The Auron MacIntyre Show - Dismantling Woke Patronage ｜ Guest： Inez Feltscher Stepman ｜ 1⧸4⧸23

00:00:00.000 We hope you're enjoying your Air Canada flight.

00:00:02.300 Rocky's vacation, here we come.

00:00:05.060 Whoa, is this economy?

00:00:07.180 Free beer, wine, and snacks.

00:00:09.620 Sweet! 0.95

00:00:10.720 Fast-free Wi-Fi means I can make dinner reservations before we land.

00:00:14.760 And with live TV, I'm not missing the game.

00:00:17.800 It's kind of like, I'm already on vacation.

00:00:20.980 Nice! 0.94

00:00:22.240 On behalf of Air Canada, nice travels.

00:00:25.260 Wi-Fi available to Airplane members on Equipped Flight.

00:00:27.320 Sponsored by Bell. Conditions apply.

00:00:28.580 See AirCanada.com.

00:00:30.000 We'll be right back.

00:01:00.000 We'll be right back.

00:01:30.360 Hey, everybody.

00:01:31.300 How's it going?

00:01:32.200 Thanks for joining me this afternoon.

00:01:34.400 Got a great stream with a guest I think you're really going to enjoy.

00:01:38.600 Now, Inez Stetman is someone who I have interacted with on Twitter a bunch,

00:01:42.980 but I had never got completely into some of her work.

00:01:46.700 And then I saw an article that she put out here in the recent week, which I thought was

00:01:51.440 really interesting.

00:01:52.240 Took a very good tack on kind of what's happening with Elon Musk and Twitter and all that that's

00:01:59.800 going on right now.

00:02:00.620 So I wanted to invite her on and kind of have a conversation, maybe learn a little more about

00:02:04.620 her work.

00:02:05.400 She is a podcaster.

00:02:07.920 She's the host of the High Noon podcast, and she's also a policy analyst.

00:02:12.220 Inez, thanks for coming on.

00:02:14.500 Thanks for having me.

00:02:16.900 Absolutely.

00:02:17.500 So the article that you had here was on Elon Musk and his takeover of Twitter.

00:02:23.620 And a lot of people have focused on the free speech aspect of this, which I think is pretty

00:02:28.300 understandable.

00:02:28.880 I mean, that was Elon's kind of stated goal, or at least one of his major stated goals.

00:02:33.780 Everyone makes the joke about the Babylon Bee getting banned and that kind of being the

00:02:37.940 domino that leads to the revolution.

00:02:39.660 But I think there was some truth to that.

00:02:42.880 But the thing that you focused a lot on was not so much the battle for free speech, though

00:02:47.900 I think we'll talk about kind of how these things are connected.

00:02:50.720 But you focused on kind of how Elon is getting the bureaucracy over at Twitter and kind of challenging

00:02:57.080 the preconceptions of many in the tech industry of kind of the support structure you need

00:03:02.340 that kind of reinforces a lot of ideology.

00:03:05.020 Could you go into that a little more?

00:03:07.520 Yeah, I think the roots of this are really sort of James Burnham style analysis that now

00:03:13.240 seems so prophetic to so many of us looking around at how economic, both economic and political

00:03:19.600 power is structured.

00:03:20.540 And so really, fundamentally, I think this is a more substantive challenge in some way

00:03:28.640 to the professional managerial class and therefore the ideas that they're able to effectuate

00:03:34.580 both through public policy and through private economic power, right?

00:03:39.100 So I think that the free speech, we can get into this, the free speech parameters are set

00:03:43.920 by these people.

00:03:44.560 Like, that's the problem.

00:03:45.540 And we've always had parameters around what was acceptable, considered acceptable free

00:03:50.100 speech, right?

00:03:50.540 It was never actually good for your career in America to tattoo a swastika on your forehead

00:03:55.500 and then try to go work at, you know, Dollar General, right?

00:03:59.520 This was always bad for you.

00:04:01.940 And I think Michael Knowles has done a good job laying out why there always have been some

00:04:07.160 parameters around free speech, even if in America, we have very strong legal protections

00:04:11.580 against government interference into free speech.

00:04:14.140 So I think these things are all related because the problem is this political class and this

00:04:21.120 particular sort of professional class that has very, very similar ideas.

00:04:25.860 They mostly agree with each other culturally.

00:04:27.860 They're coming out of the same university system that both reinforces and sometimes introduces

00:04:33.840 those ideas and makes them sort of homogenized.

00:04:36.320 And the real question, I think, for Elon Musk is not a political radical, right?

00:04:42.840 I'm under no sort of illusion that Elon Musk is our champion of the right, the right-wing

00:04:48.320 billionaire or whatever it is.

00:04:50.440 But what he is is a tough boss.

00:04:53.080 And what he is is looking for value from his employees.

00:04:57.360 And I think what he's starting to prove with Twitter is something more dangerous than allowing

00:05:01.860 Kanye West back on to tweet a Schwarzenegger or whatever it is, right?

00:05:05.980 I think what he's proving is that a lot of these people who are making very, very good

00:05:10.840 money, essentially enforcing political diktat, their jobs are ideologically justified.

00:05:19.160 And he's basically saying, you know what?

00:05:21.680 I can take a third of the company who are actually the ones who are producing the value,

00:05:26.260 the enormous value that these American tech companies are producing, maybe is coming from

00:05:30.500 a small sector within that, mostly, you know, male, mostly white and Asian, right?

00:05:35.940 Politically correct inconveniences there.

00:05:40.120 And maybe we don't need this entire class of people who are credentialed through the University

00:05:45.200 of Pennsylvania, like Yul Roth or, you know, through Harvard or through Yale, but don't

00:05:49.680 actually add a lot of substance to the bottom line.

00:05:52.760 Because in the end of the day, there isn't a lot of, I think what I wrote in my piece

00:05:56.520 was, you know, this kind of ideological policing doesn't add to the wealth of nations at the

00:06:00.880 end of the day.

00:06:01.740 And it's all kind of this house of cards of BS.

00:06:04.840 And I think calling a lot of, like, essentially calling out a lot of the fact that this quote

00:06:11.580 unquote value that is making a lot of people real billions, right, isn't actually resting

00:06:17.920 on anything.

00:06:19.220 It's an economic house of cards.

00:06:20.720 So I think that that might be very, very important.

00:06:24.420 That example might be very, very important, especially as we do go in potentially to a

00:06:28.500 recession and a contraction of the tech sector.

00:06:31.400 Yeah, I think those are really good points.

00:06:33.400 Because as you started to say at the beginning there, I think, you know, I'm not the free

00:06:39.000 speech champion.

00:06:40.460 I'm not saying it doesn't matter.

00:06:41.960 But I'm not the person who's the free speech absolutist.

00:06:45.480 I think the idea that, yeah, there have always been boundaries.

00:06:49.120 There will always be cultural norms about what you can say and what you can approach.

00:06:53.280 And some of those might even be healthy.

00:06:55.660 But the ones that are being imposed right now are rather artificial and come from, like 0.88

00:07:00.920 you said, that ideology that's very harmful and produces a lot of baggage.

00:07:05.160 I really like the phrase you used, the Homer Simpson job, right?

00:07:09.280 Like a lot of these people are coming in.

00:07:12.500 They're there to hold a place.

00:07:14.660 They're there to tick a box.

00:07:17.640 Their job doesn't, you know, as you say in the piece, there's a lot of scaffolding.

00:07:23.660 A lot of our economy is warped around, you know, producing make-work jobs for these people, 1.00

00:07:29.600 even though they're not adding anything significant.

00:07:32.180 And this creates the elevation of guys like Yul Roth, who otherwise wouldn't have any particular

00:07:37.880 value in an economy, has done some work that, you know, most people would pay almost no attention

00:07:43.120 to, but is instead granted the ability to censor the president of the United States,

00:07:48.040 from what we can tell.

00:07:48.880 Well, that's an insane amount of power given to someone who otherwise probably wouldn't

00:07:54.620 be very impressive.

00:07:56.020 And that's a very powerful tool of, like, you know, political patronage.

00:08:01.520 That's something that will pretty much guarantee someone is on your side forever.

00:08:04.940 If you can kind of invert the hierarchy and put people like that at the top and make sure

00:08:09.360 that they have power over, like, a president of the United States, those people are going

00:08:12.860 to be ride and die for you forever, right?

00:08:15.620 Yeah, absolutely.

00:08:16.400 I mean, I really think Yul Roth is just this sort of quintessential example of someone

00:08:20.660 of this type who's been very, very successful, right?

00:08:23.760 So most of these people are not as successful as Yul Roth.

00:08:26.720 They don't have as high positions in the company.

00:08:28.820 They truly are this professional class, which, by the way, Daryl E. Paul, I think, writes

00:08:33.200 fantastically about this.

00:08:34.740 And he's pointed out that the margin for, quote unquote, socialism on the left has shrunk,

00:08:42.340 right?

00:08:42.480 So it used to be tax the rich.

00:08:43.760 But what defines the rich is essentially moving with the boundaries of the professional class,

00:08:48.280 right?

00:08:48.520 So now if you have two income households, both making, let's say, $200,000, you end up with

00:08:53.800 a $400,000 yearly income for a family.

00:08:58.460 That's now not rich, right?

00:08:59.840 So we're moving the boundaries.

00:09:01.420 It's always that teeny tiny 1%. 0.98

00:09:03.260 We want to tax the Elon Musks to death.

00:09:05.740 But the professional class is very, very good at protecting itself from the kind of broad 1.00

00:09:10.360 base taxation, say, in Sweden, for example, right?

00:09:14.300 Where not only the middle class, but the professional class as well is all heavily taxed for the welfare

00:09:18.480 state.

00:09:18.920 But I do think that's just like an interesting thing to point out that this really is the

00:09:23.660 base of the Democratic Party now is this professional class.

00:09:28.280 But yeah, I mean, I think that Yul Roth is just this perfect example.

00:09:33.560 What has Yul Roth actually done?

00:09:35.220 We just assume that people like Yul Roth are worth their very, very large paychecks because

00:09:40.840 they have the right credentials.

00:09:42.280 Well, what are those credentials?

00:09:43.440 At this point, they're purely ideological, right?

00:09:46.460 I quote in my piece extensively from his LinkedIn account, right?

00:09:49.680 Which is basically his resume.

00:09:51.520 There's nothing on his resume that doesn't have to do exactly with these ideological concerns.

00:09:56.660 And of course, they're very narcissistic and self-referential, right?

00:09:59.000 He did his dissertation basically on his own sex life on Grindr, right?

00:10:04.880 And it's not at all clear.

00:10:08.340 And this is why I think Musk is so important.

00:10:10.260 Like from the actual capital perspective, from that like CEO C-suite perspective,

00:10:16.020 basically what they've been told is you have to hire a lot of these people and give them

00:10:21.140 great perks and great salaries because they came out of the right universities and because

00:10:25.660 of these sort of nebulous, sort of platitudinal level justifications, right?

00:10:32.540 So it's like, if you don't hire these people, then your employees will not be productive because

00:10:37.560 they won't feel actualized at work.

00:10:39.360 And there are therapeutic justifications as well, right?

00:10:41.320 Um, you, you won't, if you don't have enough diversity on your staff, then, um, you know,

00:10:47.020 you're, you're, you're going to suffer.

00:10:48.380 Your ideas are going to suffer because you won't have the different perspectives.

00:10:51.140 And these are all sort of platitudinal.

00:10:53.160 And I think what Elon Musk is doing is essentially saying that might not be true, right?

00:10:59.480 There may be absolutely no economic value.

00:11:01.600 And in fact, you might have a very fat payroll of people making six figures, not like small

00:11:07.220 salaries, right?

00:11:07.920 Maybe not Yule Rock level, level salaries, but six figure salaries, very nice living,

00:11:12.560 um, and an enormous amount of power to impose their views on, on the rest of the country,

00:11:18.620 um, that is, is given to them by that economic might that is really created by a small group

00:11:24.360 of people within the company, most of whom are uninterested in this kind of stuff.

00:11:28.080 Um, so I do think this is, this is perhaps if he can pull this off and I think they're going

00:11:33.440 to try everything to make sure he doesn't, um, if he can pull this off, it may not be

00:11:38.140 the free speech functions that are the most important.

00:11:40.520 It may just be that example, sitting over there to other CEOs saying, you know what?

00:11:44.940 You don't have to be held hostage by these people.

00:11:47.240 You don't have to be held hostage by your professional employees, right?

00:11:50.300 You can actually fire a lot of these people.

00:11:52.000 Cause at the end of the day, only a small percentage of them are actually doing much.

00:11:55.960 That's adding to your bottom line.

00:11:59.300 Yeah.

00:11:59.520 And it would be really great to see the, uh, the free market pick up a W like that

00:12:03.380 cause it's taken quite a lot of L's here recently.

00:12:05.780 So it'd be great if we'd actually saw a free market force, uh, work in that way.

00:12:10.280 But I do think you're right that it, it does having this stuff stripped away and still having

00:12:15.800 everything operate fine and actually become more profitable.

00:12:19.280 If, even if it doesn't force other CEOs to change their behavior, it truly lays bare kind

00:12:24.540 of the ideological, uh, structure of the regime, right?

00:12:28.340 Like we look at these people, well, actually let me ask you this.

00:12:33.380 Cause I don't know how familiar you are with James Burnham, but, uh, you, you did cite

00:12:37.780 him in the piece.

00:12:38.280 So I'm sure you're, you're, you're familiar.

00:12:39.720 Um, so if the managerial class is supposed to gain its, uh, it's indispensability by its

00:12:47.700 ability to operate the bureaucracy, right?

00:12:50.540 Like that's where, that's why bourgeoisie hand over the reins of power to the managerial 0.53

00:12:56.680 class, because they can operate massified structures in a way that the, you know, the

00:13:01.840 business owners could not.

00:13:03.860 But it's really interesting that these, that wokeness becomes kind of its own cottage industry,

00:13:09.100 its own sub function of managerial status, where at least before the managerial elite were

00:13:14.600 in theory operating a bureaucracy that did produce benefits, right?

00:13:19.600 Like you were actually able to streamline production and deliver products and these kinds of things.

00:13:25.120 But now the managerial subset has created not a product at all.

00:13:29.040 It's, it's just ideological compliance.

00:13:31.160 And so it's interesting that you, you only, it's almost like the managerial elite transitioned

00:13:36.760 over to a Leninist aspect where you're just placing commissars inside your corporation to

00:13:42.840 make sure you have compliance, like you would IRS tax compliance.

00:13:46.620 They're not actually operating the functions of the bureaucracy, the way that the managerial

00:13:51.760 elite are actually supposed to do in order to gain their status and power.

00:13:55.960 Yeah, I think that's exactly right.

00:13:57.820 Um, there are economists, and as Byrne pointed out, right?

00:14:00.240 There's a reason that we transferred away from, um, a kind of wildless capitalism more towards

00:14:06.240 this managerial economy.

00:14:08.840 And that's because it was offering real benefits, right?

00:14:11.400 It, there was a lot of, of, uh, problems with it as well, but there was at the end of the

00:14:15.520 day, this was making money.

00:14:17.520 There was a value here.

00:14:19.480 Um, and that's, I think we're, we are at a tipping point in that regard where this, this

00:14:24.600 managerial class, um, has essentially dealt themselves a huge amount of power in terms

00:14:31.600 of public policy, a huge amount of influence in terms of cultural direction of the country.

00:14:35.880 There's very much contrary to what the average or average citizen, like voting citizen things.

00:14:41.600 Right.

00:14:42.240 Um, and at the end of the day, it's very much no longer clear that they are actually even

00:14:47.840 producing anything at the end, except for that compliance.

00:14:51.600 And, and so I think this is an interesting tipping point.

00:14:54.440 We're going to see either we're going to tip over into just the absolute exercise of power.

00:14:59.040 Right.

00:14:59.520 Um, where they no longer have to justify the exercise of that ideological power, um, through

00:15:04.280 any other means.

00:15:05.080 Cause right now, I think ESG is a really good example.

00:15:07.000 Actually, um, ESG, they have to have right now in, in financially, right.

00:15:13.440 Um, and legally, they have to have this economic explanation for why it doesn't hurt.

00:15:18.800 Right.

00:15:19.480 Why it's actually better to invest in ESG funds.

00:15:22.580 And, um, there's no hurt on your bottom line.

00:15:25.360 In fact, it might be better for your bottom line.

00:15:27.060 And they have all kinds of statistical manipulations to show that that's true.

00:15:30.080 Right.

00:15:30.660 Um, I don't know that it would be as successful without those platitudes.

00:15:35.720 And if those platitudes are convincingly disproven, cause that's the thing about this

00:15:40.280 kind of work, right?

00:15:41.520 Um, this kind of professional work, it's not always clear whether somebody is actually

00:15:47.880 producing something of value or not.

00:15:50.220 Right.

00:15:50.660 Because it's not like you get paid $1 per widget, right.

00:15:53.520 That you're making.

00:15:54.300 And at the end of the day, you have a pile of widgets and you get your, your, your paycheck.

00:15:58.460 Right.

00:15:59.000 Um, it's not hourly.

00:16:00.340 These are project based.

00:16:02.000 They're somewhat creative.

00:16:03.000 They're non-repetitive, right.

00:16:04.560 These kinds of jobs.

00:16:05.520 There's a lot of room, frankly, for BS in this and into that BS has essentially stepped

00:16:12.480 this ideology and this ideological, explicitly ideological credentialing.

00:16:17.040 Um, but I think again, the, the, the Twitter counter example might show that that's all there

00:16:22.700 is there, um, that there isn't that end of the day, uh, that actual value being produced.

00:16:29.260 And look, it may take quite a while because America is very rich, right?

00:16:34.300 That's another reason where we can get away with a lot of this stuff. 0.97

00:16:37.000 Um, that wealth covers for a lot of garbage, right?

00:16:41.860 Um, so yeah, I mean, I think you're right.

00:16:43.920 Either we're going to tip into the direct exercise of power and like sort of a direct

00:16:47.260 Leninist way, right.

00:16:48.360 Where they're going to say, yes, we have this power because we are right.

00:16:52.260 And we're going to apply it, um, to, to get the results that we want, regardless of any

00:16:57.060 other justifications.

00:16:58.380 But what we have right now is this kind of hybrid thing where, you know, you're doing

00:17:02.220 well by doing good.

00:17:03.260 Right.

00:17:04.080 Right.

00:17:04.440 Um, and I think Elon Musk has the potential to disprove the, the doing well part and we'll

00:17:09.840 see what that ha what happens once that, that knowledge sort of seeps into the private sector.

00:17:16.760 Yeah.

00:17:17.280 And I think that's a really significant victory.

00:17:19.460 That's why I thought your piece had such a good angle because so often in the free speech

00:17:24.760 debate, the key everyone thinks is, you know, you just get X amount of people on your side,

00:17:30.900 right?

00:17:31.100 Like you, you, you convince so many people that it's more important to be able to say

00:17:35.460 the truth than it is to, uh, you know, comply with these things and the, the, the scales will

00:17:41.080 tip.

00:17:41.840 But I think what people need to understand is that most people didn't just decide one

00:17:46.960 day to wake up and lie about whether like men could become women or like who's really

00:17:51.960 good at computer programming.

00:17:53.620 I think that those things happen because there's a slow and steady incentive process built into

00:17:59.700 the system that kind of requires people to constantly, you know, tell themselves these

00:18:05.280 lies.

00:18:06.140 And if you strip out the patronage, if you strip out the rewards, uh, for people, a parroting

00:18:13.760 this stuff and be, you know, basically having jobs that exist only to run around and punish

00:18:18.700 people for not parroting this stuff, then you will see a decent amount of reality reassert itself.

00:18:24.660 And so in many ways, the stripping out of, uh, of these patronage jobs, I think is far

00:18:31.340 more essential to the battle of free speech than the actual ideological debate around like

00:18:36.860 whether the first amendment is an absolute right in private sectors or something like I, like

00:18:42.140 while those, those discussions are important, I think people need to understand that like the

00:18:46.320 actual abolition of the apparatus is far more valuable in this battle than like winning the

00:18:52.860 debate club thing about, you know, whether we should have free speech or not.

00:18:56.640 Yeah.

00:18:57.180 I mean, look, you, you get what you incentivize institutionally.

00:19:00.720 You're going to get more of it.

00:19:02.040 Uh, that that's a fact of human nature.

00:19:04.560 Um, are you going to have dissidents?

00:19:07.020 Yes.

00:19:07.720 Is everybody going to be Solzhenitsyn?

00:19:09.600 No.

00:19:10.500 Right.

00:19:10.900 Um, you only have one or two or a handful, right?

00:19:14.280 Meeting in cafes.

00:19:15.900 Um, and, or, or anonymously on the internet.

00:19:19.640 Um, no, but you, you're, you're fundamentally, you're going to get more of what the power structure

00:19:25.300 rewards, uh, because people are self-interested, uh, and, and that's not necessarily like a

00:19:31.180 terrible thing.

00:19:31.760 It just is right.

00:19:33.160 Um, and yeah, I think you're right that in fact, if you remove the reward structure for

00:19:38.240 a lot of this stuff, um, you'll get a lot less of it, not none of it, right?

00:19:41.880 Um, you do have your true believers and there, there are, I think the younger, there's a generational

00:19:45.520 component here, the younger your employees are, the more likely they're true believers

00:19:50.120 in this stuff, right?

00:19:51.580 Um, because they've been raised in, within the parameters of the narrative that we currently

00:19:55.960 live under.

00:19:56.680 Um, they don't really, I gotta say at some level, they must know that, um, you know, some

00:20:02.280 of these things are not true just because they directly contradict.

00:20:05.920 And here, I'm going to use the left, you know, lived experience.

00:20:08.460 Um, but, but on, on the other hand, uh, you know, ideology has the, the ability to, to

00:20:15.420 convince you.

00:20:16.040 I'm not going to use the overused, uh, final command of the party that two plus two equals

00:20:20.840 five kind of stuff.

00:20:21.760 Um, but I think it applies here, right?

00:20:23.540 Um, the, the, the, the power of, of ideological indoctrination, which is really what it is for,

00:20:29.960 for like the lower half of millennials and Gen Z, right?

00:20:32.980 They're really born into this, um, where basically since kindergarten, this is long.

00:20:38.460 Largely what's being taught.

00:20:39.800 Some version of this has been taught, uh, by all official organs that are given any

00:20:44.380 kind of honors in society, right?

00:20:45.960 If you are a good student, you know, this stuff very well, right?

00:20:49.800 Um, if you do well in life, you know, these, the stuff very well, but yes, it is inseparable

00:20:54.360 from that reward and that path to the good life.

00:20:57.260 Um, and, and that path to both money and power, but also honors and, um, societal sort of

00:21:06.060 approval and, um, and status, right?

00:21:09.660 So all of these things are, are very important to people as they, as they should be.

00:21:13.500 Um, I do think actually what you're referring to is the, the winning the debate argument.

00:21:19.020 I also think that's generational.

00:21:20.640 I think what we're seeing is the last affections from Gen X, right? 0.69

00:21:24.000 The people who are center or even left on the left, um, in the nineties, right?

00:21:29.720 Uh, Elon Musk probably falls into this category, right?

00:21:33.900 You have a lot of like these Gen X folks who just weren't fully indoctrinated. 0.97

00:21:37.940 Um, but they were, they're not conservative.

00:21:39.680 They're just sort of not of the new left.

00:21:43.160 Um, and they're neocons.

00:21:45.440 Accelerated.

00:21:45.780 Um, yeah, like, like you're seeing an accelerated move of these people out of the left because

00:21:52.380 they're right.

00:21:53.380 It has nothing to do with the ideas that they believed in.

00:21:56.680 Um, although they're, they're related, actually, I wouldn't say nothing to do, but, um, that's

00:22:01.240 a topic for another day.

00:22:02.300 But, um, fundamentally, I just, I think we're seeing the last affections of a generation

00:22:07.440 that wasn't fully indoctrinated.

00:22:08.800 And that gives people, I think, a false sense of security because they feel like everyone around

00:22:13.400 them is starting to wake up to this stuff, but they're not factoring in the, the, the

00:22:18.160 new rank of graduates every year into every single one of these powerful institutions.

00:22:22.780 Um, and those, those people are not questioning whether we're going too far with wokeness.

00:22:28.060 They're on the leading edge.

00:22:29.620 In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if, if like, uh, the woke language started to separate by

00:22:35.000 tier of university, right?

00:22:36.720 So like, if you went to Harvard, you know, um, that certain words are, are no longer acceptable

00:22:42.300 versus if you went to Brown, you might not know that, right?

00:22:44.760 Like it might literally class stratify like accents in the UK, you know what I mean?

00:22:49.920 Um, to be able to tell what school someone went to by what set of woke languages, um,

00:22:54.480 they use, but, uh, that might be a bit of an exaggeration, but, um, I don't think it

00:22:59.680 is at all, honestly.

00:23:00.820 No, I think we already see this, right?

00:23:02.940 Like we, we already see wokeness as a way to, to, you know, settle like internecine, you

00:23:08.900 know, uh, disputes inside the left and they're already using it to stratify, you know, you,

00:23:13.960 it was okay to be progressive, but now you need to start stacking modifiers.

00:23:18.660 So if you're a white guy in tech, you better figure out how to get, I don't know, you know,

00:23:22.820 trans, or you'd better figure out how to become, you know, two spirit or something like you, 0.74

00:23:27.660 you, you need to figure out some kind of ideological niche in order to make sure that

00:23:32.100 you stratify yourself away from the untouchables.

00:23:34.420 And so I think that you're only going to see that purity spiral, spiral increase.

00:23:40.580 I think there's a high likelihood that being on the bleeding edge of wokeness will continue 0.97

00:23:45.400 to be, you know, uh, the, the code switching, the jargon rearrangement will continue until

00:23:51.260 they can make sure that they're, they're very safe kind of in the, in that pattern.

00:23:56.000 Uh, so, so I, I think, I don't think that's a ridiculous thing to, to kind of believe, but

00:24:01.600 I do think it's a really important point about conservatives and just those who oppose

00:24:06.340 progressives, not understanding the gen, like what's coming up behind them.

00:24:10.000 Uh, CS Lewis, uh, in, in the abolition of men talks about how once you have a entire generation

00:24:16.260 that's completely socially, socially engineered away from basically all human instincts, that

00:24:21.200 will be the abolition of man.

00:24:22.580 Like there will no longer be kind of the natural ties to what made humans human.

00:24:27.140 You won't have that instinct to, to return back to the kind of the things that made you

00:24:34.240 whole.

00:24:34.920 And people don't understand that while, like you said, that the gen Xers, the kind of 0.99

00:24:38.780 the final def, uh, final defections of those who still had a way back to kind of that existence

00:24:45.340 that, uh, was there before the woke indoctrination, as that kind of falls away, the next generation

00:24:50.840 just does not have that built in.

00:24:52.600 They don't have those instincts.

00:24:53.920 They have swam in the waters of deep progressive ideological, uh, indoctrination their entire

00:25:00.000 lives.

00:25:00.540 And so there isn't this innate pull back to the truth and, and kind of the, the natural,

00:25:06.360 uh, beauty of human existence.

00:25:08.160 So I think that is a huge issue for people because this is something I keep trying to

00:25:13.660 explain to those that are like for, you know, the, the, the pure free speech crowd, the people

00:25:18.640 who think that, well, if we can just get the ideological, uh, stuff out of there, if we can

00:25:24.320 just get people back to it, like a safe and neutral application of policies and rules, everything

00:25:29.080 will be fine.

00:25:30.200 But one of the reasons that like stripping out the bureaucracy is so important is that at

00:25:34.340 the end of the day, it's not really about the rules.

00:25:36.660 It's about who decides on the rules, right?

00:25:38.740 Like at the end of the day, you can change the, the technical terms of the Twitter, you

00:25:45.620 know, uh, censorship agreements.

00:25:47.460 You can change the user policies.

00:25:49.240 You can clarify the procedures, but the people operating them at the end of the day are the

00:25:54.180 ones that actually make the decisions.

00:25:55.540 And if it's full of what commissars, it doesn't really matter if you clarify that language and

00:26:01.400 try to provide some level of, uh, you know, some, some level of, uh, accountability, these

00:26:08.120 people are ultimately going to be able to manipulate the procedure in the way that will

00:26:11.120 always produce the outcome they're hoping for.

00:26:12.920 Yeah, this is, this is also why I think, um, so some of the conservatives who are calling

00:26:19.200 for essentially the application of the tactics, um, to some degree of the left, um, sometimes

00:26:24.520 I think that's a good idea.

00:26:25.500 Um, sometimes I think it's really naive, uh, and, and in, in regard, especially, so like

00:26:32.100 they imagine that they can call like a couple of these bureaucrats to the carpet, right?

00:26:36.700 Um, and we can get rid of, uh, certain, like, for example, within the FBI, right?

00:26:42.760 Like we can fire a couple of people at the top.

00:26:45.240 Um, they imagine that it's, it is like fundamentally still, that power is still flowing through the

00:26:50.960 natural ways or not natural, but the, the American system, right?

00:26:55.420 And, and the reality is, yeah, the formal system.

00:26:58.640 And the reality is those rules will not be applied, right?

00:27:01.780 You can, you can tell the DOJ to go after their own.

00:27:04.600 Um, they're going to do that in a very different way and they're going to slow walk it and

00:27:08.660 maybe you'll get a scalp or two out of it, but you're not going to fundamentally change

00:27:11.660 the institution until you change the incentive structure, which is why I think one of the

00:27:15.880 most important things is to be able to do mass firing in federal government, um, and to

00:27:21.260 be able to, to put federal employees at will, uh, as opposed to, I mean, we have about 110

00:27:26.280 years at this point.

00:27:27.300 Um, uh, actually, let me see first, the first civil service can say the Pendleton act in 1883.

00:27:33.880 I mean, um, we have this very thick web of essentially job protections for federal employees

00:27:39.700 that protect them, um, not only from being fired, but also like there's very little you

00:27:44.820 can do to them, right?

00:27:46.600 You can kind of move them into a different department, um, which is usually like a lateral

00:27:50.580 move.

00:27:51.580 You really can't even promote on the basis of, of, well, merit for one, but also, uh, whether

00:27:57.160 or not they're actually carrying out the objectives of the elected officials.

00:28:00.280 So something systemic has to actually shift so that we can actually go into these departments

00:28:06.060 and affect policy change.

00:28:08.040 Because I think the clearest example is the Trump administration and, and people, I really

00:28:13.300 get annoyed when both the left and like the sort of whatever you can call it, the David

00:28:18.460 French right say, well, oh, like the head of the FBI, Trump appoint is a Trump FBI, right?

00:28:24.380 Like, so how can you say that they were going after the right?

00:28:28.040 Well, because the rest of the FBI is not controlled by the president.

00:28:32.480 Um, none of these agencies are actually controlled by the president.

00:28:36.240 This is very obvious.

00:28:37.880 Um, and most of the people making those arguments, they know it, right?

00:28:41.680 They know that these executive agencies, um, and the administrative state is effectively

00:28:46.740 an arm of the democratic party.

00:28:48.220 It's effectively a neoliberal, uh, position.

00:28:51.180 Now, if you had somebody like Bernie Sanders on the left, the bureaucracies might fight him

00:28:56.280 too.

00:28:57.000 Um, it's possible.

00:28:57.960 I mean, I'm, I'm not a Sanders fan, obviously, but like his particular brand, or at least before

00:29:02.880 he sort of walked his way back into the neoliberal fold, um, he might also have trouble implementing

00:29:08.680 some of his policies, but for the most part, the bureaucracy hums happily going after the

00:29:13.760 enemies of, of the left, right?

00:29:16.480 Um, it will not hum easily for us.

00:29:19.060 Even if we tried to use the same tactics, we tried to direct the FBI to, you know, do

00:29:24.000 some of the horrible things that it's done to Donald Trump to the, the, for example, to

00:29:27.500 Biden to do investigate Hunter Biden or whatever it is, it won't work for us because we don't

00:29:31.980 fundamentally control these institutions.

00:29:33.660 And this professional class is overwhelmingly one direction.

00:29:38.060 So 95% of the donations from federal employees, uh, in 2016 went to Hillary Clinton, right?

00:29:44.180 So it's like a faculty lounge.

00:29:45.840 It's like trying to implement your policy in a faculty lounge.

00:29:49.640 Like you're not going to get very far.

00:29:51.440 I didn't want to make two points to, cause I think you made a good point about like swimming

00:29:55.020 in the ether when you're young and, um, you don't really know anything outside of this

00:29:59.940 indoctrination.

00:30:01.160 I think there is an element of hyper novelty in tech here as well.

00:30:05.620 That makes a lot of this stuff seem, it makes the hard barriers of reality a little softer,

00:30:11.800 right?

00:30:12.040 Um, if, if your primary identity is digital, uh, it becomes much more, and I'm not the first

00:30:18.540 person to observe that there's a connection between transgenderism and transhumanism, right?

00:30:22.400 Um, or that primary identity online.

00:30:24.400 But I think it's much easier to imagine that certain things could be true than even 20 years

00:30:29.540 ago, right?

00:30:30.580 Um, and then the other thing is, look, things that, that are contrary to reality will eventually

00:30:38.760 come to a hard stop.

00:30:40.660 Um, it's true that what, what is the Horace quote?

00:30:43.780 Like you can chase nature out with a pitchfork and yet she keeps hurrying back.

00:30:47.340 Like human nature will reassert itself and some boundaries of reality will reassert itself,

00:30:52.780 but you can isolate yourself with tech and money for a very long time.

00:30:57.520 And that's not really a comfort to me as I don't intend to live 500 years.

00:31:01.160 Okay.

00:31:01.640 The USSR lasted almost a hundred. 0.91

00:31:04.640 Okay.

00:31:05.040 Like this is not, this is, this may be a comfort in sort of the, the theological sense or whatever,

00:31:11.040 theological sense, but it's, it's not an actual comfort for us right here because our generation,

00:31:16.980 our children's generation, and perhaps our grandchildren's generation will, could potentially

00:31:20.860 live under a system that is tyrannical and contrary to any boundaries of, of reality.

00:31:25.440 Like that's totally possible.

00:31:26.880 We could isolate ourselves in that way from the consequences of reality for a hundred years.

00:31:31.280 Get unlimited grocery delivery with PC express pass meal prep delivered snacks delivered fresh

00:31:39.360 fruit delivered grocery delivery on repeat for just $2 and 50 cents a month.

00:31:44.700 Learn more at PC express.ca.

00:31:46.980 Yeah.

00:31:48.120 And I think that's really, you know, a lot of people kind of in my sphere will have this,

00:31:53.620 well, everything will inevitably come around, right?

00:31:56.220 Eventually the wheel will turn and reality will reassert itself and, you know, things will

00:32:00.400 crumble.

00:32:00.700 And I think that's true.

00:32:01.900 I think, you know, you're, you're exactly right to point out that those things will,

00:32:05.020 will happen inevitably, but yeah, we can, we can put that out for a long time, especially

00:32:09.100 as a nation, like you, like that's one of the things I liked in the piece, you point out

00:32:13.300 how much of our GDP is dedicated to ignoring reality, right?

00:32:17.500 Like the, the, how, how large our economy, how much of our economy, how big a percentage

00:32:23.160 of what we do is basically there to simply deny, you know, the, the truth, the, you know,

00:32:30.120 natural truths that, and keep them from reasserting themselves.

00:32:32.840 And as we get further and further into this, as we create more and more of these systems

00:32:37.620 and make more and more of our, we dedicate more and more of our brightest minds or, and

00:32:42.220 even our mid-tier minds into the maintenance of systems that completely deny reality, the

00:32:46.900 less likely we are to do anything of importance in the worst life is, is probably going to get

00:32:51.140 for a lot of people.

00:32:52.300 I think you're also right that, that things like tech will lead people into this mindset

00:32:57.220 far more easily.

00:32:58.120 This is Pareto's, uh, uh, uh, type one, uh, res, residues where like these are the people

00:33:06.380 who are best at combinations and, and recreating batteries.

00:33:10.040 They don't have a lot of, they don't have a lot of respect for established forms, that

00:33:14.460 kind of thing.

00:33:14.800 And these are the people who are always going to predominate in classes like tech or entertainment,

00:33:18.640 creative endeavors are going to be dominated by these people.

00:33:21.100 So it is easy to live in that, in that land for a very long time.

00:33:25.980 But I think that kind of brings us to, to another aspect of this, something that you

00:33:29.500 mentioned at the beginning with Musk and kind of his, his reassertion of reality onto his

00:33:34.780 company, right?

00:33:35.420 When he cuts a large chunk of his company, many people, uh, like yourself notice, uh, that

00:33:40.780 he left a lot of, uh, men, especially white and Asian men, right.

00:33:44.540 In, in, in the company, yeah, yeah.

00:33:47.420 Those are the people who he identified as those that are essential to the operation of

00:33:53.260 the company.

00:33:54.380 That's a big problem for our society, not just for people on the left, but for people

00:33:59.100 on the right as well, right?

00:34:00.380 Like there are a lot of people I think who are really uncomfortable with what happens if

00:34:06.700 a business does address its staffing to optimize its output, to increase the, you know, uh, its

00:34:16.380 ability to run on a smaller staff.

00:34:18.780 And the truth is a lot of these make work jobs also create, you know, uh, jobs for favored

00:34:24.540 classes.

00:34:25.020 Those that have been enshrined in our society as those that have to be put into these positions,

00:34:32.380 even if they are not going to routinely achieve those kind of positions on their own.

00:34:37.580 And I think that's a really uncomfortable thing for a lot of people.

00:34:40.300 And I think it's something that will probably keep a lot of CEOs from following, uh, Elon Musk's

00:34:47.500 lead because even if he does pull this off for awhile, eventually you can't imagine, you know, lawsuits

00:34:53.580 and social pressure are going to come.

00:34:55.100 I don't think a large chunk of corporate America is going to be okay with drastically

00:35:00.220 changing the demographics of their companies, uh, after all of kind of the propaganda and other

00:35:07.420 possible, you know, uh, lawsuits that they might open themselves up to if they do this.

00:35:12.060 Yeah.

00:35:12.220 I was, I was going to say, it's not just propaganda, right?

00:35:14.060 It's, it's the law.

00:35:15.980 It's baked in.

00:35:16.540 Yeah.

00:35:17.100 It's civil rights law. 0.99

00:35:18.140 So let's, let's separate these, these two things.

00:35:20.140 Um, they're not totally separable, but, uh, there's sex and then there's race.

00:35:23.420 Right.

00:35:23.740 Um, and on, on, with regard to sex, I think it's pretty clear, uh, that one of the unpredicted

00:35:31.020 consequences of, of sort of our managerial shift that Burnham wrote about is that, um,

00:35:36.060 in large part, this class is sexed, right?

00:35:38.460 It's women. 1.00

00:35:38.940 Uh, now there are plenty of men that fall into this category, of course.

00:35:43.180 Um, but I'm saying overall, uh, it, it seems like, uh, the, the boot stomping on, on the,

00:35:50.220 the human face forever is, is more of a, like, you know, sensible kitten heel or something.

00:35:54.780 But, um, in any case it is a sexed class, right?

00:35:58.540 Women predominate these kinds of jobs. 1.00

00:36:01.900 Um, and we write about this all the time.

00:36:04.700 Uh, even, even the center left or some folks at AEI, right?

00:36:07.180 We write about this as, uh, in an economic sense when manufacturing, uh, direct manufacturing

00:36:12.060 declines, right?

00:36:12.700 And the so-called service economies, um, or service industries or whatever are on the rise.

00:36:17.980 These are largely managerial jobs, for example, health administration, right?

00:36:23.020 Um, knowing what, how to code things so that you can bill Medicare.

00:36:27.020 Like that's an overwhelmingly female job. 1.00

00:36:29.980 Um, so, so that's, that's one aspect of this, um, in, in both cases, the race and the sex case,

00:36:36.220 you have enormous incentives in civil rights law, right?

00:36:40.060 Um, and I really think, and I've, I've heard that Chris Caldwell is, uh, working on an update

00:36:45.100 to this, uh, because he, he recognizes this deficit.

00:36:47.820 He just didn't get to it, um, in his book, but I really do think the changes in the nineties

00:36:52.700 are underrated, um, in terms of our civil rights law and the incentives they created.

00:36:58.140 Uh, I don't think we had nearly as big of this kind of problem.

00:37:01.420 And in fact, I kind of disagree, at least on the edges with Chris Caldwell's book.

00:37:05.820 Um, in that I think a lot, a small percentage of the changes that he is observing rightly

00:37:12.460 today, I think came between 1964 and the 1990s and a large percentage of those changes came

00:37:19.100 after the 1990s.

00:37:20.220 Well, why is that?

00:37:21.820 Well, we did, we made a couple key changes, uh, in the nineties signed by HW Bush, of course,

00:37:26.380 who I must say initially resisted doing this.

00:37:30.060 Um, but there were sort of several rounds of this bill and his party had voted for it.

00:37:34.460 And he, he kind of, he, he, uh, capitulated and signed the bill.

00:37:38.940 Um, so two of those major changes, uh, one, no cap, I mean, vastly expanded cap on the kind

00:37:45.980 of damages, right.

00:37:47.100 That you can sue, uh, for this kind of like workplace discrimination, right.

00:37:51.740 Uh, there, there were pretty strict caps on it.

00:37:54.140 Um, there was a limit to what essentially the aggrieved employee could collect from, from his

00:37:59.180 company that limit was vastly extended, right.

00:38:01.260 So it became a much more painful, uh, tool to use against car companies.

00:38:06.380 But even more important is, um, and this came in the, in the sexual harassment context first

00:38:11.260 and moved into the race context.

00:38:12.940 Um, as far as I know, I had to check with my colleague, Jennifer Braceres, who's really,

00:38:16.860 um, she, she did employment law. 0.67

00:38:18.700 Uh, so she's, she's really an expert in this stuff.

00:38:21.260 Um, but, uh, so I think it moved from sexual harassment and sex case into the racial case.

00:38:28.220 Um, but basically the offense, legally speaking, I'm not now talking about, although they're

00:38:33.260 related, the, the, the sort of emotional offense, but the offense doesn't have to be, it used

00:38:38.300 to have to be objectively offensive sustained, um, over time.

00:38:43.420 And like basically endorsed by the company.

00:38:46.780 Right.

00:38:47.100 So you couldn't sue your company for sexual harassment, as opposed to the particular

00:38:50.940 person, you could not sue the company for sexual harassment because one guy was repeatedly

00:38:56.460 asking you out like a colleague or whatever does.

00:38:59.020 Right.

00:38:59.660 Um, now after the nineties, you, you can, um, and more than that, you can, you can sue

00:39:06.380 for hostile workplace environment or for discrimination.

00:39:09.500 Um, if one guy has a bikini calendar on his desk and another coworker made an off-color joke

00:39:15.580 one time.

00:39:16.220 Right.

00:39:16.700 Um, and you said something to HR one time and nothing came of it.

00:39:21.500 Right.

00:39:21.660 Like you, you can, you can cobble together a lawsuit and over a series of like offenses

00:39:28.700 that have nothing to do with each other.

00:39:30.140 And they may be very, very minor.

00:39:32.380 Right.

00:39:33.180 And still collect a huge settlement.

00:39:36.940 That gives companies exactly an incentive to make sure that no one could possibly be offended.

00:39:43.260 Right.

00:39:43.820 No person, no single employee, it makes an eggshell skull kind of rule for everybody.

00:39:48.700 Right.

00:39:48.940 Like if a single employee is offended by anything, if, if they can actually cobble together a lawsuit

00:39:54.540 from all these things and the dollar amounts rewards are quite high.

00:39:57.820 So companies became very afraid of this.

00:40:00.620 And they start, this is when all this kind of, um, trainings like workplace training started to

00:40:04.540 take off.

00:40:05.020 Right.

00:40:05.340 The sexual harassment trainings, the very funny ones that they can put in with the CD-ROM

00:40:09.500 right in the nineties, um, but that has melded, I think in a particularly tyrannical way with the

00:40:16.620 advancement of sort of therapeutic culture and with, um, the, the ideological strictness with,

00:40:24.780 with microaggressions with blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

00:40:27.420 Right.

00:40:27.660 So I really think we're underrating how much of this happened in the nineties and the enormous

00:40:32.540 financial incentives that corporations had to make sure that nobody could possibly be offended at work.

00:40:37.660 Yeah, I think you're right that a lot of that accelerated in the nineties, but I, I, I would

00:40:44.700 side with Caldwell saying that the groundwork was all there beforehand that the infrastructure

00:40:50.780 both legally and culturally required to allow kind of that expansion needed to be there before we saw

00:40:58.860 it take off.

00:40:59.580 I think you're right that the, the acceleration really happens there.

00:41:02.860 I mean, well then, then let me ask you this, what are the forces of the nineties that you think

00:41:07.180 brings that upon, uh, upon the culture?

00:41:10.620 I, we have a lot of people, you know, who, who, uh, kind of do Breitbart's famous, uh, you know,

00:41:16.380 culture is downstream from politics.

00:41:18.300 A lot of us around here prefer to say that culture is downstream from power.

00:41:22.700 What do you think brings about those?

00:41:24.620 Why is the nineties this crucial hinge in, in the switch?

00:41:29.180 So first of all, um, I, I always have to defend Breitbart.

00:41:31.820 Cause I was, um, I was there when he was making those remarks and I knew him a little bit,

00:41:36.700 although not super well.

00:41:37.660 Um, he wasn't saying what the people who repeat that quote today were saying, actually,

00:41:43.180 I think he was very prophetic.

00:41:44.300 Imagine, you know, in 2012, what he was saying was we need to pay attention politically to cultural

00:41:51.180 issues because in 2012, it was very much that autopsy, right?

00:41:54.300 The middle, like we need to move away from these divisive cultural issues and focus on cutting taxes.

00:41:58.940 And what he was saying with that line is good luck cutting your taxes.

00:42:02.460 There's a five alarm fire in our culture.

00:42:04.860 Um, and you need to pay attention to it.

00:42:06.700 He wasn't foreclosing political action on cultural issues.

00:42:10.620 He was actually encouraging it.

00:42:12.220 So I think he is, he is misread in that way.

00:42:15.180 But that being said, I know exactly what you meant.

00:42:17.100 There's a lot of people who use that, um, that phrase to say essentially that we need

00:42:21.980 only to, to, um, to have cultural solutions to these problems.

00:42:26.860 The solutions can't be political.

00:42:28.060 They can't be legal, right?

00:42:29.580 They have to be cultural in some nebulous way.

00:42:31.740 And, and with that, I, I certainly disagree.

00:42:33.660 And in fact, um, Reagan, uh, in his farewell speech, uh, at, at the end of his farewell speech,

00:42:40.140 he points to this problem, right.

00:42:42.860 And, and gives the only answer that was available, uh, in 19, in the 1980s, right.

00:42:47.740 In the late 1980s.

00:42:48.700 Um, but he says we are, our spirit is back.

00:42:51.740 Um, one of the things he's most proud of during his presidency is that he's revived the American

00:42:55.900 spirit by which he means is kind of like cultural patriotism.

00:42:59.820 Um, but we haven't re-institutionalized it is what he said.

00:43:03.820 And he goes into this long piece of his speech where he talks about when he was growing up,

00:43:09.340 that if your family didn't reinforce these values, first of all, most people's families

00:43:13.340 reinforce these values at home.

00:43:15.580 Um, but if you didn't get it from your family, then you got it from school because in school,

00:43:20.220 they were teaching these values.

00:43:21.580 And if, if you weren't a very good student, then you could get a watered down version by watching TV.

00:43:26.220 And the pop culture was actually like in alignment with these values.

00:43:29.740 And he's saying, none of these things are true anymore.

00:43:32.620 Um, and that's a problem.

00:43:34.220 But he, he ends, and he said, actually not a problem.

00:43:36.700 This is the biggest problem, um, for our country and its future.

00:43:41.660 However, he ends, he ends it by saying, well, I guess we're just gonna have to discuss it

00:43:46.220 around our dinner tables.

00:43:47.820 And I think from the vantage point, no, no shade on Reagan at the time.

00:43:51.580 Um, but I think from the vantage point of 2023 now, uh, that's clearly inadequate.

00:43:56.940 Right.

00:43:57.260 Um, this power is institutionalized as we've been talking about.

00:44:01.020 It's, it's applied through our laws very directly.

00:44:04.540 Um, and it has enormous shifts on what, you know, the, the folks who repeat that quote

00:44:09.740 from Bytebart mean by culture.

00:44:12.700 Right.

00:44:13.020 I mean, just look at that same sex marriage.

00:44:15.340 It's an unbelievable shift.

00:44:16.940 Transgender issues is going to be just as fast.

00:44:19.100 Right.

00:44:19.500 Um, right now we feel like we have the cultural upper hand and there's a majority against it,

00:44:23.900 but these institutional incentives do their jobs.

00:44:26.860 Indoctrination works and incentives will work.

00:44:30.140 Yeah.

00:44:30.380 I guarantee you in 10 years, those polls are going to look very, very different.

00:44:33.420 Maybe even five years.

00:44:35.340 Yeah.

00:44:35.740 It's foolish to think that conservatives have the upper hand on this. 0.97

00:44:38.780 It's absolutely insane. 0.84

00:44:40.060 Uh, you know, that that's not what's being taught in schools.

00:44:42.940 That's not, that's not the culture that's being forced on the kids.

00:44:46.220 They know, they know what they have to say.

00:44:49.580 They know what they have to, uh, affirm.

00:44:52.700 And there's no way that in, you know, five to 10 years, the, the next round of graduates

00:44:58.300 that come out of, uh, universities and inherit those managerial positions are going to be

00:45:03.420 anything but even more insanely radical on this stuff.

00:45:06.300 So yeah, I think it's really, really important for people to, to not pretend that there's,

00:45:11.980 there's some kind of silent majority.

00:45:14.060 And again, that the, uh, uh, reality may eventually assert itself.

00:45:18.780 Nature may eventually, uh, make itself clear, but I think, uh, there, there's a long space

00:45:24.380 between now and when that actually comes.

00:45:26.780 So this might be a difference between us, actually.

00:45:29.020 I think there is a silent majority.

00:45:30.780 Um, but I think that silent majority is closing, right?

00:45:34.300 So, um, I think again, this is very generational and as long as boomers and Gen X are, uh, still 0.80

00:45:45.580 active voters.

00:45:46.460 And by that, I don't, yeah.

00:45:47.580 Anyway, um, and, and more importantly, like Gen X is coming into its own and I'm, I'm a millennial,

00:45:54.300 but I'm like a fan of Gen X.

00:45:55.980 Um, as Gen X is coming into its own, you know, Gen X is going to be the C-suite.

00:46:00.380 Um, we're going to have more Gen X politicians. 0.94

00:46:02.460 And I think you can see a notable difference, for example, between Trump and DeSantis,

00:46:06.220 um, in terms of, but, but not just DeSantis.

00:46:09.020 Like there, there's a whole crop of, um, Josh Hawley, um, Tom Cotton.

00:46:14.060 Um, I think there you'll see a big difference.

00:46:17.180 And I think we'll have a lot of people in the Republican party who are Gen X.

00:46:20.780 Like I think Gen X is going to swing quite heavily for the Republican party in the, in the foreseeable

00:46:24.540 future and change what that party stands for.

00:46:28.220 Um, so I think this is largely generational, but I think that gap is closing, right?

00:46:32.460 If we wait until millennials and it's not that far from now, right? 0.99

00:46:35.660 Um, the oldest millennials are just cresting 40, I think.

00:46:38.540 Um, you know, if we wait too much longer, like I really do think this, this is essentially a very

00:46:45.660 important two to seven years.

00:46:49.900 Um, and we're going to see whether these processes of, of democracy,

00:46:54.540 um, this is the, what you're skeptical of, uh, the, the process of democracy may actually

00:46:59.580 still function.

00:47:00.460 Cause I do think there's a silent majority out there right now.

00:47:02.700 Um, I don't think in 10 years, we'll have a silent majority.

00:47:05.580 And I think that that is because again, um, all the issues we're talking about,

00:47:10.380 the incentive structure is incredibly powerful.

00:47:13.180 Um, so I think what's going to happen is you're going to see a revolt.

00:47:17.020 Um, and then we'll see whether essentially the political power structures that exist

00:47:21.900 and the material structures that exist crumble in the face of that revolt or just become

00:47:27.660 more naked and exercising power.

00:47:29.180 Like we'll, we'll move to a more explicit, um, kind of tyranny than we, we have now.

00:47:34.860 I don't know what the answer to that question is, but I still think it's a question.

00:47:40.060 Yeah.

00:47:40.380 Fair enough.

00:47:40.940 I, as, as you noted, I'm, you know, uh, less bullish on the prospects of that coming

00:47:47.100 around.

00:47:47.500 I think if, if the last 50, some years of shift don't really convince you that the

00:47:54.860 public is in almost entirely malleable and that they're going to be able to produce

00:47:59.340 increasingly, um, consistent results, uh, I guess in the democratic process, I don't,

00:48:05.260 I don't know, but like you said, the crucible will come in the next 10 years one way or another.

00:48:09.820 I think, I think that's right.

00:48:10.620 Well, do you, I don't know, do you want to talk about the, the speaker, uh, throw down?

00:48:15.580 Is that, is that, I don't know, it feels boring to me, but do you, do you want to get into,

00:48:19.180 do you have a, a thought on the, on the drama on the GOP speaker battle right now?

00:48:24.700 Um, a little bit of one, which is that I think it's largely unimportant to the country.

00:48:30.620 Um, so I guess that's the, uh, you know, I, I do, I think it's, so I think the underlying

00:48:39.900 division is very important.

00:48:41.660 I think we've seen it bubble up, um, in the Republican party repeatedly over the years.

00:48:46.700 I sort of first joined politics during the tea party.

00:48:49.660 Uh, I was a member of the several different tea party groups, um, sort of grassroots groups

00:48:54.860 and so on.

00:48:55.900 Um, I, and, and fundamentally there's a, there's a huge disconnect.

00:49:00.540 There's a disconnect between the leadership of the Republican party and the voters.

00:49:04.060 Um, and I think much more than there's a disconnect between Democrats and the Democratic party.

00:49:10.220 Um, and in fact, when people say that, that Democrats don't represent, um, sort of left-wing

00:49:16.140 interests, I think they are just underestimating or over, rather overestimating how many voting

00:49:21.260 Democrats actually agree with some of this cultural stuff, um, or whether it's important to them.

00:49:25.980 So I think the Democratic party actually does a quite good job, uh, representing the interests

00:49:32.140 of their voters.

00:49:32.860 Not a perfect one, but a decent one.

00:49:34.540 The Republican party, there's a total disjoint there.

00:49:36.860 And there has been for a long time.

00:49:38.380 I mean, the first spike of this was Newt Gingrich in the, um, in the 2012 primaries, uh, I think

00:49:45.980 going after the media, he was like really the, one of the first person, uh, in the Republican

00:49:49.500 party to like really start to go after the media.

00:49:51.580 And he got a huge spike of, of voters and he didn't end up taking the nomination, Rami

00:49:54.780 did, but, um, he got a huge spike of voters and was very clearly his like finest moment

00:49:59.340 in the primary.

00:49:59.900 And I'm not saying Newt Gingrich is some kind of like anti-establishment figure, but he was

00:50:03.260 the first to like basically directly take on the media and say like, you, you know, why

00:50:06.940 should we give you the time of the day?

00:50:08.140 Uh, we know you hate us.

00:50:09.660 You hate like the average American. 0.98

00:50:11.740 That was very popular message.

00:50:13.180 The tea party also, I think is misunderstood as purely about economic issues.

00:50:16.860 That is not the tea party that I participated in.

00:50:19.020 Um, there's this cultural anxiety that fundamentally the leadership and the ruling class in this

00:50:24.380 country, uh, is taking it in a direction that is fundamentally different, uh, than, than the

00:50:30.860 American way of life or the traditional American way of life.

00:50:33.580 Um, and then of course we had the, the Trump rebellion in 2016, right?

00:50:37.020 I think these are all manifestations.

00:50:38.620 And to some degree, the speaker fight is as well.

00:50:40.860 Although it's not clear to me that the replacement will be that much better.

00:50:45.020 Yeah.

00:50:45.260 That's the right problem.

00:50:46.140 So that that's really what makes me kind of about this fight.

00:50:49.020 Like if we were talking about putting in somebody, um, who is much more in line with,

00:50:54.780 with Republican voters, then I would think this is actually of utmost importance.

00:50:58.620 Um, but perhaps the fight itself is important in the sense that extracting a pound of flesh from

00:51:03.660 leadership, I think is itself a good lesson.

00:51:07.500 Um, I also don't think like McCarthy wasn't the biggest problem.

00:51:12.380 McConnell was the bigger problem.

00:51:14.140 McCarthy is just obviously a non-ideological guy.

00:51:17.100 He's not like on fire about any of these issues, but he did seem more willing to actually do the

00:51:21.980 traditional job of speaker, which is wrangle coalitions, right?

00:51:24.940 Um, he wasn't totally ignoring conservatives.

00:51:28.700 He was sitting down with them and trying to work on their concerns and so on.

00:51:31.660 And sometimes they won and sometimes they lost.

00:51:33.260 And he certainly wasn't one of our guys, but McConnell actively McConnell would rather

00:51:40.860 work with a democratic majority and be in the minority than have the kind of Republicans that

00:51:47.020 disagree with him elected.

00:51:48.780 And that's not an acceptable thing for a party head, right?

00:51:52.060 Like the least we can expect of our leadership should be that they're partisan.

00:51:57.660 He's not even strictly partisan.

00:51:59.420 Yeah, I think the, the pound of flesh from your leadership being the takeaway is probably

00:52:06.140 the right one here.

00:52:06.860 Again, uh, not, not here to endorse this, you know, democracy, but if you're going to do,

00:52:11.100 if you're going to play this game, the Republican base has to learn to actually make their politicians

00:52:16.940 deliver something for them and, you know, not to run through the laundry list of embarrassing

00:52:23.900 mainstream pundits who are doing this today.

00:52:26.140 But like pretending that looking slightly disorganized while you force people in your

00:52:30.540 party to actually care about what you want is more clownish than continually feeding the Democrats 0.78

00:52:38.940 every single thing they want without almost any resistance is, is insane. 0.98

00:52:45.420 It's absolutely insane.

00:52:46.460 I really have a hard time understanding.

00:52:49.180 Like the, the appearance of unity is, would be great if the Republican party had any interest

00:52:54.940 in actually serving its base, but they don't.

00:52:57.900 And so telling me that, that unity is more important than forcing these people to the table 0.97

00:53:03.580 and making them give you something is just absolutely ridiculous.

00:53:07.740 But I wondered this at, you know, and there's, there's many reasons why this happens, but I

00:53:12.300 wonder if this is one of them, the ideological underpinning of government of like the role

00:53:18.860 government should play, I think is a big part of this because Democrats, because they have no problem

00:53:24.300 with the exercise of government power are more than happy to offer their constituents, like material

00:53:31.820 benefit, like vote for me, there will be more money in your pocket, vote for me, and you will have a job,

00:53:38.060 vote for me, and I will ensure that, you know, healthcare, college, whatever, like these things

00:53:43.020 will be delivered unto you.

00:53:44.700 And even if they aren't perfectly done, like you said, the Democrats, at least on a pretty regular basis,

00:53:49.500 provide some kind of actual material benefit for their, for their voters.

00:53:54.940 The Republican Party's idea is small government, we don't do anything.

00:53:59.100 And so we don't, so when they're in power, they don't build anything that benefits their voters,

00:54:05.340 they don't do anything that actually increases their material prosperity, they just don't do

00:54:11.020 anything, and they certainly don't punish their enemies, you know, that's something the left is

00:54:15.260 very good at when they're in power. And so the left is just constantly ratcheting things because

00:54:20.700 whenever they're in power, they are allowed the free hand to generate incentives for people to vote

00:54:26.140 for them and to increase their power inside institutions. And the right is basically

00:54:31.580 ideologically opposed to doing any of those things, and so they seem to lose the game over and over again.

00:54:39.020 You know, I, so I agree largely with what you're saying, and I think what you're pointing to is,

00:54:44.460 is actually the professionalization of political benefit and patronage has been a disaster.

00:54:51.740 I, I have, I'm a proponent of the spoil system, right? I think that the 19th century spoil system

00:54:59.180 was far more democratic and responsive to the will of the people, even as it generated a certain level

00:55:04.220 of corruption, than the professionalization of the civil service. Because a lot of those benefits

00:55:11.500 that you're talking about, and look no further, by the way, than student loan forgiveness, right,

00:55:16.140 which is a direct handout to a democratic key democratic party constituency, right? Literally,

00:55:21.660 we're going to write you a check. I, I think a lot of that is, first of all, implemented through

00:55:28.860 the administrative state, a relatively small percentage of it is actually passed through

00:55:32.700 Congress. So if you think about what the Democratic Party does, in terms of elected officials, I think

00:55:37.580 they're far less efficient at that game, than the administrative status, right, there are literally

00:55:42.780 millions of grants, half the NGOs, I mean, I've been pointing out for a long time that the Republican

00:55:48.540 side is essentially privately funded, and all of the mess, whether it is called private or not,

00:55:56.380 on the Democratic Party is heavily funded by the government. Universities depend as lifeblood on

00:56:02.220 student loan programs funded by the government. They also get trillions in grants, okay? You know,

00:56:08.380 just about anything you can think of, every NGO has like six different grants from, from all three

00:56:13.580 levels of government, municipal, state and federal, right? Republican or conservative

00:56:18.860 organizations do not have any of that. We're fighting on a completely uneven playing field,

00:56:24.220 particularly since the right has lost big business, right? Because there was some parity

00:56:28.860 when big business was essentially funding the right, and the left was funded by government, right? But

00:56:35.260 there's no parity at all now, because big business is funding the left. So that's, that's one point.

00:56:41.340 So I agree with you on that, that we need to develop. In some cases, the only consistent patronage

00:56:48.620 network on the right that I can think of, is one that perhaps has yielded, again, very little benefit

00:56:55.660 for the country, sadly. But I think the professional right, we're really good at identifying talented young

00:57:04.220 people, giving them fellowships, paying them a comfortable salary to be able to do, we do this in

00:57:10.700 the world of ideas. So we have found a way to duplicate the kind of patronage style part of

00:57:16.060 universities, but absolutely not the pipeline into power, right? The graduates of think tank fellowships

00:57:22.460 don't go on to rule the DOJ. So that, that link into power, that, that last piece has not happened.

00:57:29.740 But more broadly about the chaos point, it really feels increasingly, and I've read, I feel like a

00:57:39.500 thousand different takes from a thousand different people, actually pretty far range of the political

00:57:43.980 spectrum, that something feels fundamentally broken in every aspect of not just American life, but even

00:57:52.380 sort of in the West more broadly. And I think that chaos is just not reflected so directly, and people

00:58:01.340 call us whatever, doomers, crazy, whatever, because that chaos is papered over by an enormous amount of

00:58:07.740 wealth. And so I tend to think chaos reflected in our political institutions is a good thing insofar as

00:58:16.540 it's reflecting the underlying chaos, right? Like, you can't get less accountable for chaos than losing

00:58:24.460 a war and getting promoted. So I would like to see those people get fired. I would like to see some

00:58:33.340 chaos. I would like to see our political representatives fighting over these matters instead of pretending

00:58:40.380 that everything is fine under the surface because we have so much money that we're some, we're able to

00:58:45.100 lose a war in Afghanistan, right? And not suffer immediate massive consequences of that, except

00:58:52.220 the people who fight it, right? Which is a half a percent of people who are in the military connected

00:58:57.420 to military, right? But for most of us, we didn't feel the consequences of losing a war because we are

00:59:03.020 so rich. That wealth won't perpetuate, and that's maybe to like tie it back to the Elon Musk thing, right?

00:59:09.740 That wealth is not the natural state of the universe, okay? We are going to lose that wealth over time

00:59:18.220 if we squander it, and if a third of our GDP or more is just ideological compliance. It doesn't

00:59:24.700 generate the kind of wealth that has allowed us to ignore reality and ignore the fundamental

00:59:29.980 brokenness and chaos that we're living in. So, I mean, again, this could happen tomorrow,

00:59:38.780 or it could happen in a hundred years. It matters very, very much when. So, it's not meant to be like

00:59:44.700 sort of a zen thing, like things will work out. And also, you know, things working out might just be

00:59:50.700 that we are just conquered by some other people, right? Who don't buy into some of this stuff and just

00:59:57.020 continue to raise warriors and live in a more like tangible economy. So, it's not really meant

01:00:04.700 to be a comfort so much as a warning that maybe this Musk example is that important because

01:00:14.860 that wealth is dependent on things that we no longer do, or at least a large percentage of our

01:00:21.180 society no longer does. And that cannot go on forever. So, I don't know, again, not necessarily

01:00:30.700 a white pill because it's like, it could get much worse from here. But that kind of, that idea that

01:00:37.020 we should have unity or we shouldn't have even like the kind of chaos over a Speaker of the House battle

01:00:43.100 is completely naive, right? Like I'm glad to see the cracks appearing somewhat because the faster we're

01:00:50.060 going to have to actually deal with what's underneath. Yeah, that's very right. I'm 100%,

01:00:56.540 you know, Dan Crenshaw was saying, you know, anybody who's not for Speaker McCarthy,

01:01:03.500 they're just an enemy now. And it's like, yeah, the faster we can get Republican establishment guys to

01:01:09.420 just declare each other enemies and like, and openly dismiss the interests of their voters and just

01:01:17.420 continue to show that, that conceit. I think that's really essential. Like, you know, if the GP,

01:01:24.460 if the GOP is going to be of any value, it can only be a value after it's basically deconstructed itself

01:01:30.380 pretty fundamentally. And I think the, the more often that can happen, the better. But that said,

01:01:36.860 we have hit an hour and I barely got into like half the stuff I wanted to get, but, but I think it's a

01:01:42.860 good conversation. We've got some, some questions from the audience. Like all women, I love to hear

01:01:47.420 the sound of my own voice. Well, yeah, there you go. So that, that's why we're in the business,

01:01:52.460 right? All right. So I've got some questions from the audience here, if you don't mind,

01:01:56.620 run through these real quick before we go. Let's see here. We've got QuirtzZ7, $10 Canadian. Thank you

01:02:05.180 very much. Debate shows and academic debates gained popularity in 2009 to 2014 as millennials came of

01:02:12.620 age. Does this indicate a want of millennials? Maybe Gen X influence also love your authory name,

01:02:20.060 Ina Stepan. So yeah, that's interesting. We had, it feels like this was, there was a, maybe this is

01:02:26.540 part of the new atheist time or no, maybe this was lightly after, but it feels like there was a,

01:02:31.340 there was an obsession with kind of, you know, having the debate shows facts and logic, you know,

01:02:37.580 like there, there was a far more interest in this during that time. Do you think that's a,

01:02:42.060 there's a general racial generational difference there, a shift that maybe brought that upon us?

01:02:47.980 Um, it might be generational and it also might be just the, I think this is more clear in art actually

01:02:54.540 than in, I think maybe it's a function of the same impulse, but what we're seeing now is again,

01:03:00.540 I do think it's largely like Gen X and older millennials who are driving this, but, um,

01:03:06.620 the, the institutions that produce this culture, right? They are becoming so incredibly boring,

01:03:14.860 um, that you have a certain amount of, and I think it's always going to be a relatively small

01:03:19.260 percentage of people who are just like, I cannot listen to this anymore. Even, even if they sort of

01:03:23.340 agree with the fundamentals, it's just, it's just boring in the same way that woke Hollywood, like

01:03:28.220 the really formulaic woke movies always fail. The real power of the cultural left is when they

01:03:33.980 manage to work in, you know, a left-wing theme or two into a very like interesting character-driven

01:03:39.740 story. And when they, they go to these like sort of woke, like direct woke, like sort of, um,

01:03:45.340 propaganda films, they fail, right? Cause it's not interesting. And I think that's, that might be

01:03:51.100 part of this, right? I think there was a sort of an, and the move into podcasting and long form media

01:03:56.060 is very much, I think it's a very hopeful thing. Um, I, I think, uh, it's a good thing that people

01:04:03.580 are bored with what seems like the same talking points and like tomatoes being thrown back and

01:04:12.060 forth. Um, I do think that's a good thing. I do think there is some minority of people,

01:04:16.940 clearly there are literally millions of people who want to listen to Joe Rogan for three hours.

01:04:21.900 And all he is, is intellectually curious, right? Like that's, that's it. Like I'm not a huge Rogan,

01:04:27.340 um, listener. I do listen from time to time, but all his great strength is obviously that he's just

01:04:32.940 genuinely intellectually curious. And I do think there's a certain percentage of people who just

01:04:36.780 crave that after the kind of incredibly wrote, even if they don't have deep ideological objections,

01:04:42.940 they're just sick of it. Cause it's boring.

01:04:45.020 Yeah. Have you seen the meme where it's, uh, Joe Rogan is like a barbarian king. He just brings

01:04:51.500 the, the, the wise man before him and says, smart man, tell me why the water falls from the sky,

01:04:56.620 you know, like just, just him doing that routine. Yeah. It's, it's very, it's very effective. I think

01:05:02.540 a big part of that is also found time. Um, the, the fact that our society has moved to,

01:05:08.540 uh, you know, you have the technology where you don't have to sit down in front of the TV and dedicate 30

01:05:14.300 minutes or an hour to watching a news program means that people don't have to have everything

01:05:19.900 condensed into soundbikes so they can move on to something. The fact that you can mow the lawn or

01:05:24.700 lift weights or, you know, do laundry or drive and get all this stuff, I think facilitates people's

01:05:32.620 ability to listen to those, those longer conversations. And the fact that the audience is

01:05:37.100 fractured, right? You don't have, it doesn't have to be talk radio. It doesn't have to be top 40. You

01:05:41.980 don't have to appeal to every single person driving. You need to appeal to a specific

01:05:46.460 subset of people who in drive time traffic want to learn more about the French revolution or

01:05:50.780 something like that. You know, like, I think that, that really facilitates that as well.

01:05:54.940 And why people are there, they're far more demand for long form than there was before.

01:05:59.660 But I do think it's totally true. And that rings true to me personally. Like I

01:06:03.580 am a huge proponent of the audio revolution because I listened to a lot of this stuff, not just

01:06:07.260 podcasting, but books and, um, and why exactly what you're saying while I do other things,

01:06:11.740 right? While, while I'm working out, while I'm doing chores, while I'm, and it really, um, has

01:06:16.380 been an enormous, wonderful thing in my life. Like I've learned a lot. I feel like, um, so I, I'm,

01:06:23.020 I'm a huge proponent of, of those things. Um, and I think that's totally true. There is a negative

01:06:28.940 side to cultural fraction, fracturing, right? Like we don't have a pop culture anymore. Actually, I would

01:06:35.740 argue like maybe game of thrones was the, the only. Yeah. A lot of people say that the last like,

01:06:40.540 and then maybe before that Sopranos, although Sopranos was very, still very niche. Um, even though

01:06:46.940 I think it's much better. Don't get me wrong. I'm not comparing them as terms of like literary merit

01:06:50.300 or artistic merit. I'm just, uh, we don't have, that's really has been one of the, um, consequences

01:06:57.020 for good or ill of the internet, right? It's that no matter what weird little thing you're into,

01:07:00.860 you can find the seven other people in the world, um, who are into that same thing, which is on the

01:07:06.540 one hand, wonderful and community building and, and, um, allows people to go deeply into something

01:07:11.180 they intra that are interested in, um, with, with a community of fellows. It's, it also fractures that

01:07:17.820 space where we need, um, to interact with people who are different from us, right? Um, so here I'm

01:07:24.380 thinking like there are downsides to having this kind of pop culture, but the upside is everyone

01:07:30.540 was watching Muhammad Ali, right? Um, watching those fights in America. And that brings people

01:07:36.620 together who are very different. Uh, and, and I think that that is also a force that we're now

01:07:42.700 missing. We're completely sort of fractured, um, culturally, and it makes it very difficult to

01:07:47.260 build a nation, right? It makes it more difficult to build a neighborhood, more difficult to build a

01:07:50.940 nation, especially when people find out that they might have something more in common with someone

01:07:55.500 in Timbuktu because they both love this like one weird thing. And in particular, when elites of

01:08:00.460 different nations find out they have more in common with each other than they do with their neighbors.

01:08:04.380 And so I think there are downsides to this, this kind of fracturing, but it definitely has personal

01:08:08.780 upsides. Yeah. Mark Fisher's wrong a lot about a lot of things because he was a communist, but he was

01:08:14.300 right about this. Like his best observation was, uh, that the, the, uh, the fact that all of these

01:08:21.980 cultures are now available continuously, that all, all these different decades and eras of music and

01:08:27.740 movies and, and all this stuff is simultaneously available is that you don't have one forged shared

01:08:34.140 culture anymore. People can escape into micro niche subcultures or, you know, you can go back and just

01:08:40.220 listen to metal from the eighties or, you know, listen to pop music from the nineties or only

01:08:44.940 watch movies from the sixties. And you don't actually have to care about what your culture

01:08:48.460 is producing now because there's just this, uh, the simultaneously existent, uh, backlog of culture

01:08:54.860 that, you know, anyone can escape to and not actually interface with the real world, which,

01:08:59.100 which is its own issue for sure. It also completely breaks down this distinction between culture and

01:09:03.500 counterculture, right. Um, and, and here I think Polly was very prophetic. Um, but there, there are,

01:09:10.780 there are things, um, that have always happened. And here, I think the best example is kind of sexual

01:09:16.140 minorities, right? Um, it's not that homosexuality is a new thing under the sun. It's not even a new

01:09:22.060 thing under the sun that there are men, uh, who get their sexual thrills by dressing like women,

01:09:26.060 right? This is very clearly a phenomenon in all societies virtually. Um,

01:09:30.060 the differences between the mainstream and the counterculture, right? We had these countercultures,

01:09:37.180 some of them very degenerate and some of them producing some beautiful art actually, right?

01:09:42.300 Like, um, and I think for example, uh, gay life in the 1980s in New York city is very much, uh, one of

01:09:50.540 an example of this, right? Where it's, it's actually, I think that there is a benefit, um, to those cultures

01:09:57.020 existing as subcultures as countercultures. Um, but the problem is there's no barrier now between the,

01:10:02.780 the, um, mainstream and, and the counterculture because every, every little faction has to be,

01:10:08.780 um, not in specifics, but like in essence, endorsed by everyone, everyone's little weirdness and

01:10:14.460 identity. Um, there are no weirdos anymore. You're not allowed to be like a freak or a weirdo or like,

01:10:19.740 and just exist outside of culture. Those things must be embraced by Delta, right? 0.99

01:10:24.780 Um, and I think that is bad for both sides of the equation. Like I, I think it's bad when

01:10:31.260 gay pride parades are endorsed by Delta. And I, I think it's actually bad, not only for the children 1.00

01:10:36.780 watching, um, but it's bad for gay culture when, when Delta endorses it and it becomes sort of bland 0.95

01:10:43.580 and corporatized and loses that, like that sense of rebellion and, and limitation of the, the, uh,

01:10:50.060 the rest of society that places barriers around it, that therefore engenders a certain amount of

01:10:54.540 creativity. And here I really sound like Camille Fahlia, but so.

01:10:57.020 Well, I think it's, well, I, I think there is, I think there's an observable phenomenon there that

01:11:04.860 I think a lot of people can understand. I mean, just ask, uh, all these subcultures that have been

01:11:09.260 now co-opted by, you know, the gamer gates and the, the comic book gates and, you know, all these,

01:11:15.500 all these different fandoms who, you know, maybe live their whole life saying, oh man, I can't wait till

01:11:20.220 someone makes a movie about my thing until they, and now the people who were the core audience of

01:11:25.100 those things have been completely, you know, derided and tossed out of their own subculture

01:11:30.540 because that culture had to be, you know, made safe and, and, and pasteurized and, and homogenized

01:11:37.900 so that it could then be, you know, elevated and served up to the wider, the wider culture, right? Like,

01:11:43.740 those niches are no longer allowed to exist with their own interests and their own standards. They

01:11:49.420 have to be, all the indoctrination has to be poured into those areas so they can then be

01:11:54.140 brought and made wide to, to everybody else. So I think there's a lot of truth there.

01:11:58.780 Uh, Johan Richardson for $20 says, uh, what role does a demography play in changes in the young?

01:12:05.820 If the portion of the young are less and less the long-term heirs of the first world civilization, 0.86

01:12:10.780 will the odds, uh, be tilted against the pres, uh, preserving the first world social structures?

01:12:15.980 I mean, that's a really good question. And I think there is definitely, you know,

01:12:20.780 an observable phenomenon of a lot of native people in, you know, first world culture saying

01:12:28.140 it's not worth, you know, participating anymore, especially as again, we see the incentive structure

01:12:33.020 specifically created to say, actually, we're going to elevate everyone who isn't you,

01:12:38.700 and you're going to have to, you know, justify all of your actions in every situation that you

01:12:44.380 didn't, you know, transgress some new cultural faux pas while trying to do the job and preserve

01:12:50.060 these different systems. I think there is an understandable, you know, walking away of many

01:12:54.860 people from the need to kind of maintain the systems that are holding up with culture that they no longer

01:13:00.620 see themselves reflected in. Yeah, I think that's, I think that's true, but I think the answers are

01:13:05.740 different to this question in the US versus Europe. Um, so I, I think that that's because America is

01:13:12.220 really, really assimilatory. Um, and the problem is not so much. So I guess maybe I depart from some

01:13:18.860 people on the right. Uh, I don't think that America's ability to assimilate immigrants has actually 0.62

01:13:24.860 gotten much worse. I think we're just simply assimilating them to a dominant ideology of America, which is

01:13:31.020 wokeism. Um, I, I think that actually we are quite assimilatory still. And in fact, we're projecting that

01:13:40.300 culture around the world, uh, because we do have an empire and, and it's cultural empire. Um, and so

01:13:47.500 now we are exporting, uh, this ideology just as we are assimilating our immigrants to it at home. And I,

01:13:55.900 so I, I tend to think like, yes, you can talk about perhaps, um, you know, changing the demographics of

01:14:01.260 the vote empowered specifically the democratic party that, that then passes these laws, but they're

01:14:06.060 almost tangential within the party, right? That break from immigrant vote to like woke policies,

01:14:12.140 it's running through a democratic party that's controlled largely not by, by people, uh, who just

01:14:17.580 came to this country. Right. Um, and so they might have some, some ideas about government programs and

01:14:23.900 wanting benefits and maybe don't have the same kind of, um, you know, culture of self-government as,

01:14:29.500 as Americans have. Uh, but what's actually coming out on the other end, I think has much less to do

01:14:34.860 with immigrants. And in fact, it's assimilating their children, uh, aggressively. So in Europe, 0.52

01:14:40.780 it's, I think it's quite different. Um, you have kind of the two extremes in Europe where, uh, I would say,

01:14:47.820 like, for example, in France, you just have a large unassimilated minority, uh, to that France has

01:14:54.060 very little interest in assimilating, but is now outbreeding them. Right. Um, and then in, in the UK, 0.95

01:14:59.900 they've bent over backwards to assimilate their, their immigrants, um, completely to the point where 0.99

01:15:05.180 they like disavow everything about British culture. Um, and, and have also not successfully,

01:15:12.460 I don't think, um, assimilated their immigrants because they've just assimilated. I was going to 0.93

01:15:18.140 say that that's the inverse. They haven't assimilated anyone. They've been assimilated.

01:15:23.420 Yeah. So I think these, these questions are quite different. So on the global scale,

01:15:26.540 obviously in the same vein as what can't go on forever, uh, won't eventually some civilization

01:15:32.700 will conquer another. I mean, um, if, if we don't continue to produce this much wealth, um,

01:15:38.780 I think we will be conquered eventually. Uh, but, but on the, the sort of shorter timescale,

01:15:44.300 I actually think this, this, this ideology and all of the power structures that we were talking

01:15:48.140 about for the last hour, I think they are powerful enough to assimilate immigrants too.

01:15:52.700 It's just assimilating it into something Americans from 40 years ago wouldn't recognize.

01:15:58.060 Sure. But I guess that doesn't really address the issue of those left behind by the assimilation,

01:16:03.100 right? All those who are being pushed out of those positions because the,

01:16:08.140 structural incentives are to make sure that those assimilated peoples are moved into positions 1.00

01:16:13.580 of power and in institutional structural advantage. Right? So you're right. Like,

01:16:19.020 I think that's a hundred percent correct that, that the U S is very good at this,

01:16:23.340 but the people who are the victims of this are those who are being displaced by it as it always

01:16:28.300 is. And those who are constantly the same people who are being dismissed, you know, uh, they took our

01:16:32.860 jobs as the joke, like, but yeah, but you don't have your jobs anymore. So actually that is a problem.

01:16:37.340 Right. So I think you're right that the U S is very good at the, at this, at this point,

01:16:41.020 but that only emphasizes the issue. It doesn't solve it. Well, and what you see is the needs,

01:16:47.180 right? Um, the, you, you see people drop out in fact. So Nicholas Eberstadt has some great work, um,

01:16:55.020 on this, but the, the rise of working age, and it is primarily men, right? Um, for all kinds of

01:17:00.460 reasons, these developments have been better for women, at least materially, um, have been better

01:17:07.500 for women materially than for men. But, uh, what we're seeing is working class men of primary working

01:17:12.540 age, uh, dropping out and, um, largely either existing on, um, welfare benefits or on side income,

01:17:22.380 um, that is illegally generated and largely, uh, getting dying deaths of despair. Right. I mean,

01:17:28.780 getting addicted to pay medication or becoming alcoholics. Um, and in some sense, that's

01:17:35.260 maybe that's just like, that's, that's good for, uh, not for, for us. Um, but for this managerial

01:17:43.020 class, right? Because this is the same Silicon Valley solution to this is give UBI, right? Give

01:17:49.260 people UBI, give them porn, give them, um, you know, give them pain meds easily legalize all the drugs 0.57

01:17:57.260 and let them die deaths of despair at 45 and they won't cost us any trouble. 0.89

01:18:02.860 Yep. I think that is unfortunately very much their approach. Well, Skeptical Panda, I'm sorry, 0.58

01:18:08.780 I've just, we've just failed you here, but, uh, uh, hi Inez and Oren, good to see another

01:18:13.660 based guest on the show. Remember no black pills. Uh, well, you know, we try, we try to keep, uh,

01:18:19.180 as positive an outlook as possible, but if you're looking for no black pills, you might, you might

01:18:22.620 have come to the wrong. I, I still, I, I still think that, that, uh, there could be a populist

01:18:29.660 revolution, um, in the United States. So here's your, your white pill stuff. Um, I still think 0.93

01:18:35.180 that's possible. There, there have been, uh, in my estimation for successful populist revolts,

01:18:41.340 uh, in American history. Um, the, the first being under Andrew Jackson, um, and that resulted in

01:18:48.620 something that I think is very relevant to our times, rotation in office, meaning bureaucrats.

01:18:53.900 And it started the patronage system that lasted throughout most of the 19th century was very

01:18:57.900 effectively used by the Lincoln administration. Uh, but it was then derisively called the spoil

01:19:02.380 system. Okay. But that, that started under Jackson. It was a major, and also Jackson killed the bank,

01:19:06.940 right? So two major structural victories of the Jacksonian populist movement, um, that had effects

01:19:14.700 that lasted for a century. Um, I think the next one was under FBR really. Um, and that had incredible

01:19:23.260 structural effects and lasting effects, right? Talking about the creation of social security,

01:19:27.740 um, the creation of, of the, the, the welfare state in, in large part, um, the total transformation

01:19:33.260 of the constitutional system of the United States. Um, so I think a lot of those things were bad,

01:19:39.340 but, uh, that, that was, uh, a lasting impact that we see today. Right. Um, and then the last two,

01:19:47.660 so I think the jury's still out about the last two is the Reagan revolution was a populist revolution.

01:19:52.620 Um, I think that largely it was successful in that it placed a president, a president in the White

01:19:57.980 House. I think it was largely unsuccessful in terms of changing the trajectory. It basically

01:20:02.540 stopped everything. Um, but didn't, as Reagan said, didn't really re-institutionalize anything.

01:20:08.540 And the institutions continued to, to drift left and exercise power. And now we are where we are.

01:20:13.820 Um, and I also, obviously the jury's still out on 2016. It seems like it failed to me. Um, but the,

01:20:20.300 the point being these, these movements have succeeded in American history. They have made

01:20:24.460 structural changes. Um, and I think some of the structural changes that would mark it as successful

01:20:29.820 for me would be a serious, some kind of serious knife in the heart of the university system as

01:20:34.540 a pipeline to power. Right. Um, and I think that could come in a variety of different policy ways.

01:20:39.260 Um, my own personal sort of thing that I'm stumping for right now, uh, is to use the student loan crisis

01:20:44.940 to, uh, heavily taxed universities to pay off student loans. Uh, and I think that has a lot

01:20:50.140 of benefits, but one of them is that it would be very expensive for universities and make it very

01:20:54.460 difficult for them to continue on the trajectory that they're on. Um, and, and another thing is we,

01:21:00.300 we like what I would call a success is some kind of gutting of the administrative state,

01:21:05.020 um, or at minimum exerting political control over the administrative state so that when a president who has

01:21:11.260 populist, uh, concerns or orientation, like Donald Trump is elected, uh, that he actually does control

01:21:19.020 the power of the state. Um, and I think that could come through merit reform in terms of like being

01:21:24.060 able to fire people, Trump's famous schedule F policy, but it applies only to, uh, about 50,000

01:21:30.700 people at the top. There are 2.8 million civilian bureaucrats. Um, but some kind of serious gutting of 0.95

01:21:38.060 the administrative state and then some kind of, of either gutting or convincing away from this

01:21:44.620 current path of, of, um, tech and woke capital. So those would be, I think three, and I'm sure you

01:21:52.060 could add some more of that, but I would say that progress or like structural change on, on those three

01:21:58.540 sectors. Um, I would consider that a success. And I think we could set ourselves up in such a way that

01:22:06.220 the American Republic can kind of digest younger millennials and Gen Z as, as of a generation,

01:22:11.580 um, with certain structural changes that make limitations on how much they can wield their power.

01:22:18.460 Um, and then obviously we have to stop the pipeline on the other end. So if you have to

01:22:22.060 get control of the education system, but anyway, I think it's possible. It's, it's an uphill battle,

01:22:26.460 but I do think it's possible. I don't think it's like, I mean, America, Americans are pretty,

01:22:33.020 I don't want to swear pretty remarkable people in the history of the world. Still. Um, the fact

01:22:40.060 that every single institution, um, including me, I didn't vote for anyone in 2016. Um, but every,

01:22:46.060 every single institution in American life, uh, told every single American relentlessly that you're a

01:22:53.660 bad person if you vote for Donald Trump. And they did. Um, the American middle class is not a bunch of

01:22:59.740 Russian peasants. Uh, they are used to having a certain standard of living. Um, they are used to 0.95

01:23:06.140 having a certain amount of control over their lives. Uh, and I do think there will be a pretty

01:23:10.620 substantial, substantive rebellion against the direction of this country, whether or not it

01:23:14.540 succeeds. I don't know, but I do think there will be some kind of real teeth rebellion at some point

01:23:20.780 because Americans aren't used to, um, I think large, uh, to large degree, Americans are not used

01:23:26.700 to being treated like surfs. I believe that before COVID, uh, I have a harder time. I have a harder

01:23:33.900 time justifying that belief now, but I hear you. The, the solutions are the, the things you identified

01:23:40.460 as victories are certainly correct. I think those are all valuable things that would make a significant

01:23:44.940 difference. Uh, Ben G here for $5. Nothing has changed for the positive, uh, positive with the Republican

01:23:51.820 party since the events that Sam Francis talks about in the King holiday. I know that essay is in

01:23:57.980 beautiful losers, but I, and I've, I've, of course I've read it at some point. I just don't have all

01:24:03.260 the points of that essay to mind. I wish I did. So I could give you more of an answer on that right

01:24:09.180 away, but I can't immediately remember all of the points he's made in there. I mean, I have a

01:24:13.820 journal idea of what he said, but I can't really go through all of them for you there. Sorry about that,

01:24:19.100 Ben, but, but I appreciate it. Um, let's see. I don't know it either. So I can't comment.

01:24:25.580 Yeah. Like I said, I read it somewhere in the middle of beautiful losers, but I can't, I can't

01:24:29.420 remember all the points at the moment. Uh, my tube, uh, for $1.99. Thank you very much. The right

01:24:33.900 loses because it lacks vision and spine. Well, that is certainly true. Um, yeah, I think there are

01:24:39.740 people, I think also vision and spine were beaten out of the right, uh, on a pretty regular basis.

01:24:45.580 Uh, I think the excommunication of many thought leaders, uh, was intentional, uh, and the selling

01:24:51.820 of kind of a controlled opposition was, uh, you know, has been there for a while. Uh, so I don't

01:24:58.220 think that's a unique feature of the right so much as, as something that was, you know, desired. Uh,

01:25:04.540 but I do think that is a big problem for the right. And I think you are seeing people recognizing that

01:25:08.940 problem. I think there are people actively taking action. The fact that you then have a fight over a

01:25:14.300 speaker, uh, with the right right now probably means that there are people taking notice of that,

01:25:19.340 but you are right that that is a very consistent issue. Uh, let's see here.

01:25:25.740 Uh, emergent perspective for $10. Do you think the internet allowing woke ideas to go way off the rails,

01:25:31.820 i.e. Tumblr may have backfired? Would the elite have preferred to go slowly via MSM evening news,

01:25:38.300 uh, deployment mechanism? Uh, possibly. So again, this is, so speaking of Sam Francis,

01:25:43.740 this is something that Francis talks about in Leviathan and Zen enemies. He says that

01:25:47.820 basically the, the managerial class and the left vanguard had more or less the same, uh, desires.

01:25:55.100 They had the same end goals, but that the, uh, the, the vanguard wanted to go far too fast,

01:26:01.180 the fast, the manager elite realized that they needed to boil the frog slower. And so that's why

01:26:06.220 they looked like enemies when they were actually allies. And that's why the vanguard has become more

01:26:11.500 and more okay where the manager elite are because they've kind of caught up with the eventual goals

01:26:17.260 of the vanguard. And that's why it seems like there's less tension between say like the corporate

01:26:21.660 press and, and, uh, you know, uh, left wing, uh, vanguard movements. Um, they, I think they're okay.

01:26:29.660 Uh, I think the, the, at this point, the corporations and, and most of the managers have bought in,

01:26:35.660 they've drank the Kool-Aid on the woke stuff. Uh, they probably still don't want to completely kill

01:26:40.220 uh, the golden goose with this. They are holding back things some, uh, but I think at this point,

01:26:45.020 they're kind of up to speed with the cultural revolution. And, uh, so maybe they would have

01:26:50.300 preferred to have, uh, more of a slow drip, but they haven't wasted much time and kind of onboarding

01:26:55.740 a lot of this stuff, uh, which is why we have kind of the, the corporate bloat of wokeness and

01:27:00.620 patronage networks that we do today. Um, the left is also really good at taking essentially plateau

01:27:07.340 moments, um, for the radicalism of whatever they've done to be absorbed by the American

01:27:13.020 public and to absorb a backlash. Um, here I'm thinking about more public policy than like

01:27:18.460 internet versus traditional media. But, um, I mean, you, you can look at it as there's,

01:27:23.580 there's been a backlash against each one of these major structural changes, um, quite powerful ones that

01:27:29.820 elected Republicans. And now we're back to the uselessness of doing that. Um, but

01:27:36.780 those changes have not been institutional and the left is very, very good at, I think,

01:27:41.820 and I don't want to imply even that it's like somebody sitting at the top thinking like,

01:27:45.420 uh, we just need to absorb this, but because they have institutional power, uh, and the right doesn't,

01:27:52.220 they have the, the, um, advantage of time, right? If we do, if we freeze everything right now,

01:27:59.900 we pass no new policy, nothing happens, they win. So I think that's the advantage of owning the

01:28:08.380 institutions. Yeah. Yep. All right. So, uh, Douglas, uh, you have a very long team, Douglas. I'm just

01:28:15.740 going to go with Douglas there. Thank you very much for your donation. It sounds like a fancy way of

01:28:19.580 saying bio-linitism is a thing. Uh, yeah, I'm not sure exactly when you entered that, uh, remark,

01:28:24.220 so I'm not sure exactly when, when you referenced that, but, uh, yeah, that, that is definitely something

01:28:29.100 that you could probably categorize in this discussion. Thank you very much. And then, uh, Dante's, uh,

01:28:36.460 Cacostri, uh, Cacostri, why can't I say this now? Uh, Cacostocracy. There we go. I did it. Uh,

01:28:44.620 thank you for your donation. Huh? I thought it was Cacostro, Cacostocracy.

01:28:50.540 From the Greek, you know, meaning. Yeah. Yeah. No, no, it's more legitimate than that. I thought

01:28:54.140 it was a joke. It is. It is. Uh, do, do you think the public will comply if lockdowns are imposed

01:29:01.420 again? Yeah, I think they will. Um, I, maybe that's the difference. I, I don't,

01:29:06.780 I think nothing has trashed, like openly trashed the power of the institutions and made it more

01:29:12.220 brittle as much as, as this, um, even in New York city where I live. Right. Um, I think it would be

01:29:18.540 very, very difficult to reimpose lockdowns, maybe not impossible, but I mean, even trying to reimpose

01:29:25.500 a mask mandate, I see largely failing in New York city. Now I think it would probably be possible in

01:29:31.260 Washington, DC and in my hometown of San Francisco. Um, yes, but we have entire states

01:29:36.300 now that would, I mean, I, I just, I think, I think pandemic is a, again, a black swan event.

01:29:42.060 Um, and I think that largely people more or less trusted their institutions, um, even as they were

01:29:50.540 disappointed over time in this kind of quiet way, but I think the pandemic really showed the rot.

01:29:56.140 And I, I, I would be surprised if there's uniform lockdowns that you might see them in like one place

01:30:03.180 or another, but I would be really surprised to see them broad based and maybe I'm wrong,

01:30:07.100 but we'll see which one, uh, which one of us is, is if, if the white pill or the black pill, uh,

01:30:12.140 version wins.

01:30:12.460 Well, I think you're right that it's a mask off moment, uh, not, not to create any puns there.

01:30:17.740 I think you're right that it is a moment that reveals the rot, um, and does fracture faith in

01:30:23.260 the institutions. And in that case, in that way, it is that part of it is valuable. Um, but if,

01:30:29.020 do I think that you could see that kind of thing attempted to be reapplied and probably so successfully

01:30:35.260 reapplied in a good chunk of the country? I do think that there probably is still enough institutional

01:30:40.700 momentum to get that through one more time. Uh, but you are right that every time they do try to do

01:30:45.340 that, the, the intention, the attempt to flex that kind of raw power does cost them something.

01:30:50.780 Well, and, and the federalist system is going to help us here. And if you compare, um,

01:30:55.580 if you compare the, the responses in European countries, um, to the United States, uh, I think

01:31:01.740 theirs is better in some ways and ours is better in other ways. Their experts are a little bit more

01:31:05.900 more legit in the sense that when the data strongly moved in one direction, there was some acknowledgement

01:31:13.580 of that in the professional structures. Uh, for example, uh, you know, and, and I hear it for

01:31:19.740 example, don't get out of Europe, uh, in Israel, right? Israel went really, really hard on lockdowns.

01:31:25.580 They instituted vaccine mandates up to the second booster. Um, and then publicly announced,

01:31:33.340 this isn't working or rolling all of this back. Um, so in that sense, their expert class,

01:31:39.340 I think is still a little bit more actually scientific, which is not to say that it solves

01:31:43.660 some of these deeper questions of political power and judgment. Um, in America, our expert class is

01:31:51.420 worse, um, and more ideological and more useless. Uh, and I don't think you'll ever see our expert 0.82

01:31:57.340 class walk back anything like that. I don't think you'll ever see announcement like that in America.

01:32:02.060 Um, where you have like the head of the CDC saying we screwed it up. Um, on the other hand,

01:32:09.260 the federalist system here means that we have a counter example. The fact that Florida exists

01:32:14.780 is incredibly important because now we have a counter example to say, because otherwise,

01:32:18.780 if everybody does the same thing, right, you have no way of knowing what the outcomes would be

01:32:23.820 if you had done it differently. But the fact that we have counter examples and the fact that the

01:32:27.420 federalist system did hold up in this largely, right. Um, where you had very different paths

01:32:34.220 taken in different States. Um, that I think like, like Americans largely locked down a lot less than

01:32:40.940 most European countries, um, on average. So anyway, I think the federalist system was an enormous

01:32:47.420 advantage to us in this. I think it really proved the wisdom of the federalist system.

01:32:51.500 Well, as a Floridian, I certainly benefited from, from that and, and very grateful for, uh, for its

01:32:57.660 restrictions in that way. All right, guys. Well, I think we got through all of the questions. I want

01:33:02.460 to go ahead and thank everyone for coming by. And as where can everyone find your work? Do you have

01:33:08.380 anything exciting people can check out coming up, anything like that? Um, you can find my work at

01:33:12.620 iwf.org, um, along with those of my colleagues at independent women's forum. Um, and I also affiliated with

01:33:19.420 a bunch of other folks. Um, I, you can find most of my stuff on Twitter. Honestly, I, I tweet a lot.

01:33:24.460 I'm too much. Uh, it's at, you know, Svelcher F E L T S C H E R, but you can put in Stepman as

01:33:31.420 well. That's my married name. I just, I actually, maybe now I can change it because I wasn't allowed

01:33:35.180 to change the at handle. Um, because I was going to lose the check mark. I got it when like they were

01:33:40.940 actually still giving check marks to the right. Um, yeah, maybe I can change it now, but that's,

01:33:46.140 that's my at handle. Uh, and, um, you can find a lot of my work at various sort of conservative

01:33:52.220 outlets. Excellent. So make sure to check that out guys. And of course, if this is your first

01:33:56.940 time here, make sure that you are subscribing and also remember guys that you can now listen to

01:34:03.100 the show as a podcast, not just as the live stream. So if you want to go and subscribe,

01:34:08.700 it's on all the major podcast platforms, make sure when you do, you leave that, uh, rating and that

01:34:14.380 review that really helps a lot with all the algorithms and everything. I also went ahead

01:34:18.300 and released, uh, my latest chapter of the total state chapter five, just went up on, uh, the sub

01:34:24.300 stack. So if you want to go over there, you can read the whole thing. That one's free for everybody.

01:34:28.780 Uh, so if you want to read the latest chapter there as well, oh, we have one more chat that came in right

01:34:34.380 here. Uh, let's see. Oh, I see. We have, uh, Hans Herman Hoppe, uh, fan here, uh, Phil, $10, any

01:34:44.300 right wing political pan, uh, win that does not include the physical removal of post 65ers is a loss.

01:34:50.140 Yeah. I, I hear you, but I don't know that that's in the cards. I, I don't, uh, I don't know about the

01:34:55.740 prospect of that one, buddy, but, uh, anyway. All right. So let's go ahead and wrap this up guys. Thanks again,

01:35:02.140 everyone for coming by. And as always, I'll talk to you next time. Thank you for having me on.

The Auron MacIntyre Show - January 04, 2023

Dismantling Woke Patronage ｜ Guest： Inez Feltscher Stepman ｜ 1⧸4⧸23

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript