In this episode of Stay Free With Russell Brand, Russell Brand sits down with Jordan Peterson to discuss the crisis that is the Middle East, and the legacy of Judaism to world faith and to world solutions. Jordan Peterson is a clinical psychologist, best-selling author, and bestselling author. He is also the co-founder of ARK, a group dedicated to finding solutions to the world's problems. In this episode, we discuss the role of Judaism in world affairs, and how it has contributed to the ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine, and why anti-Semitism should be seen as a symptom of the ongoing crisis, rather than a cause of it. Russell Brand is a comedian, bestselling author, podcaster, and podcaster. His work has been featured in The New York Times, The Huffington Post, and The Guardian, and he is one of the most influential people in the world. He's also the author of several books, and is a regular contributor to the New York Magazine, and has been described as the "Most Influential Person in the World" by Newsweek. and the "World's Most Influential People." by Time Magazine. Russell Brand and Jordan Peterson are good friends, and they have been friends for a long time, and Jordan is a very good friend of Russell Brand's, as well as being a regular guest on his podcast, Stay Free with Russell Brand. and his book, Keep Free With Me, which is out in the UK. Stay Free: A Guide to the World's Most Powerful People, by Jordan Peterson, which you should check out here, here and here, if you want to learn more about Jordan's work, here, and more. If you're a fan of Jordan's podcast, then you should definitely check it out! - it's a must-listen to Jordan's excellent work, and if you're looking for a good time with Jordan's advice, here's a link in the description if you can't get a copy of the book, here it is it. Thank you for listening to Jordan Peterson's book, it's worth it. You'll get a discount code: stay free with me: stayfree with me, I'll send me a review of my book recommendation, and I'll tell me what you're listening to it on my insta-tweet me on Insta: , and I'm looking forward to hearing about it on Instapreneurship, and so much more!
00:00:01.000Thanks for joining me for a very special edition of Stay Free with Russell Brand.
00:00:06.000We've had a massive, extraordinary, revealing, and deep conversation with Jordan Peterson.
00:00:12.000It's the first time we've spoken for a long while, or certainly spoken publicly, because Jordan Peterson and I communicate a lot about the culture.
00:00:21.000I talk to him personally about what I've been through and what I've been going through.
00:00:27.000He's an extraordinary mind and an extraordinary man and he has an incredible ability to ascertain just what's going on and obviously he ain't afraid to offer his opinion on what's going wrong in the world.
00:00:42.000Today, because he's over in the UK to talk about ARK, which is his consortium discussing potential solutions for the world, and you should check that out, there's a link in the description if you want to learn more.
00:00:54.000We talk about, this being Jordan Peterson, is In particular, the war in the Middle East, a kind of living, vivid symbol of end times.
00:01:06.000What specifically is the legacy of Judaism to world faith and to world solutions?
00:01:15.000The debt owed by, in Jordan Pearson's view, Christianity and Islam To the originator of the monotheistic faiths, the Abrahamic faiths as they're more commonly known.
00:01:26.000Of course we talk about kindness, of course we talk about ways in which we can change the world.
00:01:32.000The first 15 minutes will be available wherever you're watching this right now, but then We will have to, just because of the nature of free speech.
00:01:41.000It's no longer even about just our reliance to our platform.
00:01:50.000You are not allowed to communicate independently.
00:01:53.000You are not allowed to think independently.
00:01:56.000And if you still believe you are able to communicate and think independently, that's because your communication of thought is no threat to the establishment.
00:02:06.000If you do that, you can become an Awakened Wonder and get access to all of our content, including live meditations and all sorts of solution-oriented conversation and discourse.
00:02:18.000The first 50 minutes is available wherever you're watching this.
00:02:21.000After that, we'll be exclusively available on Rumble.
00:02:25.000Now we have the great privilege of a conversation with Jordan Peterson, who, if you don't know, is a clinical psychologist.
00:02:59.000I wanted to ask you, with the current set of crises that are besetting the world, perhaps most notable and extreme, at least on first assessment, being the sequence of ongoing wars, and of those wars, perhaps because of historical and even historic Freight, the Israel-Palestine conflict being the most notable and fraught of them.
00:03:27.000I wonder how you regard war as a symbolic event, war as a crisis and is there something particular to be gleaned that this is In particular, a war between Israel and Palestine.
00:03:41.000Does this war carry freight that other wars do not carry?
00:03:46.000If not, then why is it that Old Testament prophets use the conflict between Israel and their enemies as the kind of archetypal and defining conflict the conflict that in fact almost could be used to
00:04:04.000understand what war in itself is. Is it even appropriate in the midst of this conflict to regard it in
00:04:12.000its symbolic terms? And if it isn't appropriate, why have a symbolic assessment at all?
00:04:18.000Well, the Jews are always troublesome because they're a successful minority. And so that if you're
00:04:30.000inclined to view the world through a lens of power, and you make the presumption that
00:04:36.000all you need to explain all of human relations and all of human history is the
00:04:42.000narrative of oppressor and oppressed, the Jews tend to stick in your throat because minorities
00:04:52.000And the Jews succeed wherever they are, and there's very complex reasons for that.
00:04:58.000And then if you're a right-wing ethno-nationalist, well, that's equally annoying.
00:05:05.000Not because the success of the Jews devastates your oppressor narrative, but because, well, the only reason they could possibly be successful is because they're conspiring behind the scenes.
00:05:16.000And so, the Jews always get targeted when societies start to destabilize.
00:05:22.000I actually think they're canaries in the coal mine.
00:05:24.000You know, when you see anti-Semitism on the rise, you know that your society is starting to shake and tremble.
00:05:29.000If you can't tolerate this successful minority, then there's something gone deeply wrong with your culture.
00:05:36.000From a clinical perspective, the idea that a patient's history, from a Jungian perspective in particular, could be regarded as the intercession of God in that patient's life.
00:05:48.000Each crisis perhaps regarded as a collision with the capital S self, between the self and the ego.
00:05:57.000Do you agree with Erdinger's assessment that all human history What is the manifestation of God's relationship with mankind?
00:06:08.000And if there is something to be gleaned from this very particular analytic, what is this we're experiencing now with this current war, one aspect of which you have touched upon already, and the set of accompanying wars and crises that appear to be constellating around it?
00:06:30.000It's it's hard to see how you can be Christian or Muslim without being burdened ethically by the debt that you owe the Jews.
00:06:45.000I mean, the Jews, the Jews, Old Testament mythology is the starting place for Islam and Christianity, and there are complex reasons for that.
00:07:00.000I think the Jews did an unbelievably good job of formulating a monotheistic hypothesis and then buttressing that with a plethora of deep stories, but they were also among the first people, if not the first people, Per se, to hypothesize that the relationship with God was contractual and also psychological.
00:07:25.000So one of the things you see happening in the Old Testament, this happens with the prophet Elijah, is that there's a realization that whatever God is, which is the sum of all that is good, I suppose, that's one way of thinking about it, is also manifest within you, for example, as the voice of conscience.
00:07:43.000And that that voice is something that you have a relationship with, but that also has a certain kind of independence.
00:07:49.000Now it's a very strange hypothesis, but it's worth taking with some degree of seriousness.
00:07:56.000Freud posited, and people are unconscious Freudians now, that we were religious, we believed in heaven, we believed in God to help us overcome our anxiety of death, right?
00:08:08.000To give to mortal life significance and eternal significance and depth that it lacked because of its finitude.
00:08:16.000And so he regarded the religious enterprise as something that was in some ways juvenile and infantile because of that requirement for dependence.
00:08:24.000But There's a variety of serious flaws with that theory.
00:08:28.000And one is, well, why bother with the notion of hell then?
00:08:33.000Because you could just dispense with that if all you were trying to do was delude yourself.
00:08:37.000And the second one is, well, there are some stringent conditions that are laid upon you as an adherent of a religious belief.
00:08:44.000And you might say, well, you only abide by them because you're looking for eternal heaven.
00:08:51.000But it's still the case that the religious structures are set up with a fair degree of stricture within them.
00:08:58.000And if it was a mere matter of immature hedonism, let's say, the desire for eternal gratification, why make the preconditions for membership so stringent?
00:09:11.000Then there's an additional complication as well, which is that the voice of conscience is Mysterious, because it obviously makes itself manifest within, but it isn't something that you have voluntary control over.
00:09:26.000And then you might say, well, is it something you have a relationship with?
00:09:29.000And I would say that's also an accurate way of putting it, because you see this detailed very well in the story of Pinocchio.
00:09:36.000So when Pinocchio is, of course, attempting to become real instead of being a puppet, being controlled from behind the scenes.
00:09:45.000And when he first encounters his conscience, this little voice that bugs him, hence the cricket, the conscience is also not very well tuned.
00:09:56.000Like, Jiminy Cricket is just a tramp who's been everywhere, but he doesn't have a home, and he doesn't really know what he's doing.
00:10:02.000And it's in the dialogue between the two of them that the ascension to the divine occurs, right?
00:10:09.000And the full realization of individuality.
00:10:12.000That, well, that's a good example of how a relationship with what's highest can be personal.
00:10:18.000Like, modern people have a very difficult time with that idea, right?
00:10:22.000It's like, most educated people, if they deign to contemplate God at all, it's as some abstract spiritual entity who really has very little to do with existence per se.
00:10:35.000Kind of the God of Einstein, let's say.
00:10:38.000When evangelical Protestants, for example, talk about a personal relationship with Jesus, they get pretty damn nervous and want to move out of the room, you know, the intellectual types, but they fail to understand that you have a relationship with a number of manifestations of spirit that aren't clearly yours.
00:10:58.000So, for example, the voice of conscience, that's a very good one, but the other autonomous spiritual manifestation that affects all of us is the appearance of what compels our interest.
00:11:16.000You know, there's an autonomy in that too.
00:11:19.000That's summed up in the notion of a calling.
00:11:38.000And that speaks of a certain autonomy of both interest and conscience.
00:11:43.000And that autonomy seems to have a will, and historically speaking, and the Jews were very good at this, that will was associated with the manifestation of the spirit of being itself.
00:12:15.000And so every time the Jews are involved in something, its significance is magnified, which is also, you know, in large part, a mystery.
00:12:29.000The relationship between psyche and matter requires symbolism to catharsise it and to provide cartilage that would otherwise be absent, impossible to envisage without that Non-syntactical representation that symbols can provide.
00:12:51.000If the conscience, Jiminy Cricket, and the being, the entity, the marionette, the puppet, the boy, Pinocchio, to have a relationship at all, there is a kind of a tension in it, there is a polarity in it, and both of them require one another for its realisation, and perhaps that's as good an explanation for God creating our kind as any.
00:13:17.000When you say that monotheism is the great Judaic artifact, do you feel that even in a secularized culture, the paradigm ultimately remains consistent?
00:14:28.000What advances Christianity offer us on that template, particularly if Isaiah in particular
00:14:35.000is offering us the messianic event as his key and defining prophecy?
00:14:42.000What is the function of Christianity as an advance of Judaism and even in a secularized society are we still operating within a kind of monotheistic template with the state An increasingly authoritarian state, even under a liberal guise.
00:14:57.000As a Canadian, you'll recognize what I'm saying there.
00:14:59.000Is that still the paradigm we're operating within?
00:15:01.000So there's two questions there, really.
00:15:02.000Okay, well, the first one, well, imagine that there's only, well, there's three options.
00:15:16.000Now, the problem with that option is that it's It's not realistic and in any sense, it's not existentially realistic in that it doesn't accord with our experience, but it's also not practically realistic.
00:15:30.000It doesn't accord with our experience because if you dispense, even if you dispense with all the positive meaning in life as a consequence of being nihilistic, you won't dispense with the pain and the terror.
00:15:42.000And so what you do if you're nihilistic is reduce life to pain and terror, not to nothing.
00:15:47.000And so that seems like a really bad deal.
00:15:50.000And then, because pain and terror are by definition what's negative about life, so you can't elevate them to what's positive.
00:15:58.000That's not without inverting the very basis for communication itself.
00:16:04.000Okay, so then we can put that off the table.
00:16:06.000There's no life has no meaning theory, because you can't get rid of the pain and the terror.
00:16:12.000So, You could say life has no meaning other than pain and terror.
00:16:16.000You know, now that's a pretty damn dismal judgment.
00:16:20.000And I also think that's not in accord with people's experience, but at least it's more logically coherent.
00:16:34.000Okay, now, if there's a plurality, what's the consequence?
00:16:39.000Well, the consequence is that you're torn apart by inner conflict.
00:16:43.000That's the psychological consequence, because you're pointing in all sorts of different directions at once.
00:16:49.000Maybe you're a war of different desires, let's say, a war of different impulses, and that's a state of confusion and chaos, and we know technically that that's associated with both anxiety and hopelessness.
00:17:02.000And I say we know that technically because the most advanced neuroscientists in the world, Carl Friston among them, foremost perhaps, has already determined that Anxiety indexes entropy, so chaos and confusion.
00:17:16.000And chaos and confusion demolish hope, because hope is an emotional manifestation that makes itself known in relationship to a defined goal.
00:17:28.000So you feel hope, and that's positive emotion.
00:17:33.000You only feel that while you see yourself advancing towards a goal.
00:17:38.000Now, if the goals are diverse and disunified, so no monotheism, let's say, then confusion reigns and so does hopelessness.
00:17:46.000Now, if the goal is unified, which implies a unity underneath everything, let's say, then another problem arises, which is, well, what should the unity be predicated upon?
00:17:59.000Now, your observation was, and this is something Nietzsche pointed out back in the late 1900s or 1800s, that It's very easy for the collective or the state or something hedonistic to become the highest unity and for everything to be bent in that direction.
00:18:19.000Well, when the state becomes This source of unity, you have a Tower of Babel situation where people have built in a Luciferian manner, they have presumed to take on to themselves the value that should only be accorded what is truly transcendent.
00:18:38.000Then you get the collapse of the religious into the state, the failure to separate Caesar and God, you get the collapse of God into the state, then everything that the state does becomes tinged with religious significance and Well, let's put it this way.
00:19:10.000Because if your goal and my goal cannot be unified, then If we're occupying the same territory, we're definitely in conflict.
00:19:19.000It's the definition of conflict, because we're pursuing.
00:19:21.000Now, you know, we could be walking side by side, and at the moment your pursuits and mine have nothing to do with one another.
00:19:29.000But if there is a point where what you want and I want aren't in concordance, there's either going to be reversion to power, I'll try to dominate you, there's going to be conflict of some sort, or one of us is going to give up.
00:19:44.000And a society is actually The manifestation of some implicit or transcendent unity.
00:19:51.000Now, you asked as well, because that wasn't complicated enough, you asked, well, what does Christianity have to offer?
00:19:59.000Let's say that Judaism didn't offer, and I'm not sure if Christianity offered more than the full realization of what was implicit in Judaism, and that was Christ's claim.
00:20:14.000He said that he was the fulfillment of the law, so the tradition, let's say, and the prophets, which was the prophetic spirit.
00:20:22.000He was the manifestation of both of those in the flesh.
00:20:25.000And I actually think that that's technically true, too, because I think the simplest explanation for what happened in the case of Christ was that he allowed Or invited the full spirit that had been elaborated in the Old Testament books, let's say, and across that vast span of time to take residence within them and to become that.
00:20:53.000Whatever that might mean, and when I walked through the narrative structure and attempted to analyze what it points at, that seems to me the simplest explanation.
00:21:05.000Now, you can delve into that more deeply, because one of the things that happens in the Old Testament is there's a constant inquiry into the nature of proper sacrifice.
00:21:15.000And you might say, well, that's archaic.
00:21:58.000And work is also a contract or a covenant because the reason you work is because you assume that you can strike a bargain with existence such that if you give up something of value now, you know, some whim, something you want immediately gratified, you put that on hold.
00:22:14.000And the reason you do that is because you can make things better, all things considered in the future and for more people by doing so.
00:22:23.000So people are wrestling with the notion of what constitutes appropriate sacrifice all through the Old Testament.
00:22:29.000And the Christian answer to that, I mean, it's developed in the Old Testament, which is why Christ says that he's the manifestation of that spirit, essentially.
00:22:38.000The idea is that the ultimate sacrifice is your narrow self.
00:22:51.000You offer up the totality of your existence to death and to hell.
00:22:57.000And by doing that, you, well, the hypothesis is by doing that, you conquer both.
00:23:02.000And I actually think that's right, because Russell, it seems practical to me in many ways to assume that you cannot Adapt to what you will not face.
00:23:16.000Now, we know in the psychotherapeutic world that if you lead people into voluntary confrontation with what terrifies and paralyzes them, their characters develop and they get braver and better, their vision expands, their capacity for adaptation increases.
00:23:34.000And so then you might think, well, let's push that to its logical conclusion.
00:23:38.000And the logical conclusion would be, Well, you have to face death itself, and its full reality, and all the torture that goes along with that.
00:23:47.000And worse, you have to face the full reality of malevolence.
00:23:52.000And so that's why in the Christian resurrection account, Christ faces death at the hands of a judgmental mob, right, despite being innocent, and then descends to hell itself.
00:24:05.000And so that is what we're called upon to do.
00:24:07.000You know, people say, well, do you, they say to me, you know, do you believe in God?
00:24:11.000And I would say, well, if you believed in God, no one who hasn't, no one who hasn't taken on to himself the full burden of Christ can say that he is a believer in God.
00:24:28.000You know, and you might say, well, God's mercy is such that even if we struggle towards that, we'll find our reward.
00:24:34.000And I would say there is some moral, there's something morally admirable about progress, but that doesn't eliminate the remaining insufficiency.
00:24:45.000And I would also say in closing to this question, look, man, it's like, Every bit of responsibility that is rightfully yours that you haven't taken on makes the world a lesser place in a serious manner.
00:24:58.000And worse than that, it turns you into a slave, and it opens the door to tyrants.
00:25:03.000And that's always been true, and it's true now, and it will always be true.
00:25:10.000If you're watching this on YouTube, we're going to have to leave you now.
00:25:13.000Click the link in the description, join us over on Rumble.
00:25:18.000We talk about, this is one of my favourite moments in the conversation, I ask Jordan Peterson, when he says that a kind of psychopathic energy is required in order to move out of shame and apathy, that the culture offers you a kind of bizarre energised, innovated, psychopathy as an alternative to the
00:25:38.000lethargy, the kind of larvae life that you're being sold. Just sit and look at your screen, eat
00:25:43.000your pap, when you get diabetic and sick, take your medicine, get on the conveyor belt to
00:25:48.000the boneyard. He has an incredible take on this.
00:25:51.000Of course, this being JP, he talks about Heath Ledger's Joker.
00:26:10.000Of course, my first question was, war is a symbolic event, and if war and this war, these wars, are a symbolic event, then I suppose that would indicate a relationship between psyche and material.
00:26:23.000It would indicate a potential unifying event.
00:26:29.000Obviously, much of your genius and its success has, it appears at least from my perspective, to have been built on your ability to map complex ideas onto applicable modalities that a person might deploy in their everyday life.
00:26:46.000Tidy a damn room, stroke a cat, take responsibility.
00:26:51.000When we're talking about the function of monotheism and the defining contribution of Judaic culture being the bestowing of monotheism even on the immediate or relatively immediate subsequent cultures of Islam and Christianity, I wonder If we neglect the historical reality that it was a tribalised faith in direct opposition to an oppressor, and when we apply that, as we were talking around a moment ago, the new role of the state as the apex of all values, the arbiter of right and wrong, the punitive patriarch or matriarch, depending on your perspective.
00:27:38.000I know you have no strong views when it comes to gender.
00:27:50.000I wonder, Jordan, if it is possible to track from the individual to an entire culture these sets of values, and indeed, if not, why not?
00:28:00.000And may I add even to that, even though I can see you closing your eyes, as I've observed you do, when you're chewing with your mind, masticating this giant question, trying to get it into sizable chunks of cud, I would say, I would say this.
00:28:22.000This monotheism ought create unity among people, even if help us to acknowledge the division within the self, perhaps between the ego and the self.
00:28:34.000I wonder if we have to consider a Schmittian dialectic here, the possibility, as became evident in 5th century Christianity, that there was a kind of utility in Christianity that allowed it and alloyed it to Catholicism and Roman Catholicism, allowing it to become a tool of empire and requiring the exact opposite of a unitive and unitary force, a oppositional force, a religion that in a sense became
00:29:09.000I wonder if you feel that that was embedded in this original Judaic monotheism and I wonder also
00:29:16.000if if we're able to track all the way from an individual like what is how do we apply
00:29:22.000soteriology and sacrifice as individuals?
00:29:24.000How does a society apply soteriology and sacrifice?
00:29:29.000And how do we align this complexity of this monotheism that could give us a unitive vision with its application as a tool for conflict, or at least the potential for it to expedite conflict?
00:29:48.000Okay, so the first thing I would say in relationship to that is that the alternative that's been put forward before us with regards to what is the most appropriate central story of history and mankind psychologically and in relationship to marriage and All other forms of social relationship, past and present, is that the human story is by necessity one of power.
00:30:23.000And this is a very astute alternative hypothesis, because Whenever human relations, psychologically or socially, become corrupt, they do tend to corrupt in the direction of power.
00:30:42.000Now, there's an alternative contender, which would be that of sex, and that's where the evolutionary biologists go, for example.
00:30:48.000But let's stick to power for a moment.
00:30:51.000The accusation, and this primarily comes from the left, is that All you really need to understand human motivation is to understand that all relationships, except those that are strictly egalitarian, are predicated on power.
00:31:07.000And I don't think there's any evidence that that's true, except in the breach.
00:31:13.000When a relationship deteriorates, it deteriorates in the direction of power.
00:31:17.000So, for example, if you're not able to come up with a voluntary agreement with your wife, one or the other of you is going to default to being a tyrant and one or the other to being a slave.
00:31:28.000But the fact that that necessarily occurs when the negotiation fails doesn't mean that that's the fundamental motivating force that can be used to explain psychology, history, or society.
00:31:45.000It's actually the case, and I think this is being demonstrated extremely clearly, that power is not a very good basis for the establishment of productive, sustainable social relationships.
00:31:58.000It's certainly no basis on which to erect an integrated psyche.
00:32:02.000The psyche is too complex for its integration to be acquired through force.
00:32:09.000Like if you tyrannize yourself, well Freud figured this out very early on, You will be a mess of unconscious contradictions in precise proportion to the degree that you tyrannize yourself.
00:32:22.000That's what suppression is, or repression.
00:32:25.000That's how you drive unwanted impulses into the unconscious, where they become positively demonic.
00:32:31.000You have to come up with a negotiated solution to your own problem of integration.
00:32:37.000and it has to be voluntary. And the same is true with the relationships that you enter into with
00:32:42.000other people. I mean, no one who's married who's the least bit wise thinks that they can win their
00:32:54.000At best, you can terrorize the person you're with into complying with you.
00:32:58.000But if that's your sorry and pathetic substitute for love, then the victory you'll obtain will be indistinguishable from hell for you and for your wife.
00:33:10.000And so what integrates us, the leftist notion that what integrates us and motivates us is power is, I think, the most bitter possible conclusion from the analysis of human striving that can possibly be derived.
00:33:27.000Having said that, I understand why it's such a powerful proposition, because when things do corrupt, that is how they corrupt.
00:33:36.000You know, and people might say, too, well, you know, you think that voluntary organization, agreement between intrinsically valuable citizens is the proper basis for the establishment of the state.
00:33:52.000But what about all those power-mad, dictatorial, tyrannical capitalist types who thrive?
00:33:59.000And I would say The thriving that's consequential to the use of power is illusory.
00:34:08.000If you're the biggest dictator in the worst tyrannical state, you're the largest devil in hell.
00:34:15.000But that makes you the biggest loser, not a kind of winner.
00:34:19.000And you know, it's Milton's Satan who famously says he'd rather rule in hell, but serve in heaven than serve in heaven.
00:34:31.000And he's king of hell for a reason, right?
00:34:34.000People have viewed Milton's Satan as a heroic figure of rebellion, failing to note entirely that all he gains for his efforts is captainship of the worst possible place.
00:34:48.000And so, while so power The power story, this is where the French postmodernists, for all their brilliance, went so spectacularly wrong, is they started to understand that we did look at the world through a story, and that was necessary, and that even the scientific viewpoint was therefore necessarily insufficient, which is absolutely true.
00:35:11.000But then when push came to shove and they had to face the next question, which was which story does and should motivate us, they defaulted to power because they were all Marxists and that was at hand.
00:35:36.000And you might say, well, what about all the successful psychopaths?
00:35:39.000But the truth of the matter is, is that psychopathy is not a successful strategy.
00:35:44.000It's more successful than nihilistic depression.
00:35:49.000But that doesn't mean it's an optimized solution.
00:35:52.000You know, and part of the reason that psychopaths appeal to people who are nihilistically depressed is because they see in that monstrousness of the willingness to use power and dominance a potential way out of their pathetic dependence.
00:36:07.000And that is partly a realization of the necessity of integrating the shadow, but it's a dismal final vision.
00:36:16.000You know, the man with the biggest, highest leather boots wins.
00:36:20.000It's like, well, yeah, but what do you win?
00:36:39.000I suppose if you extract the sublime And perhaps more specifically, even, love, if the idea that the nuministic includes within it, as well as, or a type of fear, if it includes a type of love, a type of awareness of a unitive force,
00:37:04.000Then, and all you're left with is kind of material rationalism, then power to organize this material and rational space does become the only observable metric.
00:37:25.000Well, the people who build the Tower of Babel are basically engineering technocrats who presume that the manipulation of the material world can produce the proper pyramid of power.
00:37:41.000It's a ziggurat that reaches to the sky.
00:37:44.000And as you just said, you can understand and you can see You can see why this is an attractive proposition.
00:37:53.000If we could only master the material world, we would be the masters of the cosmos and our psyches.
00:38:01.000And the problem with that is that it's simply not true.
00:38:04.000You can be lost amidst the most glorious toys.
00:38:11.000And the other problem, of course, with the technological enterprise is that it produces immense capacity for catastrophe along with all of its
00:38:19.000abundance. And so if you don't have a wisdom, the wisdom that enables you to utilize your technical
00:38:25.000technological tools, they'll just destroy you. And that is what happens in the Tower of Babel
00:38:30.000because it eventually collapses under its own weight, so to speak, and the people who inhabit it can
00:38:35.000no longer even communicate with one another because it's oriented in the wrong direction.
00:38:41.000Now you implied what the right direction You know, so I've been writing about the story of Job recently.
00:38:50.000And Job, the story of Job, is a precursor to the Christian passion because Job is an innocent man who's tortured beyond his capacity to to endure.
00:39:00.000And Job says nonetheless that he is going to regard himself with love and proclaim his innocence Despite his suffering while simultaneously proclaiming the essential goodness of existence itself.
00:39:16.000And that's a reflection of his belief that the appropriate relationship to establish with existence is something like love.
00:39:25.000And love is the desire that all things flourish.
00:39:33.000Well, let's think about it practically for a minute.
00:39:35.000So, we know that children, infants will die without love.
00:39:40.000Now, and I mean this technically, this is well studied.
00:39:43.000So, a hundred years ago, this is a very interesting story, a hundred years ago, in the typical orphanage, the mortality rate for kids under one was a hundred percent.
00:39:56.000And this was despite the fact that these orphanages would provide Shelter and food, let's say, the so-called necessities of life.
00:40:05.000But they all died and no one knew why.
00:40:11.000She worked in a ward where the mortality rate was quite low.
00:40:15.000And a physician from New York got interested in this and went to Germany to see what was going on.
00:40:20.000And there was a nurse there named Fat Anna.
00:40:23.000And Fat Anna would take the orphans out of their cribs, which wasn't common practice at the time, and just like Pick them up and hold them and pack them around on her hip and, you know, have a relationship with them.
00:40:37.000Some physical manifestation of love and those infants didn't die.
00:40:41.000And then we saw this in Romania again, when there were orphans there who had the benefits of the state utopia, everything but love.
00:40:52.000And they were, if they didn't die, they were damaged beyond belief.
00:42:38.000You just deny the existence of evil and the fact that there are forces at work that are extraordinarily dark.
00:42:46.000But you can wake up and still see that it's love that makes the world go round.
00:42:52.000And so it is the proper basis for the organization of society at all levels and for the psyche as well and it's it's it's a strange thing eh because once you're a bit awake and you're not naive and you see the reality of tragedy and the catastrophe of malevolence it's harder to make the case that the attitude you should have towards this terrible world is still one of love but then I think that requires a kind of courage
00:43:28.000When I try to understand love in as unflorid and as straightforward a way as I am able to, I consider it to sometimes be the felt experience of unity.
00:43:41.000That I'm not coming from a position of separateness.
00:43:44.000I'm not coming from a position of competition.
00:43:48.000I'm able, even in a most prosaic way, to think this person or situation in front of me warrants love.
00:43:55.000And if I'm able to locate love within myself and a love that transmits beyond myself, I'm going to be better served when dealing with this situation.
00:44:04.000I'll get a better outcome, even if I'm not looking at it entirely from a tactical perspective, say, but just like I want to operate on that frequency.
00:44:15.000I suppose that's the kind of idea that shows that there is a continuum between the ideas that you discuss and popularise as a clinical psychologist and now as a high Highly regarded, if deeply controversial, perhaps even the archetype now of the controversial figure when it comes to discussing world events.
00:44:43.000A figure of polarity with some people almost to the degree of Donald Trump saying that Jordan Peterson, he's the avatar of love that I follow.
00:44:51.000He's the person that's gotten me out of my slump.
00:44:54.000I was struck when you were saying about how this psychopathic archetype might only have value as a mobiliser of someone who might otherwise be trapped in basement depression.
00:45:08.000That some of your detractors, maybe ten controversies back for you, I know you chew through them fast, might have used you almost as an archetype.
00:45:17.000I'm thinking of that that skull moment, you know, that red skull moment
00:45:20.000and how you were used in a sort of a film here or there.
00:45:23.000You know, they might say, "Oh, well, what Jordan Peterson does
00:45:26.000is he appeals to those sort of adrift and castrated and in-cell men as a kind of priapic
00:45:51.000When we're having a conversation as rangy as this, where it seems to me that some of the themes we're discussing is, you know, personal crisis and how you might move through personal crisis, and certainly that's something I'd like to talk to you about more in a moment, and global crisis, a war as global crisis, it seems actually pertinent that you would have figures that are able to talk about archetypal energy and indeed if anything's worthy of that
00:46:15.000name it would be useful in the life of an individual trying to get you up and at them in a society
00:46:20.000that's pretty hard to live in sometimes and it would also be applicable when pontificating on vast
00:46:26.000geopolitical events. So for me it doesn't seem contradictory although sometimes it does seem
00:46:31.000difficult to be a person and this is something that's emerged you know perhaps because of technology you
00:46:35.000have people now that are experts in neurology or clinical psychology pontificating on
00:46:39.000cultural events and some people don't like that because it brings new voices.
00:46:43.000Brings new potential and brings new ideas into the space.
00:46:46.000It's challenging to power, I think, to all of a sudden have Jungian archetypes flung about in conversations that were pretty devoid of morality until pretty recently.
00:47:13.000God is either going to be kindness and love or God is going to be the pursuit of power.
00:47:19.000So I suppose I wonder now, if you do, when you look at the culture we're living in, and it does appear to be a truly global culture, with a truly unipolar goal, this is one of the things we talk about on our channel all the time, is like, when they're passing these censorship laws in Canada and the UK and Ireland, near simultaneously, with a near identical impact,
00:47:44.000When you see that the EU want to manage social media spaces and censor some free speech and amplify other speech, do you consider that there is a project towards a global and centralised authoritarian order And if you do think that that is happening, do you think it's just the unconscious convergence of interests, or do you think that there is actually an intention behind it?
00:48:14.000Because I'm continually trying to provide us a... You go, man, you go.
00:48:19.000Well, okay, so there's three main questions in that, I would say.
00:48:23.000The first is Why, for example, might I have emerged as a controversial figure?
00:48:30.000And I think that's actually pretty straightforward.
00:48:32.000I mean, the New York Times did a hit piece on me a while back, written by Nellie Bowles, who later admitted that what Nellie Bowles did for the New York Times was write hit pieces, and that the reason she did that was to further her career.
00:48:47.000which was, you know, a pretty forthright admission, although whether or not it went deep enough is a matter for
00:49:14.000Of deception and exploitation and deceit, all of that.
00:49:18.000Then anyone who aligns themselves with tradition is immediately going to be awarded that archetypal stance.
00:49:26.000And the reason that hasn't really worked, in my case, You know, to take me out permanently is because the idea that the central spirit of the patriarchy is Satan, the demand for power and the willingness to use exploitation is simply false.
00:49:45.000The patriarchy has a corrupt element, but that's a deviation from the ideal.
00:49:52.000It's not its most true manifestation, right?
00:49:55.000And the radical critics of tradition and authority claim universally that that's all power.
00:50:06.000And part of the problem with that is, it's like, well, what about you guys?
00:50:13.000I thought there was nothing but power.
00:50:15.000And they might say, well, there's only the competition between competing interests.
00:50:20.000It's like, well, if you want to live in that world, you go right ahead.
00:50:23.000But that's certainly not how I see it.
00:50:25.000Now, we talked a little bit about love.
00:50:30.000Imagine we could conduct the conversation that we're conducting.
00:50:33.000You and I could play this all sorts of different ways, you know.
00:50:37.000We don't share everything we believe in common.
00:50:40.000You know, you're a figure that has been more identified with the left, and I'm a figure that's been more identified with the right.
00:50:47.000And we could spend our whole time trying to figure out who's right and playing a zero-sum game in that regard.
00:50:55.000And we could also spend our time trying to score points on each other to see who's smarter, or more charismatic, or more attractive, or God, there's a whole variety of zero-sum games that could be played.
00:51:08.000We could think, look, and you talked about the manifestation of something like an underlying inner unity between people.
00:51:16.000We could say, no, there's more than enough In front of us for both, and if we conducted ourselves properly, what we would do is take a voyage together that revealed riches that neither of us had realized even existed beforehand.
00:51:30.000And I think that's the right attitude to take toward the world.
00:51:34.000The world is an inexhaustible treasure house, and the degree to which we can make that available to us depends on the ethic of our conduct.
00:51:43.000And this is not the model by which we conceptualize our political and economic structures now, because we tend to default to a greedy zero-sum model and presume there's just not enough for everyone.
00:51:59.000I think there's more than enough for everyone, by any measure, if we only could see it and conduct it ourselves properly.
00:52:08.000And so, while I'm an archetype of the evil patriarchy and Satan himself, insofar as you think the patriarchy itself, social structure and history, is nothing but the manifestation of oppressive forces, but my God, that's a dismal, it's a dismal view, and it's also, it's simply incorrect.
00:52:26.000It's way, it's far too much of an oversimplification.
00:52:31.000No, I mean, we do have an intrinsic impulse to dominate rather than submit.
00:52:39.000Although that's complicated, because some people would rather submit, you know?
00:52:42.000So even there it's not universal, but that tendency in and of itself is a fragment of what should be an integrated totality, and it's not the flag under which the unity can make itself manifest.
00:53:38.000I feel that what it appears is taking place is that there appears to be no reliable coordinates, no reliable principles with which people can align.
00:53:50.000This total pessimism, this pessimistic take that the power dynamic modality offers, even though I can Understand it as a lens because that is one way of observing trends and by the nature of power, power will determine outcomes.
00:54:07.000But you said some stuff earlier about nihilism, which when married to this power narrative that we're currently discussing, makes a lot of sense.
00:54:16.000Because I've seen an absence of values when under attack that I recognize a kind of war against nature.
00:54:25.000A war against any kind of universal principle to which we might align ourselves, with which we might align ourselves.
00:54:32.000That nothing is constant or consistent.
00:54:34.000That there is no benign force behind any of these avatars.
00:54:38.000There's no such thing as the Good Father, except perhaps For a submissive father.
00:54:44.000There is no complexity afforded in its opposite.
00:54:48.000If indeed you want to see masculine and feminine as opposites, certainly perhaps we could regard them as pairs.
00:54:54.000But there is no acknowledgement that there is a clear mandacity taking place in many narratives that I've personally encountered and experienced.
00:55:04.000Principles like innocent before innocent till proven guilty are just Let's just cast aside in an instant and I see a sense within this mode an appetite to destroy many components that certainly are within the remit of morality, within the rubric of morality, i.e.
00:55:26.000sexuality, humor, maleness, femaleness, like all of these, it's almost as if there is a kind of Atomised slaves.
00:55:34.000attempt to strip us down into molecules in some way, meaningless molecules, which is
00:55:40.000part of nihilism, to strip away the possibility of benign and loving and successful relationships
00:55:47.000between men and women, the removal of nuance and complexity in order to create... you know,
00:55:54.000certainly what I'm struck by, I don't know in order to create what, but I do recognize...
00:55:59.000atomized slaves. Well, so... there's no escaping the drive to unity.
00:56:13.000The only question is unity under what principle, and if it's not the proper principle, it's the Tower of Babel, and that is a degenerating totalitarianism, or the dynamic between And of course, that begs the question, is there a proper principle?
00:56:32.000And your point is, we're in an era where even the notion of proper principle itself is under full-out assault, and that's certainly a consequence of the deconstructionist tendency.
00:56:44.000But it's entirely counterproductive because it does fail to take into account the existence, well, the existence of the very goodness whose absence is the reason for the accusation of tyranny and power to begin with, right?
00:57:00.000Now, you might say, well, why is that happening?
00:57:03.000And I would say it's part, it's part the desire to allow It's partly the wish to have no restriction whatsoever on the gratification of hedonistic desire.
00:57:24.000That's another thing, and I think this is again true of the radical left.
00:57:28.000The radical left offers endless hedonistic gratification as the potential reward for full subordination to the utopia of the state.
00:57:39.000And that's an illusory offering, partly because self-serving, hedonistic gratification is actually indistinguishable from the power that is being resisted.
00:57:52.000We know, we know... I'll leave that, I'll leave that for the time being.
00:58:29.000And if you launch a spirit into the world, which is like a principality of ideas, the spirit unfolds in accordance with its nature.
00:58:37.000And that was Solzhenitsyn's explanation, for example, for why No matter where communism was tried, the same dreadful outcomes occurred.
00:58:49.000That was in keeping with the nature of that spirit.
00:58:53.000And so there is a spirit afoot that is attempting to centralize, and it acts as if it's a conspiracy, and there are conspiratorial elements to it.
00:59:05.000But it's mostly a manifestation of something that's best regarded as Well, look, it's a principality, or you can even think about it as a transcendent spirit.
00:59:17.000Like, think about the idea of Satan for a minute.
01:00:35.000Well, you know, when you've been pushed past your limit by the suffering in your life, and you believe that you've been put upon To a degree that's 100% untenable because of the underlying inadequacy of the cosmic structure, then it could easily be that you will invite the spirit that holds nothing sacred to dwell within you and let its destructive force entirely loose.
01:01:38.000What I love there is your repetition of the refrain, nothing sacred.
01:01:43.000And of course, that declarative motif within communism that there can be no God, there can be nothing sacred.
01:01:52.000Of course, though, sancrosanct with inversions of it are all sorts of principles of centralisation.
01:01:57.000And even in original Marxism, I would say some of the folk aspects of that, like, you know, you should have a bit of time off now and again, As close to sacred as I dare to say that goes.
01:02:07.000I love too the analysis of the Joker there as a true nihilist, that there is no possibility of anything other than heresy because the Sancre Sancte exists nowhere, not even in Mammon.
01:02:18.000I love that idea and I'm reminded of a British group stroke artist group called KLF, who burned a million pounds once,
01:02:28.000as a sort of like literally piled it up and burned it as a sort of a kind of, you know, as a installation.
01:02:34.000So it's like an interesting moment to sort of like to transcend the values of a pop culture
01:02:38.000that ultimately does have a kind of embedded nihilism woven through its materialism, which I suppose is,
01:02:46.000you know, as you talked about earlier, it's not true nihilism, materialism tends to emerge from it,
01:02:52.000as well as terror and dread and the shadows of all that are good start to emerge there.
01:02:57.000Now when you talk about the hedonic as a transcendent and mobilising force, I'm reminded of Blake's famous edict, you know, it's the road of excess that leads to the palace of wisdom.
01:03:08.000Perhaps because in some kind of my cup runneth over type way, in true ecstasy you might burst the bounds of the self and discover the transcendent through ecstasy.
01:03:18.000Although personally I've discovered that's a dangerous route to ecstasy.
01:03:22.000Yeah, but you discover something else there too, Russell.
01:03:26.000You know, one of the things Nietzsche pointed out very wisely was that most morality was convention and cowardice, right?
01:03:33.000And so I always see this when people go after, well, you've been in this ballpark recently, but I remember Tiger Woods, you know, and people pillorying him for his affairs.
01:03:46.000And I look at a situation like that and I think, To all the men in particular who were, you know, decrying Wood's immorality, which I don't approve of, by the way, and that's not my point, is like, look, buddy, if the Swedish bikini team was waiting for you in a bus when you were done your golf game, you'd be in there like a mad dog.
01:04:06.000And so don't be playing any, you know, moral games because you're so useless, no woman will look at you.
01:04:11.000No woman will touch me, and therefore I'm celibate and moral.
01:04:17.000And you would fold at the first offered temptation.
01:04:21.000And for the women who are moralizing in an equivalent manner, it's like, you're so sure you wouldn't throw yourself at the feet of the first stellar celebrity that happened to wander into your line of vision.
01:04:33.000A, because Just because that hasn't happened to you because you are desirable enough or brave enough to make it happen doesn't mean you wouldn't be susceptible to that temptation.
01:04:42.000Now, you know, Blake said wisdom through excess, and some of that can be the ecstasy of the extreme.
01:04:52.000That was part of the attractiveness of the hippie culture, but it's also the case that if you Do throw yourself into the palace of pleasure, let's say, and allow your hedonistic excesses to make themselves manifest.
01:05:05.000You can also start to understand exactly how abusive and psychopathic you can become in that pursuit.
01:05:12.000And that's a form of transcendent realization, too.
01:05:15.000And maybe there's a new way of coming.
01:05:17.000Like, I don't know if you can understand the human proclivity for evil until you've been in a situation where your own ability to manipulate and act in a, what would you call, instrumental, radically
01:05:29.000instrumental manner, actually had free reign.
01:05:32.000Because otherwise your potential for corruption is hidden from you by your inadequacy.
01:06:49.000CS Lewis talks, you know, in one of his advocacy pieces for Christianity, of the atheist and rationalist scientist in their laboratory studying some faraway nebulae, determining from his lab on Earth that this far-flung cosmological destination will obey the rules of their rationalism like which again Jordan when we were talking about good and evil and indeed reality earlier we touched upon the idea for how can we even discern an essential reality that is not subject to our sensory limitations and indeed our sensory paradigm.
01:07:27.000Lewis says that when they come up with the idea that there can be no god They are making this assessment based on the rationalism granted to them as a result of the processes of evolution that began 13.8 billion years ago with that sub-molecular explosion from which all the rules of reality unfold, leading to biological life eventually, leading to the conscious ascent of mankind, and ultimately the rationalism with which they make that verdict.
01:08:10.000Well, look, one of the things that the prophet Elijah establishes... Elijah is the prophet that appears with Christ when he's transfigured along with Moses.
01:08:21.000And so, in the Christian tradition, as well as the Jewish tradition, Elijah is held up as one of the two most Okay, so why Elijah?
01:08:33.000Well, Elijah defeats the God of nature, Baal, and also is the first person to posit that whatever God is, is identical with the still, small voice within.
01:08:44.000That's actually a phrase from the book of Elijah.
01:09:11.000And then the other thing that happens if you're a scientist is that you define what's real as what's objective.
01:09:17.000Well, if God has an aspect of the subjective, then, of course, none of your scientific Investigations are going to reveal God because you made God not part of the game in the initial formulation of the rules.
01:09:33.000And you can't say, well, the rules forbid us to discover God and lo, we've not discovered God.
01:09:40.000It's like, well, you excluded him to begin with.
01:09:42.000Now, I would say, and this is why I'm actually believe I'm going to be speaking with Dawkins publicly at some point in the relatively near future.
01:09:50.000And I'm looking forward to that because There is a rigor in the exclusion of God that's actually part of rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and unto God what is God's.
01:10:00.000Like, we shouldn't be confusing God with what isn't God.
01:10:04.000And one of the things the scientists have done, the Enlightenment types have done, is certainly help us figure out where God isn't.
01:10:11.000And that careful, delineated, reductionistic thought has also massively expanded our technological ability and brought with it the possibility of a kind of abundance that was undreamed of before that.
01:11:33.000Part of the reason that, you know, and Jung said this, part of the reason that modern man can't find God is because, well, he's looking in the wrong places, that's for sure.
01:11:43.000But Jung also said that, you know, modern people wouldn't look low enough.
01:11:47.000Maybe you discover God in The radical realization of your own insufficiency and sinfulness.
01:11:53.000You know, that's a classic idea, and I also think that's true.
01:12:14.000In Bethlehem, the king will come, not in the palaces of your life or in the opulence of your life, but when you're down among the animals in the manger.
01:12:35.000Yeah, the lowly, the lowly, the lowly.
01:12:37.000I want to say that at the beginning of this, I was talking about the daring to pose the current Middle Eastern conflict as potentially a symbolic event and perhaps as a precursor to that consistent and profound Old Testament idea, the messianic event, and if indeed Christianity offers anything new, as you said, it's the literal What I would say is, is that when we are, and also another thing I wanted to touch upon there, that when you were talking about the technological ascent, progressivism and the age of abundance, you've talked about that potentially being housed within a rubric that included a component of the divine and the unknowable,
01:13:30.000And the potential inclusion of the subjective.
01:13:33.000Interesting to note, of course, that when these explorations and investigations are conducted, they always buttress and buttress hard against consciousness itself, whether it's within the double slit area or indeed just trying to determine what subjectivity might actually be.
01:13:51.000And this idea indeed of The symbolic itself, being the interface between the psyche and the material, touches upon a Jungian idea that I know is important to you, certainly it seems important to me, vital at this time, that synchronicity ultimately becomes the observed lack of distinction, the porousness between the inner and outer worlds.
01:14:17.000That if indeed there will be a symbolic end time, a rapture, an apocalypse, an Armageddon, the thing that it feels sometimes that I've been personally facing and perhaps we're globally being confronted with right now live on your TV sets, is it possible that we are sort of experiencing some aperture, some birth, some, you know, almost in a WB Yeats, potentially in a WB Yeats way, you know, like slouching towards Bethlehem, this dreadful thing, Or could it be, and is part of our shared goal here, to discuss the potential of a return of Christ that might not be personal, and God knows I don't know what the Christians mean by it, but a kind of an awakening within us all that acknowledges that what we have to recognize is that there is an overarching ideology around technology, progressivism, materialism and individualism, and that ideology is unitive, darkly unitive,
01:15:12.000It is a shadow force, it is Satan, it is the idea that the end point of this is one central authority, one central ideology, denial of nature, denial of God, the hedonic and pleasure as a substitute for divine connection and that only the ultimate sacrifice The denial of the ego, the ultimate sacrifice, the denial of the self, the small self, is the only key, the only vessel, the only branch that we can offer to some potentially forgiving God.
01:15:48.000So William James, who was the father of modern psychology and wrote a very interesting book on religious experience, varieties of religious experience, claimed, and this is partly what he was looking for, that human beings needed the moral equivalent of war.
01:16:09.000And you actually see that reflected in certain streams of Islamic thought that call for the jihad that's an internal jihad rather than an external war.
01:16:20.000Now I would say that Jung proclaimed that any state of inner contradiction that wasn't played out And faced psychologically would be made manifest in the world as fate, right?
01:16:39.000Which means that those things that you choose to ignore will rise up and hit you in the face.
01:16:45.000Well, that's what's happening as we descend into this war.
01:16:52.000It's an externalization of the apocalypse.
01:16:54.000That's a good way of thinking about it.
01:16:56.000And it's something that should occur within.
01:16:59.000And if that war occurs within, it doesn't have to occur in the world.
01:17:04.000First of all, war becomes a non-attractive option.
01:17:07.000You know, we don't understand that the call to war is extremely exciting to people who lack sufficient adventure in their life.
01:17:16.000If you look at the history of mobilization attempts, let's say at the beginning of the First World War, In the UK, say, men were lining up enthusiastically to go fight in this glorious war that would all be over in a few months when they eradicated the weak enemy and they'd come home to glory.
01:17:33.000And that call to adventure is extremely exciting and maybe even irresistible if you don't have enough adventure in your own life.
01:17:42.000And you might say, well, how do you find as much adventure in your own life as you would find in a war?
01:17:47.000And the answer is you conduct a sufficient war internally.
01:17:51.000You know, and this is, I would say, in many ways, this is the central message of a psychologized Judeo-Christianity.
01:17:59.000It's like the fundamental cosmic battle between good and evil is fought in the soul.
01:18:07.000And if it isn't fought in the soul, it will be fought out in the world.
01:18:12.000And so you call upon people to fight it out in their soul, but that's a... I don't think there's any difference between that, by the way, and the notion that you're to hoist the cross of mortality and malevolence on your own shoulders.
01:18:27.000If you're going to have an internal struggle that's as intense as an external war would be, as a substitute for that war, then that's going to be, well
01:18:37.000And that's a hell of a thing to ask people to do, but like with many properly moral choices,
01:18:45.000the only thing that's worse than doing it is what happens if you don't do it.
01:18:49.000It's hard, Jordan, to imagine that now that we've been sort of plumped and fatted and made
01:18:58.000prisoners of comfort, that en masse there could be the type of awakening required for people to
01:19:05.000undergo the true jihad, the true apocalypse, the true inner revelation that is required for us to,
01:19:14.000as a planet, abstain from war, to have the tonic to...
01:19:20.000To not fall into what appears to be the manifestation of our collective inability to stop casting out the shadow.
01:19:29.000It's curious that, you know, in order to go to war, of course, words have failed me all too often and to the point where violence is all that's left.
01:19:39.000You know, in a sense that we've all played out Baldwin's Maxim there, that, you know, what kind of culture creates the category of Negro?
01:19:48.000And what characteristics do we attribute, i.e.
01:19:52.000the dancing, the sexuality, the violence?
01:19:55.000It's very telling about the nature of a host culture for what it will cast out onto its opponent.
01:20:02.000And of course, perhaps it's even in a conversation with you that, you know, consistent across the world, enemies are defined as having these shadow traits. They are
01:20:12.000dirty, they are disgusting, they are worthy to be killed. So often when people feel
01:20:18.000that kind of personal despair, that's that they're likely to feel these days, you know, I
01:20:37.000Like how do we awaken, how do we, how do we awaken the sort of the willingness to, you know, to pick up the sword or pick up the cross or pick up whatever it is?
01:20:48.000I think we do remind people that they're built for adventure and not for comfort, and young men in particular don't require much convincing to accept that as truth.
01:21:01.000You can just lay it out, like, well, do you want infantile comfort or do you want a difficult and challenging adventure?
01:21:09.000Now, there's going to be some resistance because there's responsibility that goes along with the adventure, but But it's not a huge step to take to imagine that a compelling adventure could be posed as an attractive pathway through life.
01:22:25.000And in doing that, I was able to bring these very high order concepts, archetypal concepts, for example, down to their practical manifestations.
01:22:34.000And when I conducted therapy, I always started with practical because that's the most straightforward.
01:22:40.000And you can you can say to people, look, Try to do something a little bit better tomorrow that you could do and just see what happens.
01:22:48.000That's called collaborative empiricism, right?
01:23:02.000Just as an experiment and see what happens and what happens inevitably is you grow a little bit and then you can see a little more clearly and you can take on a little more responsibility and that's a that's an upward path that's right there in front of people no matter where they are.
01:23:18.000In fact in some ways the more problems that are around them The larger the field of opportunity, because when you're in a place where everything is wrong, there's a lot to fix, right?
01:23:28.000I mean, you could just start, like, right with the mess that's there.
01:23:32.000And that works far better than people think, and they discover that quite quickly.
01:23:38.000And then, if you also understand That the alternative to centralized utopian power-mad governance is local authority and responsibility.
01:23:50.000You can ally that meaningful pursuit of micro-responsibility with the development of resistance to totalitarian blandishment.
01:23:59.000It's like No, I don't need you to take care of me.
01:24:43.000And the answer to that should be a resounding yes, but, you know, one step at a time.
01:24:48.000Because in responsibility is the adventure.
01:24:52.000And that's such an amazing thing to understand, is that it isn't your right to To pursue your hedonic gratification.
01:24:59.000That's not where you're going to find redemption and salvation, except sporadically and counterproductively.
01:25:07.000There's inexhaustible adventure in responsibility, and there's nobility in it, and there's the furtherance of your interests and those you love.
01:25:17.000Well, people understand that if you explain it carefully.
01:25:24.000If you're watching this anywhere other than Rumble, we're going to have to leave you now.
01:25:28.000We're going deeper with Jordan Peters, and yes, we're talking about some subjects you may have heard JP discuss before, like, for example, Andrew Tate.
01:25:51.000It's kind of a disgusting idea to sell to people, the hedonic idea, and when you pursue it, yeah, believe me, there are consequences in store for you if you pursue that hedonic route.
01:26:02.000And I see a lot in the men I work with in the field of addiction, that wayward and chaotic men, when offered a simple pathway through addiction, take responsibility very well.
01:26:13.000And this micro macro dynamic and polarity that you explained and the necessary relationship between them and I reckon what you said there about your own particular studies of starting with the most practical application of clinical therapy of like why don't you do this and how it might relate to very complex erudite to the point of abstraction ideas of archetypes is perhaps defining when it comes to the scope scale and dexterity of the public discourse that you've subsequently It's part of that fractal reality that you referred to earlier too, is that you need to take on ultimate responsibility.
01:26:56.000Okay, well how do you do that in the moment?
01:26:58.000By taking on partial responsibility, because partial responsibility is actually an element of responsibility that reflects The totality of responsibility as such, like it has the same nature.
01:27:18.000So we talked earlier about the fact that and someone like Andrew Tate is good at this, by the way.
01:27:24.000And this is why he's such a popular character.
01:27:26.000He says to disaffected, nihilistic, and depressed young men, you know, why don't you turn yourself into a monster there, buddy, and take what the world's offering you, you know, without guilt?
01:27:37.000You know, there's a kind of Nietzschean Superman idea lurking behind that.
01:27:42.000And, you know, you have to give the devil his due.
01:27:45.000As I said, I think that's a more It's a step on the way to emerging from that depressive, nihilistic state of infantile dependence.
01:27:55.000Now, you had the opportunity to, let's say, revel in the abundance that life might offer you on the hedonic front.
01:28:28.000The question that I offered you earlier, I cited the famous Blake edict, the road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom, and I offered it to you.
01:28:37.000And, you know, experientially, the palace of wisdom at the end of that road of excess is despair.
01:28:48.000After absolute hedonic indulgence, without resistance, abundant access to fame and to attention and to sexual pleasure, leads to a kind of despair.
01:29:10.000Because when you are tantalised by an idea, when that idea exists culturally as an object of attraction to magnetise the vast majority that are never going to experience it, it's not a democratised principle.
01:29:28.000Celebrity by its nature is an elitist idea.
01:29:33.000You don't encounter, you don't experience limitless access to these fruits.
01:29:38.000And when you do, you recognize, no, this is a facsimile.
01:29:42.000Now, I know in Tantra, And in some forms of totemism and, you know, Aleister Crowley style stuff, you know, sex can be sort of some transcendent vehicle and there's no doubt that there's euphoria and limitless pleasure available.
01:29:57.000But the reason that that lifestyle ended for me is in the end, it is, you know, it's the finger pointing at the moon.
01:30:08.000It's alluding to the idea of the masculine and feminine principle ...existing transcendent of their polarity and dualism as one entity that's procreative.
01:30:20.000And the reason I suppose that there are prohibitions in many orders around copulation, even noticeably within certain sects within Hinduism, if you are a householder couple, only sex for procreation, for example, not pleasure even within a marriage, Is because it's recognized as a powerful force, the same way violence is a powerful force.
01:30:42.000Now these, I suppose, these motivating forces maintain our focus and our practices within the material, within the realm of the material.
01:30:51.000They're prevented from becoming transcendent and sublime, though Lord alone knows there are instantiations of coitus that can be transcendent and sublime.
01:31:00.000I wanted to touch upon two When talking about patriarchy and when patriarchy is used only in its pejorative form and you see yourself as a defender of the non-luciferian aspect of the patriarchy, which is male and dutiful and therefore beautiful, that in accompaniment to their condemnation of the patriarchy, there is a paternalism
01:31:38.000We're denied access even to our tribal anthropological origins.
01:31:44.000When you talk about this A small piece of responsibility bearing the character of the whole of responsibility.
01:31:53.000You offer people a pathway, a pathway back, even in the most pragmatic way.
01:31:58.000Start by tidying your bedroom, start by making the tea at a 12-step meeting, and before you know it... But the problem is, is with many of these spiritual modalities, even if they're psychologized as you have described, is that they're regarded actually as a route back to inverted commas normal living.
01:32:13.000Now get out there and participate in the maternal world you've God's given you a boost, now park God and get on with the business of living a normal life, rather than retaining this connection.
01:32:25.000Now when we talk about what is the inherent problem with globalism, when built into at least their rhetoric around an authoritarian and centralised globalist state, is the idea of unity, actually what we're talking about is tyranny.
01:32:41.000And what I think that we need to offer as an alternative to people is Diverse, decentralized, but unified.
01:32:52.000Although, see, the only game in town at the moment is centralization because it's corporatized, because it can incorporate big tech, because it can incorporate big pharma, because it can incorporate each nation's military, because it has got the game all but sewn up in the absence of a popular uprising, which cannot happen without a spiritual awakening.
01:33:15.000So the pathway that we have to offer, the alchemy that we have to conduct, the spell that must now be cast, is one of reigniting the fires within the individual.
01:33:26.000And I love that call to adventure, and I love the pragmatism in, you know, start with these small things and do not despair.
01:33:34.000I suppose, in a sense, I'm offering you the question now of is the function of ARC inherently connected to anti-gargantuanism?
01:33:44.000And in that, Jordan Peterson, you great crusader for so many subjects and a chief among them in the eyes of the uninitiated and the willfully ignorant would be the way that you've gone to war on subjects like gender identity, would there be the inclusion of Yeah, if you want to run your culture that way democratically, then of course you must, as long as concomitant with that is the idea that there are people here who are living by a very different path, and you don't seek to impose a transcendent and a coercive order above them and upon them.
01:34:25.000Can I say that any decentralization, I just finished, any decentralization worthy of the
01:34:32.000name will include, will have to include, the possibility for people living in...
01:34:38.000In extremely discreet ways, as we once might have done in a tribalised culture, where there'd be no reason to imagine that the tribes of Iceland would live in absolute ideological harmony with the tribes of Senegal or Japan, and true diversity would afford us that kind of uniqueness of culture.
01:34:59.000Well, one of the advantages to the leftist insistence on diversity is that with true diversity comes a range of unexpected solutions to unexpected problems, right?
01:35:11.000We don't know what the future will throw at us.
01:35:14.000If we're on the right track now and we're all busily Needling down that pathway, and something entirely unexpected comes along.
01:35:23.000Unless we have diversity within us, we won't have any answers to unforeseen problems.
01:35:29.000And so the notion of diversity as a source of resilience, let's say, is accurate.
01:35:35.000It's no different than respect for a plurality of thought, let's say, and approach.
01:35:41.000But it begs the question, which is, well, what's the source that unifies that diversity?
01:35:47.000Because Disunified diversity is conflict, anxiety, and hopelessness.
01:35:52.000So how do you take advantage of diversity while maintaining the utility of unity?
01:35:58.000And then on the unity side, well, you don't want rigid unity because it's too fragile and brittle.
01:36:05.000Okay, so this problem is actually addressed in the book of Exodus.
01:36:09.000So the existential problem that the Israelites are grappling with is Well, they're escaped from tyranny, and they don't want the tyrant, so they don't want the enforced unity of the authoritarian state.
01:36:26.000And they don't want the habits of slaves, because being subjugated to tyranny has turned them into directionless slaves, which is why they're lost in the desert, right?
01:36:36.000They don't know where to go, and they keep trying to turn Moses into a pharaoh.
01:36:42.000And then there's a vision of proper governance that emerges, the analysis of which has been core to Catholic social doctrine for hundreds of years, and which actually constitutes the central aspect of a necessary conservatism.
01:36:59.000And it's the principle of subsidiarity.
01:37:01.000So the idea is that the proper alternative to tyranny and slavery.
01:37:07.000So you imagine a two rigid unity at the top and a two fractionated plurality at the bottom.
01:37:21.000And so, well, for each of us as individuals, We're a plurality of dynamic spiritual forces, right?
01:37:30.000I mean, within our breasts, rage, lust, and anger, and hatred, and love, and appetitive urges of various forms, and it's very difficult to arrange them into a unity.
01:37:42.000But we have to do that, because otherwise we're a house divided against itself.
01:37:47.000We operate at cross-purposes to ourselves.
01:37:49.000And the way the brain organizes that is in an integrated hierarchy.
01:37:54.000And as you mature, that hierarchy emerges, right?
01:37:57.000With a union of those, that plurality of forces, not the suppression of those forces, but an integration.
01:38:03.000And that was the point Jung made, was that it wasn't superego against id.
01:38:09.000It was the integration of of these underlying dynamic spirits into a higher order hierarchical unity and the unity the symbol of that unity was christ as far as as jung was concerned and and he said that forthrightly it's not hidden and so on there's a reason for that but then socially what's the alternative to
01:38:31.000tyrannical order that still allows for unity.
01:38:38.000Well, you and your wife make up a microcosm of society and you're not the boss and she's not the boss.
01:38:47.000The boss is the superordinate principle that unites you.
01:38:50.000And in a Christian ceremony, that would also be Christ, by the way, technically speaking.
01:38:55.000But the idea there would be that it's the spirit of radical reciprocity that constitutes the core of the marriage, and you're both subordinate to that.
01:39:04.000You both have responsibility for participating in that.
01:39:08.000And so you're responsible for yourself, and your wife is responsible for herself, but the two of you together are responsible for the unity of the marriage.
01:39:16.000And in that responsibility is the meaning of the marriage.
01:39:22.000Because you will feel your willingness to bear the responsibility of fostering that unity as a meaningful responsibility.
01:39:30.000That's how it will make itself manifest.
01:39:32.000And if you both do that, your marriage will flourish.
01:39:36.000And then if you can both do that, you can extend it to your kids.
01:39:39.000And then there's a level of responsibility for the family.
01:39:43.000And you take on those responsibilities, and then the government doesn't have to play nanny state, because there's no one to minister to, right?
01:39:51.000And then families organize themselves into local communities.
01:39:55.000And there's a level of responsibility at every step of the hierarchy.
01:40:00.000And the unity is the harmony of the totality, the productive harmony of the totality.
01:40:06.000And if that responsibility is shouldered, You don't need a king.
01:40:57.000Because, of course, not only then do we cast out the shadow, as in the Schmittian dialectic of othering, we also cast out the light, affording others these positions of sovereignty that would be better held in the consciousness of an elevated self.
01:41:15.000I was struck with your last shamanic proclamation by the amount of hand gestures you used there that indicated a kind of, I wouldn't say unconscious, but integrated awareness of the geometric connotations.
01:41:31.000You know, crucifixes were made, triangles were made, squares were made, and indeed, isn't geometry The rational approach to symbology.
01:41:42.000And once again we can see how rationalism and post-enlightenment thought has abandoned its pair, its partner.
01:41:50.000Jung's obvious defining, perhaps, interest in symbolism.
01:41:54.000That there is that which can never be said, that which cannot be measured with the measure in mind, but can be felt intuitively with the belly.
01:42:04.000I love too your insistence on subsidiarity, that there is no connective tissue between the chaos, the deliberately, I would argue, and I feel that you are arguing too, the deliberately induced and fed and festering chaos at the bottom of society and the unity And lack of transparency at the head of the pyramid, the head of the serpent, the head of the beast.
01:42:27.000No transparency, total unity and convergence of purpose when it comes to corporate, authoritarian, militaristic, pharmacological goals.
01:43:33.000It's the attempt to demolish all the intermediary structures.
01:43:37.000And part of the way that's done is by telling people, well, you have nothing, but you'll be granted all your individual rights, which is like hedonic advantages.
01:43:47.000the what you're being offered as a replacement for that hierarchical responsibility is hedonic gratification endless hedonic gratification but as you already said that's not a fruitful pursuit even when it's successful you know it beckons very powerfully when it's not successful because it's the well what would you say it's the hidden I mean, I can see why a completely disaffected young man would regard Andrew Tate as a role model.
01:44:18.000But when the fruit of that new mode of being, which is essentially a form of domination oriented towards hedonic self-gratification, when the fruit of that is nothing but a higher order despair, it's a dreadful vision.
01:44:33.000And so, and the alternative to that is, well, perversely enough, the alternative to, and it's not that surprising, what would the alternative to a pointless hedonic self-gratification be other than a hierarchy of responsibility?
01:44:48.000I mean, obviously that's the alternative.
01:44:51.000And then you think, well, is that just the Rousseauian type would say, all of that social responsibility is nothing but the burdensome excess that interferes with the free-flowing manifestation of my self-actualizing spirit, as if everything that was of value was only located internally.
01:46:01.000In a sense, we can use as a kind of litmus test for the direction that the culture is headed in the way that you have become a kind of polarizing figure.
01:46:08.000Because I feel like when you're talking about the, you know, the application of these principles within marriage, I feel like how would anyone be offended by these ideas?
01:46:16.000And yet people appear to be offended by these ideas.
01:46:18.000And of course, yes, that When you say, when you point out that there's a kind of deconstructist kind of fervour underlying this attempt to create chaos among the lower orders, unity at the top of the pyramid, you know, perhaps the opposite of the inversion of what a better society might look like.
01:46:37.000It shows me, it demonstrates to me, that the fact that what you say has become so contentious is an indication of where our society has gotten itself to.
01:46:48.000That once upon a time, once upon a decade or two ago, these were ideas, and I know that you are very much a creator and a product of your time sort of simultaneously, these ideas would have just been incorporated into the culture.
01:47:31.000And also an accompanying puritanism, a kind of a deracinated puritanism as a sort of a polarised to that.
01:47:40.000Of course all energy on the physical level requires a type of polarity and even within the Rousseauian ideas that you are not disavowing but advising caution towards, there was much beauty and certainly you would have to say that the
01:47:56.000trajectory and march of civilization has oppressed, repressed, crushed many of the ideas and
01:48:03.000organic and original conditions that I suppose that Rousseau was showcasing, alluding to,
01:48:11.000So there's a sort of a necessity for the acknowledgement of that.
01:48:14.000And I also want to fold in here that when you were talking about, say, the collective Israeli will to create a sovereign from the judges create a king, it made me wonder about the individual culpability of a dictator.
01:48:30.000The dictator, the Stalin, dare I say even the Hitler, is potentially called forth By the collective in some way, but how else could it take place?
01:48:40.000And if it did take place as a result of the individual culpability of a bad actor, then why is there a pre-existing template for it in scripture?
01:48:49.000The demand for the malign, if not the malign sovereign specifically, the demand for the sovereign and unifying figure and the potential for that, particularly stripped of As with post-industrialization, as with increasing modernity, perhaps there is no better definition for modernity and post-industrialism and even the trajectory of our kind in general as a sort of a movement away from God.
01:49:13.000A movement away from God that somehow cannot, until we resolve that, until we resolve the true and evident progress of technology and medicine with its unaddressed Departure from the Holy Land that we have to, we will be confronted, we will continue to reiterate this problem or live in this sort of false polarity that is disempowering.
01:49:38.000It seems like, you know, God think how often in scripture and in prophecy we talk about the inversion and, you know, and even in alchemy as above so below.
01:49:47.000You know, when I talk about the war as a symbolic event, when I talk about the messianic advent as being one of the key prophecies, perhaps this time of crisis is calling that, that inversion, that reversal, and perhaps that's much of what you're talking about, even when you're talking about, you know, in your own training, this is the macro, the source, even the essence, and this is the application, the pragmatic and the practical, that somehow, Somehow, as discussed with this principle of subsidiarity, there has to be, there's a sort of a tension, a flip, a reversal on the axis.
01:50:22.000And my God, there's no better word for that than revolution.
01:50:25.000And sometimes it feels to me that that's what's somehow required.
01:50:28.000And I know that you advocate for conservatism so strongly that it seems odd that that's something that we might have to consider.
01:50:35.000Well, I think that's part and parcel of this strange reversal, but I would say it has to be a revolution within, right?
01:50:43.000It's an apocalypse within, fundamentally, to begin with.
01:50:48.000You know, you asked earlier, too, how is it that you can communicate to people how they would take part in the revolution that would make them Immune to the blandishments of tyrants.
01:50:59.000And part of the answer to that as well is by adopting a viewpoint of radical humility, right?
01:51:07.000So humility opens yourself up to the possibility that your problem is your problems, right?
01:51:14.000And if you understand that that's an inexhaustible well of potential wisdom, then it can flip the way you construe your own inadequacy.
01:51:22.000You know, why should I examine myself And my conscience for the errors I once committed.
01:51:28.000The answer to that is, well, those errors took me off the proper path.
01:51:32.000And if I could identify what they were and rectify them, then I could identify the proper path.
01:51:36.000And that would be worth any amount of self-abnegation, let's say.
01:51:41.000Because why wouldn't you want to be wiser if wisdom was associated with flourishing?
01:51:45.000And not only for you, but for everyone else.
01:51:48.000And that's another peculiar inversion, you know, that the road to redemption is through the through the what would you call it through the through the arch of Of confession of the most radical sort.
01:52:04.000And I think it lays the groundwork that enables you to start taking on responsibility.
01:52:10.000Because the consequence of grappling with your inadequacies is that you will start to rectify those inadequacies by becoming more integrated and responsible.
01:52:24.000You know, and there's more to it than that too, Russell.
01:52:26.000There's something else we want to talk about at ARC is that there is a notion in the Exodus narrative that the land of milk and honey is the state ruled by the subsidiary structure.
01:52:41.000And what that means, in a sense, is that if everyone took on the responsibility that was requisite to these multiple levels of social organization, so you took full responsibility for yourself, for your wife, for your family, for your community, so on, for the town, for the state, for the nation, under God, if you did all that, the desert would bloom.
01:53:04.000That human ingenuity is such that if we specialize and cooperate, there is no problem we can't solve.
01:53:12.000There's no desert we can't make bloom.
01:53:14.000And that's actually the answer to the zero-sum Malthusian objection that the world is characterized by limited resources and that privation is the only way forward.
01:53:51.000And then I think, oh yes, the preposterousness is the point.
01:53:55.000Musk is trying to demonstrate that if we organize ourselves properly, and he's very, very good at making organizations, If we organize ourselves properly, nothing, no matter how preposterous, is beyond our field of apprehension and accomplishment.
01:54:10.000And he's trying to demonstrate that concretely.
01:54:49.000But the idea that we're stringently constrained by some set of arbitrary material Limitations is just another apocalyptic blandishment of the utopians.
01:54:59.000Yes and of course a problem of materialism.
01:55:02.000If all that is real is observable then the ultimate destination is the individual and we live in a world of limitation because we are only interested in that which can be measured.
01:55:12.000I love your analysis of Musk there and I love the optimism within that.
01:55:16.000It's the only commodity we're running out of is God.
01:55:20.000I like, when you were talking about redemption there, in of course the etymology, or just the definition actually, of that word, you are giving something back.
01:55:32.000So in self-actualisation, to be redeemed, you are giving back.
01:55:37.000To be actualised, you are giving back.
01:55:39.000Personal redemption is not an individuation, as the word would suggest in the Jungian sense, a severance and a cutting off, but a redeeming and a return, a returning.
01:55:51.000I would say this is actually one of the weaknesses of the Jungian approach, is that Jung regarded the heroic endeavor as an internal voyage of transformation, and I would say that is one valid variant of the heroic process of redemption.
01:56:06.000But Jung underestimated and under-emphasized the necessity of Hierarchical social organization and the relationship between the harmony of social organization and mental health itself.
01:56:20.000All the clinical psychologists did that because, well, they were concentrating on the individual and fair enough, but it's still a, it's a marked lacunae.
01:56:30.000The only psychologist I know who essentially filled that was, was, uh, it was Jean Piaget with his studies on children showing that The fundamental unit of social organization is voluntary play, and that that scales up across levels of social organization.
01:56:46.000Piaget wasn't a clinician, you know, so his theories didn't have that much effect on clinical practice.
01:56:51.000And we did get, in the humanists of the 60s, the idea that, you know, you free your trammeled spirit by rejecting the superego tyrant and finding within you that root to salvation.
01:57:03.000It's like, well, yeah, but what about other people?
01:57:06.000And the route to salvation is, it's not just you getting your act together, it's you getting your marriage together and your family together, you know, to belabor a point.
01:57:16.000Don't presume that that individual identity, that the proper identity, ends with the boundary of your skin.
01:57:24.000That's foolish, and it's counterproductive.
01:57:29.000Let's say that's radically successful.
01:57:32.000I would say that as a hedonistic individual, you were radically successful.
01:58:43.000I like that a potential unit for progress could be voluntary play, and that the numinist, this personally felt interface with God and awe, at some point, somehow, for some reason, suggests a set of ethical steps Not solitary yogic revelry and play in the dominions of God, the personal internal dominions of God, but some kind of mission, some kind of purpose.
01:59:17.000As you said with the 60s humanists, well what about other people?
01:59:22.000At some point this suggestion that there is a sublime realm, that there is a unitary force that we are participants in, that we can access and can use as a principle if we are not trapped and ensnared in the many levels of hell that might hedonically or materially suggest themselves, for surely they will come through material channels.
01:59:42.000Then, unitary behavior, such as kindness, such as service, such as a social organization, suggest themselves.
01:59:49.000I'm also struck that at some point you said, redistribution of responsibility, that suggested a kind of spiritual communism, the radical redistribution of responsibility.
02:00:03.000Let's redistribute the responsibility.
02:00:05.000Well, absolutely, that would be way better than distributing the wealth.
02:00:09.000It's a way better model because the problem with redistributing the wealth is you have to steal the wealth and then you distribute it to the psychopaths.
02:00:17.000And then if the people you're distributing it to aren't psychopaths, you make them dependent and you destroy the adventure of their life by making the state the benevolent paternal, like the all benevolent combination of mother and father under whose wings you're currently permanently suffocating.
02:01:32.000If you think about how much necessity is required to set you on your feet, like if the responsibility for your own satiation was lifted off you by an arbitrary other, you'd have nothing left to occupy yourself with.
02:02:36.000I believe that I have a number of people in Amsterdam, which is where I am now, that I'm meeting for dinner, a number of comedians and other such creatures.
02:02:46.000I have a very nice crew of people around me.
02:02:49.000Now, I'm so fortunate because that happens pretty much wherever I go, you know, and that's a hell of a privilege, that's for sure.
02:02:56.000So, yeah, well, maybe just to close, you know that the art conferences Occurring right away the 30th 31st of October the 1st of November.
02:03:05.000We still have we have the public event on November 1st I'm going to be speaking at the O2 with Jonathan Paggio Who's the deepest religious thinker I ever met a real Old Testament prophet Paggio with Bjorn Lomborg who's a brilliant environmentalist and with Douglas Murray who's witty beyond belief and a very strong advocate for the What would you say?
02:03:28.000For the non-tyrannical advantages of the patriarchal West, let's put it that way.
02:03:34.000And we're going to discuss the subsidiary vision and the distribution of responsibility and invite people to come on board with their own responsibility, right?
02:03:45.000Because this model of leadership is something like Get out there and do what you need to do.
02:03:52.000Don't be waiting around for direction from the top other than the direction that says, look buddy, it's on you.
02:03:59.000And you want that, and you should want that, and you should understand that as As good as it can possibly get.
02:04:08.000And so we're running this experiment to see if we can provide a compelling positive vision of the future, not a zero-sum Malthusian utopian nightmare, which is what we seem to be being terrified with non-stop as the only viable pathway forward.
02:04:33.000I know that the world can be a terrible place, a place of brutal tragedy and malevolence, but That you can know that and you can see it and you can still have the courage to put forward a vision of abundance and opportunity and to try to make that a reality by retooling the limited precepts that are what constraining you in your attempts to move and everyone else in their attempts to move forward in life.
02:05:05.000And the pathway out is truth and responsibility.
02:05:08.000There's more, but that's a good start.
02:05:12.000We will do everything we can to support and assure the success of this beautiful project.
02:05:21.000I only wish that I could join you there.
02:05:24.000We'll post the link in the description now and we'll do everything we can to support that.
02:05:28.000Jordan, thank you as always for being so generous with your time and the almost limitless breadth of your thought which I understand now better than before since you told me about the manner in which you've studied and I can see how important that is to a kind of a fractal version of reality and indeed discourse and the impact that you've made with that is, you know, speaks for itself and is also shouted down pretty efficiently as well in some quarters.
02:07:22.000But join us for independent communication, independent thought, to start to examine together how we might move forward, transcend these systems, create something glorious together.
02:07:47.000Thank you for transcending the paradigm of deception that they would have you live in, like a little slug full of sugar water and dumbness.
02:07:55.000Join us tomorrow, not for more of the same.
02:07:57.000Oh no, we'd never insult you with that, but for more of the different.