All Episodes
Previous Next
March 30, 2021 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
01:32:52
A Conversation with Stefan Molyneux - Jerm Warfare Interviews!
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Oh, yeah. yeah.
It is a Friday night here in Cape Town, California.
It's afternoon where Stefan Molyneux is and he is on the other side.
My name is Jerm. This is Jerm Warfare, The Battle of Ideas.
Stefan, it is a great pleasure to finally have you on my podcast.
It has been a long time that I've been trying to get you.
I'm so glad I finally got you.
Well, thanks. I appreciate that.
And, you know, after that introduction, I feel like I should be coming through the wall, like in full camo gear, you know, kicking my way in, doing a dive roll, coming up feral with someone in my sights and screaming something in Hebrew.
I don't know, something like that. Isn't it true, though?
I mean, we are in a war of sorts.
Oh, yeah. No, no.
Without a doubt. I mean...
This is the war that happens when you can't fight face to face, right?
We're in the war that happens when weapons of mass destruction have rendered conventional warfare obsolete.
So now it's a war of manipulation.
It's a war of propaganda.
It's a war of lies.
It's a war of race baiting.
It's a war of gender baiting.
And it's a war of just about everyone against the Christians and the philosophers.
So I feel like I'm in good company on the side of virtue.
No, no. Well, yeah.
I mean, you're preaching to the converted.
I mean, well, there we go. It's been a great show, Stefan.
Thank you for joining us. All right.
I'll just... Yeah, that was great.
Let me just go down here.
But I mean...
Yes, it's a war.
But is it one that can be won?
Well, yeah. All wars can be won.
It just depends which side you're rooting for.
You know, is it a war that could be won by the good guys?
That's... You know, that's the big question.
And as you know, we've got quite a lot of cards stacked against us, right?
I mean, we've got families where women, you know, are supposed to be this big maternal instinct, right?
Women, this maternal instinct is so strong, until some feminist comes along and says, you know...
Continuing your culture and your civilization and bringing the values your ancestors died for into the fertile minds of the young and allowing for the continuation of all that passed before for the tens of thousands of years of European or Western history.
You know, that sucks.
You know who's going to do that is some Guatemalan person who barely speaks English who's going to be raising one of eight kids in a room in a corner somewhere.
Those people are going to do a fantastic job.
What you need to do is you need to go off and start dreading your phone as a customer support rep for a department store.
That's going to be what's really fulfilling for you.
Not nurturing babies and children and supporting your husband and having a community and charities and getting involved in making the world a better place.
That sucks.
What you want to do is have a drive-by drop-off.
Maybe slow down a little when you hand your kids out the car and then just go off to some crappy job where you get taxed into oblivion, where your take-home pay after childcare costs and other expenses is about the same as some rice farmers stitching Nikes together in a Singapore factory in the middle of nowhere.
You're basically going to be slave laborer.
For corporate crapitalism.
And your kids are going to be raised by strangers who don't give a crap about them whatsoever.
And that's just a start.
And then the kids, of course, go into daycare where they're taught masturbation and nothing is real.
And men and women are exactly the same.
And then they go to primary school where they're taught that only the government can ever solve problems and the free market is totally evil.
Oh, and by the way, you should never use force to get what you want even though the entire school system is funded.
Right. For the force of taxation.
And then they go to high school where math is considered white supremacy.
And then they go to university where Marxism is the only path forward.
And they teach tolerance of everything except the 50% of people who want smaller government on this planet.
And then they go out into the workforce with their brains shattered and shattered.
By all of this propaganda.
And they're $40,000 in debt because the Marxists who claim to care for the working class have propagandized the working classes into funding their own self-destruction through woke indoctrination of Marxist ideologies.
And then the guys can't get dates.
The women sleep around and destroy the capacity to pair bonds.
And then a few... Broken souls wash up on the shores of conversations like this and hear a few sweet words of reason for the first time in their mortal existence.
And we kind of got a lot of unbreaking to do.
We got a lot of repair to do.
It's a lot easier to break things than it is to repair them.
And we got a lot of people washing up.
Have you got a mic to drop?
Yes, but I don't want to make that booming sound.
The boom should be the sonic boom of truth leaving the stratosphere at high speeds, not the mic landing on my lap.
So we've got a lot of work to do.
You've covered just about everything that's conceivable in the modern era.
But Stefan... For those who don't know who you are, if you don't mind, I'm going to read the absolutely amazing Wikipedia entry on you.
The opening paragraph is to die for.
You can. I mean, do you really want to give that garbage air time?
But yeah, if you want.
I mean, I hear it's not great.
I hear it's not great, but not objective.
And you know, here's the funny thing. In 2008, I had people who were...
Emailing me from universities and they were saying, professors say you can't cite Wikipedia as a source because anyone can type anything they want into that cesspool.
And so now the idea that Wikipedia is any kind of authority, it's just a way of laundering lies.
It's just a way of laundering lies and making them look more presentable.
I agree. In fact, I've been trying to run this campaign for the last two to three months.
I've also got a Wikipedia page and it's horrific.
And so I've been trying to run this campaign in which I get as many people as possible to troll the page, to put in as much fake information about me as possible.
But there's a catch. It has to stick.
Ah, very good.
You see, it mustn't get reverted.
So the idea is to fill it with utter nonsense.
From me being a former drag queen to transgender to everything possible.
The problem is when they do it, Wikipedia locks the page.
But anyway, I'm with you.
They've locked my page because they say they don't want it to be vandalized.
Which is kind of funny because the page itself is vandalism.
It is complete and total.
And I had a guy who was like, oh, I can fix that for you.
I'm like, hey, man, you know, take a run at it if you want.
And he created a little sandbox and just started putting together some objective facts.
You know, I've had hundreds of interviews with subject matter experts.
I've spoken at conferences all around the world.
I've, you know, published books and they've been pretty well received in many circles and so on.
And I've had nearly a billion views and downloads and book reads.
So, you know, Not too bad.
Just some facts. Not even anything that is subjective.
Like, he's a great guy.
And, you know, he plays a mean game of euchre or whatever.
Like, just objective facts that people have interviewed.
He tried to create this tiny little sandbox in the corner of Wikipedia, which is totally within his realm.
And he was an experienced editor.
And his entire account got deleted.
The sandbox got deleted.
And he wasn't allowed within 10,000 miles of my page.
Even though he was absolutely citing objective facts about who I've interviewed.
And that's it. So, no, Wikipedia is, yeah, even the founder of Wikipedia says, you know, everything that's great, except you, I, and, you know, maybe a couple other people, everything that's great gets taken over by psychos.
That's the story of civilization, you know.
Hey, we've got this great method of communication to spread ideas, facts, and arguments across the human landscape.
No! Let's use it like you'd sort of shit diarrhea into a fan or a jet engine to spray it across the universe.
Like, let's just use it to spread lies and slander and falsehoods.
Instead of using it to illuminate the human condition, yet let's use it as a BB gun to shoot out the last remaining five lives of reason and the ultimate night landscape of human degeneracy.
That's all it's used for these days, and it's a real shame.
It sounds like you're referring to CNN. Do you know, I did this when I did a documentary in Hong Kong, and I marched with the protesters and took facefalls of tear gas and really saw the stand-up to communism that was happening in Hong Kong.
This was right before, this is the end of 2019, right before COVID. The first murmurings of COVID were heard.
And it's pretty wild.
You go to places not in the West, not in the sort of Western Europe, North America kind of thing.
I went to Poland, could march around, and it was perfectly safe and perfectly happy and very positive.
I got to meet with senior members of the government and have great conversations and gone on the media.
I go to Hong Kong, I'm on the media, and everybody's fine.
You know, a couple of tough questions, which is perfectly fair.
And perfectly fine.
And so when you get outside of this, you know, Marxist-controlled media that's in the West, you can actually have some reasonable conversations.
But here, I mean, it's just a face blast of, like, sandblasting falsehoods that you're just going to try and struggle through.
And, you know, I mean, gosh, I still get contacted by reporters, the optimistic fools, thinking I'm going to have much to say to them at all because...
You know, I'd rather stick my hand in a blender than talk to a mainstream reporter.
I mean, good lord. That's like your psycho ex saying, hey, I've got some bunnies with your kids and a pot on the boil.
You want to come over for some dinner?
It's like, I really don't. I'd really rather run in the opposite direction.
It's a strange world for facts.
Well, without me having read Wikipedia, you've already given the rundown from Wikipedia of you.
But let's just quickly, just very quickly, so as not to be too boring, let's run through your background, Stefan, just for those who are listening who don't know who you are.
Oh, you want me to do it?
I thought you were going to ask a question there.
No, no, no. I'm waiting for you because I've found that it's more accurate.
Yeah, my background. So, I'm 54 years old and it was almost 40 years ago that I first got into philosophy.
I started reading Ayn Rand.
I started reading Aristotle, Plato's Dialogues, of course, and...
I worked in manual labor for a while after high school.
I just needed money to go to college and university and all that and had to support my family.
So I did gold panning and prospecting.
And, you know, a lot of people I talk to who claim to be big intellectuals have never actually lifted anything heavier than a pen in their life.
And they've never had it.
You know, they've never come home from a day's labor.
Where anything other than their pride hurts.
You know, like you have to do a job where you come home and you're like, oh man, that's going to feel that tomorrow.
Those kinds of jobs kind of ground you in reality.
And the empiricism of objectivism, the empiricism of Aristotelianism really rooted me and grounded me in reality.
Because, you know, we intellectuals, it's like we got these helium balloon heads.
Like one little snip and we just fly off into these platonic ideals of class and race and gender.
And we never actually ground ourselves in things that...
Are real things that you can't manipulate.
You know, being in a situation where you can't manipulate anything is really grounding for the personality.
And I worked... Man, I spent 18 months off and on, middle of nowhere.
Like... We're good to go.
So you can talk your way in and out of a whole bunch of crap in this universe, but not actual reality, not physical reality, not tangible.
You've got a snowmobile with 200 pounds of drill rods on the back.
You've just got to be careful, because if you get injured out there, you're probably going to die, because you're a couple of days from hospital, if you're lucky.
So... Being out there was great and then I started an undergraduate degree in English because my big goal was to be a writer and in particular a writer of fiction and those who are interested I've got free books available on my website fiction books which I think people really really enjoy and then I kind of got this weird feeling in English literature which is okay how do I know if I'm wrong?
You know, that's a really, really important thing.
Like, if you've ever been in a discipline and it's not falsifiable, you know, so I had all of these fairly artsy-fartsy professors who were like, okay, just tell me what your impressions of...
Just give me your impressions.
And it's like, okay, impressions?
Charlie Chaplin does impressions.
I'm not sure that intellectuals should do impressions.
And I would be writing these essays on various writers and be like, okay, how do I know if I'm wrong?
Like, there's no science to any of this.
It's just, you know, I could maybe piece some things together.
There's a narrative.
You know, the moment you use the word leitmotiv, your balls fall off.
I just wanted to point that out.
That's just something that happens in the world.
It's just a reality. Like, you hear a thunk, I just use the word leitmotiv.
Oh, man, that's it.
It's just like I had a vaccination.
So... So I just got really troubled and bothered by the fact that I couldn't be wrong.
And I just felt like it was giving jet fuel to the softest side of me.
Because I went from, you can't negotiate, you've got facts and drills and machinery, and you've got real stuff, to this airy-fairy, can't-be-wrong crap.
And I was like, no, that's not for me.
And I started doing a lot of acting.
I did acting in high school, and so I ended up auditioning for the National Theatre School, which is like, they take like 1% of Africans, and I I did a good job and I was there for a while, but it was a Marxist cesspit.
They loved me until I found out about my politics.
And then it turns out, you know, I just went from being a really great actor to just a terrible actor.
Like the moment that...
And it's so funny because they loved Shakespeare, who was a down-and-out capitalist to the core.
I mean, he wrote for money. He supported himself with money.
He wrote for the audience. And so these guys were all like, well, the guy who, you know, everyone that we put on here, Tennessee Williams and Edward Albee and Shakespeare...
They all wrote for money and they were all right out there in the market.
But man, if you're pro-market, we hate you and we will just try and destroy you.
So I had to sort of scoot out of that.
And then I wanted to finish my degree, but not in English literature.
I wanted to be in a discipline where I had even the remote possibility of being wrong.
So I went and studied history.
And this is back when history was still vaguely factual.
I mean, boy, nothing has shaken any sane person who looks at history now and realizes, you know, the lies that were told about Donald Trump, the lies that are told about COVID, the lies that are told about white people, the lies that are told about Western history.
I mean, the lies that are told about slavery and all of that.
My God, I mean, and this is stuff happening in real time.
Like, there are literally hundreds of millions of people around the world who literally believe that Donald Trump said that Nazis were fine people.
And even if they play the whole video, and it still doesn't penetrate them.
I mean, if they become impervious, like, there's no kryptonite that gets through the Superman denial of facts.
I must just point out, I'm not a Donald Trump fan at all.
No, so, and just lies.
Lies told, and there were other lies told about Hillary Clinton and so on, but they were usually told to improve her reputation, which is generally what you had to do to improve Hillary Clinton's reputation, because facts don't help in that matter.
No. I could actually be wrong.
I could have truth and falsehood.
And so I did my undergraduate in history.
I did a graduate degree in history.
And then I saw, you know, the grim march of endless diversity, which is completely falsely named.
Diversity is not diversity.
Diversity is just anti-white.
I think we know that, right? Yes.
That's the way that it always plays out.
So I could see this big march of diversity coming down the pipeline, plus the Marxists were taking root.
There was one or two Marxists when I was there who I'd argue ferociously with over the course of my undergraduate.
But you could just see this wall of Marxism coming in, and then this wall of if you're a white male, you've got no chance going forward.
Because, you know, that's who has the real power in society, is all the people you deny and attack and criticize.
You know, Voltaire's totally wrong if you want to know who rules over you, look at who you can't criticize.
He's totally wrong. White males are totally in charge of everything.
That's why we get excluded from everything and attacked and De-platformed and denied and blah blah blah.
It's all nonsense. So I ended up going into the software world because when I was in my early teens, I used an inheritance to buy a computer.
This is back when my first computer I programmed on had 2K of RAM. Nobody knows who's under 40 knows what that even means.
But So I learned how to program in my teens.
I did a lot of programming and then a friend of mine and I had an idea for a software program which would help companies reduce pollution and all of that and comply with regulations.
So we started this company and grew it and sold it and then I took a year off, wrote novels and then I got back into the software industry as an executive and then I had a fairly long commute so I started recording My thoughts, of which there were many, apparently. I'm close to 5,000 shows now, right?
So I started recording my thoughts in my car.
And I found out about podcasting.
I was like user number three on YouTube.
And it's really great that I helped so many people come to YouTube.
I helped them build up their platform from virtual obscurity.
And then they completely deleted me against their own terms of service for wrong thinking.
Thanks, guys. I'm so glad that I helped you build your site out of obscurity by constantly posting to it and bringing tens or hundreds of millions of people to your site.
Fantastic. I'm so glad we had such a fruitful and productive relationship at the end there because that's the kind of reciprocity that brings...
It's not you. It's not you, Stefan.
It's not you, Stefan. It's me.
That's right. It's not you.
It's me. So, yeah.
So anyway, I built the show.
I quit my regular career after people said that they would be happy to support what it is that I do.
And I grew it to a true monolith of a site and a reach.
I mean, I was in my peak, in my heyday.
It was, you know, close to 500,000 people on Twitter, a million subs on YouTube and, you know, hundreds of thousands of other people in various places.
I had 100,000 books downloaded and read every month and interviewed just about everybody on the planet.
And it was a glorious time.
It really was a glorious time.
And then, you know, there's nothing more challenging for evil than the success of virtue, right?
So then after strutting my Caesar Swingin' Dick stuff on the stage, the blowback inevitably came.
And this was related to the 2020 election, right?
Because I said some positive things about Trump to millions and millions of people in the 2016 election.
And of course, he only won by 70,000 votes.
They can count as well as just about anybody else.
So they needed to get anybody who might not be anti-Biden.
And also, I was pushing back against all the race-baiting narratives about Ahmaud Arbery.
I did this about George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin back in the day.
And I was pushing back very hard against the Gentle George stuff that was going on.
And... You know, the I can't breathe guy.
So, yeah, I think that I stood between the left and the political power that is the crack that they lust for.
And so I had to, you know, somewhat gently be moved aside and so went through a sort of significant wave of deplatforming.
And it's a mixed bag.
I mean, there's good and there's bad in it.
You know, it's that old thing where somebody asked somebody in China, I don't know, 50 years ago, they say, what do you think of the French Revolution?
And he said... It's too soon to tell.
And, you know, there's a point to that.
Is it good or is it bad?
I've kind of given up guessing these things.
I've really kind of given up guessing these things.
Because what you want in the moment is based upon the past, and yet what's coming is very hard to predict.
So in many ways, it's been a better life being deplatformed.
I agree. And, you know, Bitcoin is up, and I've moved back into the Bitcoin space.
And so, yeah, I mean, there's been some pluses.
There's been some minuses overall.
Not bad. What is it though, Stefan, that you've said that has led people to call you alt-right?
I mean alt-right I think is alt-right and far-right.
Now those are terms that I think don't actually exist but nevertheless there are terms that have been used in the media quite a lot about you.
What is it that you've said that has led them to say that and what do they mean by that?
Can we just start with the things that I haven't said that have caused that?
Because that's probably a shorter list.
No, listen, I mean...
There is a lot of anti-Christian and anti-white sentiment in the world at the moment.
And I provided a methodology through interviews with subject matter experts.
Like, I interviewed 17 world-leading experts on human intelligence and pointing out IQ differences on average between the races and between ethnicities.
And I say this with no sense of happiness.
It's a very tragic fact, and it's a very tragic situation, but I was sort of raised that avoiding tragedy is not a mature or responsible thing to do, or avoiding things because they feel bad or seem negative or ill uses might be made of the truth by bad intentioned people.
That's just not a mature thing to do.
That's like having some weird growth in your mouth and saying, well, I'm not going to a doctor because it might be bad news.
That's not a mature thing to do at all.
So in talking about that, the goal of the communists, and this is not something I've invented.
This is very clear.
It's in their writings from the 1920s onwards, is to gather as many different ethnicities into a particular location as possible and then exacerbate and goad racial tensions into a civil war wherein through the end of the day, through that chaos, they can gain political power.
That's straight up out of communist diktats from the international in the 1920s, and I've been talking about this for so many, many years.
That's multiculturalism.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, not multiculturalism because Europe is multicultural.
I mean, it's not like the Scottish culture is very different from the Greek culture.
It's very different from the... Right.
French culture. No, multiracial.
Multiracial societies. Yeah, multiracial societies.
And, you know, it is really tragic because we probably, at least this round in history, will never know how well the races could get along.
And I think that the races could get along quite well if we were allowed to talk honestly about differences between the races.
And there's no such thing as superiority or inferiority.
I know that people always accuse me of that.
I don't believe that any race is superior to any race or inferior to any race.
There are some differences which we need to talk about because they play out in a free market, right?
They play out in a free market.
You tend to get a lot more blacks on the NBA than East Asians, not because the NBA owners are racist against East Asians like Japanese, but because blacks have particular physical characteristics on average.
Again, you never judge an individual by group averages, but these group averages exist.
And so we've got some explanations as to differences in group outcomes in a free market that don't lead us to hatred.
You know, isn't that a good thing?
That's a great good thing. Yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah. Yeah.
You would start making demands and pounding the table and the hatred that would grow would be extraordinary.
Whereas if you said, okay, well, look, there are certainly some, what's it, Ying Mao or whatever his name is, like some Chinese guy who's huge in basketball, I guess, kind of literally.
So, yeah, there's some exceptions off the bell curve, which is great.
But if you just accept...
But Thomas Sowell has made the same argument.
Well, yeah, if there's a sensible argument to be made, Thomas Sowell has probably made it.
He's a great intellectual. And so if you are...
Koreans say, and you say, okay, well, Koreans on average, there's exceptions, tend to be, you know, shorter than, say, blacks or certainly Danish people seem to be pretty much skyscrapers.
And, you know, there's, you know, reflexes are fast, but they don't have the same fast-firing twitch muscles and so on.
And there are some cultural influences as well, of course.
You know, a lot of black kids grow up playing basketball because they don't tend to be very wealthy in America or other places.
So there's one ball and, you know, 10 kids, it's what they can afford and so on.
So we have explanations as to why there aren't that many East Asians in the basketball leagues and they're Interesting.
And we should talk about them because the only other alternative is to teach hatred and fear and resentment and panic.
And if there's any discrepancy in anything everywhere, it's due to endless white racism.
It's not going to work out well.
It's like saying, well, if there are wealthy people, we've got to blame X group.
I don't know, the Jews or sometimes the Chinese are blamed in foreign countries.
And the only reason that they're doing better is because They hate us all.
It's just a very bad and dangerous idea.
We saw that play out in the 20th century, but now seeing it play out in the 21st century is like, you know, we've done this shit before.
We really shouldn't be doing this again.
But Stefan, I mean, you're not saying anything profound, if I may be so bold.
You're making an observation that seems fairly obvious.
Is it racist for me to say that gangsterism seems to be...
Linked to black rap culture.
Does it make me a racist to make that observation?
Bill Cosby himself made the observation.
Nobody called him a racist.
They got Bill Cosby back pretty hard.
They had covered up Bill Cosby's prodigious crimes against almost exclusively white women, by the way.
Which, to me, would be a hate crime in general.
So Bill Cosby, he had all of his stuff covered up until he started pushing back against the everything is racism narrative, right?
Everything is racism all the time, no matter what.
And look, I have great sympathy.
I have great sympathy for the black community across the world.
It must be incredibly frustrating.
I mean, it's... They're not doing well in many circumstances, many situations.
I think it's a terrible situation, and I'm trying to do all I can to help as much as I can.
I mean, I've certainly helped out blacks on my show.
I've called in shows. I've sent them money to if they need therapy because they've gone through difficult childhoods.
I'm really, really happy to help. But fundamentally, you know, what's the big problem in the black community?
Well, there's two big problems in the black community in America.
I'm not sure where it is in South Africa.
The two big problems are fatherlessness and pedophilia.
These are two huge issues in the black community.
According to some reports, pretty credible, half of black girls report being raped by black men before they reach the age of 18.
That's half. Half of the black girls are going through child rape.
And of course, as you know, three quarters of the black Kids in America are growing up without fathers.
Now, I have a lot of sympathy, but I'm not sure.
Those seem to be bigger issues than what might be floating around in my head or your head or anybody's head.
Those seem to be bigger issues.
How can I care more about black kids than their own fathers do?
I don't know how I can do that.
What am I supposed to step in and just father everyone?
I can't do that, right?
And if the children, and the girls in particular, are being treated so brutally in the black community, and the children are being abandoned by the fathers, I don't know how that lands on me.
I don't want that. I've argued against that.
I've argued against the welfare state that facilitates it.
And so I would really like to help the black community, but I have found in general, as a whole, if somebody is going through a lot of problems, just some individual, let's call him Bob, right?
If Bob is going through a lot of problems in his life, and you kind of go in and you say, all of Bob's problems are my problems, and I'm the cause of all of Bob's problems, What happens to Bob's problems?
Do they get better? They don't.
They don't at all. It's called enabling.
You know, like if you have a husband, let's say you have a wife, right, with two dudes talking, you know, like you have a wife and she drinks all the time.
And she says, I drink because of you.
Because you have disappointed me and I don't have a Maserati and, you know, I don't have an Hermes bag or whatever, right?
And you say, you know what? It is because of me.
I'm the entire reason that you drink, and I am going to go and get alcohol for you, and I'm going to shield you from all the consequences of your own bad decisions.
A psychologist would look at you and say, you are addicted to her addiction.
You have now taken on all of her problems.
You've said that they're your problems, that she has no self-ownership, no capacity to change her own life.
It's all your fault that she drinks.
Then you have simply removed from her any capacity to stop drinking whatsoever.
I think taking on The sins of the world is an act of self-aggrandizing, pathological, altruism, masochism that is entirely dysfunctional.
And I have sympathy for the black community, sympathy for a wide variety of communities in the world.
However, I can't own those issues.
That would be to say that, well, this group or that group, well, they have no capacity to change things themselves.
It's all my fault. That is really destructive.
In fact, if you want to destroy a community, this was a psychologist who made this point, if you want to destroy an individual, all you have to do is shield him from the consequences of his own bad behavior, and you will create a criminal just about every single time.
Jesse Lee Peterson talked about this, Tom Sowell has talked about this, and they happen to be black, although non-blacks have talked about it as well.
I really want the black community to do better, but I don't see how me or you taking ownership for all the dysfunctions in that community and saying it's all our fault, that's paralyzing and making things worse.
If you really hate the black community, you take ownership for all their problems and say that they have no self-ownership of their own.
Oh, but come now, Stefan. You're just in denial.
The original sin is that you're white and you're male and that you're straight.
Yes, well, pleasant though it is to be judged by things of which I have absolutely no control.
And here's the thing, too. This divide-and-conquer stuff is so boring, too, right?
I have way more in common with a black taxpayer than I do with some white guy who's in charge of the Federal Reserve, right?
I mean, come on. I mean, we're all tax slaves.
We're all... It surfs on these tax farms called countries.
We all have a whole bunch of rulers who, you know, praise us to the skies to our face and then laugh about us and try and depopulate us behind our backs.
I mean, come on. You know, we all get together on this plantation that we call countries and try and figure out how we can actually become free rather than looking at each other like each other are the enemies.
You know, slavery in the modern world is totally horizontal.
It's not imposed from above.
It's all this horizontal attack.
But I mean, isn't that the major battle that we're facing?
It's the divide and conquer concept.
Sure. And it's males and females.
And it's just straights and gays, and it's races, and it's ethnicities, and it's religions.
And yeah, it's just...
And this is another reason why the sort of diversity, multiculturalism stuff is so attractive to the powers that be, because it just creates so many people and so many groups that you can set off against each other.
Like they say diversity is a strength.
It's like, well, it certainly is, but not for us, right?
Diversity is a strength for the powers that be.
But also, I mean... What does diversity even mean?
Thomas Sowell made a great comment about diversity in an interview years ago when he said, are you saying that a room full of black people isn't diverse?
Right. Well, you know, in America, if you look at the voting patterns, you could make a bit of a case for that, like 95% voting for the Democrats and so on.
Or look at Europe.
Is Europe not diverse? I mean, people talk about Africa like it's just one big blob.
No, exactly. Or the black community like it's one big blob.
Or Joe Biden saying to the blacks in America, if you don't vote for the Democrats, you're not actually black.
I mean, can you imagine?
So, no. And here's the thing, too.
Diversity should mean diversity of arguments.
And what's happened, of course, is that whenever somebody proposes an argument that the left disagrees with, then suddenly diversity goes out the window.
And now uniformity is the only thing that is allowed.
No questioning of the central narrative is allowed.
And deplatforming, which is far worse of punishment usually than what is imposed legally through relatively minor minds, it's all that.
But I mean, look, diversity isn't always a strength and I don't know why the left uses that argument.
Let me give an example. Tell me if I'm off track here.
Let's say my wife and I go to Europe for a holiday and we're on one of those tour buses and there are 30 people on the bus and we're the only two who speak English.
Everybody else speaks Japanese, Italian, Moroccan and all kinds of different languages.
That's diverse in terms of language but it's certainly not a strength because I have no idea what anybody is saying.
So the only person I'm going to sit with is my wife because I can only relate to her.
And if I happen to hear somebody on the bus who speaks English...
I'm going to probably congregate around that person.
Now, you could argue that we're diverse by virtue of the fact that we're individuals, and I think that's probably a strong argument.
But how would the language thing be?
A strength when you can't understand one another.
Of course it's not. And even if you just look at the language of liberty, that the vast majority of books that involve the free market, limited government or no government, and free speech, the vast majority of these books are available primarily, or at least the original language is English.
And so when you bring people in who can't even read the language of liberty, it's not going to work out particularly well.
Again, except for the powers that be who want to fragment us and give us no sense of cohesion and so on.
And the erasure is really catching up.
It used to be the case that Well, when I was a kid, you had negative historical figures around just to remind you of the bad times and serve as a warning and so on.
Like, they don't tear down Auschwitz, they serve it as a warning and rightly so.
And then, of course, negative...
Or problematic individuals like, you know, the Confederate generals in America or other places.
They've just got to be torn down. Got to be torn down, right?
And then they erase that.
And then they start to go for your own childhood.
Like, now you can't read Dr.
Seuss, and I'm sure the Berenstain Bears is next, and there are all of these different things that are problematic.
And then the current childhoods have got to be erased.
You can't have the Muppets, and Mr.
Potato Head is hanging by a thread because he's got the word mystery in it.
And then they erase your contemporary life because the people who speak truth And reasoned power start vanishing, you know, black and white style and photograph style from the people around you, and you then have no base.
You have no history.
You have no pride at all.
I mean, if you look at the movie Frozen 2, I watched this with my daughter, and the movie Frozen 2, I mean, come on, it's all about, well, you know, there were these wonderful noble natives who lived in North America, and then these evil European colonists came along and killed them all.
I'm all just like, man, I'm so sorry that the Europeans came along and interrupted the rapey, genocidal crap that was going on where you had in one place in Central America, you had a sacrifice of 60,000 children on one day.
I mean, come on.
I mean, gosh, how terrible.
It sounds like you're referring to that book.
Is it by Pinker?
The Noble Savage? No.
Who's it by? Oh, well, the noble savage goes back to Rousseau.
I don't know who's written about it more contemporaneously, but I'm sure it comes out of Howard Zinn and this kind of stuff.
And it's all this trap about the wonderful natives and the evil whiteys and so on.
And I don't know.
They lived so close in nature, they used every part of the buffalo.
It's like, oh, blech. Here's the thing, too.
People who are more concerned about the terrible effects of smallpox before there was even a germ theory a couple of hundred years ago, where the hell are they when there's a hundred million people slaughtered by communism in the 20th century alone?
That's a little bit more recent.
And if the Confederate people were still in charge of the universities, you think people would have something to say about it?
If the Nazis were still in charge of the universities, you don't think people would have something to say about it?
But we've got a doctrine that's killed 100 million people, conservatively speaking, 100 million people!
You know, that's, what, 15 times the Holocaust?
That's a lot of freaking bodies to pile up.
You pile those bodies to the sky, you can't even see the sky.
That's a hundred million people.
That's just the ones killed.
Not even the ones tortured, displaced, maimed.
Just killed. And people want to step over all of those bodies, and they say, well, it was really bad what happened to the natives with smallpox 250 years ago.
I was like, what are you talking about?
What are you talking about?
There's 100 million bodies, and the people who espouse that doctrine are still in charge of major cultural, educational institutions in the West.
There are tens of thousands of outright Marxists indoctrinating the young.
Do you want to talk about smallpox in the 17th century?
Are you insane?
Well, they're not insane. Of course, it's entirely purposeful.
Sure. But I mean, James Lindsay was on my podcast and he eludes to the fact, in his view, that sort of this post-modernism, which I think is part and parcel of what you're referring to, he says that it's essentially a mental illness.
It's a mental disease that It's not as though it's a conspiracy.
I mean, look, I'm all for conspiracies and I'm not anti-conspiracy.
In fact, it's stupid, Stefan, to think that conspiracies don't happen.
The only conspiracy theory that counts is central banking.
But anyway, go on. Well, Catherine Austen Fitz was on my show, so she'll agree with you.
But he was saying, and Peter Boghossian also, who was on my podcast, said precisely the same thing, that this is something that seems to travel between people sort of subconsciously.
It sounds noble.
That's the thing. It sounds virtuous.
Isn't it right, Stefan? I mean, come on.
Why would you want black people to be oppressed, Stefan?
Why would you want women to earn less than men?
Right. Why do you want the poor to die in the streets and the sick to not get healthcare?
Okay, so is this a family-friendly show for language?
Yes, man. I just want to gauge. I don't want to jump in the deep end.
We're on a dedicated server.
You can say whatever you like. If you're going to ask me about postmodernism, I can't promise totally clean language.
You can say whatever you want, my friend.
And here's my little cup of water.
There's a reason why we aren't on YouTube anymore.
Let's go back to diversity and we'll get to postmodernism.
So diversity is fantastic if you have a common methodology.
In other words, diversity of opinion from scientists is wonderful as long as you've got the scientific method, which is the methodology you use to resolve differences of arguments, differences of opinions.
That's the deal. That's what it's for.
If you have diversity without a common methodology, then you get war.
They say diversity plus proximity equals war.
I don't think that's true. Because, again, you have lots of people with different theories of physics.
You've got superstring people.
You've got dark matter people.
You've got all this kind of stuff. But they all have a methodology they can resolve their disputes with.
So diversity plus proximity plus no common standard, no rational standard, that's war.
I mean, that's without a doubt war.
So it's not enough to just gather people who disagree together.
You also have to destroy any standard by which they might reach agreement.
Any standard by which they might reach agreement.
Now, why do people want to destroy reason?
Post-modernism, right?
Why do they want to destroy it?
Why do they say, well, reason is Western imperialism, reason is white supremacy, which is, to me, a completely racist thing to say, because you're saying that non-whites can't be rational?
Come on, people! Give me a break.
So, the only reason that you'd want to destroy reason is that your theory is a total bullshit.
I mean, it's as simple as that.
The only reason that you'd want to destroy rationality as standard is that your bullshit can't pass rational muster.
So of course you're going to want to get, you know, like the Catholic Church and its extremists in the sort of post-Aristotelian 14th and 15th centuries had certain sectors within it that were quite horribly oppositional to science because science degraded the possibility of miracles by saying that matter had absolute properties and physical standards were absolute and therefore miracles were impossible.
So there was a tension there, right?
And so if you are putting forward an argument, and one of the worst things that happened to philosophy was the economic failure of communism, because once you had the empirical evidence that communism doesn't work, and, you know, people say, well, it doesn't work, and they still say this thing, well, it's a great idea, it just doesn't work in practice, you know, it's like, no, no, no, if it doesn't work in practice...
It's a bad idea. Like, you don't get to say, well, my bridge plan is a really great bridge plan, except that it falls down when a feather lands on it.
It's like, no, then it's not a great bridge plan, because the whole point of a bridge is to not fall down when feathers and trucks land on it, right?
So, they say it's a great idea.
It doesn't work in practice. Yeah, but this time it will work, Stefan.
Oh yeah, no, no, this time.
Yeah, but that's what serial killers say.
That's what serial rapists say.
This time, I won't kill again.
But that's exactly how they put themselves in situations where they will kill again.
Or maybe serial rapists say, this time when I rape the woman, she'll fall in love with me.
Because anime or something.
I don't know, right? So, no, that's how you lure yourself back into evil and saying this time evil is going to do much better.
This time, oh, this time when I go Dostoevsky style to the gambling casino, this time I'm going to win a million dollars.
It's like that's how you get yourself back into these situations.
I promise, scout's honor. Yeah, just one more.
Just one more. So when it became enormously clear, so the theory as to why communism was going to fail was outlined by Ludwig von Mises as back as the 1920s.
It's pretty, pretty obvious.
And the basic reason why communism fails is no price mechanism.
So price tells you where the resources should flow, both in terms of labor and capital and so on.
Without the price mechanism, there's simply no way to figure out where resources should be allocated.
It comes down to politics and crap like that.
It's incredibly inefficient. And so the theoretical opposition to communism was laid out 1920s, 1930s, very strong.
And then they managed to hold on to the bullshit of communism until the 1950s, right?
So Khrushchev gets in after Stalin.
And Khrushchev reveals Stalin's unbelievable levels of murderousness, which goes all the way back, of course.
People say, oh, Lenin was better, but Stalin was bad.
No, no, no.
Lenin started right off with concentration camps and purges and mass murders.
And he was the guy who starved the living shit out of the Christians in Ukraine during the holodomor for opposing the state control of the land.
And they turned Ukraine from the breadbasket of Europe into the coffin of emaciated corpses during the mass starvation that occurred there.
Same thing, of course, happened in the 60s under Mao when the farmers resisted collectivization of the farmland.
You just, OK, well, you just get to eat.
You get to rip open your pillows and eat feathers.
You get to rip tree bark off and try and find insects underneath you can eat.
And then you'll just just die.
Right.
And so the theoretical opposition was very clear.
And then when Khrushchev came out with the practical stuff, then it neither worked in theory, neither did it work in practice.
And the fact that the only thing that kept Russia going under communism and the same thing that keeps China going was just stealing everything they could get their hands on from the West intellectually and physically and through manipulation, right?
So once the theory and the practice of communism was proven both false, inefficient, and outright murderous, outright murderous to, again, the tens of millions of people by that time, well, then they said, okay, well, our theory has been proven wrong both in theory and in practice.
So reason and evidence have completely repudiated our theory.
So clearly, the solution is not to get rid of the theory, but to get rid of reason and evidence.
And so that way, if you're...
Bullshit theory, which is false, self-contradictory and utterly murderous.
It's exposed for having those terrible characteristics.
You simply remove all standards.
It's like if your mom tells you to clean up your room, and instead you just shoot out the light and brick up the window so she can't see anything.
Hey, look, my room's clean! That's not a good way to do it.
There's a book that I'm actually...
Well, I mean, I'm reading a few books.
I don't know if you do the same, but I kind of read multiple books at the same time.
I don't know if it's a good thing or a bad thing, but it's nevertheless one of those things that I do.
If they're complimentary, it can be good, but yeah.
One of the books I'm busy with is by a guy called Paul Rosenberg.
I think it's called Production vs.
Plunder. And that essentially confirms what you've just said.
That production is essentially a market way of...
It's not even a scientific method.
It's just natural human behavior.
And plunder is when you essentially are just taking, which is a communistic way of approaching the market.
And that always turns out to be more totalitarian and more economic.
In other words, it's what happened with the Romans.
The only way that they could expand the empire eventually was to keep plundering, which is one of the reasons why it collapsed, as opposed to having a production type of economy.
Anyway, I'm going off topic, but I'm just saying that it's a book that I'm currently reading that actually echoes what you're saying.
Oh, yeah. It's the makers and the takers, right?
Yeah. The makers and the takers.
There are people who produce stuff, and then there are people who just come and take that stuff, right?
There are people who, you know, bend sweat and brow and labor and sore muscles, and they clear land, and they plant crops, and they shield them from birds.
They hook up scarecrows, and they, you know, have the cows shit on the crops so that they grow into tasty bread, and that's a lot of work.
just grab a sword and hold some guy at sword point and take his stuff.
I mean, it's just a whole lot easier.
And from an amoral, purely mammalian standpoint, it's a very good survival strategy.
But the problem is that the whole society just staggers along on subsistence level, half starvation, which is basically almost all of human history, almost all the way across the world, the sort of modern world where we actually have enough to eat, In fact, too much to eat for many people, it seems.
I mean, that's extraordinarily out of The only people who ended slavery And not just in their own countries,
but across the world. And England only finished paying the price of ending slavery in the 1980s, believe it or not.
That's how much debt it costs.
So the only culture and racial group and religion that ended slavery, not just in their own countries, but around the world, the greatest treasure of moral advancement the world has ever experienced.
They're the only people castigated for racism and bigotry.
I mean, it is It's just projection and it's, you know, they'll look back in the future and just wonder how on earth we were able to tie our shoes since we believe such infinite cosmic spanning bullshit from dawn to dusk.
But yeah, so we got the makers and the takers.
Now what happens is when you get a free market, then you know what?
Here's a big secret, everyone.
Some people are really, really, really good at stuff.
Like, you ever go to karaoke night?
Some people are really, really, really good at that stuff.
And really bad. And the majority of people.
Don't invite me to sing, man.
The majority of people are really bad at most things.
Look at sports, right?
95% of the money goes to 5% of the people.
It's the same thing in business.
It's the same thing in music.
It's the same thing everywhere you go where there's a meritocracy.
A few hyper-genius people end up running the show.
It's true in land ownership.
It's true in podcasting.
95% of the money in the eyeballs and the attention goes to just like 5% of the people.
That's just what happens. It goes to Joe Rogan, Stephen.
Let's be honest. It goes to Joe Rogan.
That's right. So very few people control the market, so to speak.
And here's the thing.
So... What happens is some people become super popular, super wealthy, super rich.
Joe Rogan signed some deal with Spotify, like $100 million.
Now Spotify is involved with Tencent, which is involved with the Chinese Communist Party.
You couldn't give me $100 million to get involved with those guys, but that's Joe Rogan.
He's a different breed from me, so to speak, right?
So some people are just really, really good.
And you look at, if you've ever seen the Live Aid concert, right?
It's considered to be the best live performance in all of rock history, all of music history, was Freddie Mercury and the boys up there for the, what, 20 minutes that they did of Live Aid.
Now, Freddie Mercury was actually told by his doctor, whatever you do, man, don't sing.
Because, you know, he was already sick.
He had the flu.
He had throat problems.
He was brilliant. Yeah, he just went up and belted the living crap out of that thing, right?
Now, here, just look at Live Aid, right?
So, Live Aid, you had the very best musical acts across the entire world, all congregating in one place.
And what do people remember?
Phil Collins screwing up the intro to Against All Odds, and maybe Sting warbling a little bit way in his only dogs can hear my countertenor way.
And all people remember...
Is like Freddie Mercury.
If you look at Shakespeare, only about 20% of his plays are regularly produced.
If you look at Dickens, only about five of his 30 novels are ever read anymore.
So even the greatest geniuses have a more missed rate than hit rate.
And so this principle that when you have a meritocracy, the vast majority of people are going to completely fail, and a very few people are going to do extraordinarily well.
It's so easy for people to come in and say, You know, that guy, he's not that smart.
You know, that guy, he's not that great.
And they'll provide some other explanation outside of just genius meritocracy as to why he's doing so much better than you.
And I studied, when I did my documentary on Hong Kong, people can find this at freedomain.com forward slash documentaries.
I talked about this, that what happened was that the communists came in to China, which had thousands of years of very complicated Largely peaceful contracts about land.
They came in and they said, that guy who's got the big house and the pretty wife, And he's comfortable, and you're not doing that well.
Do you know the only reason he's doing well is he stole from you, man.
He stole from your ancestors.
He hijacked the land.
He kicked off your father.
You know, maybe your father was an alcoholic and sold his, like my grandfather was an alcoholic, sold all our family land off in Ireland for drink, which was a real shame, but it did give me some motivation to come out here in the hinterlands of the internet and hopefully spread a couple of seeds of wisdom.
It could be manure, too, but that also causes things to grow, so we'll go with that.
But the communists come along and say, well, the only reason so-and-so is doing better is he stole from you, and it's a fixed plate, and if he's got more, you've got less, and there's only so many slices in the pie, and if he's got two, it means you have one less, and they rouse this resentment of the mediocre, this resentment of the mediocre against the really productive.
If you don't have a way of filtering out people who suck from whatever it is that you do, it's never going to spread.
Like, I mean, if everybody got to play basketball, there would be no such thing as a basketball league.
If everybody got to sing at Live Aid, they wouldn't have raised a penny, right?
So the only way that anything can ever be great is relentlessly saying, nope, nope, nope, nope, nope.
You suck. You suck.
You suck. You're bad. I mean, look at American Idol, right?
You see these guys coming up and I'm going to sing Bohemian Rhapsody.
It's like, you're not. I bet you're not even going to come close to singing Bohemian Rhapsody, but it's going to be some painful falsetto that sounded like you sat on a cactus at high velocity.
The whole point of American Idol is saying to tens of thousands of people, you suck.
They say this sometimes pretty nicely.
They say, whatever it is, dog, this is not your thing.
It could be something else, but this isn't it.
Then they finally say no.
And then he, you know, somebody finally wins and even most of those people end up in obscurity.
Like there was some guy who just in someone or other who was the first guy with Kelly Clarkson and I don't know whatever happened to that guy.
So even when they say no to like 50,000 people and yes to one person.
That person's chances of having a big music career are still pretty tiny.
So you just say no.
That's what quality and civilization and having access is letting the smartest people have the most resources.
It's letting Freddie Mercury have the microphone to sing his songs, not me and not you.
I don't know if you can sing, but probably still not as well as Freddie Mercury.
No. So the whole point of civilization is you've got to say no to just about everyone.
Think of the number of people you've dated.
You know, I dated a lot of women, finally said yes to my wife 20 years ago, couldn't be happier.
I said no to a lot of women, said yes to one woman, and I've stuck with it.
When it comes to investment, I say no to just about everything except Bitcoin.
When it comes to, you know, like people who want to be on my show, I say no to just about everyone.
I'll come chat with you. You seem like a great guy.
You've had people on that I like.
So the whole point of civilization is letting resources land in the hands of the people who can make the best use of them.
It's called the Pareto principle.
The square root of any group of productive people produces half the value.
You've got 10,000 people in a company, 100 of them produce half the value.
And 10 of those produce half that value.
So you've got 10 people out of 10,000 producing fully 25% of value.
If you don't let those people make more, then they simply won't produce that value and you'll be back to subsistence starvation within half a generation, which is kind of what we're heading now.
But we say all the time, well, we've got to take the money away from the productive people who are investing it wisely and growing jobs and buying things and maximizing capital and creating wealth.
We've got to take away all the money from the people who are really good with money and give it to the people who are shitty with money.
You are actually paraphrasing a wonderful book that I read about two years ago.
I think it's called The Richest Man in Babylon.
Do you know the book? I don't, no.
It's a good title, though. It's an absolutely glorious book.
It was written, I think, in the 1930s.
And it's essentially...
It's basically saying what you're saying.
It's the same thing. It's a meritocratic argument, which seems to be the natural way of doing things.
And anything that goes...
It's just nature, man. It's just nature, correct.
It's just nature. It is the way it is.
And... For the music industry, I was in a garage band when I was in my teens.
So was I. Yeah, and listen, the music industry was entirely wise to tell me to not do that.
They're like, you are so right, I can't even tell you.
Roxanne! You are so right to tell me.
This isn't your thing, dog.
Maybe in 25 years they'll be podcasting and you can do that, but right now this is not your thing, dog.
I'm like, you know, absolutely right.
Absolutely right. You know, when I think of the women who I would ask out, and I was, you know, a pretty good-looking kid and had some charisma or whatever, right?
So a lot of girls would go out with me.
Some of the girls wouldn't. And, you know, when I look back in hindsight, the girls who wouldn't go out with me, I'm like, you know what?
You made the right call.
You know, I've seen how their lives have played out.
I was like, thank you for not going out with me because that would have been pretty bad.
Yeah. People saying no to you is just a way of trying to funnel you into something where you're really productive.
I wanted to get into the acting world, and once the reputation got out that I was a capitalist guy, it was like, we don't want to hire him.
Okay. I like the business world, but the software world has got certain elements of corruption in it.
I've written a whole novel about this.
Then it was like, I don't really want to do that.
And then I tried to... I was writing novels and I was getting some of the best education in Canada for writing novels.
I had agents and I just couldn't sell my books because they're, of course, anti-communist and communists around the publishing industry.
So for me, it was all just about being slowly shuffled into something which...
Now this, this is good.
This I can do. This is the right thing for me.
And now I'm being shuffled into something else, which is, you know, it'd be just the way that life goes when these sort of tarot decks come down.
But being shuffled out of stuff, you know, it hurts when you get rejected.
But all that that rejection is doing, if it's reasonable and fair, all that rejection is doing is putting you on a path to something different.
Which is really going to work for you, and you may not know what that is.
I mean, I used to give speeches alone in my car before there was even such a thing as podcasting.
I've been doing this forever, right?
And so, I mean, I wrote a manifesto when I was 24 years old, and I had a PO box.
I sent it out. I was engaged in massive email correspondences with people long before the internet, just pen and paper stuff, right?
So I've been doing this forever. Finally, you know, the spinning wheels hit the real traction of the internet, and I took a great leap forward.
And, you know, again, a billion views and downloads, that's pretty good, right?
I mean, that's pretty good for philosophy.
I think it's pretty good for the world.
But that came out of a whole bunch of people saying to me, this ain't your thing, dog.
You know, this ain't your thing, and they finally get the right place.
Yeah, but I mean, Stefan, I think one of the...
The accusations that can be thrown at you about being philosophical is that you're not supposed to have a binary response to anything.
You're supposed to just only ask questions and everything needs to be relative.
Right, right, right.
Well, you know, I was just reading the study just by coincidence this morning, which is if you get a PhD, you are 25 times more likely to have had a parent who's had a PhD.
Right. Right?
So, and it's the new aristocracy.
It's the new asshole lords and ladies of the statist court, right?
Because you're not supposed to be out there helping people in the real world as a philosopher.
You know, I tell you, another reason I got deplatformed, we could do this all day if you want, another reason I got deplatformed is because I'm massively pro-natal.
Like, I want people to have kids.
I want people, like, I want women, like, to hell with your, screw your career, screw your husband.
You know, to help with your career, have some babies.
You can have your career later. I'm always telling women, you know, one of my biggest tweets ever was when I was tweeting about how I said something like, oh, Taylor Swift just passed 30.
By this time, 90% of her eggs are already dead.
You know, I hope she thinks about having your babies.
She looks like she'd be a fun mom.
Oh, my God!
Oh, my lord above.
It's one thing if you're wandering around the backwoods of Vietnam and you feel a click at your foot.
It's like, yeah, okay, that could be a landmine for the war.
It's another thing if you're just strolling down.
I think I'll make a little tweet about Taylor Swift and Kitts.
Because that goes very much against the depopulation agenda.
Plus, there is a big dumbing down agenda.
And so the average single mom has an IQ in the 90s and not the high 90s either, right?
So what they do to dumb down the population is they go to all the smart women and they say, you know, being a housewife is totally boring.
It's beneath you.
You're built for so much better.
You're going to get so bored running around after your little snot-nosed kids and wiping diapers and blah, blah, blah.
That's got much to do with parenting at all anyway.
So what they do is they lure all of these smart women through vanity and thinking they'll be the next Plato or whatever.
Or Bill Gates, of course, a lot of the women in business end up like the woman who ran there and us, Elizabeth Holmes, rather than Steve Jobs, but that's another story.
So they lure these women out of the home and they lure them into the workforce where they just drive down the wages of men and drive up the taxes of the family and there's no net gain whatsoever.
Families are poorer now.
In after-tax income than they were in the 1950s when women stayed home.
Sure. Because it's supply and demand.
You get half the women to go into the workforce, just drive down the wages.
It's good for the capitalists.
It's good for the government because they get to pay tax these women.
And it kills your culture because, as you said at the beginning of the show, you drop your kids off as strangers.
Then the strangers aren't going to raise your kids with your values.
And then you wonder why they're alienated and depressed in their teens.
Hello!
It's called daycare where, you know, 20 hours or more a week in daycare, kids experience exactly the same psychological distress as if they've been left in the woods alone.
It's like maternal abandonment.
It's the same phenomenon.
So when I say have kids and so on, particularly to women who are listening to a philosophical podcast and therefore at least IQ 120 or more on average, and I say to them, you know, you've got tons of time to have a career and also I'm a stay-at-home dad.
And it's really exciting.
It's really intellectually challenging.
It's really stimulating. It's a great time.
It's not boring. I'm not just sitting here wiping diapers.
What an insulting way to talk about motherhood and parenting.
Like you're just a Kleenex to your baby's poop.
I mean, that's got almost nothing to do with it.
So another reason why I got deplatformed is the people who want to dumb down the population...
Don't like it when a smart guy tells smart women to have kids young.
Because, you know, intelligence largely passes through the maternal line.
Intelligence, or at least IQ, is 80 plus percent genetic by your late teens.
So if you want to dumb down the population, the welfare state will do that in a dysgenic way by taking money from smart women and giving money usually to less intelligent women.
And I say this without any prejudice.
It's just this fact, right?
We've got to deal with facts if we want to be rational.
And so the fact that I was out there, and I did a calculation just off that one tweet, that conservatively, and again, I counted the inbox of women saying, you know, I've always really thought that.
I really do want to have kids, but I felt really bad about it, and blah, blah, blah.
I created 60,000 people from that one tweet.
Wow. Because it was seen by so many people you can do in slice and dice, you can drill down on the numbers.
So I did a medium-sized town worth of babies from one tweet.
Now the powers that be don't want those babies around.
I mean, one of the things they love about COVID is the massive depopulation aspect going down the road of COVID, which is all the babies not being born because of COVID. It's way worse in terms of personalized life than the old people and the obese people who were dying.
And so that's just another reason that I'm an intellectual who actually tries to help people become happy in the here and now.
And not just theoretically, but by, you know, I'm married, I'm a stay-at-home dad, I live what I preach, I practice what I preach, and I'm encouraging other people to do all of that great and cool stuff.
And yeah, I mean, that definitely goes against the depopulation agenda.
Did you see that interview?
Was it on Fox a number of years ago?
Gavin McGinnis! Yes.
Yeah, I did. He was great in that.
Yeah, I mean, and he said to her, you're unhappy because you aren't married.
Well, no. So the feminists came across happy women in the 1950s.
And nothing bothers a feminist more than a happy woman if she's...
Well, a happy woman in general.
And so... We have a great weakness for status, right?
Which is why deplatforming can be bad for a man because we want chest-thumping status to be the big dick in the tribe or whatever, right?
So we have a great weakness for status.
And if you want to pursue the truth as a man, you have to wrestle with the great demon of status.
Now, for women, the great demon is vanity.
The great demon is vanity.
And so if you say to women, you're being oppressed, you're less than you should be, you're just staying home, and you're only being paid three quarters of what a man would make, even though you never want to work on an oil rig to save your life or your nails.
And so for women, if you tell them, oh, you can be all of this great stuff, and you're just being this little thing, I guess it's like the vanity is the status thing for men.
Then you can tempt them.
They'll just, oh, let's get rid of the kids.
Oh, let's divorce the husband.
Oh, let's just go into the workplace.
And they're so addicted to the vanity of that being a working woman is superior to being a woman at home, raising kids, that they will pursue this like lemmings right off a cliff of happiness.
The happiest women in the West were women in the 1950s.
Every single decade since then, women have become more and more and more unhappy.
And now... It's even worse because now women have the infinite waving penis wall of social media and they can post a picture of themselves in makeup and get all these thirsty betas out there and there are these dating apps where people are pinging them and men are pinging them all the time and they can't ever settle down because there's always just some better guy.
Ooh, the next ping could be Brad Pitt, you know, in whatever delusory world that they're living in.
So because they're just so dissatisfied now and they've broken their capacity to pair bond, promiscuity wrecks women in a way that it doesn't wreck men.
You know, men have their own weaknesses, but like in interpersonal conflicts, women tend to outmaster men, which is why men get so shredded by divorce and women not so much.
But when it comes to pair bonding and being used for sex, Man, women just get wiped out by that.
And divorce, as I've said before, it's dick dose dependent, right?
So the more sexual partners the woman has, the more likely she is to divorce you, the less pair bonding she has, the less hat.
So women have just become progressively more and more unhappy.
Now, any sane human being, you know, if you're on a diet and you gain weight like crazy, at some point, if your actual goal is to lose weight, you'll say, Maybe this diet is not working for me.
But this just grim march forward no matter what, it's because they want women to be unhappy.
Because unhappy women transfer that unhappiness to their children.
Unhappy women divorce, which makes their children less likely to marry, especially the sons.
Why is it that so many men aren't dating anymore?
Because they saw their fathers get completely destroyed through family courts and divorce proceedings, sexual abuse allegations in divorce and so on.
And so they don't want to get married again, which is part of that whole depopulation agenda.
And if they actually cared about women's happiness, they would be noting that women keep getting more and more unhappy and maybe changing their course.
But they don't. They're just trying to destroy society.
I want to go on with that point, but I've kept you longer than what you promised.
Let's do a little more.
I've been waiting for the perfect segue, and it just hasn't been created.
You've been waiting for me to take a breath.
Never do that. That's a bad idea.
No, I've been waiting because when you're not chatting over email, you mentioned Bitcoin and you threw it in the conversation, but I haven't been able to create a decent segue.
So I have to be quite blunt and say, well, let's segue into Bitcoin because I know it's something.
I'm here for a while, man.
Yeah, I know that you're a big fan of it.
I also am.
I own both Bitcoin and Ethereum or Ether.
And I want to know your views on it.
I've had a lot of people asking me to ask you to comment on cryptocurrency in general.
I think a good starting point is that it's a decentralized currency.
Anybody who is fairly anti-state or anti-centralization or anti-central banking would favor cryptocurrency.
Well, cryptocurrency is the only chance we've got outside of war.
I mean, outside of a brutal, bloody revolution to try and push back against the endless predations of the powers that be, in particular through fiat currency.
It's the only chance we've got.
I mean, the reason I'm so committed and have been since 2010, 2011 to cryptos is it's the peaceful way.
And I'm a big guy.
You know, I'm great with debates and arguments.
You know, I'm not so great in the old fistfights, right?
And so for me, that the strength is the most peaceful way that we can resolve the growing power that people have over us is through cryptocurrencies.
So cryptocurrencies, it's the people's money.
It's the people's money.
It's the greatest store of value that has ever been invented.
It's not controlled by anyone.
It's a store of value that's reached well over a trillion dollars with no CEO, no company, no marketing, no budget, no advertising, no state.
But Stefan, is it really money?
Is it really money?
You said it's the people's money.
Compared to what? Compared to this ass-wipe toilet paper that central banks can fart into existence by typing whatever the fuck they want into their own bank account?
That's not money. I mean, the whole essential question in philosophy is compared to what?
It's not real money.
First of all, define to me what real money is.
What is real money? Is it something the government decrees as money?
You've got to be kidding me.
That's like saying the only rights are the things that the government says you have, or the only truth is what the government says is true.
That's bullshit. Currency is what is chosen by the market to store value.
Now, there's no storing value.
In fiat currency, central banking currency is a vampire that sells your children to bribe you with bullshit nothing in the here and now, while pilfering 2-3% from your bank account on a good year every single year.
It is a theft mechanism that enslaves your children.
It's so weird to me.
It's like all these hyper-delicate people.
The Titanic is at like 44 fucking degrees.
And people are like, ah, it's just sliding.
The guy's falling down and gonging his head against the propeller.
And people are like, I'm not sure that that's the very best lifeboat.
I mean, are you fucking kidding me?
Okay, but let me play devil's advocate.
It's just binary.
It doesn't have any value.
It's not linked to anything, Stefan.
What is fiat currency linked to?
Okay, let me throw another spanner at you.
Okay, gold is physical.
It's been around for thousands of years.
You and I can both physically trade gold.
Well, we can't right now because we're literally geographically too far away.
But theoretically, we could meet and trade in gold or let's say silver.
Yeah. Yeah. Humans have agreed for thousands of years that gold and silver have got intrinsic value.
Humans agreed for 150,000 years that slavery was moral, so I don't care about the human agreement argument.
So I would just say to somebody, okay, get $10 million of gold and walk across a border.
Seriously. Go and buy a Tesla with a brick of gold.
Go and buy something in Thailand from America or South Africa with a couple of ounces of gold.
Just go for it, man. Tell me how it works.
Tell me the paperwork. Tell me how you send all of that stuff.
Tell me how you receive. That's all I want to hear.
You won't get over the border.
To me, it's like saying, Steph, you haven't beaten platform because you can still go to people's houses door to door and speak podcasts to them.
It's like, that's physical.
Physical? It's so funny to me that people will literally be listening to this and you know what?
We're just digital here, man.
I'm not actually in your house.
I'm not trapped in your TV here like a squid in a fish tank.
I'm not trapped here, man.
It's just digital. Almost everything you consume is digital.
You watch Netflix.
You read stuff online.
You take phone calls.
That's all digital. It's like, well, digital doesn't have that much value.
It's like... Are you kidding me?
All you do is digital. And then you're saying that somehow digital is doubtful.
I mean, just look in the mirror.
How much time do you spend on your phone, on your tablet, on the internet, listening, posting, blah, blah, blah?
I say, well, it's all digital. It's like, hello?
Digital is the thing, man.
We're only having this conversation because digital.
Let me now play into what you're saying.
So, as you know, I'm a political cartoonist and over the last, what, 10, 12 years, all of my work has been drawn digitally.
I don't have it physically on paper.
So, I guess you could argue then that it doesn't exist, which is nonsense because it does exist.
Well, do you think that there's any gold behind fiat currency?
No, there isn't. That shit's all been sold long ago.
Yeah. That's all gone.
I mean, originally, you know, so those I'm sure you know the history.
It's very briefly, right? So originally it was gold and then gold became dangerous to transport.
So they had physical paper notes that represented gold and then you blah, blah, blah, right?
Like checks, okay? So you were supposed to be able to redeem your paper currency for gold and blah, blah, blah.
And then at all, First World War, 1934, 1971, in staggered increments, they just got rid of all of that.
All the money. Is digital these days.
Oh yes, but there's physical dollars around that.
Yeah, yeah, I get it. And 40% of those have just been created in the last 12 months when economic activity has been virtually nil.
So that's all bullshit too.
So, do you think that there's some value in the Federal Reserve just typing something into their own bank account and calling themselves rich?
You understand that's totally digital.
But here's the thing. You've got a choice in digital.
And this is what confuses people, right?
So in digital, they think, oh, you know, I've got an MP3, a Bohemian Rhapsody.
I can just send that and copy and paste it.
I know it's not legal. Don't do it.
But, you know, you could, right?
Or some digital art, you can just copy and paste it and spread it all over the place.
And it's Because it can be reproduced forever and ever, it loses value.
Okay, well, that's via currency.
Because digital and scarcity...
There are two things that people don't know.
They understand scarcity in the physical world, right?
In South Africa, my father worked in South Africa for most of his career as a gold geologist and so on, right?
So I get all that. Gold, I've been down the mines.
It's horrible and hard to get out.
I went panning for it and gold panning for it and drilling for it up north in the middle of nowhere.
I get gold. I'm a uniquely qualified guy to say that gold is really, really hard.
To get out of the ground. I get that.
And so it's scarce. And people, oh, gold is scarce.
And I, yeah, okay, I get that. And they think, well, digital, man, it's just, it's, but here's the whole point of Bitcoin is that it's digital plus scarcity, like these non-fungible tokens, like the art stuff that you see these days.
So the fact that it's digital, there will only ever be 21 million of them.
And that means that if the, and it's fewer than 1% of people in the world all Bitcoin right now, and it's going to go up because fiat currency is going down.
You know, Bitcoin is the lifeboat that turns into the spaceship.
Like you get off the Titanic and you think, oh my God, I'm in a cold lifeboat.
It's lonely here. Okay, that's been Bitcoin for the last eight years, right?
Or from inception to eight or nine years.
Now it's turning into like one of these Elon Musk far propelled jetpacks to Mars or something like that.
It's going through the moon into the roof.
Because if a significant proportion of the world economy starts going into Bitcoin, and it is, we're not just making this up, it is.
Since I started doing my Bitcoin roundtables, the price has more than tripled or the value has more than tripled.
So, if you start to have to jam a significant proportion of the world's economy into 21 million Bitcoins, And Bitcoins are being withdrawn from the market.
I don't know if you follow this, I'm sure you do, but I don't know if people are following this.
You can see what's going on with people's Bitcoins.
You can see where they are, where they're going.
Now, some people, you don't know who the hell they are.
Like the 40th richest guy in the world, Satoshi, nobody knows who he is, the guy who made Bitcoin, right?
He's got a huge number of them.
Some people, you do know who they are, right?
Now, what you can do is you can see bitcoins going off the exchanges.
So bitcoins are stored on a public ledger.
And if you move them to trade them, you move them usually into an exchange where you can buy and sell the bitcoins, right?
Now, what's happening is these bitcoins are being pulled out of circulation.
Like, billions of dollars worth of Bitcoin just over the last couple of weeks are being pulled out of circulation.
Why? Because people ain't selling.
Now, there's a number of people who've dipped in and they've made triple their money, more power to them, fantastic.
But the hodlers, the people that are holding on for deal life and who have been for just about ever, they are the people who are pulling their Bitcoins out.
Why? Because Morgan Stanley says $400,000 American Bitcoin by the end of the year.
My particular prediction, 100K by the summer.
Because as you have a digital, which is incredibly valuable just because it can fly all over the place, you can walk across the border with millions of dollars of Bitcoin and a 12-word phrase in your head.
It's fungible. It's tradable.
It's instantaneous. It's cheap.
You can't beat it. I mean, it's like, do you go to the library or do you go to Amazon?
Come on. I mean, everybody knows how this works, right?
I mean, physical books are largely a thing of the past, and I still like them, but, you know, because it's just so much more convenient and easy, and you can make your notes, and you can carry it around, and you get a thousand books in your pocket with your Kobo or whatever.
So you've got the incredible fungibility and transferability and security Of digital, but it's limited.
And it's not limited like...
NFTs are limited like maybe somebody sells 100 copies of their thumbprint or whatever, right?
Okay, but everybody else can still see it and get the enjoyment out of it.
They can see pictures of it in the art world, right?
Oh, this picture sold for $60 million.
It's like you can still see the picture on the website.
You can still enjoy it if you want.
That's not the way it is with Bitcoin.
Bitcoin is digital, which is incredible.
And it's limited.
You can't counterfeit it.
You can hot load a book from somewhere.
You can back load an APK onto an Android phone.
You can jailbreak an iOS.
You can do all kinds of shit with a lot of digital stuff.
You cannot break Bitcoin.
It's transferable.
It's fungible. It's instantaneous virtually.
And it's blindingly secure.
And it's limited. And we don't know what to do with that yet, as far as our conception of the world goes.
Because we're so used to something which is limited, but not digital, like gold.
Or something which we think is limited, like fiat currency, but which is not, and it's actually digital.
But, I mean, if you tried to propose a cryptocurrency where you said, oh yeah, here's a cryptocurrency, everyone should buy it.
And by the way, I can create as many of these tokens or coins as I want in my basement at any time.
Nobody would buy that. If you try to launch a cryptocurrency that had the characteristics of fiat money, I mean, you'd be laughed out of the investment round table.
Like investors would be like, they'd be angry at you for wasting their time.
And so we now finally have technology that can replace bullshit we simply inherited.
So you think gold and silver are potentially a waste of time now?
Well, just look at the numbers.
I had this debate with Peter Schiff like six or seven years ago, Bitcoin versus gold.
And gold has barely moved and Bitcoin has gone to the moon.
So, look, gold is fine.
You know, I'm a big one for, you know, don't have all your eggs in one basket, although Bitcoin is not a bad basket to have.
So, I think there's room for some diversity and all of that.
And people say, oh, Bitcoin is not dual use like gold.
You can't do anything else with it.
No, that's good. Don't you want something that's specialized?
That's saying, like, you know, there's some James Bond cars which also turn into submarines.
And you say, well, my car is not worth that much because it's not also a submarine.
It's like, you just want it for driving around.
You don't want dual-use shit for your currency.
You want a currency to just be currency.
And, and, and, here's the most important thing.
Here's the most important thing.
If you care about the environment, if you care about nature, get your ass onto Bitcoin now.
Like, should have been 10 years ago, get it on now.
There is nothing more destructive to our precious and scarce natural resources than fiat currency.
Because, you know, all of that debt is consumption in the here and now, borrowed from the future.
Every piece of government debt is an additional consumption of scarce resources.
You know, America's gone through, what, eight massive stimulus packages where people have gone out and bought everything known to man?
Well, that's all ripped out of nature's precious bosom, and it's all debt-based.
Everything we borrow is pillaging nature now at the expense of the future.
If you care about nature, if you are an environmentalist, And this is where you find out whether environmentalists are actually environmentalists and actually care about nature or just bullshit watermelons, you know, like green on the outside, red on the inside, and useful idiots for communists.
Because fiat currency and national debts and deficit financing are the greatest destroyers.
Of nature. It's even worse than war.
And speaking of war, if you care about peace, you cannot fund endless wars with Bitcoin.
You cannot fund empires with fucking Bitcoin.
So if you care about human peace, if you care about America not having 750 goddamn army bases and military bases all over the world, if you don't like regime changes, if you don't want Endless mercenaries being funded all over the place to destabilize other governments, then you've got to get your ass off fiat currency and onto Bitcoin because you cannot do that shit with Bitcoin.
You cannot. The whole point of getting off the gold standard was because world wars were way too expensive for the gold standard.
And if they were too expensive for the gold standard, when governments had already tons and tons of them, Bitcoin is our only chance for a peaceful future.
And I say that with no sense of hyperbole.
It is our only chance.
For a peaceful transition of power from totalitarianism.
And it is our only chance to protect nature.
And it is our only chance.
It's our only chance to end war.
But Stefan, the Huffington Post says that mining cryptocurrency is very expensive and dangerous to the environment.
Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah. Unlike, say, war, which is funded through fiat currency.
Two trillion dollars of...
Oh, it's criminal and it's too much power.
So, first of all, in America, 67% of the power is wasted anyway, and Bitcoin is mostly harnessing that waste.
And secondly, if it gives us a chance, like, when Joe Biden dumps $2 trillion on the economy and people rush out and buy stuff, how much energy is consumed producing whatever the hell they want to buy for money that doesn't even exist?
To be fair, though, have you seen Joe Biden?
I don't think he uses much energy at all.
Joe Biden is the biggest boost to Bitcoin that could possibly be conceived of.
No, I'm not kidding. So I was like half and half about Joe Biden getting in because I'm like, okay, well, it's going to, you know, America's going to auger in towards socialism, but Bitcoin is going to go through the fucking roof with Joe Biden in power because he's just going to print his way into Weimar Republic style hyperinflation and people are going to find a way to take refuge.
And That's why I'm saying to people, I mean, I don't want to tell people to buy and sell anything.
Everybody's got to make their own decisions.
But my vision of the future, and it's a sad vision, I tried for a long time to avoid it.
What's going to happen in the future is there's going to be an aristocracy of people who own Bitcoin.
And I'm not talking about Ethers a little bit.
It's Bitcoin. Most of them are just distracting garbage and vanity projects.
But there's going to be people who own Bitcoin, and then it's going to be everybody else who's going to be put on UBI from us white paper currency produced by the state, which is going to be able to buy you virtually nothing.
So, you know, I'm saying look into it and understand it.
And again, I've been crystallizing this stuff since 2010, 2011.
And you know what they say about Bitcoin.
It's like buying a winning lottery ticket that pays off in 10 years.
So something to think about.
Stefan, there is a lot of demand for you and me to have round two because there's just so much to talk about.
Put them up, man. Put them up.
No, that's great. Listen, we don't want to exhaust the audience.
And we've done 90 minutes and there are still a pile of talking points that I haven't even got to yet.
We've done like 3% of the stuff I talk about, so yeah, we can do it again.
Yeah, for sure. But I wanted to say, though, that one of the great things about...
I mean, I am a cryptocurrency fan myself.
One of the great things is that I can literally, like, right now on my phone, I can send you money.
I mean, isn't that incredible?
You know, it's remarkable.
One of the things I learned about...
So, my parents divorced when I was a baby.
And my father went to Africa.
I was born in Ireland.
I grew up in England.
And one of the things that I take pretty fucking personally when it comes to crypto is my childhood.
So my father did quite well as a gold geologist, and he owed child support and he owed alimony and so on.
My mother was very mentally unstable, not particularly well able to hold down a job when I got older.
But here's the thing. It was virtually impossible to get the money out of South Africa.
It was virtually impossible to get the money out of South Africa.
If it had been a Bitcoin situation, it would have happened like that.
And my childhood would have been entirely different.
It wouldn't have been hunger.
It wouldn't have been scraping together money for a sports team.
It wouldn't have been eviction notices and fearing that we'd be kicked out on the streets in the middle of winter.
It wouldn't have been me having three jobs in high school and junior high school and a paper route just to make ends meet.
I wouldn't have been banished to the frozen tundras of the north to make money for my family.
I mean, if it had been a Bitcoin universe, Then I could have had a reasonably comfortable childhood.
It's really, really important to look at the personal effects of this.
If you've had trouble collecting debts, if you've had trouble getting money across borders, if you've had trouble helping people out through charities and so on, you've got to look into this stuff, man.
This is the Esperanto, the truly unifying language of humanity.
This allows us to interact and discuss things economically.
In a way that's never been possible before.
Stefan, before you go, just quickly tell me about your South African connection.
I know you've been here a few times.
Sure. Yeah, so as I said, my father, sometimes he would come up to Ireland and we'd spend some time together in the summer.
When I was six, I went out and spent the summer in South Africa.
It's one of the most vivid and amazing memories of my childhood.
The land is a gift from the gods.
It's the usual thing that the more beautiful the landscape, the more crappy the politics.
It's just one of these things in life that generally goes that way.
And then I did come back in my mid-teens and spent another couple of months there.
And because my father was a geologist, he died last year, but he was a geologist, so we went all over.
I mean, we went into the bush.
We went to Cape Town.
We went to Johannesburg, which is where he was based.
We went through the Kruger National Park.
We went all over, and I really got to see...
Just the most amazing stuff, which, of course, is second nature to you.
But, you know, when I was growing up in England, it's a much more vivid landscape and a much more vivid animal scape than, you know, oh, I saw a robin in the mist in London, right?
So I do.
I love the country in many ways.
It is a wildly misunderstood country.
It's a wildly sabotaged country.
The communists, of course, have set their sights on race-baiting and destroying the white Christians there with ferals.
And ferocious abandon.
It's a great tragedy.
I'm glad that Peter Gabriel is so depressed.
I really am. I'm serious, man.
I'm serious. A lot of these 80s asshole musicians, they deserve being unhappy because they took simplistic moral dichotomies to a highly complex land and highly problematic solutions and they just said, white man bad.
And, you know, it was a brutal situation.
People don't know the history.
They don't know that the whites were there first.
They don't know that the land was largely empty.
They don't know that whites have been in South Africa longer than whites have been in America.
They don't know that it was an empty land brought to fruition by the Boers and then later by the other Europeans.
They don't know that the blacks swarmed down to escape black rule and to live in white generosity and then overwhelm the native population.
They think that there was this wonderful happy land of blacks that the whites came along and just enslaved.
And they've just all of history has been completely rewritten.
And a lot of it with the aid of these asshole ladies musicians.
I just wanted to point that out.
I hope that you choke on the anti-impressants, Peter Gabriel, because Biko was it was a pretty tragic piece of propaganda.
So sorry, I just wanted to mention that.
I like the song, but, you know.
Anybody ever deserves to be fat and ugly.
Anyway, sorry, go on. Just quickly, so you said you were in Cape Town.
That's my home, by the way. I live in Cape Town.
Yeah, I know, I know. Oh my gosh, I mean, if you could get a free market into South Africa, I'd never be anywhere else on the planet.
I'm telling you that right now.
Stefan, we've got lots more to chat about.
So you and I are going to have to stay in touch.
This has been an amazing 90 minutes.
It's the best way for me to start my weekend.
I can guarantee you that.
Appreciate it. I hope it was not too chatty boxy on my part, but these are all topics very close to my heart.
So I appreciate you introducing me to your audience.
If people want to find me, it's at freedomain.com.
Yes. And I really appreciate everybody's interest in that.
And I really, really appreciate your time today.
It was a great pleasure to chat. Yeah, I'm going to put you on my website and all that information as well tomorrow.
But, Stefan, thank you.
It's been an absolute pleasure.
You're welcome. Take care.
Talk soon. Bye. My name is Jerm.
▲
Export Selection