All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 12, 2021 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
01:27:06
9/11 AFTER 20 YEARS
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey everybody, Steph. Hope you're doing well.
20 years. 20 years, man.
20 years since 9-11.
20 years since 9-11.
Oh my. Oh my.
Oh my. Oh my.
How are you guys doing tonight? Have you been thinking about it today?
Where was I then? Don't forget Building 7.
Don't start me off annoyed when you can't do anything you want, I'm just telling you.
If you are going to...
Are you almost enlisted? If you're all going to drop the...
I wouldn't even call it conspiracy theories.
The alternative theories about 9-11.
It's such a waste of time.
I mean, when I was in...
History class.
I took some summer school courses so I could get out of the hellhole of high school early and the teacher was a real psycho and he was really boring and I was 16 or 17 years old and I would occasionally just kind of half doze off because it was early morning classes and then when I went up to give a presentation Once,
he screamed at everyone to put their heads down on the desk and pretend to sleep, and then he turned to me and he said, it doesn't feel so good now, does it?
How do you feel when other people do?
And again, real psycho, right?
And a really bad hairpiece, I'll tell you that for sure.
But he brought in someone to go over the JFK assassination, right?
The Zapruder film, the grassy knoll, the sniper, and He was very keen on this kind of stuff, right?
Now, any event that you look at in history, particularly when you have a lot of data, any event that you look at in history is going to have inconsistencies, is going to have contradictions, is going to have problems, is going to have coincidences.
And I watched James Corbett, like, 9-11 explained in under five minutes or whatever it was.
I watched this last night. And yeah, there's a lot of hinky stuff.
But here's the thing. I'll tell you why, if you're interested in that kind of stuff.
And it is interesting. Don't get me wrong.
I mean, it is interesting and I'm skeptical and I know that there have been a lot of false flags in the past and so on.
But here's the thing. You don't need it.
And why you do need it, if you do need it, is an interesting question.
You don't need it. The state is a violation of the non-aggression principle.
What it does with that violation of the non-aggression principle is like asking what happens to your money after it gets stolen.
It doesn't matter what happens to your money after it's stolen from you.
What matters is that it's stolen from you.
So the government, as a violation of the non-aggression principle, because it initiates the use of force against its citizens, Let's say that all of the alternate theories regarding 9-11 are true.
I don't believe that they are, but let's say that they are.
Okay, so governments did terrible things with the money and power that they took from people by force.
You understand that the reason you would focus on a particular thing like 9-11 or the JFK assassination or Tuskegee experiments or whatever it is, is it's a way of drawing people's attention away from the essential moral issues regarding the state.
You're actually working for the state.
You're making things worse.
I'm sorry, you really are.
You really are.
Because you're saying this, what the government did, is really terrible.
By definition, that means that the essence of government is not terrible.
You say, oh, well, the government did really, really bad.
They shot JFK, whatever, it was an inside job and so on, right?
Even if you're 100% correct, don't think you are, but even if you're 100% correct, all you're doing is whitewashing everything else.
You're saying, okay, if you focus on some guy, let's say he's a serial killer, right?
And then you say, well, this murder he did was really terrible.
This murder he did was really terrible.
You understand? You're kind of whitewashing all the other murders.
You're focusing on one particular thing.
Now, I know people have the theory, well, if this is believed and if it's accepted and if it becomes widespread, people will wake up and blah blah blah.
No, no, no. It's the moral. All you need is the moral argument.
All you need is the moral argument, the non-aggression principle, property rights, self-ownership, free will, the gun in the room, as I sort of pointed out.
All you need, all you need is the moral argument.
And everything you do that distracts from the moral argument is a justification for immorality.
To take another analogy, if there was a serial killer around who tortured and slaughtered his victims in gruesome ways, and you said, I have absolute proof that he double parked during rush hour.
He double parked during rush hour.
You understand that by focusing on him double-parking during rush hour, or getting a speeding ticket, or kicking a dog, that you're saying that by focusing on that, you are over-leaping everything else that the serial killer has done.
By getting people to focus on that, you are avoiding the fundamental moral argument that he's a serial killer.
So, just don't...
You can if you want.
A guy can commit a hundred murders, but if you only have evidence of one, that's the only thing that truly matters.
You see, but you're making the case that you need proof of murder when you already have a confession.
I mean, Barack Obama said, the state is an agency of force.
It's political science 101.
The state is the legal entity with the monopoly on the initiation of the use of force in a geographical area.
So you already have a confession.
When you have a confession, why are you fussing about with esoteric details of one particular crime when you have a confession?
I don't know why you would do that other than you don't want to deal with the moral issues.
You want to skirt around the asbestos and the squibs and the freefall and Building 7 and where did the plane go and could the wingspan fit into the Pentagon and they were looking for two trillion dollars that was missing and the paperwork is all gone and they found a passport here and this impossible aerial maneuver and so on.
It's like, but you have a confession.
The state openly says it's an agency of coercion.
It just seems odd to me.
It seems odd to me.
It's like you don't want to just make the moral case.
The moral case you don't need evidence for.
You know, it's like if somebody comes along and says slavery is immoral because it's the initiation of the use of force and it denies self-ownership, you can't both have property and be property, right?
And so... And you say, well, but we're going to need to go around and interview a whole bunch of slaves and find out if all of them are miserable.
And it's like, what empirical evidence do you need when you have a clear violation of the non-aggression principle called slavery?
Rape is immoral. There is a minority of women who experience orgasm during rape.
that doesn't mean that rape is any less immoral.
Morality specifically denies empiricism.
Morality is the first principle.
In science, you need empiricism.
I get all of that. Certain epistemological conclusions, you will need empiricism.
Morality, this is the whole point of universally preferable behavior, morality does not require and in fact is undermined by a demand for empirical evidence.
What is the empirical evidence that rape is universally immoral?
Well, people don't like it, or women resist it, or men resist it.
It's like, okay, well, men and women resist a lot of things.
They resist taxation.
They resist censorship.
And certainly not everybody finds it universally wrong, because some people are rapists, damn their heights.
So if you start looking for empirical evidence when you already have a clear moral argument, it's because you want to avoid the clear moral argument.
That's all. If you are looking for complicated and convoluted empirical evidence for wrongdoing when you already have a clear moral argument and a confession in its essence, if you already have someone who's a serial killer who says, I kill for fun, I enjoy it, whatever, right?
And then you say, well, but that one murder is really complicated and we've got to get more evidence.
Like, it's...
No.
No. No. No, it's huge.
And you know, the CIA, I mean, who came up with the conspiracy theory term, the CIA regularly would release, like if the JFK stuff began to die down, then the CIA or the government would sometimes release more information just to fuel it back up again and have people distracted by the pursuit of this.
Complicated. And you're not a judge.
You're not a prosecutor.
You can't subpoena.
You can't demand evidence.
You can't cross-examine witnesses under oath.
I mean, you don't have these powers.
So the idea that amateur sleuths, I don't know, it just, it's a huge amount of time and energy that is consumed, and I would argue wasted.
Because here's the thing now, so the JFK thing, what is it, 64, 63, 63, or something like that, right?
So, come on, it's 60 years, almost, right?
It's 60 years.
And what has come of it?
What has come of hundreds of thousands of people pouring millions and millions of hours into the JFK thing?
Could Lee Harvey Oswald have reloaded twice and was there another shooter and let's look at the Superfooder film frame by frame and blah.
What has come of all of that?
And now 20 years after 9-11, all of the amount of time and energy that's been poured into analyzing frame by frame and could have fallen faster than free fall and who said pull the buildings and who profited from the airline stock being shorted the day before and okay, what has come of it?
What has come of it? What have you done with all of that?
Now, for me, I have convinced hundreds of thousands of people to stop hitting their children.
At least. Could be in the millions.
You know, 800 million views and downloads.
Could be in the millions. Let's just say...
Let's be conservative.
A couple of hundred thousand people I have convinced to not circumcise, to not hit their children, to not yell at their children.
That's what I've been able to achieve.
Now, let's say that they have two kids, so a million, two million kids, whatever it is.
A million, two million kids are not being hit, screamed at, circumcised, and abused because of what I've been doing.
That's just one of the many legacies that I have, but that's, right, and again, I think it's in the millions, many millions, but let's just say it's a million, two million, you know, So, that's a million or two million kids not genetically mutilated, a million or two million kids not beaten on a regular basis, and not abused, and not confined, and not tortured, and so on, right?
And peaceful parenting. I mean, that's just one of the things, but that's a pretty big thing.
So, you have gone frame by frame over every piece of video you can grab a hold of these complicated events.
And has that prevented one child from being beaten?
Has that prevented one child from being mutilated?
One child from being abused?
Well, I know it hasn't. You see, it's not about the world.
It's about you. It's about you and probably some personal issues that you have.
And I say this with affection. You're listening to this show, so I say this with affection.
I say this with some respect, and you care about the truth.
You're a moral person. I get all of that.
But you understand that you've just been kind of fools, right?
You've been kind of fools. If you're focusing on Identifying the moral arguments that are valid in society against institutionalized coercion and convincing people to not abuse their children.
That's something you have control over.
If you put out a very strong anti-child abuse message, who knows how many people will pick up on it.
But you don't want to do that, right, if you're into this other stuff.
You don't want to do that. Why?
Why? That's a clear moral benefit.
Not one of the JFK people, not one of the 9-11 people, have ever Through those arguments, convince someone not to hit a child.
How much initiation of the use of force has been reduced by focusing on these two events?
Just two events, could be any number, just these two events, right?
How much net reduction in the amount of violence in society has been achieved by focusing on 9-11 and JFK? I mean, to ask the question is to answer it.
How much net violence in society Have I been able to reduce?
With me and a camera. Me and a camera.
So let's just say a million kids not getting mutilated.
Well, I guess it would be half a million because they're boys, right?
So let's say half a million kids not being genital mutilated, and that goes forward because then they will not do it to their son, so that just goes forward and wider.
And let's say that the kids get hit once a week, right?
So once a week, and they get hit once a week for 10 years, right?
So that's 500 assaults, right?
So a million kids, that's 500 million Half a billion assaults in the world, conservatively, have been prevented by my show, by what I've been doing.
So you've been mucking about with asbestos and engineers and blueprints and specs and all of this, right?
And what have you achieved in terms of a net reduction in the amount of violence in the world?
Zero. And I say this again.
I know you care about truth. I respect that you want the truth.
But you've got to get your head out of your ass and start working to actually change things in the world.
Start working to actually change things in the world and leave the esoteric analysis to others.
What we do here is we empirically try to reduce the amount of violence that's actually in the world.
That's what we do here. That's what we do here.
That's what we do here. Now, I'm just talking about my own direct and immediate impact on the world.
And this is assuming that, I don't know, one to two percent of people end up not spanking.
It's probably way higher than this.
It's probably a billion, two billion assaults that I have prevented in this show over the last 16 years.
And that's just my direct influence.
Now, what about the people I convince to not hit their kids, to not circumcise their kids, to not abuse their kids?
And those people also go and talk to other people or other people come and say, wow, your children are really well behaved.
They're really, really pleasant. You really seem to love each other.
What do you do? Everywhere I go, I say, oh, we don't punish our daughter.
We don't have spanking. I just engage in conversations about it.
It spreads like you would not believe.
So most likely, given that I talk to people and they talk to people and this kind of word spreads, billions of assaults have not occurred because of what I've done.
Billions of assaults have not occurred because of what I've done.
Now, if you've been into loose change in 9-11, and again, I know people work very hard on that and all of that, but what assaults have you prevented?
What violence have you prevented?
What have you actually done to reduce the amount of violence in the world?
I mean, I'm an empiricist.
I've said this from the very beginning. I'm an empiricist, which means that I care about actual things in the real world.
I don't care how right you are.
I don't care how much research you've done.
I don't care how many movies you've watched.
I don't care how many books you've read.
What I care about is, give me the number.
And this comes from both being an empiricist as a philosopher, but it also comes from being a business manager, right?
You've got salespeople out there and they're like, well, I did this and I did that and I did the other thing and it's like, okay, that's great.
I don't care. You tell me, how many sales did you close this week?
How much money changed hands?
How many contracts were signed?
How many sales did you actually make?
Well, but I went through this initiative and then I went to this conference and then I did this trade show and then I put out these mail outs.
It's like, yeah, I don't care. I don't care.
I don't care. What I care about is How many sales did you close?
I can't pay my payroll with your going to a conference.
I can't pay my payroll with you sending out mailers.
In fact, that costs me.
The only way I can pay my employees is if you actually close the deals, close the sales.
So it's empiricism, right?
How many assaults have you prevented in the world?
How much violence have you reduced in the world?
Give me a number. And you see what I'm saying?
This stuff that you're looking into, and this is why I said at the very beginning when people are like, oh, Building 7 and Freefall and...
I said, don't start off by annoying me.
You know, you can do anything you want.
I'm just telling you that it's annoying.
Because I've been in and out of this stuff certainly since I started the show 16 years ago.
And I regularly get lambasted and attacked for this kind of stuff, which is fine.
I'm a big boy. It's no big deal.
It doesn't keep me up at night. And I don't mind being lambasted and attacked.
I'm sure there are good reasons.
And I know that there are good reasons to attack and lambase me from time to time.
Absolutely. No question.
And I do it to myself if it's any consolation as well.
But here's what I don't like.
Here's what does annoy me.
When I get lambasted and attacked by people who've actually done nothing, nothing to reduce the actual number of assaults in the world, the actual amount of violence in the world, they've done nothing to reduce it, and I've got billions of reduced assaults on my metal wall.
Billions of reduced assaults against innocent, helpless, independent children.
Half a million. Uncircumcised boys.
That's what I got. Now, if you found ways to get a hundred million uncircumcised boys, you can lecture me and I will listen.
And I will worship you and I will adopt your methods and I will be humble at having missed what a great job you've done.
And if you have found ways that has vastly outstripped me, even though with my limited resources, if you have found ways to reduce assaults on children by the tens of billions.
Amen, man. Hallelujah.
Praise be. Teach me your ways.
Senpai, I will learn what you have to do and I will be humble and apologetic about my own lack of success.
But here's what I... I don't get lectured by people like that.
I don't get lectured by people who are like, oh, okay, you've reduced assaults against children by a couple of billion.
Those are rookie numbers.
You've got to pump this up.
Here's how I do it. All right, okay.
Fantastic. You know, love to hear it.
Never had that happen once. Because there has been no stronger or better advocate for the protection of children in the podcasting world, numerically.
I don't even think there's a close second.
So, yeah, all of these people who've done nothing to protect children, who've done nothing to reduce the amount of violence in the world, give me all these pompous lectures about how I should be spending my time Well, excuse me for not poring over blueprints from 1998 and figuring out who took out insurance on what building in 1999.
Excuse me for actually working my ass off and getting my reputation shredded to actually reduce the amount of violence in the world against the most helpless and dependent people around the children.
So you come here, and you are lecturing me and goading me and superiorly pompously windbagging on me about what I should be doing.
This is not a night for swearing, but it's tempting.
Because you don't see yourself the way the numbers see you.
You literally are like somebody going to Jeff Bezos and saying, let me tell you about business, because when I was 12, I had a paper route.
You don't see it. I'm not trying to make you feel bad.
I'm really not. I'm not saying this out of love.
I really do. I say this out of love.
Because you care about the truth, and you care about virtue, and you care about getting things right.
I respect you for that.
I think it's wonderful. I say this out of genuine love.
Shut up about these things and go help some children.
Shut up about these things and go make some moral arguments for which you do not need people to do 16 weekends worth of research.
Go make the moral case for the non-initiation of force.
Go make the moral case for anti-circumcision.
Go make the moral case for anti-spanking and you will help the world in ways that you will look back upon obsessions with minutiae, That was a very sad way to have spent a good portion of your life.
Ah, but there was, if you look at, there was thermite in the dust and it's all gone.
It's all gone. You understand?
They hold off the evidence.
It's all gone. What are you going to do?
So, yeah, I'm sorry to start off that way, but it wearies me a little bit.
So, let me just make sure I'm up.
with everyone and what's going on.
So, look at that.
It's all going pretty well.
Things are coming through smoothly, right?
Is that right? Okay. So, somebody did ask Miller.
Let me just go back here and see if I missed anything.
Isn't this a logical fallacy?
Just because someone isn't an anti-violence advocate doesn't mean they can have a valid point about something.
I don't know what that means, but it sounds like a false dichotomy to me.
All right. And it's great.
I'm really happy that you guys have joined tonight.
Of course, it is one of these things that you stop one circumcision.
Fantastic. And you're doing better than the JFK people and the 9-11 people put together.
Why does Stefan talk about himself so much?
Seems kind of narcissistic.
Okay, I'll tell you what.
You can get lost.
So the reason that I talk about myself is because I'm an empiricist, you see, which means I can't talk about your history and personal experiences because I'm not you.
So because I have my own knowledge, my own history, my own experiences, my own decisions, my own choices, I can talk about those as a way of bringing evidence to an argument.
I can't talk about your personal experiences and decisions because I don't know you and I'm not you.
So a narcissist would be unable to distinguish between himself and other people and view other people as a means to his end, which would be you, my friend, which is why you're gone.
9-11 theories in JFK is the equivalent of watching sports ball.
Waste of time. No, it's worse than that.
Because you understand that the government loves you to go into esoteric topics for which you cannot come to conclusions and you cannot convince people as a whole.
Like all the people who do 9-11 stuff got to look at the JFK stuff with 40 years of...
It doesn't change anything.
It doesn't matter. And they're still into it, right?
It is a way of just...
Making sure that you are rejected by people that decide I'm in the box of things as a whole.
All right. Hey Steph, is being an introvert bad and how can I not be one?
How do I overcome my social shyness?
Hit me with a why if this is a topic you'd like to do.
I can do it very briefly, I think, but I do want to stay on the 9-11 stuff.
Would you like me to...
Tell you how to overcome shyness.
Would you be interested in that? Hit me with a Y if you would.
Otherwise, I can make a mental note of it and do it another time.
Anybody? Sorry, I know we're a little delayed here, but just wait for that to catch up.
Yes? Yes, you would?
Yes. All yeses and three noes.
Brief is good. Yes, brief is good.
Brief is good. Okay, I will keep it very brief.
Okay, so... Shyness is selfishness.
Shyness, we all think that it's insecurity.
No, no. It's selfishness because it is withholding yourself from a world that needs you.
And when you withhold yourself from a world that needs you, as we need all good people, and if you're part of this conversation, you're a good person, I mean, in general, except for the guy I had to kick.
So, you are selfishly withholding yourself from people, and what you're doing is you're insulting them.
What you're doing is you're insulting them because there were people who mistreated you in the past, without a doubt, if you're shy.
There were people who mistreated you in the past, and what you're doing is you are promoting all the new people that you meet to the position of the abusive people in your past.
Right. That's unfair.
That's unjust. Like, you know how your parents would blame you for things that weren't your fault?
It's not other people's fault that your parents were abusive, but if you pretend that everyone is just like your abusive parents, they're going to dislike you because you're being unjust and unfair.
So you're selfishly withholding The truth and the value that people could get from you.
And also, you are telling people very clearly, you are an abusive person, and so I'm going to be frightened of you because you're a dangerous person.
Which basically lets your mom and dad, if they're abusive, stick their hands up people's asses, become their sock puppets, and scare you for the rest of your life.
By pretending to inhabit their faces, right?
So everybody turns into your abuser, you withhold yourself from the world, your parents win, you lose, and your life is crap.
So, yeah, don't do that.
Don't pretend that everyone is like your parents.
And of course that's what your parents want you to do, right?
So another reason why we end up shy if we've been abused as children, and I think it's very correlated, is because our parents want us to not develop strong bonds with other people to the point where we can tell those other people about the abuse we suffered at the hands of our parents, right?
It's a classic cult thing, and parents are generally an abusive, like abusive parents are an abusive cult.
And a cult will separate you from people so that you can't have any strong connections with people, so that the people can say, this cult is insane, or your parents are abusive.
And so the fact that your parents have programmed you to be shy and recoil from people and treat them as if they're your parent, then that means you can't develop any strong bonds with people, which means you can't have any allies and you can't reveal how abused you were, and the parents get off scot-free.
Don't do it.
Don't do it. Hey, look at that.
That was pretty fast, right? So, if you have asked about this, yes, some people have asked about this, so what was I doing on 9-11?
So, back in 2001, I was chief technical officer of a company I co-founded in the 90s, And I was working on a very thorny technical problem.
I still remember exactly what it was.
I was trying to integrate a software with a program called Tanks 4.0 that calculated tank emissions or tank leaks over time from various substances.
And I was going from an Oracle database to a FoxPro database and back again.
It was a brutal thing to go through technically because I had to reverse engineer the other database and figure out where to stick the data in order to have the program process the leaks according to government regulations.
So that's what I was working on.
A ridiculous salesperson had booked 10 hours for it, and I just knew it wasn't going to be that.
So I was working very hard on that integration, which was very frustrating, because I had to push the data out, call the other program, which was a DOS program, call it to run that data, and then suck the data back into the database so that it could be kept in perpetuity because the other one didn't have any...
Time slices in it. Anyway, so I was working on this very challenging reverse engineering technical problem and a friend of mine who was one of my employees who I was mentoring along to become more of a leader in the business, he came in and he said a plane crashed into the World Trade Center and came to my office.
And it sort of reminded me that there was a plane that flew into the Empire State Building back in the day.
So I thought, you know, like most people who heard this, I thought, oh my God, a Cessna got lost or, you know, whatever the pilot passed out and I thought it was just a small thing, not much damage and so on.
And then, of course, a fairly short amount of time later, he came in and said, a second plane has hit, and then it's like, war.
War. It's war. It's war.
Straight up war. I mean, that was very clear to me.
So, this, of course, was way back in the early days of the Internet, but we managed to get a feed.
There was a television station that was experimenting with live feeds, and we didn't have a television in the office, but we did manage to get A live feed.
And I stood there, of course, shocked, horrified, appalled.
That when the building collapsed, I mean, like most of you, I could feel like you put yourself in that situation.
The Gurdas collapsing and realizing in that split second that you're dead.
You're dead. You're going to die.
You're going to die. And at least it's going to be quick.
And so when the building went down, you think of all of these people just being completely wrecked and destroyed.
The people jumping off the tops of the buildings when the second building went down.
It was one of these situations where you say, okay, the world will never be the same.
The world will never be the same.
And I remember thinking very clearly at the time that I said, the terrorists are going to win.
And I said this, I said, they've just won.
They've just won. Because the odds that you were going to get any honest explanation of what happened from the media was so low, and it was not, of course, the case.
They hate us for our freedoms.
It's like, well, Switzerland is even more free than the U.S. in some ways, lower taxes in some ways, and yet they're not being attacked.
So, you know, just, we're being attacked for our virtues is one of the most insulting things that came out of the media as a whole.
And the hatred of the good for being the good, that kind of stuff.
So I knew that the media wasn't going to talk about what actually happened.
I thought that there was a tiny possibility that a certain portal might open in the mind of the American public to say, okay, how the hell did we get here?
How the hell did we get here?
What happened that we ended up in this place?
Where this is happening.
Because this was a tear in the complacent, self-satisfied smugness of the inner-dwelling empire inhabitants, right?
Where you're far from the fields of battle, you may see occasional lights of tomahawk missiles going up from a ship, which happened in the first Gulf War, and it would be like...
Maybe like a little tear has happened so that people can see how an imperialistic nation looks to outsiders, to people that it's victimizing, to people that it's bombing and attacking and destroying and so on, right? And I thought, of course, well, it's going to be, they hated us because we're so moral.
And, you know, we're going to go and destroy the wrong place, right?
The vast majority of the attackers, as you know, were Saudi.
And, you know, then you go and hit Iraq, right?
Like you just missed or something, right?
And that there was going to be no particular explanation as to the backstory, which I'm sure you know of, right?
I mean, the backstory that the CIA trained Osama bin Laden and the Mujahideen to fight against the Soviets before the fall of the Soviet Union.
And the reason they were able to do that in such an effective manner was that it was economic warfare, right?
Economic warfare. The economic warfare is that...
Attacking is vastly more expensive than defending, which is also the story of Afghanistan in some ways, right?
So attacking is vastly more expensive than defending.
The reason being, if you've got a $25 million fighter jet, you can shoot down that fighter jet with a $20,000 Stinger missile.
You may even be able to get it cheaper if it's secondhand, right?
And so you can knock out $25 million worth of hardware, plus a pilot probably, or possibly, with a $20,000 It's a piece of defensive weaponry, right?
So to attack is vastly more expensive than to defend, which, of course, has been known since Napoleon.
It's been known all the way back into the Carthaginian War and the Peloponnesian Wars.
Of course, Hitler found this out when he invaded Russia, that it's vastly more Expensive to attack than it is to defend.
And so those who are defending are waging fundamentally economic warfare against the attackers, because the attackers are spending dozens or hundreds or even thousands of times more money to attack than the defenders are to defend.
And so after they trained the Mujahideen to wage economic war against the Soviet Union and That was one of the reasons why the Soviet Union ran out of money, and this is why it's called the graveyard of empires.
Afghanistan is called the graveyard of empires because empires go there, and because of the rough terrain and the incredibly tough and ferocious people, and the fact that they've got very long supply lines, which are very easy to disrupt and very expensive to maintain and defend, that's where the empires go to die.
And it's happened, of course, as you know, to a wide variety of empires throughout the course of human history.
So, yeah, what did the government do?
Well, the American government trained the Mujahideen, the Islamic extremists, on how to wage economic war against an imperial country by causing it to vastly overspend in attack relative to defense.
And as you know, 9-11, according to some estimates, cost between $100,000 and $150,000.
And I can't even, I think it's seven to ten trillion dollars that's been spent in response to this through the war on terror and the economic and civil liberties destruction of the Patriot Act and all that, right?
Because, you know, Patriot Act, now that Afghanistan has been left, I'm sure it's going to be all dismantled because, you know, it was just there for the war on Afghanistan.
So, there could be some history of like, okay, how do we get here?
Well, you know, maybe it's not a great idea to train extremists in how to wage economic war against an empire.
Maybe that's not a super great idea and all of that.
And so maybe, I thought maybe there was a slight possibility, but the internet was too young.
I wasn't doing shows.
Other people weren't doing shows and all that.
I remember when Princess Diana died, going on the internet to see how long it would take for the internet to come alive with this news.
And it took a long time back in the day.
It was in the 90s, right? So there was no possibility of...
Opening up that narrative because we don't, you know, if you're younger, you don't really know what it's like, how much the media dominated everything.
Now the media is just one player in the alternative media or whatever it is, right?
So, I remember thinking, okay, well, we're not going to get much truth out of this.
And there were some people who were writing some pretty good stuff about it, but it didn't really get very far.
It certainly didn't make it to the mainstream news.
The mainstream news was, you know, we'll make them pay and we're going to stand together and the first responders are heroes.
Yes, absolutely.
Very brave people who did some wonderful stuff, but never any sort of deep backstory.
Because there's this weird thing That happens in people's minds.
I don't know if it's just low IQ. I don't know if it's just bad programming.
I don't know if it's just like a weird stalking kind of patriotism or whatever.
But if you try to find first causes for something, somehow you're justifying that thing happening.
You know, like if you try and find first causes for 9-11, that somehow you're justifying 9-11, which is...
I mean, the complete opposite. It's like if you say, well, if I try and find what causes lung cancer, I'm justifying lung cancer.
It's like, no, that's the only way you can prevent lung cancer is to find out what actually causes it.
The only way you can prevent terrorism is to try and find out what actually causes it.
And, you know, it's pretty clear.
I mean, it's pretty clear. I mean, the Islamists were very clear on the troops stationed in Saudi Arabia and the brutalization of the Muslims in the Middle East.
I mean, they were all pretty clear about what their major issues were.
And, of course, none of that was reported because then you say, okay, well, if we recognize that they have issues, and particularly the infidel troops being on Saudi Arabian soil was a very, very big deal, of course.
And so if you say, well, okay, this is partly the cause, then somehow you're saying that it's justified.
And it's like, I don't see that.
I don't see that. The only way you can say that is if you're a complete victim.
Like if you're a child and you're beaten up by your parents, your parents will say, oh, well, I beat you up because you dropped a glass, or you're always careless, or you didn't clean your room, or, you know, you lied.
So they'll come up with something, but you are a genuine victim.
And so the root cause is your parents are sadists, not you lied, right?
So when you're a complete victim, when you're a child being beaten up by abusive parents, then yes, I get that.
Trying to come to some kind of root cause that holds the victim responsible is a way of justifying the abuse, but we're not talking about children.
We're talking about governments and geopolitics and all of that kind of stuff, right?
So... That is...
Remember Joe Rogan blasting you for saying that Afghanistan and the Taliban was defeating the U.S. military?
Yeah. I mean, I've been, of course, saying this forever, right?
Of course. I mean, yeah. Not only did they win, they got gain-of-function because of all of the military hardware left behind and all of that.
So it's pretty wild.
So I do sort of remember that there was this sense that nothing was going to be the same and that the terrorists were going to win because, you know, if they say...
as the narrative was, oh, they hate us for our freedoms.
Okay, well, it's okay. We can get rid of those freedoms with the Patriot Act of the NSA and the Department of Homeland Security and so on.
It's like, well, we can get rid of those freedoms, so now they won't hate us anymore.
It's like, oh, my God, right?
And I think if the internet had been around more robustly than it was back then, it is similar in some ways to this Wuhan thing, right?
The Fauci thing and the, you know, was it 27 of the 28 people who signed the Lancet letter saying that there's no way that it came from a lab?
All 27 of the 28 people had ties to the Wuhan lab.
It's brutal. Absolutely brutal.
And, of course, completely expected in many ways.
But There is, like, these portals, these windows, they kind of open up, right?
And people say, wait, wait, our government did...
Our government did what?
Right, so that, you know, the training of the Mujahideen and so on.
Like, and of course, this Trump did too.
I mean, didn't Trump sell huge amounts of weaponry to the Saudis and so on?
It's like, wait, our government did what?
It trained an armed...
Radical fundamentalists on how to defeat foreign powers in their country while we are a foreign power in their country.
Like, I mean...
They did what?
And so, you know, it's the same thing with the stuff coming out with Fauci and others.
It's like, wait, our government gave money for gain-of-function research to the communist dictatorship?
In what? Our government essentially paid communist...
USA hating China to develop a bioweapon of sorts?
Like, what?
And so there's these little portals that open up, right?
Where people are just like, wait, what now?
What? Ah, right?
I mean, and so...
There is this, and it is really jarring for people, right?
For those of us who know the sort of immoral nature of the state as a conceptual entity, right?
I mean, we kind of get all of that, right?
But for a lot of people, it's like, that's really shocking and really surprising stuff for them to come up with.
So, I did watch all of that.
Al-Qaeda terrorists caught openly admitting that the long-term strategy is immigration.
Yeah. Yeah, for sure.
That certainly does happen.
That certainly does happen. Courtney Love came on T. We should all be super patriotic.
Well, I mean, that's like Britney Spears, right?
I mean, you should just obey the president and trust him in whatever he says and all that kind of stuff, right?
But yeah, so atheists think in much shorter time frames than many religious people, so it's quite different.
So, and I had therapy that day.
I was still doing talk therapy, and I remember my therapist saying about the attacks, that's, oh no, I didn't go to therapy that day.
I couldn't do therapy that day to talk about myself, and I didn't want to talk politics with someone and pay them for it.
But I remember the next time I went to therapy, probably a couple of days later, I remember my therapist saying, what a powerful conversation.
I remember thinking like, okay, let's just stick to the self-knowledge stuff and the dream analysis because this powerful conversation stuff is all kind of crazy, right?
So that was my experience of it.
I was certainly more of a warmonger.
I mean, I'm very anti-war now, other than a sort of free-market defensive war.
But... I certainly was...
I did not believe...
I don't think I believed that there was going to be weapons of mass destruction.
No, I actually remember that.
I remember thinking, oh, this war is a pretense, the Iraq war, right?
Definitely a pretense, right?
Yeah, Ann Coulter was like, yeah, just turned the whole area into glass and so on.
It's like, no, it's not. Somebody bought a stereo in 9-11 to help support the economy.
Yeah, yeah, that's right. I guess there's no point talking about the government hitting their own buildings.
No, there's less than no point.
I mean, you're actually kind of aiding and betting immorality in the world, in my opinion.
What was worse at work was the OJ verdict.
Blacks on one side and whites on the other.
Appalling to me. Yeah, I was working at a stock trading company as a programmer when that news came out, and yeah, it was really quite different.
Never thought I'd be looking back at the 9-11 era with rose-tinted glasses, but it was a paradise compared to today.
Yes. Now...
We know and we feel, I think, I don't want to speak for you, I think as a whole we know and feel that the big challenges are not at the hazy distance that the tsunami has already raised the horizon, right? So, yeah, that was sort of my...
My history of it.
And in the same way, I mean, I remember when I first started talking about COVID at the beginning of 2019.
Yeah, I remember the beginning of 2020, sorry.
When I first started talking about COVID, I referred to it as China's Chernobyl.
And this was China's Chernobyl as it was happening.
And of course, Chernobyl was averted, but this was not And I remember thinking, OK, well, with the pandemic and nothing's going to be the same either.
And there is a portal in which people could get a glimpse of what's going on with the machinery of the state.
But of course, most people will simply, they just ignore it.
They just ignore it.
Like when the experts said that the vaccine will prevent you from catching or spreading the disease, and now it doesn't prevent you from catching or spreading the disease.
And now they've just changed the definition on the CDC website to the vaccine.
Now it doesn't mean it gives you immunity from an illness, but that it activates your body's defenses against particular things, right?
Back in 9-11, I was more hopeful, I suppose.
I was more off the opinion that people would get information that blew their minds, that was like, what is going on?
Because, you know, people bond with the state.
That's the Stockholm Syndrome, right?
They bond, like ducklings, bonding with me and my daughter.
She's their mom. I'm the grandma, granddad at best.
But so people bond with the state because it's the state who raises them, right?
More than their parents do, right?
Because they're with the state, you know, seven, eight hours a day.
Maybe they get an hour with their parents in the evening or whatever, right?
So the state raises the children.
So children bond with the state.
And you know how difficult it is for people to admit that they're in an abusive relationship with abusive parents.
It's very hard. Like once the government gets a hold of the children and educates them and instills values in them and raises them, so to speak.
I mean, it's amazing, right?
I mean, it's so funny, right?
The government now promotes, you know, massive amounts of multiculturalism in the educational system.
And I don't know if you know, but in America, the government first took over the educational system on the promise that it was going to keep the Protestant, like the WASP, culture strong in the face of massive amounts of Catholics, in particular from Ireland, coming in.
From overseas and so on.
And so it's like, well, let's give education to the government to make sure that we remain a monoculture.
And now, of course, they're just promoting cultural relativism and endless diversity, right?
So, all of that, right?
So, I think that, I think that, I mean, I know that.
I had more hope back then than when people got really shocking information about what their government was up to.
You know, and certainly, you know, what is Afghanistan?
The Afghanis, I think it was the Taliban, offered to turn over Bin Laden, and then he got away, and like, well, no, Bin Laden's the guy, and they're offering to give him up.
In fact, check me on this if I got that wrong, but I seem to remember that they offered to give Bin Laden, and they simply wouldn't accept it, right?
They wouldn't take it, because they want the war, right?
They want the war. So, I remember back in the day thinking, okay, this is going to be helpful to revealing the state as a violator of the non-aggression principle because, you know, people have bonded with it and then they view the state as mommy and daddy and Auntie M and all of that.
And it's not, right?
It's not at all. So, I was of the belief back then that people would not have...
It was a mistake.
It was a mistake. Here's a mistake.
The mistake that I've made, and I'm getting a little better at this mistake, though I still make it, is I mistake the world for myself.
I think, well... When I get an extraordinary piece of counter-information, then I can't just shrug off the cognitive dissonance.
It's like a splinter in the mind's eye.
It's like a thorn in my brain.
You know, for 20 years, I was like, hmm, something's not quite right with the objectivist argument for morality.
And I remember going through the psychology of self-esteem, and there was a whole section there about free will, and I was like, okay, this is the answer.
I could just look this up, this is the answer.
And Brandon wrote that, I think, with the help of Ayn Rand.
And it's a great book, but I was like...
Okay, so that's not really a good answer.
I could never sit with it.
I could never sit with it, which is why I eventually sat down and said, I'm not getting up.
Even if I pee myself, I'm not getting up until I solve the problem of morality.
It took a long time, and UPB was kind of forced out of me at intellectual gunpoint, so to speak.
And so, for me...
If I get an extraordinary piece of counter-information, it sits with me.
It sits in my brain.
I can think of thousands of examples in my past where I got some piece of counter-information.
I was like, oh, that's not good.
Oh, that's not right.
Oh, that's not right.
That's definitely not right.
And it sticks. I can't just wallpaper over it.
You know, like I guess you can wallpaper over a nail hole, but you can't wallpaper over a missing wall, right?
And so for me, when I get this kind of contradictory stuff, the cognitive dissonance kicks in.
I can't just, you know, make it go away.
I can't just wave it away. I mean, I can ignore it for a while in the same way like when you really have to pee, you can ignore it for a while.
But you can't not pee for the rest of your life, right?
So for me, it's like I can sort of suppress it.
Like, suppression is when you hide your emotions in the short run.
Repression is when it becomes a permanent habit.
So what I was thinking is like, okay, I was thinking back in 9-11.
I was like, oh, wow, there's some really...
There's incredible counter-information.
There is a... Something has come through the bubble of empire, right?
Something has come through the bubble of empire and woken people up to the evils being done overseas.
You know, 700-plus military bases overseas.
You know, the amount of regime change and destruction of countries, to some degree wrought by the US funding various groups and all of that, Sandinista in Nicaragua and other things, right?
You're getting a view of what the government looks like outside the bubble of empire, right?
And horrifying that it is, right?
And it was a way also of trying to understand, like, so if the US is bombing other countries, then the anger you feel about 9-11 is the anger that other people feel towards your government.
And I think a lot of the terrorists, you know...
Not that they're in any way not evil people, but they do say, look, our beef's not with the American people, it's with the American government.
But the problem is, of course, the problem is because it's perceived overseas, America, because it's perceived overseas as a democracy, it is assumed that There are no civilians when it comes to foreign policy, because what is generally assumed is, well, the Americans are taught about their government, they're taught about what happens, they have a free media, they have a free press, they have free education, and so they must be aware of what's happening overseas, so if they don't vote to get someone to change it, they must approve of it.
This is the problem. Democracy.
If you have a brutal foreign policy, an expansionistic, imperialistic foreign policy, and you're a democracy, Then the people outside of your country do not...
I mean, they view children, I suppose.
That's why they didn't hit daycares or whatever, right?
But they view people as like, you're part of this.
I mean, you don't...
I mean, nobody views...
The people in North Korea as being responsible for what King John does, right?
Nobody... Was it Raul Castro?
Did he die? Whoever...
Oh, it's his sister. Anyway, whoever's in charge of Cuba now, nobody looks at the average Cuban person and says, well, you're totally responsible for whatever your government does because it's not a democracy.
It's a totalitarian dictatorship of the communist variety, which is really the only kind that's left these days.
So, from the outside, When your government has a violent foreign policy and you vote, then it is assumed that the majority of the population Approve of what's going on.
And the way you would know that is that if some politician came along, like Ron Paul, who said, got to close down this imperialistic stuff, we got to stop subsidizing Europe, we got to stop subsidizing Japanese self-defense with all these bases in Okinawa, where, by the way, there's a huge number of rapes and problems with the local population and drunken brawls and blah, blah, blah, right? So, when someone comes along like Ron Paul, Who is anti-imperialistic.
How does that politician do in the general sphere of American politics?
And the answer is, very badly.
Right? Very badly.
And so, when nobody votes for the anti-imperialistic candidate, and everyone votes for the imperialistic candidates, like when 97 or 98 percent of the votes go for Republicans or Democrats who are pro-imperialism, both sides, right?
Then from the outside, it's like, well, because you vote for all of these people and your government is doing this, we cannot hold you immune from moral liability for what your government is doing because you have a say.
And clearly you want what's going on.
Otherwise you'd vote for the people who...
The people outside the empire study the empire way more than the empire studies itself.
Way more than the empire studies itself.
You know, the predator studies the prey a lot more than the prey studies itself.
So... That's really hard for people to sort of understand.
To say, well, why would they hit civilians?
It's like... Again, I don't want to speak for this.
This is my sort of understanding of how it works.
But I don't think that when you get the vote that you are perceived as a neutral or...
Captured civilian. Now, because the people overseas imagine that there's all this free press and robust debate and they don't understand how narrow to non-existent the Overton window is, right?
And then it really was hard to see the Overton window until the alternate media came along and me talking about basic biological science and IQ gets me yeeted off the internet.
It's like there's no, you can't even discuss science.
We might as well be in the Spanish Inquisition.
It's medieval when it comes to whether you can discuss science or not in the world as it stands.
So, that, of course, is another issue, but I thought, oh, a portal can open, a portal can open, in the same way when Edward Snowden's revelation about the NSA came out, it's like a portal can open.
Now, I'm not expecting these things to change in sort of fundamental ways, but I do sort of expect people are going to, ah, you know, ah.
But here's the thing. People wallpaper over a complete absence of wall with no problem.
They lean up against it. They hang pictures on it.
It's like they live in an alternate reality where contradictions can completely coexist within their minds.
You know, it's like that terrifying scene in 1984 where O'Brien says to Winston Smith, two and two makes whatever the party wants it to make.
And he says, but this is not rational.
It's not the case. Like, no.
Two and two make whatever the party wants it to make.
How many fingers am I holding up?
He starts with four. He says, four.
No. If I say that I'm holding out five fingers, will you say that there are five fingers?
And he won't say it because he says, I can only say what I see.
No. You must say what the party wants you to say.
You must see what the party wants you to see.
It's not just that you have to lie.
You have to believe the truth, the metaphysical and epistemological truth that it's five fingers if the party says it's five when you can only see four.
I mean, that's absolutely terrifying.
It's demanding that somebody not even be humiliated by lying, but be further humiliated by no longer knowing the truth at all.
No longer knowing the truth at all.
Absolutely terrifying, terrifying stuff.
And because America has, like, the First Amendment and a reputation for free press and so on, the people outside, they think there's some kind of robust debate going on.
And if there's not a robust debate going on, it's because nobody wants one.
I mean, you take left-wing people like Noam Chomsky, he's got pretty good critiques of American imperialism, which he would have until his left-wing people got control of the government, then everything would be justified.
But because people outside the empire don't realize, you can't talk about anything.
I mean, you can't really talk about anything.
You can't talk about who's really in charge.
You can't talk about IQ. You can't talk about anything to do with race and biology.
You can't talk about dysgenic effects of the welfare side.
You can't talk about anything.
You know, tucked away in the corner, you can have a couple of mutterings, but you can't.
So there is no debate.
So it's like saying, well, she must be happily married to him because she hasn't left him.
And it turns out she's chained to the basement for 20 years, right?
Okay, well, she didn't have a choice to leave him, so it's not love.
She's just trapped there, right?
And so people on the outside say, well, Americans have the First Amendment.
They have free speech. They have a free press.
If nobody's talking about the dangers and damage of empire, it must be because nobody wants to talk about it because they don't care, because they approve of it.
They like it. They're happy with it.
And no anti-imperialistic candidate ever gets elected, so clearly the American public loves imperialism, wants the government to do what they're doing, in which case our beef, in a sense, is with the American people, not the American government, because the American government is perceived to be a reflection of the American people, because they don't know very easily that you can't talk about anything.
So I hope that makes some kind of sense.
You know, it is kind of funny.
I guess this is part of the chat thing.
I don't quite understand it myself.
It's like you're watching a great movie.
And look, I'm giving some great speeches here.
It's like you're watching a great movie and you're talking loudly on the phone.
And, you know, you're all talking about JFK and JFK's dad and Chappaquiddick and Ted Kennedy and all of that sort of stuff.
And it's like, I don't know, it's just kind of interesting to me.
I'm not sure that live streaming this stuff is the best idea.
Because, I don't know, you all have ADHD or something like that.
I mean, this is a show about 9-11 and you're all talking about everything but that.
And it's pretty wild.
It's pretty wild. Bread and circuses, yeah?
Yeah, for sure. For sure.
Now, of course, when you can get people dependent on the government, Then they don't really care what the government does, as long as they get their steady diet of government cheese in a van down by the river or something like that, right?
I'm listening, not watching the chat.
Yeah, no, I appreciate that. I feel like I've just been scolded by a parent.
Well, because here's the thing, right?
So if people...
When I'm doing the speeches, what I'm looking in the chat is I'm looking for things that help me with my speeches, right?
Arguments, better information, worse information, alternate perspectives, and so on.
If you all are talking about something completely different, it's a little rude, right?
Because I'm sort of pouring heart and soul into doing a speech, and I'm not trying to scold you or anything.
I'm just going to give you my sort of honest emotional experience that then if you're Talking about things that I'm not talking about, if you're having your own conversations in public, you're not going to sort of a private chat room or some other place or saying, oh, you know, I'm more interested in what you have to say, I'm going to disconnect from this.
But you're using the public chat to interfere with and distract people from what it is that I'm saying, that's just kind of rude.
I mean, it is just kind of rude.
So that's sort of what I'm pointing out.
The reason I do the chat is because I like to have it when people can give me more information or personal experiences or things that can help me flesh out the topic more.
It's fantastic. But if you're all having your own conversations, I mean, it's just kind of rude, right?
It's just kind of rude.
It's like if you are trying to tell me a really important story or something that's really important to you or something that really matters to you, And while you're talking to me, I'm texting someone else about something completely unrelated.
I mean, I think you would consider that a little rude, wouldn't you?
I think you would. So, if Stefan was on YouTube for at least 10 years, does that really support his point that they shut down free speech?
See, now that's, that's on point with what it is that I'm talking about.
So I was on YouTube for 10 years, but YouTube was tiny at the beginning, and the moment that I gained any actual effect in the world through YouTube, then I was kicked off, right?
So the fact that I was kicked off right before the 2020 election.
So the moment, like you can have free speech as long as it doesn't change anything.
If your free speech changes something, right?
So you can have a free election, Unless you elect Trump and then you can't have free elections really anymore because Twitter is going to suppress stories about Hunter Biden's laptop.
And, you know, all the pro-Trump people are going to get kicked off social media for largely made-up reasons.
And any negative information about the Democrats are going to be erased.
And Trump is going to be kicked off Twitter.
While the Taliban is still on Twitter, right?
So you can have an election.
As long as you choose between one of the two pre-approved candidates, a lot of whom seem to be pretty closely related, right?
So you can have free elections as long as your free elections don't actually end up with you potentially reflecting the will of the people.
What have people in the West wanted for the last 40 years is a slowdown to mass immigration.
It's the number one issue repeatedly just about everywhere.
And yet any time any politician arises who might even potentially bring that into being, Well, they're just wrecked, right?
So, I mean, what was it?
The AFD just got attacked in Germany now.
One of their leaders was put into hospital with a concussion.
No punishment, I assume, for any of these things.
So, if your free speech actually achieves something, That goes against the powers that be.
Are you really allowed to have free speech?
Are you allowed to have free speech in universities?
No. Are you allowed to have free speech in public school?
No. Junior high school? High school?
No. Absolutely not. Because if you say things that they don't like, they'll just suspend you.
Are you allowed to have free speech?
Or do you actually have the capacity to have free speech?
If you say things like, what is the standard response if you say something that the left doesn't like?
Well, they will... Try to destroy your reputation and your source of income.
Yet. They go a lot further when they get real power.
But right now, it's like, well, they'll destroy your reputation and they'll try to destroy your source of income so that your life is wrecked and ruined and you end up destitute.
Indigent, as they used to call it.
Maybe they still do now.
So do you really have free speech?
If you vote for a non-traditional candidate that upsets the status quo, What happens?
Well, they lie about him continuously.
They attack all of his colleagues and his family and his co-workers and the people who he's hired, and they try and get them one kind of various process crimes.
I mean, I understand how this all works, right?
So, do you really have free speech?
So, I had free speech to some degree, as long as my free speech didn't really affect that much.
But the moment that people perceived that it began to affect things a little bit, gone, right?
Was the pseudo-democracy predictable at the founding of the Republic?
Was it inevitable in replacing the Articles of the Confederacy?
So, I don't know, of course, what was going on in the minds of the Founding Fathers.
I do know that George Washington very clearly said the government is a terrible, a dangerous servant and a terrible master.
So, the idea of a society without a state It's so foreign to our conception, and it's so foreign to our conception because we're raised by the state and we're raised by generally, as a whole, with many exceptions, totalitarian parents.
Totalitarian parents saying, do what I say or get punished.
Do what I say or I'll yell at you.
Do what I say or I'll take away your PS4. Do what I say or I'll lock you in your room.
Do what I say or you won't get your meal.
Do what I say or you'll get hit or whatever, right?
Or humiliated or whatever it is, right?
So, because we're raised in a totalitarian parenting style as a whole, in general, and because we're raised by totalitarian entities such as government schools, the idea of living without a state is akin to the idea of living without gravity.
Like, it just has to be.
It has to be. And we know this is the result of PTSD, right?
I mean, if somebody's gone through abusive childhood, they will often end up in abusive relationships.
And they will go from abusive relationship to abusive relationship.
And this way we know that the idea for them of living without an abusive relationship is incomprehensible.
They can't fathom it, they can't practice it, they can't make it come into being.
So when you've had a lot of abusive relationships, that just becomes your norm.
Relationships are abusive.
And then if you try to break out of that cycle or pattern, you will feel intense anxiety and terror and a very desperate desire to retreat back into what you know best, which is the abusive relationship.
And so when you propose a society without a state, it's like proposing to somebody with PTSD A completely stress-free life.
It's not possible. Can't have a stress-free life.
Whatever, right? So, yeah.
In the founding of the Republic?
I mean, yeah. What did they say?
Was it Benjamin Franklin? They said, what kind of government do we have?
Said some woman. They said, a Republic, if you can keep it.
How are you supposed to keep it?
How long did it take for the government to break the bounds of the Constitution?
80 years? Even before that.
I mean, I got a whole presentation on George Washington, how he wrote down, what was it, Pennsylvania?
He wrote down everyone for not paying their whiskey tax with troops, right?
So, the idea that you can have a society of spontaneous self-organization is incomprehensible to most people because they are traumatized by their social environment.
And we all know that people have Stockholm Syndrome, that they worship their traumatizers and they believe that they can't live without them and all that.
So it is just the way it is.
All right. Too tired to make a good point, but I'm glad to be here.
Well, I'm glad you're here as well. I only listen to people who've been deplatformed.
That's very funny. Are you a software engineer?
Try being critical of women in tech or any effective diversity hiring practices and see what happens.
Yeah, there was a Boeing 747 software that caused massive problems and a lot of it was outsourced to India.
So, yeah.
Well, James Damore, who was on the show many years ago, and of course he wrote with great scientific studies and great citations, and he was correct in the science that he cited, according to many of the experts that I read and some I spoke to.
So James Damore wrote some potential explanations as to why there may be underrepresentations of women in the tech field and what happened to him, right?
I think we can all see that, right?
With things as they are censorship-wise, would you start your show now in 2021?
Well, I'm still doing my show, obviously, right?
So, Whiskey Rebellion.
That's right, that's right. You get cancelled by Hollywood just for saying you voted for Trump.
Yeah. Do you think a lot of young free thinkers were created from 9-11?
Worked for me. I don't know what you mean by free thinkers.
What I care about is people who actually reduce the amount of violence in the world in a practical, numerical sense.
So I don't know what free thinkers actually means, right?
Truth tell us of the new bootleggers.
Bravo to Steph, one of the bravest men on the internet.
I appreciate that. Thank you very much.
I'm not sure if people know that or see that as much as it seems pretty obvious to me, but let's see here.
Have you overcome all of your trauma?
Have I overcome all of my trauma?
I mean, it depends what you mean, I suppose.
I think the childhood stuff, I mean, about 55 in a couple of weeks, if I haven't dealt with my childhood stuff that's 40 years in the past, I haven't been doing a very good job of being a philosopher or pursuing self-knowledge, right?
Above all, know thyself.
That's the first commandment of Socrates.
So I think my childhood stuff has been done for a long time.
And of course, because I've become a really great father, you know, you provide what you were denied is the best healing.
Provide what you were denied. And I think my childhood stuff is done.
I don't have any trauma in my marriage.
My wife is wonderful. I don't have any trauma with my daughter.
She's a complete delight. We went today.
We took our ducks to a pretty fast-flowing stream so they could learn how to swim better.
And my daughter was digging up crayfish and trying to find small enough crayfish.
She could feed the ducks and they absolutely loved it and would attack her every time her hand went into the water.
They'd go down and try and attack her hand to get the crayfish.
I mean, not fun for the crayfish, but massive fun for us.
And so I don't have any trauma with my daughter.
I don't have any boss, really.
You guys, I guess, but it's not too traumatic with you guys.
But I would say...
Like all intelligent, mostly men, with your ear down to the ground, you hear a very gentle sound.
Yeah, you got to keep your ear on the tracks, right?
You got to keep your wits about you.
You got to watch what's going on with the state and what's going on with the anti-unvaccinated hysteria and the mob being riled up to...
Virtually demonic level. You've got to keep your eyes on that kind of stuff.
So I wouldn't say that's trauma, but I am staying pretty freaking alert to what's going on in the world today.
today.
It's not hypervigilance if it's needed, right?
So, um, I work for a major streaming platform and they've been hitting the diversity crap hard, even the job training manuals.
Yeah, so generally I did the whole presentation on free speech years ago and white males.
White males are the ones big into free speech.
So if you want to undermine free speech into an organization, you have to have fewer white males.
It's just the way things work. And wasn't it more trying to actually help them achieve their goal?
Well... I don't know. I'm sure he had that.
But, you know, I think he was probably just trying to figure out what could be said, right?
Let's see here. So does that mean Steph only respects the opinions of people who can prove they've stopped the abuse of children?
I'm sorry. You just, you don't have the brains to be in the conversation.
I'm really sorry about that.
I'm really sorry. Like, I don't mean to insult you, but, you know, if you're 5'3", you can't be on the basketball team.
I'm sorry. You can do other wonderful things.
Maybe you can be a jockey, but you can't.
So, first of all, I don't respect opinions.
I mean, so much is wrong in what you said, right?
So, I don't know what you mean by respect opinions.
If somebody says, oh, I like the Led Zeppelin, that's an opinion.
I like the color blue.
Well, what's the respect about that or not?
Respect is something that is earned through moral virtue, through moral courage, through integrity, through consistency, through fighting evil and promoting good.
That's what gives you respect.
I don't know how anyone's opinions have anything to do with that.
There's no opinion that it's morally courageous.
There's no opinion that has ethical integrity.
Or has you stand up for virtue in the face of dangerous evil?
So, I don't know what it means to respect people's opinions.
It sounds to me like you want people to respect whatever comes out of your mouth.
And the answer to that is, thanks, but no.
So, yeah, I respect people.
And I don't even respect people who tell the truth.
I don't respect people who have facts, right?
Somebody who says two and two make four, they're telling the truth.
They have a fact. Does that mean I respect them?
No. Moral courage, moral quality, moral integrity, that's what I respect.
That's the only thing you can respect, really.
So, as far as respecting people's opinions, I don't know what that means.
It just sounds like you're demanding respect for opening your mouth, in which case, I have no respect for you.
In fact, it's negative. I have contempt, to a large degree.
And as far as Do I only respect the opinions of people who've reduced the amount of violence in the world?
First of all, I don't respect opinions, don't care about opinions.
And if you think opinions are worthy of respect, I have contempt for your mindset.
And as far as...
I respect what my dentist says in terms of oral hygiene.
Does that mean that she has reduced the amount of violence in the world?
Oh, I listen to, I respect.
I will listen to and heed my dentist's advice on oral hygiene.
Well, fair. If she says, oh, you're grinding your teeth, you need to wear a night guard, fine, I'll wear a night guard.
I'm not going to wait until my teeth turn to cocaine powder and I blow it out my nose.
So, has she reduced the amount of violence in the world?
No, I doubt it, right?
But I'll still listen to what she has to say because she has factual statements that are useful and helpful to me.
So, there was so much wrong with that and it was so impulsively stated and You didn't pause for even a tiny moment to think about, like, this in general, I think a lot about my shows.
I don't just sort of sit down, right?
I mean, I think a lot about my shows because I want to put out stuff that's helpful and useful and interesting and engaging and valuable and hopefully promotes virtue and harms the interests of evildoers, hopefully by converting them to be not evildoers or whatever, right?
When you just blurt out things, and it kind of puts me in an impossible situation.
I mean, you're trying to, right?
Which is why I sort of banned you.
I mean, anybody who tries to put me in an impossible situation, you're just not ready for the conversation.
You may be at some point, but you're not ready yet, right?
And, you know, you're like the six-year-old kid trying out for the NFL football team.
I mean, they may let you play a little bit as a joke, but when the game comes, you've got to get off the field, right?
Not as a joke, but as a sort of feel-good thing.
But... Oh, so you only respect the opinions of people who've actually reduced violence in the world, right?
So then if I say, yes, I only respect the opinions of people who've reduced violence in the world, right?
Then you'll find somebody where I say, in passing, oh, I respect that person's opinion or whatever, and they have not reduced violence.
Ah, you're wrong, right? If I say, oh, no, I do respect the opinions of people who haven't.
Reduce violence in the world, then you say, well, no.
But then you have to respect the people in 9-11, the JFK people, which totally contradicts what you said.
It's just, it's a stupid game set by your parents, enacted by you, which I don't really want to play.
All right. Do you think the government's nefarious behavior is more an instinctual behavior, or is it more by design or because of incompetence?
No, human beings have a good instinct for domination.
Yeah, human beings have a very good instinct for domination.
It's called grooming, right? Where you, you know, if you have predatory impulses, and I've talked about this with a number of victims of pedophilia, pedophiles, as children in my show, and as adults, they're talking about their past experiences.
Human beings have a very good instinct for how to slowly groom people into subjugation.
I think so. I think you called giving your kids what you were denied, is to find us being a hero.
I think it's one of the things that would be heroic, yeah.
Alright. Shall we close down?
Oh my gosh, we've been going for almost an hour and a half.
Wow. If you were making good money as an employee and they forced you to get vaccinated, would you quit or speak out?
I'm not sure how to approach it.
Well, I don't know. I mean, I don't know what you should do, but I will tell you this, that an enormous number of people around the world are being very strongly encouraged to pursue their entrepreneurial dreams, to work for themselves,
to create their own companies, to go become self-employed, A large number of people are being kicked out of the corporate veal-fattening fluorescent bulbs, square honeycomb nest of salary taxed doom,
and they're being strongly, strongly encouraged to go out and finally start that business, finally get that business going, finally partner up with their friend to find some way to add economic value without being part of a company with 100 or more people.
So let's see here.
Right.
You have to respect people who believe in astrology because you can't possibly know everything.
Yeah, of course. Have I ever said that you have to respect me?
No. Certainly not what you see my kind of coast playing in the bedroom, right?
No, I've never said you have to respect me.
I mean, respect is, it's like demanding your body you have to be healthy.
I mean, your body is empirical.
It doesn't care what you say. It only cares what you, you can't eat facefuls of chocolate, scream the word diet at your body and lose weight.
Your body's just empirical based upon what you put into it.
And so if what I do generates respect in you, I think that's fair.
I think that's just. If what you do generates respect in me, I think that's fair.
I think that's just. I pay what I owe.
It's kind of the definition of justice, is pay what you owe.
Sometimes you owe people contempt, and if you withhold it, you're being unjust.
Sometimes you owe people love or respect, and if you don't pay it, you're being unjust, right?
So I've never demanded that, though.
I mean, I think it would be crazy to demand it.
We've got to make Galt's Gulch.
Maybe that's El Salvador. Maybe.
Maybe. Your birthday is also in a week?
Is my birthday in a week?
No. Two weeks?
No. 23 days?
No, 13 days! Oh my God, where's my...
My respect for nurses has definitely changed.
I'd let them fire me, sue, and use the settlement money to buy bitcoin.
I owe people their own responsibility.
Well, no, because that's not a debt that they incur with you or don't, right?
They have their own responsibility whether you give it to them or not.
It's not a debt. It's like saying you owe people gravity.
It's just a property of life to have your own self-responsibility.
Do you think they'll mandate vaccines for apartment buildings?
Well, at this point, there's just a mania, right?
There's just a mania. And there's a mania for a variety of reasons, right?
So, I mean, I remember back in...
I'm old enough to remember when they said 70% vaccination plus people who've already had prior exposure will be herd immunity and we'll be fine.
And now we've got Erin O'Toole, emphasis on the last syllable, conservative leader in Canada going up against Justin Trudeau, and he's saying, oh, we've got to get north of 90%.
That's just vaccination, not even counting the prior exposure stuff, right?
It's just a mania. So I think what it's become now is it's just, they're just mad at people who won't do what they want.
They're just mad at people who won't do what they want, and I think that's got a lot to do with it.
Thoughts on Chris Sky? I didn't like his brother No Man's video game.
I don't know anything about Chris Sky, sorry.
It's sad nurses who are quitting are being ridiculed after working through COVID. Oh yeah, well they're heroes until they disobey, right?
And then they're bad people.
That's kind of nasty. You get the vax or you get the axe?
How do you feel about a man who is with a woman he doesn't really like but stays with because she's wealthy and will provide for him?
That's a labradoodle posing as a human being, so.
The team of docs I work with all refuse the vax?
Yeah. Yeah.
You were forced vaxed in Australia?
Ouch. I'm sorry about that.
I mean, I think the constitutional argument here in Canada is that they can't kneel on your neck and vax you.
But, you know, they'll just continue to put pressure on you and all of that.
All right. I hope you guys have a wonderful evening.
Thank you so much for dropping me by tonight.
A really, really enjoyable chat, and I even appreciate the people who I... Found annoying because they give me some wonderful things to talk about.
So, I'm about to lose my job due to the tyrannical forced vaccinations.
I'm very sorry to hear about that.
And, you know, you may want to explore your legal options, but also...
Maybe you're about to gain self-employment.
Maybe you're about to gain the job of your dreams by all of this.
So, yes, thank you.
Have a great rest of the evening.
I wish I could give you guys some remote kind of schedule, but other than Wednesday nights, 7 p.m.
and Friday night, 7pm, it's Catch as Catch again.
Although, again, if you follow me on social media, I will generally try and post when I'm doing these things.
And of course, freedomain.locals.com, when I stream there, you'll get the notifications right away.
So, have yourself a wonderful evening, everybody.
Lots of love from up here. Take care.
▲
Export Selection