Jonathan Goldstein joins me to talk about his new book "Rage in the Republic" and why he thinks Bitcoin is a great investment in the future. He also talks about what he thinks is going to happen with Bitcoin in the near future.
00:01:30.000They are people who are inebriated by rage.
00:01:34.000I think it was a miracle that saved his life, actually.
00:01:37.000People today talk like they want to kill each other.
00:01:39.000And I said, Congressman, they were actually trying to kill each other better.
00:01:43.000That's what the Alien and Sedition Acts were.
00:01:49.000Jonathan, thank you so much for coming on.
00:01:52.000Jonathan, I am, as you know, a big fan of yours.
00:01:55.000And as I said to you before the interview started, what I like about you is I get the same thing from you that I get from the Constitution.
00:02:04.000And that is, you're not always on my side.
00:02:07.000And that's how I know somebody's reading the Constitution the right way is it doesn't always cut my way.
00:02:33.000Well, you know, the book itself, coming out before the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, gives us a chance to take stock of not just where we are, but who we are.
00:02:46.000And the first half of the book looks backwards.
00:02:48.000It looks at really what were the unique characters and actions that came together to create the most successful democracy in the history of the world.
00:03:00.000And to do that, I compare two revolutions.
00:03:04.000It's really a tale of two cities, Philadelphia and Paris, both of which were experiencing growing violence.
00:03:10.000This is after the revolution in Philadelphia, but one Philadelphia stopped almost on a dime.
00:03:20.000The violence ended with the ratification of the United States Constitution, a system that allowed for pressures to be vented within the system instead of on the streets.
00:03:31.000Paris, of course, turned into a bloodletting known as the terror.
00:03:34.000And so I explored that by looking at a common denominator in the form of Thomas Paine, who was one of two of our great leaders of the of the early republic that was involved in both revolutions.
00:03:49.000The other one being Lafayette, the what really comes out of this, as you, I think, really poignantly noted, Glenn, is that we've been here before, that the rage we're seeing, many of the voices we're hearing, we have seen and heard before.
00:04:05.000And it is a caution, sort of a cautionary tale of what destroyed the French Revolution, where many of the same types of voices we're hearing today.
00:04:18.000The second half of the book looks forward and asks, can that unique American republic survive in the 21st century?
00:04:28.000And it looks at everything from robotics to AI to global governance, like systems like the EU.
00:06:11.080And Franklin met Thomas Paine when he was penniless and totally out of the running of anything.
00:06:19.620And it was Benjamin Franklin that sent him to this country.
00:06:23.140Two years later, he would be called the penman of the revolution.
00:06:26.800But where the book criticizes Paine is that he was a believer in pure democratic action, the sort of Rousseau view that the general will will produce good things.
00:08:03.360And there's a chapter in the book called The New Jacobins.
00:08:06.240And it is a chapter that looks at this growing movement to strip away powers of the Supreme Court, pack the Supreme Court, dump the Constitution.
00:08:17.200You have leading legal figures who are saying that the U.S. Constitution has to go on the 250th anniversary of our independence.
00:08:26.080This is the most successful and stable democracy in the history of the world.
00:08:29.600And you've got law professors telling people the Constitution is our problem.
00:08:33.780And what they are really restating is what we heard in the French Revolution, this belief that we just need to strip away those barriers to democratic action.
00:08:44.060That historically has proven a disaster time and time again.
00:08:48.260The irony that I point out in the book is that when you look at these past systems like the French Revolution, they tend to produce a single tyrant.
00:08:56.640So at the end, what they do is they melt down and then the people embrace a tyrant like Napoleon.
00:09:05.680When people talk about the Athenian democracy, the Athenian democracy collapsed and the framers didn't want the Athenian democracy because they saw it as a mobocracy.
00:09:21.940I mean, very few revolutions end with the people who started them.
00:09:25.080I think we're one of the only ones that that that ended with the people because it always it ends in a mobocracy and then people are screaming out somebody make this madness stop.
00:09:37.380And that's when you get your dictator.
00:09:38.900I mean, yeah, the way it always happens.
00:11:23.840You know, one of the reasons why he had no friends in the end is because I think he was gravely misunderstood on age of reason.
00:11:32.480You know, he's trying to make a case to the French that don't believe in God, in fact, relate to God right directly to the king and government.
00:17:06.920Now, that relationship I explore in the book towards the end of the French Revolution discussion, because I think the greatest disappointment for Paine,
00:17:15.820I, and he didn't show that a lot because a lot of people attacked him.
00:17:20.300But I think the thing that cut him the deepest was he felt that Washington abandoned him, that when he was sitting in the Luxembourg prison,
00:17:29.380he did not feel that Washington came to his side and reading his letters.
00:17:36.200When he left, when he left, wasn't it?
00:17:39.080I mean, Washington said this is not the American Revolution.
00:17:42.800Washington, you're wrong, and he was upset at Washington, and didn't Washington at the time make it clear, you're on your own, dude.
00:19:27.180And actually, one of his, originally, and one of his greatest critics, John Adams, who I think was a bit jealous of Paine's influence, admitted that when his wife wrote him and said,
00:19:39.300And people say, you wrote Common Sense, and at this time, Paine was not really that well-known.
00:19:46.740And John Adams said, I could never have written that.
00:20:01.000And that's the same thing that Franklin saw, and I think the same thing that Washington saw.
00:20:07.200So Washington and Madison together helped temper this republic and to create the things that limit the passions of democracy, force compromise.
00:20:19.040That's what people today resist the most, right?
00:20:22.200They want to just pack the Supreme Court with a liberal majority.
00:20:26.360They want to reduce the influence of the Senate, to try to force compromise.
00:20:34.240All of those things were the rallying cries of the French Revolution.
00:20:38.320All of those things were what Washington and Madison rejected.
00:20:43.020And in some ways, I think Paine was the voice of righteous rage in our revolution.
00:20:52.400And Madison was the voice of pious reason.
00:20:55.380And Washington preferred Madison after the revolution.
00:21:00.440As I say in the book, there's nothing more inconvenient than a revolutionary after a revolution.
00:21:07.020And that's what Paine found in two countries.
00:23:57.560That's what we're really talking about here.
00:23:59.540The irony, as I point out in my book, is that the Rage of the Republic really shows over and over again that today's revolutionaries become tomorrow's reactionaries.
00:24:09.960All of the so-called mountain, as they were called in the French Revolution, Robespierre, Marat, all of them, they were all guillotined.
00:24:20.240And so it's why I quote at the beginning of the book, one of the few Frenchmen to survive from the revolution.
00:24:29.780And he observed that revolutions like Saturn devour their children.
00:24:36.500And Paine himself made reference to that expression.
00:24:39.980And it has proven itself over and over again that revolution unleashes not just the best, but the worst of us.
00:24:48.280And if you don't have a system that can take those pressures, it consumes you with the rest of the world around you.
00:24:54.620Now, that's going to be very important because the book goes into what we're looking at in the 21st century, which is unprecedented.
00:25:01.200With AI and robotics, we are looking at massive unemployment numbers.
00:25:05.660Even the most conservative estimates are looking at a huge population of citizens that may have to be subsidized by the government.
00:25:15.000And the book, there's a lot of research on that.
00:25:17.860What's different about Raging of the Republic is I look at what does that mean about being a citizen?
00:25:23.700What does that mean if a large part of our population is supported entirely by the government?
00:25:29.080How does that change your relationship to the government?
00:25:31.480How do we make this republic work if we are essentially a kept citizenry?
00:25:36.980And I explore that and suggest ways that we can avoid it.
00:25:42.240But the only way we will survive this is if we return to the principles that created us, including what I call a liberty-enhancing economy, which is capitalism.
00:25:54.320People forget that Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith came out the same year as the Declaration of Independence.
00:26:02.860And it did not go over well back in Great Britain.
00:26:47.100And, you know, we think, we thought, because I don't think we've had capitalism, real true capitalism for a very long time.
00:26:56.860But what we are in now, I don't even know what to call it now.
00:27:00.960But, you know, we have so, what people have a problem with, with capitalism, I think, is the fact that there is no, there's no understanding of moral sentiments, our responsibility.
00:27:18.800And that doesn't mean just capitalism.
00:27:31.520You're the best read person I know in the media.
00:27:33.720And you're absolutely right that people forget that Adam Smith was really offering a theory of political economic rules, not just economic rules.
00:27:59.100And in that sense, he broke from some people in what's called the Scottish Enlightenment, who sort of downplayed the role of faith and morals in their theories.
00:28:11.440He believed wholeheartedly in those decisions.
00:28:14.480And people often misportray him, as you noted, because they say, oh, well, you know, it's not for the love of the butcher, which is, you know, why we, the system works.
00:28:46.680And if you are, if you're a good capitalist, you realize the only thing you have to do to win is figure out how to make people's lives better, you know, or give them what they want.
00:30:08.840Well, I do think that's what we need to be talking about.
00:30:12.540You know, I have, I just gave a speech in Prague where I may have irritated my, my audience and said that I have less faith that the EU will survive this century.
00:30:21.040The key here is how can we preserve a republic with the pressures that are coming?
00:30:30.320And the book lays out a couple of critical components of that, that basically mean that we have to reaffirm and magnify some of the original values that created the American Republic.
00:30:42.000That includes keeping government as local as possible, avoiding these global governance systems like EU.
00:30:48.640It means trying to, to maintain what I call a liberty enhancing economy.
00:30:54.460And we do that by trying to, to not subsidize just, you know, half or more of the population, but to try to make wise decisions about what areas are likely to be homocentric and what are going to be robo-centric, as I talk about in the book.
00:31:13.080And the book actually refers to certain jobs is what I call Guinan jobs, which are, it's actually a named after the bartender on the Star Trek enterprise.
00:31:22.040I used to always, as a kid, marvel the fact that Guinan, the bartender was, was standing in front of a replicator that could make the perfect Romulan sunrise cocktail.
00:31:50.640But what I'm afraid of is that the usual response in government is let's just subsidize dying industries and, you know, penalize industries going to robotics.
00:32:03.720The key is to be smart about this and we need to lead the world in that.
00:32:11.720You know, Kondrakiev is one of my favorite economists from history, you know, Stalin's economist.
00:32:19.560And he came up with a Kondrakiev wave and he actually did research when Stalin said, you know, which is better, capitalism or communism?
00:32:28.200And he's like, let me think that through the answer to Stalin is whatever you say.
00:32:33.000He was killed after, you know, he came up with his wave.
00:32:35.620But his his whole thing was capitalism will it's seasonal and it will burn itself out.
00:32:43.260It will go into winter where where communism and socialism and all this try to take the trees and force them into growth when they have to have sleep.
00:32:53.240And you have to burn out the, you know, the dead stuff and we are headed towards a deep, deep winter and those things have to die.
00:33:04.940But, you know, as you point out in the book, you're talking about such displacement of people.
00:33:11.080You know, I have I have been, Jonathan, I've been talking about this for 30 years.
00:33:28.800It will cut our throat or it will cut the cut the forest down in front of us so we can we can expand.
00:33:36.260But I don't you know, you get to this place to where if we're not careful, we will have a very few people making all of the money, controlling absolutely everything.
00:33:50.680And then we're kind of just sheep that are have to be fed by the machine and by the elites.
00:33:59.040You know, I talk about that in the book because I ask a question in the book that was asked by a Frenchman who went by the name of Farmer John.
00:34:12.760And he was a Frenchman who came to our shores and wrote a book that was itself a rage success in Europe.
00:34:20.720And it described what was happening in the United States.
00:34:24.100People were fascinated by these Americans.
00:34:27.600We were viewed as a type of new species.
00:34:30.320And he asked us for this poignant question.
00:35:45.480Certainly my coal mining grandfather didn't like getting black lung.
00:35:49.320But if you asked him who he was, he'd say, I'm a coal miner.
00:35:53.540We've always been defined by what we did, by how we were productive.
00:35:59.420And we can't go into this century with a huge percentage of our population of unproductive people who have no identity, because the only identity they will have then is the government that's supporting them.
00:37:34.860I believe that there will be those industries.
00:37:37.620As you suggest, Glenn, there's going to be a burn off, but then people will shift.
00:37:42.480We have to facilitate that by not artificially subsidizing some industries.
00:37:48.760We have to allow people to find ways to advance themselves.
00:37:51.940What we need to avoid is that if you have a small percentage of productive citizens, they're going to increasingly live separately and they're going to demand more power over how money is spent.
00:38:03.940And you're going to have a calcified class structure that has never existed in this country.
00:38:12.900But we won't if we follow the way of the new Jacobins, these leaders and this mob that is calling for us to trash the very thing that we will need to survive this century.
00:38:25.560There comes a point where everybody, everybody starts to feel sore, you know, where your body is offering unhelpful feedback.
00:38:39.140Usually at inconvenient times, you stand up and something like all of a sudden you're like, hey, that's not good.
00:38:47.160You reach for the floor thinking that Jesus might be calling you home.
00:38:51.000This is why you should trust relief factor.
00:40:55.700They are people who are inebriated by rage.
00:41:00.100It's also caused by these politicians who are so similar to what I describe in the book in France.
00:41:06.160They are so much like these figures that enabled the mob in France and then ultimately were themselves guillotined and devoured essentially by the revolution.
00:42:07.240And what we're seeing in the terms of the sort of unrequited rage will spread.
00:42:12.920That's the reason I'm so concerned with what we're hearing from democratic leaders.
00:42:16.500They want to ride this rage wave to the elections this year, the midterm elections.
00:42:25.400They don't they don't realize that history has shown people just like them who are ultimately declared reactionaries by the mob that they are leading.
00:42:36.260But for them, the only thing that's important is the midterm elections.
00:42:40.360I tell you, Jonathan, I've been saying this for a long time.
00:42:44.020I said this when they first put Michael Moore in the presidential box, maybe in 2004.
00:42:49.120And I said, you can't put a revolutionary, you can't put a guy who doesn't, you know, fit into that constitutional box and believe in that and and make friends because it's not him.
00:43:01.600It's the people who are left of him and left of them and left of them that now have access.
00:43:19.140You think you can control them, but they're actually revolutionaries that actually believe in something.
00:43:25.500And I you know, when you say we're not in an insurrection, I think that the average person in Minneapolis does not consider what they are wanting or thinking about as an insurrection.
00:43:36.560But you are looking at people who, you know, these Turtle Island people who are saying, you know, America was a mistake, never should be, blah, blah, blah, who are actively working to overthrow the government.
00:43:47.940Then you have crooked politicians who either think they can control this and use this to their advantage or I think in some cases to cover their own crimes on something entirely different.
00:44:05.400And there's nothing more pathetic than watching people like Schumer and Walsh, you know, mouthing these revolutionary and reckless rhetoric lines.
00:44:16.720It's pathetic because this is only going to come out one way.
00:44:22.040I mean, this mob is not going to embrace those individuals as their leaders.
00:44:28.060They they are the temporary convenience that they that they need.
00:44:32.360But what they are unleashing could be uncontrollable.
00:44:35.880Now, having said that, we have a system that is still working.
00:44:39.980You know, we have been stress tested before the what worries me are these figures like Schumerinsky and others who want to change the system itself, because as long as we keep the constitutional system, I have no question about our survival and that we are going to flourish.
00:44:56.980It's only if they take that system down and that unfortunately is what a lot of these law professors and others are arguing for.
00:45:08.600However, there is a step in between this and that is so to so perverted.
00:45:13.940I mean, how does the president prosecute people for crimes in states where the prosecutors or the attorney general or the even federal judges will not stand with the Constitution and the rule of law of the United States?
00:45:32.800And I'm not saying there's a lot a lot of them, but there seems to be a lot more than I thought there was.
00:46:32.920I mean, if you look back at like the Jefferson Adams period, you know, the I once was in a in a hearing and a member said, you know, Professor, don't tell us about the forming of the republic.
00:46:45.180People today talk like they want to kill each other.
00:46:47.760And I said, Congressman, they were actually trying to kill each other.
00:46:50.560That's what the alien and sedition acts were.
00:46:54.320You know, they wanted to kill each other.
00:46:55.980So don't pretend that your problems are unique.
00:46:58.720There's this dangerous conceit from people on the left that we've never faced these problems.
00:47:04.560And you're the same voices that we've heard throughout our history.
00:47:07.180The key that we have to keep our focus on is as long as we preserve this system, we can outlast these people as we have in other ages of rage.
00:47:23.020I had a debate with one Harvard professor who admitted that they want to change the Supreme Court because they can't make radical changes to the constitutional system if the Supreme Court is still around.
00:47:35.380So this is a concerted, knowing effort to try to get rid of the Supreme Court and then to push through these radical agendas to change our system.
00:47:47.100And the scary thing is, is I think they'll do it.
00:47:50.160I think they'll actually do it if they're given the chance.
00:47:53.780So let me ask you this about changing the system.
00:47:56.960Um, they're talking about the zombie, um, oh, filibuster, getting rid of the zombie filibuster and getting rid of anything related to the filibuster scares the heck out of me.
00:48:11.140But from what I understand, the zombie filibuster, um, puts it back closer to the way it's supposed to be, where you actually have to stand up and make your case.
00:48:19.700I mean, if my understanding filibuster was to slow everything in government in our constitution is just meant to slow the process down.
00:48:27.580So you don't do anything hasty and you give people time to think, and that's what the filibuster was supposed to do.
00:48:34.220But now you just filibuster and then it's over and it needs a 60 vote, uh, to, you know, bring it to the floor.
00:48:41.780Um, getting rid of the zombie filibuster, good idea or bad idea?
00:48:48.000Well, I'm not too sure it was so essential to have strong Thurman with, with bacon in his pockets, trying to talk for days on end, certainly made for good theater, made for a great movie, uh, with Mr. Smith goes to Washington.
00:48:59.960I think the key here, what I talk about in the region of the Republic is that we have to look at preserving, uh, these minority protections in our constitutional system, everything from the filibuster, uh, to, um, electoral, the electoral college ways of guaranteeing that we have, for example, a federalism system where states have real power to go their own way.
00:49:26.100All of those are bulwarks against, uh, tyranny of the majority.
00:49:31.880And it's why many of these people on the left want to eliminate that.
00:49:36.940Uh, you have law professors that said, even without, I talk about this in the book, you've a couple of Yale and Harvard law professors that have argued that they could change the Senate without a constitutional amendment so that, uh, you can give more representation to more populous states.
00:49:52.100I have no idea how they think that comports with the constitution, but it won't matter.
00:49:57.720If you can pack the Supreme court successfully, those things become less important as to whether you can make the case as opposed to make the court.
00:52:37.000They had a legitimate subpoena, uh, lawfully issued, but on a bipartisan vote.
00:52:42.020And they just said, we don't feel like it.
00:52:43.740Uh, it is the most open and clear case of contempt I have seen in my lifetime.
00:52:49.020Now we, I think the Clintons are counting on the fact that they might be able to play this out until after the Trump administration.
00:52:56.520If there's a democratic president, uh, they'll scuttle this effort.
00:53:00.460But what if they don't, you know, it does take a long time to put cases together.
00:53:04.240What if the next president is named Vance?
00:53:06.640Uh, the fact is, I don't see any cognizable defense here.
00:53:11.200One of the things I've been writing about is this is the first time where there's not even a suggestion of a defense.
00:53:16.460It's just basically, we're the Clintons and we don't feel like showing up.
00:53:21.020So this would be the world's fastest trial.
00:53:23.400Now this goes to your point, Glenn, that they may be counting on the fact that they would be tried in Washington, D.C.
00:53:29.360And it's pretty hard to imagine a jury pool in Washington without at least one person who wouldn't convict the Clintons, uh, if they had a video of them committing heinous crimes.
00:54:09.380Um, how is SCOTUS going to rule on tariffs?
00:54:16.640And if they rule against the president, what does that mean?
00:54:20.860Well, you know, I've always said the odds are against the president on IEPA.
00:54:27.660Uh, but I have to tell you after the oral argument, I said, you know, it's not as clear as people suggest.
00:54:33.020Uh, the, the, the justices did, uh, I would say a majority have serious questions about the president's interpretation.
00:54:41.080But if you look closely, they had different reasons.
00:54:44.180And so how that cycles out in the final vote is something we'll have to see, but if they do, wait, wait, wait, wait, because if they, you don't, you wouldn't say I have a reason different than yours, but I'm going to vote the same way as you, or what is that?
00:54:57.800Well, because some, we've seen justices who disagree with, with an interpretation of the majority, but still wrote a concurrence with the majority, uh, and they can choose whether it's a concurrence or a dissent.
00:55:10.340So is it possible you could have a divided court, maybe a plurality that preserves the tariffs?
00:55:16.560Yeah, they could fracture on the rationale and you could have some that say that they will concur with upholding the tariffs.
00:55:24.400Uh, but if he, if the administration loses, there are a myriad of other tariff provisions that they can rely on.
00:55:33.840So the tariffs are not going to immediately go away.
00:55:36.260Also, even if the court rules against the administration, it could make any relief perspective so that they don't have to return the money.
00:55:44.420So there's a lot of elements here that we don't, we really don't know.
00:55:48.540And that's why we're all waiting to see that, that opinion get handed down.
00:57:20.880Because the people have a right to say, no, I don't want to do it that way.
00:57:25.800Um, and, you know, in, in every state, how do you feel and will it stand if, if that's, if, if that's what we actually end up with?
00:57:36.740That, no, the federal government has control of this, and they're going to make all of the rules, and no state has anything to say about it.
00:57:43.100You know, I, I talk about this in Raging the Republic and saying that I don't think we're going to get this cat to walk backwards.
00:57:49.860AI, uh, is now integrated so thoroughly in various industries, I do not think that any given state is going to be able to seriously curtail it, or even a government can curtail it.
00:58:02.380I don't think the EU could curtail it if they wanted to, which they don't.
00:58:05.960Uh, so AI is here, and it's going to continue to grow.
00:58:11.220What we can do is to reinforce its protections.
00:58:14.880For example, I talk about in the book how AI has been accused, for example, of inducing suicide or enabling suicides with teens.
00:58:25.500And these are shocking cases where AI is advising teens how to hide marks of prior suicidal attempts.
00:58:32.900Yes, I, yes, the argument of these, these companies is, well, look, it's not like we did it that's AI.
00:59:02.040You know, in Raging Republic, I talk about the fact that ChatGBT defamed me in a bizarre situation that the Washington Post and New York Times got involved in because ChatGBT said that I had sexually assaulted students on a trip to Alaska while teaching at Georgetown.
00:59:22.780Now, every aspect of that was hallucinated.
00:59:26.940We don't take students on field trips.
00:59:29.600I've never taken a student on a field trip.
00:59:31.200I've never been accused of sexual harassment or assault.
00:59:33.700And I think that the Washington Post was a bit disappointed when they found out it was untrue.
00:59:38.040But then they, you know, but they then sort of begrudgingly said, we're sort of interested because this is the only pure hallucination we've ever encountered because we can't find any basis for hallucination.
00:59:51.520There's not even an article that would cause hallucination.
00:59:54.840Now, the fact is, I regret now that I didn't sue.
00:59:59.060I've never sued for defamation, but I almost regret now that I didn't because the solution of ChatGBT was to ghost me.
01:00:08.880So if you go on and ask ChatGBT about Jonathan Turley for years, and I think it's still the case, but it might have loosened up a little recently.
01:00:24.460And I write in the book, this sort of captures the inherent dangers of AI in these companies that if you raise defamation, they then eliminate your existence so that you disappear.
01:00:40.780And there's no right to be recognized so they can get away with it.
01:00:49.620And we do have to look at things like that.
01:00:52.620How far are we away from somebody, you know, because people are already marrying their, you know, their avatar, their, you know, ChatGBT avatar.
01:01:04.040And you can see people, it's coming, where they will say, this is my husband, this is my spouse, this is my best friend.
01:01:13.640You don't have a right to terminate him in the, you know, the next upgrade.
01:01:20.440And as ChatGBT and AI becomes ASI or AGI, you're going to have a, you're going to reach a moment where it's going to claim or people will claim that it is, it should have rights, should have human rights.
01:01:47.080I don't think in the short term we're going to see that.
01:01:48.840The question that you're raising is a good one, is to the degree to which AI and robotics are combined, and you have greater sense of interaction, it can give the illusion of sentience.
01:02:01.940And sentience has always been the key issue as to whether you have rights.
01:02:06.100The reason that human beings are treated differently from other animals is because of sentience, the awareness of who you are, consciousness.
01:02:13.360And so this is sort of the Westworld, you know, type of theory that eventually they could break through to sentience.
01:02:24.340But I think that what we have to focus on immediately is what AI is going to do to us as opposed to what we're going to do to AI and prepare ourselves for the elimination of whole job categories.
01:02:44.020There's not going to be many radiologists.
01:02:46.240All of that is going to go the way of the buggy whip, right?
01:02:49.980And when I talk about AI and Rage of the Republic, I mentioned the wonderful first work of Vonnegut, Kurt Vonnegut, called Player Piano.
01:03:01.780And he describes the scene of this carpenter looking at this vast factory of lathes.
01:03:09.600And each lathe is reproducing or exactly replicating his actions.
01:03:14.960And he was told what an honor it would be that he would be immortalized.
01:03:18.420But, of course, he and the rest of his colleagues were then fired, and they just watched these machines do what they did.
01:03:25.720The player piano problem is a serious one, that we become player pianos, that robots and AI mimic what we do, and then we are not necessary.