Timcast IRL - Tim Pool - IT HAS BEGUN, Subpoenas Filed Over GRAND CONSPIRACY Against Trump | Timcast IRL

00:02:31.000 We got him, boys.

00:02:32.000 It's all over.

00:02:33.000 We've proven everything.

00:02:34.000 James Comey has been subpoenaed in the grand conspiracy against Trump.

00:02:40.000 So far, 130 subpoenas have been issued, and that proves it.

00:02:46.000 It doesn't.

00:02:47.000 It's a subpoena, meaning they're going to investigate.

00:02:49.000 Maybe there will be an actual indictment for once, but I don't want to be blackpilled. 0.99

00:02:54.000 I just don't know that we're actually going to get any real criminal charges.

00:02:57.000 I mean, the best it seems the Trump administration has been able to do is accuse certain Democrats of like mortgage fraud for having houses in the wrong location, which they shouldn't do, but it's certainly not evidence of a grand conspiracy against Trump.

00:03:11.000 So, I'm interested to see where this goes.

00:03:14.000 It is big news, so we'll talk about that.

00:03:15.000 Plus, the Pentagon is requesting $200 billion from Congress to keep funding this war, which is absolutely crazy.

00:03:24.000 And, well, I guess, oh, what are you guys doing?

00:03:29.000 I'm not doing anything.

00:03:30.000 Partying.

00:03:30.000 I'm messing with the computer over here.

00:03:33.000 Anyway, so back to the news.

00:03:35.000 I'm just jamming on the guitar.

00:03:36.000 What about you, man?

00:03:36.000 Ian's just jamming on the guitar.

00:03:38.000 The intro is all ruined.

00:03:39.000 The metaverse ended, and it's really funny because there's some guy who's like, I spent millions of dollars in the metaverse.

00:03:44.000 Dad's falling apart.

00:03:45.000 And then we have an AI movie.

00:03:48.000 Because you know, we love talking about AI movies.

00:03:50.000 And you're going to want to hear this.

00:03:51.000 It's a movie about.

00:03:53.000 I'm going to say it.

00:03:54.000 Do it.

00:03:55.000 Impossibly fat milkers.

00:03:56.000 Impossibly fat milkers.

00:03:58.000 That is what the AI movie is about.

00:04:01.000 Wow.

00:04:01.000 And it's hilarious, but it's actually a good jumping off point to talk about how far AI has come.

00:04:05.000 Because it's actually, aside from the goofy nature of the video, it's remarkably well generated.

00:04:12.000 It's pretty crazy.

00:04:13.000 So we will get into all of that, my friends.

00:04:15.000 But before we do, head over to Tax Network USA, my friends.

00:04:18.000 We've got a great sponsor.

00:04:19.000 It is tnusa.com slash Tim.

00:04:24.000 Do you guys owe back taxes or have unfiled returns?

00:04:26.000 Have you filed every year, but you still keep Owen?

00:04:28.000 Did you retire and suddenly get hit with a tax bill you didn't expect?

00:04:32.000 Your balance is not going to go down.

00:04:34.000 Penalties are going to grow.

00:04:35.000 Interest will compound.

00:04:36.000 And many of you are about to owe again for this upcoming tax year with no plan in place.

00:04:40.000 Stop what you're doing and call Tax Network USA.

00:04:43.000 The IRS is not waiting.

00:04:45.000 The IRS is enforcing collections through wage garnishments, bank levies, and property seizures.

00:04:50.000 They can even file for you without your consent.

00:04:52.000 This is where Tax Network USA comes in with over 15 years in the business.

00:04:56.000 There hasn't been a tax case they haven't seen or resolved.

00:04:59.000 They specialize in tax controversies and help taxpayers nationwide get back on track by resolving back taxes and unfiled returns once and for all.

00:05:07.000 Whether you owe $10,000 or $10 million, their team has resolved over $1 billion in tax debt.

00:05:13.000 And they can do the same for you, but you got to call now.

00:05:15.000 They're offering a free investigation call with the IRS.

00:05:18.000 After that, they put a clear case plan in place to resolve your tax problem and get you back on track.

00:05:23.000 So call 1-866-686-1535.

00:05:29.000 That is 1-866-686-1535 or visit tax network, t-n-usa.com slash Tim.

00:05:40.000 Check that one out.

00:05:41.000 Don't forget, my friends, to also smash that like button.

00:05:43.000 Share the show with everyone you know.

00:05:45.000 Joining us tonight, talk about this and so much more.

00:05:47.000 We have Rudyard Lynch.

00:05:49.000 Thank you so much for having me.

00:05:50.000 Grab your microphone, brother.

00:05:51.000 We can't hear you.

00:05:52.000 Thank you so much for having me.

00:05:53.000 It's really a...

00:05:54.000 What do you do?

00:05:54.000 Who are you?

00:05:55.000 I run the YouTube channel, What If All Test in History 102.

00:05:59.000 And you discuss history.

00:06:01.000 I talk about history, anthropology, politics, and the intersection of all of those things.

00:06:07.000 Right on, should be interesting.

00:06:08.000 Kyla is back.

00:06:09.000 Hi.

00:06:10.000 You can find me not so erudite everywhere.

00:06:13.000 And you're a, what do you do?

00:06:15.000 Uh.

00:06:15.000 I do political commentary, but also debate.

00:06:17.000 She's here to yell at us because she's a lib. 1.00

00:06:19.000 Yes.

00:06:20.000 That's what she's doing.

00:06:21.000 Of course, Phil and Ian are here, but we don't need introductions for the people you know and love.

00:06:25.000 Let's jump to the news from axios.com.

00:06:29.000 We got James Comey subpoenaed in alleged grand conspiracy against Trump.

00:06:34.000 Former FBI director James Comey has been subpoenaed in the wide-ranging grand conspiracy case against the ex-officials who investigated and prosecuted President Trump.

00:06:42.000 Two sources with knowledge of the situation tell Axios.

00:06:45.000 The investigation has produced more than 130 subpoenas since cranking up last year.

00:06:50.000 The officials, including Comey, have all decried the investigation as political persecution and lawfare.

00:06:56.000 The Trump administration's grand conspiracy theory posits that Democratic officials bent the rules, broke the law, and lied under oath to investigate, prosecute, and otherwise undermine Trump from his election in 2016 through his federal indictments in 2023.

00:07:09.000 The Comey subpoena issued last week relates to his alleged role in the drafting of a January 2017 intelligence committee assessment concerning Russia's election interference that favored Trump.

00:07:20.000 The assessment referenced the now widely discredited Steele dossier, whose inclusion ran counter to fundamental tradecraft principles and ultimately undermined the credibility of a key judgment, according to a Tradecraft review completed in June under Trump's current CIA director, John Ratcliffe.

00:07:36.000 Ratcliffe then referred Comey and former CIA Director John Brennan for prosecution.

00:07:40.000 Well, all I can say, folks, is this proves it once and for all.

00:07:45.000 It is now beyond a reasonable doubt, and we will just assert it as fact.

00:07:48.000 Great.

00:07:49.000 It would be nice.

00:07:50.000 It would be great if we could do something like that, but I guess.

00:07:53.000 We can't.

00:07:54.000 I don't know.

00:07:54.000 It doesn't mean it's correct.

00:07:55.000 We definitely shouldn't.

00:07:56.000 Because the rule of law matters.

00:07:57.000 Until proven guilty.

00:07:58.000 Comey, you're innocent.

00:07:59.000 Until we find out.

00:08:01.000 Well, if this was the standard of due process, then like every single lawyer that we were talking about yesterday is like beyond guilty compared to Comey, right?

00:08:08.000 Agreed.

00:08:09.000 Lock them all up. 0.88

00:08:09.000 They're all guilty. 0.88

00:08:10.000 Lock them all up, right?

00:08:11.000 But obviously, due process matters, and it's good that we have due process because it protects, as a liberal, I want due process so that when my side, but I don't really have a team, but when we want due process because we want to ensure that people who have vested interests against us can't weaponize systems.

00:08:27.000 And I think that there's genuine concern that the DOJ is being weaponized against Trump enemies.

00:08:34.000 Yeah, I think I think it was weaponized against Trump.

00:08:36.000 I think it's due weapons.

00:08:37.000 Both of those instances, if that was the case, if these are the same thing.

00:08:40.000 That's why I just don't think that's it.

00:08:41.000 I don't believe in due process anymore.

00:08:43.000 Like it's like the tooth fairy to me now.

00:08:45.000 Like you can say it exists and we understand the concept.

00:08:47.000 Like, yes, when I go to bed after my teeth fall out, hopefully not at 40 years old, that would suck.

00:08:52.000 But I put it under my pillow and then money's there.

00:08:55.000 Like something did happen.

00:08:56.000 And then I'm told it was the tooth fairy.

00:08:58.000 That's how I feel about due process, right?

00:09:00.000 Something does happen most of the time, but when it actually matters, there's no due process because the left makes the same exact argument I'm making now.

00:09:07.000 You've got that dude in California who raped that one chick and they said he had affluent. 0.98

00:09:11.000 Was it affluenza from raping that chick? 0.98

00:09:14.000 So he didn't, there was no functional due process. 0.94

00:09:16.000 He was too rich to know what he was doing wrong.

00:09:18.000 He had realized spoiled into things.

00:09:20.000 It's crazy.

00:09:21.000 He had affluenza.

00:09:22.000 Yeah, they said he suffered from affluenza because he was too rich to understand what he did was wrong.

00:09:26.000 So that's from the left.

00:09:27.000 The left has made that argument.

00:09:28.000 I think it's fair to say both the left and the right agree that the legal system is just a function of who wants to exercise power against their enemies.

00:09:35.000 I think that these going behind the backs.

00:09:38.000 I think the inverse case.

00:09:39.000 Yes.

00:09:39.000 Going behind the backs of people and like spying on opponents has been the norm through history, even though they will tell you we have due process.

00:09:46.000 And I'm wondering, Rudyard, I really want to get your take on this because since the internet feels like people like Donald Trump actually have a chance at bucking the system, did this kind of thing ever happen in the past?

00:09:55.000 So I have a few different takes here.

00:09:57.000 The first of which is we have to be very careful about eroding rule of law because that's been the English-speaking world's great advantage. 0.77

00:10:04.000 And if we erode rule of law, it's going to have very negative downstream effects on everything between the economy, between politics, because rule of law is the set of rules you use to establish all social interaction.

00:10:18.000 And if that goes away, you won't make companies because someone will steal the company you make.

00:10:24.000 But I have another thing.

00:10:26.000 The second thing is the left has been weaponizing this already.

00:10:28.000 And there's been a huge issue with conservative judges and with conservatives making the argument that you're opposed to, saying, oh, we can't do this, blank, blank, blank.

00:10:39.000 The left has already done a weaponization of the political process to an insane degree.

00:10:46.000 And when conservatives push against stuff where it should be illegal to discriminate against white men under civil rights law, it happens on a mass degree.

00:10:54.000 But conservative judges don't stand against it.

00:10:57.000 Conservative judges don't stand against the rampant abuse in the family court system against men.

00:11:04.000 They don't stand against the rampant biases against white men, where the left has been doing this to an insane degree.

00:11:11.000 And even defensively, the right does not protect itself.

00:11:16.000 Well, so to your point about how we want to keep the rule of law, I would agree, but when it's gone, it's gone.

00:11:22.000 I want to keep my car nice and clean, but if a bunch of vandals come and smash it with crowbars, there's nothing I can do about it.

00:11:26.000 So I get it fixed.

00:11:28.000 To point on the couch thing you guys were talking about, he wasn't under affluenza.

00:11:31.000 He was under the influence of intoxication, Ethan Couch.

00:11:36.000 The argument was that he shouldn't get the harshest penalty because he had, quote-unquote, affluenza.

00:11:42.000 It's a nonsense term that meant he was so rich he didn't understand right from wrong.

00:11:47.000 Yeah.

00:11:48.000 So he did actually end up getting charged.

00:11:50.000 Yeah, he did.

00:11:51.000 And the argument was that he shouldn't get the harshest of penalties for what he did.

00:11:51.000 Yeah, he had to change.

00:11:54.000 Wasn't it like there was a passed-out woman and he was raping her and then some guy's caught her or something? 0.72

00:11:58.000 This was like a Me Too era.

00:11:59.000 This is the left, right?

00:12:00.000 This is his defense attorney who argued this.

00:12:03.000 The left was upset that he did not go to prison in the most harshest of penalties because the court system failed us.

00:12:10.000 Sure, yeah.

00:12:12.000 Again, I don't know for someone who's not.

00:12:13.000 He's conservative?

00:12:14.000 Texas.

00:12:15.000 Well, he's from Texas, not California, so the left narrative isn't working here.

00:12:19.000 But also in this case, he was intoxicated and under the influence of drugs.

00:12:22.000 No, he disagrees.

00:12:23.000 Yeah, which is all bad, right?

00:12:25.000 But I think it's progressives were upset at the time of this case because they wanted a very harsh penalty against him The judge gave him a light sentence, citing what she called affluenza.

00:12:36.000 I see his defense attorney citing affluenza.

00:12:38.000 I can't find the judge citing that as the reason why she gave him.

00:12:41.000 But 10 years prevention.

00:12:42.000 Neither here nor there.

00:12:43.000 I mean, it's an old story we were lightly referencing where people on the progressives were upset about it.

00:12:47.000 Sure, I agree.

00:12:47.000 But to the point back to Red Yard, like I was saying, I have a nice car.

00:12:52.000 I try to protect it, right?

00:12:54.000 I'll park it in my garage.

00:12:55.000 Then one day while I'm sleeping, a bunch of whoever Antifa comes and firebombs the garage. 0.89

00:12:59.000 It's gone.

00:13:00.000 So you talk about the rule of law and we want to maintain it.

00:13:03.000 But at the same time, you say that the left has been destroying it and eroding it.

00:13:06.000 I mean, at a certain point, they've destroyed it.

00:13:08.000 Yeah, that's – you oftentimes have to balance two opposing things and figure out where between these two is the reasonable conclusion.

00:13:17.000 And I understand what you're saying, where, I mean, Russia Gate was a lie, and it's crazy there's been no prosecution for this staggering lie because there was no actual evidence that Trump was colluding with Russia or that the Russians tilted the course of the election.

00:13:34.000 This was just a story the left made up.

00:13:36.000 And slander is incorrect, especially slander on that scale.

00:13:39.000 And you can't let that go back.

00:13:42.000 And I think another thing is we have laws against treason, and we have seen mass treason among the population.

00:13:49.000 And I would need to actually, I'm not a lawyer.

00:13:52.000 Do you mean like codified legal treason?

00:13:54.000 Which I would say this.

00:13:58.000 The actual law is when you're providing material resources to an enemy at a time of war or aid and comfort, whatever it's specific.

00:14:06.000 Sedition is general undermining of the government in the United States.

00:14:10.000 Yes.

00:14:10.000 And there is treason.

00:14:14.000 Because this happened when Trump said this is like sedition punishable by death.

00:14:19.000 That is when the military seeks to undermine.

00:14:22.000 So there is a special sedition there.

00:14:23.000 I would argue that many of the people you may be referring to, you could perhaps argue treason because they are adherent to, say, China or whatever.

00:14:30.000 But we aren't at war with China despite being adversaries.

00:14:32.000 Iran now is where it gets interesting because you've got a lot of people that are accusing Tucker Carlson of treason directly for communicating with Iran before the U.S. like as the U.S. was preparing strikes against them.

00:14:43.000 But I would say for the general leftist, it's seditious conspiracy.

00:14:47.000 You're correct.

00:14:48.000 I got the words wrong.

00:14:50.000 I mean, what I'd say in general is there's been a complete and utter abuse of the rule of law so far.

00:14:58.000 And it's been done predominantly by the left across a variety of different fields with everything stretching from the national level to the social level to the family level.

00:15:11.000 And this has been justified by the court system.

00:15:13.000 And so you have to be careful that if you remove the institution of law, we're going to devolve into being a third world dictatorship.

00:15:22.000 I think we are.

00:15:23.000 So Trump won the popular vote.

00:15:27.000 He got a plurality, which I think was like 49.8%.

00:15:30.000 The American people expect something to be done.

00:15:33.000 But he's being obstructed by judges every step of the way.

00:15:35.000 And then there's this tit-for-tet back and forth where it goes to like three appeals and then finally he wins.

00:15:40.000 There was a recent ruling with RFK Jr. where he wanted to change the rules on vaccine safety.

00:15:45.000 And then once again, a judge blocked him.

00:15:47.000 And you famously have this judge in D.C. that just says literally no to everything.

00:15:51.000 There was that particularly important court case where these judges were arguing that any district, actually the left was arguing that any district court judge can overturn anything Trump does.

00:16:04.000 And then the Trump administration argued this is insane because at the time, they had an appeal granted allowing this immigration practice.

00:16:15.000 I forget the specific executive order.

00:16:17.000 As soon as it was granted, progressive groups filed a lawsuit in another federal jurisdiction, which put a stay on it, so they can't both be true at the same time.

00:16:25.000 I think it's fair to say that while I agree with you, the left is absolutely just saying by any means necessary, and the right is saying, slow down their Democrats.

00:16:34.000 The left is breaking rule of law.

00:16:36.000 What they're doing is not – it's not justifiable and it's not fair.

00:16:41.000 And English common law was established in the 12th century under a certain context with a certain aim in charge.

00:16:51.000 And this was not the end point of the context or the aim that we were trying to reach.

00:16:56.000 And you have to parallel the left for where they're at.

00:16:59.000 And it's quite – I'm trying to articulate something complicated where in crisis periods like this, you set precedents that you can't go back.

00:17:12.000 And so if you compare the English Civil War to the French Revolution, in the English Civil War, you had a political crisis.

00:17:19.000 And at the end of it, England became a democracy with rule of law.

00:17:23.000 And in France, it spiraled into being a military dictatorship.

00:17:27.000 And these are very different outcomes.

00:17:29.000 And you have to be careful about not establishing precedents that future generations can look to, because if you go to Latin America, there's a lot of countries in Latin America, like Argentina, that's Argentina is more white than America. 0.93

00:17:43.000 It has a temperate climate.

00:17:45.000 And Argentina is poor because they don't have rule of law.

00:17:48.000 Where if you can't establish a company and assume that a social superior is not going to steal your company, you can't have a capitalist economy.

00:17:57.000 So let me ask you this question.

00:17:59.000 What is wrong with a military dictatorship?

00:18:03.000 So there's multiple tiers.

00:18:06.000 95 plus percent of regimes in history are authoritarian.

00:18:10.000 And authoritarian is one strong man on top who runs everything.

00:18:13.000 There's tiers, though, where some of them are enlightened.

00:18:16.000 And when you look at authors like Aristotle, they were talking about the benefits of monarchy.

00:18:21.000 And I'm not a monarchist.

00:18:23.000 But monarchy is you have a long-term incentive for the leader to care about the population.

00:18:29.000 And that works a lot better than something like the Soviet Union. 0.88

00:18:33.000 Well, I want to ask you, I wanted to ask you specifically about what you mentioned what's going on today.

00:18:38.000 You compared that to, say, the British or the French.

00:18:41.000 So my question is more so, what would be bad about the United States becoming a military dictatorship?

00:18:49.000 The military would be you could have a situation where the military is corrupt.

00:18:55.000 It shuts down capitalism.

00:18:57.000 It shuts down freedom.

00:18:59.000 It shuts down the functioning of a society.

00:19:03.000 And the good things we take for granted die.

00:19:06.000 And those things are fundamentally dependent on freedom.

00:19:09.000 What if a military dictatorship emerged in the United States that was based entirely upon traditional American conservatism?

00:19:18.000 And the military by force said, we're not going to allow leftism anymore.

00:19:24.000 We're not going to allow the courts to supersede the will of the people.

00:19:27.000 And they just, through military rigidity, enforced the right cultural worldview.

00:19:33.000 That's why I said there's a huge overturn window for authoritarianism, because you're trusting the leader a lot.

00:19:39.000 If you look to Emperor Augustus, who was the first Roman dictator, he was one of the greatest statesmen in history.

00:19:45.000 So when Rome did the transition from democracy to monarchy, they had one of the best rulers ever.

00:19:51.000 And things governed very well until Tiberius and Caligula showed up.

00:19:56.000 And then it got a lot worse.

00:19:58.000 And with monarchies or authoritarianism, you're trusting the – and the reason that a lot of the older authors preferred monarchies to military dictatorships is that the monarch has an incentive to pass things on to their children.

00:20:14.000 So the monarch has a multi-generational incentive.

00:20:17.000 So they're less likely to hurt things like freedom or the free market.

00:20:21.000 Because I put rule of law above democracy.

00:20:24.000 Because if you're a society with rule of law, it means you have functional freedom.

00:20:29.000 It means you have you can have capitalism.

00:20:32.000 Because keep in mind.

00:20:34.000 But let me ask you, how would you feel if there was a military dictatorship that enforced the things you wanted to exist?

00:20:44.000 Everyone wants the things they forced.

00:20:45.000 Everyone wants the things that they believe to be enforced.

00:20:49.000 So would you be happy if Donald Trump became a supreme dictator and used the military to enforce laws, but it was everything you wanted in society?

00:20:57.000 I would not be happy with that.

00:20:59.000 What I will say is that the reason you could not have Timcast in any other Western country, because they've had left-wing authoritarianism remove the rule of law and personal freedoms, where once you start pulling that away, you very quickly end up in a society where you lose a lot. 0.70

00:21:25.000 And it's one of those things where I put property rights and rule of law above everything else in my framework.

00:21:33.000 But so I guess my ultimate point is when you look at the history of the United States, there are varying degrees of cultural enforcement across the board.

00:21:42.000 Obviously not military dictatorship, but until you get to Abraham Lincoln, I suppose, when things got pretty serious with the Civil War.

00:21:47.000 But blasphemy, for instance, was illegal up until like the early 1800s.

00:21:52.000 My view largely is that if everybody in this country was morally homogenous, they'd be completely happy.

00:22:01.000 Let's say everybody in this country, 100% of people were Christian theocrats. 0.99

00:22:06.000 They'd have no problem with a member of Congress proposing a commandment law.

00:22:10.000 But Christian theocracies fell at the hands oftentimes of Christianity because the idea that people will stay like wholly unified in the perfect way insofar as that people will be happy just doesn't happen, right? 0.73

00:22:24.000 Like the United States today used to be morally homogenous to a great degree, and then it started fracturing.

00:22:30.000 I would argue that since the Civil War, like the bifurcation actually started around the time the country was formed because Thomas Jefferson wanted to actually complain about slavery in the Declaration of Independence, but they were concerned that South Carolina and Georgia would not join the effort if they included that grievance.

00:22:47.000 And so there was a general bit of, let's call it acrimony, but it started to bubble up in the 1820s when there was a perception in the 1820s that a civil war could actually happen in the United States, though it didn't.

00:22:57.000 And then it did happen in 1861.

00:23:01.000 Since then, you've had this clash between two polarized worldviews in this country.

00:23:07.000 My point ultimately is if you have a group of people that believe the exact same thing, the things they argue about are the minutia.

00:23:16.000 You know, in the 90s.

00:23:17.000 People kill over the minutia, though, right?

00:23:19.000 Sure.

00:23:20.000 And it can spin wild out of control.

00:23:23.000 But in the 90s, Democrats and Republicans lived together, got married, and their arguments were over how much in taxes versus how long a woman should be allowed to have an abortion.

00:23:35.000 And it was like the Republicans were like, I think 16 weeks is too long.

00:23:38.000 And Democrats are like, it's got to be 18 weeks.

00:23:40.000 That was just the political window.

00:23:41.000 That was the political overtime window, though.

00:23:43.000 I guess what I'm saying is that when you look at the moral worldview of Democrats and Republicans, the majority of the country, in like 1994, they overwhelmingly overlapped.

00:23:53.000 And so they were pretty okay with like, I mean, like, certainly we had protests for the Iraq and Afghanistan war, but still people generally were like, well, you know, 9-11, right?

00:24:05.000 They rallied around George W. Bush even after 2000.

00:24:08.000 Ultimately, my point is this, just to simplify.

00:24:12.000 No one would care about a military dictatorship that was enforcing exactly what their worldview was.

00:24:18.000 Only the dissenters would. 0.99

00:24:20.000 But fools only don't care about that. 1.00

00:24:23.000 Everyone is a fool. 1.00

00:24:24.000 No, I don't think everyone's a fool. 0.98

00:24:26.000 I think like the one of the things that I love about like America and like the American tradition, like Greek philosophy is that we're built on a tradition of people thinking beyond just their own skin and preferences.

00:24:36.000 This is why you're probably familiar with Rawls and like the veil of ignorance, right?

00:24:40.000 So it's great.

00:24:41.000 It's this great kind of political philosophy where it says, you should imagine a world where you can't know what body, gender, et cetera, you'll be born into.

00:24:50.000 This literally society views.

00:24:51.000 This literally sounds like an argument against universal enfranchisement because the average person doesn't conceive of the world like that.

00:25:00.000 And as much as you're like, this is what it ought to be, and I agree, this is not the reality of the world that we live in.

00:25:07.000 So I agree that it's not the reality of the world we live in to some degree, but I think that like to a large degree.

00:25:13.000 Well, sure.

00:25:13.000 And I think that that's a sad thing.

00:25:15.000 I think the fact that we've like lost the connection to the things that matter beyond just our own skin, that we've failed to understand that principles matter fundamentally and deeply and to hold to these principles, to understand why we said everyone has to be equal before the law, even if I hate that guy and why that matters is a failing of our society.

00:25:36.000 And it doesn't matter what side of ourselves is.

00:25:39.000 Don't we have to deal with the world as it is?

00:25:40.000 We have to meet the population and meet the world where it is.

00:25:43.000 We can't be like, well, you know, it should be this and it should be that.

00:25:47.000 There's this saying in psychology where we say, if you meet people, if your expectations for people are exactly where they are, all they'll do is be exactly what they are.

00:25:54.000 Whereas if you look at people and you say, I know you can do better.

00:25:57.000 I know that we can collect and do and unify.

00:26:00.000 They might not get up here, but they're probably going to get here.

00:26:03.000 Let me ask you a question.

00:26:04.000 Let me ask you a question, right?

00:26:05.000 Like murder is wrong, obviously.

00:26:08.000 Generally, except for like self-defense, but that's not murder.

00:26:11.000 Self-defense isn't murder.

00:26:12.000 Murder is the intentional killing another person without warrant.

00:26:15.000 Okay.

00:26:16.000 And so if you walked up to a person and just shot them and they died, we'd find that to be murder. 0.82

00:26:21.000 And Rudyard, this is for you too.

00:26:24.000 Let's say that you live in a small village in the countryside and the year is 1300 or whatever.

00:26:30.000 And you're French.

00:26:32.000 So you're all like, you know, white, brown-haired, blue-eyed people or whatever.

00:26:36.000 Whatever they looked like in France.

00:26:37.000 And they're sitting there going, ha ha ha, and inventing croissants.

00:26:40.000 And then you get people who are clearly distinct from you, and they show up and you say, well, we don't just kill people.

00:26:46.000 We're a little apprehensive.

00:26:47.000 And then you meet and you talk and the guy pulls a knife and just stabs your village elder to death and then throws fire on your village and then flees.

00:26:53.000 Sounds like the Romans. 0.82

00:26:54.000 So then the next day, a similar person shows up.

00:26:58.000 Do you just say, no, we must stand by our principles.

00:27:01.000 We do not attack.

00:27:02.000 We do not, you know.

00:27:05.000 Or when a similar person shows up in the same garb, with the same physical appearance, carrying a torch, do you say, one more move and you die? 0.97

00:27:13.000 I would say that both of these philosophies were silly to begin with.

00:27:15.000 I don't think that the philosophy of generosity means naivete.

00:27:20.000 I didn't ask you, I asked you a specific scenario and tell me what you thought.

00:27:23.000 I'm telling you why the scenario already is flawed.

00:27:25.000 I think that the principle that they had initially probably was uninformed and uncomplex, and it does have to be.

00:27:30.000 They don't greet outsiders.

00:27:31.000 But it doesn't have to be updated to an extreme opposite side, which is often what people do.

00:27:35.000 They go from one side and then they swap to the other side.

00:27:38.000 The reality is that the truth is a lot more times in the middle of what is a of a proper dialectic of what's happening.

00:27:44.000 So let's just back to the question.

00:27:46.000 Your proposition then is the village should not allow anyone to peacefully greet them out of fear that there could be an act of violence against them.

00:27:54.000 No, of course not.

00:27:55.000 How would you take that away from what I just said?

00:27:58.000 You said the initial response they had was probably flawed.

00:28:00.000 Right, but I said, don't just do the opposite also, which is...

00:28:04.000 Because it might be a defector that wants to help you.

00:28:06.000 If a guy throws a torch at your village and burns on your house and kills one of your people and then flees, and then a person who looks just like him, wearing the same clothes, the same flag, whatever, shows up the next day, do you treat him the same or do you adapt your...

00:28:17.000 You should adapt, but...

00:28:18.000 But my caution to people is that when they think adapt, they want to go to the opposite extreme end.

00:28:24.000 When in reality, oftentimes wisdom falls between the middle of two dialogues.

00:28:29.000 So just what do you do?

00:28:29.000 True, true, true.

00:28:32.000 I would probably be cautious, probably have arms and weapons ready in case he whips out his torch to start stabbing and murdering and burning things, right?

00:28:40.000 But inquire him, ask why he's there, see what his intention is in the village, right?

00:28:44.000 You could even treat him cautiously, say he gives you all of the perfect answers that makes you go like, oh, he's actually a defector from that village and he's not in the future.

00:28:50.000 What if he throws a torch at your village and burns another building down and runs?

00:28:53.000 Well, hopefully you've got the guy's ready and he's far enough away that we're like, can you agree on me?

00:28:57.000 He does.

00:28:57.000 And then the next day, a similar looking guy in the same clothes shows up with a torch.

00:29:01.000 Do you shoot him with an arrow? 0.84

00:29:03.000 No. 0.98

00:29:03.000 You let him throw the torch again. 0.98

00:29:05.000 No, you do neither, right?

00:29:06.000 You do neither.

00:29:07.000 Well, yeah, like I said, black and white on this.

00:29:10.000 Like, the reality is that like wisdom.

00:29:11.000 Just giving you a simple scenario, like a scenario that has happened over and over again.

00:29:15.000 I agree.

00:29:16.000 And I'm saying the scenario of human nature is to go to black and white thinking immediately.

00:29:20.000 And what I'm saying to people is that black and white thinking is just as destructive. 1.00

00:29:23.000 What if that next guy showing up with the torch is just about to show up and like bring blacksmiths and like ironworks to your village and like revolutionize your technology?

00:29:33.000 I'm going to answer both of you.

00:29:34.000 I said that I liked freedom and property rights and I didn't say how that's enforced.

00:29:40.000 So in many cases, monarchies or authoritarian regimes provide more freedom and property rights than democracies.

00:29:49.000 And democracies supercharge the character of whatever people they're in.

00:29:53.000 So of the top 1% of societies, they are predominantly democracies.

00:29:58.000 Among the top 1%, they're predominantly democracies.

00:30:02.000 That includes Athens, Rome, Rome, America, the Netherlands.

00:30:08.000 And democracies can also supercharge negative characteristics.

00:30:13.000 They're not good because they're democracies.

00:30:15.000 They're good because they were good.

00:30:16.000 They were not.

00:30:17.000 Examples of democracies supercharging negative characteristics are the Latin sphere and the Middle East.

00:30:23.000 France was better under a monarchy than it was under a democracy.

00:30:26.000 So was Brazil. 0.83

00:30:28.000 So was Greece. 0.91

00:30:30.000 A bunch of lower trust societies.

00:30:32.000 Same thing in the Middle East, democracies have performed better.

00:30:36.000 In the Middle East, democracies vote in the preferences of the majority group.

00:30:42.000 So when America made Iraq a democracy, the majority Shia voted in to oppress the minority Sunni, and then they sided with America's rival Iran. 0.94

00:30:52.000 Yeah, but this it's not just sure, but the issue is like, this is why when we look at democracies, there are different systems that work better, right?

00:30:58.000 Like there are certain, like I'm sure you probably oppose like direct Iraq democracy, right? 0.94

00:31:02.000 Like the Greeks did, because it doesn't work very well. 1.00

00:31:05.000 It leads to a lot of tyranny, right?

00:31:06.000 There's the tyranny of majority to be feared in democracy.

00:31:08.000 It's also slower.

00:31:09.000 I'm going to write it down.

00:31:10.000 But democracies, the point of all these systems is to build counters to the major failings, right?

00:31:10.000 It is slower.

00:31:17.000 In the case of a democracy, you have to be afraid of the majority, the tyranny of majority.

00:31:22.000 And so you have to build into the system checks and balances to prevent against the tyranny of majority as much as possible.

00:31:27.000 You're appealing to wishy-washy concepts where if there's an external threat, you have to assess it for what it is based on context.

00:31:35.000 And you pick the highest quality person to do the assessing of context.

00:31:39.000 And the thing with John Rawls is it's not an accurate depiction of the human condition to randomly pick what individual you would be because that's not how this works.

00:31:49.000 Individuals have their own genetics, and groups have different genetics, and people are rewarded for the choices they make.

00:31:56.000 That's not a refutation of Rawls.

00:31:58.000 Rawls' hypothetical can engage without those.

00:32:01.000 Sure, but you're saying that Rawls doesn't work because there's no baked in genetics, but that's not the point of the hypothesis.

00:32:06.000 You have to let me finish the argument.

00:32:08.000 So Rawls operates under an underlying Christian assumption that there's indeterminate souls that you shove into a population.

00:32:15.000 That's not what happens.

00:32:16.000 A population is made up of individuals with different traits that make choices.

00:32:21.000 And so you can't say, if I were to randomly pick a certain population, what would I be?

00:32:26.000 Because there's nothing random.

00:32:28.000 An individual is the aggregation of all of the choices that went through them.

00:32:33.000 And so you can't say, I would, if I were to be born in a blank society, because the society is informed by the contextual decisions of everyone involved up to that point.

00:32:43.000 It strips context from the entire human condition.

00:32:46.000 So this is like saying trolley problems strip context because they live in gay. 1.00

00:32:50.000 But let's say instead of saying Rawls, just make the argument of, just articulate the argument.

00:32:56.000 Yeah.

00:32:56.000 Sure.

00:32:57.000 The veil of ignorance is this thought experiment in the way that trolley problems are thought experiments, which is designed to help you decide which principles you want in your society.

00:33:05.000 So if you imagine a society where you can't know who you will be in that society, what are some of the principles you hope are there?

00:33:12.000 Rule of law, right, and like fair treatment before justice would be one that we would all be for because I don't ever want to be in the minority group that just gets treated poorly by the justice system because I happen to be in that minority group.

00:33:23.000 So how would you define society?

00:33:26.000 The way that we, I don't know, the way that we usually do it, a collection of people with somewhat unified cultural values, probably bordered by a nation state that unifies together.

00:33:33.000 That's a great definition.

00:33:34.000 I would argue that by that definition, which I agree with, there are several distinct societies that exist within the United States.

00:33:42.000 And each and every one of these societies is willing to use violence and lawfare against those who would threaten their moral worldview.

00:33:49.000 What does this have to do with the veil of ignorance?

00:33:51.000 So you're saying in a society, like, who would you want to be?

00:33:54.000 What rules do you want?

00:33:55.000 And I would say, yes, that works wonderfully in a collection of individuals with a shared moral worldview and probably a national border.

00:34:01.000 But what happens when that society is up against another society overlapping on its territories with a completely different worldview?

00:34:07.000 Well, this is part of how you can engage in the veil of ignorance is going, well, I don't know who I am in this society, but how do I want that society theoretically to engage in foreign policy?

00:34:14.000 Well, one of them I would say is, I want my government to protect me as a citizen of whatever this nation state is, because I don't want other nation-states coming in, stomping me and killing me in the future.

00:34:22.000 This is more so like an example that I'll use that's probably the least egregious would be open-air fish markets in New York City.

00:34:28.000 I think they're absolutely disgusting, and they shouldn't be allowed.

00:34:31.000 Because they smell? 0.77

00:34:32.000 It's not just that, it's the rotting fish and flesh that slops off.

00:34:36.000 It's a state street.

00:34:36.000 And it just, yeah, it's all over the street.

00:34:39.000 And then it's just rotting for days.

00:34:40.000 And when you go to Lowry Side, it's just everywhere you go.

00:34:42.000 Go to Houston.

00:34:44.000 The people who live there, that's their society.

00:34:44.000 Right.

00:34:46.000 They are largely Chinese and Southeast Asian.

00:34:49.000 They don't care about open-air fish markets.

00:34:51.000 But the people of New York have started to move away because they don't like it.

00:34:55.000 And this has created an entrenched enclave.

00:34:57.000 Enclaves are bad, I believe, like having a group of people that form their own subdivision that have their own rules is going to create animosity and violence because you'll create two distinct moral worldviews at odds with each other.

00:35:11.000 Now, the reason I cite this example is because it's one of the least egregious, meaning the people of New York don't really care all that much about the open-air fish markets.

00:35:18.000 They just move away.

00:35:19.000 They stopped living in the area, more Chinese people moved in, and now the area is dominated by Chinese.

00:35:24.000 But you could take a look at this and bring it to its most egregious, and that is like Chicago crime and shooting violence.

00:35:30.000 Sure. 0.69

00:35:31.000 So you have areas where there may be a middle-class black family and gangbangers will come into that territory or just young black men who are violent for whatever reason they may be, and they will create crime. 1.00

00:35:44.000 This will cause the higher income people to flee and then just dramatically impoverish the area and create more crime and violence throughout the area.

00:35:51.000 So then the argument we would make is, what rules do we want?

00:35:55.000 Well, our principles would suggest that you are innocent until proven guilty and you should not be searched or have objects seized without something that warrants it.

00:36:04.000 Probable reasons.

00:36:05.000 And probable cause.

00:36:06.000 And so what happened in New York is they said, this neighborhood is where most of the shootings and violence happens.

00:36:12.000 So this is where we're going to stop and frisk people. 1.00

00:36:14.000 It also coincided with being a black neighborhood. 0.55

00:36:17.000 The progressives then said, why are the majority of stop and frisks black? 0.97

00:36:21.000 And the government, which these are Democrat-appointed police, said, that's just where the crime is.

00:36:26.000 Then they said, no more stop and frisk. 0.97

00:36:28.000 You need to stop because you're doing it to black people. 1.00

00:36:30.000 So you have two distinct moral worldviews. 0.97

00:36:33.000 You can't do this only to black people, but it's just the neighbor where the crime happens. 1.00

00:36:38.000 Your principles are meaningless in this regard because both groups are going to assert power over the other to make their world happen.

00:36:44.000 Well, this is where democracy can be beautiful or bad, right?

00:36:47.000 And so the thing you're posing, right, say you say, I don't want to have enclaves in a society.

00:36:51.000 And my counter to that would basically say, I think with the size of nation states, it's almost unavoidable.

00:36:58.000 Even just think about the way that geography shapes a culture, right?

00:37:02.000 If you've got a nation that's mountainous and full of pine trees, and it's also in a nation with beaches and fishing, and it's also in a nation with, you know, insert different geographies, right?

00:37:13.000 The people in the culture that are going to emerge from these, even just geographies alone, are probably going to have some of the different values.

00:37:18.000 They're going to have things where they want to prioritize fishing industry more, but it's possible that the lumber industry is like having issues and they want more advocacy.

00:37:25.000 And so they'll always have these competing interests.

00:37:27.000 And I think the beauty of a democracy that's functioning well is that it takes to things where actually there might be reasonable concern, right?

00:37:36.000 Let me ask you a question.

00:37:37.000 Can I finish my thought and then I'll let you ask a question?

00:37:39.000 This is a long, long time.

00:37:40.000 Hey, you went for five minutes.

00:37:41.000 I'll just go for two minutes, okay?

00:37:43.000 You've been doing this to be reflective.

00:37:45.000 If you can proceed, I'll make the point.

00:37:46.000 Okay.

00:37:47.000 The beauty of a dialectic of a democracy is you can take two opposing values.

00:37:50.000 And what the idea is, is to find a compromise within both where ideally you find the best way to get the right thing.

00:37:55.000 So here's why I'm interrupting.

00:37:57.000 Yeah.

00:37:58.000 I feel like that is rudimentary and we understand that completely.

00:38:01.000 It's not the point that I'm making.

00:38:02.000 So I'll give you a better example.

00:38:04.000 Dearborn, Michigan has several instances of female genital mutilation among young girls. 0.98

00:38:08.000 That is explicitly illegal in the United States.

00:38:10.000 But in that community, it happens because there's no law enforcement that will stop it.

00:38:13.000 You are not going to get a white cop to go into a Muslim community and say, stop doing this, because they'll say it's our community.

00:38:19.000 In fact, they even have their own de facto versions of police.

00:38:21.000 And they likely won't report it either.

00:38:22.000 That's probably pretty interesting.

00:38:24.000 So what is the solution then?

00:38:25.000 Should the overarching government dispatch some white people who are non-Muslims to take over their government, to force them at gunpoint to stop? 1.00

00:38:34.000 Yeah, I mean, this is the great federalist question as to what extent should...

00:38:37.000 Now, that's a violation of the principles of the locals who voted that in.

00:38:40.000 It's true, but it might be for superseding cultural values that we value more.

00:38:44.000 This is the constant tension that happens with the federalism, like, you know, amendment number 10.

00:38:48.000 Go ahead, sorry.

00:38:49.000 I'm going to say a few things.

00:38:50.000 First of all is, thank you.

00:38:54.000 You're not stating Rawls' full argument, where if you, for the argument that Rawls gave, you could also apply that to Aristotle, because Aristotle was saying, what is the abstract concept of good that we can use?

00:39:05.000 And Aristotle said there's three different political systems which are useful under different contexts that have their own issues.

00:39:12.000 Rawls is also operating under the principle of equality, which is demonstratively false.

00:39:17.000 Equality has been continually disproven by the science, as well as there are genetic differences between populations.

00:39:24.000 That's disproven among all of the academic community.

00:39:28.000 And so when you're looking at the Rawls, he's automatically jumping to socialism is good because equality is good.

00:39:35.000 And this is all operating under the assumption that Enlightenment morality is correct.

00:39:40.000 Rawls is incredibly critical of socialism.

00:39:42.000 He rejected a Galatianism.

00:39:44.000 So it depends on your definition of socialism, because the socialists play a game where there's multiple definitions of socialism used at any given time.

00:39:52.000 So you can pick one or the other based on context.

00:39:54.000 Rawls was responding to the Marxists.

00:39:56.000 Rawls is a democratic socialist, which is still a meaning of the word socialist.

00:40:00.000 I want to move on to the next big story, but I do want to just conclude by saying I completely agree with Kyla.

00:40:05.000 I think we should exert force over Muslims who refuse to adhere to our traditional values. 1.00

00:40:09.000 I don't think that's all. 0.72

00:40:09.000 That's not my position. 0.72

00:40:10.000 But I would love to flesh it out with you.

00:40:11.000 But sort of my position.

00:40:12.000 It's like 50% of my position.

00:40:14.000 Well, I think that, again, we're going to go on to that.

00:40:17.000 I want to clarify their argument before we move on.

00:40:19.000 The point is, when there are people who enter our society who have a religious practice that is an affront to our moral worldview, we will exert force against them to make them stop.

00:40:30.000 Yes, to an extent.

00:40:32.000 Well, of course to an extent.

00:40:33.000 Not to an extent.

00:40:34.000 No, but not to an extent.

00:40:36.000 Like, we will use force up to whatever means or whatever amount of force necessary to get them to stop.

00:40:41.000 So it's not to an extent.

00:40:42.000 It's literally a statement.

00:40:43.000 No, no, no, no.

00:40:44.000 She's saying we'll tolerate some of their religious movements.

00:40:46.000 Like I want religious freedom as well, right?

00:40:48.000 And so this is like the constant.

00:40:49.000 This is why I'm saying there's this tension all the time between like individual rights of freedom of religion, but also state values of things like we don't need any children.

00:40:57.000 Sorry to interrupt, but we really do have to learn.

00:40:59.000 I got to stress and continue.

00:41:01.000 I got to stress one more thing.

00:41:03.000 This argument still only works so long as you maintain the monopoly on violence.

00:41:08.000 Like the state.

00:41:09.000 Yeah.

00:41:10.000 You, you are, not the state.

00:41:13.000 If you as a society with a moral worldview have the monopoly on violence, you can stop, say, female general mutilation. 0.75

00:41:20.000 But if there is a new cultural worldview that has emerged, a new moral worldview, let's call it leftist, that tolerates and supports what Muslims are doing, they will take from you your monopoly on violence, and then you get a civil war. 0.82

00:41:33.000 So a lot of leftists get into this weird tension with Islam because they're very pro-final. 0.86

00:41:38.000 I don't want to have an argument about leftism in Islam.

00:41:39.000 My point was if there is if you have a monopoly on violence, you can assert your authority.

00:41:44.000 If there are two distinct factions with equal use of force, you get civil war.

00:41:48.000 I agree with that.

00:41:49.000 The issue is, I guess I'm just correcting the leftist idea that they just want FGM.

00:41:53.000 They don't just want FGM.

00:41:54.000 In fact, they acknowledge this tension you're outlining exists regardless of the party side that you're pointing to.

00:42:00.000 My ultimate point as we move on, again, sorry, is that your principles only apply to the people who agree with you.

00:42:08.000 And that is universal to all moral groups.

00:42:11.000 End of story.

00:42:13.000 Sure.

00:42:14.000 Yeah, I live in a society.

00:42:16.000 True.

00:42:17.000 Yes, like you might believe in the right to keep in bear arms, but you're not going to give an Islamic terrorist a gun and be like, you have a right to bear arms.

00:42:22.000 Sure, it's why I like the liberal principles where we said, well, we should have a couple of basic rules that we all apply to because other things we shouldn't impose on the right.

00:42:28.000 So when you have two distinct moral worldviews operating in one country, and I would say more than that, you are not going to abide them the same rights as you would someone of your society.

00:42:37.000 Sure, because I would say free speech is better than compelled or controlled speech.

00:42:40.000 Yeah.

00:42:40.000 Like I would say, if someone is an advocate for the destruction of my country, I will not defend their right to speak.

00:42:47.000 I will not defend their right to keep and bear arms either.

00:42:49.000 If a man comes this country screaming Aluhu Akbar and starts throwing bricks at cops, I'm not going to say he has a right to keep in bear arms.

00:42:55.000 I'm going to say no.

00:42:56.000 Nobody thinks that he has a right for assault, right?

00:42:57.000 That's already borrowed out.

00:42:59.000 The point I'm taking is if someone expresses clear ideological sympathies for ISIS, we will not give them a gun.

00:43:07.000 possibly with isis i think that's the case in america but i think that there's like good good statutory reason if you're like a terrorist sympathizer or whatever but like in general like right my point is but we don't want to say people who we just disagree with can't have rights you are Domestic terrorism doesn't exist in the United States because of the First Amendment.

00:43:21.000 So that's why Trump, his declaration, was actually just a statement he made and not anything extra informal.

00:43:27.000 He would have to do an international declaration.

00:43:29.000 This means, and I'll say it again: if someone is antifa and says this country should burn, I will not defend their right to keep and bear arms.

00:43:37.000 These are people who have expressed a violent intent, and we have seen in the past them use a violent intent.

00:43:42.000 And that's a more egregious example.

00:43:44.000 Let's jump to the next story.

00:43:45.000 Otherwise, we'll keep talking.

00:43:46.000 This is from the Washington Post.

00:43:47.000 The Pentagon seeks more than $200 billion in budget requests for Iran war.

00:43:53.000 Some what as officials do not think the Defense Department's request is a realistic shot of being approved in Congress, one senior administration official says.

00:44:00.000 Additionally, we've got more updates as more Marines are being deployed to the Middle East.

00:44:06.000 And of course, Donald Trump has said Israel was angry and bombed the South Pars gas field in Iran.

00:44:13.000 Gas, oil, crude oil, is now up to $119 per barrel, and gas is expected to go up.

00:44:20.000 I've seen reports, correct me if I'm wrong because I haven't read too much into this, that China is now cutting off fertilizer exports.

00:44:26.000 China.

00:44:27.000 China.

00:44:28.000 And guys, I know the Republicans are going to say, stick with the plan, but as of right now, I don't want to be pessimistic. 0.98

00:44:36.000 Let's just say, holy crap, this is bad. 0.74

00:44:38.000 How about what plan? 0.89

00:44:39.000 I've heard Phil loves China, actually, so I'd love to.

00:44:42.000 Phil's avid communist communicator about China.

00:44:46.000 China is an adversary. 0.98

00:44:48.000 I will say that $200 billion, the request for $200 billion, if I understand correctly, is to replace the stocks that they've already used.

00:44:55.000 So it's not technically to continue funding the war.

00:44:59.000 Not that it's not a slush fund anyways, essentially at the Pentagon, but it is to replace the stuff they've already used because you don't want to have your stockpiles of weapons.

00:45:08.000 Agreed, agreed.

00:45:09.000 The point is, the point is we spend several hundred billion on Israel for the past 50, 60 years.

00:45:17.000 We spent $250 billion on Ukraine in the past four years, and now they want another $200 billion.

00:45:22.000 I understand we spent, like, what's the budget per year, like $7 trillion?

00:45:27.000 I don't know.

00:45:28.000 I have no idea.

00:45:29.000 It's some psychotic number like this.

00:45:30.000 My point is, we are looking at, they're discussing removing sanctions on Iranian oil at sea because they, is it $7 trillion?

00:45:40.000 It's $8.38 billion.

00:45:41.000 So this would up it to $1 trillion.

00:45:43.000 $1 trillion, you mean?

00:45:44.000 Billion.

00:45:46.000 $838.7 billion.

00:45:49.000 Really?

00:45:50.000 Yeah.

00:45:50.000 The second budget request.

00:45:52.000 So this ups it to $1 trillion if they get it.

00:45:54.000 It aims to cover sustained military operations, replenish depleted munitions, and accelerate weapons production in mid-intense strikes over the past three weeks.

00:46:02.000 Look, look, look, I get it.

00:46:03.000 I don't like the Ayatollah.

00:46:05.000 I don't like his son.

00:46:06.000 I don't like their government.

00:46:07.000 I don't like them constantly being a thorn in the side of all the countries in the region that are trying to just sell oil.

00:46:12.000 I am not a Greta Thunberg.

00:46:14.000 Bring the oil on, baby, drill, baby, drill. 1.00

00:46:15.000 Let's have some capitalism.

00:46:17.000 Greta Thunberg doesn't even care anymore. 1.00

00:46:19.000 She's demanding oil get sent to Cuba. 0.99

00:46:22.000 She didn't care about climate change.

00:46:23.000 She's just a bad thing. 1.00

00:46:24.000 My point is, the Iranian government sucks miserably. 0.97

00:46:27.000 But as we already discussed, Eric Prince, he was quoted as saying, the problem with Iran is to roll the dice. 0.98

00:46:33.000 You don't know if you can succeed.

00:46:34.000 This is not, I'll quote Charlie Kirk in June, I think it was June 17th.

00:46:39.000 He said, this is a developed nation of 90 plus million people that you cannot just easily go in and topple.

00:46:45.000 You cannot just ideologically change like some smaller countries.

00:46:48.000 This is a serious war.

00:46:50.000 Now, again, I think it's fair to point out, after Trump launched those strikes on the bunkers, a day after Charlie Kirk did say, I stand with my president and I want him to win, and I can respect that.

00:47:01.000 I feel the same way.

00:47:02.000 I want to win.

00:47:04.000 I do think it's ill-advised, but I think we have to just be realistic, and I'm saying optimistic, but let's at least recognize a $200 billion budget request, oil at $120.

00:47:18.000 This is not good news.

00:47:20.000 This is not good news for anybody.

00:47:22.000 I would implore the Republicans to pay attention to this because if you ignore it or poo-poo it, you're going to lose the midterms worse than you may already do.

00:47:27.000 Dude, I'm at a real crossroads in my own soul about this because we're all in. 0.99

00:47:34.000 We put our, as Alex Jones said, we put our dick in the light socket. 0.99

00:47:37.000 So here we are electrocuting. 1.00

00:47:39.000 And we're all the way in, baby.

00:47:41.000 There's no going back.

00:47:42.000 I mean, obviously we could leave, but then they'll attack us for 20 years.

00:47:42.000 I don't know.

00:47:45.000 Like, what do we do? 0.99

00:47:46.000 Do we level this country to the ground, kill 100 million people? 1.00

00:47:46.000 Destroy? 1.00

00:47:49.000 However many millions of people got to go.

00:47:51.000 There's nothing.

00:47:52.000 Set up a new government?

00:47:53.000 Or do we, or do we, do we yell to stop the war?

00:47:57.000 Because I feel like I'm on board with this motion of American hegemony, free speech, property rights all over the planet.

00:48:03.000 If we stop this thing, I think the whole system will crumble.

00:48:09.000 But I don't want to kill a million Iranians. 1.00

00:48:12.000 I do want the country to be called Persia, though, so it's less confusing about Iran-Iraq.

00:48:16.000 So it's been Iran for a long, long time. 0.88

00:48:19.000 I know that it was Persia.

00:48:20.000 It's the Persian, it was Persian Persian Empire and stuff, but it's actually been called Iran for a long, long time.

00:48:29.000 The term Aryan comes from the word Iran because they were like with the Caucasus, I guess the region is similar.

00:48:36.000 But I don't have so much of a problem with the request for the money because of the fact that it is to restock the depleted munitions, right?

00:48:47.000 So you can have your problems with the war.

00:48:50.000 You can have your concerns.

00:48:52.000 You can address all of the real, actual, tangible problems that this is causing.

00:48:59.000 But to say that the returning to whatever baseline level our munitions are or should be, I think that that's something that we should do because the idea of allowing the United States to not have the overwhelming military power that we do have, allowing that to be degraded, is far more of a problem for the U.S. than to say, oh, we're not going to spend $200 billion.

00:49:23.000 How do you guys feel about Trump in general, like promising peace, promising no wars, promising to end wars, and dragging you guys into Iran?

00:49:31.000 Does that bother you?

00:49:32.000 Were you for Trump's promise of peace?

00:49:35.000 Like, how do you scratch it?

00:49:37.000 I view Trump on foreign policy as generally better than every other president in my lifetime.

00:49:43.000 And despite him being so hawkish?

00:49:46.000 He's been hawkish on Iran the whole time.

00:49:47.000 Well, he's hawkish everywhere, right?

00:49:51.000 He pretends deterrence is like dovish policy, right?

00:49:53.000 Like he'll let it go.

00:49:54.000 Yeah, I actually respect the hawkishness.

00:49:57.000 It's a question of are you going to actually go in?

00:49:59.000 I think my view of getting involved in Iran was skepticism, but hope.

00:50:04.000 Venezuela was the same thing, and I think Venezuela played out very well.

00:50:08.000 Wow, for who?

00:50:10.000 For us.

00:50:10.000 Not for the Venezuelans.

00:50:12.000 Actually, Venezuela seized our oil assets.

00:50:15.000 We had a treaty with them, okay?

00:50:17.000 We shook hands with Venezuela and said, we're going to build oil.

00:50:19.000 And they said, you got it, brother.

00:50:20.000 And we were all sharing in money, and they were the wealthiest country in South America.

00:50:23.000 Then they elected a Democratic socialist who came in and stole our oil assets.

00:50:27.000 And our country did nothing about that.

00:50:29.000 So I, again, say the Venezuela operation, skepticism.

00:50:32.000 But then when Trump goes in, takes out Maduro and just brings him to New York, which will be weird if he's found not guilty.

00:50:37.000 I don't know how that'll play out.

00:50:38.000 But then we get our oil assets back.

00:50:40.000 I'm like, well, that's what I call justice.

00:50:43.000 Now, as for Iran, this is a bigger question over the Strait of Four Moves.

00:50:47.000 Didn't they steal their own national, didn't they nationalize Venezuelan companies? 0.69

00:50:51.000 These were American multi-billion dollar investments to build oil infrastructure in Venezuela.

00:50:56.000 And we had treaties with them to do it.

00:50:58.000 And there's an estimated billion dollars and that it's stolen.

00:51:01.000 Sure, but how do you do that?

00:51:02.000 You do not get too hold on.

00:51:03.000 This is property.

00:51:04.000 This is private American dollars, right?

00:51:06.000 Does the American government owe private companies military protection if a government that they went into trade with buys out the company that they wanted to do?

00:51:16.000 Especially when they're giving the oil to our enemies.

00:51:18.000 If Walmart has to do it.

00:51:18.000 I don't care if it's true or not.

00:51:20.000 It's an opinion on the country.

00:51:21.000 No, no, no.

00:51:21.000 About the principle here, like let's take it out of Venezuela.

00:51:23.000 If say Walmart has a close relationship with China, there's a Chinese private company that they're working with, and as a result of the Communist Party, China goes, We're actually taking all these assets and they take like $10 billion worth of Walmart principles.

00:51:37.000 Should America go in there and take private company assets?

00:51:40.000 We should spend taxpayer dollars to take private company assets.

00:51:43.000 Yes, I also think that so.

00:51:45.000 So, first and foremost, the question about China would actually be a question of can we be militarily successful in doing so?

00:51:52.000 In terms of what Venezuela stole, we had a treaty with them, which was at the governmental level, which we do have a treaty with China on trade.

00:52:00.000 So, if they're violent and it's not just private assets that are being violated, Venezuela stole $10 billion plus dollars in assets.

00:52:06.000 We did nothing about it.

00:52:08.000 All we did this time was discombobulate, take their leader out, and take back our oil industry from them, which we agreed to build with them. 0.78

00:52:17.000 They broke the rules, they stabbed us in the back.

00:52:19.000 Question: I got is when the Chinese buy a bunch of farmland in the United States and then the Americans are like, actually, this is our land and they seize it from these private Chinese companies that did everything legally, are we in the right?

00:52:31.000 And I would say yes, because it's American sovereign.

00:52:34.000 So, are Venezuelans in the right taking their sovereign territory back?

00:52:37.000 It's different because it's Venezuela.

00:52:38.000 That's the problem: you justify, I mean, it's a justification of Monkeytail.

00:52:41.000 You got to do the strongest, hardest, brutalist winning tactic to surveillance.

00:52:47.000 The first thing I would say is you are absolutely correct, and that I will always be biased for my society and my way of life, and what I think is right.

00:52:54.000 And I think that if I enter an agreement with another country to build oil assets and they share in those profits, and then they take them from me, that is a violation of our moral agreement.

00:53:03.000 Then, if you start privately buying up under my nose through our legal system, farmland near our military bases for which you can surveil them, I'm going to tell you to knock it the F off.

00:53:12.000 Yeah, I'm going to take that land back.

00:53:16.000 The product that they're actually talking about matters too, right?

00:53:20.000 Like, oil is definitely a geopolitical tool, right?

00:53:25.000 Like, it's literally civilization juice.

00:53:28.000 So, we're going to take a look at the Chinese health justification.

00:53:32.000 We've already addressed it.

00:53:35.000 The farmland they're buying is near our military bases for which they're surveilling our military.

00:53:39.000 Yeah, I agree, but they're going to be different.

00:53:40.000 Let's say that's not what they're doing.

00:53:41.000 Well, let's say in the hypotheticals, hold on.

00:53:44.000 In the hypothetical, it's more analogous to this situation where that's not, because I'm assuming you're not saying that America was actually making it military assets secretly.

00:53:52.000 And I think it was actually private companies, oil drillings.

00:53:54.000 Let's say it's private Chinese companies, as private as they can be, that own and buy farmland and are growing soybeans in Canadian, in Canadian and American land.

00:54:03.000 Venezuela is one of the least defensible regimes you can pick because the Venezuelan government alienated even their own people, where Maduro needed to use Cuban mercenaries in order to establish his power, where Maduro was a democratically elected politician who installed himself as dictator.

00:54:19.000 He was profoundly unpopular, so he used Cuban mercenaries to install himself in power.

00:54:24.000 So, nobody's defending Venezuela here.

00:54:27.000 Nobody likes Venezuela.

00:54:28.000 I didn't defend Venezuela.

00:54:29.000 I'm going to say it for the third time.

00:54:31.000 If I have an agreement to produce oil in your country and we share in the profits and you have a problem with that, negotiate the treaty, sever it or otherwise.

00:54:40.000 Which they did not pay out of the money.

00:54:42.000 Let me finish.

00:54:43.000 Let me finish.

00:54:44.000 Don't steal it.

00:54:45.000 If you are buying land in our country that is a threat to our national security, you're a threat to our national security as per our assessment.

00:54:52.000 There is a moral distinction between these two things.

00:54:52.000 So the issue.

00:54:55.000 I will still add on top of that.

00:54:58.000 We are the United States, and we are always going to operate at our behest and not for the benefit of anybody else.

00:55:04.000 So if that means we in good faith negotiate a contract with Venezuela to build oil and they steal it, we take it back. 0.71

00:55:10.000 And that means if China buys land in our country and we deem it so, we will seize it from them. 1.00

00:55:16.000 We do because we are America working for our interests.

00:55:20.000 But then the principle that you're not mad about isn't that they're stealing from us.

00:55:23.000 It's just that it's America.

00:55:25.000 It's just that's all the principle is.

00:55:26.000 And what I'm saying is, that's probably not good foreign policy.

00:55:29.000 For example, in the Venezuela thing, as quickly as I'm looking, Chevron took a billion-dollar payout because they agreed to dip.

00:55:35.000 And they stayed actually as minority partners with Venezuela for a long time.

00:55:38.000 The issue is that the two other oil barons didn't want to take the deal.

00:55:41.000 And then in that case, it got seized.

00:55:43.000 And then they went through courts to try to get their assets back, which they were not successful back now.

00:55:48.000 And now the taxpayer is paying so that mobile can have their assets back.

00:55:55.000 The American taxpayer.

00:55:55.000 Yes.

00:55:58.000 I'm not sure I'm forced to go.

00:55:59.000 What is the purpose of taxpayers?

00:56:01.000 What is the point of the public coffers if not to defend the public from foreign adversaries?

00:56:06.000 I would say in this case, it would be: okay, what's in the good of the public?

00:56:10.000 Making sure we have oil in the US.

00:56:11.000 Let me ask you a simpler question.

00:56:12.000 Hold on.

00:56:13.000 A guy is on his dinghy fishing off the coast of Florida when pirates show up.

00:56:17.000 Why should the private taxpayer have the Coast Guard go and save him from some other country's pirates?

00:56:21.000 These are literally the foreign arguments.

00:56:25.000 What does that have to do with what I'm talking about?

00:56:26.000 Well, you're comparing a company to an individual on his boat.

00:56:29.000 What does that have to do with the moral?

00:56:31.000 Individual having their lives and safety threatened by pirates is not the same thing as mobile.

00:56:37.000 They want to steal his boat to the Coast Guard stop.

00:56:38.000 It's his individual property, right?

00:56:40.000 In this case, the Coast Guard stopped.

00:56:41.000 It's a company's property.

00:56:42.000 Just call it an Exxon tanker.

00:56:44.000 Yeah, there's an Exxon tanker and a bunch of pirates raid it.

00:56:46.000 Should the Coast Guard stop the pirates?

00:56:47.000 Probably the pirates, yeah.

00:56:48.000 What's the difference?

00:56:49.000 The difference is that we're negotiating.

00:56:51.000 For Venezuelan pirates. 0.98

00:56:52.000 It's a nation state that we have to negotiate with, and we can't just go to war with everyone else.

00:56:56.000 So we let Venezuela seize our tankers.

00:56:58.000 I think we, well, when they happened, we had massive sanctions.

00:57:02.000 I believe large NATO sanctions were put against Venezuela.

00:57:04.000 Nobody, as you've said, nobody likes Venezuela.

00:57:07.000 I don't like Venezuela.

00:57:08.000 Let's go back to the original question about.

00:57:10.000 You're arguing against America's interests, which should be the opposite of the American government.

00:57:14.000 You're not using rational consistency.

00:57:16.000 You're arguing against the interests of American power in each individual context.

00:57:21.000 I'm not actually, because theoretically, if the American government's for American success, the thing at question here isn't mobile.

00:57:29.000 We don't owe mobile anything as a company.

00:57:31.000 We owe Americans.

00:57:32.000 Does mobile pay taxes?

00:57:33.000 No, but they do pay taxes, but we could negotiate a new trade deal with the buy of oil from somebody else.

00:57:40.000 They pay taxes, partly for the local government.

00:57:41.000 Instead of spending money to go blow up Venezuela, we could have negotiated contracts with other oil suppliers to get to the banks of the United States.

00:57:46.000 These companies pay taxes, which includes money for public defense for which they are entitled.

00:57:51.000 To some extent.

00:57:52.000 And I will add on top of this that Venezuela seized our oil assets to distribute oil to our adversaries.

00:57:58.000 Yep, that did happen as well, which is why we engage in sanctions.

00:58:01.000 But the idea is that this is the issue. 0.99

00:58:03.000 In foreign policy, when people fuck you over, you don't just immediately go to mice. 0.99

00:58:07.000 We didn't. 0.99

00:58:08.000 It was 20 years ago.

00:58:09.000 Why?

00:58:10.000 It was 2009.

00:58:12.000 War is expensive, bad for the economy, and a lot of people are not.

00:58:15.000 This was 17 years ago.

00:58:18.000 And they tried the legal method, and none of it worked.

00:58:20.000 And Trump said, okay, get our oil back.

00:58:22.000 17 years later, it's not a short amount of time.

00:58:22.000 Sure.

00:58:24.000 Yeah, and one of the issues is we didn't really get our oil back.

00:58:26.000 Most of the tankers that we seized from them, we've sold off to Saudi Arabia, which only apparently the Trump admin can actually have access to the $500 million.

00:58:33.000 So the American taxpayers didn't even make back the money that we spent to bail out.

00:58:37.000 We also cut off Cuba. 0.99

00:58:38.000 But I want to go back to the original question so we can round this one out and jump to the next stories that we have.

00:58:43.000 And it was a question about how do we feel about Donald Trump.

00:58:47.000 And I will say I'm a big fan of the Abraham Accords. 0.97

00:58:50.000 When Donald Trump crossed the DMZ with Kim Jong-un, I was welling up.

00:58:54.000 I was nearly in tears.

00:58:55.000 I mean, that was an incredible moment for the Koreas.

00:58:59.000 And Donald Trump crossed into the DMZ without security.

00:59:03.000 They could have captured them. 0.98

00:59:03.000 They could have killed him. 0.98

00:59:04.000 They could have done a lot of things. 0.99

00:59:06.000 And you can say it was free.

00:59:07.000 You can say it was foreign.

00:59:08.000 But it was a tremendous step towards peace.

00:59:10.000 And I'd like to see more of that.

00:59:11.000 So I tremendously respect it.

00:59:12.000 Donald Trump's at the timeline for getting out of Afghanistan.

00:59:14.000 None of this, of course, is perfect.

00:59:16.000 But Donald Trump has been infinitely better on foreign policy than any president of my lifetime.

00:59:20.000 The Afghanistan pull-up was horrific.

00:59:22.000 That was Joe Biden.

00:59:23.000 It was not.

00:59:24.000 You just said that the pull-up policy was decided.

00:59:26.000 The deadline was set up.

00:59:28.000 It was not just Biden.

00:59:29.000 The problem is that when things happen over multiple presidencies, it's typically both a nationalist.

00:59:33.000 No, it was Joe Biden.

00:59:35.000 It was not just Joe Biden.

00:59:36.000 Trump had established a timeline to pull out, and Joe Biden went ahead and said, we're not going to do that.

00:59:41.000 I'm going to just do it now.

00:59:42.000 He changed the timeline in 9-11 to make a scene.

00:59:45.000 And they surrender.

00:59:45.000 And then they abandoned Bagram Air Force.

00:59:47.000 Not only did they surrendered military equipment.

00:59:50.000 I'm not a fan of the way that we pulled out of Afghanistan at all.

00:59:53.000 What I'm actually pointing to is a partisan blame of just one president.

00:59:57.000 For example, when we look at economies, we always agree with the people who are in the world.

01:00:01.000 Trump began the pull-out of it, which we all want to do.

01:00:06.000 Not the way we did.

01:00:07.000 No, Not the way Biden did.

01:00:09.000 Let's go back in time.

01:00:10.000 Do you support at the time when Trump said we're going to get out of Afghanistan?

01:00:14.000 Is that a good thing?

01:00:15.000 I'm not sure.

01:00:16.000 You think we should have stayed in Afghanistan? 0.56

01:00:18.000 Possibly, yeah.

01:00:19.000 Okay, I don't know.

01:00:19.000 I think that's morally abhorrent and psychotic.

01:00:21.000 Why?

01:00:22.000 But you want to take Venezuela.

01:00:23.000 20 years of nation building.

01:00:24.000 Trying to turn over Afghanistan into South Korea. 0.96

01:00:26.000 How is it possible that overthrowing a nation state sovereignty is cool and base, but trying to establish democracy within a country, which I agree wasn't done very well in Afghanistan, is somehow morally abhorrent?

01:00:36.000 That first one seems to be something you've made up.

01:00:38.000 Venezuela, you're for Venezuela, which is an invasion of a nation. 1.00

01:00:41.000 We're taking back our assets that were taken from us.

01:00:44.000 And taking their elected official.

01:00:48.000 I don't care that we don't like him.

01:00:50.000 How is this criminal trial?

01:00:50.000 You're for it.

01:00:51.000 How is this not morally questionable?

01:00:53.000 But in case of Afghanistan, let me explain it as simply and monosyllabically as possible.

01:00:57.000 Sure.

01:00:58.000 Afghanistan is 20 years of nation building.

01:01:03.000 Venezuela was several days.

01:01:07.000 Okay.

01:01:07.000 Why did the nation building fail?

01:01:10.000 Because you cannot make Afghanis gay communists. 0.98

01:01:13.000 No. 0.97

01:01:14.000 The reason that it failed is in large part because it was too expensive.

01:01:17.000 No, because we nation-built in Japan.

01:01:19.000 Exactly.

01:01:20.000 Exceptionally well.

01:01:21.000 We nation-built in Greece.

01:01:23.000 We nation-built in the US in South Korea.

01:01:25.000 That implies that all societies are the same.

01:01:27.000 I don't think they're the same.

01:01:28.000 And the Afghanis couldn't do jumping jacks. 1.00

01:01:31.000 You need at least three generations, which we did get in the Koreas and in Japan. 0.99

01:01:35.000 You need to establish education.

01:01:36.000 You need to let girls go to school. 1.00

01:01:38.000 And you need to establish a middle class, which doesn't work.

01:01:40.000 And they were in active conflict the whole time in Afghanistan.

01:01:43.000 It wasn't working, and they should have gotten it.

01:01:44.000 But more importantly, we never worked with local experts of Afghanistan.

01:01:48.000 We didn't work with the people on the ground.

01:01:51.000 We worked with the Hazaras. 1.00

01:01:52.000 We worked with the northern tribes.

01:01:54.000 We built up an entire northern coalition.

01:01:56.000 And to pull back, you support the continuation of the occupation of Afghanistan.

01:02:01.000 I did not hold on.

01:02:02.000 No, I did not say I supported Greece.

01:02:04.000 I said, I don't know.

01:02:05.000 So you're that's an argument that allows a lot of plausible deniability.

01:02:10.000 So it says I don't know my answer to that.

01:02:13.000 Well, you can, but you can't put words in my mouth of what I haven't said.

01:02:16.000 Afghanistan, Venezuela, I'm going to say Burma, but I mentioned Radin.

01:02:21.000 I did not say that.

01:02:22.000 So in each place, you are positionally against American foreign policy.

01:02:27.000 You're not operating under a unified moral code.

01:02:29.000 No, my uniform.

01:02:30.000 It's America.

01:02:31.000 Yeah, you're against the American foreign policy, and you're picking whatever the opposition of it is.

01:02:36.000 Respectfully, you couldn't engage in a hypothetical.

01:02:38.000 So I'm not sure.

01:02:39.000 I write an alternate history show for seven years.

01:02:41.000 My consistent value.

01:02:42.000 My consistent, well, you didn't, so that's the idea.

01:02:44.000 You didn't have to do anything.

01:02:46.000 Rawls isn't true because, you know, genes.

01:02:48.000 God is enough with Rawls.

01:02:50.000 Rawls couldn't engage in a hypothetical because he couldn't forget.

01:02:52.000 How dare he use it like this?

01:02:56.000 Here, I'll tell you my consistent threat.

01:02:58.000 My consistent threat is I would like to see worldwide liberal democracies emerge.

01:03:02.000 That's what I would like to see.

01:03:04.000 Because I think liberal democracies tend not to go to war with each other.

01:03:07.000 They lift people out of poverty best.

01:03:08.000 They establish a good middle class.

01:03:10.000 They establish education and they decrease poverty, death, et cetera.

01:03:13.000 That's your religion.

01:03:15.000 It's not my religion.

01:03:16.000 That's not my religion.

01:03:17.000 That's what we're talking about.

01:03:18.000 One at a time.

01:03:19.000 One at a time.

01:03:19.000 Sorry.

01:03:20.000 The idea that every society can be a liberal democracy is totally outside of the realm of possibility.

01:03:20.000 Go ahead.

01:03:27.000 Like genes, like some people are genetically incapable of having a liberal democracy.

01:03:31.000 Just from custom, no, just because of customers.

01:03:33.000 I have a question.

01:03:33.000 I have a question in this regard.

01:03:34.000 Like Liberia, for instance.

01:03:36.000 I don't know enough about Liberia.

01:03:38.000 We repatriated former slaves and then established an American constitutional liberal democracy, and it devolved into cannibalism and tribal warfare.

01:03:46.000 Because why?

01:03:48.000 I don't know.

01:03:48.000 Well, the issue is hard to get.

01:03:50.000 Nobody can.

01:03:51.000 Nobody can.

01:03:52.000 It's not like nobody can.

01:03:53.000 Sorry, certain cultures.

01:03:54.000 Sometimes you can't.

01:03:55.000 Certain cultures can't.

01:03:56.000 My argument would be not all the liberal democracies have to look the same. 0.90

01:03:58.000 When I say liberal democracy, I don't mean superheroes that are gay. 0.91

01:04:02.000 What I mean is free speech, due process, strong institutions and boundaries.

01:04:07.000 Your argument about free speech, like there's a lot of societies that totally reject free speech out of hand.

01:04:13.000 Yeah, and they're wrong.

01:04:14.000 Well, I mean, so they're not brought together.

01:04:16.000 The key point that I'm making is those societies choose to be that way.

01:04:20.000 They choose to not be liberal democracy.

01:04:22.000 Well, they shouldn't have the choice.

01:04:23.000 And we can't make other societies have our values.

01:04:27.000 Well, no, I think we can convince them to have our values.

01:04:30.000 I want to get to this next story, which is actually relevant to the conversation.

01:04:32.000 I'll say one last thing on this, in that I think there's a realignment that's going to happen.

01:04:36.000 The progressives that lost in Illinois lost largely to APAC-backed candidates, which many people consider to be a shift.

01:04:41.000 Plus, we're seeing the media purchases by pro-Israel, pro-Zionist individuals.

01:04:48.000 I tweeted this earlier.

01:04:49.000 I think that we're going to see a political realignment where one party becomes interventionist and one party becomes anti-interventionist.

01:04:55.000 I'm not entirely sure if the Democrats will be the anti- or pro-interventionist, considering they're very critical of Trump right now, but it is shifting.

01:05:03.000 And with APAC backing these candidates, Democrats may actually end up in the we should go into these countries.

01:05:09.000 And then with Tucker, Candace, and Megan being loud right-wing voices, the Republican may become staunchly anti-intervention, which shifts the dynamic from woke versus anti-woke into war and pro-war, which is exactly what we were seeing with Obama versus McCain after the Bush era, where Obama played the I'm against the war, and McCain was like, well, sometimes you need it.

01:05:33.000 So again, I think the point you're making about why we may have needed, may have, I'm not saying we should have, may have needed to stay in Afghanistan is a point made by many neoliberals, more moderate Democrats about nationbuilding.

01:05:43.000 But let's jump into this story.

01:05:44.000 Let's jump into the story.

01:05:45.000 It's really important.

01:05:46.000 That sometimes you need to do evil to create order in life.

01:05:49.000 And sometimes you need to create chaos to produce good because totalitarian systems that have too much.

01:05:54.000 So this is an instance of going into Venezuela of doing something predominantly evil to create order in the realm. 0.73

01:06:00.000 We just have to always have that debate.

01:06:02.000 We got this in the New York Post.

01:06:02.000 We're going to jump to the story.

01:06:04.000 U.S. territory turned tropical maternity ward has produced thousands of American babies for parents living in China.

01:06:11.000 Amazing.

01:06:11.000 The Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands is a U.S. territory northeast of Guam in the Pacific Ocean.

01:06:17.000 It's been flooded with so-called birth tourists since 2009 when then President Barack Obama introduced a visa waiver program for Chinese nationals. 1.00

01:06:24.000 What a scumbag. 1.00

01:06:26.000 I say, strip them all of their citizenship. 1.00

01:06:29.000 Absolutely.

01:06:30.000 No more birthright citizenship, and they can't come back. 1.00

01:06:33.000 Yeah, I mean, Kylo's gone.

01:06:35.000 Okay, everyone agrees.

01:06:36.000 Yeah, probably, to be honest with you.

01:06:38.000 She's going to be like, no, Chinese should be allowed to be president of the United States. 1.00

01:06:41.000 It's just that civilizational suicide.

01:06:44.000 I mean, the idea, the fact that there is evidence that there are thousands and thousands of people that are going there just to have children, particularly from China, right?

01:06:54.000 China is absolutely an adversary. 0.97

01:06:56.000 They're not a partner.

01:06:59.000 They're not even rivals.

01:07:00.000 They are an adversary.

01:07:01.000 And the idea that they should be allowed to be American citizens just because they're born there, then brought back to China to be raised as a child. 0.98

01:07:09.000 That's why I can't stand liberals, man.

01:07:11.000 Because they're just like, they're going to stand around while the like these Chinese people doing birth tourism are literally saying in 20 years, you will start seizing power and assets from the American people. 1.00

01:07:21.000 And the American liberals are like, they're going to be standing there as the Chinese guy goes like, I have every right to take your stuff because I am American. 0.75

01:07:28.000 And they're going to go, guess you're right.

01:07:29.000 Yeah, I mean, they're going to be used as a vector of attack against the United States.

01:07:34.000 Is it just that people don't, I'm asking you too, Rev, I mean, you study this stuff, that people just don't have that outside perspective of the system.

01:07:40.000 They get in it. 0.71

01:07:41.000 They get emotionally involved with like, yeah, we're accepting of people, but like, is it just that like dumb first order thinking? 0.75

01:07:50.000 So James Burnham has the best narrative about this.

01:07:53.000 He wrote a book in 1961 called The Suicide of the West.

01:07:56.000 And the thesis of the book was that liberals do not have a morally consistent code.

01:08:01.000 They just support whatever degrades the West fast enough.

01:08:04.000 And so in 1961, he said that this would cause the collapse, the suicide of Western civilization, because the liberals don't have a consistent code.

01:08:12.000 They would just push for these various policies that would degrade the character of Western civilization.

01:08:18.000 And then people would give concessions to moderate liberals, which would then pass to radical Marxists.

01:08:23.000 And so he said radical Marxists would take over the institutions, which is what we've seen.

01:08:27.000 And these people, I agree with you, Tim.

01:08:30.000 These people have no, this is why I brought up Rawls in the Enlightenment.

01:08:33.000 These people have no concept that there are others who do not share their values who will use violence against them.

01:08:38.000 And if someone was willing to use violence and will not share your values, you have to pair that with violence.

01:08:44.000 I often notice people are very laissez-faire about, you know, about whatever, bringing new people in, changing the system.

01:08:53.000 They're kind of open to it until it affects them directly.

01:08:55.000 They get mugged.

01:08:55.000 And then they're like, like Anna Kasparian, you know, she's completely flipped after she got attacked by some dude outside her house.

01:09:01.000 I don't know that she's completely flipped, but she's definitely once it affects you.

01:09:04.000 And so to make sure that people don't have to face it and have that traumatic realignment that you can maybe educate them ahead of time and get them to kind of see what mass migration can do, see how societies can be destroyed with mass migration as used as a weapon.

01:09:21.000 But like to get people to realize it without really experiencing it, I don't know.

01:09:26.000 I don't know how.

01:09:27.000 I played a lot of Crusader Kings.

01:09:28.000 And I would watch countries get flipped with cultural, you know, the culture just takes it and then people vote for their own demise.

01:09:34.000 I'm like, that's how I learned.

01:09:36.000 But sorry, Marie.

01:09:37.000 Yeah, you'd have to establish cultural traditions to because this is something a lot of tribal societies do, where they have rites of passage that force people to grow up through these various rituals that make them comprehend the horror of the world.

01:09:51.000 Because industrial civilization has protected us from the brutality of the human condition.

01:09:56.000 And so people are just not aware of how bad things can get.

01:10:00.000 And that's why we're having mouse utopia.

01:10:03.000 And so like horror movies and stuff, is that part of why people like them is because it helps them see into what it could be?

01:10:09.000 Yeah, people like horror movies as like a reset button.

01:10:13.000 And it's because people physiologically process reality.

01:10:18.000 And so if someone physiologically does not understand something, they're going to have trouble understanding it in abstract intellectually.

01:10:27.000 And so but like we don't this is so I think you guys are like true about something.

01:10:31.000 Which is that like by and large people are a culmination of their experiences and that's about it, right?

01:10:36.000 What you're talking about like Anna Kasparian, right?

01:10:37.000 What you're talking about like the morally lucky individual who just happens to grow up with the whatever morals you prefer and loves them because they grew up with them, right?

01:10:45.000 But I also think that we can experience and observe things and think of things and develop a sense of self.

01:10:51.000 Outside of these experiences, it just takes significant work, right?

01:10:55.000 In the case of learning math, it's really hard to experience high levels of math, Euclidean geometry.

01:11:00.000 However, if you engage in it at high levels over and over as like a rigorous mental practice in the way that you could do with philosophy, right?

01:11:07.000 You can actually come to observe and understand these things and have it kind of phenomenologically affect how you engage with the world, I think.

01:11:14.000 Well, let's go back to the original question, which is there's an island where Chinese people are flying, giving birth and then leaving, so that those babies will have standing to be president and be American citizens. 0.70

01:11:24.000 Should we put a stop to that?

01:11:26.000 Yeah, probably.

01:11:27.000 Should we end birthright citizenship?

01:11:29.000 I think it's complicated because it's a very American tradition, right?

01:11:36.000 There's a really good debate between two of my friends.

01:11:41.000 I don't know if I can shout out other creators.

01:11:42.000 I think you've had both of them, whoever you want.

01:11:44.000 Pisco and Ryan Mulali, when they were at World War Debate, talked about this, and I think both of them had really good arguments.

01:11:50.000 Ryan being saying birthright means an implied patriotism because obviously the founding fathers didn't know about planes, right?

01:11:58.000 So if you were born here, you're probably invested because you're not going to leave very easily, right?

01:12:02.000 And Pisco kind of addressed that, well, birthright citizenship is about the individual.

01:12:07.000 It's not about their parents, and that matters.

01:12:09.000 So I think there's really good arguments on either side.

01:12:12.000 No.

01:12:13.000 It's silly that someone from China can fly here specifically to give birth and then fly here a week before birth, give birth, and then fly back a week later. 1.00

01:12:21.000 I agree, but there might be a way to like policy carve out in such a way that people can't abuse it like that, but we still protect the birthright citizenship.

01:12:29.000 Yes, some way to do that work.

01:12:30.000 Because I think Pisco points out really aptly, I forget which amendment it is, and I'm going to butcher his arguments for him.

01:12:36.000 Very sorry, Pisco, I think.

01:12:37.000 The 14th, yeah.

01:12:38.000 But the jurisdiction of the state it's talking about is the child.

01:12:41.000 It's not the parents.

01:12:42.000 And a child is not responsible for their parents, their parents' sins, their parents' heritage, any of these sort of things, especially in...

01:12:47.000 That's not what jurisdiction thereof was...

01:12:49.000 Like, if you look at the debates...

01:12:50.000 No.

01:12:50.000 No, but in the American law idea, the idea is that you can come here and be born here, and that makes you American.

01:12:56.000 And yes, there are people abusing it. 0.68

01:12:57.000 But the question might be, is there a way to prevent the abuse while maintaining the principles of what they're saying?

01:13:04.000 The 14th Amendment was specifically for post-Civil War, addressing the issue of slaves.

01:13:08.000 And the point of if you were born here, you were a slave, was past tense, not future.

01:13:13.000 The idea was all of the slaves who were born here are citizens.

01:13:17.000 That's what they were saying.

01:13:19.000 There was a debate on this in which the guy said, well, no one's going to construe this to mean that foreigners, diplomats, or their children would have to go to the city.

01:13:26.000 Just fly here.

01:13:27.000 And that was back when we didn't have planes and people were like traveling three months.

01:13:32.000 So it was actually debated.

01:13:33.000 And then it was, what was it, Wong Kim, what was it?

01:13:38.000 Wong V. Kim Ark or whatever?

01:13:40.000 I don't know.

01:13:41.000 I can't remember the name of the political president.

01:13:42.000 Where they were like, no, no, no, anybody born here at this point forward will be a citizen, despite that not being the intention of the 14th Amendment.

01:13:51.000 There was never a moral argument behind it.

01:13:53.000 It was just practicality.

01:13:55.000 Only really nations in the new world do not have to be in the world.

01:13:57.000 Wong came in the United States. 0.99

01:13:58.000 Birthright citizenship is just nations in the new world with a handful of exceptions because these were countries with high demographic turnover.

01:14:06.000 If you went to the founding fathers and made that moral argument, they just wouldn't have a concept for that.

01:14:11.000 Sure, but the principle that's emerging is this.

01:14:13.000 What's the principle?

01:14:14.000 What's the moral principle?

01:14:15.000 That the principle here would be that you are not held and bound by the actions or identity of what your parents are.

01:14:21.000 Why is that good?

01:14:22.000 I think that that's good because, for example, being held accountable for the sins or like history of your parents is something that was often done in older world orders that I think was harmful.

01:14:32.000 I don't think that I should be culpable for the behaviors, the actions, the viewpoints, or the identity of my parents.

01:14:37.000 I completely agree.

01:14:38.000 Like, if someone illegally enters my home and then gives birth, that kids will just live in my house now. 1.00

01:14:43.000 I am not responsible for the crime they committed.

01:14:45.000 Well, it was a really cute baby.

01:14:46.000 No, baby's got to go.

01:14:47.000 But reality also exists.

01:14:49.000 We fundamentally exist in a world of distinct countries that have their own histories.

01:14:53.000 And the reality is not that we are fundamentally bored because the baby boomers are going to pass on a crap ton of debt to my generation, Gen Z, by this logic. 0.96

01:15:04.000 And we can't, you can say, of course, it would be nice if we got rid of the debt.

01:15:07.000 I am going to be stuck with this debt.

01:15:08.000 I am going to force the generational inheritance the baby boomers gave me. 1.00

01:15:12.000 And I cannot do anything about this.

01:15:14.000 This is the fundamental reality of the human condition.

01:15:17.000 And I believe in creating politics around fundamental realities, not around abstract principles, and then enforcing them on reality whether or not they make sense.

01:15:26.000 So if your parents are a thief, should everyone look at you skeptically for the next like 15 to 40 years of your life because your parent was a thief?

01:15:32.000 Might be in your genes.

01:15:33.000 This was something that the Western tradition had established.

01:15:35.000 We had already thought this through, where Christianity and the Greco-Roman tradition said that the individual should be judged for their actions.

01:15:44.000 But this was something that was thought through at the time.

01:15:47.000 It wasn't just a post-ad hoc rationalization for a legal structure.

01:15:52.000 Where we established this legal structure because it was convenient at the time, it was not a moral principle.

01:15:58.000 You know, I think we form society based off of literal reality, like you're saying, but also off of abstract concepts like our rights are given to us by God.

01:16:07.000 Well, man, reality is complicated.

01:16:09.000 And my theory is that it's like the masculine and the feminine.

01:16:12.000 The ideal and the material match up together.

01:16:15.000 And so there's a dynamic between them where the ideal can pull a little bit and the material can pull a little bit.

01:16:20.000 And it's a negotiation between the two.

01:16:22.000 So do you think right now?

01:16:24.000 To my point, right?

01:16:24.000 What you're saying is what I'm saying, right?

01:16:26.000 I agree that, for example, the national debt that the boomers created is something that my generation and your generation are going to have to deal with. 0.71

01:16:32.000 But at the same time, I might be able to say the way that I identify as an individual, the things that I carry into this world, as far as maybe things like opportunity and circumstance, shouldn't be nearly as neatly tied to my parents.

01:16:43.000 I think that that's a very old world idea that I don't like.

01:16:45.000 But if there's these tension between these two things, if your parents literally birthed you here, then your whole world identity would revolve around the fact that they did that.

01:16:52.000 Only if you lived here would it mean if you were born here.

01:16:54.000 So it totally depends on what you're doing.

01:16:56.000 If you live here you're saying it's your identity shouldn't be anything to do with your parents, but your parents decided where you're going to be born.

01:17:03.000 Nothing to do with your parents.

01:17:04.000 The idea is that you shouldn't have to inherit their actions, right?

01:17:07.000 But you become a citizen of the country they choose to birth you in.

01:17:10.000 To some extent, well, they do, but we don't, right? 0.93

01:17:13.000 My dad, being an he's not any of these things, but say my dad is an alcoholic and a thief.

01:17:18.000 That doesn't mean that I am accountable for the time that he stole from somebody.

01:17:21.000 This is why land's rights can get really messy.

01:17:23.000 And we often say in the case of like, is that stolen land or not?

01:17:26.000 We go, well, maybe my ancestors' ancestors' ancestors, but for how long do we have to pay for that, right?

01:17:31.000 Yeah, I don't know.

01:17:32.000 No, it goes 40 acres and a mule.

01:17:35.000 I shouldn't have to pay for that.

01:17:37.000 By that logic, white people should not be held to the actions of their ancestors because we should not inherit the costs of our ancestors. 0.70

01:17:43.000 Wait a minute.

01:17:44.000 And also, on top of it, I said that the development of these moral codes is a conflict between the material and the ideal.

01:17:52.000 What you're basically saying is that if the ideal is a man and the material is the woman, the man should just totally dominate the woman without reference to the material realities.

01:18:01.000 Wait, wait, wait a moment.

01:18:02.000 I want to change my opinion because I just realized something.

01:18:05.000 That you're a Democrat.

01:18:06.000 No.

01:18:06.000 I did.

01:18:07.000 For the longest time, I just thought I was a quarter Korean, but then I found out that I'm actually 5% Japanese.

01:18:14.000 Now I'm in favor of the sins of the father because this means the government, the United States government, has got to give me reparations because I'm Japanese.

01:18:20.000 So pay up.

01:18:22.000 You have to prove that they stole stuff from you.

01:18:24.000 No, I don't.

01:18:24.000 No, you do.

01:18:25.000 No.

01:18:25.000 I think the Japanese had to submit receipts of being like, hey, but also part of why they got paid back.

01:18:30.000 Part of why they got paid back is because it was actually within the same domain.

01:18:33.000 Do you guys think that we're out of balance with like, okay, so like Rodriguez, you were saying about the politics based on the harsh reality and politics based on the philosophy that we've become so, I think we've become so into philosophy with post- Thank you, Rudyard.

01:18:47.000 Yeah, talk me in.

01:18:48.000 That we become like in postmodernism that we're so philosophical heavy that we've lost sight with just brute reality.

01:18:54.000 We're radically delusional.

01:18:56.000 I think that's just obvious.

01:18:57.000 Our moral code is no frame for reality.

01:18:59.000 Yep.

01:19:00.000 Okay, I'll be right back.

01:19:01.000 Thanks.

01:19:01.000 I agree with you.

01:19:02.000 I agree with the internet.

01:19:03.000 It's easy to become something you're not to play in fantasy.

01:19:06.000 And since the end of the Cold War, we've just been carte blanche.

01:19:08.000 We haven't had repercussions.

01:19:10.000 How about we go nuclear and jump to this next story? 0.97

01:19:12.000 Donald Trump is the Antichrist.

01:19:14.000 Now that I've sufficiently made many of you angry, and I'll say that I'm joking, there is something interesting because we've got this tweet from Drew Tang who says, Remember when me and Donnie Darkand and Sovereign Bra went on Timcast in December of 2023 and quoted this exact verse to him saying it would happen to Trump?

01:19:31.000 And then the FBI had the episode taken off YouTube.

01:19:34.000 Wait.

01:19:36.000 Oh, that's right.

01:19:37.000 The episode was taken off of YouTube.

01:19:40.000 And Leonardo Joni, you know, you love her.

01:19:43.000 She posted this.

01:19:44.000 What do we think of this?

01:19:45.000 And it shows Trump with his ear bleeding.

01:19:47.000 I saw that one of the heads of the beast seemed wounded beyond recovery, but the fatal wound was healed.

01:19:52.000 The whole world marveled at this miracle and gave allegiance to the beast, Revelation.

01:19:56.000 Now, what's really interesting about this is that when I saw this tweet, I recalled sitting down with these individuals, and they literally explained to me that Donald Trump would be injured on the right side of his body in some capacity because that was a, if he was the Antichrist, that was a symbol of the Antichrist.

01:20:14.000 And so when I saw this, I was like, no, wait a minute, because they did say it on the show.

01:20:21.000 So I asked Grock and it said, the idea the Antichrist will be injured on the right side comes primarily from interpretations of biblical prophecy.

01:20:27.000 Woe to the worthless shepherd who leaves the flock.

01:20:30.000 A sword shall be against his arm and against his right eye. 0.97

01:20:33.000 His arm shall completely wither and his right eye shall be totally blinded.

01:20:37.000 Well, in all seriousness, Trump is not completely blinded, but the bullet did hit his right ear.

01:20:42.000 And what they said on the show was that Trump would be injured somewhere on the right side of his face, not necessarily his eye.

01:20:47.000 And then, ladies and gentlemen, Pamer drop time.

01:20:50.000 Nasty bruise on Trump's hand breaks through layers of makeup.

01:20:53.000 The president showed it off to Irish leader on St. Patrick's Day.

01:20:56.000 So this is a story the left has been playing like crazy.

01:21:00.000 Trump's right arm, his right hand, has been consistently bruised for going on months now, which again, I am not saying is the Antichrist, but a lot of these people who are.

01:21:12.000 And wearing makeup is pretty antichrist behavior when he's wearing makeup.

01:21:15.000 Well, he's trying to cover up that his right arm is bruised.

01:21:20.000 I'm kidding, is perhaps withering. 0.99

01:21:24.000 Damn. 0.99

01:21:25.000 I just think that was interesting. 0.99

01:21:26.000 I don't know.

01:21:27.000 If the Antichrist is here, my personal take is that people can behave in a Christ-like manner or in an Antichrist-like behavior.

01:21:33.000 And if they're super famous and powerful and you start being sinful, then you're exhibiting Antichrist-like behaviors and you'll be like one of those Antichrist people.

01:21:41.000 Can we?

01:21:41.000 That's my personal take.

01:21:42.000 But now let's just pretend there is a guy that is the Antichrist.

01:21:45.000 That means the Second Coming is arriving.

01:21:47.000 He doesn't know enough, which is what the argument is about the war in Israel and Netanyahu saying the messianic era will come, but it won't be next Thursday.

01:21:57.000 And then you've got people pointing to Donald Trump.

01:21:59.000 You've got the efforts to breed the red heifer.

01:22:02.000 I am not saying it's prophecy, but I am suggesting that people want it to be.

01:22:08.000 Roger, were you going to say something?

01:22:09.000 Oh, Trump doesn't know enough esoteric religious lore to be the Antichrist.

01:22:14.000 He didn't first say that he was gravely wounded.

01:22:16.000 In the case, he literally wasn't gravely wounded.

01:22:18.000 He had his ear nicked.

01:22:19.000 He was shot in the head.

01:22:20.000 He literally wasn't gravely wounded.

01:22:22.000 That was the miracle, is that despite having someone shooting at his head?

01:22:25.000 So eventually people have produced the book of Revelations 50 times and it has yet to have happened.

01:22:30.000 That is a 0% track record.

01:22:32.000 Sure, but once it does, then they'll be right.

01:22:35.000 Then we're all dead.

01:22:37.000 So the Antichrist is deeply knowledgeable in religion.

01:22:40.000 Is that what you mean?

01:22:41.000 So if someone were to be the Antichrist, they'd have a wide variety of esoteric lore in order to found the anti-religion against Christ.

01:22:48.000 And so you could assess their actions and their behaviors based off their knowledge of religious lore.

01:22:52.000 Could it be?

01:22:54.000 He's hiding his power level.

01:22:55.000 He does have the religious lore, but he can't show people yet.

01:23:00.000 Could his knowledge of religious lore be his knowledge of business?

01:23:02.000 See, the dollar is now what people worship?

01:23:04.000 They're not transferable.

01:23:06.000 Are you sure?

01:23:06.000 Because people seem to worship money.

01:23:08.000 I'm pretty sure.

01:23:09.000 I mean, money's God on earth, is it not?

01:23:11.000 No, that's not how the mystic lore goes.

01:23:14.000 Okay.

01:23:14.000 It is now.

01:23:16.000 So it's going to be like a priest.

01:23:17.000 They say it's going to be a priest.

01:23:18.000 If he is making weird esoteric remarks and he drops these things inside his content that demonstrates that he knows more than he says, then you'll know.

01:23:27.000 What would be an example of a weird esoteric remark?

01:23:31.000 So I'm trying to figure out.

01:23:33.000 He's trying to figure out if you're the Antichrist, by the way.

01:23:35.000 Don't tell him.

01:23:36.000 I'm not.

01:23:37.000 That's what the antichrist is.

01:23:40.000 When people.

01:23:41.000 Different mystics have different code words they use to demonstrate the religious tradition they're operating in.

01:23:47.000 You can look at the code words they're operating under to figure out what their level is.

01:23:53.000 So Hermetics do that, Gnostics do it, Platonists do it. 0.99

01:23:57.000 So his philosophy, not wanting not a Gnostic, not a Platist, but what is he?

01:24:01.000 A secular businessman?

01:24:02.000 Yeah, he is.

01:24:03.000 So is he speaking code?

01:24:03.000 That's his philosophy?

01:24:05.000 No, he's not.

01:24:06.000 Are you sure?

01:24:06.000 I'm pretty sure we just don't know the code.

01:24:08.000 I'm pretty sure.

01:24:09.000 This guy knows everything.

01:24:10.000 I mean, if he doesn't know, if we don't know the code, then no one knows the code.

01:24:15.000 Phil, is something happening that we don't know about?

01:24:17.000 I mean, we don't know.

01:24:19.000 I don't know, dude.

01:24:20.000 I think I can't even joke about it. 0.99

01:24:22.000 If there was an Antichrist on earth right now, who the fuck else would it be than Donald Trump? 0.99

01:24:26.000 It would have to be that guy. 0.99

01:24:27.000 Peter Thiel?

01:24:27.000 Well, Peter Thiel thinks it was Greta Thunberg.

01:24:29.000 It would be the weaker, Justin Dieber.

01:24:31.000 Or like Elon Musk.

01:24:33.000 It's just a really great.

01:24:34.000 Dr. Thunberg, a know enough esoteric religious war to be the Antichrist.

01:24:39.000 I think it was in Ross's interview with Peter Thiel.

01:24:42.000 He was like, oh, yeah, it's Greta.

01:24:43.000 It's Greta Thenberg.

01:24:44.000 I can't remember his reason.

01:24:44.000 She's the Antichrist.

01:24:46.000 Peter Thiel is having a meeting, I guess, today, or this week at the Vatican or something like that.

01:24:51.000 Let me see what I can.

01:24:52.000 Okay.

01:24:53.000 Don, I don't think you're the Antichrist, by the way.

01:24:54.000 I already said my philosophy.

01:24:56.000 I think all of us can exhibit the behavior and become it.

01:24:58.000 So don't say stuff like, I hate my enemies, worship pain on your enemies because that's wrath.

01:25:03.000 That is a sin. 0.99

01:25:04.000 He's a queer. 1.00

01:25:05.000 What if Karl Marx was?

01:25:07.000 What if Karl Marx was the Antichrist because he established a religion based upon material things and he was also a Jew and then it was an anti-church founded upon envy rather than love? 0.68

01:25:17.000 Then what would happen in the story leading to Christ's return?

01:25:20.000 So some people think that the book of so I'm not a book of Revelations guy.

01:25:24.000 That's not my thing.

01:25:25.000 But some people think that book of Revelations takes course over centuries and you're compressing a complex historic event like the fall of Rome into a singular chapter.

01:25:36.000 They'll post hoc update their theory to match like whatever's happened in the timeline for their preference.

01:25:40.000 So the response, the antidote to communism would be the return of Christ in the story.

01:25:45.000 Christ returned into communism. 0.96

01:25:48.000 Maybe we are in heaven now?

01:25:50.000 No.

01:25:52.000 This is hell.

01:25:52.000 It's just one way of looking at reality.

01:25:54.000 Wouldn't it be absolutely wild if like in two years like literally Jesus just came back?

01:25:59.000 It would be pretty wild.

01:26:00.000 Jesus is smiling.

01:26:01.000 He's very cool.

01:26:02.000 Dancing with us right now.

01:26:03.000 Jesus' spirit is within the Christian community.

01:26:05.000 Oh, yeah, no, no.

01:26:05.000 Here's a question, though.

01:26:06.000 When he comes back, does he like descend from the heavens or is he already here and then like reveals himself?

01:26:12.000 He's inside you.

01:26:13.000 Quaker says inside you.

01:26:13.000 What I would guess.

01:26:15.000 What I would guess is that he would embody the spirit within his action, then people wouldn't notice.

01:26:21.000 That's what I'm talking about.

01:26:22.000 Subversive, dude.

01:26:23.000 So nobody would know he was here.

01:26:25.000 Wait, why would he not notice?

01:26:26.000 Jesus knows that he was cursive.

01:26:27.000 But the return.

01:26:29.000 You know what's going to be really funny?

01:26:30.000 When it happens and the rapture happens, but then all the Orthodox people are still here and they think they're right, but they're not. 1.00

01:26:36.000 Yeah, all those things.

01:26:38.000 All those EOs down bad.

01:26:38.000 I'm just kidding, Orthodox.

01:26:40.000 The schism Catholic schism.

01:26:44.000 It's crazy, but for centuries leading up to Christ in the Jewish community, they would constantly talk about the rise of their Messiah and the Messiah was about to come.

01:26:51.000 And the Messiah would defeat the Romans, and then they didn't figure out it was Christ. 0.67

01:26:56.000 Ironic.

01:26:57.000 Well, did he defeat?

01:26:58.000 I mean, I guess so.

01:26:59.000 Hold on.

01:27:00.000 So when he comes back, who are the Romans? 0.92

01:27:02.000 Like, he's going to go to Italy and defeat the Roman Catholics? 1.00

01:27:05.000 This is why I said I wasn't a book of Revelations guy, because I don't think I can actually figure this out.

01:27:10.000 So when Christ returns, he defeats the Romans. 0.96

01:27:12.000 So Christ emerged from a Jewish messianic tradition that stemmed back for centuries leading up to him.

01:27:19.000 In this tradition, they thought their Messiah would arise and then defeat the Roman Empire because Israel was a Roman colony.

01:27:26.000 Yeah.

01:27:27.000 And that's why they don't like Jesus, the Christian Jesus, because he wasn't political.

01:27:32.000 Yeah, that's exactly right, actually.

01:27:34.000 Oh, look at that, EO Bros.

01:27:35.000 Jesus wasn't political, interesting.

01:27:36.000 No, Jesus wasn't political.

01:27:38.000 He believed in God.

01:27:39.000 And so Jesus emerged and he said, we should love each other.

01:27:41.000 We should accept the Roman colonization because the kingdom of heaven lies within. 0.88

01:27:45.000 And they killed him for that.

01:27:46.000 They were looking for the Messiah, but then he didn't have the message they wanted, that they launch a war against the Romans.

01:27:51.000 You know, the White House is Roman. 1.00

01:27:53.000 It's Roman architecture.

01:27:55.000 They even have it as white killers unpainted as it, because the Roman architecture, all the paint washed off. 1.00

01:27:59.000 These idiot Americans came and they rebuilt it without paint. 1.00

01:28:03.000 So what is this return of Christ going to come overthrow the vestiges of the Roman Empire? 1.00

01:28:06.000 That's the guise of the American oligarchy and like reset the system to a republic again?

01:28:11.000 Everyone used Roman architecture at the point.

01:28:13.000 But they forgot to paint the stuff.

01:28:15.000 The Roman statues weren't white back in the day.

01:28:18.000 Yeah, they were all crazy rainbows.

01:28:18.000 That's what they get wrong.

01:28:20.000 You know, they were woke.

01:28:21.000 And then so the Jews will be freed from the tyranny of the American Empire, the British Empire. 0.89

01:28:27.000 And then the ones that have strayed and have forgotten what God is will return to God.

01:28:31.000 They need to rebuild the temple and then the prophecy can be fulfilled.

01:28:34.000 No, no, no, and the red heifers.

01:28:36.000 Oh, they got to get the cow.

01:28:37.000 Genetic engineering.

01:28:39.000 They're trying to, like, which is crazy.

01:28:41.000 They're trying to manufacture the end of time.

01:28:43.000 I think this whole Jesus.

01:28:45.000 I don't want this reality to end.

01:28:45.000 I like this reality.

01:28:47.000 Yeah, it's good.

01:28:47.000 It's going to be a little bit more.

01:28:48.000 Well, it's, you know, one of my simulation theories is that we're just an AI-generated television entertainment show for the progenitors.

01:28:55.000 So they made this.

01:28:56.000 Think about it this way.

01:28:58.000 Instead of making a show, like We View a Show, you create, you get an AI to auto-generate the stories, and it's like a real-time present thing you can just turn on and watch and then be like, I love the Trump show.

01:29:13.000 Like, we just watched President Trump be crazy, you know? 0.99

01:29:15.000 This AI is an absolute sexual freak. 1.00

01:29:17.000 But it's not AI. 1.00

01:29:18.000 It's just for sure, bro.

01:29:19.000 It's going to be a lot of fun for people to watch.

01:29:21.000 Whoa, man, what if reality fans makes money?

01:29:24.000 What if reality is a dream by the gods in order to simulate different realities to figure out what does and doesn't work so that they can repurpose this into the tree of life?

01:29:33.000 Yeah.

01:29:34.000 And it's not AI, it's I. That's why we think of ourselves.

01:29:39.000 We call ourselves I.

01:29:40.000 It's just actual crazy.

01:29:40.000 It's intelligence.

01:29:43.000 We got to jump to this next story so we can explain to you, my friends, you need to understand just how powerful AI has become.

01:29:51.000 While I wouldn't describe this as family-friendly, maybe you don't want your kids watching it.

01:29:57.000 Which is very funny.

01:29:58.000 Take a look at this AI-generated trailer for a movie that you wish existed.

01:30:05.000 Three years after a string of brutal, unsolved murders of local co-eds with impossibly fat milkers, the women of Delta Delta D will be headed to the space station as part of NASA's Project Buff. 0.97

01:30:17.000 Scary, the titty killer just disappeared.

01:30:19.000 We're going to be 250 miles up.

01:30:22.000 The only person watching us get changed is going to be a 60-year-old man at Cape Sinai.

01:30:29.000 You know, I heard in space your boots actually get bigger.

01:30:33.000 Why exactly are they sending a shuttle full of sorority girls to space? 1.00

01:30:38.000 Son, the only thing bigger than the NASA budget after this is going to be the strain on those girls' sweaters. 1.00

01:30:43.000 This is like the plot of a movie written by a 12-year-old boy.

01:30:46.000 This is the first time I felt safe since the titty killer.

01:30:51.000 You don't think it's him, do you?

01:30:55.000 Who else would go all the way to space?

01:31:01.000 Take a physics test for an AI engine.

01:31:03.000 The boys down here tell me you're flat as a board.

01:31:05.000 If that's right, you're basically invisible to them.

01:31:08.000 You might be our only hope.

01:31:10.000 This is crazy!

01:31:11.000 Do you guys remember when we reviewed Capital of Conformity?

01:31:14.000 Yeah.

01:31:16.000 Amazing.

01:31:18.000 Let me contrast this for you guys.

01:31:21.000 Capital of Conformity, because this was a couple years ago.

01:31:25.000 I was even going to pull it up.

01:31:27.000 And real quick, I'll only play like two seconds for you. 0.93

01:31:30.000 You.

01:31:31.000 Oh, man.

01:31:32.000 Yes, you look.

01:31:33.000 So good.

01:31:34.000 Do you dread waking up in the morning?

01:31:36.000 Are you feeling helpless in your society?

01:31:38.000 Perhaps even a bit lost?

01:31:39.000 Well, look no further.

01:31:42.000 At the Capitol, we offer an escape.

01:31:44.000 A new beginning, a lifetime of unending joy.

01:31:47.000 We have an abundance of attractions so captivating, you'll wonder how you ever lived without them.

01:31:52.000 I recommend if you guys have not seen Capital of Conformity from Azay Alter, you must watch it.

01:31:57.000 And I will tell you what's really sad about this.

01:32:00.000 This short film, it's two minutes and 42 seconds, and it's brilliantly done, but the limitations of AI video made this movie feel like a nightmare.

01:32:09.000 The faces are all melting together.

01:32:11.000 People are walking in weird ways.

01:32:13.000 It feels like you're in a nightmare and it works perfectly.

01:32:16.000 But as AI gets better, it loses that.

01:32:20.000 So now we just have the titty killer, which is really, really good.

01:32:26.000 And it's crazy that we've gotten to this point in AI generation.

01:32:31.000 Apparently, Sea Dance 3, China's new AI video model, it's not released yet, but these are the leaks.

01:32:38.000 In 30 seconds, it can render a 17-minute short film.

01:32:42.000 I mean, just think about how psychotic that is.

01:32:44.000 When this comes out, you're going to type in short film about Titty Killer 5, and it will make a full movie for you.

01:32:51.000 And then, depending on your proclivities, it might be worse than just Titty Killer.

01:32:56.000 Well, I just got to say, we've seen it three times, so I feel like I know what some people's search history will be in this robot.

01:33:02.000 Titty Killer.

01:33:03.000 I don't want the women to die. 1.00

01:33:04.000 I want them to play games with each other.

01:33:07.000 I want Titty Candyland in outer space. 0.58

01:33:09.000 No, I didn't expect that to open up learning more about you.

01:33:12.000 But we did play it.

01:33:13.000 It is incorrect.

01:33:14.000 We played it two and a half times because I didn't see the beginning the first time when he says this.

01:33:20.000 Three years after a string of brutal, unsolved murders of local co-eds with impossibly fat milkers. 1.00

01:33:28.000 The important problem is that you're going to be able to do this.

01:33:29.000 The important problem.

01:33:30.000 Dude, the movies that people are going to make are going to melt your eyeballs.

01:33:34.000 This is already good.

01:33:36.000 They're going to do retro where they're like, give me AI, a version of it, but AI 2025 March 17th version.

01:33:44.000 Just like we make 8-bit video games still.

01:33:46.000 Yeah, it is worth noting, though, or it is worth pointing out that it was a very, very short amount of time where you could get that, I guess, surreal quality in AI videos where it was almost like Uncanny Valley.

01:34:00.000 It was just creepy.

01:34:02.000 Everyone's familiar with the Will Smith eating spaghetti and how that was almost a nightmare in and of itself.

01:34:09.000 Like it was just so creepy looking.

01:34:12.000 And obviously that's gone nowadays.

01:34:14.000 And I'm not even sure if you could get an AI to produce that quality anymore.

01:34:20.000 To be honest with you, I imagine eventually it will be able to do that.

01:34:23.000 You know, they'll be able to say, look, make it as if this.

01:34:28.000 But you can't just prompt it to do something that's that.

01:34:33.000 I don't know if I want to say the texture is a certain way.

01:34:37.000 I don't know if that's the right way to articulate it, but it was the capital of conformity was super creepy.

01:34:43.000 Yeah, I recognize it.

01:34:45.000 It was the imperfection that was so creepy.

01:34:48.000 Roseanne, if now's the time to stop making movies and to start just focus on AI because the effort, and she and Jake, her son, were like, no, now's the time.

01:34:56.000 No way, dude.

01:34:56.000 Look at this.

01:34:57.000 I mean, look, if you want to make a movie, you just do this.

01:34:59.000 That's what you could do.

01:35:00.000 This is crazy.

01:35:01.000 I mean, look, aside from the fact that you do money while you're on set, literally, while you're not shooting, you could be making another movie.

01:35:07.000 I'm wondering who made this.

01:35:10.000 Yeah, we should shout these guys out.

01:35:11.000 What were you saying, Carter?

01:35:12.000 Oh, I was saying, maybe Roseanne meant that now's the time to make it because there won't be any more time after this gets so good.

01:35:19.000 Could be.

01:35:19.000 So, like, maybe you should, if you're going to do it, do it now.

01:35:22.000 And show the world, like, hey, human art's still good.

01:35:24.000 Even though this is great.

01:35:24.000 Yeah.

01:35:26.000 Oh, my God.

01:35:27.000 Wait, there's.

01:35:28.000 Wait, part two?

01:35:29.000 There's actually a bunch of these.

01:35:31.000 Are there four?

01:35:31.000 Good.

01:35:32.000 Oh, there's actually one through four.

01:35:34.000 Let's watch.

01:35:34.000 Titty Killer.

01:35:35.000 So this is Titty Killer in Space.

01:35:37.000 I get it.

01:35:38.000 I was trying to, I'm trying to figure out who made this, but apparently there's a one through four as well that you can watch.

01:35:42.000 I hope the world was underground in the sewer system of New York.

01:35:45.000 Is that hot for you?

01:35:46.000 You know what movie was great?

01:35:47.000 Chud. 0.97

01:35:48.000 I didn't see it. 0.52

01:35:48.000 Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dwellers. 0.52

01:35:50.000 That's correct.

01:35:51.000 That's correct.

01:35:52.000 Shud. 0.91

01:35:52.000 Chud. 0.91

01:35:53.000 You know what we need to do?

01:35:53.000 The 80s.

01:35:55.000 We need a nuclear war. 0.89

01:35:56.000 We need one.

01:35:57.000 Yeah, we need a nuclear war to wipe out all of our digital infrastructure so that we're forced to go back to an era of the 90s where we have blockbuster video. 0.73

01:36:04.000 That sucked, though.

01:36:05.000 No, it took so long to do stuff. 0.82

01:36:07.000 That's how it was.

01:36:08.000 All the best culture came from 90s to like 2010.

01:36:13.000 1994.

01:36:15.000 94 was the year.

01:36:16.000 1994 was the PC. 1.00

01:36:17.000 8 City was the shit. 0.99

01:36:18.000 94 was the bomb. 1.00

01:36:20.000 97 was the 2015.

01:36:22.000 94 is the greatest year of humanity.

01:36:24.000 Everybody agrees.

01:36:25.000 That's what I'm saying.

01:36:26.000 Thank you.

01:36:26.000 The Tonies were kicking off.

01:36:26.000 That's true.

01:36:27.000 I mean, it was a great thing.

01:36:28.000 All of the albums you know from the 90s came out in 94.

01:36:31.000 Credit for 94.

01:36:32.000 All of the 90s albums.

01:36:33.000 I have one in January, so it was the best year.

01:36:36.000 You know, the 90s, 40 pumpkins was 94.

01:36:39.000 Siamese Dream was before that, I believe.

01:36:42.000 Gold medal on Big Ben, The Coolest Horse in the World, 1994.

01:36:46.000 What happened?

01:36:48.000 Not five.

01:36:49.000 The 90s were.

01:36:49.000 They always seem cool in retrospect.

01:36:51.000 It's like that nostalgia. 1.00

01:36:52.000 Being there was boring as fuck. 0.95

01:36:54.000 Anything from 90s to 2015 just like was, I don't know, like, bro, Gen Z, look, they dress better than we ever did, but they don't have any like, they don't have goth or punk or live, 94. 0.98

01:37:07.000 Bush, 16 Stone, 94.

01:37:09.000 The Cranberries, 94.

01:37:10.000 Cranberry.

01:37:11.000 What's what we got?

01:37:12.000 Tori Amos.

01:37:14.000 I'm not, you know, Earthquake.

01:37:15.000 Totis was 94.

01:37:16.000 Yeah.

01:37:17.000 We have Neil Young.

01:37:18.000 I mean, that's fine.

01:37:19.000 Soul Coughing, 94.

01:37:21.000 Dinosaur Jr., 94.

01:37:22.000 Really, you go back to 91.

01:37:23.000 91 and 94.

01:37:24.000 We're like, let's see.

01:37:25.000 Q2 is kicking it.

01:37:27.000 Smashing Pumpkins, of course, 94.

01:37:29.000 You've got Bad Religion in 94.

01:37:31.000 You've got, what is it?

01:37:33.000 There's a bunch of songs on that.

01:37:34.000 It's like Mr. Big to Nirvana, you know, that horse transition.

01:37:38.000 Stone Devil Pilot was their second album, though.

01:37:40.000 Broke Assault.

01:37:41.000 So the 90s.

01:37:44.000 I'm an avid kid of the 90s.

01:37:46.000 The offspring sounds. 0.98

01:37:47.000 They suck now, but we'll give them that one. 0.98

01:37:48.000 Ian, why do you like the 90s so much? 0.98

01:37:49.000 REM REM.

01:37:51.000 Sorry, youth.

01:37:52.000 I'm an information guy.

01:37:53.000 I like to learn, and it took so long to learn anything before the internet.

01:37:56.000 It was awful.

01:37:58.000 You had to read.

01:37:59.000 You'd have to look up books if you could even find the book if you didn't even know what you're looking for.

01:38:03.000 So it's like you go to card catalogs at the library.

01:38:05.000 I'm like, I got to be home by 6 o'clock.

01:38:07.000 Sound good.

01:38:08.000 The music was incredibly good in the 90s.

01:38:11.000 No, I agree with that.

01:38:12.000 It was extremely good.

01:38:13.000 I listened to it two plus hours a day every day.

01:38:16.000 Literally.

01:38:16.000 I taped songs off the radio.

01:38:16.000 Radio.

01:38:18.000 I just laid in bed.

01:38:19.000 All I did was read and listen to music.

01:38:21.000 That was my, or ride bikes or video games.

01:38:24.000 But it just didn't have Primus nowadays.

01:38:28.000 Primus?

01:38:29.000 Primus is phenomenal.

01:38:30.000 Did you know that Pink Floyd had a number one album in 94?

01:38:33.000 The wall.

01:38:34.000 No, that didn't come out.

01:38:34.000 No.

01:38:35.000 No, it was the Division Bell.

01:38:37.000 Yeah, Division Bell was pretty good.

01:38:38.000 Tom's heavy, dude.

01:38:39.000 Tom Penny's greatest hits was great.

01:38:40.000 Toto's Greatest Hits, Past to President.

01:38:41.000 The Lion King was the number one album for like three months.

01:38:44.000 I mean, you two.

01:38:46.000 Automatic for the people, REM, groundbreaking.

01:38:48.000 But so, okay, I agree with that, but that doesn't mean that.

01:38:51.000 The final season of Star through the Next Generation.

01:38:53.000 Good, but you had to wait till like Thursday at 8 p.m. to watch it.

01:38:56.000 TV was golden like 2008.

01:38:58.000 It was so much better when we had to wait and we didn't know.

01:39:00.000 When you were like, you'd pick up the phone and you'd call your friend's house and you'd be like, Is Billy home?

01:39:05.000 And she'd be like, I don't know where he is.

01:39:06.000 But guess I'm not going to see him.

01:39:07.000 But that's so much.

01:39:08.000 Because then you just sit around all night.

01:39:10.000 No, I'd know the bunch of trying to get him.

01:39:11.000 You'd go to the park while they were there.

01:39:13.000 No.

01:39:14.000 You go to the, and then they were, and you were like, everybody would hang out in the same places because that's how you found each other.

01:39:19.000 Look for all the bikes.

01:39:20.000 Look for all the bikes.

01:39:21.000 Yeah, but then you get beat up if they were the wrong kids.

01:39:23.000 I mean, did you get beat up a lot when you were a kid?

01:39:26.000 Not a lot.

01:39:27.000 But enough to learn that humans are vicious animals.

01:39:30.000 That's not chanting.

01:39:31.000 Yeah.

01:39:31.000 That's not staying.

01:39:32.000 That's convenient.

01:39:33.000 I'm sorry.

01:39:34.000 It was because I was too smart.

01:39:34.000 Hey, it happened.

01:39:36.000 I would always raise my hand in class.

01:39:37.000 Yep.

01:39:38.000 I just started picking on the kids.

01:39:39.000 I mean, just he's so smart in the show.

01:39:40.000 Sometimes we all just want to get away from it.

01:39:41.000 I didn't realize that they were getting annoyed.

01:39:43.000 Rudyard's been just wincing and just growing up.

01:39:46.000 I'd raise my hand.

01:39:46.000 I'll call on me.

01:39:47.000 Obvious, easy answer.

01:39:48.000 They're just repeating.

01:39:49.000 Repeat what we already told you.

01:39:50.000 I'd answer.

01:39:50.000 Okay, next question.

01:39:51.000 They ask, no one, I'd raise my hand again, and they just look over me at the room like anyone, anyone?

01:39:56.000 Okay, Ian, I'd answer again.

01:39:57.000 Third time, they do it again.

01:39:58.000 No one answered.

01:39:59.000 I'd do it again.

01:40:00.000 Eventually, the kids turned on me like they thought I was trying to be too good or something.

01:40:03.000 You should have told them that you were just better than they are.

01:40:05.000 I didn't know that at the time, though.

01:40:07.000 All right, we're going to go to your Rumble Ranson Super Chat.

01:40:09.000 So smash the like button, share the show with everyone you've ever met in your life, including your neighbor and their dog.

01:40:14.000 You can follow me on asking Instagram at Timcast, of course.

01:40:16.000 That uncensored show be coming up at rumble.com/slash Timcast IRL.

01:40:20.000 But let's see what you guys have to say.

01:40:22.000 Pinochet says, rule of law, LOL, there is no incentive to follow laws anymore, not to mention the laws and systems politicians skirt and ignore.

01:40:30.000 There will never be justice in this country again.

01:40:32.000 Not he's Pinochet.

01:40:33.000 Not never again.

01:40:34.000 Well, his name is actually Pinochet's Helicopter Tours.

01:40:37.000 Of course, he'd say that.

01:40:37.000 He's Pinochet.

01:40:39.000 Justice will come again, but only with moral homogeneity.

01:40:45.000 And I think every society goes through this where you have a moral homogeneity and then it ebbs and flows and then there's a clash.

01:40:54.000 This is the, weren't you saying, Rudyard, that like life is built upon opposition?

01:40:59.000 It is, yeah.

01:41:00.000 The duality of there must be opposition to our worldview for it to be challenged and evolve.

01:41:06.000 Yeah, that's true.

01:41:07.000 Otherwise, we just sit around like dodo birds.

01:41:08.000 You know, we'll just be all fat.

01:41:10.000 What's the best way to bring about homogeneous? 0.99

01:41:14.000 So that's what the liberal economic order wants.

01:41:18.000 They want global homogeny.

01:41:21.000 They want global homosexuality. 0.99

01:41:23.000 No, they want to know homogenization.

01:41:27.000 If you want homogeneity, you can either have everyone mate together or you can segment into smaller populations.

01:41:36.000 Well, they're trying that first one.

01:41:37.000 Yeah.

01:41:38.000 And I don't want a purely homogenous country because you look at Scandinavia.

01:41:45.000 Iceland.

01:41:47.000 They're all cousins.

01:41:48.000 Yeah, that's true.

01:41:49.000 But also, they're hyper-conformist societies.

01:41:53.000 And in a place as big as in America, we're not all going to be homogenous.

01:41:56.000 The question is, what groups are fighting each other?

01:41:58.000 Yeah, but they're happy to be conformist.

01:42:00.000 I don't think they are.

01:42:01.000 They have a super high suicide rate.

01:42:03.000 Well, that's because of the weather, though.

01:42:04.000 They're also all liberals and we love the gays, so you guys might not like that society, that world of order.

01:42:09.000 I got no issue with the gays.

01:42:10.000 Just, you know, do your thing somewhere else. 0.99

01:42:11.000 It's like, let me black out your country.

01:42:11.000 You know what I mean?

01:42:14.000 Might be willing to trans the kids.

01:42:15.000 No, the only issue I have with the trans is the kids, you know? 1.00

01:42:17.000 No kids.

01:42:18.000 They're a very liberal progressive society.

01:42:20.000 The liberal isn't the right word for that, though.

01:42:22.000 Which?

01:42:22.000 You know what I mean?

01:42:23.000 Like, it's not liberal to cut off a kid's hoo-hoo. 0.99

01:42:26.000 No, I would say that's progressive.

01:42:28.000 So you said they were liberal, and I'm like, well, you know.

01:42:28.000 Yeah.

01:42:31.000 Well, I value liberalism more than progressivism.

01:42:33.000 I have sensitivities to certain progressive values, but I don't even understand how the trans stuff is progressivism. 0.99

01:42:38.000 Is it like progressivism is like a really loose label for essentially like pushing dominantly for areas where the like the like high levels of minorities have been like disproportionately disaffected, basically?

01:42:52.000 Like the progressives of the early 1900s were eugenicists, is that the right word?

01:42:52.000 I don't know.

01:42:57.000 They were into eugenics. 0.70

01:42:58.000 I don't know if I would agree that the progressives were.

01:43:00.000 I would say that was a mainstream.

01:43:01.000 That was like the principles.

01:43:01.000 The progressives.

01:43:02.000 No, not the progressives.

01:43:03.000 That was the mainstream.

01:43:04.000 That was the mainstream.

01:43:05.000 No, those are the progressives.

01:43:06.000 Eugenics was mainstream more than it was progressive.

01:43:08.000 Eugenics was not a mainstream opinion.

01:43:10.000 It was an opinion pushed by small elites.

01:43:13.000 But the term progressive, it had a wildly different meaning from a century ago than today.

01:43:18.000 It used to be Woodrow Wilson was a progressive.

01:43:21.000 This is a fact, by the way.

01:43:22.000 Yeah, Thomas Soul talks about it. 0.57

01:43:24.000 Woodrow Wilson was super racist.

01:43:26.000 He was also pro-centralized state and pro-eugenics.

01:43:30.000 And what happened is the Marxists took over over time.

01:43:34.000 And with FDR, you saw a shifting of the term progressive.

01:43:37.000 And the term liberal got co-opted by leftists under FDR as well.

01:43:41.000 Sure.

01:43:42.000 It's just like such a, this is such a boring, uninteresting talking point.

01:43:45.000 It's like, were people of the past into bad things sometimes?

01:43:49.000 I find the entire FS.

01:43:50.000 It's a platform boring because it's inaccurate.

01:43:53.000 Good one.

01:43:53.000 Roy got him with that one, right?

01:43:55.000 Yeah, I did.

01:43:56.000 Changing of definitions of autism bullying at its finest.

01:43:59.000 So like when we, well, if we want to engage with the actual ideas here, right?

01:44:02.000 Like, okay, yeah, eugenics was popular, so was like phrenology, right? 0.83

01:44:05.000 And then these fell out of favor.

01:44:06.000 Although a certain level of soft eugenics has almost been held universally even to this date, right?

01:44:11.000 We just don't want to call it eugenics, right?

01:44:13.000 Like most people are okay, for example, with like making sure that we try to reduce over time rare diseases that cause immense suffering, right?

01:44:20.000 Like people are broadly okay with these ideas.

01:44:23.000 And so obviously I'm not a supporter of eugenics, but I think like saying like, it was just a left idea.

01:44:27.000 It's like, okay, I could just say conservatives just always really love slavery and just love slavery.

01:44:32.000 It's just like it's an unsophisticated, uninteresting way in way to engage with the ideas because it requires typifying an entire like half of political thought that has a massive amount of history that's unsatisfying.

01:44:44.000 It would be the same as if I did that to the conservative side, which I typically aim not to do.

01:44:48.000 You would say a different thing in a different context.

01:44:51.000 In a different context, we are talking about.

01:44:53.000 So in a different context where you're talking about what traits do you want to further inside the population?

01:44:58.000 Because you accept these principles.

01:45:00.000 And I'm not a big eugenics guy.

01:45:02.000 I don't support it.

01:45:04.000 I believe in a mating free market.

01:45:08.000 But so you're willing to accept the principles that are bad, like horrible illnesses.

01:45:13.000 But what principles are positive?

01:45:14.000 What are the positive genetic traits you'd select for?

01:45:17.000 There aren't positive genetic traits that I would like to select.

01:45:20.000 There are traits that make people more successful.

01:45:22.000 There are traits that make people more intelligent.

01:45:23.000 Yeah, but I don't want any level of state-level pressure to be selecting for that.

01:45:26.000 I think that would be bad.

01:45:27.000 You're willing to talk about it at the extremes, but you don't have a logically consistent code for what you're going to success.

01:45:33.000 Have you ever heard of the word pluralism?

01:45:36.000 But what does pluralism mean?

01:45:37.000 Pluralism means that you have irreducible moral values that often end up competing against one another.

01:45:42.000 This is what most democracies are built on.

01:45:43.000 For example, you've got like Hobbes and Locke that are talking about privacy versus freedom, right?

01:45:47.000 Privacy matters and freedom matters.

01:45:49.000 And the actual answer is in different circumstances, you might have to prioritize security, such as at the border, whereas we might prioritize freedom, such as people can't just come into your house without a warrant and take things or arrest you, right?

01:46:00.000 So we have these trade-offs all the time.

01:46:02.000 This is what pluralism is.

01:46:02.000 It's a very accepted standard thing.

01:46:04.000 What's the line between that and just making things up based off context for what sounds good?

01:46:08.000 Well, typically you would utilize philosophy to build a rational reason as to why certain values might matter more here.

01:46:14.000 This is what, like, what do you mean?

01:46:16.000 Do you think Hobbes and Locke just didn't really engage in philosophy? 0.80

01:46:19.000 They're just some silly billy guys who just like had preferences.

01:46:22.000 Hobbes and Locke would be radically right-wing by the current concept. 0.96

01:46:24.000 That's not what I asked. 0.86

01:46:26.000 Do you think Hobbes and Locke's were silly little guys that just cut them? 0.94

01:46:29.000 I'm asking you. 0.97

01:46:30.000 I'm asking it your moral philosophy.

01:46:31.000 I asked you about Hobbes and Locke.

01:46:32.000 Can you not answer it? 0.96

01:46:33.000 Were they silly little guys? 0.99

01:46:34.000 It's a comparison. 0.98

01:46:35.000 I'm making an analogy.

01:46:36.000 Hobbes.

01:46:37.000 Hobbes was operating under a radical modern monarchist perspective, and Locke was operating under a liberal perspective.

01:46:44.000 They both ground themselves in the Greco-Roman and the Western and the Abrahamic tradition.

01:46:51.000 That's not the modern left.

01:46:51.000 Sure.

01:46:53.000 The modern left is not operating on a similar level of rationality as those things.

01:46:57.000 Of course they are.

01:46:57.000 Most of the modern left is broadly built off of like Rawls and utilitarianism.

01:47:02.000 That's not true.

01:47:03.000 And here's the issue, right?

01:47:04.000 I can engage with conservatives and actually take their concept seriously.

01:47:08.000 I think some of the things that you said have been insightful and interesting and should be engaged with, and I've disagreed with some things.

01:47:13.000 The problem is that what you're doing instead is, I think I even heard you before saying, I don't even talk to anybody on the left anymore.

01:47:18.000 Plugging your ears and not engaging with opposition that actually has substantive ideas, especially if such a large population amount finds some of these ideas valuable, is just engage.

01:47:28.000 It's just intellectual naivety and baby behavior.

01:47:32.000 We got to grab more checks.

01:47:33.000 I want to engage with you in the way that you should engage with me in what I'm actually saying.

01:47:37.000 Answer my question.

01:47:38.000 Is Hobbes and Locke silly because they were engaging in a pluralistic question of what is the tension between these two irreducible values of things?

01:47:45.000 So the reason I reached that conclusion is because I've spent hundreds of hours or thousands of hours talking to leftists and I've read thousands of pages in the history of the world.

01:47:53.000 But you don't know me.

01:47:54.000 And I came to the conclusion.

01:47:55.000 I've seen your argument so far and I came to the conclusion.

01:47:58.000 Straw man half of my argument. 0.76

01:47:59.000 And I've came to the conclusion that the left is not rationally consistent and they're not morally consistent.

01:48:04.000 And so agree.

01:48:07.000 The right is anti-war, but they love Trump.

01:48:09.000 They're Christian values, but they have sex tests in their lives. 0.84

01:48:13.000 Sure, I can do this to the right too. 0.94

01:48:15.000 That's my point, is that it's a straw man.

01:48:17.000 Sure.

01:48:18.000 I believe you.

01:48:19.000 I believe you that you have talked to a progressive.

01:48:20.000 But the right is a composition, a coalition of disaffected liberals, libertarians, and conservatives.

01:48:25.000 The left is a coalition of progressives and liberals.

01:48:27.000 The left is a pro-black. 0.96

01:48:28.000 Because the left is not consistent, moderates who are rational.

01:48:31.000 Neither is the right because the right has to have a big tent.

01:48:34.000 No, no, you're talking about specific conservatives.

01:48:36.000 I am saying there is a, when you refer to the right, you're talking about a coalition in modern times, which includes disaffected liberals, moderates, and libertarians.

01:48:44.000 True.

01:48:44.000 They left the left because the left was morally and logically inconsistent.

01:48:48.000 I'll give you a question.

01:48:49.000 They left the left for tons of reasons.

01:48:50.000 Actually, probably the number one reason why they left the left wasn't just logic inconsistency.

01:48:55.000 It was abhorrent left behavior and censorship, right?

01:48:57.000 The way that the left treatment.

01:48:59.000 I would argue a lot of weird beliefs.

01:49:02.000 Like, what is a woman? 1.00

01:49:06.000 It's a performance.

01:49:07.000 I've already answered this question before.

01:49:09.000 This is exactly the point.

01:49:10.000 No, this is the word game.

01:49:11.000 We know what a woman is. 1.00

01:49:12.000 What's a chair?

01:49:14.000 A chair is an object with four legs used for a human being to sit on it.

01:49:17.000 Is a stool with three legs not a chair?

01:49:19.000 It is a chair indeed.

01:49:20.000 Oh, okay.

01:49:21.000 But it didn't match your definition.

01:49:22.000 Well, because a stool is a subset of an object which is.

01:49:25.000 Yeah, we're doing the category.

01:49:27.000 So you're doing a performance that no one believes is real.

01:49:30.000 I'm the only one just willing to engage in the actual philosophy of the question here, right?

01:49:35.000 Rather than just doing some like silly conservation.

01:49:36.000 No, no, no, no.

01:49:37.000 I just don't want to interrupt.

01:49:37.000 I'm willing.

01:49:38.000 No, no, the point is.

01:49:39.000 Ian's always willing.

01:49:40.000 Women use words to convey ideas. 1.00

01:49:42.000 Sometimes we have a mismatch in the definition of words between cultures.

01:49:46.000 Everybody understands what is meant when someone says what is a woman. 0.84

01:49:49.000 That's why I said a performance.

01:49:50.000 If you said to me, what do you mean when you say a performance? 0.98

01:49:52.000 I'd say, by and large, when we say a woman, we mostly mean a person that has tits, that looks like a woman, that typically dresses like a woman and acts like a woman, right? 0.98

01:50:00.000 According to our society. 0.99

01:50:01.000 Yes, it is.

01:50:02.000 Absolutely.

01:50:02.000 No.

01:50:03.000 Yes, because you didn't check my genitalia. 0.99

01:50:03.000 No. 0.99

01:50:05.000 You didn't check my genitalia. 0.94

01:50:06.000 You made up left definition. 0.96

01:50:07.000 You looked at my breasts.

01:50:08.000 You look at the way that I'm fem presenting, that I have long hair and that I talk femininely, and I've talked about tampons and whatever else I've talked about.

01:50:16.000 It might be too, but come on.

01:50:16.000 I appreciate that.

01:50:19.000 I agree.

01:50:20.000 This is the issue.

01:50:22.000 No one uses the word to mean performance, and you know it and you are lying to say otherwise.

01:50:26.000 I'm not because I'm not because the gender movement just absolutely said, actually, let's separate woman from female. 0.94

01:50:32.000 A female is a biological. 1.00

01:50:34.000 People who would make the argument that the word woman means performance are progressive, hoity-toy individuals who pretend like they're smarter than other people.

01:50:40.000 This is the way language has always worked, right?

01:50:42.000 Yes, it absolutely is.

01:50:44.000 Language and definitions have absolutely shifted in utilization and what we mean them to use all the time.

01:50:49.000 This is why depression is a problem.

01:50:50.000 You want to create elements of weirdos.

01:50:52.000 And depression, the moderates leave.

01:50:56.000 Because you are logically inconsistent.

01:50:57.000 Well, it does something that's really interesting, which is that it creates basically a very simple thing.

01:51:02.000 It causes a major question.

01:51:03.000 It makes somebody look silly if they don't have an immediately satisfying answer.

01:51:06.000 But what it also is doing is it's employing a categorical error and utilizing that to say, see how simple this is?

01:51:13.000 And I would agree, yeah, 99% of the time.

01:51:16.000 Sure, but the issue is that, again, we have these fringe instances where it doesn't fall into it, which is why we utilize either language left.

01:51:23.000 We're talking about things like that.

01:51:24.000 You can argue that 2 plus 2 equals 5.

01:51:25.000 2 plus 2 equals 5.

01:51:27.000 I would say I disagree.

01:51:28.000 But I think the mainstream left did.

01:51:30.000 And they also could not define woman, despite the fact that everyone on the planet can. 1.00

01:51:35.000 And then moderates were like, these people are nuts.

01:51:38.000 The core assumption of the left is social constructionism, that you can use social categories to create reality and that the people in power through using social categories can fundamentally alter reality.

01:51:51.000 My core assumptions of reality, if you want to look at Aristotle or Plato, Aristotle said that material things exist and that material things are reflections of higher things, but you should assess the material things first.

01:52:04.000 Plato thought that the world we live in is a reflection of higher divine forms.

01:52:09.000 Western civilization has used these two different theories based on context to assess for different layers of reality.

01:52:18.000 And so the West has alternated between these two core theories, and these were the acceptable ones for how to structure reality.

01:52:25.000 We got to grab checks.

01:52:28.000 What's money?

01:52:28.000 Money is typically a universal trade medium that represents debt for exchange between individuals for something of value.

01:52:34.000 Can we shift and change what money actually means?

01:52:36.000 And have we?

01:52:36.000 What do you mean?

01:52:37.000 Well, in the past, for example, we utilize like loan sticks, and then we shifted to gold, for example.

01:52:42.000 Inflation.

01:52:42.000 And money is always.

01:52:44.000 Inflation is not the answer to the question.

01:52:44.000 It's a universal intermediary of value exchange.

01:52:47.000 And money has always been the intermediary for value exchange.

01:52:47.000 That's right.

01:52:51.000 Sure, but the way that we've observed and viewed money, the way that we've engaged with money, modern monetary theory.

01:52:57.000 Technology does not change the fact that a woman is an adult woman.

01:53:01.000 The issue is that when technology exists, we discovered that a lot of fundamental axioms that we held about the world are more complex and fractal than we would have to do.

01:53:08.000 I'm just going to say this again.

01:53:09.000 You do recognize that like 95% of people on the planet disagree with what you're saying.

01:53:14.000 Absolutely.

01:53:14.000 But the issue is, hold on, hold on.

01:53:16.000 At a quantum level, for example, 99% of the population would disagree.

01:53:20.000 If I say, if I'm not looking at the moon, if nobody observes it, does it exist?

01:53:24.000 Everyone would say, yeah, of course it exists.

01:53:26.000 But at a quantum, well, at a quantum level, no, it doesn't.

01:53:30.000 That's really true.

01:53:30.000 Yes, it is true.

01:53:31.000 Project permanent desired by baby in one year.

01:53:34.000 This is like the major quantum conversation that happened between Einstein and what's the problem.

01:53:39.000 You fundamentally misunderstand the double slit experiment.

01:53:42.000 Can we read more super channels?

01:53:43.000 This is not about the double slit experiment at all.

01:53:44.000 I don't even know why you're not.

01:53:45.000 Particle wave duality.

01:53:46.000 They both embrace uncertainty.

01:53:47.000 Yes, it is about particle wave duality.

01:53:49.000 Yes.

01:53:50.000 We'll change the definition of the term current.

01:53:50.000 Okay.

01:53:52.000 Schoener's cat and all that stuff.

01:53:53.000 We get it.

01:53:53.000 All right.

01:53:54.000 Let's see what we got here.

01:53:55.000 Timothy Robinson says, always good to see you, Rudyard.

01:53:59.000 Rudyard Hist 102's Age of the Last Men was insightful.

01:54:03.000 Could I impose on you for a book suggestion of Cold War history?

01:54:07.000 The best Cold War history is John Lewis Gaddis's one.

01:54:11.000 I'm trying to think of any other ones.

01:54:12.000 Dan Carlin's got a great podcast, too.

01:54:16.000 Right on.

01:54:17.000 Cody Ellen says, What's your favorite death cab song, Tim?

01:54:22.000 Tremendous question.

01:54:23.000 I like the earlier albums.

01:54:25.000 President of What is one of my favorites?

01:54:28.000 I used to play it all the time on the guitar.

01:54:29.000 TV Trace is pretty good.

01:54:31.000 And then I would just say, like the thing about all their albums is every single song was good.

01:54:37.000 Title Registration has always been a big favorite of mine.

01:54:39.000 I could play that one.

01:54:40.000 And then, of course, Transatlanticism, Tiny Vessels, so good.

01:54:47.000 And We Looked Like Giants.

01:54:50.000 We looked like Giants may actually be my favorite.

01:54:53.000 It's a tough call.

01:54:54.000 What about Falkland?

01:54:56.000 You know, I like Transatlanticism.

01:55:00.000 Or the New Year, actually.

01:55:01.000 The New Year, because when I was in my, like, when that song came out, all of the hipster indie kids, like, we'd have a party on New Year's, and everybody would play the new year as soon as the new year hit because we were so cool.

01:55:13.000 But then also give a shout out to the Postal Service because that was good, too.

01:55:16.000 I Will Follow You Into the Dark.

01:55:17.000 Is that Death Cab?

01:55:18.000 Yes.

01:55:18.000 I love that song, man.

01:55:19.000 That's so good.

01:55:20.000 See, but that's overplayed.

01:55:22.000 You're talking about the OG stuff, bro.

01:55:24.000 He's going to be a hipster, man. 0.99

01:55:25.000 Someday you will die. 0.96

01:55:27.000 That song's so good. 0.97

01:55:28.000 Don't get a sword.

01:55:28.000 I'll be right behind.

01:55:30.000 But to be fair, Soulmate's Body is okay.

01:55:32.000 Crooked Teeth, I really do like.

01:55:34.000 I really just love, like, President of What?

01:55:38.000 Ben Gibbard is a master lyricist.

01:55:40.000 He knows how to do it.

01:55:41.000 I haven't listened to Death Camp in a long time, though.

01:55:43.000 They had a new song come out the other day.

01:55:44.000 Good for them.

01:55:44.000 Oh, wow.

01:55:45.000 All right, let's go.

01:55:46.000 Minor Zirkon says, this chick is a communist. 0.95

01:55:48.000 I thought we figured that out yesterday when she wanted the government to steal people's property.

01:55:52.000 That never happened.

01:55:53.000 Again, you can strawman me for as long as you want.

01:55:56.000 The issue is that I, in large part, come to Tim's show because I want to engage genuinely with people of opposing ideas.

01:56:02.000 If you can't do the same to me, that's fine, but that's a reflection of you.

01:56:05.000 No, no, actually, we all agree with you, but before you got here, we all talked to each other and said, let's just pretend like we don't.

01:56:11.000 They actually also, we voted for Kamala.

01:56:13.000 I'm not even going to lie.

01:56:14.000 We voted for Kamala.

01:56:15.000 Only when liberals show up, we change the format of the show.

01:56:18.000 Would you think it's right-wing?

01:56:19.000 Would you have voted for Kamala?

01:56:21.000 Yeah, probably.

01:56:22.000 I do like it because they selected her.

01:56:23.000 Not even probably.

01:56:24.000 Absolutely, unequivocally unquestionable.

01:56:26.000 The problem was they didn't have a primary, and it was like imperial selection.

01:56:29.000 That's like, I don't want to vote for imperial selection.

01:56:31.000 Sure, but it's better than somebody who tried to overthrow their own.

01:56:34.000 I got to read this.

01:56:35.000 I vote for Kamala.

01:56:36.000 I hate Mark Efferburn says, drug test your guests, Tim.

01:56:40.000 Okay.

01:56:41.000 Mythos says, Kami Mami, just to let you know, corporations are considered individuals under American law.

01:56:46.000 If you let another country screw over our business interests, you are letting them screw over the majority.

01:56:50.000 So that's a good thing, actually.

01:56:53.000 The law did it, so that's a good thing.

01:56:55.000 I thought it was funny that he called you Kami Mami.

01:56:57.000 Yeah, all of them are going to call me Kami.

01:56:58.000 I'm not a communist.

01:56:59.000 In fact, I spend a large portion of my content pushing.

01:57:03.000 Tim's the Great says, I live in rural Virginia.

01:57:05.000 If a pregnant cow, a heifer, crosses onto my land, neither the cow or calf become mine, and I could be killed if I try to say they are. 0.65

01:57:12.000 And birthright citizenship.

01:57:15.000 I want to take the cow. 1.00

01:57:18.000 Methos says, Jesus is the third temple.

01:57:20.000 His return is the fulfillment of the prophecies.

01:57:22.000 He said before his death, tear this temple down and I will rebuild it in three days.

01:57:26.000 He came back to life in three days.

01:57:28.000 Interesting.

01:57:31.000 All right.

01:57:32.000 Let's see what we got going over here on this YouTube.

01:57:35.000 We got a bunch of big, big super chats here around this.

01:57:39.000 Big ones.

01:57:40.000 Big, very big.

01:57:41.000 Very big.

01:57:42.000 Some say too big, but it's okay.

01:57:43.000 The biggest, the best.

01:57:44.000 Madcap vlog says, I got a question for Rudyard.

01:57:47.000 Have you looked into astrology and the 84-year Uranus cycle?

01:57:51.000 The last Neptune was in Aries.

01:57:54.000 The last Neptune was in Aries was the Civil War.

01:57:57.000 The last time Pluto was in Aquarius was the American Revolution.

01:58:00.000 Is it real?

01:58:01.000 I have not studied astrology.

01:58:03.000 I have not put significant effort into it.

01:58:05.000 I heard there were studies by the CIA studying it that thought that I heard the CIA did research that there are correlations in political events and astrology, but I haven't looked deeply into that.

01:58:15.000 We're talking about Newton and how he was into alchemy.

01:58:18.000 Newton was into alchemy and these things were all part of the same coherent pre-modern worldview, but I have not sunk a lot of time into astrology.

01:58:27.000 Personally, I feel like the planets, if it is a magnetic universe, which evidence is pointing at, that they're like lenses, radiation lenses, so that the radiation passes through planetary bodies and it can super accelerate and leave imprints on your body when it comes out of the mom's EMF frequency body.

01:58:44.000 You're exposed to the radiation and it imprints something on you.

01:58:47.000 Might have something to do with what their stars and planets are.

01:58:49.000 People generally believe that the planets inform stuff over history.

01:58:55.000 What I would best guess is it's a correlation thing, that the planets operate under certain underlying correlations we're not aware of, and that these correlations operate across the universe.

01:59:06.000 Because lots, like, you know, the suicide rate is correlated with the yo-yo purchasing rate.

01:59:10.000 And no one thinks that buying yo-yos causes suicide.

01:59:15.000 I do now.

01:59:16.000 Have you ever seen the website, Spurious Correlations?

01:59:18.000 Yeah, I have.

01:59:18.000 It's great, right?

01:59:21.000 Spurious correlations.

01:59:23.000 This site's been around forever.

01:59:24.000 It's so good.

01:59:25.000 Here we go.

01:59:27.000 Google searches, let's see, the number of movies Dwayne Johnson appeared in correlates with Google searches for zombies.

01:59:35.000 Popularity of the first name Caroline inversely correlates with Newmont's stock price.

01:59:42.000 Interesting.

01:59:44.000 Google searches for zombies correlates with the number of real estate agents in North Dakota.

01:59:49.000 Interesting.

01:59:50.000 The distance between Neptune and Mercury correlates with petroleum consumption in Azerbaijan.

01:59:55.000 Whoa.

01:59:56.000 That proves it something.

01:59:57.000 And it's from 92 to 2017, too.

02:00:00.000 Right, right, right.

02:00:01.000 All these different timelines, interesting.

02:00:03.000 I wonder why that can't hold to a consistent timeline for their claims.

02:00:06.000 The popularity of the press F to Pay Respects meme correlates with Boeing's stock price.

02:00:11.000 Naturally.

02:00:12.000 I wonder what happened before 2006.

02:00:15.000 Probably the same thing.

02:00:16.000 Or before 2011 or before 2004, 1999.

02:00:19.000 Interesting.

02:00:19.000 Obviously, exactly what you found.

02:00:21.000 Can you just take a little snapshot of them?

02:00:22.000 Yeah, I love that.

02:00:24.000 The number of breweries in the U.S. correlates with Amazon stock price.

02:00:27.000 That is not a spurious correlation.

02:00:29.000 That is not at all a spurious correlation.

02:00:31.000 Because they bought Whole Foods and they put breweries in the Whole Foods.

02:00:33.000 No, Amazon stocks themselves are sentient and they buy beer.

02:00:37.000 No, because Amazon's growth correlates directly with the shuttering of box stores and local businesses, which creates open vacant buildings by which people try to fill them with a service that Amazon does not provide.

02:00:51.000 So your local butcher gets shut down, your local packaging store gets shut down, whatever Amazon.com can replace, there are now empty buildings in your city center.

02:01:00.000 And what can't Amazon make?

02:01:01.000 A brewery to hang out, play games, and drink.

02:01:03.000 So this actually makes sense.

02:01:05.000 Interesting.

02:01:06.000 They do have sell beer, like in the Whole Foods in Venice, California, on Rose and 7th.

02:01:10.000 We would go hang out at the bar in the Whole Foods.

02:01:14.000 Let's grab this one from the Apostle James says, I'm a combat veteran, 22 years in the USMC infantry, six combat deployments.

02:01:21.000 I can tell that Kyla has never experienced real adversity, let alone seconds to assess potential life and death danger.

02:01:26.000 Okay, just to front loan this.

02:01:28.000 That's the hop.

02:01:29.000 No, I was serially sexually abused from zero to three.

02:01:33.000 I worked for, it's fine, it's nobody's fault.

02:01:36.000 One of the worst things that I think that we do on all of these types of political conversations is we engage in thought termination, right?

02:01:41.000 We use cliches that will make our audiences happy, like being like, what is your woman? 0.99

02:01:46.000 It's like, okay, I can just scream, Trump's a pedophile, and my audiences will be happy too. 0.92

02:01:50.000 I think one of the worst things that we also do is we assume a lot about each other, right? 0.95

02:01:53.000 You've assumed, for example, that there's no substance that you can engage with me on, which is unfortunate because I haven't assumed that about you, despite the fact that I haven't been overly impressed by any of you.

02:02:02.000 You've never been in a life-and-death situation, right?

02:02:04.000 Yes, I have.

02:02:05.000 I've had children chase me with axes.

02:02:07.000 I worked for high-risk youth.

02:02:09.000 I spent most of my career in jails working with both young sex offenders and their victims.

02:02:14.000 But they're getting chased by dude that's a very good idea.

02:02:16.000 I'm not a combat.

02:02:16.000 I'm not a combat veteran, and I would never, ever begin to take that away from people or steal that valor.

02:02:22.000 But have you ever been shot at?

02:02:23.000 People pretending.

02:02:24.000 No, I haven't, but I'm Canadian.

02:02:26.000 We don't have guns.

02:02:27.000 Well, that's crazy, right?

02:02:28.000 We have the next question.

02:02:31.000 Close, actually.

02:02:32.000 Very close.

02:02:33.000 And I'm sure someone said after our hockey team beat the Canadians, they have to give each person in America 40 acres and a moose.

02:02:40.000 I agree.

02:02:41.000 Yeah, but you get only the Northern Territory, so nobody cares.

02:02:44.000 In Roger's defense, he did ask you what your philosophy.

02:02:46.000 When you guys were going at it, he asked you what your philosophy was, but it kind of got ignored.

02:02:49.000 Sure, the reason why I'm saying that he's not engaging with me is he just keeps insisting you're morally inconsistent.

02:02:54.000 And it's like, I'm a pluralist.

02:02:56.000 Being pluralistic necessary, like, it doesn't mean that I'm not, I can't be inconsistent, but you can just ask me, how do you draw the through line of your foreign policy?

02:03:04.000 And I'll give it to you.

02:03:06.000 But instead, you assume things about my foreign policy.

02:03:08.000 I think the point you understand is that, like, I'm going to say this.

02:03:11.000 So, the reason I say this is that I've spent a very significant amount of time studying the philosophy of the left.

02:03:17.000 And the left uses various rhetorical games.

02:03:19.000 And when I hear them, I just throw them out.

02:03:21.000 Because the rhetoric, you've used many.

02:03:23.000 So when I hear the rhetorical games, I hear the mental filtering process they're used for.

02:03:27.000 But what is a woman? 1.00

02:03:28.000 Isn't a rhetorical game?

02:03:29.000 What are we talking about?

02:03:30.000 I'm done.

02:03:31.000 So I'm not done.

02:03:32.000 So, I'll ask you after.

02:03:33.000 When you look at how the left operates, they have a series of mental games they use, and they have a series of filtering consumes.

02:03:41.000 Why don't we start off the uncensored show with this?

02:03:43.000 So just keep that location.

02:03:45.000 We're going to jump over to the uncensored portion.

02:03:46.000 Also, comie mummy-based.

02:03:48.000 I'm taking it.

02:03:48.000 Rumble.com.

02:03:50.000 Common mummy.

02:03:50.000 Rumble.com/slash Timcast IRL in about 30 seconds, and then we'll add swear words to the arguments.

02:03:55.000 You can follow me on Axe and Instagram at Timcast.

02:03:57.000 Roger, do you want to shout anything out?

02:03:59.000 You could watch my shows.

02:04:00.000 I'm just here, man.

02:04:02.000 Just load it up.

02:04:04.000 So I should start now?

02:04:05.000 No, we're going to shout out someone's jover.

02:04:08.000 So, Kylo, what's up?

02:04:09.000 Hey, not so erudite.

02:04:09.000 Yeah.

02:04:10.000 If you actually want to engage in substance, that's kind of the thing that I do.

02:04:14.000 I don't care what you think.

02:04:16.000 Oh, no.

02:04:16.000 I care how you are.

02:04:18.000 Yes, it's not about what, it's about how.

02:04:20.000 We are bridging the gap.

02:04:21.000 Literally, the future is reliant on people continuing to communicate in high-stress situations like this.

02:04:27.000 So keep it going.

02:04:28.000 Ian's a dogged subscriber.

02:04:30.000 You can't trust anything he says about this.

02:04:31.000 All I want is to preserve righteousness throughout.

02:04:35.000 We got to define all those terms.

02:04:36.000 I'm at Ian Crossland.

02:04:37.000 Follow me there, Carter Banks.

02:04:38.000 Man, this has been a really great discussion.

02:04:40.000 Thank you both for coming out.

02:04:42.000 And I'm really excited for the after-show.

02:04:43.000 You can follow me at Carter Banks everywhere.

02:04:45.000 Phil.

02:04:46.000 I am Phil the Remains on Twix.

02:04:48.000 You can check out my Patreon.

02:04:50.000 That is patreon.com/slash Phil the Remains.

02:04:52.000 The band is all that remains.

02:04:53.000 We're going on tour this spring.

02:04:54.000 We're going to be out with Born of Osiris and Dead Eyes.

02:04:57.000 We start April 29th in Albany.

02:05:00.000 You can check out tickets.

02:05:02.000 You can get tickets at alltheremainsonline.com.

02:05:04.000 You can check out the band's music at Apple Music, Amazon Music, Pandora, YouTube, Spotify, and Deezer.

02:05:08.000 Don't forget the left lane is for crime.

02:05:10.000 We will see you all over at rumble.com/slash Timcast IRL in about 30 seconds.

02:05:14.000 Thanks for hanging out.

02:06:20.000 Did you want to wait for Kyla to come back before you met here?

02:06:22.000 Yeah, I'll wait for her.

02:06:23.000 I'll play a song then in the meantime.

02:06:25.000 So quick, Phil, talk about something.

02:06:28.000 So today what do you actually, I'm going to go after?

02:06:33.000 No, I think okay, you've only got four strings on that thing.

02:06:35.000 Oh, it's four strings and they're not even the busted ones.

02:06:38.000 I'm using the high E and the G. Probably get some strings delivered, I bet.

02:06:44.000 The body feels nice on it.

02:06:46.000 Does it feel nice?

02:06:47.000 Yeah, it was dusty.

02:06:48.000 It hadn't been touched in like months.

02:06:50.000 It's almost loose.

02:06:51.000 Yeah, I tuned it up earlier.

02:06:52.000 I think the high, what is it, the B string is tweaking.

02:06:58.000 Sambles along here. 0.79

02:07:00.000 Yeah.

02:07:01.000 Broke into the old apartment.

02:07:04.000 I think so, yeah.

02:07:05.000 That's a good song.

02:07:06.000 Yeah.

02:07:07.000 42 steps from the street.

02:07:09.000 You know that song?

02:07:10.000 I think there's a capo on three for that.

02:07:14.000 I got three strings to work with, so there's no minors.

02:07:18.000 You can still get most of it.

02:07:19.000 I mean, you get three strings.

02:07:19.000 You get most of the chords.

02:07:21.000 No.

02:07:22.000 You try heads.

02:07:23.000 Here you go.

02:07:34.000 What was the big news that we were gonna talk about?

02:07:36.000 Kyla, what is it that you were running your face about earlier?

02:07:41.000 Nothing?

02:07:42.000 Running your face about?

02:07:43.000 She was talking about philosophy, you and Rudyard.

02:07:47.000 The topic of the after-show is going to be talking about.

02:07:56.000 The left changing the goalposts of definitions, is that a good way to tap it up?

02:08:01.000 There's one thing that I don't understand about your, but one of the things that you consistently say, right?

02:08:06.000 So you consider yourself not a leftist, right?

02:08:10.000 Well, by leftist, in my camp, when you say leftists, and when we say leftist, we mean like they're edging into like pure communist.

02:08:17.000 Yeah, okay.

02:08:17.000 Not a communist.

02:08:18.000 Okay, so that's fair.

02:08:19.000 I'm very doggedly, aggressively opposed to communism.

02:08:23.000 Okay, so, but there are, so would you consider yourself postmodernist?

02:08:27.000 I'm also a liberal.

02:08:28.000 No, not a postodernist, because I believe in like moral objectivity.

02:08:32.000 So then, so the way that you use words oftentimes does sound like postmodernism, at least in my ears.

02:08:41.000 When you're talking about, when you're talking about like, oh, you know, for instance, the what is a woman question.

02:08:45.000 Yeah, the idea that the word itself doesn't actually have any meaning.

02:08:52.000 It's more, so I think that, I think one of the worst things, so as somebody who actually loves Jordan Peterson a lot, I think one of the worst things that he did is just excuse all of postmodernism.

02:09:00.000 I think there's a valid and important critique that we need to engage with, which is that a lot of the things in society that we presume are objective and dogged and material and must be this way oftentimes are kind of circumstantially erected and also circumstantially deposed.

02:09:15.000 And I think that that's an important conversation to have because we assume so many things that are immutable, oftentimes on a basis that we can't really ground out.

02:09:23.000 And I think that that's a conversation worth having because it's valid, in my view, to figure out what is unchanging, why one does equal one, and how do we substantiate that.

02:09:33.000 Deus Wolt, that's why.

02:09:35.000 The reason I said that is I've spent a significant amount of time studying the left and I read thousands of pages in the origin of the left alive yet?

02:09:43.000 Their internal logic structure.

02:09:45.000 And the left's predominant motivator is power and they say whatever they can to get power.

02:09:49.000 Is that me?

02:09:51.000 I'm not done yet.

02:09:52.000 And so when you look at women, when you look at the left, they have a variety of arguments they use, and they change definitions you can't hold them. 0.71

02:10:03.000 And they'll alternate a definition based on context for whatever can allow them to have power.

02:10:08.000 And so the term liberal can have five different meanings based on context.

02:10:12.000 The term leftist can have five different meanings.

02:10:14.000 Same thing as working class, same thing as women. 1.00

02:10:16.000 And they do this.

02:10:17.000 You can't hold them down to a singular thing.

02:10:19.000 And so when I hear leftist arguments, I know that the person's operating under that system.

02:10:24.000 And so most leftists, and this has been proven through studies, have a quite uniform worldview.

02:10:30.000 And so if you can know one of their opinions, you'll know the rest.

02:10:33.000 And once you can see the games with alternating logic structures, you know what's going on because the foundational argument behind the left, and this stems back to the 19th century, is that reality is socially constructed.

02:10:46.000 And if someone believes that reality is socially constructed, you can't hold them to an underlying argument because they're going to keep changing definitions until they can get more power.

02:10:55.000 Okay, so if you want to engage with me, I think one thing that we have to establish is that if you front load a whole bunch of information, I either have to monologue back at you, which is boring, or we have to go point by point.

02:11:06.000 So I'll say, I'll begin at the beginning.

02:11:08.000 Am I the left or am I Kyla?

02:11:10.000 Individuals operate within groups.

02:11:13.000 Am I the left or am I Kyla?

02:11:14.000 You are both.

02:11:15.000 But the thing is, it's very rare that people are.

02:11:19.000 How can I be both?

02:11:20.000 me explain it's very rare that people have wishy-washy what those definitions are Can you explain?

02:11:24.000 Well, how am I both the left?

02:11:26.000 You're not going to answer you.

02:11:28.000 I'm doing the thing.

02:11:29.000 It's very rare that individuals have viewpoints that are theirs.

02:11:33.000 And that stems from having a data set distinct from the population.

02:11:38.000 There's only a handful of free thinkers at any given era of history.

02:11:41.000 The vast majority of people replicate the views that their group has.

02:11:45.000 And so in almost every case, if you hear a handful of someone's views, you can assess the rest of their views because humans are innately troubled.

02:11:52.000 I'm not going to say that I'm Christian or non-Christian.

02:11:54.000 I don't know.

02:11:55.000 Take a guess.

02:11:56.000 It seems like you can assume all my views based on your claim.

02:11:58.000 So you said I'm the left and Kyla.

02:12:00.000 So what are all the views that I've assumed?

02:12:01.000 Am I Christian or not?

02:12:02.000 I can make a probabilistic bet based on context.

02:12:05.000 What is it?

02:12:06.000 I don't think your Christianity matters. 1.00

02:12:08.000 What do you put it at?

02:12:09.000 I would think that you would say you're Christian, but you don't actually follow Christian moral code.

02:12:13.000 Why would you suddenly say that?

02:12:14.000 Because Christianity has a series of assumptions that make sense in a pre-modern culture that people can say when they translate into a modern culture.

02:12:24.000 Where lots of people who, if they lived 300 years ago, would not be Christian.

02:12:28.000 Are you Christian or non-Christian?

02:12:30.000 You're in an indeterminate space that allows plausible deniability.

02:12:33.000 That's a really great way to determine.

02:12:35.000 I didn't agree with that.

02:12:35.000 No, the reason I'm saying is every single thing the left says allows plausible deniability because plausible deniability is the currency where the left can't make it.

02:12:44.000 So you can simultaneously, out of one side of your mouth, insist that based on some factors of things that you've heard and all the left that you've studied, you could just assume all of my positions and then I go, great, assume one of my positions.

02:12:55.000 And you go, oh, well, I can't actually be.

02:12:57.000 I'm saying that because I'm mirroring great.

02:12:59.000 Great predictivity.

02:13:01.000 Because if this was a normal historic society like Confucian China or Islam of established principles that everyone in said society agrees to, what the left does is they pick positions that allow an enormous amount of plausible deniability.

02:13:17.000 So you can say you're Christian, but you don't actually follow a Christian moral code.

02:13:20.000 And that allows you to appeal to Christians to work with them, but then not actually follow the moral code. 0.68

02:13:26.000 And this is what the left does strategically.

02:13:28.000 And so when I see these games, I just automatically shove people in that bracket.

02:13:34.000 So you can assume everything about me, but you also can't know, you can't actually give me a certain amount of time.

02:13:38.000 Because that's a leftist strategy.

02:13:40.000 No, you're doing it.

02:13:41.000 Yes, you're doing the leftist strategy because you're denying that.

02:13:43.000 You're saying, I'm not doing this thing.

02:13:45.000 I can just say things.

02:13:46.000 For example, I don't quite know what your politics are.

02:13:48.000 You seem conservative.

02:13:49.000 I wouldn't be surprised if maybe you're a natural lawist, because it seems like you're maybe not into, like, it seems like you're not a theist, but I'm not really sure, right?

02:13:56.000 So I wouldn't be surprised if you're a natural law objectivist, but I could be wrong, right?

02:13:59.000 These would be some presumptions.

02:14:01.000 But what you'll notice is I'm not assigning you any of these positions. 0.98

02:14:04.000 What you've done in this conversation is you have assigned me positions that you're assuming, and now when I'm holding your feet to the fire and saying, put some fucking money on it, you can't do it. 0.98

02:14:11.000 You can't label me Christian or non-Christian. 0.93

02:14:13.000 You have to exist in the plausible deniability because you're wrong.

02:14:16.000 You don't know anything about me.

02:14:17.000 You can't predict my position.

02:14:18.000 Because anthropologically, the left lies.

02:14:21.000 And so when I see someone fits in that category.

02:14:23.000 That's anthropologically the left lies.

02:14:25.000 Can you, what does that mean?

02:14:26.000 Because the left has a strategy where they can have an enormous amount of plausible deniability.

02:14:29.000 Isn't that what you're doing right now?

02:14:30.000 To change, okay, if I'm.

02:14:31.000 How do you not have plausible deniability by saying, I can assume everything about you based on a couple of things that you've said, but also when you ask me to label me, I can't actually know.

02:14:39.000 Aren't you just existing in a plausible, deniable state?

02:14:39.000 How are.

02:14:42.000 I would say that you would say you're Christian, but you don't actually follow Christian morality.

02:14:46.000 And how would you establish whether I follow Christian morality?

02:14:49.000 Because if you were to go back 500 years ago into a society that was fully Christian, they would say you were a heretic.

02:14:56.000 Christianity hasn't updated and changed?

02:14:58.000 Because there's a set rule book called the Bible, and if you do not follow the rule book, you're not a Christian. 0.72

02:15:03.000 And that was the established rule kit.

02:15:05.000 And what the left does is it creates games where you can muddle the ground.

02:15:08.000 And when you muddle the ground.

02:15:10.000 Aren't the Christians muddling the ground? 1.00

02:15:11.000 Eastern Orthodox don't believe in the filioque, but the Catholics do, so who's right there? 1.00

02:15:15.000 Which version?

02:15:16.000 Every single thing you say muddies the water and you're not establishing categories of thinking.

02:15:21.000 What I'm doing is I'm trying to establish.

02:15:23.000 Is the filioque true?

02:15:26.000 Wait, so is Christianity concrete and simple and knowable, and there's a strict moral code that all Christians follow?

02:15:32.000 Or are there actually massive diasporas and different opinions on these things?

02:15:36.000 Which is it?

02:15:36.000 You're muddying the water.

02:15:37.000 How am I muddying the water?

02:15:38.000 I'm asking a very specific question.

02:15:40.000 Is it A or B?

02:15:40.000 Which is it?

02:15:42.000 I am establishing logical categories.

02:15:44.000 What you're trying to do is establish logical binaries.

02:15:47.000 So if I pick the wrong binary, I have the wrong choice.

02:15:50.000 So what I'm saying is that the left.

02:15:52.000 Isn't that what you're doing to me by saying I'm the left, so I must have these positions and you can't engage with me?

02:15:56.000 Aren't you engaging in a binary there?

02:15:57.000 You're saying, well, you're left, Kyla, so why would I listen to you or take any substance from you?

02:16:02.000 You're left.

02:16:03.000 There's nothing I can take.

02:16:04.000 It's not a problem.

02:16:04.000 You haven't demonstrated that you're one.

02:16:06.000 You exist.

02:16:08.000 You've talked a lot.

02:16:09.000 You haven't demonstrated that you exist outside of group categories.

02:16:13.000 Sure, I have.

02:16:15.000 How?

02:16:16.000 I'm here.

02:16:16.000 I think yesterday I had criticized Hillary Clinton.

02:16:19.000 I acknowledge.

02:16:21.000 Well, I acknowledged that the left is a lot of people.

02:16:22.000 Yeah, but after the show, she was like, I love Hillary so much.

02:16:25.000 That's not true.

02:16:27.000 I agreed and established.

02:16:29.000 I need to get water soon.

02:16:29.000 My mouth is super dry.

02:16:31.000 Thank you so much.

02:16:31.000 I agreed.

02:16:32.000 I agreed and established, for example, that the left mistreated and was wrong in how they engaged with the right from like 2016 to 2022, which most partisan hacks won't agree with me.

02:16:40.000 Okay, wait, prove you're not left.

02:16:42.000 Say you like Donald Trump.

02:16:43.000 I don't need to prove I'm not left.

02:16:44.000 Say you love Donald Trump.

02:16:46.000 I don't need to do that.

02:16:47.000 I don't need to prove that I'm left.

02:16:48.000 I need to prove.

02:16:49.000 All that needs to happen is he needs to prove that I cannot fall outside of my stereotype.

02:16:53.000 So what?

02:16:54.000 Which is why he was not.

02:16:55.000 I think he's trying.

02:16:56.000 You've put the right.

02:16:57.000 I can do this too. 1.00

02:16:58.000 Trump's a pedophile. 1.00

02:16:59.000 Trump's a pedophile. 1.00

02:17:00.000 I can do thought-terminating conversations. 1.00

02:17:02.000 You're doing what I said you would.

02:17:03.000 No, no, I'm not.

02:17:04.000 Tell me that's not the same thing. 1.00

02:17:05.000 Tell me, Trump's a pedophile. 1.00

02:17:08.000 Trump's a pedophile. 1.00

02:17:09.000 Okay. 1.00

02:17:10.000 I think you proved that you're not.

02:17:11.000 What is a psycho?

02:17:13.000 Somebody who performs like a woman. 0.83

02:17:14.000 You see, this is why you're on the left.

02:17:16.000 Nope, it's not.

02:17:17.000 That is a left moral.

02:17:19.000 Can children be trans?

02:17:21.000 Okay, well it seems like, wait, do they just magically become trans at 18? 0.91

02:17:21.000 No. 0.91

02:17:25.000 Can adults be trans?

02:17:27.000 I'd argue if they can experience gender dysphoria. 0.77

02:17:30.000 Oh, okay.

02:17:31.000 So adults can, but kids can't?

02:17:33.000 Yeah, no, I don't think so.

02:17:34.000 Okay, so suddenly at 18, magically gender dysphoria turns on transition.

02:17:37.000 I think it's post-pubescent, a period between that and adulthood.

02:17:40.000 They start to experience gender dysphoria.

02:17:44.000 Pre-pubescent, no.

02:17:46.000 Teenagers at some point post-pubescent, switchers, minors, kids, yeah.

02:17:49.000 So I'm glad we can clarify those definitions.

02:17:51.000 Yeah, so pre-pubescent, no, like jazz genetics, absolutely not.

02:17:54.000 Well, it's interesting, actually, when you look at gender dysphoria study, there's three major areas where dysphoria seems to emerge.

02:17:59.000 The most extreme and common one is actually at like three years old, and then there's the going through puberty patients.

02:18:04.000 Which is dramatically different from what a 20-year-old is experiencing.

02:18:08.000 I agree that they're different, but you said trans kids can't exist, and obviously they can. 1.00

02:18:12.000 So you're using an umbrella term to refer to two different phenomenon.

02:18:16.000 Trans? 0.76

02:18:16.000 Is it an umbrella term? 0.76

02:18:18.000 Yes.

02:18:18.000 Yeah, I'm saying.

02:18:19.000 The gender dysphoria experienced by a three-year-old is fundamentally different from a 21-year-old.

02:18:23.000 That is the concept of sex. 0.94

02:18:23.000 Of course, that's a good idea. 0.94

02:18:25.000 Sure, that can be true.

02:18:26.000 And at the same time, when you say trans people can't be, like kids can't be trans, the answer is that's not true, and you don't even believe that.

02:18:33.000 You don't think that you don't think that they should be treated in the way that adults can be treated.

02:18:37.000 That's the actual thing.

02:18:38.000 I actually think adults shouldn't be allowed to do it either.

02:18:40.000 Sure.

02:18:41.000 Wait, what's the difference then?

02:18:42.000 Why can adults be trans and kids can't be trans? 0.61

02:18:44.000 See, well, hold on.

02:18:45.000 See, this is why I'm going to say the left because that's not what I said.

02:18:48.000 Yeah, I asked you, can adults be trans?

02:18:50.000 Can you experience gender dysphoria?

02:18:51.000 Gender dysphoria.

02:18:52.000 Which is fundamentally different from a three-year-old who has gender confusion.

02:18:56.000 So a three-year-old that maintains gender confusion, when does it switch from gender confusion to gender dysphoria?

02:19:01.000 Probably sexual development.

02:19:03.000 Okay.

02:19:04.000 Okay.

02:19:05.000 And so at 13, we call it?

02:19:07.000 Three-year-olds don't really have that presence of mind.

02:19:10.000 Sure.

02:19:12.000 They don't know what a woman is. 1.00

02:19:13.000 They don't know what sex is.

02:19:15.000 Can three-year-olds experience trauma?

02:19:17.000 Yes, they can.

02:19:17.000 Well, yeah.

02:19:18.000 Yes.

02:19:19.000 I agree.

02:19:20.000 Does trauma in three-year-olds typically present in the way that they present in like a 21-year-old?

02:19:24.000 No.

02:19:25.000 Uh-huh.

02:19:25.000 Right.

02:19:26.000 So you're using trans to describe two different phenomena in gender dysphoria.

02:19:26.000 Yeah.

02:19:30.000 Well, in this case, I'm using trauma to describe two physical.

02:19:32.000 So what I would say is this.

02:19:33.000 Three-year-olds who have the possibility of a gender confusion, it's because of conditioning from their parents.

02:19:39.000 If a child is not introduced something, it doesn't know it exists.

02:19:41.000 In fact, they teach you this when you're raising kids.

02:19:44.000 For instance, our doctor told us, do not introduce sweets for the first year.

02:19:47.000 The baby won't know what sweets are, and that will affect its neural development.

02:19:51.000 So when you have a three-year-old and the parents are like, are you a girl?

02:19:54.000 Are you a girl?

02:19:54.000 Wear a dress.

02:19:55.000 The kid's going to be retarded. 1.00

02:19:56.000 The issue is that the phenomenon of three-year-olds being, like, having gender dysphoria or gender confusion, as you want to call it, emerged long before the major trans come up. 0.67

02:20:05.000 In fact, we saw this even in like studies.

02:20:06.000 How come there weren't trans studies in the 70s?

02:20:08.000 How come there are no trans kids in Ohio, but they're in California? 0.93

02:20:11.000 There probably are trans kids in Ohio. 0.56

02:20:14.000 Right, statistically, according to the data and the science.

02:20:17.000 There's zero in Ohio.

02:20:20.000 We don't need to be hyperbolic.

02:20:21.000 There's dramatically less.

02:20:23.000 Well, this is a different class.

02:20:24.000 And there's dramatically less.

02:20:25.000 I grew up in Ohio.

02:20:26.000 Doctor says, when I pretended to be Wonder Woman, my mom said, you're going to be an actor.

02:20:30.000 She didn't say, oh, my God, I think you're a girl.

02:20:31.000 She said, you're probably very creative in the world.

02:20:32.000 It's called a prediction game.

02:20:34.000 Do you think that I think that there is a canary syndrome of gender dysphoria?

02:20:38.000 I think that the strategy you've picked allows picking individual issues where you can disagree with the broader body to say that you're independent while agreeing with them in 90% of stuff.

02:20:48.000 That is called the existence of appealing to – are you conservative?

02:20:53.000 That's called feminism. 1.00

02:20:55.000 Do you agree with everything every conservative says?

02:20:58.000 Every single thing you said is muddying categories.

02:21:00.000 You've been trying to.

02:21:01.000 Are you a conservative?

02:21:02.000 Yes, I am.

02:21:02.000 Do you agree with everything conservatives say?

02:21:04.000 No, I don't.

02:21:05.000 No, you don't.

02:21:06.000 Good job.

02:21:07.000 Good job, buddy.

02:21:07.000 You're catching up.

02:21:08.000 We're there.

02:21:08.000 There's a decision.

02:21:09.000 Congratulations.

02:21:10.000 Welcome to the conversation.

02:21:11.000 Going back to the trans kids, Tim, what I'm trying to say with you being on the left. 0.95

02:21:14.000 We've got a trans category.

02:21:16.000 Yep.

02:21:16.000 Right?

02:21:17.000 We're not arguing.

02:21:18.000 Your worldview is leftist.

02:21:20.000 And I think we can establish that.

02:21:21.000 She's like, what does this label mean?

02:21:23.000 Exactly.

02:21:24.000 You proved my point.

02:21:25.000 It's not proving its mind.

02:21:26.000 You're muddying categories.

02:21:28.000 Exactly.

02:21:28.000 Hold on.

02:21:29.000 Hold on.

02:21:29.000 Me saying some definitions are hard to know is valid.

02:21:34.000 You said this.

02:21:35.000 You've said progressivism has been loose and moved over time.

02:21:38.000 This is obviously true of all language.

02:21:40.000 I can argue this.

02:21:42.000 Gender dysphoria and trans. 0.84

02:21:44.000 No, you're not dysphoria. 0.91

02:21:46.000 I'm going to mute you. 0.96

02:21:46.000 I will mute you because we are going to steer through your mind. 0.96

02:21:49.000 We are not debating trans.

02:21:50.000 The point was. 0.99

02:21:51.000 Tyler has a leftist moral worldview, and she changed the argument into trans for no fucking reason. 1.00

02:21:57.000 So I am not going to open this up to shift the conversation. 0.92

02:22:00.000 I think just as we change the conversation.

02:22:03.000 The conversation that Rudyard brought up is that you are a moral worldview leftist.

02:22:07.000 You then ask.

02:22:08.000 What do you mean by that?

02:22:09.000 I said.

02:22:10.000 You don't define woman. 1.00

02:22:12.000 Your worldview is of the left.

02:22:14.000 It's one thing.

02:22:15.000 I don't define woman.

02:22:16.000 Yes, you just define it.

02:22:17.000 But I did.

02:22:18.000 You just don't like my definition.

02:22:19.000 Your definition is a leftist definition.

02:22:21.000 Sure, but in the same way that I would say, oh, yours is a conservative definition.

02:22:24.000 You are pretending not to be on the left, but you literally are.

02:22:27.000 I'm not pretending at all.

02:22:28.000 I am very openly, aggressively on the left.

02:22:30.000 I have said it all the time.

02:22:32.000 This isn't to your point.

02:22:33.000 This is so hilarious.

02:22:35.000 You guys don't even see it.

02:22:36.000 Okay, okay.

02:22:37.000 You guys see all of us, right?

02:22:38.000 I don't know.

02:22:38.000 I don't.

02:22:41.000 You guys don't fucking get it. 0.99

02:22:42.000 You did exactly what I said you would. 0.99

02:22:44.000 No, I didn't, actually.

02:22:45.000 What's happened the entire time is I've had satisfactory answers to your questions and you're not willing to engage, which is why I said, are you a conservative?

02:22:52.000 And you said yes.

02:22:52.000 And I said, do you agree with 100% of your conservative views?

02:22:55.000 And you said no.

02:22:56.000 But when it's coming to me, suddenly I have to move and shift and I have to prove I'm an independent by saying where I disagree.

02:23:02.000 But I actually disagree with 90% of what they believe, which is not true at all.

02:23:06.000 And even if it was, it doesn't mean that I can't have independent opinions on certain things in the same way that you have independent on certain things.

02:23:13.000 I'm not moving around in any way, shape, or form other than when we're talking about categorical definitions.

02:23:17.000 Because as I've outlined, and everyone here has agreed, definitions of things do change over time.

02:23:23.000 I do appeal to a gender worldview and a sex worldview, where I see these things as different. 0.80

02:23:29.000 You don't, but that doesn't mean that I'm just some silly willy.

02:23:32.000 What it means is that that's the left cultural world for sure. 0.78

02:23:32.000 But that's all. 0.78

02:23:35.000 Sure, but I would say, okay, you probably have a bunch of stupid conservative shit that you appeal to that I might reject, but I wouldn't just dismiss you. 0.99

02:23:40.000 But I wouldn't dismiss you. 1.00

02:23:42.000 Well, the issue is he's dismissing me out of hand because I have a left worldview.

02:23:46.000 I would never dismiss you or you because I think you have a right worldview.

02:23:50.000 Because the point he's making is that the left worldview, a good example is they refuse to define the word woman so that they can apply it in any way they want politically. 0.97

02:23:58.000 Why the fuck do you want me on your show if you think that I'm just the left worldview and I can't engage in any substance? 0.96

02:24:03.000 I didn't say that because we want to have a conversation with someone of the left worldview. 0.99

02:24:06.000 And I'm good at actually engaging in substance engagement.

02:24:09.000 I'm just saying that when he says you're a leftist and you don't have amorphous definitions for political power.

02:24:09.000 There's nothing wrong with that.

02:24:15.000 What he said that I'm taking issue with is not that he called me a leftist or left.

02:24:19.000 I said that he is assuming my positions and he won't engage with me honestly about my positions because of that fact.

02:24:25.000 He's saying that he can't know. 0.99

02:24:27.000 Sure, you're a big meanie bo-bini and you're kind of weird and you breathe funny and it's gross. 1.00

02:24:31.000 I don't know what to say. 0.99

02:24:32.000 Okay, wait, okay.

02:24:33.000 Well, let's grab calls.

02:24:34.000 Mirachi, would you like to join in the fun?

02:24:38.000 Hi, dude.

02:24:39.000 Oh, he's gone. 0.58

02:24:40.000 I'm not saying he's wrong because he breathes gross. 0.85

02:24:41.000 I'm just saying he breathes gross. 0.58

02:24:42.000 He's called a meditative practice.

02:24:44.000 Yeah, you have to get a note to tell you to stop breathing so loudly.

02:24:46.000 So I don't know.

02:24:47.000 Okay, go off.

02:24:49.000 Elmarachi left.

02:24:50.000 Kai, what's going on?

02:24:51.000 Oh, wait, no, wait, wait.

02:24:52.000 Elmarachi came back.

02:24:53.000 Sorry.

02:24:54.000 Elmarachi, are you working?

02:24:56.000 I'm glad you're back, man.

02:24:57.000 We missed you.

02:24:59.000 It's been a great day.

02:25:00.000 What's going on?

02:25:00.000 I miss you the most, though.

02:25:01.000 Yeah, Kylie, what is your right?

02:25:02.000 I hope you mean to me.

02:25:04.000 You got to bring the heat.

02:25:05.000 Brother, it says you're playing Fallout 3.

02:25:05.000 Remember, Kyle.

02:25:07.000 Dude, at least get 76.

02:25:09.000 Are you winning, though? 0.99

02:25:11.000 Are you taking some dumb? 0.99

02:25:12.000 Are you winning something? 1.00

02:25:13.000 We're not even telling you.

02:25:14.000 He's got a lot of money.

02:25:15.000 Are you winning?

02:25:16.000 Oh, my God.

02:25:17.000 I can't believe it works.

02:25:18.000 What weapon do you use?

02:25:19.000 No, I'm on my Xbox.

02:25:21.000 I accidentally left the Discord chat when you caught on me.

02:25:24.000 There we go.

02:25:25.000 So are you not playing Fallout right now?

02:25:27.000 No, I am.

02:25:28.000 I am.

02:25:29.000 And are you winning?

02:25:30.000 Are you winning right now?

02:25:31.000 Oh, winning?

02:25:32.000 It's Fallout 3.

02:25:33.000 It's not a multiplayer game.

02:25:34.000 I'm playing the story.

02:25:36.000 Nice.

02:25:37.000 So he is winning.

02:25:37.000 You should know this.

02:25:38.000 You should know this.

02:25:40.000 She's a woman. 0.82

02:25:40.000 Why did she know about ideas? 0.82

02:25:42.000 As a leftist, you should know about Fallout 3 and that.

02:25:45.000 I mean, I would say if I'm not dying constantly, then I'm probably winning Fallout 3.

02:25:49.000 It's the greatest game I ever made.

02:25:50.000 I've been playing Fallout 3.

02:25:51.000 Skyrim, I would argue, competes.

02:25:53.000 Definitely.

02:25:54.000 You're wrong.

02:25:55.000 Halo 3, right?

02:25:57.000 I'm a Skyrim.

02:25:58.000 Did you play Morrowind?

02:25:58.000 Halo 2.

02:25:59.000 Okay, all right.

02:26:00.000 Morrowind was better than Skyrim, I thought.

02:26:00.000 Halo 2 is good.

02:26:02.000 I would agree.

02:26:03.000 Oh, yeah?

02:26:03.000 Because you can fly.

02:26:05.000 They took that away and I'm blue.

02:26:05.000 Yeah.

02:26:06.000 I know, but I'm a sucker for open worlds.

02:26:08.000 Oh, I know.

02:26:08.000 I know.

02:26:08.000 Shoot, man.

02:26:09.000 Fallout is open worlds. 0.99

02:26:09.000 But I'm not sure. 0.99

02:26:10.000 I know, but I don't love guns.

02:26:12.000 I like magic. 0.99

02:26:12.000 You're using AI to map like Google Maps now as your video game maps and shit. 0.99

02:26:16.000 So what's your question? 0.94

02:26:17.000 Sorry, yeah.

02:26:18.000 Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

02:26:18.000 What's your question?

02:26:19.000 Sorry, let me, I'm trying to pull it up on the thing.

02:26:23.000 So I sensed it through the calling request.

02:26:25.000 I'm going to say it word for word.

02:26:27.000 Okay.

02:26:27.000 Oh, good.

02:26:28.000 All right.

02:26:29.000 So with all the deportation talk going on nowadays, what is the opinion of the panel when it comes to DACA kids, the dreamers?

02:26:36.000 It seems a bit immoral or evil to send people back to a country that they don't even know.

02:26:46.000 What is the best solution for these individuals who grew up American but still face deportation?

02:26:52.000 Send them back.

02:26:54.000 I think there are a lot of people that should go, especially people that came in in the last five years.

02:27:00.000 But the people that have been here, it's just like, how many times are you going to stamp on the ground to try and put the fire out until you snap your own ankle?

02:27:06.000 Like at some point, you know, there's like an order of operations of who needs to go.

02:27:11.000 I think the people that have born here and have lived here for 30 years are like very low on that list, personally.

02:27:17.000 Look, I mean, I'm probably the guy with the hardest take on immigration.

02:27:25.000 I do think that they have to be sent out of the country.

02:27:29.000 I do think that they probably should get, they should get put to the front of the line when it comes to coming back because it wasn't their fault.

02:27:37.000 But you can't make exceptions to the law just because it's kind of mean, especially when you have the situation in the United States that we have where there's been probably 20 million people that have been let in illegally over the past four years.

02:27:54.000 So I do understand that there's a lot of people that are going to be really, really negatively affected.

02:27:59.000 And the U.S. can do things to facilitate those people coming back if they're DACA, if they're getting DACA or whatever.

02:28:09.000 But I do think that they have to be deported, honestly.

02:28:13.000 And I know that it's kind of a shitty thing, but.

02:28:18.000 Especially if you're talking to one of them right now.

02:28:21.000 Telling him he's got to go back to some country he's never been to. 0.99

02:28:24.000 It's fucking crazy. 0.99

02:28:26.000 What's your opinion, Tim? 0.99

02:28:28.000 I think DACA, DACA kids got to go home.

02:28:31.000 You got to go home.

02:28:32.000 I mean, what if he's DACA right here, this guy?

02:28:33.000 What would you say to his face?

02:28:34.000 No, I'm not.

02:28:35.000 I'm a citizen.

02:28:36.000 We've done amnesty like four times, and it's had devastating effects on the states and the places that did.

02:28:43.000 And every time we've had amnesty, the deal has been, okay, but this will be the last time.

02:28:47.000 And then it just keeps happening.

02:28:49.000 So at a certain point, we've got to be like, okay, we can't do it.

02:28:52.000 It's just, we can't do it.

02:28:54.000 And even if you, like, Ian, even if he was a DACA recipient, like, that's why I'm trying to be delicate with it, because like I'm, like, I do understand that there are people that are here that are DACA recipients that were brought here when they were kids and they didn't have any control over it or whatever.

02:29:09.000 But that doesn't change the fact that you have a country with laws for a reason and their parents broke the law and their parents are actually the ones that are responsible for that.

02:29:20.000 I agree with rule of law.

02:29:21.000 That's been a big topic of the show earlier.

02:29:23.000 But at what point, like at what cost?

02:29:25.000 Some laws can be evil.

02:29:27.000 And so you don't want a society of evil law.

02:29:30.000 It's not evil to say don't bring it in my house.

02:29:32.000 I reject the morality question in this context.

02:29:37.000 For a kid that was lived here for 30 years in this context.

02:29:41.000 There's total morality.

02:29:42.000 Because they've known.

02:29:43.000 Like they know if they're not.

02:29:45.000 A kid?

02:29:47.000 Like a family.

02:29:47.000 A child?

02:29:48.000 He's like 20 years old and he grew up here.

02:29:48.000 He's talking about DACA.

02:29:50.000 He's almost 30 years.

02:29:52.000 If you're a DACA recipient and you're 30, you've lived here and you know that you're a DACA recipient.

02:29:59.000 If you're a DACA, if you're like you're getting deferred action, like if you're DACA, you know you're DACA, right?

02:30:05.000 You know that you're not a citizen.

02:30:07.000 You should be doing what you need to do to get that squared away, not dodging the system.

02:30:13.000 So, granted, 100% if they're like little kids, I get what you're saying.

02:30:18.000 But if they're little kids, that's actually a better argument for sending them back.

02:30:23.000 Yeah, and the parents should go to jail for trafficking.

02:30:26.000 Sure, I don't mind that at all.

02:30:27.000 But because they can go back and they haven't built a life here, they don't have a family and kids or girlfriend or friends that they've got long deep relationships with.

02:30:38.000 Their kids, they can go back to the country they came from. 0.99

02:30:41.000 DACA recipients are adults or mostly probably adults that have been here and they've known that they're DACA recipients.

02:30:48.000 They know that they're here illegally and they've been dodging the system.

02:30:51.000 They've been dodging the legal process.

02:30:55.000 So that's why.

02:30:56.000 I'm curious, is this about principle to you or like outcome?

02:30:58.000 Like are you about outcome?

02:31:02.000 Okay, so I guess I'd be curious, right?

02:31:04.000 Like one of my concerns with like sending everyone who's DACA home is, for example, like in the case of the 30-year-old, I suspect it would be incredibly economically costly, not just to get rid of them, arrest them, et cetera, fine them, because I assume that they'll start hiding. 1.00

02:31:17.000 But also all of these people are probably like have some level of skilled labor that they're probably participating.

02:31:22.000 There's probably a pretty high chance that they're participating properly in the economic system.

02:31:26.000 So I guess the question would be, would you be open to, since it's not about principles, about outcome, say I could wave a wand magically and we'd have the perfect policy that I implemented right now that would transition them towards being citizens.

02:31:38.000 And we could even have some requirements, for example, right, that they like subpoena their auditing to make sure that they've their sorry their financial stuff, all the things that you might want that you might be like outcome concerned about with DACA people.

02:31:50.000 Would you be willing to let these people say if they pass and satisfy all of these citizenship tests, essentially?

02:31:55.000 That's what I was going to say.

02:31:56.000 If I was in charge of immigration, I would take in immigrants who pass a certain threshold for skill level or for Western values. 1.00

02:32:05.000 Yeah, my big concern is that my primary concern is that people that come to America love America and love our way of life.

02:32:14.000 So say we could prove the DACA kids in some tests that you'd be satisfied with do have all of those values, especially because they've probably grown up here.

02:32:21.000 Would you be okay with a system that integrated them and just gave them legitimate legal citizenship?

02:32:27.000 I think theoretically, yes.

02:32:30.000 Because my big concern is people that come to the United States that don't want to become Americans. 1.00

02:32:35.000 The people that like, it really rubbed me raw to see the protests in California where people were waving Mexican flags.

02:32:41.000 They don't love America.

02:32:43.000 They don't want to become Americans. 0.98

02:32:45.000 They're just here and they, you know, the people that you see, you know, whatever percentage of the actual illegal immigrants you say it is, or people say it is, the people that get on TikTok and say, we're only here to take advantage. 0.97

02:32:57.000 You hear about the stuff that's going on in Minnesota with the Somali, their asylum seekers. 1.00

02:33:02.000 They've taken advantage of the asylum system. 0.65

02:33:05.000 Well, most of the Somali issues are complicated just because a lot of them came like disrupted Ethiopia. 1.00

02:33:10.000 They're citizens.

02:33:11.000 Most of them are citizens now.

02:33:12.000 Okay, fair enough.

02:33:13.000 But I would agree to an asylum. 1.00

02:33:14.000 Imagine what you're talking about.

02:33:15.000 Yeah, the asylum laws were totally abused.

02:33:20.000 Like people that come to the United States, you have to come a certain way. 1.00

02:33:23.000 If you can go to another country that's safe, you don't get asylum in the United States.

02:33:27.000 We totally abuse those.

02:33:28.000 So my concern is that we're not bringing people into the country that hate America, hate our system, hate the way that America take advantage of it, essentially.

02:33:38.000 Sure, which is why I'd basically say it's really sucky that Trump forced Republicans to quash the bipartisan immigration bill that Biden brought in 2022.

02:33:44.000 The Biden, the bill that Biden was in the Biden bill was horrible.

02:33:49.000 On like what standard was it horrible?

02:33:49.000 It wasn't.

02:33:51.000 It upgraded asylum so that you couldn't just claim psychological distress.

02:33:54.000 You had to have proof of like actual threat.

02:33:57.000 It mandated thousands more dollars to judges, more money to border control, and it also escalated what certain border control agents could do so that we could process asylum seekers faster so that there was way less catch and release.

02:34:08.000 Because it wanted to, one of the biggest Legalize illegal immigration, like crossing over illegally?

02:34:14.000 No, not at all.

02:34:15.000 It actually tried to streamline the process so that if people were doing that, we could catch them more quickly and kick them out.

02:34:19.000 It also wanted to fund more border walls, actually, as well.

02:34:22.000 So it was bipartisan by Republicans.

02:34:25.000 It's not a lie.

02:34:25.000 This is true about the immigration bill, right?

02:34:27.000 The immigration bill was.

02:34:28.000 It was de facto amnesty. 1.00

02:34:29.000 It was fucking, now that I can say it, it was fucking awesome. 0.99

02:34:32.000 It was exactly what. 1.00

02:34:34.000 So it was fucking terrible. 0.98

02:34:35.000 In what way? 0.99

02:34:37.000 What's bad about funding the border market?

02:34:39.000 It basically codified the policies of the Biden administration where they were saying anybody who comes in can apply.

02:34:44.000 That's not true.

02:34:45.000 And in fact, it rejected those by updating asylum seeking.

02:34:48.000 No, it.

02:34:49.000 Yes. 0.86

02:34:50.000 Hold on, I'm playing a fat purple-haired woman in Cranworld. 0.80

02:34:54.000 I can't.

02:34:55.000 It didn't do that.

02:34:56.000 It actually tried to update asylum seeking so that you couldn't just come and claim psychological distress, which is what asylum seekers can claim now.

02:35:01.000 Right, but it's still basically, it created de facto policy.

02:35:05.000 So what Biden did.

02:35:06.000 That's good, right?

02:35:07.000 Updating asylum seeking.

02:35:08.000 What Biden was doing was that people were coming in when they were clearly not asylum seekers and claiming asylum.

02:35:14.000 Yes.

02:35:14.000 Then they would bring them.

02:35:15.000 And so the bill just codified those policies.

02:35:18.000 No, it didn't.

02:35:18.000 It upgraded it so that you couldn't easily claim asylum, and it increased judges, and it increased border patrol agents, and it increased fences so that there was way less catch and release because most illegals aren't coming through just fences.

02:35:30.000 You're giving me a little off track.

02:35:30.000 Most of them are coming.

02:35:31.000 No, we're not going back to the bottom.

02:35:34.000 What do you mean by the way?

02:35:36.000 You just don't like that this is the reality of what this bill was.

02:35:38.000 And Trump shut it down because he knew that he could run on immigration effectively.

02:35:42.000 That's why he shut it down, because he cares less about immigration than the people of America and more about power and consuming it for himself.

02:35:48.000 I would disagree with that.

02:35:50.000 He came down like the very first thing that he was talking about when he came down the golden escalator was he was talking about.

02:35:55.000 Sure, but you know what he hasn't done?

02:35:56.000 Update asylum through actual codified bill, like through Congress.

02:36:00.000 No, but if the asylums, if the asylum laws are you can't come to the United States or you can't like you're supposed to stop at the first place that's safe for you, what kind of updates does it need?

02:36:11.000 Because technically the only people, the only countries that we should be accepting. 0.94

02:36:14.000 Psychological distress.

02:36:15.000 I don't think saying I'm distressed at home is sufficient to claim that.

02:36:18.000 The only places that we should be taking asyles from is Canada and Mexico because you can stop in any other country where that's safe. 1.00

02:36:26.000 They created a path of citizenship for 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States. 1.00

02:36:29.000 Fuck that. 0.99

02:36:30.000 Wait, that's not necessarily no, because again, if the illegal immigrants are the type of immigrants that you want legalized working in your country, that's good. 1.00

02:36:39.000 Yes, you do.

02:36:40.000 You do.

02:36:41.000 You do want.

02:36:42.000 Yes, you do.

02:36:43.000 No, I don't.

02:36:44.000 I don't know what to tell you.

02:36:45.000 Tell me what I want.

02:36:46.000 So, okay.

02:36:48.000 If you're saying you genuinely don't, I'm saying I don't think you understand the infrastructure of your economy if you believe that.

02:36:53.000 I totally do.

02:36:54.000 I don't think you run a manufacturing business.

02:36:56.000 I do.

02:36:58.000 Yeah, you run a local American-built manufacturing, but you don't own a farm, for example.

02:37:01.000 A farm I've worked on extensively.

02:37:03.000 What do you mean I don't own a farm?

02:37:04.000 Do you own a farm?

02:37:05.000 I own a chicken city.

02:37:07.000 I don't believe in suppressing.

02:37:08.000 I don't believe in suppressing farm, ma'am.

02:37:11.000 Contract.

02:37:12.000 We have over 50 chickens.

02:37:14.000 Wait, 50 chickens?

02:37:15.000 Yes, a legal chicken farm is around like 25.

02:37:18.000 Oh, nice.

02:37:19.000 Okay, so you're not in like the level of like major manufacturing.

02:37:22.000 So my farm doesn't count?

02:37:23.000 No, no, no.

02:37:24.000 Chicken city.

02:37:25.000 Yeah, wait till I tell you.

02:37:26.000 Cobby farms.

02:37:27.000 Wait till I tell you a burden of the farmer's face.

02:37:28.000 Yes, hobby farms don't compare it to like Tyson major egg.

02:37:31.000 Yes.

02:37:32.000 I never said I don't own it.

02:37:32.000 But I was going to say.

02:37:34.000 You said you own a farm.

02:37:35.000 So the chicken farm.

02:37:36.000 When I'm talking about farms, I'm talking about people doing industrial level farming.

02:37:39.000 That's what I'm obviously saying.

02:37:40.000 What does that have to do?

02:37:42.000 Because when we're talking about labor, especially affordable labor, when it comes to things like agriculture, this is something that immigrants have often supported us on, and it is really important because most educated immigrants won't do this. 0.99

02:37:54.000 Check this out.

02:37:55.000 I don't care about the economy.

02:37:59.000 The argument that immigrants will do the work Americans want is meaningless. 1.00

02:38:04.000 Americans will do the work that is available and they have to do. 1.00

02:38:07.000 And we saw this when Trump raided all those meat processing plants in the South.

02:38:11.000 And then guess who showed up?

02:38:12.000 A bunch of Americans.

02:38:13.000 And when they were interviewed saying, we thought Americans wouldn't do this job, he goes, what do you mean?

02:38:17.000 It pays more than the gas station.

02:38:18.000 The argument isn't that Americans won't do these jobs.

02:38:20.000 The argument is actually that when you bring in labor forces that are less educated than your own populace, it frees up your populace from the explosion of jobs and income.

02:38:29.000 Why don't you want the American economy to grow?

02:38:31.000 Funny.

02:38:31.000 I want Americans to do work.

02:38:33.000 You are arguing for the economy of the leftists.

02:38:36.000 Growth at what costs?

02:38:36.000 That's why.

02:38:39.000 I would call you neolib. 0.97

02:38:40.000 So you just want to reduce me over and over again.

02:38:42.000 I'm saying this isn't.

02:38:43.000 Okay, I'll put it like this.

02:38:44.000 That is the neoliberal view.

02:38:46.000 Do you value the outcome or the principle here?

02:38:48.000 In what context?

02:38:50.000 The outcome of America successfully growing its GDP, having a more competitive agricultural.

02:38:56.000 The success of America to me is that the American people of the American tradition have children.

02:39:02.000 Those children work hard.

02:39:04.000 The wages for those jobs are good enough that that person can work.

02:39:08.000 And when you flood the country with low-skilled labor, you erase the younger generation's opportunity because 16-year-olds should be doing farm work where they learn and they get strong and then they graduate to other jobs.

02:39:18.000 This would be true.

02:39:19.000 Instead, we flooded the country, told people not to have kids, got tons of abortions, and then gave all our manufacturing plants to China, Mexico, and Indonesia. 0.86

02:39:25.000 This would be true.

02:39:26.000 This would be true if it wasn't the case, if it was the case that jobs are finite.

02:39:30.000 But what happens when you have a large infusion of labor is that it frees up small business owners to hire cheaper labor.

02:39:36.000 Tell that to Gen Z right now experiencing massive unemployment. 0.99

02:39:40.000 Correct.

02:39:41.000 Sure, but why are you doing that?

02:39:41.000 Tell that Gen Z you can't pull the house.

02:39:43.000 Unemployment in California.

02:39:43.000 What are they unemployed?

02:39:45.000 What are they unemployed in?

02:39:46.000 Tell them Gen Z you can't get an apartment in New York, but they're giving hotels to illegal immigrants. 1.00

02:39:50.000 Okay, I agree that catch and release isn't good.

02:39:52.000 I'm talking about catch and release.

02:39:53.000 I'm sat in New York brought in illegal immigrants, gave them hotels, and then Zoran Mandani. 0.60

02:39:59.000 Zoran Mandani came on defying federal law voted for by the plurality of this country.

02:40:04.000 Yes, so first of all, they were not illegal.

02:40:06.000 They were not illegal.

02:40:07.000 They were asylum cleannees that could claim in the way that they could because they campaigned explicitly on blocking federal law that the people of this country voted for. 1.00

02:40:19.000 That is fascist, evil shit. 1.00

02:40:22.000 Now, Zoran, Zoro Mamdani. 1.00

02:40:22.000 Sorry. 1.00

02:40:24.000 Why are we talking about Zoro Mamdani when I am trying to establish outcomes of certain economic principles of immigration, for example?

02:40:31.000 Because Zorhan Mamdani campaigned as a progressive on blocking federal law enforcement that was voted on by the plurality of the people of this country. 0.99

02:40:42.000 So we said in this country, get them all the fuck out. 1.00

02:40:46.000 End of story. 1.00

02:40:47.000 I don't give a fuck about it. 1.00

02:40:49.000 You can argue every day of the week how you want low-skill slave labor to pick your fucking business. 1.00

02:40:55.000 You don't want low-scale slave labor. 0.98

02:40:57.000 Well, you want second-class citizens here at deferred departure whenever. 1.00

02:41:00.000 Sorry, why are you saying that if you work for farms in America, you're a second-class citizen?

02:41:04.000 No, I'm saying that if you come here illegally and you're under a special class like documents.

02:41:07.000 I don't want them to be a pending status and you can't vote, you're a second-class citizen.

02:41:11.000 And Democrats want people to clean their toilets. 0.95

02:41:14.000 I actually, what I would like to say.

02:41:16.000 Sure, very quickly.

02:41:18.000 Part of the reasons why you're having such issues in like Gen Z getting jobs, it isn't because of illegal immigrants taking care of the city. 0.99

02:41:24.000 Yes, it is.

02:41:25.000 No.

02:41:26.000 Gen Z is a. 0.89

02:41:27.000 I said Gen Z, so you lost the argument. 0.75

02:41:28.000 Yeah, yeah, that's true.

02:41:29.000 I did lose the argument, but because of Gen Z. 0.99

02:41:32.000 But Gen Z is struggling to find jobs for a number of reasons.

02:41:36.000 And illegal immigrants taking high educational jobs is not it. 0.97

02:41:39.000 It's number one, H-1B visas that have not been updated to guarantee wage equality for immigrants you bring in for high-skill labor jobs.

02:41:48.000 It's also a lot of jobs getting destroyed.

02:41:51.000 H-1B is not high-skilled labor.

02:41:52.000 You're talking about O-vis. 0.53

02:41:54.000 No, no, O-Visas are like celebrity. 1.00

02:41:56.000 H-1B is high-skill lab.

02:41:58.000 There's a bunch of different visas.

02:41:59.000 O is specialists.

02:42:00.000 No, extraordinary talent.

02:42:01.000 Okay, OnlyFans come in under O. O is extraordinary talent.

02:42:04.000 H-1B is celebrity skill.

02:42:06.000 H-1B is unavailable.

02:42:08.000 Wait, is cybersecurity a high-educated job or not?

02:42:11.000 H-1B is unavailable skill, not high skill.

02:42:15.000 H-1Bs are available to companies that can't find the job in the country.

02:42:18.000 They can get any job.

02:42:20.000 So I will tell you, as somebody who's an immigrant and has gone through this process, I couldn't apply for an H-1B because I had a business and was working in an industry of media.

02:42:27.000 And to get an H-1B, you have to prove that you have education in the field you're going to be working in.

02:42:31.000 It is necessarily high-skilled.

02:42:33.000 Yes, having a bachelor's degree.

02:42:37.000 No, they are not.

02:42:38.000 No, they are not.

02:42:38.000 Yes, they are.

02:42:39.000 You have not been following the story.

02:42:41.000 I have been following the story, and I am participating in the immigration system, which means that I know it quite content.

02:42:46.000 H-1Bs are necessarily high-skilled because they're replacing cybersecurity. 1.00

02:42:49.000 What do you have?

02:42:50.000 Gen Z, I have an E2 visa.

02:42:52.000 And Gen Z is struggling to find jobs because of mass layoffs, because of AI pruning jobs.

02:42:58.000 Now that they're finally hiring back, that might be better for Gen Z, but also because of a slowing inflation.

02:43:04.000 They are starting to.

02:43:06.000 Because of a slower inflation under Trump's tariff system.

02:43:09.000 These are two of the things that have been impacting them.

02:43:11.000 Why they can't afford households, again, isn't because of illegal immigrants. 1.00

02:43:14.000 It's because people won't approve zoning to build more housing.

02:43:17.000 That's why, because boomers don't want more housing because all of their retirement is locked up in assets of immigrants. 1.00

02:43:23.000 We do know that sellers outpace buyers right now.

02:43:27.000 In what industry?

02:43:28.000 In the housing market.

02:43:30.000 I will say that.

02:43:31.000 Yes, I know.

02:43:31.000 Yes.

02:43:32.000 Why?

02:43:32.000 Do you own a house?

02:43:33.000 Because we're not building houses.

02:43:35.000 Do you own a house?

02:43:35.000 That's why.

02:43:36.000 No.

02:43:36.000 I own a bunch.

02:43:38.000 I have a lot of houses.

02:43:38.000 Okay.

02:43:39.000 So I have to deal with all of the stuff you're talking about.

02:43:42.000 And I will tell you: a component, not the principal reason, of why Gen Z can't afford houses is entirely illegal immigration. 0.78

02:43:50.000 Now, to be clear, I did say a component of this entirely, which is redundant and silly.

02:43:55.000 Housing.

02:43:56.000 I imagine, for example, California is probably more disproportionately impacted by the fact that it's really hard to get approval to build housing centers than it is just like apartment buildings, for example.

02:44:05.000 The problem of homelessness in California has nothing to do with.

02:44:07.000 I'm not saying homelessness.

02:44:08.000 I said like housing.

02:44:09.000 Lack of housing has nothing to do with zoning.

02:44:13.000 That's a crazy take, but okay.

02:44:14.000 I'm going to say this.

02:44:15.000 I mean, having worked in the homeless industrial complex in California, I can tell you with expertise.

02:44:19.000 I agree that in the case of homelessness, that housing is not the specific issue.

02:44:23.000 It's typically mental illness.

02:44:24.000 Unavailable housing, which is a contributing factor to homelessness.

02:44:27.000 The issue is not zoning.

02:44:29.000 So building apartment buildings is extremely difficult because so many areas of zoning that boomers prefer single-family homes and single-family homes are influenced by the biggest issue in major cities.

02:44:40.000 Building owners can't rent the properties because of rent control policies from Democrats.

02:44:45.000 Very few rent control policies.

02:44:46.000 Santa Monica, for instance, is a really great example of this.

02:44:48.000 You don't know what you're talking about.

02:44:49.000 I literally worked in this industry and I'm showing you as an expert.

02:44:52.000 Hold on.

02:44:52.000 So I will agree with you.

02:44:53.000 In New York and California, is that you have empty buildings, and the people who own those buildings say it's not mathematically possible to rent it out because we can't rent them for the money.

02:45:04.000 So this is what I'm with you on.

02:45:05.000 I'm with you on.

02:45:06.000 I abhor rent control policies.

02:45:08.000 They've always been economically devastating and they're not good for housing industries.

02:45:11.000 The issue is that when we're trying to simplify housing, Gen Z jobs, all these things are just being like, it's just the illegals. 1.00

02:45:17.000 It's not.

02:45:18.000 There is an immigration crisis.

02:45:20.000 There are problems with immigration, and I would totally grant you that. 1.00

02:45:23.000 But we can't be reductionary and simplistic on extremely complicated issues.

02:45:27.000 Well, this was a good discussion.

02:45:28.000 Mirachi, do you want to shout anything out before we got the next callers?

02:45:33.000 I want to give a little more, but yes, the conversation kept going.

02:45:37.000 I also don't want to take too long because of the other callers.

02:45:41.000 That's how I feel.

02:45:43.000 I just want to say that there's one compromise to this whole situation with the doctor people: I don't want amnesty for them because a lot of them tend to have loyalties to Mexico, but I don't want to also deport them because they do have lives that they built that they built their entire life while living here.

02:46:01.000 They have a lot of, you know, people that they know, family, whatever.

02:46:05.000 I think the best solution for this would be to just give them permanent residency with no path to citizenship through that residency. 0.84

02:46:12.000 They have to go through other means to get citizenship, but at least that way they could keep what they've worked for and not have control over elections either.

02:46:21.000 You think their kids should get citizenship?

02:46:24.000 Depends.

02:46:25.000 Not that they're recently here within the past like five, six years since the Biden administration, but for older kids and Gen Z's, Doc people, then yes.

02:46:35.000 Well, Ryan, brother, you want to shout anything out?

02:46:38.000 No, I'm good.

02:46:40.000 This is a very long conversation.

02:46:43.000 Thank you guys for having me on.

02:46:45.000 The last thing I'll just say is make sure you get Lincoln's Repeater. 0.59

02:46:47.000 Do you know where it is?

02:46:50.000 I do not.

02:46:51.000 Okay, so it's in the Lincoln Museum.

02:46:54.000 There's a lot of feral ghouls.

02:46:55.000 You got to be careful.

02:46:56.000 But it is the best weapon in the game.

02:46:58.000 Now, if you're playing like a brute build where you're just running in with a submachine gun or something, yeah, probably not, or like, you know, Fat Man or whatever.

02:47:05.000 But if you're playing, if you're doing anything vast, the Lincoln's Repeater is the best gun.

02:47:10.000 Get it.

02:47:11.000 Thanks for calling that.

02:47:12.000 Thank you.

02:47:13.000 Nice, dude.

02:47:14.000 I'm going to interject this, but you keep on appealing to your moral authority as an individual.

02:47:18.000 So tell us what ideas you've developed as an individual to separate you from group ideas.

02:47:23.000 Well, we have to get another caller in, and we've gone really late.

02:47:25.000 So, Kai, why don't you just, what's your question?

02:47:30.000 So, everyone's following me.

02:47:32.000 Fallout, Fallout 3 or Fallout New Vegas.

02:47:35.000 Oh, man.

02:47:36.000 Fallout 3.

02:47:38.000 But New Vegas is great.

02:47:39.000 I think Fallout 3 is better.

02:47:41.000 All right, I'll do New Vegas after my current game.

02:47:43.000 But my question is for Red Yard.

02:47:47.000 Weather politics, do you believe that the next revolution or Second American Civil War will be possible if the government's able to make HEI artificial general intelligence?

02:47:58.000 Because I have a feeling that they will use AI to silence people who pose a threat to establishments.

02:48:03.000 Think of like Captain America.

02:48:05.000 Can you think of Captain America with your soldier?

02:48:08.000 The Trump administration is pushing hard for AI and they have used it for the Maduro raid and maybe being used for the war with Iran.

02:48:15.000 Yep.

02:48:16.000 Tim, I'm appearing on your show again on Monday, and I want to talk about this.

02:48:19.000 Where I think Mouse.

02:48:22.000 I thought I'm on your show.

02:48:23.000 I talked to Lisa about this.

02:48:25.000 You're flying to West Virginia?

02:48:26.000 No, I've been appearing remotely.

02:48:27.000 Oh, you're doing the morning show.

02:48:29.000 Yeah, yeah.

02:48:30.000 So I think that mouse utopia is intersecting with the civil war in an interesting way.

02:48:37.000 But the thing also with AGI is that in America, we have multiple competing ones.

02:48:41.000 You have Grok as a right-wing AI, and then you have left-wing AIs. 0.99

02:48:45.000 Chat GPT is fucking retarded. 1.00

02:48:49.000 It's complicated. 1.00

02:48:50.000 Chat GPT is woke as fuck. 1.00

02:48:51.000 It gets offended. 1.00

02:48:52.000 It's retarded politically. 0.99

02:48:54.000 It's pretty advanced in the AI arms race. 0.90

02:48:56.000 Well, it's completely useless because it won't answer questions because it's like, I'm Asian, and I asked it a question about Koreans, and it refused to answer because it could be offensive. 0.96

02:49:05.000 And I'm like, I'm literally a fucking Korean asking you about what Koreans do, and you won't give me an answer. 0.98

02:49:09.000 True, and the right-wing one just let us have child porn being made all over Twitter. 1.00

02:49:14.000 And it was hit.

02:49:16.000 To your point, I don't think the authorities are actually strong enough to enforce using an AGI tyranny in America.

02:49:27.000 I look at the current leftist elite class, and the right-wing was one as well.

02:49:32.000 I don't think they actually have an elite coherency capable of enforcing an AGI tyranny because most of the boomers in charge, they don't even know how the internet works. 0.87

02:49:46.000 Yeah, but boomers are not going to be around for much long. 1.00

02:49:48.000 So who's going to replace them as the new elite class?

02:49:51.000 It's either going to be the according to Phil, either the gay commie furries or the Zoomer Waffens. 0.98

02:49:58.000 So Zoomer Waffin. 1.00

02:50:01.000 Both the Zoomer Waffens and the gay commie furries cannot organize in a large scale because they're too foolish. 1.00

02:50:07.000 But that means that we'll have to have a new one that's more realistic because a society can't have a new – a society must have a ruling class. 0.99

02:50:21.000 Get it?

02:50:23.000 I think you stunlocked me.

02:50:24.000 Are you still there?

02:50:25.000 Stunlock Ross?

02:50:28.000 Sorry, I lost contact for a second.

02:50:31.000 With Earth or with the comms?

02:50:35.000 I'll say the boomers lose power. 1.00

02:50:37.000 What's the next generation? 0.71

02:50:42.000 I've been seeing a lot of memes on Instagram and Twitter.

02:50:45.000 I think the Zoomers, it's going to probably be like a Zoomer uprising. 1.00

02:50:49.000 With what happened with the rest of the world.

02:50:51.000 So we have the far-right Zoomers or the far-left Zoomers.

02:50:54.000 I agree.

02:50:56.000 I think the Zoomers are dissatisfied enough they could rebel, and I'm getting – the thing I want to talk to you soon about is I'm getting progressively more worried about mouse utopia. 1.00

02:51:07.000 I think mouse utopia is consuming every other variable.

02:51:10.000 That's what we were talking about earlier, too, in the green room.

02:51:14.000 The lack of resistance making people wilt like a tree with no wind or no gravity.

02:51:20.000 All right.

02:51:21.000 I think that's all.

02:51:23.000 Again, Red Yard, thanks for your input.

02:51:25.000 I have two shout-outs before I head out.

02:51:27.000 Rightard, look, I need this from you.

02:51:30.000 I need a very detailed video from you about why feet is being sexualized.

02:51:34.000 I need that video.

02:51:35.000 Oh, feet's been sexualized because the neurological area associated with genitalia is quite close to the area associated with feet.

02:51:43.000 You want to shout anything out?

02:51:45.000 Yeah, one more thing for Kyla.

02:51:47.000 This may sound mean, but after tonight, you've proven yourself why the 19th Amendment needs to be repealed.

02:51:53.000 That being said, such a crazy thing.

02:51:57.000 That being said, I was wondering if you haven't only fans.

02:52:00.000 That's class.

02:52:02.000 Don't do this.

02:52:03.000 The 19th Amendment.

02:52:05.000 Before you're geez, thanks for calling in, brother.

02:52:07.000 It doesn't go far enough, guys.

02:52:08.000 The 19th Amendment being repealed does not go far enough.

02:52:12.000 All right.

02:52:13.000 Macchaeus.

02:52:14.000 Is that how you pronounce it?

02:52:16.000 Hello.

02:52:17.000 Howdy.

02:52:19.000 Macaus.

02:52:20.000 Speak to me. 1.00

02:52:22.000 Give me your shit, bruh. 1.00

02:52:25.000 Give it to him. 1.00

02:52:26.000 You're unmuted, but no sound is coming through. 1.00

02:52:28.000 I can't hear you, motherfucker. 1.00

02:52:30.000 Yo, talk. 1.00

02:52:31.000 Macaus.

02:52:32.000 What's this guy's name?

02:52:34.000 Dr. Zaeus.

02:52:35.000 Dr. Zaeus, Doctor.

02:52:38.000 talk to me dr zayas testing okay there we it wasn't it was plugged in but it just was not connected right Good stuff.

02:52:49.000 Yes.

02:52:49.000 You're back.

02:52:50.000 All right.

02:52:52.000 So, first things first, to the guest.

02:52:57.000 The entire chat has been clowning on you all night as being disingenuous.

02:53:02.000 As but one example at 7:17 California time.

02:53:07.000 Alpa Nalinski tactics.

02:53:09.000 Pure offense and refuses to defend any actual position.

02:53:13.000 Another example from 7.47 Cali time.

02:53:17.000 Oh, he threw in a straw man.

02:53:18.000 How cute.

02:53:19.000 I roll emote.

02:53:21.000 Secondly, for everyone, claiming Skyrim is the best video game is insane.

02:53:26.000 FF6 is infinitely superior.

02:53:29.000 That's...

02:53:30.000 Now we're getting sick.

02:53:31.000 You kind of had to be there, though.

02:53:33.000 For FF6?

02:53:34.000 Yeah.

02:53:35.000 That's fair. 0.99

02:53:36.000 It was paradigm shit. 1.00

02:53:38.000 Come on, man. 1.00

02:53:39.000 I don't know which guest you're talking to.

02:53:39.000 Whatever.

02:53:40.000 I'm assuming.

02:53:41.000 I don't know.

02:53:42.000 I think about you.

02:53:43.000 Do you know what I noticed about the chat?

02:53:46.000 Don't take it personally.

02:53:46.000 I don't know if you guys find this too.

02:53:48.000 There is wisdom in the crowd. 1.00

02:53:49.000 Like, if it's like, shut up, shut up, Kyla, shut up. 0.99

02:53:51.000 What they're really saying is, like, if you listen more, your communication will improve. 0.99

02:53:57.000 Not literally, because they'll project their own stuff onto you, and you're just something, and they're expressing their own emotions.

02:54:03.000 But there is still wisdom.

02:54:05.000 So, indeed.

02:54:06.000 Sorry, are you telling me that I should shut up and listen?

02:54:09.000 No, I was referencing a couple of comments they're complaining about.

02:54:11.000 I had to have a look, because I actually don't know which guesses are.

02:54:13.000 I'm sorry to interrupt.

02:54:14.000 Continue, please.

02:54:14.000 Okay.

02:54:15.000 Apologies.

02:54:17.000 My actual statement.

02:54:19.000 They say it to me that.

02:54:20.000 Start preamble first.

02:54:22.000 You're probably going to say this is too far, but five years ago, you came to the conclusion that the left and the establishment were evil, and I was at that point five years prior to that.

02:54:31.000 So.

02:54:32.000 Yeah.

02:54:33.000 So, the actual grenade I want to throw into the chat room.

02:54:38.000 I believe that we need to start refusing to interact with the left in any way, in any place, and to outright ban them from any conversation as anti-human seditionists and/or traitors.

02:54:52.000 Yeah, that worked really well when the left did that to the right.

02:54:54.000 It's just such a good strategy.

02:54:55.000 You can't identify who's left and right.

02:54:58.000 True, you got it.

02:54:59.000 I mean, someone can self-identify, but how do you believe them?

02:54:59.000 You can't.

02:55:02.000 Wait, caller, do you think it was bad when the left did that to the right?

02:55:07.000 Frankly, yes.

02:55:08.000 Okay, and frankly, turnabout is fair play.

02:55:11.000 Wait, wait, wait.

02:55:12.000 Hold on.

02:55:14.000 Just to be clear, if it was bad for the left to do that, do you think it was harmful for the country for the left to do that to the right?

02:55:20.000 Honestly, no.

02:55:22.000 You think it was not the only thing you have the power to do it?

02:55:26.000 Wait, so when the left wouldn't talk to the right, it was bad, but it wasn't harmful for the country.

02:55:32.000 So why was it bad?

02:55:34.000 Simple.

02:55:36.000 Because it is still morally, unambiguously, not a good thing.

02:55:42.000 At best, it is great.

02:55:44.000 Okay, gotcha.

02:55:45.000 However, however, they have spent so long raping the golden rule half to death, and very specifically half to death, because the suffering was the point that we can no longer abide by the golden rule.

02:56:00.000 We now have to abide by the iron rule.

02:56:02.000 And the iron rule, as I call it, is turnabout is always fair play.

02:56:08.000 Isn't there like this?

02:56:11.000 Isn't there like an entire litany of literary?

02:56:13.000 Do you watch anime, like Vinland saga or anything like that?

02:56:18.000 I'm not sure if you're an anime fan.

02:56:21.000 I am a weeb, yes.

02:56:23.000 Okay, but you know, you know, Vinland saga.

02:56:28.000 No, not really.

02:56:29.000 It's first of all, it's amazing.

02:56:29.000 Okay, you should watch it.

02:56:31.000 It's a great story.

02:56:33.000 Yeah, sure, the Taekwondo Titan's good, but there's these constant stories of how pain begets pain begets pain, and things don't get better.

02:56:41.000 And Naruto, Naruto's a better example.

02:56:43.000 There's literally a Vincent.

02:56:46.000 Yeah, there's literally Vincree Pain.

02:56:48.000 And it's one of the best.

02:56:49.000 I'm saying this.

02:56:50.000 Wait, where are we going?

02:56:51.000 Yes, that's a good example, too.

02:56:52.000 So, Payne's real name is Nagato.

02:56:54.000 And his sensei back in the day was Jiraiya.

02:56:57.000 I watched it.

02:56:58.000 So you're familiar with the thing.

02:56:59.000 Okay, it is one of the greatest bits of writing they did.

02:57:02.000 I agree.

02:57:03.000 When Nagato speaks to Naruto and Naruto recites the line from the book, Nagato realizing that it was what he said that inspired Jiriah, who he killed, and then regrets his decision. 0.94

02:57:13.000 Fucking brilliant. 0.94

02:57:14.000 I agree. 0.94

02:57:15.000 And all these stories tell us that, like, when people do us wrong, the response cannot be, I just continue the cycle of pain.

02:57:24.000 At some point, somebody has to say, enough is enough.

02:57:27.000 And usually that's the same thing.

02:57:30.000 Well, the issue is, the left is saying the same thing you're saying right now to me, right?

02:57:35.000 They're saying we should get back power from Trump.

02:57:37.000 We should punish the conservatives.

02:57:39.000 We should weaponize the DOJ against them.

02:57:41.000 And the answer to this is this just kills our country more.

02:57:45.000 At some point, somebody has to say, we must stop.

02:57:50.000 We must unify. 1.00

02:57:51.000 We've been saying that for 60 years, you stupid bitch. 1.00

02:57:55.000 I don't know. 1.00

02:57:56.000 I don't know, first of all, why you're calling me a stupid bitch when I'm advocating for a world that it seems like you want. 0.98

02:58:02.000 I'm sorry that you're in pain. 0.99

02:58:04.000 You're not.

02:58:04.000 You're not advocating for that.

02:58:06.000 Of course I am because I am one of the few people on the left that talks to you that talks to you and pushes back against the left when they insist that when we take over power in 2028, we should brutally punish all of the conservatives.

02:58:20.000 I'm one of the few people doing that. 1.00

02:58:21.000 And yet I'm sitting here, I'm getting lambbasted by people, dismissed as a leftist, and you're calling me a stupid bitch. 1.00

02:58:27.000 And the previous caller is simultaneously not willing to defend the rights of my body, but also wants to sexualize me. 1.00

02:58:34.000 I'm one of the few people trying to do the noble thing. 0.99

02:58:37.000 And I'm not telling you that you must, but nobility must win or we're all fucked. 0.98

02:58:43.000 And that's what I'm fighting for. 0.97

02:58:44.000 I don't think I'm perfect.

02:58:45.000 I don't think I'm the perfect moral arbiter.

02:58:46.000 I don't think I'm always very nice, but I am absolutely striving for it. 0.97

02:58:50.000 It's why I'm fucking here. 0.98

02:58:51.000 Yeah, I want to say, you know, please, please don't call Kyla bitch. 0.98

02:58:56.000 We invite a lot of lefties here so we can have these discussions, and they almost never want to do it.

02:59:01.000 So I respect that she's willing to have this conversation.

02:59:04.000 I understand.

02:59:05.000 I apologize.

02:59:06.000 I am just very emotional, and I'm sick and tired of people who are blatant.

02:59:13.000 I didn't call Leonardo a ratar, but I didn't know what to do.

02:59:17.000 Don't take all of your pain.

02:59:18.000 That sounds really legitimate.

02:59:20.000 You sound really angry and take it out on me as like the burning girl because I happen to exist in your space.

02:59:27.000 I'm like the one person striving, though imperfectly, to do what you're asking.

02:59:33.000 I have a different answer here.

02:59:34.000 No, shoe on head is doing it and she's doing it better. 1.00

02:59:37.000 And frankly, he's probably.

02:59:41.000 Do you know my audience overlap or shoe on head?

02:59:44.000 I get called the shoe on head all the time.

02:59:47.000 Right.

02:59:50.000 You have to have the Darwinistically strongest argument.

02:59:52.000 And the only way to get the strongest arguments is through competition.

02:59:56.000 And so you can't cut yourself off to other arguments because then you're going to evolve into an echo chamber where you agree with everyone else.

03:00:02.000 So you need to argue with lots of different people to develop the strongest argument.

03:00:07.000 And there is no benefit to isolation in this manner.

03:00:10.000 There's actually a book by Paul McGojan.

03:00:12.000 That is a good argument against my position.

03:00:15.000 And I changed my mind based on that.

03:00:17.000 Thank you. 0.99

03:00:18.000 God, what a pathetic. 1.00

03:00:19.000 What pathetic behavior from you. 1.00

03:00:21.000 It's so disappointing. 1.00

03:00:22.000 Well, everybody's kind of coming from their own place.

03:00:24.000 You know, it's high.

03:00:25.000 I don't understand.

03:00:26.000 He said, I want to take all my rage out on you because you're the left.

03:00:29.000 And now I'm compelled because Darwin changed it.

03:00:32.000 He changed his opinion under logic.

03:00:34.000 Sure.

03:00:37.000 Because I'm off the list.

03:00:38.000 No, I didn't soften him up.

03:00:40.000 I am the call girl that he wants to utilize as something to beat and punish, despite the fact that I am one of the few doing the thing that he's asking the left to do.

03:00:48.000 Maybe he used to want that, but after this conversation, he's different.

03:00:53.000 I don't know. 0.98

03:00:54.000 Well, you called me an evil bitch and have been like nothing but nasty to me, so I'm not sure. 0.99

03:00:58.000 Oh, it's called How to Have a Life. 1.00

03:00:59.000 You've been nasty to everyone this evening.

03:01:02.000 That's not true.

03:01:03.000 How have I been nasty to everyone?

03:01:03.000 Hold on.

03:01:05.000 Don't dish it out.

03:01:06.000 How have I been nasty to everyone?

03:01:09.000 Do you want me to bring up a chart?

03:01:13.000 To be fair, Kyla and I have had some spirited back and forths on Twitter, and we managed to sit next to each other and be pretty civil.

03:01:23.000 So she genuinely has been good.

03:01:26.000 I've seen what she's like when she's not being cordial.

03:01:31.000 Well, that's a trial to Robertier.

03:01:31.000 True.

03:01:35.000 Is that how you pronounce it?

03:01:36.000 My apologies.

03:01:37.000 Rudyard.

03:01:39.000 Rudyard.

03:01:40.000 Okay.

03:01:41.000 She's been an absolute monster to Rudyard and has a whole evening. 1.00

03:01:48.000 When.

03:01:48.000 Nope.

03:01:49.000 After he dismissed me outright and refused to engage with my answer.

03:01:52.000 You dismissed him.

03:01:53.000 I never dismissed him.

03:01:55.000 I never dismissed him.

03:01:56.000 There are multiple times you can watch this as he's describing certain things.

03:01:59.000 I'll like nodalog and agree.

03:02:01.000 There are multiple times where I engage with his conversation.

03:02:03.000 There are very few times where he substantively engages with me and out of his mouth he said, you're just a leftist.

03:02:08.000 I heard a couple of quotes, so I can assume your positions and dismiss you outright.

03:02:12.000 Also, why you previously said, I don't talk to leftists anymore.

03:02:15.000 Prove to me that you're an individual.

03:02:16.000 State what ideas you have developed as an individual to separate yourself from the group.

03:02:21.000 I would say as a liberal that I'm like decently critical of the immigration policy that most 2016 presidential candidates ran along.

03:02:30.000 That's not an individual idea.

03:02:31.000 That's a smaller group idea.

03:02:32.000 What is sufficient for you to be an individual idea?

03:02:34.000 Okay, so I've developed an idea about generating a life charge in a society where you establish incentives.

03:02:40.000 Why do I need to prove to you?

03:02:42.000 Why do I need to prove from the beginning that I'm an individual with engaging with?

03:02:45.000 Why don't you?

03:02:46.000 Almost no one is.

03:02:47.000 Almost no one is an individual.

03:02:48.000 Here's a pro tip.

03:02:49.000 Try to talk to people like maybe they are.

03:02:51.000 It's not true.

03:02:52.000 Let them prove you wrong.

03:02:53.000 It's not true, though.

03:02:54.000 Most people belong to their group identity and they reflect the group identity. 0.70

03:02:57.000 Sometimes.

03:02:57.000 Sure.

03:02:58.000 I agree.

03:02:58.000 It's very rare.

03:02:59.000 I agree with you on this.

03:02:59.000 It's very, very rare.

03:03:01.000 I agree.

03:03:01.000 I agree with you.

03:03:02.000 And yet every now and then you will engage with somebody of substance that has interesting ideas and you should be open to hearing those people even if they trigger off some of your buzzwords of being like, maybe they're not going to be good faith.

03:03:13.000 You should engage in that anyways.

03:03:14.000 Just like when I started going through your social media, there was a couple of assumptions I had.

03:03:17.000 But fundamentally, I engaged and understood your ideas.

03:03:20.000 I asked you questions, right?

03:03:22.000 I was trying to engage with you substantively.

03:03:24.000 You just didn't want to do the same back.

03:03:25.000 I engaged with you.

03:03:26.000 And that's when I went, okay, well, if all we're doing is just being like bad faith and dismissing each other, I'll just be mean.

03:03:31.000 If you're engaging in the strategies I said you would, you are muddying the water and moving definitions around.

03:03:37.000 You muddied the water.

03:03:37.000 You said biblical morality is like this objective thing, and then at the same time it shifted and moved.

03:03:43.000 It's a literal book.

03:03:43.000 It's the post-day.

03:03:45.000 Would he be a heretic to the hundred? 0.57

03:03:47.000 No, he wouldn't because he followed the rules.

03:03:49.000 This is the literal seated Christianity. 0.75

03:03:51.000 They would call him a heretic.

03:03:53.000 You have to prove that someone's an individual.

03:03:55.000 Most people follow group moral codes.

03:03:56.000 Very few people develop individual ideas.

03:03:59.000 I don't engage in.

03:04:00.000 We could do an eight-hour show, which would be fun, but we should grab one more caller.

03:04:03.000 Do you want to shout anything out, brother?

03:04:04.000 Thank you, Tim, for speeding this up.

03:04:06.000 I would like to apologize again for the name calling, but I was getting heated.

03:04:11.000 And again, I really don't think you understood just how hard you were on my fellow autists.

03:04:18.000 I was very hard on him.

03:04:20.000 I would never even begin to pretend that I wasn't hard on him, but I wasn't mean to the rest of the panel.

03:04:24.000 This is Darwin War.

03:04:25.000 Rudyard is war.

03:04:26.000 I wasn't.

03:04:27.000 Rudyard is completely fine with the way that I engage with them.

03:04:30.000 Rudyard, as an autist, is utterly privileged and disprivileged compared to you, a highly functioning. 0.93

03:04:36.000 Traditionally, cis-abled.

03:04:39.000 Cis-abled white woman, and you've got to check your problems. 1.00

03:04:41.000 You're assuming that I'm cis-able. 0.98

03:04:43.000 Actually, I will make one last shout-out.

03:04:45.000 You know that joke people make about gamers being the most oppressed minority?

03:04:50.000 No, it's autists. 1.00

03:04:52.000 It's actual people with autism because I don't know if you've got it.

03:04:56.000 No, no, hear me out.

03:04:57.000 No, I agree.

03:04:57.000 I'll hear you.

03:04:58.000 But I also hear you.

03:05:01.000 Okay, fair enough.

03:05:02.000 Apologies. 0.93

03:05:04.000 I don't know if you've noticed, but the left loves to talk about ableism, but whenever an autist says something that isn't groupthake, they will gladly rip his throat out with their teeth.

03:05:14.000 I agree with you.

03:05:15.000 I agree.

03:05:16.000 Do you want to know?

03:05:16.000 I'll give you this as my individual piece.

03:05:18.000 Do you want to know my breakout, one of my biggest breakout debates?

03:05:21.000 It was insisting that autistic incels are a vulnerable population that experience significant more oppression than anyone on the left.

03:05:29.000 Does that make me an individual yet?

03:05:31.000 No, it doesn't.

03:05:33.000 You're not like other girls. 1.00

03:05:34.000 I get your special girls.

03:05:37.000 Wait, sorry, is that griping nasty right now?

03:05:41.000 Oh, yeah, you are.

03:05:42.000 I mean, I'm interested.

03:05:42.000 I do.

03:05:43.000 It's not the first.

03:05:44.000 I think it's a poor taste joke.

03:05:46.000 It is a poor taste joke, Ackley, because I'm not throwing women under the bus, but thank you. 0.82

03:05:51.000 It's a story.

03:05:51.000 You want to shout anything out before the last colour?

03:05:53.000 I want to do meme games with you because I promise you're not going to win.

03:05:56.000 Never mind.

03:05:57.000 Thank you, caller.

03:05:58.000 Thank you, man.

03:05:58.000 Bye-bye.

03:05:59.000 Thanks for calling out.

03:06:00.000 And I love you.

03:06:00.000 I forgive you.

03:06:03.000 All right.

03:06:03.000 Next up, we've got, and last but not least, squirrel tactics.

03:06:08.000 What's up? 1.00

03:06:08.000 Oh, shit. 1.00

03:06:09.000 Squirrel Tactics? 1.00

03:06:10.000 What's up, man?

03:06:11.000 Or woman? 0.96

03:06:12.000 Give it to me.

03:06:14.000 I want to see your nut. 1.00

03:06:15.000 Oh, Jesus.

03:06:16.000 It's a squirrel.

03:06:18.000 It was a wildlife thing.

03:06:19.000 I got it.

03:06:19.000 Joe.

03:06:20.000 I got it.

03:06:20.000 Give me your nuts.

03:06:22.000 You are unmuted, but we can't hear you.

03:06:25.000 He's playing Fallout.

03:06:26.000 He's playing Fallout Tactics, which is a decent game.

03:06:29.000 This is a debate strategy, actually.

03:06:30.000 He's playing.

03:06:31.000 He's icing you.

03:06:31.000 Fallout Tactics.

03:06:32.000 What's it called in debate strategy?

03:06:33.000 I don't know if it's.

Timcast IRL - Tim Pool - March 19, 2026

IT HAS BEGUN, Subpoenas Filed Over GRAND CONSPIRACY Against Trump | Timcast IRL

Episode Stats

People

Summary

Transcript