one that is your kind of crazy.
	No, that's not true. That's not true.
	I think I get it on the basic level.
	I'm not sure if I understand the first part about arguing against it proves UPB. Okay, no, it's a little tricky one.
	So most arguments in philosophy can be solved by simply slowing down and looking at what you're doing.
	So if somebody says, we can't trust the evidence of your senses, then they're relying on your senses being valid to transmit the argument that you can't trust the evidence of your senses.
	If somebody says to you, well, you don't exist, well, they're talking to you, right?
	They're assuming that you have to assume that you do exist in order to argue that you don't exist, right?
	So most philosophical arguments can be solved.
	Probably 90% of philosophical arguments can be solved by simply slowing the hell down, figuring out what you're doing, and what premises are necessary for you to act the way that you act, right?
	So it's really, really important. So people are going to try and drag you into all these abstractions, right?
	Just slow down.
	Say, okay, what is it that's necessary for us to even have this debate?
	So we have to accept that words have meanings.
	We're not just gobbledygook gibberish, right?
	Words have meanings. We have to accept that there's an objective reality between the two of us.
	We have to accept that we both exist.
	We have to accept that the senses are valid.
	They're not perfect, but they're valid, right?
	We have to accept that we own the effects of our actions, otherwise we have no idea who to reply to when somebody makes an argument.
	And we have to accept that truth is preferable to error, and consistency is preferable to randomness.
	Logic is preferable to Irrationality.
	All of these things must be accepted before you enter into a debate.
	So what will happen is people will enter into a debate and then act in complete opposition or argue in complete opposition to how they're acting.
	So they will tell you you can't trust the evidence of your senses.
	Like, okay, then clearly I can't understand that argument.
	But they're relying on your senses being valid enough and language having enough meaning that you can understand their argument.
	It's like mailing someone a letter saying...
	Letters never get delivered to the right person.
	Like you're having a pen pal debate with someone, right?
	And this is actually how I started way back in the day.
	I had a P.O. box of pen pal debates with people.
	This is why I appreciate the internet so much.
	So, if you're having a debate with someone and their argument is, letters never get delivered to the right person and they address it to you, then they're assuming that it's going to get addressed to you.
	So then if they argue letters never get addressed to the right person, then their argument contradicts the empiricism of their behavior.
	And I don't, you know, it's like I can't hear what you're saying over what you're doing.
	So if somebody comes to you and says, UPB is invalid, you should stop arguing for it, they're saying...
	That the senses are valid.
	Objective reality exists.
	You exist. Stefan Molyneux is responsible as the author for UPB as the content of the book, so he's a firm property rights.
	We own the effects of our actions.
	He's saying truth is infinitely preferable to error.
	Accuracy is infinitely preferable to inaccuracy.
	Logical consistency is infinitely preferable to logical inconsistency.
	This was backed with rationality rules when he accused me of begging the question Because I said, okay, if we assume this, these are the consequences.
	Oh, that's begging the question. It's like, no, it's not.
	It's a thought experiment. So if you simply slow down and say, okay, let's examine what assumptions we have to assume are true in order to have this debate.
	Do you believe that truth is preferable to error?
	Yes. Do you believe that logical consistency is preferable?
	To inconsistency, yes. Do you think that a theory that claims to describe reality should accurately predict reality?
	Yes. Okay.
	So you believe in property rights?
	Do you believe that reasoning is a preferable method to solving problems than violence?
	Well, of course, because he's coming at you with an argument, not a knife, right?
	So if you simply slow down and say, okay, before we start this debate, let's figure out all the things that we have to accept in order to have this debate, and let's not debate those.
	Because if the debate solves 90% of the philosophical issues, like the form of the debate solves 90% of the philosophical issues, great, then you can focus your attention on the 10% that really matters, right?
	So, yeah, somebody argues against UPB, they're demonstrating UPB, that it's universally preferable behavior to reject universally preferable behavior.
	It's like, come on, that's not a valid argument, right?
	All right here. Hey Steph, I have some questions about my life and wondering how am I getting in contact with you for these?
	Yeah, so I do call-in shows, two a week.
	And you can email me, call-in at freedomain.com.
	You rock, man! Great to listen to you here.
	Thanks for keeping on. Sent you a tip on Float.
	Yeah, float.app is pretty cool.
	Let's see here.
	Would saying I'm not claiming you shouldn't, just that your claim is incorrect.
	Be correct.
	Thank you.
	Well, you have to ask the person, is correct better than incorrect?
	Right? Is being correct better than being incorrect?
	Now, if they say no, then you have to say to them, why the fuck are you correcting me?
	If, like, I don't think that liking blue is better than liking red.
	It's a subjective taste thing.
	I don't care. You can like blue all you want.
	You can like red all you want. I don't care.
	But if I sit there and say it's objectively incorrect that you prefer blue, you should objectively prefer red, and then you ask me, do you think that one color is better than the other?
	I say no. And they say, well, why the hell are you correcting me then?
	Right? So it's just, you know, people would just try the sophist crap all the time, right?
	So if somebody is correcting you, they're saying that truth is better than falsehood, correction, correctness is better than incorrectness, doing all of that.
	And if they try to do all of this goopy shit where they're like, oh, I don't believe that anything's better than anything, then why the fuck are you talking to me?
	Jesus. Sorry, what are your views on altcoins?
	A lot of people say it's immoral scamming.
	I don't know. I mean, I'm sure some are good and some are bad.
	I don't know. Alright, I genuinely appreciate your breakdown on this.
	Been watching debates on this and trying to get a handle on it.
	Your videos really helped me out through college.
	I appreciate that. The calls are amazing.
	You give me so much clarity. Thank you so much.
	I really, really appreciate that.
	And I appreciate the calls too.
	They give great clarity to me as well.
	If you had to pick one, what would be the strongest argument against a libertarian or ANCAP society according to you?
	So, the only way that you, and you can see this, there's a pretty 22 million plus views now.
	Jordan Peterson with some...
	Oh, absolute Harridan from the BBC called, there was plenty of motivation to take me out.
	It just didn't work or something like that.
	And it's worth watching. Jordan Peterson is both brilliant and immensely frustrating when it comes to debate, right?
	And this is the woman, he said to her, because she was such a leftist feminist cliche bot that he said, look, it's like you're not even here.
	Like you're just boring, repeating arguments like you're not even here.
	And if you believe that there's this evil patriarchy dominating women, It's going to be bad for your relationship.
	It's like, no, no, no, I'm happily married.
	You go to her Wikipedia page.
	Oh, yeah, shortly after she got married, or maybe shortly after this interview, she just fell in love with someone else, don't you know?
	He made me feel special.
	Right? But, yeah, in that.
	Okay, so in that. He's talking about intelligence, abilities, competence not being evenly distributed.
	So what she does is she says, well, yeah, so what we do is we take from the rich and we give to the poor and we even things out a little, right?
	Because economic inequality is really, really bad, you see.
	Economic inequality is really, really bad.
	So we take from the rich and we give to the poor and that evens things out, right?
	So that seems like a compelling argument, right?
	It's all the way back to King Lear.
	Shakespeare puts everything incredibly beautifully, right?
	And he says that distribution should undo excess and each man have enough.
	Distribution, redistribution, taxation, welfare should undo excess.
	People have too much and each man should have enough.
	Distribution should undo excess and each man have enough.
	Beautiful. Couldn't put it any better than that, right?
	Or from each according to their ability, says Marx, to each according to their need, right?
	Sounds good, right?
	All you have to do is ignore the giant fucking gun in the room.
	That's all you have to do. All you have to do is just kind of step over the big smoking gun in the hundred million bodies or more, right?
	That's all you have to do. Because what people will get you to do, and it seems very compelling, is they'll get you to focus on economic inequality.
	Some people are rich, some people are poor, some people have money, some people aren't...
	But the only way to solve economic inequality is massive political inequality.
	Some people, a small group of people, have to have the right to transfer trillions of dollars at the point of a gun.
	That's pretty bad. I mean, it's really terrible.
	But give me economic inequality any day of the week and twice on Sundays.
	Because the really dangerous thing is this political inequality shit.
	That's the really dangerous stuff.
	That's what drives me nuts about Jordan Peterson.
	Oh yeah, well, redistributionism.
	Yeah, I can see that's a good argument.
	No, no, no, no. Because political inequality, some people having the right to transfer trillions of dollars and print money at whim and enslave the next generation in massive debt.
	People with violent, monopolistic, coercive power over an entire multi-trillion dollar economy Now that's the real inequality.
	Some guy has more money than you.
	That's a difference of degree. You got $10,000.
	He's got $100,000. This guy has a million.
	This guy has a billion. That's a difference of degree.
	And you can skate all up and down.
	You can U-boat that shit all the way up and down, right?
	You can make more. And most people do, right?
	They go poor, middle class, upper class, middle class, poor, whatever.
	They just go up and down, right?
	Up and down like the Assyrian Empire.
	So, economic inequality is just a difference of degree.
	Political inequality is a difference of kind and moral kind, fundamental kind.
	You can initiate the use of force to transfer property, and that's moral.
	If I do it, I go to jail.
	That's complete opposite.
	That's as big an inequality as you could possibly conceive of.
	Some people are moral to initiate force.
	Some people are evil to initiate force.
	That's as big a gap as you could conceive of.
	That's not a difference of degree.
	A difference of degree would be stealing a million dollars is worse than stealing a dollar.
	That's a difference of degree, but they're both still wrong.
	It's just a difference of degree, right?
	So they'll lure you in with this economic inequality shit, and then they'll slip in This roofie of, now we have the greatest possible span between ruler and citizen, political inequality, political opposites, moral opposites, use of force opposites, rules of engagement opposites.
	The mirage is economic inequality.
	The hellscape, when you wander into the desert, is this political opposites where they get to use force.
	To specifically deny to you what they do every day.
	To call themselves moral for doing what you are termed evil and thrown in jail for.
	That's the big inequality.
	That's what frustrates me about Jordan Peterson.
	He doesn't see that stuff. Do you think Kafka was ANCAP? No, I think he was...
	No, I don't think he was ANCAP. Alright, I'm going to close off, but I want to close off with something that's worth waiting for, because I did say I was going to give you some life-saving information.
	Okay. You guys, let me know.
	You heard of the term defu?
	Defu? Family of origin?
	Defu? It's like if you've got abusive parents and you decide not to see them, you can choose not to see them.
	It's like divorce, but it's a separation from an unchosen relationship.
	Divorce is separation from a chosen relationship, like your spouse.
	Defu is separation from an unchosen relationship, i.e., Parents, in general, right?
	It could be brother, sister, whatever, right?
	But unchosen relationships. You heard it, right?
	Okay, okay. Yes.
	I'm living it. I'm sorry about that.
	Difu, you're a wifu.
	Okay, so, listen.
	Oops, sorry about that. Just scratched the mic.
	Now, I'm going to give you guys...
	This could be genuinely powerful, maybe even life-saving for you, okay?
	It's really, really important. We are entering a pretty rough political passage, to put it mildly.
	Now, if you are pro-freedom, you might be a Republican.
	You might be a small government person.
	You might be a libertarian. You might be an ANCAP. You might be a leftist libertarian.
	You might be a socialist anarchist.
	You could be whatever, right?
	But you're not a...
	The union of government and corporate power is called fascism.
	Communism is when the government takes over the corporations and runs them internally.
	Fascism is when The enforcement algorithms are generally outsourced to corporations, right?
	So we're going into a, you know, kind of fascist era, which is not, you know, the mirage is, hey, you get free stuff from the welfare state.
	And the next thing you know, everybody and their dog from the whole planet over with no cultural continuity comes to get all the free stuff and your country gets swamped, right?
	That's, hey, free stuff, right?
	It's like the guys who made cyberpunk.
	They thought they were getting free stuff.
	From the government. Turns out they got massive PR problems, endless refunds, and now they're getting sued for misrepresentation, right?
	So, turns out it wasn't so free after all, because it never is, right?
	So, here's what you need to think about.
	It's not now. It may never happen.
	Probably is, though. Probably soon.
	Think about the people you break bread with.
	Think about the people you hang with.
	Think about the people you socialize with, you see.
	At some point, COVID's going to recede when they get what they want, right?
	And certainly COVID is going to recede to some degree under Biden.
	So... Let's say that someone, doesn't really matter who it is, someone comes up to someone you know, your brother, your sister, your brother-in-law, your aunt, uncle, friend, whatever, and they say, let's say your name is Bob, right?
	They say, do you think that Bob is a radical?
	Does Bob have wrong think?
	Does Bob, has he ever uttered this, the phrase, make America great again?
	Is it possible he could be dangerous?
	Is it possible he could be subversive?
	How much do you really know about him?
	Do you know what groups he's part of?
	Do you know who he hangs with?
	Do you know what are his perspectives about whatever, insert topic here, right?
	Now, I'm going to submit that in these troubled times, you kind of want people who are going to say, oh, yeah, lawful guy, peaceful solutions, he's a peaceful parent, you know, yeah, he got into Trump, but, you know, he just wanted lower taxes, blah, blah, blah, right?
	I mean, if you've got Trump derangement syndrome people in your life and somebody ever comes up to them and starts asking about your possible radicalization, well, I guess there's a couple of answers they could give, right? They could say, no, he's not a radical.
	He's just a thoughtful guy and blah, blah, blah, right?
	Or they could say, you know, he was pretty intense about that stuff.
	I don't know that he believed in the election.
	And he used the word quota once, and that's got Q in it, right?
	I don't know, man, right?
	Okay, that's...
	It could be a problem going forward, right?
	It could be a problem. Now, or they could say, oh, man, I haven't talked to that guy in forever.
	I have no idea. I have no idea what he's up to.
	I don't know. I think you've got to...
	I think it would be prudent to evaluate the people in your life and their level of honest reporting about your beliefs and perspectives.
	Would they rat you out? Would they paint you in a negative light?
	Are they angry at you? Did they dislike you?
	Did they think you were a racist or a whatever, misogynist?
	These are the days.
	And if there are people in your life who hold you in great contempt...
	I mean, it's one thing if they just hold you in great contempt, which I think is a pretty humiliating and god-awful way to go through life.
	But these days, you know, they're going to be trying to root out the bad elements in society as they see it, and you don't want to be anywhere near...
	There's a reason I haven't been doing politics for, like, ever, right?
	Seven, eight months, right? They're going to be kicking over a whole bunch of rocks!
	And what are the people who are in your life going to say about you?
	If they're asked, they may never be asked, may never happen, probably won't, but if it does, if it does, what are they going to say?
	It's really important to think about that these days, in my humble opinion.
	All right, so... Alright, let's see here.
	Yeah, a lot of suffering coming our way?
	Yeah. Well, you know, people either learn through reason or they learn through bitter experience.
	I don't know that the reason thing is working quite as well as we'd like it to.
	What if you don't care what they say and defend yourself?
	I think that's a terrible idea.
	It's a terrible idea. The solution isn't disavowal of your blood, you effing moral coward.
	What a small-hearted position to take.
	What a joke! Oh, apologize to Nick.
	I assume that's Nick Fuentes, right?
	Yeah, okay. So, you can...
	Look, you can completely reject my...
	This is just a thought I've had.
	You can completely reject it and you can say, no, no, I'm going to hang with my family even if they think I'm a Nazi.
	Okay. Then, yeah.
	We'll see. We'll see.
	Somebody said, I've already had this problem with my brother.
	He posted on Reddit about my, quote, radicalization at hundreds of thousands of people.
	So, yeah, it could be.
	It could be a challenge.
	It could be a challenge. All right.
	Okay. Well, listen, thanks, everyone, so much.
	A great pleasure to chat with you guys this evening.
	It is, you know, stay peaceful, stay reasonable, stay legal, stay safe, stay secure.
	We will get through all of this.
	And, um... I really appreciate everyone's support.
	If you can help out, as you know, it's been a hell of a year and a half, and it's almost two years now.
	It's almost two years since I first started getting suppressed, and it didn't exactly slow down.
	So, you can go to freedomain.com forward slash donate.
	Please check out the free books, freedomain.com forward slash almost.
	And fdrurl.com forward slash TGOA to go at.
	And, of course, all the books, freedomain.com forward slash books.
	You can get those for free. Really, really good audiobooks to check out and listen to.
	And I actually had a guy call me today.
	He's kind of an acquaintance, for sure, who was saying that he showed me a picture of his sleeve wet with tears about the end of my novel, almost, which is an incredible novel.
	And, of course, I poured my entire acting training and all of that into it.
	So, anyway. So, call in.
	C-A-L-L-I-N. Call in at freedomain.com.
	Yes. Thanks everyone so much.
	A great pleasure to chat. I hope that you will have a wonderful evening and I will speak to you guys soon.
	Let me know in the chat here if you'd like two live streams a week.
	I do enjoy them so much and you guys are just a great bunch of people to chat with during these times.
	So, Have yourself a great, great evening.
	Lots of love from up here. I hope you are staying healthy, staying safe.
	Get your exercise. Try and get some vitamin D as best you can.
	And that's it for my nagging.
	That's the start and end, the alpha and the omega of my nagging as a whole.
	So, lots of love.

▲