00:01:51.000In another massive victory for the GOP and Donald Trump, the Supreme Court issued what would be calling a sudden ruling, granting Alabama the right to redistrict, which means one by one the dominoes are falling and Democrats is cooked.
00:02:27.000They're just going down with the ship.
00:02:30.000Donald Trump may have some polling issues, but the way this procedural war is going, Republicans are certainly winning.
00:02:36.000And then there's the question of Donald Trump's election integrity army that they intend to dispatch across the country.
00:02:42.000I'm wondering if it's going to have an impact in the California races as well.
00:02:46.000Spencer Pratt is skyrocketing in public notability, and there is this attack ad that I thought was a parody of.
00:02:58.000I thought Spencer Pratt made this ad that was a gag meant to act like it was insulting him, but in fact, it's actually an attack ad where it's like, Spencer Pratt doesn't want to spend taxpayer dollars on housing for our unhoused neighbors.
00:03:11.000And I was like, huh, very funny, Spencer.
00:03:13.000It turns out, no, it's actually a group that doesn't like the guy.
00:03:16.000And they just made an ad that accidentally supports him.
00:03:50.000Turn the water off and it shrinks back to pocket size.
00:03:52.000The Pocket Hose ballistic is reinforced with liquid crystal polymer used in bulletproof vests, making the anti burst sleeve practically bulletproof.
00:04:01.000And that liquid crystal polymer fiber is actually five times stronger than steel.
00:04:05.000Comes with the pocket pivot, which gives you total freedom of movement at the spigot with 360 rotation.
00:04:10.000You move, it follows, and the water flows.
00:04:15.000So the hose looks new year after year.
00:04:17.000Re engineered thicker washers that resist leaks.
00:04:20.000Pocket hose carries over 100 patents worldwide.
00:04:24.000And now, for a limited time, when you purchase a new pocket hose ballistic, you get a free 360 degree rotating pocket pivot and a free thumb drive nozzle.
00:06:51.000It was like, thank God, thank you for coming.
00:06:54.000I'm really happy to be here, and I'm really glad that episode with Rogan reached you.
00:07:01.000It actually, interestingly, we talked in that about Jordan and I did a very deep dive on what the meaning of Hitler and Hitlerian like characters is.
00:07:12.000And it actually resulted in a student reaching out to me who was doing his PhD on the Holocaust, and I actually became his PhD advisor.
00:07:22.000He has now done Dissertation research on some of the ideas that we presented in that podcast.
00:07:27.000So it's a demonstration that actually this podcast stuff causes interesting changes in the world, positive.
00:08:02.000They didn't say Supreme Court allows Tennessee to eliminate congressional districts held by a white Democrat because we know what they're doing at CNN.
00:08:10.000They say Supreme Court's conservative majority on Monday cleared the way for Alabama to revert to a congressional map with one majority black district in a sudden ruling that drew a dissent from the court's three liberal justices.
00:08:22.000Now, I will say, wow, the Supreme Court justices are just ramming these things through.
00:08:29.000I got to say, I'm surprised to see it, but it looks like the Supreme Court conservatives have joined the fray and are actually now deciding to stand up for this country.
00:08:45.000The petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment is granted.
00:08:50.000The judgment of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama in that case is vacated, and the cases are remanded to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th District, et cetera, et cetera.
00:09:00.000Today, the court vacates a district court order enjoining Alabama's 2023 redistricting plan and remands for reconsideration in light of the court's new interpretation.
00:09:08.000I just want to, of Section 2 of the VRA, I just want to really quickly stress these states were trying to redistrict before we got to this point in 2026, and they were blocked by lawsuits and the Biden DOJ.
00:09:22.000Alabama was trying to redistrict from the census in 2020.
00:09:35.000In addition to holding that Alabama's 2023 districting plan violates Section 2 of the district court, held in one of three cases before this court that Alabama violated the 14th Amendment and intentionally diluting the votes of black voters in Alabama, that constitutional finding of intentional discrimination is independent of and unaffected by any of the legal issues discussed in Calais.
00:09:51.000Vecatur is thus inappropriate and will cause only confusion as Alabamians begin to vote in the election scheduled for next week.
00:10:03.000I think it's plain to see at this point.
00:10:06.000They are not playing the decorum game, which in 2020 they very much did and said, we're not going to look over this Texas v. Pennsylvania thing.
00:10:35.000The final paragraph The court today unceremoniously discards the district court's meticulously documented and supported discriminatory intent finding and careful remedial order without any sound basis for doing so, without regard for the confusion that will surely ensue.
00:10:49.000And with all vacatures of this kind of the court, the district court remains free on remand to decide for itself whether Calais has any bearing on its 14th Amendment analysis of its prior reasoning or if its prior reasoning is unaffected by the decision.
00:11:48.000And that it is now escalating and that the judiciary is weighing in on one side is bad for the U.S., it's bad for the Republic.
00:12:00.000And so, you know, you can call me naive, but I would like to live in a country where we agree that actually we want to.
00:12:08.000Poll the electorate and discover what they want in terms of governance and not go outside and, you know, draw funny lines on a map in order to wield power.
00:12:17.000Now, that's not the country we live in, but it should be.
00:12:20.000Well, here's Chicago, which I just love in terms of their congressional districts and how they make no sense, but are specifically designed to maximize power in certain ways.
00:12:39.000The Pacific, I'm sorry, not the Pacific, but the Northeast, Massachusetts, all of it, a really obvious example of just the political manipulations to steal power.
00:13:17.000Well, that's what Spanberger's new map was trying to do, right?
00:13:19.000I mean, it was trying to have like what five districts or something start all in Alexandria, Arlington, so that those rural areas were, you know, lumped in with Democrats.
00:13:30.000The thing that you mentioned too about Tennessee and Tennessee's ninth is the person who's representing the incumbent in Tennessee's ninth is Steve Cohen, I think his name is.
00:13:39.000And he's a white guy, he's a Democrat.
00:13:41.000And Justin Pearson, who's a very outspoken Tennessee state senator who's always going into Nashville and like throwing a fit about something other, whether it's trans or gun control or something else, he is running against Cohen in the ninth district as it was prior to this new redistricting.
00:13:59.000And now that it's going to be, you know, it's likely more Republican.
00:14:03.000What they don't want you to know is that the person who's going to win that, her name is Charlotte Bergman, and she's a black woman.
00:14:10.000So they're talking about how it's Jim Crow because they really wanted Justin Pearson, but instead they're going to get this black woman instead.
00:15:08.000I don't think it actually looks like it was a problem that they got rid of, but the reality is you can have the same exact district and say it was just by political affiliation, even if it was originally by race.
00:15:18.000So you can lie, and this just gives people the ability to redistrict.
00:15:26.000That can't happen based on the arguments of the woke left and their parity, national parity argument.
00:15:32.000So if you have a district that has, at this point, greater than 13%, then someone's going to make an argument of black people that are going to make the argument.
00:15:40.000That it's either over or under representing a certain race.
00:15:45.000It's racist to say you can't have more than 13.
00:15:47.000That's 1965 when they said that they ruled you have to have a majority black district, otherwise, you're being racist.
00:15:57.000Now they're saying you can't use race as the predeterminate factor as to why you create a district.
00:16:01.000It sounds like the Supreme Court's just tying up some loose ends as we transition to the New World Order, and then they're going to be like, okay, okay, you can redistrict back to, you can have whatever races you want.
00:16:14.000No, no, the argument literally was we don't need this policy anymore.
00:16:19.000Alito literally stated back then it made sense based on the structure and the nature of our society and culture, but the framers of this law intended for there to be some kind of sunsetting.
00:16:30.000And at this point, we don't need to have districts based on race.
00:16:35.000In fact, the only guarantee a person should have is that they will not have their district gerrymandered based on their race.
00:16:41.000And that's actually true to the spirit of affirmative action.
00:16:45.000It was always supposed to be a temporary remedy and it became a permanent feature.
00:16:50.000And so, in that way, you can argue that this decision is good.
00:16:53.000On the other hand, at some level, it's like we're rooting for different kinds of cancer that are in competition, right?
00:17:01.000The redistricting is, in and of itself, anti democratic, you know, in the small d sense.
00:17:07.000And we should be concerned about the fact that this midterm election was headed in one direction and that this may substantially change the.
00:17:17.000Calculus, not because anybody's opinion was changed.
00:17:23.000And the argument is that illegal immigrants padding the electoral college and congressional seats for blue states by upwards of being nice on the low end, two to four congressional seats, four Democrats they should not have.
00:17:33.000And on the high end, upwards of 12 seats they should not have.
00:17:37.000I'm talking about when you look at, there's the third way they did an analysis on does illegal immigration increase the amount of Democrat held seats.
00:17:46.000And they said, actually, when you look at the data, California may gain one seat, but Texas gains one seat as well.
00:17:52.000Therefore, it's one Democrat, one Republican.
00:17:55.000The only problem is the seat in Texas is in an urban area, largely around Austin, which creates another Democrat district.
00:18:01.000So, yes, illegal immigrants tend to be moved towards cities where they could create urban Democrat congressional districts, even in red states.
00:18:09.000So, when the Republicans say we are going to redistrict to eliminate past injustice, I say sure.
00:18:15.000These black majority, majority minority districts should not exist.
00:18:18.000And so, I'm happy to see that stopped.
00:18:46.000If there was an issue of me and Ian largely get along on most things, we're never violent, we don't fight, we may disagree, but it's always afterwards we're hanging out, we're eating cheeseburgers together.
00:18:58.000Someone in this area or the governing authority or the police came and said, Ian now is going to be discriminated against for a particular reason.
00:19:06.000I would stand up against that as he is a member of my community.
00:20:56.000I don't want to see one side put down their arms in the redistricting battle, but I do want us to all recognize it's bad for the thing that we value.
00:21:04.000So the issue of gerrymandering is interesting.
00:21:07.000Typically, when people refer to gerrymandering, you're talking about the process by which you construct a party dominant congressional district or district in general politically for that purpose.
00:21:19.000However, the problem I see with it is sometimes districts should not be just blocks.
00:21:24.000They're going to look weird and you'll be accused of gerrymandering.
00:22:36.000The issue is that humans don't live in blocks of the same populations.
00:22:40.000So districts are always going to be oddly shaped in some way because you're going to have an urban center and you're going to have a disparate rural demography.
00:22:50.000So that means if you just made a congressional district a square, it might only have 35,000 people in it, and that's not proportional to.
00:22:58.000I feel like we can develop heat maps for zones for what are these called?
00:23:04.000Districts that where you can use I don't know, I don't want to just say like artificial intelligence is the end, is like the solution to everything, but you can.
00:23:12.000You can vote by your vicinity and it doesn't have to be in a sphere or a circle.
00:23:16.000It can like travel through paths of least resistance to find the balance to make these districts without having to get some crudely drawn thing.
00:23:29.000They use computers that draw districts.
00:23:32.000The only problem is in most blue states, they manipulate them to gain power.
00:23:36.000They bring in illegal immigrants to gain power.
00:23:39.000The general idea, at least in my moral worldview of a congressional district, is that it's supposed to represent people who live similarly and their political whims.
00:23:50.000So if you look at Louisiana, for instance, you can see here that the third district is the shore.
00:23:57.000If you live on the water, you are going to have a similar life experience and goals to the other people who live on the water based on.
00:24:01.000Flooding on shrimping or fisheries or whatever it is you might be doing.
00:24:05.000The idea that they're going to create a district just for black people because they're black is the most insane thing imaginable.
00:24:11.000Yeah, I think a lot of these come from like where you have the city has like nine districts is from like the time of better men where you had the plebs that ate, you know, garbage and they had terrible IQ because they had no nutrition.
00:24:21.000And then you know, all the rich, wealthy men that ran the show behind the scenes.
00:24:25.000And so you got these vestiges of people that think they're in charge.
00:24:27.000We're like now with the internet and high access to nutrients, like even people in these red farmer districts can be pretty brilliant.
00:24:35.000And so The age of like consolidating power in the city, I think, is sort of coming to a close.
00:24:42.000The next big move, of course, South Carolina lawmakers will take up the proposed congressional map tomorrow, eliminating a Democrat seat and creating a solid red state.
00:24:51.000And guess which South Carolina politician opposes this?
00:26:21.000Supreme Court of Virginia said you will not redistrict.
00:26:24.000Some woman went out screaming and pointing at the court building.
00:26:28.000The argument is you can't just ignore your Constitution when you try to change the rules and ice out half of the population, which Virginia tried to do.
00:26:37.000And now Virginia Democrats are discussing a court overhaul.
00:26:42.000The strategy will be to let me just read it.
00:26:45.000Behind the scenes, some Democrats considered going further after a Friday article by the down ballot, a progressive outlet proposed lowering the retirement age for Virginia judges.
00:26:54.000From 73 to 54, and installing new justices to rehear the case.
00:27:31.000Now, this question was never answered in Texas v. Pennsylvania because the Supreme Court was too cowardly to answer the question, which leads us to this conflicted circumstance, which Democrats wish, wish they had answered now.
00:27:45.000Because the issue would now be when the judges said, no, you can't, the argument from the Virginia Democrats is then we have to physically remove these people and overhaul them.
00:27:55.000If they were to do that, they would surely face a battle from the DOJ.
00:28:00.000Or from the Supreme Court, it would just be a legal catastrophe to which the Democrats would have to argue the judiciary has no right to.
00:28:12.000They're already arguing the judiciary has no right to overturn the will of the voters in a referendum, despite the fact they argued the inverse in 2020.
00:28:20.000So I'm just loving the hypocrisy, but the desperation is palpable.
00:28:25.000Why don't the voters notice the hypocrisy?
00:28:27.000You know, Democrat voters don't notice and they don't seem to care.
00:28:31.000There's countless instances of hypocrisy over and over.
00:28:36.000Did you see the thing recently where Spanberger said that whoever that Virginia's electoral college votes will go to whoever wins the popular vote nationally?
00:29:13.000I'm only going to briefly mention this before we get to this later on in the show.
00:29:17.000But every story I've heard about a baby being born in some other hospital in like any other state, the doctors come in and say, You have to get these shots.
00:30:08.000That's why these are the richest counties in the entire country, the ones surrounding D.C.
00:30:12.000Yeah, well, obviously, if it's the country, then it's the world.
00:30:14.000But, you know, Fairfax, Loudoun, and a couple of them in Maryland.
00:30:18.000And you're just like looking at it and you're like, what?
00:30:21.000You're all just fleecing us and living in these beautiful homes, and you can drive through Loudoun County and it's like you can smell money.
00:30:28.000It's very easy to make money if you know what's going to happen before everyone else.
00:30:42.000He made a declaration about energy infrastructure, and instantly a bunch of key infrastructure energy providers saw a massive spike in their stock value, but it was.
00:30:52.000It was just before Trump made the announcement, but you know, whatever.
00:30:56.000Well, I wanted to go back to the hypocrisy point because I think the hypocrisy is universal and the rule is obvious.
00:31:03.000Everybody wants the rules bent when they are asking for something and they want the rules enforced when the other people are asking for something.
00:31:11.000So we've become a country that views ourselves as teams.
00:32:33.000Libby and I do, Ian and I, you and Libby, we largely agree on most things with minor differences.
00:32:39.000And we are beset on all sides by political factions that don't actually want anything good.
00:32:45.000Half of them want to extract power for themselves, the other half want to extract status and appear virtuous.
00:32:53.000And they are willing to lie, cheat, steal, and kill to get it.
00:32:56.000I feel like I want to preserve the system.
00:32:58.000I think what you're talking about is maintain a system that's honorable, that will function no matter where you are within that system.
00:33:04.000But because there's been such a barrage on the system from outside, from Chinese AI, who knows where all this global misinformation is coming in and twisting people's minds and making them think Trump is Hitler and they hate this person and I'm afraid that, like, maybe the system, like Abraham Lincoln, you know, he suspended habeas corpus.
00:33:27.000That's so far outside of my wheelhouse of reality of what I think I would do, but he did it and he's considered one of the greatest presidents.
00:33:45.000Well, I want to put a model on the table that's a level up from what we're talking about that I think explains it.
00:33:52.000There's a problem on the right and there's a problem on the left, and the two of them are functioning in a dynamic.
00:33:58.000The problem on the right is that the right believes the mythology of the market much more strongly than it should.
00:34:04.000The market is the best tool we've ever come up with to figure out how to accomplish things.
00:34:09.000Nothing competes with the market in terms of its ability to figure out that question.
00:34:13.000But the market is beset by a tremendous amount of market failure.
00:34:18.000Lots of people who are winning in the market are either partly or wholly winning as a result of rent seeking, and lots of people who are losing are losing for reasons that have nothing to do with their willingness to do the right thing.
00:34:31.000So the right is stingy with respect to taking care of the losers in our competitive system, and there will always be losers.
00:34:37.000What we should want is a system that takes care of people who lose, who want To do the right thing, they want to compete, but it doesn't happen to go well.
00:34:46.000We should want everybody to have access to the market.
00:34:48.000What we have is a system in which the stinginess on the right and the failure to recognize the amount of corruption that there is and the amount of wealth that is generated by it is causing a large fraction of the population to correctly understand that they are not going to win.
00:35:04.000We have a competitive system and they are born into losing and they have no interest in preserving the system.
00:35:10.000So, what you're talking about, the people who want to overthrow the system.
00:35:22.000And I would be interested in your response to the right thing isn't universal.
00:35:29.000And doing the right thing sometimes defies what people want, in which case, to instill upon them something they don't want would be the wrong thing.
00:35:39.000So I'll give you an example of a non market circumstance which we should not support.
00:35:44.000And I'll use a bit of an absurdity, and that would be asparagus flavored ice cream.
00:36:47.000Put money into the stock market, right?
00:36:49.000You need to suffer the downside of your judgment, including the 25% chance that it's going to go in the wrong direction, even if you calculate it correctly.
00:36:57.000But let's say that we have a level of pesticide use that causes a certain number of cancers.
00:37:05.000And let's say you didn't do anything to increase your exposure to this pesticide, but you're one of the unlucky people who gets a cancer.
00:37:49.000And it means that when you're the unlucky one and the dice go the wrong way, You know, we come together and rebuild your barn.
00:37:55.000Where I agree with you is that there will be a firefighter's pension and it's got to be invested somewhere.
00:38:02.000It can't, it's not just going to sit in cash in a bank account.
00:38:04.000And so, with all good intentions, it's placed into a series of just some funds.
00:38:10.000And unfortunately, many of those companies go bust.
00:38:13.000The pension loses a large portion of its value.
00:38:15.000And these hardworking men and women who all had good intentions, thought they made a sound investment, are now hurt because of it.
00:38:22.000And we are facing Hard working retirees who now don't know how they're going to pay their bills despite doing everything right, versus a guy who is buddies with a member of Congress who whispers to him, We're going to vote on this bill tomorrow.
00:38:36.000Go put a bunch of, you know, go short this stock and you'll make a billion dollars.
00:38:41.000There are people that do nothing for society but the wrong thing and extract through the market value and live like kings while hard working men and women every day don't have access to these systems and suffer because of it.
00:38:52.000What about something like, what about the people who lost everything because they invested with Madoff?
00:38:57.000They believed they were doing the right thing.
00:39:13.000Should you be, if you are investing in, you know, investment funds, should you be required to take out some sort of investment fund insurance?
00:39:22.000Well, if we're going to bail out the elites when they engage in this, then we should bail out the little guy.
00:39:28.000Bail out the people who are the big ones.
00:40:01.000Because we didn't do that, what we ended up doing was bailing out not just those institutions that we would have suffered more for allowing to fail, but we bailed out the people who made the bad decisions, guaranteeing that those decisions would be revisited on us in a future context, like right now.
00:40:17.000So the point is, none of this is as hard to solve as it seems.
00:40:22.000It's being made hard to solve by people who are winning disproportionately, not because of insight, not because of hard work.
00:40:29.000They are winning because they have power with which to seek rent.
00:40:33.000And I think they that's the intention is that they are stripping the wealth from the United States through the corporate upward mobility, taking it away from common man, lower and middle class, to incite a communist revolution within the United States so that the United States will destroy itself so that they can centralize power in Switzerland with the Bank of International Settlements.
00:40:53.000This is my point about stinginess on the right.
00:40:56.000We're not going to pay attention to the suffering of people who are unable to compete in the market because they ate.
00:41:03.000Garbage food, because their water was poisoned, because the schools were never properly constructed to educate, right?
00:41:11.000Those people discover when they, you know, reach adulthood hey, I am structured to lose in a system in which the winners take from the losers.
00:41:19.000Why would those people act to preserve the system?
00:42:03.000There are stupid people who deserve to work at McDonald's, and when they fail, it's a good thing, and they should lose because the ultimate end goal should be a headlong rush into transhumanism, sacrificing the weaker for the stronger.
00:42:17.000You're not going to want the same world you want, and their moral worldview is that they're just.
00:42:20.000Now, of course, we can call that evil, but they're not going to exist in the same moral framework that you are.
00:42:26.000Well, I believe their model of what makes people capable is in error and self serving.
00:42:32.000That actually, the amount of this that has anything to do with genetic differences between us is tiny.
00:42:38.000And the amount of it that has to do with mistreating people during development, even before they're born, is so large that actually, if you did have a system in which it didn't matter what zip code you lived in, your water was clean, that would do a huge piece of the heavy lifting.
00:42:53.000If you made sure that everybody had proper actual food, which only rich people can even access now, you would see these fundamental differences disappear.
00:43:02.000And then the question is, how good is the developmental environment that you're Family and your school provide for you.
00:43:10.000I'm not saying that there's an argument to be made about nature versus nurture.
00:43:13.000I'm saying that there are wealthy, powerful individuals who probably agree with everything you just said.
00:43:18.000And they say, and still, human beings are limited, and we have to expand this through Neuralink and through technological advancement, for which the sacrifice of humans in cobalt mines and sulfur mines is worth every cent.
00:43:31.000Yeah, I just don't think they understand or care to understand what actually motivates humans.
00:43:38.000And what I've learned in traveling the world and dealing with people.
00:43:42.000Many different continents, many different economic strata, is that people basically want the same things.
00:43:55.000The wants and desires of chickens are immaterial to me because I want to build AI data centers and turn myself into a machine that can fly around the universe.
00:44:13.000Your point about the world that we want to build is challenged by those that will lie to us and destroy what we want, manipulating our motivations and desires.
00:45:00.000The rules to work for us, and they're exploited by the likes of these liberals, these Democrats, these big tech companies.
00:45:06.000And so every step of the way, as we've been trying to implement this rules for all, they've been playing no rules for me, and we get crushed because of it.
00:45:35.000Well, if you let's take the fire department to take, you know, a low bar.
00:45:42.000Knowing that if my house catches on fire, all I have to do is make a phone call and people who have the capability of putting it out are going to show up and it doesn't matter what zip code I'm in.
00:45:54.000The point is, I get liberated by not having to fight my own fires, not having to contract with a private company to do it, not having to arrange things this way.
00:46:02.000There's a labor requirement from you for that.
00:46:10.000And I don't mind the fact that I will probably go my whole life subsidizing other people's houses being put out and mine's not likely to catch fire.
00:46:17.000Then the challenge for police and fire is the people who live in more rural areas that don't have access to those but still have to pay for it.
00:46:36.000Do you disagree with the top value I've put down that we can assess the quality of a policy based on whether or not it liberates individuals?
00:47:05.000It's also tremendously constraining at the same time.
00:47:08.000Do you resent the constraints that come with air travel?
00:47:11.000Or do you say, actually, net, net, I want to live in a world where I can go anywhere I want.
00:47:16.000I just have to, you know, figure out whether or not the price of going there is.
00:47:20.000I would love it if I could build my own ultralight without having to be controlled by the government to do it so that people can have their $60 Spirit Airlines airfare.
00:47:28.000So your ultralight, I want you to be able to build it and I want you to be able to fly and I want you not to have to ask.
00:47:46.000It would mean that many people would lose access because large commercial airliners would have difficulty flying in and out of urban areas when people are flying cars around.
00:47:53.000So much liberty is a bad thing, is your argument here.
00:48:16.000I'm constrained by the government, they prevent me from using these things.
00:48:19.000To make sure that other people can have large commercial airfare.
00:48:22.000Well, look, I have become unfortunately cynical about why the government does what it does.
00:48:28.000But my point would be we should look at the question of whether you should be allowed to build and fly your own ultralight, whether you should be allowed to buy a flying car, based on whether or not the net effect is liberation of individuals over the long term.
00:48:43.000The issue, I think, is exemplified pretty well by drones.
00:48:46.000So when the commercial drone thing first started, we started seeing them pop up in Best Buys and things like this.
00:48:52.000My friends and I were doing crazy experiments with them.
00:48:54.000We were hacking them, we were doing a lot.
00:48:55.000Broadcasts, and we actually got a request from the US government to consult on the expansion of this.
00:49:01.000When they first launched, I was liberated.
00:50:53.000Should that person be allowed to have that weapon?
00:50:55.000Well, I have become persuaded that the net liberty argument strongly favors the Second Amendment, and it does so in spite of the fact that.
00:51:05.000Liberties are limited by unstable people who use these weapons and rob innocent folks' life.
00:51:13.000So, this person in this apartment has a break in, and this is their singular weapon, and they use it and they shoot the guy, cavitates, vaporizes a large portion of his chest, and the bullet carries on through other apartments, striking a child.
00:51:25.000This is the argument why in New York they say we won't allow these weapons.
00:51:29.000Now, if I live out in rural West Virginia, nobody cares because I can go outside right now and just unload and nothing, no one will get hit.
00:51:40.000The challenge is that you maximize for, I suppose, in a situation like New York.
00:51:48.000And I'd largely agree with we have a constitution, we have rules, and people should be allowed to have these weapons.
00:51:53.000But I fully recognize a lot of people are going to get blasted if that's the case.
00:51:56.000Well, a lot of people are going to get blasted.
00:51:58.000But the hard part to calculate about the costs and benefits of the Second Amendment is that I'm fairly convinced that the founders understood the necessity of an armed populace to prevent tyranny.
00:52:12.000And the question is, how many skulls end up in a pile if we end up with tyranny because our weapons aren't powerful enough as citizens?
00:52:19.000Well, there was a really great meme where it's a guy with an American flag.
00:52:24.000I posted it and he's got a big pile of guns.
00:52:28.000And then he's like, he says something like, man, it's just so awful about these Epstein guys.
00:52:31.000There's nothing we can do, literally nothing that we can do at all.
00:52:35.000And that's the point that people keep making is, you know, around the world, the gag that they're saying is that Americans claim to have these guns to fight tyranny.
00:52:42.000We get these disclosures about Epstein, the people flying on these planes, the powerful elites.
00:52:48.000Everybody kind of knows what they're doing, but of course, no one.
00:54:02.000Free speech is, you know, like, no one can come out in the town square and shut you up, but it doesn't mean you have to be on, you know, CNN and Fox and wherever else.
00:54:12.000You know, it doesn't mean you have to be on.
00:54:14.000Time will tell whether or not free speech means for sure that you're allowed to be on every social media.
00:54:18.000Does that mean you have access to a telephone?
00:54:20.000Is that your right as an American citizen?
00:54:22.000But just, I suppose, to the argument about liberty.
00:54:25.000Do I have the liberty to enter someone else's property?
00:54:52.000But this is, this is my point about why the right has to wise up about taking care of the people at the bottom so they don't fall off the ladder and have no investment.
00:55:23.000I think we should go back to the free speech question because we're getting tangled up in whether or not you have a right to be on CNN versus whether or not anything should be sayable on CNN, right?
00:55:35.000And I would argue you're saying, well, you know, you could have a Hitlerian figure, you know, Mesmerizing the population over a platform.
00:56:34.000So, do you think that, like, if Epstein investor class wanted to launch a primetime cable show on CNN advocating for pedophilia, let them do it?
00:56:43.000Well, like I said, we have a special obligation with respect to pornography.
00:56:53.000Going on, making a political argument for legalization.
00:56:56.000A political argument for legalization, I suppose I would have to accept that on the basis that we could meet it with the obvious counter argument and hopefully people would spot where it is.
00:57:34.000But now we're back in COVID hell, right?
00:57:36.000Because you had a bunch of people using wrong arguments to say you shouldn't be allowed to discuss the virulence of COVID or the safety of vaccines or the utility of repurposed drugs.
00:57:53.000And the fact is, those people got a lot of folks.
00:58:01.000And sought to destroy us using that system against us.
00:58:05.000And so if we adopt the, we will allow them to keep doing what they do as long as we get to do what we do, the end result is we get crushed and they do the bad things.
00:58:12.000So I think you have just gotten right back to the question about we are in a war in which we have to meet fire with fire.
00:58:20.000That's not where we should want to be.
00:58:21.000We should want to get out of that situation as quickly as possible.
00:58:24.000And the fact is, if you can't trust people in power to make decisions about what Can and cannot be said because you know what they'll do with it.
00:58:31.000Then we are stuck with any idea should be expressible, and you meet it with the counter idea.
00:58:36.000That's that's the it's not that that's a good system, it's that it's the best system that we can consider.
00:58:41.000So, if someone came out and they were like, This there's a virus, and someone's like, This is what you have to do, they gave the wrong information, it got a hundred billion or billions of people believed it.
00:58:51.000You think that the government should not step in and shut it down, or it would be up to the populace to self regulate?
00:58:57.000You're saying that to a funny person to be.
00:58:59.000Land that argument on because the government did step in cryptically and said that Heather and I were spreading COVID disinformation, that we were endangering people, and they muscled the platforms to silence us.
00:59:16.000We were right and they were doing exactly what they were accusing us of.
00:59:20.000So the right solution was not to tell them that they couldn't deploy their arguments about ivermectin vaccines, origin of the virus, virulence of the virus.
00:59:29.000They can deploy their arguments and we can deploy our arguments.
01:00:21.000And then we tried to glue these things together and act like they existed under one umbrella.
01:00:26.000The reality is if I say something like, you can express your political opinion, it's fine, you'll end up with Antifa going and attacking people.
01:00:36.000And then here's the problem of reality.
01:00:38.000In the case of Derek Chauvin, a travesty of justice, the jurors were entering a courthouse under armed guard because the rioters were threatening people.
01:00:48.000Which case was it where the journalist followed?
01:01:22.000Within the confines of our moral framework, there is free speech.
01:01:25.000That is, you defend free speech, you reject and denounce violence, and never seek to recruit for it, you get free speech.
01:01:33.000The moment you say we can throw bricks, diversity of tactics, and we have to crush or kill fascists, the people we disagree with, I say, then you get the treatment you've asked for all the same.
01:02:24.000There are people who don't want the truth, they don't care.
01:02:28.000There are people, you see these videos during COVID where a guy is chasing a woman down, screaming, If I have to wear a mask, then you do too.
01:03:11.000Yeah, I think your argument, Brett, about the best ideas will win.
01:03:14.000I believe that if there's enough time and people are calm.
01:03:17.000But when people are agitated and it's an emergency, a bad idea can get super hot traction real fast and you need some authority to stomp it out, I think.
01:03:27.000I don't think that the best idea necessarily will always win.
01:03:30.000Because I do think that what Tim is saying is accurate about there being different moral frameworks.
01:03:34.000So I think, you know, generally, the four of us, five of us, would have been raised with a relatively Christian moral framework, whether there was Christianity involved or not, because we were swimming in those Christian moral framework waters of the United States as it was in the 20th century, you know, and going into the 21st century.
01:03:55.000But we now have a situation where there are a lot of people who don't think that that is a valid way to look at the world at all.
01:04:02.000You recently have, and you have a situation too where the people who don't think that that basic Christian worldview is valid think that their worldview is valid and that you, as someone who accepts a basic Christian worldview, have to accept their craziness.
01:04:17.000Like, just for an example, you look at this recent viral video on X that was going around today or yesterday, and it's a bunch of Muslims in the UK demanding that all the pubs close because the pubs are next to mosques.
01:04:46.000We have to protect kids from disfiguring.
01:04:50.000So when you say medical, I think we're talking about a judgment call over what is in the medical interest of your child.
01:04:56.000This is not a judgment call, this is the maiming of children.
01:05:00.000I would argue that that is the reason I answered the way I did is because within the medical realm, I believe that the right to informed consent is sacrosanct and kids can't exercise it because they can't be properly informed.
01:05:27.000In which case, you would argue that there should be, I should say, would you argue then there should be an authority that can go to, say, California and say, the federal government, for instance, we are going to stop you?
01:05:37.000The parents say our child shall get a sex change.
01:05:40.000Should the federal government send agents in to stop that from happening?
01:05:43.000So then, when, as you mentioned already, with rules we don't want to live under, the inverse happens is that in a state like Florida, when the parents say, absolutely, you will not vaccinate our kids, the Democrat federal government comes in and takes the kids and says, the state has the authority to come in.
01:05:57.000Now, the only thing you're arguing is your moral worldview, not the principle.
01:06:15.000In one case, you have doctors maiming children, and the federal government has not only a right, but I think an obligation to prevent that from happening.
01:06:24.000In the other, you have a shot with unknown impact that there's no medical need for.
01:06:32.000So, I would argue that the very same principle has you preventing the supposedly medical intervention.
01:06:41.000What if the kid has cancer and the doctor recommends?
01:06:46.000Chemotherapy, low success rate, and the parents believe that it's not at the point where the child is at risk of dying in the short term, and they want to try something alternative.
01:06:55.000The state can then say, No, we're coming in.
01:06:59.000This child's body is not functioning properly, they need medicine.
01:07:01.000Well, unfortunately, COVID delivered a graduate level education in modern medicine to anybody who was ready to pay attention.
01:07:11.000I'm not saying you become a medical expert, but a graduate level education in how medicine functions.
01:07:19.000You're talking about a case where parents are rejecting a doctor's advice.
01:07:26.000There are many places where it makes sense to reject a doctor's advice because the doctors are perversely incentive or badly educated.
01:07:34.000Will that mean that someone, like, let's say, a Christian scientist, Christian scientists, as I understand it, believe that medical intervention is never warranted?
01:07:46.000And so you could have a child born with cancer who the parents refuse to treat.
01:07:50.000And when the child dies, that will be a tragedy.
01:07:54.000On the other hand, you might have an instance in which the parents are very well informed and they recognize that there is a more promising therapy for the cancer in question.
01:08:04.000And then what they're effectively getting is a pharma sales pitch for chemotherapy that's highly destructive and perhaps not very effective.
01:08:12.000So the question is The answer to the question is as with the case of liberal gun laws.
01:08:21.000I think we have to tolerate a tiny amount of tragedy.
01:08:24.000The number of doctors who will turn down medical treatment for their children when their children are in dire need is tiny.
01:08:31.000And so we have to recognize that the principle that is maximally liberating and valuable of humans is the principle in which you either have an absolute right to informed consent over all medical intervention, or in the case that your child can't exercise informed consent, you have it in their stead.
01:08:54.000To clarify, there will be some instances where the parents will turn down a known effective treatment, which will kill the child, but we have to allow that.
01:09:00.000It's a minimal tragedy to protect the rights.
01:09:02.000Well, not just to protect their rights, but to protect all of the children who will be maimed by doctors prescribing things that are not in the child's interest, which is happening all too frequently.
01:09:13.000Does this mean that I suppose the argument is against an authority on medicine, that the individual shall choose whether that medicine should be applied regardless of the science?
01:09:28.000The problem is that the phrase the science in that sentence is doing so much heavy lifting.
01:09:34.000The way science works, you have inflicting everything.
01:09:37.000Let me clarify the point so I can train you.
01:09:58.000But what you need to compare that little tragedy to is the massive tragedy in comparison of all of the people who are killed annually by doctors.
01:11:02.000That's the person's choice to get to just wither away.
01:11:05.000Yes, if you want to make it tough, then the question is with an infectious agent, what do we do to protect other people from so now we come to the next question, which is a contagion, which is hantavirus?
01:11:16.000Yep, and do we then say we've decided that because we believe you have hantavirus and we don't know for sure, we're taking your rights from you?
01:12:26.000And when I say low event volume, I'm describing at the national and international level, things of magnitude were fairly stagnant.
01:12:33.000Now, at the local level, sure, but the goings on of a police involved shooting in Oklahoma doesn't matter much to New Yorkers.
01:12:40.000Hantavirus was a story that could theoretically affect the whole world and likely would as these people start returning to their home countries.
01:12:47.000And thus it generated a lot of attention that I don't think is warranted, but correct me if I'm wrong.
01:12:51.000Well, I would say this is a story that we have to think about very carefully because Hantavirus is not new.
01:12:58.000It is not new that we have an outbreak amongst humans.
01:13:02.000The story of the MV Hondius does not add up as presented, but we don't know why it doesn't add up.
01:13:28.000Track Hanta, I'm not saying it's correct, says March 20th.
01:13:31.000You know, there is some disagreement between different sources.
01:13:34.000I think it's April 1st, but I don't know.
01:13:35.000It could be that I'm looking at the wrong source.
01:13:38.000But nonetheless, what we have, irrespective of which of those dates is correct, what we have is an individual who shows symptoms of Hanta virus and then gets so sick he dies.
01:14:32.000After the ship, the passengers disembarked.
01:14:35.000The question is how could you get this number of cases on the ship?
01:14:41.000And there are only a small number of answers.
01:14:44.000First of all, you should know Hantavirus is not conveyed between people.
01:14:48.000It's not contagious between people, except maybe the particular Andean strain.
01:14:54.000But that is far less certain than people think.
01:14:57.000The evidence of it being transmitted between people is quite weak.
01:15:03.000Peter McCullough put a paper on his X feed, a meta analysis.
01:15:09.000Actually, they couldn't do a meta analysis because the data was of too many different types, but they did a review of all of the available evidence and concluded it was actually unlikely that even the Andean strain is capable of transmitting between people.
01:15:23.000So, one possibility is that either there were rodents on the ship, another possibility is that one of the suppliers of the ship had a rodent problem, and so Some rice or something was brought in that was contaminated.
01:15:38.000Don't forget the bird watching at the dump.
01:15:40.000Well, the bird watching at the dump is pretty fishy because hantavirus.
01:15:47.000Here's the thing it's a really bad disease.
01:15:52.00040% mortality if you don't get good medical help.
01:15:58.000It's much less, but it's still a ferociously high case fatality rate.
01:16:03.000So the question is still how could you get this many cases on a ship of something like 150 people in the period of time that you've got?
01:16:14.000And all of the various explanations are pretty weak, right?
01:16:18.000Let's say that the bird watcher did go to the dump and he dropped a piece of food and was thoughtless and picked it up and ate it and contracted Hantavirus.
01:17:48.000So, the HVAC system has to work over time to keep such a ship warm.
01:17:52.000And it has to be biased towards recirculating air that's already been warmed and has cooled off a little bit rather than pulling in really cold air from the outside and warming it up.
01:18:01.000For energetic reasons, that would be what they did.
01:18:03.000So maybe the HVAC system is pumping aerosolized Hantavirus through the ship.
01:18:12.000But even that, given how poorly transmissible this is, that is unlikely to work.
01:18:18.000For one thing, the HVAC system would be very dry.
01:18:21.000Is it possible that someone on this boat was some kind of UFO related researcher?
01:18:28.000I'm not going to touch the UFO thing yet.
01:18:30.000We can go back to UFOs, but frankly, you're.
01:18:32.000So, are you saying it was an intentional infection?
01:18:35.000I'm saying, look, the most natural way for eight people on a ship of 150 to get a hantavirus infection is for there to have been mice on the ship.
01:18:45.000But so far, we've been told no mice have been found on the ship.
01:18:58.000Get any say at all in what the public discovers.
01:19:01.000Frankly, the best answer from the point of view of planet Earth is that there were mice on that ship, there was Hantavirus circulating, an unfortunate number of people got sick, and the world can go back to doing what it was doing.
01:22:07.000A horse dewormer, even though it has been labeled by the World Health Organization as an essential medicine and been given billions of times to humans.
01:22:17.000I mean, it also works for horses, but it's not working.
01:22:20.000Let me just throw this out there, too.
01:22:21.000Another crazy thing is on my Wikipedia, it says that when I got COVID, I explained that I was getting treated with ivermectin and monoclonal antibodies, which is a gross mischaracterization of what actually happened.
01:22:32.000What actually happened was I did not get ivermectin, I got monoclonal antibodies.
01:22:37.000Five days later, on the phone with the doctor, she said, I want you to take ivermectin.
01:24:09.000It can make its argument if it wants, but I'm a biologist making an argument for a very safe medication and its likelihood of being effective based on the fact that this virus happens to belong to a class of viruses in which ivermectin is generally effective.
01:24:25.000So they have no business tamping this down.
01:24:28.000Further, it turns out that hydroxychloroquine, which I have not mentioned until now, Is effective against hantavirus.
01:24:35.000That comes from a researcher who actually works on hantavirus.
01:24:38.000So we have repurposed drugs with a well known safety profile that one of them does work and one of them may work.
01:25:22.000So, your point, I think, was people are interested in this because it's interesting.
01:25:27.000Maybe they're primed for it after COVID.
01:25:29.000And my point is okay, that would be great if the only thing that was happening is the public is talking about hantavirus, but officialdom is talking about hantavirus now, too.
01:25:38.000Deborah Burks actually showed up and said we should be testing the population for Hontavirus with PCR, which is absurd.
01:25:45.000I got to say, though, a lot of people have said, you know, I will not comply, right?
01:26:05.000When there are people who are literally at 40% mortality, like if we actually saw a real Hontavirus outbreak, That somehow was spreading rapidly from person to person.
01:26:14.000And you look out your window and you see people collapsing in city centers, people are going to say, I don't need a lockdown.
01:26:26.000First thing I want to know is, is this a rerun of COVID where they tried to lock us indoors, which is literally the only place the virus spreads?
01:27:15.000Nobody wants to be locked down to go through what we went through during COVID, but there will be a psychological difference between what COVID was.
01:27:27.000It was like a very low, and it was people who were already close to death.
01:27:32.000Honda virus is 40% without proper treatment.
01:27:34.000I think it's 5 to 15% in the first world.
01:27:37.000When we're looking at death rates of that magnitude, people are going to be in major cities, it's going to be tenfold what COVID was.
01:27:44.000These liberals are going to be like, govern me harder, daddy.
01:27:47.000In rural and conservative areas, people are going to generally oppose forced lockdowns, but overwhelmingly will avoid dense populated areas that would have high levels of infection.
01:27:58.000Well, I don't know whether or not the dynamics of hantavirus look anything like COVID and whether or not the outdoor environment is safe, although there are reasons to imagine, even just based on simple principles, that it will be less likely to transmit.
01:28:13.000Unless, of course, this is a gain of function hantavirus.
01:29:13.000That means that it wasn't under development for a long number of years.
01:29:17.000It doesn't show that initial hallmark, which means we're probably dealing with Hantavirus like it exists in the wild, which means that even if you have an unfortunate outbreak like this, it's not going to take over the world by wildfire.
01:29:28.000It's not a candidate for that kind of pandemic.
01:29:31.000If it does, I think it's going to be one of two things.
01:29:35.000One of them is PSYOP, and the other is gain of function.
01:29:39.000But gain of function has, it is the solution to a problem from the point of view of the weapons makers, and it has a problem of its own, which is that once it escapes into the wild, natural selection takes over.
01:29:52.000The powers that be, the whatever you want to call the Davos group, these groups, they don't actually need the virus.
01:30:00.000They only need three cases to which they can then start saying there are deaths.
01:30:06.000But for the podcast world and free speech, which is exactly why I'm defending it.
01:30:12.000Agreed, but I would still argue that if every cable channel came out and said seven cases confirmed in New York, it appears to be spreading, the podcast will run with it too.
01:30:22.000Well, I don't know what you mean by the podcast.
01:30:25.000I'm talking about the podcast on the streets.
01:30:28.000Are going to say, we now have, if the New York Times were in a report saying seven cases of Hantavirus emerged in New York City, you'd be like, nope, I don't believe it.
01:30:49.000My question is if the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, Fox News, MS Now, all were reporting that we just saw an emergence of seven cases in New York, would you say that's not true?
01:31:01.000Or would you just say, it appears that we have these cases being reported?
01:31:05.000I would do exactly what I'm doing here, which is I would say, that's interesting.
01:31:09.000Because that doesn't sound like hantavirus from the wild.
01:31:12.000Let's look at these cases and what the putative mechanism of transmission was and see whether or not we're being fed a story.
01:31:18.000My point is if with these cases on this boat, you now have a prime narrative, a narrative primed, if a managing editor walks into his newsroom in New York and just says, We just got a huge report, internal documents from the CDC, check this out.
01:31:36.000We've got seven confirmed cases in New York.
01:32:50.000So, There's no reason in the world that I can think of, at least, that you would invest in Hantavirus as a target for your vaccine unless you thought there was some reason that Hantavirus was going to start doing something.
01:33:04.000Are you saying I should buy some Moderna?
01:36:21.000But the other interesting feature of what they did to us is that apparently there was some, and we know that this discussion went on in the C suite of YouTube.
01:36:29.000We think it was with the CEO, but nonetheless, in the C suite of YouTube, they decided to demonetize us and cap the channel without telling us that they did it or by whatever mechanism they did it.
01:36:40.000And they decided to stop harassing us.
01:36:43.000I think going on Joe Rogan's podcast was so painful to them.
01:36:47.000That they didn't want it to happen again.
01:39:01.000We definitely defeated them in their effort to keep the origin of the virus quiet, to cause people to universally embrace the vaccines, to believe that they were safe and effective.
01:39:14.000But in the end, people are awake that something happened during COVID that was unholy.
01:40:14.000Well, I think people need to understand that whatever else it may have been, the COVID pandemic was the debut of gene therapies dressed up as vaccines.
01:40:28.000They changed the definition of vaccine.
01:40:48.000From the point of view of the vaccine making industry, it is the ultimate cash cow for multiple different reasons.
01:41:00.000It streamlines the process of creating a vaccine and it cuts right through the regulatory apparatus because the argument that they're going to make is we tested the platform.
01:41:34.000I want to show you guys this post from Jack Posobic.
01:41:36.000He tweeted, What if instead of a vaccine, we just were able to get exposed to a weak version of the virus that enabled us to build the antibodies we need to fight the real thing?
01:41:44.000Of course, Jack's point was that mRNA vaccines were totally different from the, what is it, attenuated virus?
01:42:17.000Mean, these individuals had no idea, and to this day have no idea what is actually going on in the world.
01:42:23.000They see this post from Jack, and they are so far removed from the context of the real conversation around this technology, they genuinely believed the COVID vaccinations were attenuated virus vaccines.
01:44:05.000It destroys the cell that made the protein.
01:44:09.000Now, if that cell is in your muscle or your liver, not a big deal.
01:44:14.000If that cell is in your heart, it's a big deal, right?
01:44:16.000Your heart is not supposed to have a viral infection, they're rare.
01:44:21.000Your body decides, well, killing off heart cells isn't a good idea, but leaving virally infected heart cells isn't a good idea either, and it kills off those cells.
01:44:30.000That's where your myocarditis is coming from.
01:45:45.000It happens, but it's very serious when it happens.
01:45:48.000To clarify, you're saying OG vaccines, they would put the pathogen in the body and the pathogen would be there in the body, be like, immune system, kick on, go get it.
01:45:57.000But these new mRNAs, they attach to a healthy cell in your body and then make it seem like it's a virus and your own body destroys its own healthy cells.
01:46:07.000And that's supposed to knock up your immune response to create an immune response.
01:46:11.000And so, what the whole thing was predicated on was that the shot stays in your arm, right?
01:46:17.000If the shot stayed in your arm and their little pseudo virus infected your cells and then your immune system cleared those cells by killing them off, it wouldn't be a huge deal.
01:46:27.000But one of the things that Steve Kirsch and Robert Malone and I talked about on that podcast in June of 21 was the fact that the biodistribution did not suggest that it stayed in the arm.
01:46:53.000If you have a terminal disease and we've got an mRNA shot that might address that disease, you might be willing to take that risk, right?
01:47:03.000The risk of the shot might be low enough and the benefit of the shot might be high enough.
01:47:06.000But let's just address the theoretical nature.
01:47:10.000If they were to create the addressing mechanism, as Ian was asking, targeting for destruction cancer cells, specific cancer cells, because not all cancers are the same, they inject it into your arm or whatever, it floats through the body, but specifically only attaches to the cancer, your immune system then destroys those cells.
01:47:39.000And, you know, I would cautiously say I don't trust these people.
01:47:44.000I'm not necessarily going to buy what they tell us about how effective the thing is, but I'm open to the idea that in extremely dire cases, you might be willing to take such a shot.
01:47:54.000But I'm not open to the idea that it's a vaccine, and I'm not open to the idea of preventing infectious disease with it because the platform itself is terminally flawed.
01:48:02.000So, we're going to go to Rumble Rants and Super Chats.
01:48:03.000One quick last question, though, is how much information can be delivered to the cell?
01:48:08.000I mean, could they reprogram a cell to repair damaged DNA or RNA?
01:48:23.000Could they inject it into your body so that it tells the cells to reproduce perfectly?
01:48:28.000So, that basically destroys the aging process or ends the aging process.
01:48:32.000Well, we're not going to end the aging process.
01:48:34.000You know, we'll have to talk another time about why that is.
01:48:37.000They're biological reasons or biological reasons?
01:48:40.000Oh, let's talk telomeres, fundamental ones.
01:48:42.000Could they make the cells reproduce perfectly again?
01:48:45.000Like it's a damaged cell, but they give it the perfect information, program it to reproduce.
01:48:48.000You're kind of coming at the story upside down because the promise of gene therapy was very much like what you're describing, right?
01:48:56.000The idea is you might have cells that are doing the wrong thing for some genetic reason, and if you could get genes taken up into these cells, you could get them to do the right thing and you might cure disease.
01:49:06.000It never panned out for reasons like this addressing problem, right?
01:49:12.000And so the huge investment that we biologically put into gene therapy never returned on that investment.
01:49:18.000Yeah, but if you were able to do like one clinical test on, say, like 5 billion people, you'd get all of that data at once to solve for this.
01:49:28.000You dispatch various batches to key regions, make everybody.
01:49:32.000I mean, could you imagine if something like that happened where they were doing a mass clinical test like that?
01:49:35.000Yeah, but what I would tell you is that what can be done on paper. Is spectacular.
01:49:43.000What happens when you try to deploy these things in the layered complex systems that make up the human body is you end up with all sorts of unintended consequences.
01:50:09.000I'm just saying, instead of doing a bunch of human trials where you can't.
01:50:12.000Figure, you know, it's from the eighties, and you're like, why can't we get this actually problem right?
01:50:16.000So, if only if we could test it out five billion times in a short period and get all the data, we're going to go to your Rumble rants and super chats.
01:50:23.000So, smash the like button, share the show with everyone you know.
01:50:26.000The uncensored portion of the show will be up in about twelve or so minutes at ten p.m.
01:51:52.000And everybody just says, like, Just press the red button everywhere.
01:51:55.000There's a big leap of human evolution some 300,000 years ago where they discovered the first human bone that was actually looked like it had been repaired.
01:52:03.000Before that, if someone broke their leg, they were just left to die.
01:52:05.000And that was very bad for us as a species.
01:52:07.000Once they started taking care of their weak and their wounded, we evolutionarily leapt.
01:52:11.000So we're sort of in a situation like that.
01:52:15.000I'm trying to steel man your argument.
01:52:17.000My argument actually is that the transhumanists, and there's lots of people who fall under that banner who wouldn't label themselves that way, but the transhumanists have.
01:52:26.000Sold us a bill of goods, and I think many of them have lied to themselves.
01:52:30.000The story that they tell themselves is that there are people who are so broken, there's just nothing we can do for them, and they're half right.
01:52:37.000Okay, once a person has gotten through development, it's very hard to help them before they've been damaged in development.
01:52:45.000It's very easy to protect them by delivering an environment that looks like their ancestral environment, so their body knows what to do, their mind knows how to develop, and that's what we ought to be targeting.
01:52:55.000So, I just want you to separate two questions.
01:52:58.000What do we do for the broken people on planet Earth today?
01:53:02.000And the answer is that's going to be a tough one, and we're going to be less successful than we would like by a lot.
01:53:07.000What can we do for the generation that has yet to emerge?
01:54:17.000And if the instinct is, oh, they don't have teeth, it better be pureed, then what you're going to do is you're going to cause the wrong information to register.
01:54:47.000Mike Mew calls it the big bolus chewing involving chewing a large ball of five to 10 pieces of gum to strengthen the masseter muscles and develop the gonial angle, the jaw corner.
01:55:52.000We were in Baltimore before we went to Phil's show, and she was staring at the jazz band, obsessed, and she kept reaching for him.
01:55:59.000And so my wife was like, okay, and she would let her watch and then bring her back over to eat, and she would start freaking out again, wanting to go back to watch the jazz band.
01:56:05.000And we were like, okay, she likes music.
01:56:07.000So we went to Guitar Center and we showed her piano, and she immediately, I put her sideways on the bench.
01:56:14.000She immediately spun to the keyboard, and so we're going bang, bang, bang, bang on it.
01:56:17.000And we were like, she knew right away what to do.
01:56:21.000And when we told the man we're going to buy it, And picked her up to put in her chair.
01:56:24.000She started reaching for it and yelling and complaining, and then started arching her back, refusing to go into her seat because she wanted to play the piano.
01:57:26.000And this is a place where I have a long standing annoyance with Steven Pinker, who declared that our love of and pursuit of music was the result of the fact that it combined a bunch of other things that we love, that it has no meaning of its own.
01:57:49.000And he compared it to, he said it was, I think, musical cheesecake.
01:57:57.000And so this is a giant mystery where we can't.
01:58:00.000Admit that the answer is it's for something really freaking important, but we don't know what it is.
01:58:06.000And I have my own hypothesis, but let's just say the fact that all human cultures have music, the fact that both males and females participate in music, that every human being until recent times has had their own individual relationship with music, the fact that you hear a song, even a sad song, a sad song makes you feel sad, but you want to hear it again.
01:58:38.000And some things people describe, like Ben Shapiro says, rap isn't music.
01:58:42.000He's unmoved by it, he doesn't connect with it emotionally.
01:58:45.000I'm not defending every piece of music or every genre of music.
01:58:49.000So, what I would say is the important thing is to reduce it a little bit and say every society has some kind of emotional communication through sound.
01:59:00.000Speech, for instance, it's like an evolution of music.
01:59:03.000I would argue that like mumble rap is.
01:59:06.000I understand it is music functionally, but it's actually nails on a chalkboard to me.
01:59:30.000And we'll come back to this for the uncensored portion, though, because this is fun.
01:59:33.000Freedom Stripes says I know Brett is not a big fan of Trump, but he must know that science is better with him in office at this point.
01:59:40.000Well, my relationship with Trump, who I've never met, so I don't have a personal relationship with him, but my relationship with him is complicated.
01:59:54.000I think the alternatives are disastrous.
01:59:56.000So terrifying that just even the fact that you have a person who is in possession of his mental faculties, who you could haul in front of Congress and ask questions, that can make a decision if the phone call comes in the night and, you know, Mr. President, the missiles are on the way.
02:00:12.000Is so far and away better than having an empty suit puppet or, you know, a demented old man or any of that stuff that covers the cabal on the blue team.
02:03:55.000And tomorrow, my new podcast drops with Jan Yekalek and Chloe Chung, all about crazy things happening in China and how we should watch out for them here at home.
02:04:08.000I want to ask you about mass population reduction and the mass genocide of people over the past several years, which will be available at rumble.com slash Timcast IRL in about 10 seconds.
02:06:37.000I've heard Asians are more susceptible to the virus, to COVID, because of ACE2 receptors.
02:06:42.000However, there's also a clip going viral of RFK Jr. saying quite the opposite that the most resilient to it were Chinese and Ashkenazi Jew.
02:06:52.000And that Caucasians actually were the most susceptible to it.
02:06:56.000I've seen these things, but I have to say that in my observation, based on, I'll put it this way a casino down the street in Charlestown could not reopen its racetrack restaurant.
02:07:08.000They couldn't find anybody to work there.
02:07:09.000A restaurant in town recently went out of business.
02:07:11.000They couldn't find anybody to work there.
02:07:12.000Ticket sales slumping across the board at all these major shows is another example.
02:07:17.000And that guy's video makes it really feel like a lot more people died than they let on.
02:07:24.000First, that COVID actually killed substantially more people than we realize intentionally.
02:07:28.000That was always the goal, and they just lied about it.
02:07:30.000Or, on top of that, what I was alluding to in the show is that we've known that Moderna, I think they've been working on mRNA, what, for decades?
02:07:41.000With one of the technologies they've posited is that they can stop aging if they can direct the appropriate DNA to the appropriate cell to replicate itself perfectly, repairing the damage, but have not been able to do it due to addressing issues.
02:07:56.000One conspiracy theory is that you go to the likes of Bill Gates, who's aging, and you say, I'm sorry, Mr. Gates, we cannot figure this out.
02:08:03.000If we keep doing illegal human trials on Epstein Island, it will take 20 years.
02:08:07.000And he goes, Then just give everybody the fucking shot.
02:08:11.000How do we get 5 billion people to do it so we have the data so I can live forever?
02:08:16.000And they say, We're having to mass manufacture a pandemic to do it.
02:08:19.000I'm curious if you think there's any plausibility in those scenarios.
02:08:26.000At least put on the table the mundane explanation for can't find people to staff your restaurants, can't find people to go to your shows, there's nobody in town.
02:08:35.000That could be, and maybe even probably is, at least partially the result of us having been retrained during COVID, right?
02:09:51.000The fact that there are a lot of people on planet Earth who require medical care, they require resources, and they don't have either any meaning in their life or any utility from the point of view of the economy, right?
02:10:09.000Point about bullshit jobs that most jobs do not involve anything that actually produces a useful product.
02:10:16.000So we have all these cryptic jobs programs, is truer than most of us would want to believe.
02:10:23.000And the idea that there may be discussions amongst elites, especially in light of what AI is about to do to normal employment, that says, well, what are women cooked?
02:11:24.000So what that means is if you can get the intelligence into the robot, it can do any job a person can do, including crawl under your house and fix your plumbing.
02:11:33.000And oh, by the way, it can deal with your HVAC system and your electricity at the same time because it's every.
02:11:43.000It doesn't sleep, you know, it doesn't need medical care, it can call in replacements and the work can go on, you know, when you're there, it doesn't steal your stuff.
02:11:53.000There's lots of arguments for humanoid robots being better than employees.
02:11:58.000They'll know more, they'll be more effective, etc.
02:12:02.000So, my point is if you're an ultra elite and you're looking at a huge planet full of people who are already struggling to find purpose and utility.
02:12:14.000And you know that the purpose and utility problem is going to crater, then you may be thinking, well, what exactly are we going to do?
02:12:23.000And the fantasies about universal basic income and taking care of people, and we're all going to live in paradise because we're going to have all of our time to ourselves, that's an old fantasy and it never works out that way.
02:12:32.000And it wouldn't work for the human organism in the first place.
02:12:35.000So, my point is, is it conceivable that somebody is thinking about reducing the population?
02:12:53.000But I agree with you, except for the fact that I know a little something about what these people are capable of, and they're not capable of making that virus.
02:13:03.000Even if they could make one that at the point you released it, it behaved this way, evolution would take over and it would end up being something much more mundane, very much.
02:13:11.000Right, which tends to happen with viruses, I imagine, I believe, right?
02:13:14.000Yeah, it's not as hard and fast a rule as people tend to think, but yes, evolution is going to turn it into whatever is most effective at getting it into the future, which isn't a destroyer of.
02:13:25.000We're loaded with viruses all the time that do almost nothing to us, so they persist.
02:13:31.000And in fact, the rodents that naturally carry Hanta virus don't suffer.
02:13:45.000You can't get to the next guy unless they get to Greenland.
02:13:48.000But, like, if COVID, I see what you're saying.
02:13:50.000COVID wasn't the virus to kill the people.
02:13:52.000If they wanted to reduce the population, what were they doing?
02:13:54.000Were they trying to get people to comply to put them in pods?
02:13:56.000Do they really are trying to avoid killing?
02:13:58.000Well, mass clinical tests on mRNA technology over a short period of time.
02:14:03.000Except for one thing I don't think they collected the data.
02:14:08.000That's the thing that bugs me is that it was the most massive experiment ever conducted in the history of humanity, except that they didn't collect the data that would even, I mean, maybe.
02:14:18.000Wi Fi can, the Wi Fi signals in this room can track our movement.
02:14:30.000Just based on your phone's movement, they created a predictive algorithm to know when you were going to eat lunch, go to the bathroom, where you'd eat lunch.
02:14:36.000They could predict in the morning if you're going to go to Arby's or Taco Bell.
02:14:39.000Based on the behaviors you had versus the behaviors everyone else had, they could find these patterns to it.
02:14:44.000They could generate probabilities indicating a greater chance for today.
02:16:26.000I think the fact that they can determine when you're going to go to the bathroom based on the movements of your phone in the morning within a 10 square foot space means that they can extrapolate much more than you realize.
02:16:37.000Believe me, the big data problem is absolutely gargantuan.
02:16:40.000And I do want to take a crack at answering the question of what I think the purpose of COVID may have been.
02:16:46.000But Ian had something he wanted to jump in with.
02:16:49.000I've heard a lot about conspiracies about people in the COVID injections that they were putting things into the body other than COVID vaccines, including graphene oxide.
02:16:57.000I've heard other tracking mechanisms or anything like that.
02:17:09.000And part of why I don't think it was there is that a number of people, most especially Kevin McKernan, have done a lot of testing of vials and what was left over in them.
02:17:19.000And he's found DNA contamination in the mRNA shots, which shouldn't be there, including the SV40 promoter, which is cancer causing.
02:17:46.000I think that was all a red herring designed to lead us off the track or just somebody made up a story.
02:17:52.000But all right, let's talk about what the purposes of the COVID pandemic may have been.
02:17:59.000One is what I call the time traveling money printer.
02:18:03.000The idea is if you had a time machine.
02:18:05.000Everybody knows how to make money, right?
02:18:07.000You can go back in time and you can buy Apple and Microsoft and be rich, but we don't have time machines.
02:18:15.000You can make money the same way, though, if you can know what's going to happen and slow the public down in its awareness.
02:18:23.000So, COVID was dropped on the public as an idea at the beginning of 2020, but it appears to have been circulating at least as early as the fall of 2019 at the Wuhan Military Games, which means that the people who knew that.
02:18:40.000We're in a position to place bets in the market that would allow them to turn millions into billions.
02:18:45.000So, one of the purposes was we know what's about to happen and you don't.
02:18:49.000That gives us an ability to drain your money into our pockets without our fingerprints on it.
02:18:54.000Second thing is that the mRNA platform is the mother of all cash cows for the pharmaceutical industry, except for the fact that it's dangerous and can't be fixed.
02:19:08.000So, they couldn't get it through safety testing because it isn't remotely safe.
02:19:13.000But in an emergency, that whole process was short circuited.
02:19:18.000And not only were they able to get it past the safety testing with the emergency use authorization, but they were able to get the public to want it because they'd been locked down and that was what they were promised was going to give them freedom.
02:19:31.000The mRNA platform is not about the COVID shot, it's about reformulating every shot we've already got and making a thousand more of them cheaply because all you have to do is swap out the The gene, right?
02:20:01.000The last thing that seems to have been part of it was that we were trained for being controlled.
02:20:07.000We were trained that emergencies eliminate your constitutional rights, that we get to tell you what to do for your own good.
02:20:13.000And it didn't work all that well because of, you know, podcasts and People talking on Twitter who saw through it and rose up, and the damage was monitored by us.
02:20:22.000But the basic point is, those three things line up together and they strike me as purpose enough for people with no scruples whatsoever to deploy a master plan that would have looked like it.
02:20:38.000I think the artificial general intelligence has, I think there's a decent probability of this.
02:20:43.000Artificial general intelligence has been around since at least 2009, 2010.
02:20:48.000The US military has been working on AI since the 70s.
02:20:51.000They're likely much more advanced than the private sector, as the military tends to be, and they have access to steal all of that data anyway.
02:21:01.000So, all of the source code, all of the training data, they could have just taken as these companies are making it, and they can't do anything about it.
02:21:07.000And so, 2020 seems like a perfect opportunity for the AI to test mass global control of humans in a rigid system.
02:21:18.000The future that I see as a decent probability of occurring would be humans all become effectively cells in a greater multicellular organism system.
02:21:26.000So, we were talking about cancer earlier.
02:21:29.000Cells that are not behaving the way they're supposed to be behaving when the body, they decided, I'm not going to do the job I was told to do.
02:21:34.000I'm going to do the job that I want to do.
02:21:37.000So, they start operating outside the confines of the system of the body, causing damage to that body, consuming resources they're not entitled to, and then ultimately distorting the balance.
02:22:48.000And then two guys show up in white outfits with truncheons, take them away, and beat them to death.
02:22:52.000This is what happens when the machine stops.
02:22:54.000Ian Forrester, 1918, he wrote about this.
02:22:58.000If cancer is acidity in the lymphatic system, then the AI may be able to treat the Root cause of individuality and make sure that we are all deviantly compliant, that could be even worse.
02:23:10.000Well, but there's a mundane way of doing this.
02:23:13.000And I think the technocracy knows that what it needs is the ability to reward and punish you algorithmically.
02:23:37.000You're not going to be able to travel.
02:23:38.000You're going to be ridiculed by your friends.
02:23:41.000And, you know, eventually we broke through it.
02:23:44.000But a much more sophisticated system, especially one that involves a CBDC and a car that won't start if you don't behave, that begins to get really tough really quick.
02:23:56.000You displease the AI central authority because you don't believe the story about the pandemic that they've just announced, and suddenly you can't spend your money.
02:24:56.000I reserve the right to discover 10 minutes from now that this is stupid and take it back.
02:25:01.000But if you accept that the founders gave us the Second Amendment because they understood that an armed population was much harder to tyrannize, well, what we've now got is a new kind of potential tyrant, like a technical tyrant.
02:25:42.000But the important clarification on the Second Amendment is that the Founding Fathers principally weren't concerned about tyranny, they were concerned about.
02:26:30.000And I accept what you say as likely that the founders were focused on the foreign one.
02:26:34.000But the basic point The original article in the Constitution stated specifically that conscription, that it said something to the effect of, we went over this a long time ago, that refusing to go to war or be a conscript or being a conscientious objector would not disqualify you from running a gun.
02:26:52.000They removed that as they feared it would create the possibility that conscription could be outlawed, and they didn't want it to be.
02:26:58.000They wanted to be mandatory, principally because the idea was we just want everybody to have guns.
02:27:03.000That way, if the engines, if Britain, if anybody comes and knocks, we can say, Boys, grab your guns, and not have to worry about it.
02:27:10.000You know, I think it should be a basic human right.
02:27:12.000You're talking about a digital human right.
02:27:13.000Everyone should have the right to their own artificial intelligence off grid.
02:27:41.000I have a bit of a thought experiment question for the panel.
02:27:45.000So, reps from other districts in my state that I did not vote on make decisions that still affect me, not just their district.
02:27:55.000Now, this is not the 1700s anymore, where 100 miles away is like another state.
02:28:00.000Nowadays, some people drive that far to work.
02:28:03.000I myself have interests in multiple districts.
02:28:07.000Now, as just a thought experiment, how well would this affect the gerrymandering squabbling, understanding that it would take a constitutional amendment?
02:29:13.000And I'm not sure anything else recovers it.
02:29:17.000If you could somehow track the motion of the individuals and see who goes where, then their votes would be like they would self form a district based on their behavior.
02:29:47.000Maybe if I understand what you're saying correctly, Ian, is if you can make sure that there was somebody that came from each, that there would be a district that each rep would have to come out of, but it wouldn't be voted that way.
02:30:05.000It would be voted statewide, something like that.
02:30:07.000It would be like if there's a little village and the people in the village drove Highway 55 and 70% of them took Highway 55 three cities over.
02:30:17.000The district would naturally become that highway towards that other area where they all kind of work.
02:30:22.000And you would be due to like tracking mechanisms, kind of fortunately or unfortunately, but we use like an artificial intelligence to parse who's where when.
02:30:31.000And then that would, I keep thinking of these heat maps, self organizing districts.
02:30:41.000I want to say I didn't catch the caller's name, but as much as the system you're proposing has a flaw that I don't think gets fixed by anything we've talked about.
02:30:52.000I'm not sure it would be worse than what we have now.
02:30:55.000So it might be that it's even somewhat better.
02:30:58.000But I'm wondering if maybe it would be vastly more democratic if we did what you're suggesting and each state was allocated a representation in the House based on its absolute population, period, the end.
02:31:11.000And then we selected in an election the top, you know, if you were allotted 30 representatives for your state, the top 30 vote getters.
02:31:22.000In the election, which would allow you to organize around your interests and it would allow you to organize around local things if that was what mattered to you and get somebody elected who would represent you.
02:31:34.000The downside is that people use the internet to get people to vote that are far away in their area.
02:31:42.000Yeah, which we already have, and we have a worse problem, which is, you know, at the moment, the Thomas Massey situation where you have outside money that has nothing to do with.
02:31:55.000And, you know, frankly, it's dominating it both in the campaign to get rid of Massey and it's dominating now in the campaign to protect him, which I've participated in.
02:32:04.000So the point is, this is not the founder's vision at all.
02:32:08.000Should money be allowed to come in from out of state to help in state candidates?
02:32:40.000I think we need what I keep referring to as a direct republic, where we use smart contracts for like your 70,000 people, constituents to vote into a contract system that sways yes or no.
02:32:51.000And then that yes or no vote goes to Congress and functions as the representative of your system, of your locale.
02:33:15.000Longstanding idea for me, which is you can buy as much campaign ad time as you want, but every other candidate in the race gets equal time.
02:33:24.000Didn't we used to have something kind of like that?
02:33:27.000We used to have it on network TV when most of our news came on government owned airwaves and there was an equal time thing.
02:33:36.000And that was recently brought into question by Trump and others when it came to.
02:33:42.000What was it, the Kamala Harris interview in 2024?
02:33:47.000And because she got this bogus 60 minutes interview that was then edited to make her sound like she knew what she was talking about.
02:33:53.000And so then Trump had to get equal time.
02:33:55.000So, yeah, I mean, I think we did have something like that, but we certainly don't have that now, especially when you consider the multiple, multiple platforms that people can put their campaign information on.
02:34:40.000I think there's also, I remember talking to Matt Gaetz about this, and he said that the fundraising component.
02:34:47.000Once you're in Congress, it is absolutely insane, too, that you have to keep fundraising just to get on committees, which seems completely anathema to a democratic process.
02:35:07.000And then you think about, like, the average person who might think, you know what, I think I could do well for my district, but you have absolutely no shot because of the millions and millions of dollars you need to fundraise.
02:35:18.000I'm telling you, dude, people think, I bet people in Congress think their jobs are safe from AI.
02:35:40.000So I think that the age of the U.S. House representatives is kind of like, just like the feather and ink are on their way back to the 1700s.
02:35:50.000Don't you think we'd need a constitutional amendment to do away with that?
02:35:53.000Well, we better move fast because the rest of the world ain't going to wait.
02:35:55.000I don't know that people would go for that out in the rest of the states.
02:36:00.000Well, if you think of it as a layering system, like you'll still have the exact same system we have now if the power goes out.
02:36:10.000You can't get to Congress if the power goes out.
02:36:11.000You'll have to ride there on the horse.
02:36:13.000Well, that's why it used to be that when you got elected, it was like, you know, so long until you had to actually show up in Congress because you needed to have time for everybody from like Oklahoma to get there.
02:36:28.000I just want to say one other thing here to Libby's point.
02:36:32.000Our system is a farce, and it's a farce for a reason.
02:36:37.000The fact is, the public, we've got two fringes who are crazy.
02:36:42.000And in the middle, you've got this vast number of people who basically agree on what they want.
02:36:47.000They don't agree 100% on policy, but there's basic agreement, even on the issues that we're supposed to not be able to even talk about.
02:36:54.000And the system is structured in such a way that the person that you're describing, who just simply wants to represent their district, is the enemy of the things that have power.
02:37:03.000So they specifically are not wanted, they're driven out.
02:37:07.000And That if we understood that basically what's happened, our whole system has been hijacked.
02:37:13.000It's been hijacked so that it won't do our bidding and will do the bidding of the people who control it.
02:37:18.000If we understood that, then the point is well, we want any system that makes a decent effort to represent what we want.
02:37:25.000It would be 6,000 times better than what we've got.
02:37:28.000And the elephant in the room is this a political party that simply decided to represent the interests of the people as the people understand them would win every time.
02:37:41.000It would be so popular, it would be unstoppable.
02:38:16.000It's something that we all almost all agree on that a system in which there are firefighters who come running when we need help, we all think it's a good thing.
02:38:25.000And the fact is, it wasn't true when the country was founded.
02:38:28.000It used to be that you had to buy a contract to get somebody to fight the fire in your building.
02:38:50.000But nonetheless, the same thing that has most people willing to pay taxes in order to have firefighters come running causes people to volunteer and to support volunteer fire departments.
02:39:55.000So, I got a pretty relatively straightforward question.
02:39:58.000So, given the VRA ruling, do you think it's possible Democratic leaders will now try to educate their voters on issues rather than pandering based on race, or do you think they'll just lean even harder on class based, rich versus poor arguments?
02:40:40.000Well, I will tell you, as a lifelong Democrat and a lifetime observer of the Democratic Party, I will tell you that the faction that has control of it is incapable of learning a lesson from a failure.
02:40:56.000They double down every time and it is absurd, but you can rely on it.
02:41:02.000So, yeah, I'm expecting more of the same.
02:41:04.000So just invest in Moderna and take your money, man.
02:41:17.000Well, do you think though, like because they, you know, just like this whole VRA ruling, they've pretty much taken out one of the legs of their arguments that more of these won't come down the line as far as more of the legs being knocked out?
02:41:30.000We're to the point where you have to actually truly reach out to their constituents and make them understand why vote for them as opposed to, you know, A Republican or the opposition.
02:43:50.000And there was even a video from Pete Buttigieg, who is, you know, contemplating a 2028 run along with Newsom and Kamala Harris.
02:43:59.000And he was saying that his, he was like, oh, my biggest fear is that we get back in, that Democrats get back into office in 2026 after the midterms and try and revert to the status quo.
02:44:10.000There can be no going back, no going back to the status quo that we had before all of this.
02:44:21.000Are to double down on all of these crisis ideologies and to keep pushing this thing.
02:44:29.000And they're making people believe that we have the most racist country in the history of the world.
02:44:33.000And we have the most non racist country in the history of the world.
02:44:37.000We have the most liberated country that the world has ever seen, which, you know, can work sometimes to our detriment a little bit because we have so many options that we don't know what to do.
02:44:47.000And then we just go get Taco Bell or whatever.
02:47:54.000And the question is Is there a reason that we should expect to see that pattern?
02:47:59.000In other words, would there be an advantage to it?
02:48:02.000Well, the reason this even came to my mind is because I think about this in our social situation, and I get there's other factors involved in this, of like two parents.
02:48:14.000Whether they're conservative or liberal, having a child opposite to them.
02:48:20.000And I was wondering if that is something that can, in a sense, happen in nature in any such way where two of one species could create something that's totally not of them, essentially.
02:48:32.000But I mean, I know the ideology versus biology is totally separate, but it just kind of crossed my mind if something like that is even possible or even does happen.
02:48:43.000I used to have a rule for my students.
02:48:47.000It was so I would ask them a question, I would get back an answer that wasn't very good.
02:48:52.000And then five minutes later, they would give me a great answer.
02:48:55.000And so I started telling them, Answer the question I should have asked you rather than the one I did ask you.
02:49:02.000You're liberated to answer the right question.
02:49:04.000So I'm going to answer the question that I think you're shooting for here.
02:49:09.000The special thing about human beings is that we have offloaded a huge fraction of the work of evolution from the genes to the cultural layer.
02:49:22.000And what you're talking about, where two parents create an offspring that Is a reaction to them rather than a continuation of them is a natural pattern.
02:49:32.000So you can imagine that there are times, most times presumably, when your kids should probably pick up your understanding of the world and run with it, maybe elaborate it a little bit.
02:49:44.000But then there are going to be other times when the elders, the world that they knew has come to an end because let's say maybe you moved, you know, you got on your kayaks and you got to a shore somewhere and you've walked onto a land with no human competitors and you're now not a kayaker.
02:50:00.000Person anymore, you're a terrestrial hunter.
02:50:03.000So the point is, you don't want your kids to continue what you were.
02:50:07.000You want them to respond to the new world that is.
02:50:10.000And human beings are capable of doing that because we are so heavily biased in the direction of culture.
02:50:16.000And this is one of the hidden, spectacularly important aspects of human biology our genome has surrendered so much control to our culture, not because it's given up our ultimate objective, it's still in control of that.
02:50:30.000But because culture does the job much better because it can turn on a dime in the way you're talking about.
02:52:35.000With a quick follow up on that, with the new projected congressional maps, does passing the Save Act even really matter that much this cycle?
02:53:18.000I only vaped enough to peer through the veil.
02:53:20.000I didn't blast through, like they say, but I was in a stereoscopic realm.
02:53:25.000Hyper frequency, colorful, shimmering light, like all the colors of the rainbow become white.
02:53:31.000And then they take on this hominid form and it's these personas.
02:53:34.000And I'm communicating with them with my thoughts.
02:53:36.000And it's because your body's like, but if you can think clearly, you can ask them questions, they'll respond to you.
02:53:42.000And they were like, he can fucking see us.
02:53:43.000And they were looking at me like I was the video game character they've been playing, turned and looked at them and started like you're playing a game and the guy starts talking to you, Brett, like your video game.
02:54:30.000I find the meaning of this, whatever it is, fascinating, whether that's a product of the human mind or something else.
02:54:39.000It's fascinating that this is the one drug that takes people to a shared experience.
02:54:48.000And that could be the power of suggestion.
02:54:50.000It's possible that the power of suggestion over DMT for some reason has caused this story to resonate for multiple people.
02:54:57.000But whatever it is, I don't think it's suggestion.
02:55:01.000Because a lot of the stories are, they've done tests on uninitiated people who don't know anything about it.
02:55:06.000And they've put them in two different rooms and they experienced the same thing.
02:55:10.000Like, they both went, they both peered through into a different reality where the walls weren't there, but they were still within proximity of each other.