0:00 - Morning Greetings and Show Introduction
39:26 - Honesty in Relationships
43:31 - Media and Body Image
49:51 - Navigating Dating Histories
58:54 - Understanding Personal Growth and Relationships
1:01:42 - Historical Perspectives on Propaganda
1:13:50 - Understanding Value in Relationships
1:14:09 - Women's Value Beyond Physicality
1:15:00 - Addressing Insecurity in Relationships
1:15:59 - The Risk of Regret
1:18:34 - Embracing Philosophical Identity
1:20:52 - The Impact of Philosophy
1:28:02 - The Burden of Expectations
1:28:56 - The Nature of Public Perception
1:32:57 - Propaganda and Population Control
1:35:51 - Navigating Parental Age Gaps
1:37:53 - The Writing Process of "Just Poor"
1:39:04 - Codependency in Relationships
1:41:50 - Political Choices and Philosophical Integrity
1:46:02 - The Focus on Parenting vs. Politics
1:53:58 - The Consequences of Parenting Choices
1:57:22 - The Price of Political Pursuits
2:00:01 - The Challenge of Conscience
2:01:58 - The Ineffectiveness of Political Action
2:04:19 - The Illusion of Political Engagement
2:05:41 - Closing Thoughts and Community Engagement
In this episode, we delve into the complexities of political expression and the dilemma faced by individuals when voicing their support for candidates amid a climate of fear and hostility. Fielding a question from a listener who faced hostility after publicly supporting a candidate, I unpack the dynamics of political allegiance, societal perceptions of dissent, and the implications of coercive behavior in modern discourse.
Exploring whether to publicly display support for a presidential candidate or to conform to a culture of silence, we discuss the notion of coercion and the loss of reason in contemporary political dialogue. Drawing parallels to past uprisings and political protests, I highlight the importance of standing firm in one’s beliefs, even in the face of potential backlash. We acknowledge the anxiety surrounding overt political expressions, especially in an era where societal disagreements can lead to severe consequences, including threats to personal property and freedom of expression.
As we transition to broader political themes, I tackle the deep-seated issues surrounding economic dependency and societal structure, where many have adapted to live off government provisions. This analysis leads us to consider how such dependencies affect societal attitudes towards political change and the pervasive fear of losing those benefits. The conversation further steers into the deeper philosophical waters about the nature of self-ownership, moral principles without deific influence, and the existential questions surrounding consent and ethical behavior.
Through a series of engaging questions ranging from libertarianism's impact on societal behavior to the moral implications of actions without a divine mandate, we engage with the inherent contradictions in the quest for self-ownership and autonomy. The topic of consent broadens into discussions about ethical ownership of oneself and the troublesome morality surrounding complex issues such as consent among individuals with varying degrees of mental capacity.
The episode picks up momentum as we navigate the intricacies of libertarian thought, societal norms, and the ever-important discussion of parenting practices. We critique the historical neglect of peaceful parenting principles within libertarian discourse, shedding light on how this oversight has perpetuated cycles of violence and coercion through generations. The urgent need for adopting more humane, ethical parenting practices is highlighted as a critical method for changing the cultural and political landscape, promoting self-ownership, and reducing aggression.
Ending on a reflective note, I emphasize the necessity of action over rhetoric, insisting that meaningful change must prioritize the well-being of future generations by addressing the issues of parenting. Listeners are encouraged to engage with these themes deeply and consider the critical role they play in shaping their political and moral landscapes, ultimately pushing back against the coercive forces in society that diminish individual freedom and agency.
This thought-provoking episode serves not only as a call to action for those navigating the contentious political framework but also as a broader invitation for reflection on personal values, morality, and the legacy we choose to leave for those who come after us.
[0:00] Good morning. First of September 2024. Freedomain.com slash donate to help out the show. We've got some great questions this morning. Already, already.
[0:14] And let's get straight to it. Good morning, Stef. Thank you for the tip. I have truly enjoyed listening to this show. I've learned a tremendous amount about myself and the world. I have a question if you have a chance to look it over. I want to put up a flag supporting my chosen presidential candidate. But last time I did so, it was stolen off my property and destroyed.
[0:37] My question is, should I put up a flag or should I support in secret? I feel like I'm being slowly silenced and pushed to comply due to unhinged individuals. Thank you. Well, are they unhinged? Are they unhinged? People are, I mean, concerned about a second Trump presidency. I assume that that's what was stolen. And they are concerned that there might be more job creation. They're concerned that there might be less money available for welfare. They're concerned that people, if they have cushy government jobs, that they might get fired. People have adapted now for several generations to live off government money. Repeat after me. People have adapted now, for several generations, to live off government money. And they don't like anything that threatens that government money. Of course, right? I mean, you tell me an animal alive that's indifferent as to the viability of its food source. Such a creature does not exist. So...
[1:48] One of the reasons why, of course, your flag would be stolen and destroyed is because, and it's a funny thing, you know, the amount, and this is why I'm not in politics, it's all become smoke and mirrors for the most part, right? Right. So now it's like, well, Trump has this many people at his rally, but Kamala Harris has only this many people at her rally. And people are actually making their decisions based on how many people are showing. This person is popular. This person is unpopular. This person is nice. This person is orange. This person is weird. This person is not. I mean, it's really it is. It's like to trying to philosophize with pre-verbal toddlers. Right. I mean, there's really nothing you can, nothing you can, Reason has left the building. Reason and Elvis have left the building. Although Elvis left the building because he was overfed, Reason has left the building because it's been starved to death.
[2:47] So, yeah. The reason that your flag is stolen is people don't want to think, they don't want other people to see that other people support that particular candidate. I mean, what should you do? I don't know. No, I mean, there is no philosophical answer to the problem of coercion, right? This is why philosophy works as hard as possible to maintain free speech and to push back against the spread of coercion. I mean, when I was in Hong Kong and the tanks came down the street, I mean, hey, I'll stay I'll stay there for the blue spray paint. I'll stay there for the loud noises. I'll stay there even when the tear gas canisters are flying around, which actually was, in hindsight, kind of unwise. One of those could have hit me in the face or the eye, but nonetheless, it survived. I'll stay for all of that, right? But when the tanks come rolling down the street, I'm not going to reason with tanks, right? Right. So you're asking me, what is the philosophical answer to the problem of coercion? And there is not a philosophical answer to the problem of coercion, which is why philosophy works as hard as possible to prevent the spread of coercion. All right. Yes.
[4:11] Good morning for everyone from Scotland, from England. Very nice to see you. And let's get to your comments and questions.
[4:26] Yeah, like wasn't I talking about how the job numbers are all made up and then they had to revive them down, what, 700,000, 800,000? Yeah, nine out of 12, the year is flying by. That's right.
[4:42] All right uh let's see here let me see if i've got any questions over here if politics isn't the answer and it clearly isn't what are we supposed to do well um you're supposed to, tell parents about peaceful parenting and you're supposed to peacefully parent yourself i mean you're supposed to be a peaceful parent yourself you can't exactly peaceful parent yourself in that sense but yeah you are supposed to talk to people about.
[5:13] Peaceful parenting and peaceful parent yourself uh one love above i appreciate the sentiment behind the support but um if i could refund you that i would please please please do not send a dollar uh it breaks my heart it absolutely breaks my heart uh if you're down to your last dollar please don't spend it on a live streamer no matter how fantastic and ruggedly handsome, don't spend it on that please please save your money use it for bus fare to get a job i'm not kidding like do not spend your last dollar on a live streamer please please please save it, get on a bus and get to work do you recommend the play long day's journey and tonight any particular version yes i quite like the version with jason robarts uh playing the bad brother So that's a pretty chilling but good version. All right. So we got some questions. Let me get to them. They are good, juicy from Heisey. They are good, juicy, meaty questions. And we will get in there right away. Let me just boot this up and get them. All right. I will post these questions in. and we will get them on.
[6:34] Oh, all right. Let's see here. That's the first bunch. And where the heck does that go? It seems to have vanished. All right. All right. So let me just paste these in and then we'll go from there. And those are the first three and here are the last seven.
[7:07] All right the questions are will libertarianism or anarcho-capitalism inevitably lead to degeneracy self-ownership can it be proven without a deity or divine command can you own people is there immorality without a deity? Is there a secular proof of rational ethics? Can you get an ought from an is? Referring to the Crucible podcast, the debate between Wilson and Smith, is incest between consenting adults a violation of UPB? Does a UPB violation require the use of force to stop it? And last but not least, can we use force to stop an aesthetically unpreferred action? Actually, technically, it's an aesthetically negative action. So these are great, great questions. I appreciate them and we will get through them together and answer just about everything that needs to be answered in this or any other universe. I will do it in tough guy voice. I will not do it in tough guy voice. Spoiler, it was not tough guy voice that he used. All right.
[8:13] And let's keep it rapid. Will libertarianism or anarcho-capitalism inevitably lead to degeneracy? Well, the first question is, what is degeneracy? Degeneracy is the corruption that occurs when people are disconnected from reality. When people are disconnected from reality, they can indulge in all kinds of monstrous messes. And that would be degeneracy.
[8:41] So if somebody has some kind of sexual perversion, generally in the past when you needed to have a job and you couldn't get free government money or free government jobs you would have to keep that degeneracy to yourself, and like some weird sexual perversion something that I mean just about everyone would agree is a weird sexual perversion we don't really have to get into details you have to keep that to yourself and because if that weird sexual perversion were to come out front and center people probably wouldn't hire you because they would be liable for whatever weird sexual energy you brought to the actual workplace and they would find it off-putting to put you in front of clients other co-workers might not want to work with you and so on right so if you're really into sex with pencil sharpeners you're probably not going to get hired as a teacher. So there are specific negative financial issues when you are into something completely weird and unpalatable to society as a whole. There are negative consequences. And it's always the question that I have, and this is the question that I grew up with. I was talking about this with someone just this week who was telling me about a family issue, and my question was, How do you afford it?
[10:06] That's one of the most foundational questions of philosophy as a whole, and of morality and society and politics. How can you afford it? How do you afford it?
[10:21] So, if the answer as to how you can afford it is, I get government grants, I get SNAP, I get ABD cards, I get a government job where I really can't be fired. I get welfare. I get whatever, free X, Y, and Z from the government. Well, then you're disconnected from reality and you're kind of half a surf owner, right? Because you own people and you take their money through the force of the state. Violence breeds degeneracy because violence removes you from the need to provide value in order to receive value. And degeneracy happens when that equation is broken and you no longer need to provide value in order to receive value. You can just use force to take value. Degeneracy occurs when you don't have to negotiate with your fellow human beings and you just get whatever they want through force.
[11:20] So, female degeneracy to some degree, and there's male degeneracy too, so I'm not going to ignore that, but female degeneracy occurs to a large degree because the consequences of a lack of degeneracy are borne by other, sorry, the consequences of degeneracy are borne by other people. So some woman has three children by three different men and therefore can't really work and is mean to all of her boyfriends and so irresponsible well what would prevent that behavior in general is the consequences accruing to either her or her immediate family so in the past of course parents in particular fathers used to have a strict fairly strict control over the sexual activities of their daughters prior to their daughters getting married. Because if the daughter had a child out of wedlock, a man would not marry her, and the parents would end up having to pay for that child and raise that child, sometimes even as their own. There's lots of stories of the daughter getting pregnant, and then the baby being passed off as a whoops late in life, oopsie, of her mother. right? So they pass that off and so on.
[12:37] So in the past, bad decisions about childbirth would be borne by either the woman herself or her immediate family. And in fact, it would be borne by her immediate family. They could not force other people to pay for the bad choices. So whatever you subsidize, you get more of. Whatever you tax, you get less of. And right now, and really for the last couple of generations, we have been taxing good decisions and we've been subsidizing bad decisions. And some of those bad decisions are in the realm of degeneracy.
[13:10] So when the costs of children get turned into an asset, then you are paying people to have children out of wedlock. Of course, you know, one of the things that happened with the welfare state is welfare would not get paid out to the woman if there was a man in the house. So you are just incentivizing father absence in the household, which is, of course, bad for the children as a whole. You know, say, what's the old saying? like if masculinity was so toxic, then children raised without fathers should be doing way better than children raised with fathers, and they're not. So, spoiler, masculinity is not toxic.
[13:52] So, is it the case that when people are responsible for the consequences of their own bad decisions and they can't force other people to subsidize their own bad decisions or their own weirdness, is it the case that that will expand? Well, that takes such a fundamental lack of understanding of economics it just kind of takes my breath away so when people have to pay for the cost of their own mistakes your theory is that those mistakes will massively increase so when people can force other people to pay for the consequences of their own bad decisions.
[14:25] That's going to lead to less degeneracy but when you can't force other people to pay for the consequences of your own bad decisions and you bear the costs of your own bad decisions yourself self, somehow those bad decisions are going to increase. Come on, man, this isn't even that complicated. All right. Self-ownership, can it be proven without a deity or divine command? Yes. Self-ownership is implicit in the act of having a conversation and debating. So if you were to say to me, prove self-ownership, I would say, I need you to ask that question without exercising self-ownership. And if you say to me, Stef, you need to prove self-ownership, you're saying that you, Stef, need to use your control over your body, your self-ownership, in order to produce an argument that proves what I have to assume you're capable of in the first place. So, you're making a question to me. So, you're exercising self-ownership to ask me the question. You're asking me the question, not someone else. Therefore, you're asking me to exercise self-ownership in responding to the question. So, self-ownership is axiomatically assumed in asking a question for someone else to prove. So, self-ownership is self-defined by the act of exercising control over yourself, which you have to do in order to ask someone else a question. So, self-ownership is tautological in the act of communication.
[15:48] Can you own people? You cannot own people because you can own yourself. I can make my arm move up. I cannot make your arm move up because my neurological system is wired up to my own muscles. It's not wired up to your muscles. I can no longer, I can no more control you than I can digest food for you. Or if you say, Stef, I really need to pee. Can you go and pee for me? I would say, not so much. Watch, I'm afraid you're going to have to take your waterlogged ass to the bathroom. And if you're a male asking that question, you're probably going to have to sit to pee anyway. So no, you can't own people because self-ownership is direct control over that thing, direct internal control, right? And so you don't have direct control over other people. So self-ownership and the ownership of other people is not physically possible in the same way. Now, people say, ah, yes, but you can put a gun to someone's head, but that's a violation of the non-aggression principle, and that person has the right of self-defense, and so you can force someone to do something. Yeah, absolutely. But that's like saying nobody can own anything because everyone can steal. So the reason you have to put a gun to someone's head if you want to force them to do something, and you don't have to put a gun to your own head to force you to do something, is you have direct control over yourself. You don't have direct control over other people. So you cannot own other people in the same way that you would own yourself because you don't have the direct wiring to do that.
[17:13] Is there morality without a deity? Is there a secular proof of rational ethics? The question is not, is there morality without a deity? The question is, is there morality with a deity? Well, I don't know. Because if you're going to say that there is morality with a deity, you're going to have to say, since morality must be universal, that everyone has a direct experience and capacity to communicate with the deity in order to establish morality, which we cannot do. I have never been communicated to by any ghost, goblin, supernatural being, spiritual agent, space alien, deity, you name it. I have never ever once been contacted by any being that is not material.
[18:00] And this is, in fact, the case in general around the world. There are people who claim to be able to do this, but they cannot reproduce it. To claim that you have access to omniscience would be a very easy claim to establish, right? So if Bob says, I have direct contact to an omniscient being, an all-knowing being, you would simply ask Bob to show that by revealing something that either Bob could not know directly or that is not known by humanity at all. It's really not that complicated. To say that you're in connection or contact with divine omniscience is very easy to establish. You simply ask something that can't be known by humanity but is a knowledge point in the universe. Right? Not that complicated. I mean, omniscience would know where a pirate's buried treasure would be somewhere in the world. Say, oh, okay, well, you have access to omniscience. All you need to do to prove that is take me to some buried treasure. Oh, I can't really do that because it doesn't really work that way. So if you can't even, or some mathematical theorem that hasn't been proved, you could ask that. What are three equations in physics that have yet to be established? Oh, well, I have access to divine knowledge. I have access to omniscience, so I can give you that answer.
[19:28] What is unified field theory? Give me a unified field theory. Oh, I can't do that. Well, that is knowledge that is out there somewhere if there's omniscience, and so it's really not that complicated.
[19:45] If I say I can fluidly translate ancient Aramaic to Japanese, well, that's quite a claim, isn't it? So trust but verify. You'd say, okay, you have access to all knowledge. You have access to all knowledge. But like, hey, I will pay you, somebody will pay you a million dollars over the next two years because you have access to omniscience to recreate the library of Alexandria. Because that knowledge exists in omniscience, right? So it's simply a matter of proving that you have access to omniscience. Now, no one has ever proven that. People who claim to have access to omniscience, to all knowledge, to all knowledge, have never once been able to prove, even hint at, having access to all knowledge.
[20:47] And it doesn't even have to be that complicated. If someone has access to all knowledge, right? Bob says, I have access to all knowledge. Then I would walk up to Bob and say, what did I dream about last night? And then he would ask the giant infinite Googleplex of all knowledge and would get an answer. If you claim to have direct access to omniscience, very easy to establish, never is established. So, since nobody has ever proven to have any access to omniscience, why would you accept this supposed omniscience as the transmitter of morality? Would it make any sense? And the question is, is it morality because it is true, or is it morality because it is ordered, it is so ordered? Now, this is an old question back from Socrates.
[21:44] Right are we pious because we simply obey the gods even though the gods contradict themselves and make different rules in different circumstances are we pious because we obey the gods or are both us and the gods pious because we obey some objective moral standard if there is an objective moral standard then it needs to be proven if you are simply obeying then you are making a virtue you out of obedience. Now, that is very dangerous. To say, I am good because I obey those in authority is a direct path to totalitarianism. I am good because I obey those in authority. So, are the moral laws that the gods give us good because there's some objective moral standard that the gods obey, and therefore we should obey, okay? But if the objective moral standard is something the gods obey, then it is beyond the will of the gods, which means it is a universal moral standard that can be proven in some manner. Because if the universal moral standard can be proven in some manner, then both the gods and us obey that objective moral standard, and we don't need the commandment of the gods to obey a moral standard that can be proven objectively.
[23:02] If the moral standard cannot be proven objectively, then we are simply obeying the gods because they have power. And therefore, we are not obeying morality, we are obeying power. We are obeying their signs. Or we sprinkle the magic dust called all good on deities who cannot explain their morals and then say, well, by obeying the deity, which means actually obeying the people who claim to speak for the deity, obeying mere human beings is the ultimate virtue. you. Now that is going to lead to degeneracy. Can you get an ought from an is? So saying you cannot get an ought from an is, is getting an ought from an is. You ought not, right? So it is a self-detonating statement. You cannot get an ought from an is. So I ought not say that I can get an ought from an is. So there is no ought, therefore we ought not to say there is. So you've just created an ought, and then we just wrangle from there. Referring to the Crucible podcast, the debate between Wilson and Smith, is incest between consenting adults a violation of UPB? It certainly is. It certainly is. Oh, no. It's consenting adults. No, it's not. It's not consenting adults. Very, very briefly, and I've made this argument twice before, not that you would have heard it, but very briefly, incest is not consensual.
[24:25] We all accept that there is a certain amount of brain damage that eliminates the possibility of consent if somebody is severely mentally handicapped has had half of their brain eaten away by meningitis or some horrible illness or injury they cannot consent somebody in a coma cannot consent somebody who is blackout drunk cannot consent there is a certain amount of debilitation in the mind that eliminates the capacity for consent. And incest is such a vile and, of course, anti-healthy, both mentally and physically, sexual practice that it could not have arisen except in situations of extreme trauma and abuse. And because the people who are engaging in incest have had their brains broken by massive extreme trauma and abuse, they cannot consent. We all understand this, right? I've got this show that's been in the wings forever, About the Turpin family, the Turpin family raised like over a dozen kids, chained to the beds, never really allowed out, fed very badly, beaten, tortured, abused, threatened.
[25:30] Would we say that one of these poor children who was weighing 90 pounds at the age of 19, well, they're 19, they can legally consent to sex. It's like, no, they can't because they're so damaged and broken by abuse that it will take them a long time to overcome the abuse to the point where they can consent. So, yes, you cannot consent even as a, quote, adult. There are lots of adults who can't consent. Lots of adults. I mean, mentally damaged adults cannot consent. And so...
[26:00] Even the Stockholm syndrome, right? The Stockholm syndrome is where often a woman, could be a man, falls in love with their captors. And well, that's just brain trauma and that is a terrible attachment disorder based upon PTSD and so on. So if somebody who's been kidnapped, if a woman who's been kidnapped says, no, no, no, I want to go with my kidnappers, are you still allowed to use force? Yeah, because she's not in the right mind. She can't consent to go because she's been traumatized and brutalized. So and i understand it all with this slippery slope and how do you prove this but that's a different matter it's a different matter the question of the principle is there are people brain damaged to the point where they cannot consent and we all accept that to one degree or another and if we had good brain scans to figure out people who practiced incest as adults it would be the result of a massive amounts of trauma injury and ptsd and abuse and so on to the point where it would not be it would not be consensual so, all right does a UPB violation require the use of force to stop it.
[27:09] I'm not sure what you mean by require so a UPB violation let's say somebody runs at you saying I'm gonna stab you with the chest what do you mean does it require the use of force to stop it not necessarily let's say that you could would jump in a car, roll up the windows and drive away. Okay. Well, that's not a UPB. That's not violence. That's just getting away. Let's say you can talk the person down, right? Let's say you can go inside the house and close the door and so on, right? So there's things that you can do that will prevent a UPB violation that are not force, but you're allowed to use force, right? You're allowed to use force. And for that, you can go to my book, UPB, universally preferable behavior a rational proof of secular ethics can we use force to stop an aesthetically unpreferred action so that's an aesthetically negative action so there's five categories of behavior in morality universally preferable behavior right which is respecting property rights say or not initiating the use of force there's aesthetically positive actions and these are things that are good but not enforceable things such as being polite being on time, having a sense of diplomacy, giving correct notice to your office, not calling in sick when you're not sick, you know, not lying and so on. These are aesthetically preferable, but you can't enforce them with violence. So if being on time is preferable.
[28:33] But you can't shoot someone for being late, right? Because they are not imposing their being late on you by force. You have chosen voluntarily to engage in that. It's definitely better if they're on time, but you cannot shoot someone for showing up late because they are not using force to hold you there. You're not chained. You are voluntarily in the relationship and so on. So you can't use force to stop anesthetically negative action, perfection such as lying right so if someone says let's say you're singing a song and you're sending in an audition tape and you do a bad job but your friend says sounds great to me sounds fantastic right and then it turns out that you are in fact off pitch and off tune and sound bad can you shoot your friend no because your friend is not imposing his opinion on you by force you're voluntarily seeking it out and he's voluntarily providing it but he's not imposing anything on you by force So you can't use force to stop someone from lying. Now, if it's a contract and then it's a form of theft and that's sort of a different matter. But, you know, little white lies or just, yeah, you look fine in those pants when you're actually asked, looks like two zeppelins and a condom. Well, then, you've voluntarily chosen to have that person's counsel in your life. They're not imposing anything by force. So you can't use force to stop aesthetically negative actions.
[29:56] So that's it. But look at that. We got through that. Very, very interesting stuff. All right, let's get to your comments about it. I've learned 100 times more from your show than university. Wow, that's interesting. Okay, let's look at this. Average cost of university degree. Let's say USA. Average cost of university degree.
[30:27] I need some. I don't want just each year. Average cost. All right. 93.08. Tuition and other fees. 20,000. So let's say $80,000. $80,000. And you have learned 100 times more than something that costs $80,000. You owe me $8 million. I will take that in Bitcoin. coin. Be careful what you say. If you've learned a hundred times more from my show than university, bing, bing, that will be $8 million. I'll wait. Appreciate it. No, I appreciate that. Thank you. Thank you. Tattoos have become normal. Degenerate behavior has been shifting more extreme. Right. So how have tattoos become normal? Because the cost of tattoos is not borne by individuals. So, one of the reasons why you wouldn't get a tattoo in the past is because...
[31:34] You would have fewer hiring opportunities, but now you either go on government welfare, you get a government job, or maybe there's some rule that says you can't discriminate against tattooed people and so on, right? The opposite of degeneracy is the choice to hire or not hire, right? Prove is a problematic term in ontology. Problematic is a problematic term because nobody knows whatever the hell it means. Doesn't that apply to pets, though? though. Surely you can own them. Well, it depends. Sorry, I hate to say it depends what you mean by own, but you can't own them in the same way that you can own yourself.
[32:18] Hey, Stef, did I miss the answer to the follow-up question I asked a week ago regarding honesty? I couldn't find the answer. I don't know. I have no idea. People always ask me these things, like, I've got six million questions whirling around. I've got a whole bunch of projects going on. I've I've got employees and it's like, but my question from a while ago, and it's like, why don't you repost the question? All right. Let's see here. Was it immoral for a man and woman to be lovers before they found out they were brother and sister per an episode of law and order? Oh, so you mean a brother and sister, both, uh, A boy and a girl both given up for adoption in different places, they end up meeting by coincidence, they become lovers. Well, no, that's just a lack of knowledge, right? I mean, that's like, is it theft if I buy something from a garage sale that turns out to be stolen? No, it's not theft. I have no evidence for that, right? In the UK, foreign students pay £40,000 a year. Well, that's what, £85,000? And yeah, per year, oh my gosh, that's got to be 20 million or so.
[33:39] Alright, let's get a question over here on Rumble. If you were a US citizen, would you move to Puerto Rico to avoid taxes? Um, I don't know. I, um, I can't possibly give you that kind of advice. That's something to talk about with an accountant.
[34:02] A bit of a weird one, but are you your brother's keeper? Well, that's a complex question, of course, because you are your brother's keeper to some degree when you're younger, particularly if you are an older brother, then you have some responsibility to keep your younger brother safe from bullying and other forms of danger to some degree, if you want loyalty to be there for you. So you are your brother's keeper when you are younger. When you are older, you are not. Any tips for a straight white male dealing with a 90% nursing staff? P.S. from Australia, loved your live show when you came. Well, thank you. I appreciate that. Yeah, female nursing staff. Dealing with a 90% female nursing staff. The best way to deal with women in the workplace is to get married yourself. Best way to deal with women in the workplace is to be married yourself.
[35:15] All right. I'm trying to sell an old car and some joker offered me a trade for tattoos for the car instead of cash. What am I going to do with tattoos? Well, I mean, tattoos are just advertisements for fairly low IQ trauma victims to find each other and replicate their trauma with each other. All right. August 24th, he posted a question regarding honesty. Okay.
[35:49] Okay, there's stuff about privacy here. Yeah, honesty. Let's see here. Oh, is this like keep some things, you don't have to tell everything to your partner?
[36:03] I'm sorry, I did answer the question. But no, you don't. You know, if you've got a great woman in your life, let's say you had some crazy woman and you had wild sex in your past, right? Are you going to go into endless detail with your current wonderful wife or girlfriend friend about all the crazy sex you had in the past no shut up shut up i just i don't know i have to be honest i have to be honest it's just i mean it's half autistic to say well honesty is something that programs me regardless of any kind of sensitivity to the feelings of others let's say that i don't know um some girl you're you're dating at a sex tape or something Here, show, this is me with another guy. I'm just being honest. I don't know. Let's say, I mean, the sex tape is an extreme example because you probably wouldn't want to date someone with that kind of stuff. But no, just shut up. Just shut up. Here's a picture of my poop from this morning. I got a mountain. I got a devil's mountain. I'm quite excited. Look at that. I'm above the waterline. That's impressive. That means my bowels are more productive than a Miami beach sunscreen factory. It's just like input-output. No, feel free to shut up.
[37:30] Feel free to shut up. Oh my gosh. There's lots of posts on social media about how devastated women's partners have been about them being honest. Yeah, shut up.
[37:49] Could biological siblings even be attracted to each other? Doesn't the human body have some protection against this, such as pheromones or something? Yeah, but you can create some scenario where that might happen, right?
[38:07] See, just saying I have to blarp honesty no matter what. Okay, if you're not asked, right? If you're not, is there a lie by omission, right? Is there a lie by omission? Right if you are walking past some bus shelter with your wonderful wife and in a misbegotten youthful past you had sex with someone in that bus shelter you say hey that bus shelter i i i banged a crazy girl in that bus shelter it happened like this it happened like this this This was great. This was bad. I got this. I mean, shut up. Shut up. Oh, my gosh. Oh, my gosh. I don't know. Shut up. You don't want to make decisions. You just want to be programmed. Philosophy is not going to program you. You must do this. You must not do that. You have to be honest without any judgment whatsoever. Why wouldn't you want to share your relationship history with the person you will be marrying?
[39:26] Oh, that is some absolutely, truly interstellar levels of not listening at all. That's really amazing. That is an amazing level of not listening. So, did I say don't share anything about your dating history? No, I don't share sexual details about past relationships with new lovers.
[39:53] I mean, if the person says, have you dated in the past? Yes, I dated. I had a six-year relationship. Why did that end? X, Y, and Z. That's fine. There's no problem with that, right? There's no problem with that. Do you have to be honest when the wife asks, does this make me look fat? Well, I think you do have to be honest if your partner is gaining weight. This is something my wife and I talked about before we got married, because we are aware that married people sometimes gain weight. And we said, let's just be honest with each other. Now, of course, you can weigh yourself and so on, but if your partner is gaining weight, you should say, I think you might be gaining weight. Let's, you know, check or whatever, right? Yeah, of course. Because we had a deal. And I think, in general, if you care about someone, then you should tell them if they're gaining weight. Because it's unhealthy. And if you care about them, then you want them to be around for a long time and to be healthy and happy, right? You can share what you've done without being misleading, but I never said to go into extreme explicit detail.
[40:57] Well, I'm talking about extreme explicit detail. That's what I talked about. The crazy sex I had with my ex, right? Who was later institutionalized or whatever, right? So I was talking about explicit sexual detail. I never said you shouldn't talk about prior dating at all. That isn't my question. It's more so why would you want to hide things, e.g. not tell them you have had a bad dating history generally. But that's not what I'm talking about. So you can just go off and have this conversation with yourself. Because if you're not going to reference anything that I'm talking about, why would you want to pretend that we're having a conversation? I don't understand that. I don't understand that.
[41:40] So I guess you can chat with yourself and not reference anything that I've saying, but I, I, I generally have this policy. I don't interrupt people's conversations with themselves. So if I've made it clear that I'm talking about explicit, my examples are, you know, having sex in some skeevy bus shelter and wild sexual positions and, and things you did in the past and, and so on. Right. And so I'm talking about explicit sexual detail. And then you're saying, well, no, but you should be honest about, you know, your general dating habits and histories. It's like, well, that's not a conversation that has anything to do with what I'm talking about. So you have your conversation with yourself. I'm just not going to pretend that I'm involved. Right.
[42:24] All right. Already got married last month. Still happily. Okay. So then what is the gaslighting going on these days is that obese women are attractive. And if you disagree, the problem is with you. Well, the media in America and New Zealand, the media takes money from direct-to-consumer ads for medicines, right? So why would the media want to tell fat women to lose weight? I mean, the media is generally on the leftist side, and unmarried women vote for the left. The media makes a lot of money from pharmaceutical ads, and people who are overweight consume a lot more pharmaceuticals. And women who are slender are very happy to say that fat women look great so that they have less competition. So there's just a massive amount of political, financial and sexual marketplace value competition incentives to tell fat women they look great and fat men and so on, right?
[43:31] And my experience is that men generally don't like being compared either favorably or unfavorably basically don't want to think about anyone else not sure if it's the same for women so there was a post on x uh maybe i can find it maybe i really don't want to search for penis size on x so but But there was a post on X, and it was about a guy who said that his wife made a comment about his penis size. Right?
[44:02] I guess his wife had been with, obviously, a certain number of women in the past. A certain number of men in the past. Maybe one of these days. Oh, yeah, here we go. Lord knows I actually found it. All right. So this is a guy who said, my wife commented on my penis size, and now it's ending our marriage. 34-year-old male and 34-year-old female married for six years. Everything was going great until my wife made a comment about my penis size last year. I didn't care at first, but after a while, problems started to occur. First thing is, I couldn't get hard at all for her. I could think of other women and get hard for them, but not her. She apologized right after her comment, but it didn't work. I went to two different therapists this year, and we also went to marriage counseling, but my thing will just not work with her. It happened after that comment, and nothing can solve it. I mentioned divorce this Friday in a discussion and she broke down. To be honest, I'm not sure what's wrong with me. I don't feel resentment or anger thinking about her comment. There should be nothing wrong, but my thing refuses to act with her. I could be having a hard-on, but once she gets close, it shuts down. Therapists didn't work. Marriage counseling didn't work. And the only option I see is divorce here.
[45:09] Well, what can I tell you? Hey, man, she's just being honest. she's gonna be honest and divorced, what can I tell you no no she's being honest.
[45:32] There's a documentary called Unhung Hero, oh, that's funny, about a guy whose proposal got declined at a baseball game because the woman thought his penis was too small. Yeah. She deserves it. Well, no, see, she was being honest. Man, she's just being honest. So, yeah, just shut up. Just shut up. Do i look as great as the day i met my wife i mean i'm a little more muscular and i'm a little i weigh less but uh you know in terms of skin elasticity and and so on uh no i mean when i when i met my wife i was still 10 years away from eating even needing glasses right, So, would I want my wife, every time she looks at me and notices me aging, would I want my wife to say, you're getting older, you're really looking older, you're getting older, man, you really don't look like you did when I met you. Oh, she's being honest. Shut up. Shut up. Oh my gosh. Fuck.
[46:55] Uh, so does he have a small one or not? I can't see how it can affect you if it isn't. Oh, come on, man. You don't have to ask that. That's got to be a woman who's asking that question. Do you really think that a man would be upset about a comment about his penis size if it was, it's too big? It's so big, it's not going to bother him. Trust me, I know. It's not going to bother him. All right. Right. As a slender woman, I used to get death stares from fat women when I ran. They didn't know me. My life had no effect on them. I wondered if they hated to see proof that I wasn't just lucky to be thin. That was usually what women said. No, actually, it takes effort and anyone can do it. Yeah. What do you mean my life had no effect on them? Of course your life has an effect on them.
[47:44] So, and this is a line from Kevin Samuels, but a woman shows a man what she thinks he's worth by her appearance. A woman shows a man what she thinks he's worth by her appearance. So if a woman works very hard on her appearance, looks great, then she's saying to you i think you're worth a lot i mean one of the reasons i exercise a lot and watch my weight and so on and uh i i barely ever even watch a tv show without doing leg lifts and sit-ups you know like 150 sit-ups uh because i want my wife to know how much i i value her and as a monopoly provider of romantic attraction to my wife i want to look as good as possible. I mean, there's a certain amount of aging out that's going to happen, but I'll fight it every step of the way, every step of the way. Whereas if a woman or a man gets fat and unattractive over the course of the marriage, they're saying, I don't really value or treasure you that much. I don't care about you that much. It's not just laziness. It's the denigration of the other. It's hostility towards the other.
[49:00] So your life absolutely has an effect on them because you are taking away what do men want? Men generally want slender women. It's going to be a bit of aging out and that's fine and pregnancy, I get all of that. But men want slender women. And so if a woman is not slender, she's saying, I don't care what men want. Doesn't matter to me. I don't care what men want. I don't care what you want. I don't care what you prefer. It's all about me and my brownies. I don't care. I don't care what you want. So it is a signal in general, again, barring medical issues and so on, but it's a signal in general that the woman is not going to care about what you want. It's a signal of selfishness.
[49:52] Stef i'm not the person asking but the original question they asked about honesty was born from the call-in where you told the woman not to disclose her bad dating history chiming in as i find this interesting still not settled on this but i have realized there's a line which signals a lack of boundaries, so you can say you had a negative dating history and look every 57 it was a 57 year old woman right so every 57 year old woman who's single and dating has a bad dating history that's understood unless she just bailed out of a nunnery in which case she probably had a pretty bad childhood but, every woman who's in her 50s and single has a bad dating history, or they have no dating history in which case they had massive amounts of trauma as a child, so that's understood, that's understood so if i shave my head come on a show and you're watching the video and i spend half an hour telling you that i've shaved my head isn't that kind of pointless you can see, i've shaved my head right so a woman who's 57 of course she has a bad dating history of course she does because she's 57 and single single.
[51:15] So that's understood. Now she can say, yeah, I was in a relationship for this long and it broke up and that's fine. But in terms of like, well, he did this to me and then this happened and then the other thing happened and then he ran out my credit card debt and there's like all of these horrifying details. No, shut up. Shut up. Because if you've learned from them and you won't do it again, right? You've learned the red flags, you've learned, You've hit your maturity bandwagon, your maturity stride, right? And so you've learned, then it's not relevant to the current relationship. If you haven't learned, then you shouldn't be dating because you're just setting yourself up for more disaster.
[52:01] Alright, she was 35. Okay, so a woman who's 35, who wants to be in relationships, has been dating for close to 20 years and has never found a man to commit to her and has never found a man that she wants to commit to and wants to commit to her. So she has failed. Look, let's be frank. All relationship breakups are catastrophic failures. All of them. Every single one of them are catastrophic failures because everyone goes into a romantic relationship with the hopes of it lasting a lifetime and producing children. Everyone goes into a romantic relationship, deep down, admit it or not, right down at the base of their spine, hoping it's going to last forever, be a perfect love that produces a family, children, and a legacy. see. Somebody to ride with you in the graying, collapsing horse into old age. Somebody to cry at your funeral when they drop you into the yawning gap of earth known as the six-feet dirt nap of eternity. Everybody goes into a relationship with the goal of it being a perfect love that lasts forever, produces a children and family, and gives you care, comfort, and companionship into your old age. Every single person.
[53:10] It's not like a job that you take in order to get another job in order to improve your career. Everybody goes into a relationship with the goal of a permanent pair bond. Therefore, every breakup is a catastrophic failure. It breaks your heart. It screws up with your sense of reality. It screws up with your trust in your own judgment. It takes a long time to repair because a breakup is perceived by the unconscious as the death of someone or a massive betrayal. Trail so all relationships that break up that are romantic and even friendships to some degree but all relationships all romantic relationships that break up are catastrophic failures, and it doesn't matter really how long they are, if you go out with a girl for two months and you're thrilled and happy and think it's going going to last forever and then it comes to a horrible malevolent violent end after two months.
[54:11] Then you are worse than clueless you are walking into the dick pencil sharpener of being blind to red flags balls in a blender right so the shorter the relationship is the more your judgment is impaired at least if you last for a year or two you could make it that long and then there's a breakup then so the amount of trauma is the same it just gets compressed right the amount of matter in the old black hole is the same as the earth the earth is like a teaspoon of black hole material is the same material it's just compressed it's the same trauma it's just compressed so if a woman's 35 she's failed for close to 20 years in every single one of her relationships so we know We know that, we understand that. Why would you need to, well, this happened and then this happened. No, shut up. It's understood, it's known, it's implicit. If you've dealt with it, it's in the past, move on. If you haven't dealt with it, then don't date until you have.
[55:20] But Stef, it's just a situationship. I'm strong and won't be affected by Chad. A situationship is a woman who is trying to get a man to commit to her, but she's already given him sex. A situationship is when a woman hopes that sexual access will lead to pair bonding.
[55:50] She was 35 and had a short time to get pregnant but you told her to take it to the grave which is fundamentally dishonest i would also bring guilt upon her and take it to the grave has very negative consequences so you understand that's not an argument you're just making sounds right you are as my daughter would say yapping yeah the absolute details of already processed says brutalities in prior relationships, shut up about them. Have some discretion. You don't have to, you don't have to tell everyone everything. You don't have to tell everyone everything. Have some discretion. Have some privacy. Have some care and concern for your partner.
[56:37] So in terms of take it to the grave, yeah, I can't remember the details, but if she has some massive dysfunction in a prior relationship and she's dealt with it and she's done the therapy, she's done the self-work, then shut up about it. Yep, absolutely. No problem with that. No problem at all with that. It's fundamentally dishonest. Oh, you put the word fundamentally in. Well, that's proof. It's not just dishonest. It's fundamentally dishonest. But also bring guilt upon her as take it to the grave has very negative consequences. So this is in the realm of um a bullshit egyptian voodoo curse right oh you can't disturb that mummy's tomb you'll be cursed and you'll end up with a career like brendan frazier who there's a detailed uh layer of analogies no if you don't tell everyone you're dating all of the details of sexuality and trauma and problems and betrayals in your past relationships relationships, you're going to be cursed with guilt.
[57:41] Okay, but you're just saying something. You're just saying something. If you've dealt with your past relationships, they won't affect your current relationship. Right? If you've dealt with your past relationships, they won't affect your current relationship. And therefore, the information is not a value or of use to the other the person. If you haven't dealt with your past relationships, and I think she had gone to therapy and dealt with a bunch of stuff, then you need to deal with those past relationships. 150 sit-ups is pretty good. Swole philosophy. Well, okay, I'll be honest, right? It's 50 straight and then 50 obliques. I saw some of that unhung hero documentary. I can't believe a dude had to make a documentary to find out size matters. Greater surface area means more stimulation. And obviously there is such a thing as being too big, but come on. All right. I understand this intellectually, but I'm struggling to reconcile with the best predictor. The best indicator for future behavior is relevant. It's past and present behavior. Right.
[58:55] But self-knowledge changes that. Philosophy is about changing things.
[59:07] All right. What if you have learned about some red flags, done some work on yourself, but still have a nagging feeling that you're missing a trick? You now have no or some idea of what you want or need. I don't know what that means.
[59:25] I don't know what that means. What if she has an STD? Okay, what did I just say? Okay, maybe you typed this before. So, of course, if it's relevant information, right, if it's relevant information, if she currently has an STD that can be transmitted to the partner, then, yeah, that is, of course, important. If she had some prior STD that has no lasting health effects and was cured many years ago, you can shut up because it's not going to affect your current partner, assuming you've dealt with all of that, right?
[1:00:06] Do mothers no longer warn their daughters about men and the old adage why buy the cow if you can get the milk for free about marriage first physical intimacy after for the women in chat, do you warn your daughters well i mean there's a race to the bottom i mean it's almost literally if you use the british phase in um in bottom right so yeah there's kind of a race to the bottom, so when women kind of had a cartel right when women kind of had a cartel on sexual access and and women didn't break the line, they held the line, right? They weren't scabs, so to speak, then women could demand commitment before sex. But the problem is, when so many women are giving sex without commitment, it gets tough. It gets tough. How does a woman get a date if all the other women are handing out sex like candy? It's very, very tough.
[1:01:01] All right. Alright, I'd say about three quarters of the way there with the honesty conversation. If the person hasn't dealt with things, then it'll show up in the present. And if that person chooses to share, great. If not, you decide what to do with what is a red flag. I don't know what that means. Alright. The first question, what did you say here? What is the first question from this person? Hmm.
[1:01:33] Um, um, thank you for your work. I've come across a book titled The Iron Curtain Over America.
[1:01:42] It's about the alliance with actually the bad guys, FDR, Churchill, Stalin, created wartime propaganda thoughts. They did. I don't have any particular thoughts. I did read a book called Churchill and the Unnecessary War by Buchanan. And i had it somewhere here oh you know what actually my camera is sitting on it right now so it's i've still got all of my post-it notes in the book so yes um world war ii uh you know the interesting thing just about history in general not about world war ii in particular, but.
[1:02:18] When you see history being rewritten and lied about even with video evidence in the present You can understand that there's nothing to believe in history. There's nothing to believe in history. Because, I mean, I've mentioned this before, the fine people hoax, right? That Trump at Charlottesville said that white supremacists and neo-Nazis were very fine people, were fine people. It's not true. He said they should be condemned utterly. He was talking about other people who weren't those people on both sides at the debate. So the fact that you can literally beam the truth into somebody's ass in about a second, and this lie persists. It just tells you that even with video evidence, even with being able to prove to somebody that video evidence, in about 10 seconds, lies persist. Nine lies persist.
[1:03:17] Uh let's see here if being naive means that i appreciate intelligent competent men who makes over six figures i'll take average or less than average every day any day i don't know what that means but maybe you're in a conversation with uh with somebody else 98 of women chasing two percent, of men math does not work yeah i mean the best way to make people miserable is to tell them to never settle i mean the best way to make people miserable is to tell them to never settle you You hold up the absolute ideal. I should not be live streaming because I have fewer people on my live stream than Mr. Beast. Yes, but I get to work with some infinitely better people, so I'll take that, right? So everyone tells you not to settle. And it appeals to your vanity. Pride and vanity is a desperately dangerous sin, right? And so telling you not to settle is provoking your vanity to the point where you don't end up happy. Never settle. You deserve the best. No, you don't. Neither do I.
[1:04:25] What does that mean? Let's just take this in the movie industry, right? Where's the highest paid actors get what, like $20 million? A movie, right? So then you say to every actor, you deserve the best. You should never ever appear in a movie unless you're being paid $20 million. Even if Even if you're an extra somewhere in the backdrop, you deserve the best.
[1:04:48] Even if you're the guy who says, Telegram, Mr. Swaggart, you deserve $20 million. You deserve the best. Everybody should be a leading man or woman and get paid $20 million and a percent of the gross. You should be like Jack Nicholson and the Michael Keaton Batman and earn $5 million for a couple of days' work. Right? It's funny. There would be no movies if everybody had to get paid $20 million. Like, the movie industry would not exist.
[1:05:21] Everybody who's watching the Rolling Stones perform deserves to be Mick Jagger and should take the microphone and sing Angie instead. There's no concert if there's no Mick Jagger, right? Man's got a narrow waist and Kevin Bacon. He looks like a wasp. Is he a wasp? Probably. Anyway, so, you deserve the best. No, you don't. That's just vanity. You deserve what you earn. You deserve the best. You deserve what you earn. You deserve what you negotiate. You deserve whatever the fuck people are willing to give you. That's what you deserve. You deserve... I deserve more people watching my livestream. No, I don't. I deserve exactly the people who choose to come to my live stream.
[1:06:18] I deserve more donations. I'll ask. Freedomain.com slash donate. Really would appreciate it. I mean, as a baby and as a toddler, you deserve your parents' love, care, and attention. Absolutely. Absolutely.
[1:06:37] But as an adult, you deserve nothing. Deserve is just a way of raising entitlement. Entitlement raises exploitation. exploitation, and entitlement is a prequel to rage. Right, being entitled is a prequel to rage. You deserve the best. Well, you keep going through life without getting the best, and you get angry. History is a set of lies that people have agreed upon, says Napoleon. I mean, that's a catchy phrase. But history is a set of lies inflicted by people in power in order to maintain their power. Buchanan got a lot of heat for that great book I could mention another author a British guy who went above and beyond him but I'll abstain yes I think I have some idea of whom you speak not the songwriter.
[1:07:30] All right. Now you deserve. You deserve the best. I mean, it gives you a flicker of vanity and a flicker of happiness, a little bit of dopamine, and then you set your life waiting for the best to be delivered to you. You deserve a million dollars of Amazon packages left on your doorstep. You don't? You don't deserve any of that. Oh, my gosh. Paid for renewing my monthly sub last night, not relying on coins. Can tip through the website. Thank you. You deserve the best. Is that a communist way of thinking? Well, you deserve the best keys into people's sorrow about their early childhood, right? You deserve the best from your parents. Absolutely, you deserve their love, care, attention. You deserve the best from your parents. For sure, absolutely. And I'm really, really sorry that you didn't get it, but you can't use that as a giant chain to enslave others in the adult. So what happens? You deserve the best, makes you arrogant.
[1:08:29] Right? You deserve the best makes you arrogant. You deserve first class. What do you mean I have to sit and coach? It makes you arrogant, makes you unpleasant. You deserve the best means you end up with the worst. I mean, guaranteed. Guaranteed. You deserve the best means you end up at the worst because you become arrogant and therefore quality people don't want to deal with you because you don't negotiate. All you come is is with demands and entitlement, right? It's the old thing that when you say to a woman, what do you bring to, well, here's what I have to bring to the table, right? 666 or something like, here's what I have to bring to the table. There's a reason why that's demonic. And you say, what do you bring to the table? I am the table. It's like, eh. Eh.
[1:09:24] If you're waiting at home for a marriage proposal, your chances are couriers and missionaries. Good luck with that. Right. Right. That's funny. Yeah, you deserve the best is just a depopulation. Seriously, it's a depopulation political power agenda. You deserve the best means that women stay single and therefore they'll vote for the government. Right. You know that the meme of the it's some I think it's some Japanese or Korean cartoon and there's a butterfly and a guy looks kind of wondering. Right and and it's like what is it the one in china there's a butterfly is this food, and it's like single women is this government the government is this boyfriend is this a boyfriend is this a husband it's the government right married to the state wed to the state you deserve the best is just a way of making people unmarriable so they'll vote for bigger your government, stay single, stay lonely, stay bitter, and be easily weaponized. Because when you get people to make terrible decisions, they end up with a lot of anger that's easy to weaponize against your enemies.
[1:10:39] Saw another podcast about advertising and how one strategy is flattery. You're the best, therefore drink Coke. Yeah, well, they make it a status thing. Have you ever seen that, uh, the lemon monologue. Have you ever seen this? It's pretty wild. I don't know if... This is the monologue.
[1:11:16] When life hands you lemons, make lemonade? No. First, you roll out a multimedia campaign to convince people lemons are incredibly scarce, which only works if you stockpile lemons, control the supply. Then a media blitz. Lemon is the only way to say, I love you. The must-have accessory for engagements or anniversaries. Roses are out. Lemons are in. Billboards that say, she won't have sex with you unless you got lemons. You cut the beers in on it. Limited edition lemon bracelets. Yellow diamonds called lemon drops.
[1:11:47] You get Apple to call their new operating system OS Lemon. A little accent over the O. You charge 40% more for organic lemons. 50% more for conflict-free lemons. You pack the Capitol with lemon lobbyists. You get a Kardashian to suck a lemon wedge in a leaked sex tape. Timothee Chalamet wears lemon shoes at Cannes. Get a hashtag campaign. Something isn't cool or tight or awesome. No, it's lemon. Did you see that movie? Did you see that concert? It was effing lemon. Billie Eilish, OMG, hashtag lemon. You get Dr. Oz to recommend four lemons a day and a lemon suppository supplement to get rid of toxins because there's nothing scarier than toxins. Then you patent the seeds. You write a line of genetic code that makes a lemon look like just a little bit more like tits. And then you get a gene patent for the tit-lemon DNA sequence, you cross-pollinate, you get those seeds circulating in the wild and then you sue the farmer for copyright infringement when that genetic code shows up on their land. Sit back, rake in the millions and then, when you're done and you've sold your lempire for a few billion dollars, then, and only then, you make some fucking lemonade.
[1:13:00] I mean, that's how it works. and I mean a fool and his money is soon parted if you think that you buy that beer and you get abs and a hot model by a pool well take the beer right.
[1:13:18] Alright um somebody said sorry Stef I meant in relation to dating when looking to marry I tend to overthink things then not act now I have no clue what I should be looking for I do but not how to prioritize those things and potential dates pass me by okay Okay, so you can wait for perfection and stay single. Or you can, at some point, you're going to have to roll the dice. Stef, I have ex-girlfriends that have me blocked, but often spy on my social media. Why do you think they might be doing that? Well, they want to find out if you or they were at fault. They want to find out if you or they were at fault.
[1:13:51] Right, so if you end up happy and wonderful and great, and then they will feel at fault, so what they're doing is making sure you're still single so they can convince themselves they didn't make a mistake. deck. Right? Make sense?
[1:14:09] All right. I can see why it's tough for women to think about providing value because when they're young, they have value just by existing. They have potential to have babies. No, I don't think that's quite true. Women don't have value just for existing. Women have value when they're young by being physically attractive. And the more physically attractive they are, the more slender and toned and the hair is great and they, you know, work on their outfits and they whatever, then they do better. It's not just being young. You also have to be young and attractive. What is the best I can get? Not happy with the choices? Can you do more to increase your value? Yeah. If you're not happy with your salary, then work to increase value and then communicate the increase in value and then go and get another job offer to confirm all of that.
[1:15:01] And yeah, just complain, right?
[1:15:12] All right. Why am I so insecure when my girlfriend is talking to a single man? My parents' divorce had a major impact on me in 1974. Is this the major reason why, or is it my personal deficiency? I'm... No, it wouldn't be your parents' divorce. Is your girlfriend fully committed to you? With your wife, you said she's the best you could get, or something along those lines. However, you just mentioned some people need to roll the dice. Is this contradictory? victory. Well, no, I mean, my wife could have been some absolutely compelling shapeshifter and could have just told me everything I wanted to hear and then totally turned on me after marriage. Right? I mean, there is no risk-free life, people.
[1:15:59] And there is no risk greater than regret. There is no risk greater than regret. Because regret is inevitable. Taking risks is your only chance to avoid suffering. Now, in the short run, avoiding risks is going to make you feel better, but it's predicated on the belief in immortality that is a false lie. Sorry, a complete lie. Taking risks is the only way to have a chance to not suffer in life.
[1:16:33] I mean, I can't even tell you how much I would have regretted not doing this show. So like close to 20 years ago, I started this show, and I had a good life as a software executive and entrepreneur. I traveled all over the place, stayed in five-star hotels, had a pretty great life. I loved working in tech, and it was pretty good. So I rolled the dice and started this. Took a massive pay cut. Well, two massive pay cuts over the course of my life, right? Leaving the software executive field and deplatforming, which I regret neither.
[1:17:17] So if I had stayed in the software field, I would be, I mean, I would have been very successful. I would have made a lot of money in that way. And I would have all of this capacity that I have would have been unexpressed in the world. And deep down, I know that the world needs a philosopher a hell of a lot more than it needs another software entrepreneur. I've been thinking about this a lot lately. The world needs a philosopher, a really good philosopher, more than it needs another actor or another playwright or another director or another novelist or another academic or another software entrepreneur or all the things that I had some pretty good success with before I did this. What is more needed? Now, of course, I was skeptical of how good I could be because the idea that, the golden god fingertip of philosophy would have landed on my random skull, is like expecting to win a lottery where the numbers come up once every thousand years.
[1:18:34] My skepticism as to my capacities was extraordinarily high and is beginning to fall now.
[1:18:46] I'm beginning to accept how good I am. After 42 years in the field, I can look back and say, yeah, I've solved the major problems, and I've advanced the field of philosophy enormously, and, tens of millions of people's lives have been vastly improved by this work that we are all doing together in the realm of philosophy.
[1:19:11] I've had the most general and positive impact of any philosopher because I focused on that which can be actioned, that which can be done. Quality relationships, peaceful parenting, and so on. And I have provided moral certainty for the first time in the history of philosophy. And an airtight defense of free will, rejection of, determinism, and a rejection of the simulation thesis of Scott Adams and René Descartes. So I am beginning to accept what I have done, but I need a lot of empirical evidence to accept proof, right? Outlandish claims require excessive proof, right? Things which are very, very hard to believe need a lot of proof. Things which are virtually impossible need a massive amount of proof. And it is virtually impossible, despite my lineage of philosophical ancestors, or ancestress, it is so ridiculously improbable that my abilities in philosophy have flowered in this kind of way that I just needed a ridiculous amount of proof to even really accept it at all. I've sort of been working on it over the last couple of weeks, just saying, looking back over sort of the body of work and the effects that I have and the inbox that I have and all of that.
[1:20:36] I can look back and say, what I have done is now empirically verified. I mean, nobody's been able to overturn UPB. It's been 15 years. A lot of people have tried.
[1:20:52] And the odds that philosophy and this ability and this willpower and this resolution and this focus would all have coalesced into me along with you know a fairly pleasant speaking voice a vaguely intelligent accent and not unpleasing physical appearance that all of this would have landed on me to advance philosophy in this kind of way is so ridiculously improbable i mean who was the the last famous philosopher, philosopher, not thinker, not intellectual, first principles, reason from the void philosopher, who was the last popular philosopher, maybe Bertrand Russell, but he was more analyzing other people's work, who had a real effect on the world, who actually helped spread and improve prove virtue and ethics in a practical manner.
[1:21:54] Not one of these, hey man, maybe we're living in a simulation. Well, Aristotle, okay. Aristotle, obviously a very famous philosopher and one of the best in the biz. But in terms of creating practical virtues that people can measure, that people can live by, The pursuit of excellence is eudaimonia is the best. The pursuit of excellence, particularly in the realm of morality.
[1:22:26] Locke certainly had a big effect on economics, but not so much on parenting. And economics is not small. But anyway, let's just say it's been a long time. Been a long time. Been a long time. I've been a long, lonely, lonely, lonely, lonely, lonely time. Yeah, it's been a while. It's been a while.
[1:22:54] So, very, very odd. Would donate to someone cleaning up my life? Broke, but later more donations. Used to donate more and I will. Can't thank you enough. Every day life gets better, truly. Beautiful. Thank you very much. Hey, good to see the most banned man on the internet. You know, you were the only man in Lauren Southern's tell-all who said she was a good man through it all. That's right. I did watch that. I thought it was very interesting. Are you Jewish? I am not Jewish I had a Jewish step grandmother but I was raised as a Christian and have no particular connection, with the Jewish community except that I was influenced by a lot of Jewish thinkers I mean a lot of non-Jewish thinkers but a lot of, Jewish thinkers don't forget how good your singing is thank you I appreciate that that's very kind I had a better singing voice before I got my nerves I got a bit of a droop here got my nerves drilled like crazy to remove an ankylos tooth so, But I appreciate that. I do like to warble from time to time.
[1:24:01] All right. What else do we have here? Still can't work out if you're left or right. You contradict yourself all the time. Still can't. Oh, are you the guy who leaves all of these vengeful comments on my rumble? 17 comments from this user. It's not going to be nice. Are you French or French descent or ancestry? ancestry. Your name looks kind of French. Also, the music is a bit loud. I kind of hard to hear you. Okay, I guess the music where you are. I am a French descent. My ancestors came over from France with William the Conqueror in 1066 in the Battle of Hastings and ended up as aristocracy in Ireland. Officially, I have an ESQ short for Esquire at the end of my name. And I am in the registry of all of that. Thank God you decided to become a philosopher, Not a singer. That's very true. I think that's very fair. I think that's very fair. Somehow don't abuse your kids. Escaped all those Greco-Romans and theologians and such. Crazy how that works. Well, didn't escape Jesus. Didn't escape Jesus.
[1:25:09] I said, baby, baby, baby, I'm going to leave you. Leave you in the summertime leaves you when the summer comes along, molyneux esquire yes officially it is thank you for the tip i appreciate that also thanks for the answer just now you are very welcome you're very welcome i don't have really much connection, with french history and i i suppose i mean i was born in ireland but i spent most of my childhood in England, in various places in England, and then moved to Canada when I was 11. I mean, I certainly think of myself as European in that sense, and my moral history is specifically Christian. I was raised as a Christian. I went to church when I was in boarding school from the age of six onwards. We went to church twice a week. I was in the choir and Sunday school, and I was raised as a staunch christian and i'm uncircumcised, i'd show you but i don't have um fisheye lens widescreen very very important.
[1:26:33] No one like i mentioned that i had a jewish grandmother without specifying that it was a step-grandmother and all of that so, did you ever play lawn darts i did not uh i did not but uh you know we had our own dangerous games when i was a kid do you have any additional comments regarding the rfk endorsement, um didn't they just pull his social security detail after his father and uncle were killed in this way so.
[1:27:08] You're welcome for the quick answer. All right, any of the last comments, questions, issues, challenges, problems, tips, support, donations. Remember, anyone who donates at freedomain.com slash donate gets the complete feed for my History of Philosophers series. Amazing, fantastic work, I think. In my own not-so-humble opinion, but you get that. Free Domain, the only philosophy show with penis jokes. There should be more. There should be more. What was it? It's a libertarian guy. The comedian who he ended up hosting The Price is Right basically got kind of bought out to drop libertarianism and warble at middle-aged women about the prices of things. He had a TV show for a while. Anyway, he had an entire, what was it, 20 minutes of My Dick is So Big jokes, which I thought was just hilarious. My dick is so big it only plays stadiums. Things like that. It was very, very funny.
[1:28:03] I got here kind of late, but I think the reminder, if you don't deserve the best, is always valuable. Yeah, you know, it's funny that people say, they don't say, I must provide the best. You must provide the best. You must provide the best. I think about occasionally in Magnolia, this rage against the breast, Tom Cruise screaming, just do your job, do your effing job. You must provide the best. Drew Carey. That's right. Lost tons of weight. Yes, Drew Carey.
[1:28:37] So you must provide the best. You must be the best. You must provide the best. Nope. It's always you deserve the best. You deserve a break. You deserve the best. You deserve a treat.
[1:28:51] Does Stef have the best body of any philosopher in history? It depends whether the statue of David comes to life and quotes UPB.
[1:28:57] That's the only question.
[1:29:05] I've never watched Henry Cavill. I know he was in The Witcher, which I barely played and have never watched. He was called an incel due to rumors that he doesn't want wokeness to mess with the established lore of his favorite franchises. This made him tough to work with. Well, when you have a passion for accuracy and conformity with lore, then what happens is you interfere with the parasites who cluster around art in order to program the people to be subjugated right oh yes he was in superman right yeah.
[1:29:47] Yeah, so, of course, a lot of stuff on social media is just pre-programmed psyops. I mean, if you've been on social media, and you've been prominent on social media, which I was for many years, you just know there's an absolute swarm of psyops. Very little of it, in terms of controversial stuff, is organic. Is just a massive swarm of psyops. So, for instance, is it beneficial for the powers that be if men remain pornography-addicted, playing video games, overweight and unhealthy? Yep! Because then women don't want to choose them, women stay single, and then women vote for more government.
[1:30:34] So, I would not assume that too much of this is organic, I assume it's all a psyop, right? I mean, this is sort of fifth-generation warfare. Fifth-generation warfare is you don't fight with weapons, you fight... So weaponry is about killing people. Fifth-generation warfare is about preventing people from being born through propaganda. Propaganda right men are pigs men are toxic women are hoes and and you know you can do better and mig tau i'm not saying everyone involved with these phenomenon is a psyop but warfare is about reducing the population through the attrition of low birth rates you don't have to kill people in warfare if you can simply program people to not give birth right so this is what warfare is these days. It's a warfare against it used to be a war against the male muscle, now it's a war against the female womb.
[1:31:33] Yeah, Penn Jillette used to be libertarian. I actually have a friend who met Penn Jillette and was extremely disappointed by that. Razor Fist has also been talking about leftist parasiting popular culture since they're creatively bankrupt themselves. So yeah, all the power mongers, when some popular piece of art is created, all the power mongers swarm in and attempt to wrestle it. You can see this with Star Wars and Star Trek and other things. All of the power mongers seek to swarm in and hijack it for their own particular purposes. This even happened with the Dungeons & Dragons movie, which I thought would be a bit of a bastion, right? Of not being able to do that, right?
[1:32:19] When does Freedom A.I.N. get a dance on a rooftop in New York with headphones? Yeah. I feel grateful that this is the warfare now. Now, being propagandized sounds better than being killed on the battlefield. Yeah. I mean, in a sense, instead of men being drafted, women are being sterilized through propaganda. And at least with propaganda, you have a choice. You don't have a choice if a bomb drops on your trench, right? You don't have a choice. You just get blown up, right? You don't have a choice if you either have to run into machine gun fire or they shoot you down in the trench, right? You don't have a choice in that.
[1:32:58] Propaganda is weeding out those susceptible to propaganda. I can have lots of different opinions about this, almost all of which would get me in significant trouble, but it is a simple fact that propaganda is weeding out those susceptible to propaganda.
[1:33:18] And the end results of that are very interesting. the end results of that are very interesting but there is an absolute goal of getting people to stop having babies by having them raise their expectations by normalizing being physically unattractive with pornography with unrealistic expectations of every kind and so on right And so there is an absolute thirst and hunger for a depopulation. I mean, this is very clear. It's nothing unusual. I've talked about it a lot. And you can see in almost every developed nation, the birth rates are crashing. It's not by accident. It doesn't just happen, right? And it is the taking out of the gene pool those who are most susceptible to propaganda.
[1:34:17] It's complicated. I heard Lauren Southern stopped sponsoring you. That's why you were deplatformed. Then you blamed the right for ADL money. I'm not sure what that means. Stopped sponsoring you. I'm not sure what sponsoring. I never took any money from Lauren Southern. I don't know what that means. That's why you were deplatformed. No, I was deplatformed in my view because it was an election year. And people can count. So I don't know what it means when you say Lauren Southern stopped sponsoring me. I don't know what that means. She never gave me money. I mean, we did shows together. We did a tour together. But I don't know what that means. Lots of things you hear. Lots of people talking. Very few of them know.
[1:35:18] All right let's see here and yeah you and another way that you cripple people's military is you have them focus on non-military goals and you make the leadership so ridiculous that nobody wants to join right okay somebody says i have a question a user on quora asks about their being embarrassed that at age 12 their dad is 57 is that a normal age for parents then commented on how his friend's parents were under 30. They were called out on that math, of course. But most of the comments were saying, it is normal for a near teen to be embarrassed by everything about their parents, that they should be grateful to have a father in their lives.
[1:35:51] Also, many users said that they were themselves or friends with people who had multiple siblings. And there was that larger, larger gap between a parent and the youngest child. I would just be curious how you would respond to the the question. So, being embarrassed at age 12 that their dad is 57, he's 57, he's 57.
[1:36:12] I mean, that's actually not that far off for me. So at 57, the dad had the kid at 45, if the kid's 12, give or take, right?
[1:36:24] And is that a normal age for parents? I mean, I don't know. So, I mean, there are minuses, of course. There are minuses to having an older parent, but there are pluses as well. And the pluses are there tends to be more money around, there tends to be more job security, there tends to be more wisdom that has been accumulated, and so on. So there are benefits and there are costs, but nobody's embarrassed. Like teenagers are not embarrassed except by what their friends are embarrassed by. So the real embarrassment is the dad putting their kid into a situation where the kid's friends are going to be making fun of him for having an old dad, right? Which means that the friends are lame. How long did it take you to write Just Poor? That was one of the longest ones for me to write. So, Just Poor came in two phases. One, I wrote in about four months. I wrote the first third, and then I completely hit the wall and didn't know how to continue the story. And then I ended up finishing it, and then I had an agent who looked at the book and really liked it, except for the last third. So, I ended up renting a cottage in England for two weeks and then rewriting the last third. And it was a funny thing. It's the only time where I couldn't write by, I brought a computer and I couldn't write by typing. I just couldn't write by typing. It's the only time that ever happened. I actually had to handwrite it. It's the only way that the inspiration would come.
[1:37:49] And so I spent another couple of weeks writing the ending.
[1:37:54] So I would say probably about six or seven months as a whole. But I'm actually, as a Sparta guy, I'm glad you're coming here and asking these questions. Because, I mean, there's a lot of rumors. A lot of rumors. All right. Questions, comments, issues, challenges. Is Led Zeppelin One your favorite Zapp album? I don't in particular love Led Zeppelin. I mean, I'm a big singing guy, so I appreciate Robert Plant's banshee shrill of a voice. It's a shame that he destroyed it over the course of touring in the 70s. And it's dark. I mean, it's dark and evil in a similar way to the way that The Doors is kind of dark and evil. I think that Led Zeppelin is sort of a portal to hell as a whole. And I'm sort of mixed. Some of their songs I really like, some of the songs I really can't stand. I really can't stand. But yeah, it's all very dark. Somebody says, have any thoughts or advice? I have been helping someone and it has got me into debt. I know I should stop, but I love this person.
[1:39:04] Well, do you? Or are you just attached, right? Do you love the person in your life? Are you anxious if they're not there? It's really kind of important, right? In other words, are you of such low companionship that you have to give people money in order to keep them in your life? Well, that's an anxiety about your worth as a friend and as a person as a whole. Love is our involuntary response to virtue, if we're virtuous, right? And so if you claim to love someone who's exploiting you, then it would be the case that it's not love. Love is our involuntary response to virtue if we're virtuous. And if you have to pay someone and they're exploiting you, it's not love. You're just afraid of being alone, which I completely understand. Good Rockin' at Midnight is a great Robert Plant song with the Honey Drippers. Moon Zappa, Frank Zappa's daughter, recently wrote an autobiography about her abusive childhood. Yeah, Frank Zappa was another dark, creepy, fairly negative, hostile individual. Very, very dark. Very, very dark. Mr. Sting, I hope it's not too late to ask a bigger question. I'm trying to be concise. What am I doing, and how can I stop walking into this dynamic with people where they basically do this whole everything about me and what I do is perfect, and everything about you and what you do is garbage, unless you're praising me, of course. I hope that makes sense. I think I have issues with codependent attachment.
[1:40:32] Um, so as a child, you were bullied into serving a vain person's ego and you're continuing that pattern, which means you put out signals that you're just happy to be wide-eyed and praise someone and people are exploiting that. So you have to go back and deal with the sorrow of having been exploited by a narcissist, since I think that's what happened. If you were exploited by a narcissist as a child, then you will have that habit of appeasing and serving narcissistic vanity as an adult. And the only way to solve that is to go through the pain and anger of having been exploited as a child.
[1:41:24] Uh, let's see here. Somebody asked an interesting question. Where did it go? Did I miss that? I thought it was a question about Trump. Where did it go? Did it get deleted? Where did it.
[1:41:50] Okay so somebody asked a question i will uh i can't find it but the question was something some libertarian said that you sold out by supporting trump and uh that this was a massive uh catastrophe uh and and maybe hypocrisy or or something like this that i i sold out by supporting trump well i'm not sure what you mean by supporting trump Trump. I never told anyone to vote for Trump. I never told anyone to vote for Trump. What I did was I pushed back on the lies that the media was telling. So, if it is not the job of a philosopher to push back against falsehoods, then I think people are misunderstanding the People are kind of misunderstanding the purpose of philosophy. The purpose of philosophy is to tell the truth. And there were lots of lies about Trump. And I pushed back on those lies about Trump.
[1:42:55] And there was, of course, in the back of my mind, the idea that if Trump, who was a free market guy to a large degree, he's tariff based, but a free market guy to a large degree, that he might be able to grow the economy to the point where people could get weaned off welfare and there wouldn't be a general collapse. It was a long shot. I get that. But I thought that was an interesting possibility. Trump also, as a white male, white males generally tend to be the most solid free speech absolutist, so it gave more of a chance for free speech for a certain amount of time. And I wouldn't say that it was particularly the end of the world that there weren't any wars for four years, right? So I'm big into the non-aggression principle, and certainly businessmen tend to be less pro-war. My politicians, and he was not a politician, really right but businessmen they tend to be not pro-war people don't like blowing up buildings in particular who are in real estate because they know how hard it is to build them so you know for the people who helped get trump across the finish line i wouldn't put myself in that category because i was just responding to the lies about him but people who helped trump get get trump across the finish line you know probably saved half a million lives lives. That's not bad, but that's not bad.
[1:44:15] And the other thing too, so back in the day, when I, and I was still doing peaceful parenting and all that kind of stuff as well. So my problem back in the day, when I was critical of the people who were pursuing the Ron Paul thing is that Ron Paul could never be elected president. It just wasn't there. The numbers weren't there. So it was kind of a waste of time and resources and energy. And I wanted people to not say that the only solution is politics, right? And so Ron Paul could never have been elected president. And the Libertarian Party has never polled or achieved much above a couple of percent over 50, 60 years. They barely got a couple of percent. So that's not going to work. And I was annoyed at the fact that people were pursuing a fantasy solution of Ron Paul presidency at the expense of peaceful parenting, which was actually practical. But I did say to all the people back in the day, and you can find all of this at fdrpodcast.com, I did say, if you believe that there's value in a political candidate, go for it 100%. Yeah. 100%. So, yeah, I, you know, it's funny how libertarians basically say fuck all about peaceful parenting as a whole. Right? So libertarians are not opposing the widest violation of the non-aggression principle.
[1:45:37] That exists in the world, right? Oh, for the non-aggression principle. Well, okay. So what is the most prevalent violation of the non-aggression principle that people can do the most about? Well, it's spanking. It's abusive parenting. That is indisputable. The most widespread violation of the non-aggression principle that people can do the most about is child abuse. And libertarians don't talk about that.
[1:46:02] I mean, a few do. Dave Smith, a couple other people have I've mentioned it here and there, but they're all keen to debate politics and Gaza and war and incest and like they're all keen to debate this abstract stuff that really has very little impact on people's life, right?
[1:46:22] So they still haven't learned their lesson, right? They still haven't learned their lesson. How many libertarians have you seen reviewing my book on peaceful parenting? Right, zero. So libertarians refuse, refuse, refuse, refuse, refuse to deal with the most widespread violation of the non-aggression principle that people can do the most about. People absolutely, in the libertarian community, absolutely refuse to deal with that. And then, they nag me for pushing back against media lies about Trump in 2015. Yes, yes, that's the big problem, everyone. It's not that literally billions of children are getting beaten half to death around the world, which is creating a traumatized and violent future that has people fully believe in the need for the power of the state, that criminals are being produced at mass industrial scale by abusive parents. No, no, that's not the issue. The issue is that Stef pushed back against some lies in 2015.
[1:47:38] Come on. Oh, my gosh. It's so embarrassing. Oh, my. It's so fundamentally unserious. And it's like, okay, I get it. I get it. Libertarians all around the world. Yes, it's so much fun to warble on about the Federal Reserve and inflation and Austrian economic theory and foreign aid. Yeah, it's great fun. Doesn't change a goddamn thing, but it sure is fun to talk about, and you sure feel like some kind of warrior because you're not actually disturbing the interests of one single immoral person in the world. And I started making the case close to 20 years ago about the need to focus on parenting. And if libertarians had focused on parenting, we'd have an entire generation of adults raised peacefully now. Millions and millions of adults raised peacefully now, and we'd have an ironclad proof of the value of the non-aggression principle in a practical, actionable manner. Nope. Instead, we've tossed hundreds of millions of dollars at people who've not achieved anything. And we have avoided parenting, and we've avoided helping the children. That's the libertarian, noble libertarian approach, is talk about the things you can't change, waste money on things that won't change, and never talk about the things that you could change in perfect accordance with your values and prove all of the joys and glories of the non-aggression principle to the world. Nope. Nope.
[1:48:58] Nope. I have not seen a single libertarian. Now, I will say that the guys at Lotus Eaters had me on to talk about peaceful parenting, which is very nice, and I appreciated that. So I'm not saying everyone, right? There are some people who get it. But the idea that libertarians would have anything...
[1:49:20] To nag me about when it comes to integrity to my principle. Yeah, you all keep talking about the Federal Reserve and I'll prevent millions of children from being beaten. That's the ticket. You all keep wobbling on about the need for a more rational and sane foreign policy and the need to reduce consumer regulations and a simplified tax code. You all keep doing that, which you've been doing decade after fucking decade after fucking decade after fucking decade, achieving virtually nothing. And I'll do my little bit to apparently have no integrity and consistency by changing the course of the lives of millions of children so that they don't get beaten. And I guess at the end, you're going to just have to live with your own conscience and I'm going to have to live with mine. It's true, I could have followed your path and done nothing to expand the non-aggression principle, or I could have used my mind as a shield against abuse for literally millions, tens of millions of children so that they're not getting beaten.
[1:50:30] Not getting screamed at, not getting abused. Tens of millions of children are not getting abused because of what I've done over the last 20 years, and before that even. So, if you care about the non-aggression principle, is it me or the political libertarians who've done more to protect people from violations of the non-aggression principle. I leave it to your discretion to follow that particular rabbit hole to the core of truth.
[1:51:02] So libertarians are like, well, yes, but Stef has a bad reputation. It's like, yes, yes, it's true that if you harm the interests of evil people, they will tell lies about you. That's the price. That's the deal. They just love... Because look, the problem that libertarians have, and again, there's exceptions, but the problem libertarians have is not with me. It's with their own conscience. Because now the evidence is in, right? The evidence is in. Thank you, Lorraine. The evidence is in, and it's very clear. Who has done more to promote the non-aggression principle and protect people from violence, political libertarians or me?
[1:51:40] The plan that I put forward 18 years ago was to focus on parenting. And it doesn't mean that I can't do anything on politics, I certainly have, but to focus on parenting, to focus on the protection of children. And they have not done that. They have not done... They have not taken my path to focus on the protection of children because they said, To heck with protecting children, the important thing is to work in the realm of libertarian politics. And what has libertarian politics done to reduce the spread of violence and aggression in the world? Is the government smaller? Are the taxes lower? Is the debt less? Did the government powers, have they decreased? Well, no, it's gone quite the opposite way. So I predicted that if you focused on politics, then violence would spread. And if you focused on parenting, violence would decrease. Overall.
[1:52:35] And they said, no, no, you're crazy. That's nuts. You go mess about with your parenting stuff. We'll focus on politics. And now listen, if they had been able to solve the problem of politics, then I would be the first person to say, holy crap. Wow. Tax rate is down to 5%. We've got a flat tax and the government has shrunk by half or three quarters. Like, holy crap. You guys were totally right. You were absolutely right to pursue this path. I was completely in the wrong. i humbly um concede the point and uh you know good for you right.
[1:53:11] However of course if we look at the size and power of the state the amount of the debt and the proliferation of laws and the hostility to free speech that has only increased in the last 20 years all of this has gotten far worse over the last 20 years whereas parenting the parenting that i've been able to influence has improved so they poured their energy into to trying to reduce the size and power of the state as a way of combating violations of the non-aggression principle. I said that's not going to work. But what we can do is focus on parenting because that is the most widespread. Abusive parenting, violent parenting is the vast majority of people in the world. It is the most widespread violation of the non-aggression principle and something which we can do something about. We can't really influence foreign policy as mere intellectuals, but we can convince people to stop beating their children.
[1:53:58] So we each took a path and they said my path was foolish and I said their path was foolish and the data is in the data is in and it's utterly, completely and totally irrefutable.
[1:54:25] So, I mean, will they admit it? nope Nope. Because here's the thing, right? Here's the thing. The conscience is a pretty grim beast. And people who can't admit they're wrong, about very essential areas that they claim are fundamentally moral, people who can't admit that they're wrong have a really bad conscience. So why the libertarians, they're not ignoring me, they're not ignoring peaceful parenting, they're not doing any of that. They are trying to avoid their own conscience. So everybody who has not accepted and spread the message of peaceful parenting is responsible for the continued beatings of uncountable numbers of children.
[1:55:12] This isn't even an argument. This is just foundational. It's almost tautological. So by rejecting and scorning the message of peaceful parenting, as most libertarians have done, or rejecting and ignoring the message of peaceful parenting, by failing to spread the message of peaceful parenting, they are responsible for uncountable numbers of children continuing to be abused and beaten. Now, I would not want that on my conscience. I'm very sensitive to my own conscience. My own conscience is a wonderful pet and a terrible master. And so i can't imagine what it would be like to be sitting on oh that Stef guy is crazy we're going politics and then the politics have just gotten worse and worse and there's uncountable numbers of children who've continued to be beaten because you have not promoted peaceful parenting.
[1:56:03] So they're not bothered by me they're not bothered by the bothered by their own conscience You took a path to virtue that sacrificed uncountable numbers of children to uncountable numbers of child abusers to pursue politics which have only gotten worse. So you haven't achieved any of your goals. In fact, everything that you say you wanted to achieve has gotten almost infinitely worse, and you haven't protected the children. You left the children in the company of wolves to be mutilated, chewed on, torn apart, and abused. And those children are in your mind. Those children are in your mind. I don't think I could have done more to promote peaceful parenting than I did. So my conscience is very clear. My conscience is very clear.
[1:56:57] I interviewed all the experts, I made all the arguments, I put together all the presentations, I got all the data.
[1:57:06] I don't know that there's many people around who've worked harder to protect children and improve the family than I have. I mean, I've burnt my entire reputation to the ground in order to help protect children, and I'm not the first, and I'm certainly not the last.
[1:57:22] So, all of those who said, peaceful parenting is not the way to go, I'm going to ignore the children's suffering, and I'm going to focus on my own political fetishes, knows deep down that there are tens of thousands of children that they could have protected from being beaten, that they left behind in order to pursue their addiction for politics and their avoidance of virtue. You now having those children in your mind if you look back and you say Stef was right i should have 20 years ago started promoting peaceful parenting and we should have had an anti-spanking article every other week and we should and you know still do a bit of politics that's fine.
[1:58:04] But we should have had him come and talk about this we should have had a real robust debate about that we should have really promoted the peaceful parenting stuff because that is dedication to the non-aggression principle, right? The most widespread violation that you can do the most about is exactly what you should focus on. Of course, of course, right? So, for the libertarians who've scorned and rejected my message, they've harmed children. They've harmed children. And if there's one thing that will mess up your conscience, it's harming children.
[1:58:39] I can't help them with that. I made as positive and enthusiastic a case as possible. I really did. I made jokes about it. I made PowerPoints about it. I spoke about it. I preached about it. I wrote about it. I did as much as humanly possible, in every passionate way possible, to promote this. So my conscience is clear. And I can control myself. I can't control the actions and behaviors of others. Right?
[1:59:09] So I can't turn back time and not even the gods, can change a bad conscience.
[1:59:22] What we do gets recorded, whether we like it or not. The choices we make get recorded, whether we like it or not. And people were chased away from me by bad actors. And they were happy to run. And they could have taken up the mantle of peaceful parenting without even referencing me. I don't care. I don't want the credit. I just want the children to be protected. That's all I want, is for people to stop harming children. Forget about me. It doesn't matter. And people have chosen to be eaten up by the lower intestine sandworms of political action, which has achieved less than nothing.
[2:00:02] It's worse now than it was when you started, and they have avoided protecting children. Now, I mean, they could try to rescue their conscience by reversing course, but after a certain amount, you can't, right? I mean, if I had spent 20 years of my public life not protecting children, but instead pursuing a course that only made things worse? I can't tell you. I mean, I don't know how I'd get out of bed in the morning. I don't know. It's not parents abusing children. It's ZOG. Parents have free will. Parents have free will.
[2:00:43] Stef, what you've done is priceless. Thank you for me and all future unborn children. You know, I know a lot of people that promote most people parenting, not just for the sake of the children, but for the sake of their own conscience. And again, some have, some have, but most have not. And most won't admit it. Most won't admit it. And I can't do anything about that. I can't undo what people have chosen to do. I made my very best case, pushed it forward as much as possible. And if people choose to do the opposite, I can't control that. And I certainly can't control the effects on their conscience. And of course, anybody with any sense of honor and decency would come back and say, well, we haven't achieved our political goals, but you certainly have reduced the non-aggression principle by protecting tens of millions of children. So you made the right choice.
[2:01:42] You made the right choice. You made the right choice. You've actually served the non-aggression principle. You've protected children. We wasted hundreds of millions of dollars in time and money on politics.
[2:01:59] And politics is far worse. And the parenting that you've influenced is far better. So you made the right choice. We made the wrong choice. We're sorry. sorry and again i the apology wouldn't be to me it would be to the children right that you failed to protect so i can't i can't make people do the right thing right that's free will i can't make people do the right thing i can make the best case possible but i can't make people do the right thing and i certainly can't make people look back and say well Stef um you reduced far more, you eliminated far more violence in the world than we ever did so you were right and we were wrong I mean the evidence is in the evidence is in government is many many times bigger now than it was 20 years ago.
[2:02:53] And yet the people who've listened to peaceful parenting have stopped abusing their children yeah if you want to address the drug epidemic you need to address non-peaceful parenting but yeah see See, virtue is not about what makes you feel good. Virtue is about serving the values, serving the virtues. I didn't in particular want to take on the parents. I didn't want to take on the abusive parents, right? Because there's a lot of blowback in that, and we've all seen that. I didn't really enjoy it. But philosophy and virtue is not about, well, I like talking about Austrian economics. It's not about that. It's about serving the values. It's about expanding the non-aggression principle. And I made an airtight case with every conceivable intellectual weapon at my disposal. I made an airtight case genetically, in terms of self-knowledge, interviewing the experts, looking at the data, 100%. So I made an airtight case. people rejected it because they wanted to pursue their fetish of politics and they wanted to avoid actually annoying any evildoers. See, libertarianism in the political sense is just a place where people can go to pretend they're doing something. It's a way of neutering people.
[2:04:20] Because it never achieves its goals and people don't care. Because the goal is not to reduce the non-aggression principle. The goal is to feel like you're doing something. Actually reducing the non-aggression principle, they don't care about that. General. Again, in general, they don't care about that. They do care about feeling like they're doing something and apparently a lot of them like quite a lot of drugs, right? So they love their little conferences and their articles and their typing and their outrage. But in terms of, actually doing the right thing and serving the values. Not so much. Not so much. I mean, I remember talking to a very prominent libertarian. I won't give out names, but at a conference, one of the last ones I was ever really allowed to attend. But I remember talking to a very prominent libertarian all about child abuse, the Gabramete stuff, and addiction as a self-management for child trauma, childhood trauma, and so on, and all of that, right? You never, you know, I went and spoke at a variety of places about all of this. I did the whole bomb in the brain at a speech in Toronto. I did another speech in Toronto about the addiction stuff. I was just doing this stuff continually.
[2:05:41] And now the avoidance is hardened into a permanence because if you've done the wrong thing for 20 years, and you've opposed the guy doing the right thing for 20 years or ignored him which is an even more form even more oppositional um what are you going to do i mean what are you going to do people can't look at themselves that way they almost nobody can look at themselves and say i blew 20 years by not listening to the facts uh it's almost impossible for people to do that all right have yourself a wonderful evening if you're listening to this later if you could go to freedomain.com slash donate and help the show out. I would really, really, really appreciate that. That would be lovely and glorious and beautiful. And thank you for the people over there on Rumble. I appreciate those questions. And I hope that I gave you some reasonable answers. And of course, I'm always happy to take more questions, comments, you can post them at freedomain.locals.com. You can also join the community. It's a great community at subscribestar.com slash freedomain. But even more helpful, freedomain.com slash donate. it have a beautiful beautiful afternoon everyone lots of love from up here i'll talk to you soon bye.
Support the show, using a variety of donation methods
Support the show
