Kind: captions
Language: en
Dave Smith welcome to the show oh thank
you so much for having
me it is a pleasure uh as I was saying
you become a part of my sensemaking
apparatus and so getting a chance to sit
down with people uh that have helped me
think through some tough issues is
always a lot of fun so thanks for taking
the time well thank you I appreciate it
and like I told you before it's a it's a
bad comment on the State of Affairs when
I'm the one making sense but I do
appreciate that that's hilarious uh let
me ask when you were talking to Tucker
Carlson you said that you were terrified
for the future of our nation what
exactly are you worried
about well I mean what you know I got
two little kids so that's what really
makes me scared if I if I was still like
single and childless I think I'd be much
more just like oh this is a fun ride
let's see where this ends but I I don't
feel that way the uh now that I'm just
an old nervous dad um look I mean
there's a mix of a lot of things I guess
uh that that all seem to be kind of
happening at once so you have first off
the um the financial cliff that were
rapidly driving off uh is is pretty
terrifying um there you know it's not
just the $35 trillion in debt or the
fact that um that interest on the debt
is now overtaking the budget but when
you really start to get into like the
derivatives and how much actual debt
there is how the dollar being the world
Reserve currency has kind of been
propping up this whole thing and that if
those dollars you know if forget even
those dollars being returned but if we
can't just continue to export pieces of
paper uh how much you know our whole
economic system is built off of that is
scary but then at the same time you also
have um this kind of like really
intense um cultural divide I think that
cultural and race and sex relations and
things like this are just simply much
worse in this country than they have
been in my life and you know I'm 40 in
my life I think they're they're
certainly at their worst and then on top
of that as if all of that wasn't enough
you have these constant
um this kind of open
flirtation uh by the ruling class with
some type of like real creepy um
technological Neo fascism I mean the the
stuff about like a central bank digital
currency and um you know all of this
kind of like you will own nothing and be
happy and you know that like the the
worst of the clips that come out of like
wef forums which I I understand aren't
exactly you know guaranteed to be the
law of the land anytime soon but it's
still enough to be kind of creeped out
by that all of this happening with the
rise of AI and how advanced the kind of
um
uh the spying apparatus of the federal
government has become you know with all
of that I think there's more than a
little bit to be concerned
about oh and I didn't mention World War
I uh yeah that one how how real do you
think that is like is that are we
actually flirting with World War III or
is that just the sort of um skull and
bones that we're meant to avoid well
there's a um was uh uh Jason Stapleton
was a very bright guy he once said and I
really liked he said never uh never bet
all your chips on the end of the world
because you're only going to be right
once and when you are it won't matter uh
so I'm not saying you know that this is
that we're going to be in in a world war
hopefully we're not I do I am and I'm
somebody who kind of focuses on the
corruption of the ruling class for you
know a a lot more of my life than the
average person does but I have been
absolutely stunned by the recklessness
of the the policy of the Biden
Administration since the war in in
Ukraine broke out like there is there
seems to be
no
considering uh of the possibility that
like we are risking so much for such an
unspecified goal um you know Victory
whatever for that means exactly uh for
Ukraine and the fact that even over the
last uh couple months now I mean there's
been more and more signals I guess for
more than just a couple months these
signals that the regime in DC will
support Ukraine's striking inside of
Russia and then even supporting as the
war moves inside of Russia's borders and
this is simply unlike anything even in
the Cold War and if you know your cold
war history like we actually play came
pretty close to nuclear war on a couple
of occasions and it was only through
Communications at the highest levels
that we were able to avoid that and
these days they openly brag that they're
not communicating at all and so I I I
just I think it's so crazy to be
involved in a proxy war on Russia's
border um and now I'm not saying it's
we're going to all die in a nuclear war
but the fact that we would even tolerate
upping the the risk of that for no
strategic Advantage whatsoever is been
pretty wild to see
so what's your thesis on that so I tend
to assume that while I may have wildly
Divergent values from the people in
power I don't think them stupid so is it
that they're dumb or is there an agenda
that we're unaware of that makes them
say uh hey don't worry we're not going
to move NATO an inch East Ops uh we just
keep marching East like nine minutes
after making that statement
I I mean I you know I guess it it'd be
comforting to kind of believe that no
there is some real wisdom there and they
actually have a plan and know better
um I I got to say I think that at least
amongst the political class this is more
or less how I see it right so amongst
the political class I think what you
have for the most part as you may have
noticed is like the same generation of
politicians as when I was a kid for the
most part I mean I know just had to swap
Biden out they had to swap Biden out for
Camala Harris but you know Nancy Pelosi
and Chuck Schumer and Joe Biden who's
the president of the United States
presumably um they are all kind of came
up during the unipolar moment um maybe
maybe they came up a little before that
but then they were really all in power
in that moment and I'm referring to was
what Charles crammer called the unipolar
moment after the the Soviet Union
collapse
and I think that being in this moment
was unlike anything else in human
history a truly like a one dominant
Global Empire with a you know military
and technological capabilities unlike
anything that any country had ever had
and there was essentially no there was
no counter force and so they were kind
of allowed to do whatever they wanted to
or they were able to do whatever they
wanted to and I do think that this bred
a very
unimpressive group of political leaders
uh it it's breathtaking if you go back
and listen to political speeches that
were given by Eisenhower or Jack Kennedy
and just think about how much not only
how much smarter those guys
were but how much smarter they presumed
Their audience the American people were
and listen to you know political
speeches from today it's like I mean
just watching the Democratic National
Convention over the last few days it's
unbelievable how dumb the whole thing is
forget whether you lean left or right
and this is true for the Republicans too
whether you lean left or right
everything has gotten so freaking dumb
and the more I look at this I'm like no
I don't think these politicians have
some master plan I don't think that
behind the scenes Camala Harris is like
a a genius or Joe Biden is a genius and
they have some plan I think they are
really unimpressive they're they're
essentially the the old saying of born
on third base and felt like you hit a
triple like they feel like they built
this the greatest power in the history
of the world when they didn't they just
inherited it and then who who you have
who's really pulling the strings are
essentially big business interests and
they are very smart but they're very
smart and motivated at making money and
so like you know if you're like all that
talk about NATO expansion I mean that
was a if you were just somebody in a
weapons company who's trying to figure
out how to make more profits and you're
like listen we're going to fund these
think tanks that advocate for NATO
expansion and then we're going to Lobby
these politicians to get this NATO
expansion well it was a great deal for
you you got to sell weapons to like a
much much bigger Market than you would
have before so I think there is like a
an intelligent plan going on but it's
not you know not one that's like on
behalf of the American
people do you think that this is all
ultimately just a question of
money no not entirely uh no one thing is
ever completely the answer so I mean I
think money I think business explains a
lot explains a lot of it um no but there
is there's ideology at work also um and
certainly I think that like the the
neoconservatives I think certainly had
an ideology about what what should be
done in the uh after the collapse of the
Soviet Union and how we should have as
they called it a project for a New
American
Century I think there there were there
are True Believers in that group and I'm
you know I I I don't know exactly with
some of the other stuff you know like my
my gut not that I I know this for sure I
can't read people's minds but my gut is
that a lot of the Progressive Democrats
the Democratic Elite type don't really
believe in a lot of the ideology that
they espouse I mean I I don't believe
that Joe Biden is really concerned about
trans issues or something like that I
just I don't buy that I don't think
anybody who's 80 is really like I just I
don't buy that they're really concerned
about trans issues um but I do think
that there are like neoconservatives who
really believe their hawkish foreign
policy View and I do think that there
are there are people in DC you know like
human beings are a weird species it's it
if all of your incentives dictate that
you believe something most of the times
human beings aren't just going Mah I'll
be evil and act out my incentives even
though I know they're wrong we have a
tremendous capacity to like convince
ourselves that the thing that's good for
us is actually the correct move so I'm
sure there are some people in DC who
really believe in like you know some
peace through strength or we got to go
you know confront Iran or something like
that I you know I'm sure there were
people who really believed that uh if if
we toppled Saddam Hussein democracy
would sweep the region people can
convince themselves of all types of
nonsense I have a a theory that is it'll
be interesting to hear what you think so
um I think that when you view this all
through the lens of power like the will
to power like n's Will To Power it all
starts making sense um when you look at
it through the lens of money it actually
makes less sense there's clearly money
involved but I think money through the
lens of again the will to power that
somebody can use that money to be in
control that makes sense uh so what it
looks like to me even when I look at
Russia is um having I'm old enough to
remember the height of the Cold War I
remember one of my neighbors asking me
if I thought we were all going to die
from a nuclear blast I was uh a kid
perfectly timed for the movie Red Dawn
where it isn't specifically Russia but
that's obviously what it's meant to be
they just paratrooper in uh take over a
town I used to have a recurring
nightmare about Red Dawn actually
happening um and so I think uh when I
play out the following scenario a a lot
of things make sense you have uh the Old
Guard still in in control they lived
through all of that they knew what that
was it felt like an unbel believably
jubilant moment when we tore down the
Berlin Wall the Soviet Union collapses
uh it just felt like man this is America
really the ideal of freedom and
capitalism has won over communism and
tyranny this is uh a fantastic moment
unipolar let's make the most of being
the only Power uh and we are the good
guys and so let's go do what good guys
do and and bring democracy to the rest
of the world now where that starts to
read is like okay this is really just
the the cover story for my Will To Power
that gets cloudy like you said some
people probably convince themselves of
it other people may be purely cynical it
almost doesn't matter it's okay we
won we are now going to um use our
influence we clearly will pitch it as
benevolent and then it becomes a
question of okay if if that's what doing
and this is the old war and now we're
pushing NATO up closer to Russia if
we're having PTSD essentially of when
there really was parity between us and
Russia economically um I get why they
want to keep Russia weak somehow some
way they're they don't realize that when
you topple a regime it seems almost
universally that something worse comes
into power but when I run that thought
experiment everything I see clicks into
place
do you think there's anything missing in
that assessment well I you know again I
don't think it's necessarily one or the
other I mean I think the will to power
is certainly um a major factor and and
human psychology of course is a is a
factor with all people and and powerful
people don't escape that and there have
been like some studies on this done and
stuff of like the drug that is power and
human beings are you know genetically
hard wired to desire power and status
and all of these things and and I've
even seen it like uh just in my little
bit of experience in like the corporate
media it's it's amazing how much these
people are driven by the fact that you
know they they got a phone call from a
senator and they're going to be at a
cocktail party with the FED chairman and
like there little like status things
like that mean a lot to people and I'm
sure everybody listening could think of
examples of that just with regular
people they know you know like within
their little company or where whatever
um I I would say though that I think
along with so I don't disagree with
anything you said but I think along with
that there was um you know so if you if
you go back and read bill Buckley from
like in in the 50s there even back then
he was writing in like in right after
World War II about how look we
essentially the conservative movement it
probably wasn't called that yet but
essentially the conservative movement he
was like look we believe in limited
government and you know the Constitution
and being a normal country the problem
is we have the Soviet Union and because
we have the Soviet Union we have to all
be cold Warriors right now he actually
said we have to embrace a totalitarian
dictatorship in our own Shores in order
to fight off you can go look this up in
order to fight off the totalitarian
dictatorship abroad we have to create
our own military-industrial complex is
essentially his argument and this was
the entire justification for this
gigantic um Honeypot I mean not just
NATO but like the entire
military-industrial complex budget the
justification was NATO and is soon I'm
sorry the justification was the Soviet
Union and as soon as the Soviet Union
collapses I think there is this
Collective freak out from a whole bunch
of people who now have to justify their
job I I mean like what you know like
even just the existence of NATO didn't
make sense anymore once the Soviet Union
collapsed they were an organization to
defend against Soviet aggression well
there's no more Soviet Union and for the
you know there there were lots of people
um some liberals and some conservatives
and some like even in positions of power
or influence who were like oh okay great
the Soviet Union fell so now we can have
a big cut in defense spending I mean
this was the justification for how high
it was and now we can return to being a
normal country there was a lot of talk
of a peace dividend uh you can read this
in the uh the neoconservative writing in
the 9s where they were all like very
concerned about this that they're like
oh man like even up to like 96 when Bob
Dole was running and they're all uh
they're all kind of writing like oh man
like there's this there's such an
appetite in America to worry about our
own issues like whatever we don't have
to worry about running the whole world
now we can like kind of focus on issues
that we have here at home and
when there is that type of uh
environment I do think it makes you find
a lot of people going oh well look
Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait okay this
is a huge thing we have to go because if
that's a huge thing then all of a sudden
Your Existence is Justified again and so
I I just do think there is also like a a
money element to it however that plays
out psychologically that it's like oh
there's the you know there is a thing
where you see this all over the place I
mean if there's if if there's a whole
like movement to let's say or different
organizations um to combat racism well
what do you do when America becomes a
much less racist country than it used to
be do you go all right boys time to
close up shop we're all done here or do
you just turn up the hysteria and go
well we found five more incidences of
racism even though they all turn out to
be hoaxes or exaggerated or something
like that and so I think that's kind of
what happened with the military
industrial complex with NATO with all of
this it's like their reason for existing
disappeared and then they were like well
we got to replace that with something
else and much like with the racism stuff
the less of it that there organically is
the more you have to embellish and the
crazier you have to become because you
have to you know it's like oh so this
NASCAR guy got a noose hung in his
driveway you're like wait that doesn't
seem plausible it's like well I don't
know we got to find something because no
one's really fighting about this stuff
and so I think a lot of that is what
happened after the fall of the Soviet
Union that's uh that's very interesting
a lot of Confluence um I want to go back
to what you were saying about Bill
Buckley there's something interesting
there the impulse to rule the world is
something that I find um I find myself
constantly wanting to push back people
who I think trust themselves too much
what do you make of the impulse that and
I I I never know what name to give this
the elites the anointed class whatever
we need a a better name for um the sort
of psychological organizing principle
that they all fall under but it's the
sense of the nanny State there are some
people that are smart this is what I
think is their operating system there
are some people that are smart there are
some people that are dumb we are the
smart people we have to protect the dumb
people there's certainly an amount of
arrogance there it isn't just um we want
to help it's we're Superior and I don't
want to have to deal with your dumb
ideas so sh little boy be quiet and just
do as you're told um but what do you
make of the fact that these incredibly
intelligent people can say we need a
dictatorship on our own
Shores well it was uh to to be clear not
a dictatorship but he said a a
totalitarian bureaucracy was uh was his
term so but um better I mean honestly
you know with with Bill Buckley um I
mean the guy did work for the CIA and
then supposedly left and then came out
and said this stuff so I'm like I'm
certainly open to the possibility that
that was just a CIA operation to like
keep the whole thing going um in in
terms of broad like to your broader
question yeah I mean I think this is
kind of why the Lord of the Rings was
such a you know a br
uh example of this is that it's like
it's even for people who really want to
destroy the ring of power it's tough
once you get a hold of it I once you get
a hold of it I mean come on like I mean
if you could remake the world in your
image wouldn't your image be better than
you know than anyone else's and it's
very easy to rationalize that away and
to go well if I don't do this someone
else is going to do it and they'll do it
much worse I mean I I hear that
rationalization constantly when
defending the American Empire that's
like well I mean hey if we didn't do it
China would do it so therefore whatever
we're it's better it's got to be better
with us than with them and you know it's
very easy to to feel that way and it's
very rare this is why George Washington
is like uh you know revered because it's
very rare when there are people who even
and Washington had a lot of flaws but he
could have been a king and he chose not
to be and that in itself is so rare that
people are like whoa that's incredible
the idea that someone would have turned
down power that they could have had and
perhaps it's true that almost any
country in the position that the United
States of America was in the 90s would
have probably done the same thing that
if you had this opportunity to to rule
the world who's really going to turn
that down and or at least it would be
the rarest of of men who would turn that
down because they were like no listen
this isn't it's not the right thing to
do and it's not in our long-term
interest so yeah I think I think the the
desire to rule the world is something
that's existed for a long time and
there's there's no question I mean look
you don't really even have to um read
between the lines too much to look just
you know listen to anything in the G7
Summits or the wef or something like
that it's like yeah they're all talking
about ruling the world I mean they're
all they're talking about what
temperature it should be outside in a
hundred years and how they're going to
legislate what the what the temperature
can be in the year you know uh whatever
the year 100 years from now or whatever
and so it's uh it it's pretty I mean
they're talking about global regulations
I mean what is this rules for the entire
world to follow it's clearly they
animating you know like the animating uh
characteristic there is a desire for
global
domination there is a revolution
happening in nutrition it lets you eat
like a fitness model save time like a
CEO and enjoy meals like a food critic
it's called Factor every week you get to
choose from 35 different meals and over
60 add-ons we're talking restaurant
quality dishes featuring premium
ingredients like fet minan and black and
salmon Factor takes care of everything
shopping prepping cooking all you do is
heat and eat head toact meals.com impact
Theory 50 and use code impact Theory 50
to get 50% off your first box plus 20%
off your next month that's code impact
Theory 50 at Factor meals.com
impact Theory 50 and that gets you 50%
off your first box plus 20% off your
next month while your subscription is
active life moves fast you're rushing
from meeting to meeting stuck in traffic
or racing to meet project deadlines
these are the moments when nutrition
ends up getting shoved into the back
seat leaving you hungry unfocused and
reaching for instead of something good
for you whatever is convenient a
convenience doesn't have to mean
sacrificing your health that's where
fuel comes in fuel is a complete meal
designed for your busiest days it packs
40 g of protein 27 essential vitamins
and minerals and it needs zero preptin
with flavors like chocolate and vanilla
hule is like a milkshake that's actually
good for you over 400 million hule meals
have been consumed worldwide ready to
fuel your busiest days here's an
exclusive offer for impact Theory
listeners get 15% off with code impact
at huel.com that's hu
huel.com and use code impact for 15%
off and why is it a bad idea if they
really have the right answers why is one
Global government a bad idea well number
one because they don't have the right
answers and look I mean even if you even
if they did um I mean that if you were
to set up a one world government well
all it takes is one government going bad
now and the entire world is ruined you
know and so this is the the the like
decentralization of power and Liberty go
hand in hand and you you really never
have one without the other and the idea
that even if you were to put the most
perfect angels in ter in in charge of
the world it's like the old Lord Atkin
you know concept that power tends to
corrupt and absolute power corrupts
absolutely and so the idea that any
group of men are capable of ruling the
world and not being corrupted is at best
highly unlikely at worst completely
impossible and in the event that they
are corrupted if you have one uh world
government then you're in the you're in
the nightmare scenario which is that
everybody lives under a totalitarian
regime all right so during the Cold War
when we actually had two opposing forces
uh it did not feel safe in fact I would
say it certainly for Americans uh it has
felt way safer in a unipolar moment but
I've heard you say that
unipolarity is the problem uh is that
only true because there are so many
people that are not Americans or is the
unipolar moment actually bad for
Americans ourselves well I think it's
very I mean it's very bad for the
American people broadly speaking it's
probably been very good for Washington
DC and for you know giant corporations
who are connected to Washington DC um
and and I think there is some truth to
the fact that there it there was a
danger the danger of nuclear war um was
higher in the Cold War than immediately
after the Soviet Union fell I think now
because of these awful policies and
backing Ukraine we've we've brought that
risk back um so that's not good the the
thing is that that what the unipolar
moment allowed was for America to go on
a a type of global adventurism that that
they would not have been able to get
away with um beforehand there's a reason
why we didn't do anything like the
terror Wars before the Soviet Union
collapsed because there there was a
counterweight to us there was a
counterbalance to some degree and so
what you see after the Soviet Union
collapses is like this tremendous
expansion in American Warfare in
American spending and debt and money
Printing and all of this stuff and I
think that that has been very bad for
the nation it's been very bad for the
people in general and so that's that's
what I meant by saying that the unipolar
moment was kind of a disaster for the
American people um that doesn't mean
that the cold war is good there were
terrible things that happened during the
Cold War um
but you know if you just look at say
like in a 20year period roughly speaking
a little more than 20 years the fact
that America's fought a war in
Afghanistan in Iraq um in Libya in Syria
in Somalia in Yemen and in Niger and
Pakistan with the Drone bomb campaigns I
mean there simply just wasn't any there
wasn't anything quite like that during
the Cold War even with Vietnam and the
war in Korea and stuff like that it
wasn't like just war war war war war war
war in a 20-year period with this many
people dying and this much money wasted
and this much of a region of the world
totally destabilized and I don't think
you would have that in a non unipolar
world so that I think has been the real
disaster of all of
this and how do you see us getting out
of um the unipolar moment obviously for
us there there would be a potential
economic defeat that goes hand inand
with that so if it's bad for us but the
solution is potentially worse than the
disease what do we do about that
well I mean we're the way we actually
are getting out of it is that we are you
know kind of uh spending ourselves into
debt while pissing off a lot of the rest
of the world and now they're starting to
Ally with each other so that's what's
actually playing out this is probably
the least responsible way to end the
unipolar moment but I guess what I would
just say is like kind of the message of
optimism in all of this is that what
that moment allowed America to become
and it's not just that moment I mean
there's several other major factors um
being Go Nixon taking us off the gold
standard is a huge one that we're were
now we were also like perfectly
positioned it was like 20 years after we
went off the gold standard the Soviet
Union collapses so now not only are we
the world Empire but we also have this
fiat currency machine where we can just
print up as much money as we want to um
really nothing to kind of check
government excess um but I don't think
you know like I uh I think that both
logically we we can kind of deduce this
from the best economic thinkers and also
just empirically you can look at the
20th and even the 251st century and kind
of see that like what actually creates
wealth is um free markets cooperation
voluntary trade and what the government
class is is parasitic in nature they
take from produ of people by force or by
the threat of force and they uh
redistribute that money to people who
aren't producing and I'm not saying that
like I'm not saying like when I'm not
even thinking like these lazy bums on
welfare I'm thinking like these
billionaires on welfare um
but the the idea that like drastic Cuts
in government spending or something like
that or like a drastic reduction in the
power of Washington DC over the rest of
the world I don't think that would
really hurt um Americans I mean
obviously the transition might be a a
bit wild and that's never the best thing
but ultimately I think that on the other
side of that is that the the American
Empire is a a weight on the back of the
American taxpayer and so ultimately I
think that if that were to be greatly
reduced there would be a huge
Improvement in the Liberty and the
prosperity of regular people in this
country which is I think what we should
all care about a lot more than you know
those poor weapons
manufacturers uh so when you lay out
that vision for what we're doing now
that's taking us in the wrong direction
I don't see a way to reverse that pain
and suffering so
um do you see any way for us to get of
our debt spiral uh get out of our
addiction to spending money we don't
have by printing uh to not need the wars
to keep GDP pumped Skyhigh so that we
can justify the amount of money that
we're pumping into the system um do you
see a realistic way to reverse that or
because this is how it feels to me I am
watching something that plays out in a
really predictable debt cycle that Ray
Delio tracks
and it's it's I I don't want to be
defeatist but it does feel a bit like
the Emoji where you sit back with your
popcorn and you just watch what unfolds
because I don't see a way to pump the
brakes yeah I mean I I certainly get
your point and I I have that feeling at
times as well I think like one of the
things that really keeps me encouraged
is that all of this stuff
like as with all government
authoritarian policies all relies on
propaganda um it's very important to the
powers that be that they are able to
propagandize their citizenry and
convince them of things that are not
true to be true in order to justify
whatever the government policy is and
one of the things that we are living
through right now that we're kind of
participating in right now um is that we
live in a whole new world now where the
state's Monopoly on the control of
information has been broken really for
the first time and there are shows now
like yours that that have a huge
audience way way bigger than what a lot
of the corporate media Outlets uh are
getting these days and that the the
propaganda can totally be challenged
this is something that's just very
different than in the past and so that
gives me a a lot of optimism as far as
the actual system um you know look
related to my first point people are so
much more aware of how corrupt the
system is now than they've ever been
before people are so much more aware of
the deep State and the dishonesty of the
corporate media and how much Wars are
started based off lies um to the point
that everything is almost questioned now
and that leads to other problems but I
think uh in in total the the positives
outweigh the negatives and so how does
the whole thing how does this
unsustainable thing get
unraveled I don't know exactly but I
would say that there's you know using
the example of the Soviet Union I mean
there was a big powerful government that
controlled half of Europe and chunks of
the rest of the world and the whole
thing was gone and not too many experts
predicted 10 15 years before the
collapse of the Soviet Union that it
would be gone at by the early 90s and so
it is you know I think that the the
future always holds um uh I wouldn't say
unlimited possibilities but certainly
many more possibilities than any of us
are smart enough to foresee and that I
don't think it's that crazy that you
would have some type of radical
transformation in the United States of
America I mean we've already had a
radical transformation in this country
just in the last 30 years this is a much
different country than what I grew up in
in the 90s and I think that we're living
through some pretty incredible times
there's a massive um Awakening and
realignment happening right now and so I
do I I like to stay optimistic that we
could see something like a a radical
decentralization of power in this
country um and something that could make
it a much a much better Freer
place okay interesting I definitely want
to hear about the uh decentralization
what you mean about that I know a little
bit about your background as a
Libertarian uh but first I want to
address what I'll consider the elephant
in the room so if you're most worried
about World War III the thing I'm most
worried about is that the debt cycle
that we're in is is man it as close to
inevitable as you're going to get and I
forget the exact percentage but it's
like 84% of the time it ends in War uh
because what for people that um aren't
paying attention a lot to economics the
debt Cycle Works something like this
uh usually you just had a war and
because you just had a war all the debt
is wiped off the table and um everybody
starts over the table's turned over and
people start building up from scratch
now people don't have a lot but they
also don't have a lot of debt and so now
you get into this accumulation phase and
it becomes the the party time and people
start bringing on debt uh they
discovered that they can print money
especially if you're the reserve
currency like we are where you can
literally uh spread your losses
internationally uh through uh inflation
you're just adding money to the money
supply we don't have to get super deep
on that right now but um you keep
building up that debt bubble you keep
bringing on debt both personally at the
governmental level at the corporate
level and it gets to the point where we
are right now where even just servicing
the interest on the debt becomes next to
impossible so you are in a situation
where you have two options before you
you can hyperinflate your currency
because to make good on your debts you
will have to you you literally even if
you taxed everybody at 100% you would
not be able to meet your obligations so
you either have to hyperinflate the
currency or you have to default and the
only option that you have out of those
historically speaking is war and so it
can be a revolution or it can be uh a
World War I 2
three and when I look at the numbers
that America is putting up on the board
I'm like you have an inevitability that
you have to deal with so when I hear an
idea like hey we decentralize this I
don't know yet if I love that idea or
hate it I'll have to hear more about it
but we have to deal with the debt like
there must be a debt Jubilee in here
somehow and so you'll hear people say
that maybe the closest saying to the
debt Jubilee is going to be AI that Ai
and Robotics they basically are like an
untapped continent that we suddenly
discover hey and it's effectively Free
Labor it's complicated as to why that
would work but it would work um but
barring that I don't see a happy path
out of this what what do you see yeah
okay so first I would just point out
that look in in 1971 as I mentioned
Richard Nixon getting us off the gold
standard that was a a default I mean
that's they they painted it in you know
a different way but that's 100% what
that was is that we had said hey World
here that was the Brett Wood's agreement
right was that will be the world uh the
world Reserve you can Peg your currency
to the dollar and you can redeem your
dollar anytime you want uh $35 an ounce
per an ounce of gold and then when the
French wanted to come redeem it Nixon
was like no no we're not giving it to
you we don't have it it was a big giant
default they just spun it as like the
French are trying to undermine dollar
stability or something like that but it
was like yeah but this was the deal that
they were allowed to do it and anyway so
we certainly um I I'd say that a couple
things on that um number one I think
default is the best answer so I think
you're essentially right that you either
have default or you have um
hyperinflation default or inflation and
at this point with the level of debt we
have it would be hyperinflation um
default is not all sunshine and
but it's a lot better than
hyperinflation and it's a lot better
than starting a war to get yourself out
of it the thing that does encourage me a
little bit is that you know oftentimes
you'll hear the political class talk
about how divided we are and that's
certainly true but they talk about how
awful it is that we're so divided um the
whoever their candidate is is always
supposed to be a uniter um they also
talk about the problems with fake news
and all this stuff and I think what's
there there's an admission of truth
that's buried underneath there which is
that it it would be really really hard
for them to recreate say
2002 um in in 2002 for people who are uh
old enough to remember as I am um there
was a steady War beat uh a steady War
drums beat for the war in Iraq we didn't
invade till 2003 but all of 2002 was
spent laying the groundw so that you
would have to be crazy to not know that
Saddam Hussein had nuclear weapons and
he was in on 911 and he's about to pass
these nuclear weapons off you know he's
about to pass the weapons he doesn't
have off to the terrorists he's not
really friends with and they're going to
Nuke Kansas this is just a matter of
time literally the Vice President Dick
Cheney say it's just a matter of time
it's not a matter of if it's a matter of
when they and they got large enough
levels of support for the war in Iraq
that they were able to pull it off and
back then the New York Times was selling
it CNN was selling it Fox News was
selling it I mean they just
all powerful sources of information all
got behind this war push and of course
there was a tremendous um as there is
now but even a stronger push to demonize
anybody who was critical of the war if
you weren't with George W bush you were
with the terrorists they could not pull
anything like that off today and I think
that's why they're so upset that we're
uh you know that we're uh not unified
because when the time comes if you
really want to sell a war what you're
going to need is a massive propaganda
campaign and you're going to need to get
at least a large enough percentage of
your population behind your war that you
feel comfortable enacting the policy and
today we have Joe Rogan and Tucker
Carlson and like all of these people who
are like way way bigger than the entire
propaganda apparatus itself and they if
they were trying to lie us into war
again those guys would be the first ones
exposing it on their show and so that
does give me a little sense of hope that
I don't know how easy it would be for
them to pull off the you know leading us
into a next War based off lies um now
that doesn't mean it's impossible and
they couldn't do it and there wouldn't
be some type of ba based on that
assumption do you think if we had a uh
covid V2 that we wouldn't be lied into
submission with that I think it would be
much harder to do it again than it was
the the first time um you know they they
tried to float out another round of
lockdowns like kind of late into Co and
it was just like thoroughly you know
they do these things where they put out
like trial balloons you know they'll be
like articles about like well you know
Joe Biden is considering a national
vaccine passport and then like
everybody's up in arms and they're like
no no we weren't going to do that no
problem like they're always testing the
waters uh this happens a lot and I think
that again it's not that it's impossible
um but it would be much much harder to
do covid again than it was the first
time because a you know a a not
insignificant percentage of the
population now recognizes that they were
duped and and now Al doesn't trust any
of the people who sold that to them um
so I think it it's not impossible but it
would certainly be a lot
harder okay so um if we were going to
get across this Chasm somehow we unwind
the debt in some way that hopefully
isn't wildly traumatic um talk to me
about what does decentralized power look
like I'm assuming your answer will come
from a Libertarian framework so if you
you can give me the um the rubric by
which you're coming to the conclusion of
why this is better uh I would love to
understand that yeah sure well I mean
it's look I I think it's very consistent
with kind of the founding documents of
the United States of America and with
like the the basic premise being that
man ought to be free and that government
is an instrument of force and if
government is to exist its only
legitimate function is the protection of
of Liberty um decentralization it could
be on a spectrum I mean it it could mean
um secession and a national divorce of
of some sort in the most extreme form
but it also could just mean strong
federalism something that is still
enshrined in the Constitution but we do
not have at all anymore in this country
but the you know there's um I think
there's a thing some lawyer told me this
once but they said that on the bar if uh
if there's a multiple choice and the
answer is the 10th Amendment they say
that's always wrong like you never pick
the 10th Amendment if that's the answer
because that's just never how things
actually work but we do have an
amendment to the Constitution that says
hey like anything not expressly given to
the federal government here doesn't
belong to them then that's for the
states and for the people and I think
that particularly when you have such
strong cultural divisions in the country
that you're going to be like the a that
okay we're going to have an election
every four years and then whoever wins
rules over you so if my team wins then
you know whatever it's rural Alabama
rules over
Portland OR or Portland rules over rural
Alabama well that makes no sense on any
level and that's certainly not a recipe
for Liberty and so which much better is
to just accept that hey there are many
different cultures in this country and
that they they should not get to impose
their Wills on others it's really if you
think about it right the same it's just
the logical conclusion of what I was
saying before in in opposing One World
Government I mean if you're not for one
world government and you go well no we
have to have more competition well then
why shouldn't we just have a little bit
more and a little bit more and
ultimately I think that the more kind of
decentralized power is the more likely
you are to have a free prosperous
Society it's not it's not a coincidence
that the United States of America was
such a successful country and the model
that it was started off of was being
these United States like they're they're
all together in a union but there's all
of these different little States um that
all have their own constitutions and I
think particularly today as as you've
seen over the 20th century but really
drastically in the 21st century the a
lot of the problems we're facing are the
centralization of power in Washington DC
and what the antidote for that would be
a decentralization of
power it's really interesting there's a
story about Robert E Lee uh originally
not wanting to join the Confederate Army
uh he was considering going to the um
North and he ultimately was like I'm
just more loyal to my state than I am to
my country and I thought whoa that's not
something that you would hear a lot of
today um so heard understand that um out
of curiosity where do you think like is
50 states and a geographic region as big
as the United States is that the right
subdivision or would you want to and and
I'm talking not in theory in practice in
practice would you want to see that
subdivided farther much
farther yeah I mean I think I I think um
certainly like 300 plus million people
under one government is just way too
many people um so I you know so again I
know you're asking me not in theory but
in theory I'd like to see it divided as
small down as it could possibly go I'd
be happy to see it divided down to
Neighborhood blocks um in practice I
would support anything moving in that
direction however there's you know
there's also um there there's if we're
talking in practice then there's also
the reality that like okay the feds
might crack down on you so you want to
do this in an intelligent way where
you're not going to like you know have
your community invaded and and dominated
and brought back into the larger poity
um but but I do think that any of those
uh types of um any of those types of
divisions are good I think that if uh
it's probably not anytime soon going to
come in the form of secession but
anything where uh Texas just takes a
little bit more power for Texas to
regulate themselves than the federal
government or you know or California or
whoever I think that's a step in the
right
direction the business world is changing
at light speed Market shifts AI
Revolution Rising Global tension a lot
of businesses are struggling to keep up
but some are also thriving so what are
the ones that are thriving doing they're
using net site by Oracle over 38,000
forward-thinking businesses use it to
turn rapid change into fuel for growth
with netw Suite you get one source of
Truth real time insights and closed
books in days not weeks so if you're
serious about turning uncertainty into
opportunity netw Suite is the tool to do
it speaking of opportunity download the
CFOs guide to Ai and machine learning at
netsuite.com
SL Theory the guide is free to you at
nets.com
Theory that's nets.com
[Music]
Theory um there's a book called
infomocracy uh and it contemplates a
world that's kind of like bology I don't
know if you know bology but bology
Sharina voson is a guy that talks about
something called the network State I man
you you will have a very strong reaction
to him I think you'll like him
um but you definitely should look him up
at at a minimum anyway this book uh the
uh
infomocracy Toys was some of the same
ideas of B's idea of the network state
where people really self-organize they
form essentially governments his thing
is that it's not necessarily
geographically uh that people will
Orient around it will be around a value
system where they connect to each other
over the network um but even if you take
that to be Geographic but at hyper
fragments like you were saying down into
the neighborhood that's what this book
contemplates it's a fiction book but it
did give me a Sci-Fi glimpse into what a
hyper uh decentralized world would look
like and if I'm honest it seemed just
unbearably burdensome to have to worry
about what's legal and not legal a block
away from you and so even if you're just
like walking to a mall which doesn't
happen to be on your block uh you might
have to pass through three different you
know block States
and I was just like oh my God like that
seems like an absolute nightmare now I
have tried to wrap my head around uh and
you're you have not said the word
Anarchist so I don't want to paint you
with this brush but I've tried to wrap
my head around some um uh Anarchist
principles from talking with Michael
malice and it's one of those where I get
it at the idea stage but I am left
asking looking at socities as like a
what we see is is the result of many
civilizations cities states countries
everything going through a long-term
evolutionary process and they all seem
to end in roughly the same place and I'm
just curious why don't we see large
scale um truly
libertine groupings is there something
about it that doesn't scale well I mean
okay so just to at the end there I mean
I I wouldn't be arguing for libertine uh
groupings much as uh just for
libertarian groupings which there isn't
differ yeah yeah I mean libertine
usually comes with a connotation of more
like free love uh and that type of stuff
but so I would I would say this so um
first Michael M's a very good friend of
mine and I do essentially agree with him
that I do I think that the ultimate goal
should be a voluntary society and if you
think about how essentially your your
interactions with everybody in your life
every type of business interaction and
personal every business relationship
every personal relationship you have in
your life down to the very very complex
ones are all completely voluntary except
for your relationship with criminals and
the government criminals and the
government are the only relationships
that you'll ever have in your life where
it is literally at the threat of
violence you are forced to do something
you're going to do something because
they will throw you in jail if you don't
do it they will ruin your life if you
don't do it they will shut down your
business if you don't do it and then of
course if you happen to be unfortunate
enough to interact with like criminals
and they pull out a gun and say give me
your wallet that's also uh you know a
relationship predicated on Force
everything else is voluntary this
podcast right now we have is a voluntary
reaction you know your people reached
out to my people and we set it up we're
across the United States of America
right now there's also a voluntary
relationship with our internet providers
with the people who we bought our our
microphones and computers and all of
this stuff with all of this and it's
pretty complex um and there really does
not seem to be any obvious reason to me
why I mean we all certainly recognize
that our relationships with criminals
are unnecessary and the goal should be
to have as little of them as possible
and it's not self-evident to me why but
the government must be this Monopoly of
force and that all the services like all
of these incredibly complex Services um
from you know like whatever I don't even
know what half of the technology I have
in front of me is here because other
people who I trust told me what to buy
and I bought it and they set it up for
me but there's a lot of complexities to
all of this yet the services of say you
know an elementary school and a road and
your defense agency that has to be based
off a violent Monopoly but all of these
other services can be done voluntarily
so I I think that it's uh an artificial
distinction without a real justification
for those Services um being delivered in
that way and then on top of that I would
say that you know look you could um you
could certainly write uh a novel about
how scary it and I haven't read that
book so I don't I'm not like commenting
directly on it but you could write a
story about how scary and awful and and
burdensome it would be to have like a
different you know um uh you know like
every every little neighborhood having
their own government I could also write
you a pretty scary novel about what it
would be like to live under a government
you know and there's and and history has
lots of pretty scary examples of living
under governments and how bad they can
get I would say that we live let's say
in the United States of America
obviously there's this is Under the
Umbrella of the federal government but
there are different laws across uh every
state has lots of different laws I'm not
tremendously worried about that as I
travel from state to state um it would
not make sense for it to be designed in
a way that you were like in a ton of
trouble just for entering New Jersey but
then when you got back into New York
everything was okay and I don't think
there's much reason to believe that if
there were instead of 50 states let's
just start with going to 150 states that
that problem would get much worse right
now we can go through the United States
of America and it's pretty well accepted
you know what I mean like that you
you're kind of allowed to do the similar
type thing that you're allowed to do and
then for other issues there might be
some questions like am I allowed to you
know make a right on red here or
whatever um but I I think that even
traveling um between different uh
Nations has become largely more of a
hassle in the last 50 years than it ever
was previously and that's been because
of the centralization of power and the
growth of those governments making it
more difficult to leave and come in so I
I just think that both in theory and in
terms of like you know the the Practical
reality you're going to be better off
with more decentralization now that
doesn't mean that there's no scenario in
which Anarchy could be bad or
decentralization could be bad but I
think that the likelihood of it going
bad is way lower than the likelihood of
uh of centralized power going bad which
has happened a lot more
often uh I certainly agree that
centralized power can and will go bad
there's no doubt about that um what I'm
trying to figure out is is
libertarianism the worst of the systems
uh except for everything else you the
worst system except for everything else
or is uh democracy the worst system
except for everything else because when
I look at history history is a a John
mimer stamped parade
of real politique and you don't have to
read many books about the Mongols before
you realize oh dear lord there are
people that will come through your
village and they will rape and kill and
just take everything from you and so
thinking of this as an evolutionary
inevitability it seems like we are
always going to end with centralized
power where we make the tradeoff for I'm
going to give up a ton of freedom in
exchange for security and once I make
that trade that slowly over time the
government oif it takes too much you end
up in the debt cycle which we've already
talked about like that feels like what I
know about humans that that is the
inevitable Loop that we will always live
in and so it makes libertarianism
anarchism to me feel like a thought
experiment that yeah if I could program
out some of the human tendency where a a
typically strong guy with uh just
sociopathic tendencies uh he's going to
come take your [ __ ] and all of a sudden
you're going to be like well I don't
want that to happen again and we find
ourselves back here well okay so I
probably would have agreed with you um
before uh guns were widely available but
I do think that that changes that
equation entirely and once you've got
something like the United States of
America where you have even with
uh these large centralized governments
even with them you have something I
don't know if anyone exactly knows
something like 400 million guns in the
country and if you could imagine you
know if we're talking about
libertarianism or even Anarchy here if
you could imagine abolishing all gun
laws tomorrow you're going to have a lot
more uh guns at on the street and this
makes this makes um self-defense much
more um of a tenable idea like like much
more like oh it's not that there would
be these communities who are entirely
vulnerable to a bigger stronger guy
coming in and taking all their stuff
they would actually be able to defend
themselves in terms of like uh look do
things
inevitably lead to centralized power
into giant powerful governments look
there's a strong argument to look around
and say well hey that's the situation
we're in now but I would I I'm I'm a
little hesitant to just buy into these
inevitability arguments I I mean again
you know I Ed the Soviet Union as as an
example before um where it certainly
seemed inevitable that the Soviet Union
would exist forever and you know that it
wasn't and you know my a good friend of
mine Gene ebstein who's a brilliant
Economist he would always use the
example um of uh of
slavery and where he was like you know
if you were sitting around in
1845 at the height of slavery and you
were to say hey in the next 20 years
slavery is going to be totally abolished
in the west people would think you were
insane I mean that literally would have
made no sense people have been like
listen this is inevitable this has this
institution has been with Humanity for
all of its history it is the way of the
world there is no way all of these
people are going to give up on their
free labor and yet
miraculously but it really did happen
and you know okay yes obviously there
was a Civil War in the United States of
America most other Western countries
didn't require a Civil War in order to
abolish slavery it's it's debatable
maybe we didn't need to have one either
um but the fact is that the the
institution of slavery was abolished and
again people could argue that it was
transferred into other forms or whatever
but still I'm just saying for the that
that really awful thing went away and
didn't come back um at least for a while
and so I I just I'm a little bit
hesitant to to buy into this like well
it's just inevitable um the the truth is
that the United States of America was
the largest experiment in free markets
and in individual liberty in the history
of the world and that doesn't mean it
wasn't a perfectly free market country
ever and it wasn't a perfectly
libertarian country ever but there if
you look at the period of time between
like the uh um the end of the Civil War
and say
the woodro Wilson Administration so from
1865 to 1910 or something like that you
had this giant country in the United
States of America that had no income tax
no Central Bank no Federal Regulation to
speak of um the total spending from the
federal government was like 2% of the
national income or something like that I
mean it was by today's standards would
be the most radical Bare Bones
government you know like you could you
couldn't even imagine if someone
proposed today to just be like okay year
one we're going to abolish every single
Department that we have here we're you
know I mean like there none of this
stuff existed um and in that time of
like Radical by today's standards
radical lafair capitalism we built up
the the most powerful country that the
world had ever seen it was the the
largest rise the lot and life of the
average person that had ever been seen
in world history two levels of what
would what would have been perceived as
magical levels of prosperity just a
couple of generations before that and
so look it's it's very hard the the
primary reason I think it's very hard to
get from here to there is that there's
so much concentrated power who benefit
off the status quo and they would lose
their power if they were to you know if
we were to embrace libertarianism um but
it's just so it's like it's kind of been
done before we have way more
technological advances at our disposal
now than we did then and I think
nothing's inevitable and so it's worth
continuing to try to push for
that I I agree that um nothing is
inevitable that things are actually I
don't agree that nothing is inevitable I
do agree that you should approach the
world as if nothing is inevitable um but
I also agree that looking at history
it's it's going to offer you something
because you have tens of thousands of
years of these tests being run and you
can see at least for recorded history
roughly what they look like and um I
don't see societies going
libertarian uh at scale again I maybe it
works when you're small but there's a
question to be asked and answered which
is why do people tend to form larger and
larger societies now again I'm not even
saying that's good but here's my
thinking on why this happens so to me
when I look at Society it is the answer
to the question of what do weak men want
uh for two reasons one they either want
to choose to be weak so they can focus
on something else so they don't want to
have to develop their physical prowess
to be a Spartan to constantly think of
being ready for war so I won't even use
weak as a perjorative they just don't
want to spend their time doing that
right like I don't consider myself War
ready uh so I there are other things I
want to do and the other would be to
specialize right so I want to specialize
but that means that I need to be in a
larger group so other people can do
their specialization and hopefully I can
get really really Niche and do something
that I really enjoy so we just see that
over and over and over okay so uh maybe
not inevitable but it's certainly
something that we see people forming
into so now to I guess really make this
concrete and I actually don't know how
you're going to answer this question so
this is a very very s sincere question
if you look at something like Israel
Gaza and what's going on there
um if I were to go and pull the um
Palestinians aside and be like all right
here's what you have to do you've got to
band together you've got to have one
Vision you've got to get everybody on
the same team you guys have to decide
what you're going to do whether it's war
or peace like this has to be a really
galvanized uh energy and effort it is
not going to be um a bunch of like hyper
fragmented groups that they're going to
have a way harder time I'm going to want
to give them one narrative uh some
mythology that pulls them together uh a
single aim something that we can build
towards metrics that we can count and so
all of those are centralizing forces and
that's one I'd be very curious if you
think a Libertarian approach there would
be more
effective so okay so it's an interesting
question I would just say that there's a
there's and this is uh a point that
Frederick bosot made um in in his work
um but there I I just want to be careful
to not kind of conflate society and the
state or groups of people and the
government because there is a major
difference there and so I do think
essentially that you are right that we
we um we bind ourselves together in
groups so that we can specialize and so
that we can be more prosperous I mean
that's a big part of how Prosperity
happens is that you stop you know you
become more and more specialized and
then you trade with other people who
specialize and obviously like you know
if we just go to like way back to the
state of nature if you have to hunt your
own food and build your own furniture
and knit your own clothes you're doing
everything not very well and it's taking
a lot of time to get it all done but if
you're just like an awesome Hunter and
somebody else is really awesome at at
knitting clothes it's much more
beneficial for you guys to trade that
type of um that type of like kind of
coming together is heavily
incentivized uh because it makes you all
more uh prosperous and can be done
voluntarily but in terms of like the
government being much more powerful that
isn't something that I and I think this
is something that people have a tendency
to look back on you know Murray rothbart
is like a really brilliant his historian
an economist he he wrote a lot about
this but people tend it's like we tend
to tell ourselves stories and one of the
stories will often be that if something
was one way before and then it became
this way we go well we all decided to
make it this way and that's kind of the
way the story is told you you can
particularly see this uh when
progressives argue about why we have a
regulatory state or why why we have an
EPA or why we have all of this they'll
they kind of tell you stories like
they'll be like well we used to not have
one and then it was a disaster and so
now we have one because we know it was a
disaster with that one but if you
actually look at the actual history of
almost any of these things it's not 100%
true but it's like
99.9% true if you look at how a
government regulation came to be it is
almost never the case that all of the
people stood up and just demanded that
the government come in and regulate this
bad business business man who is doing
something bad to them what it is almost
every single time is that special
interests from within that sector Lobby
to the government in order to get them
into the business of regulating that
sector usually to make it harder for
their competition or to give them some
type of competitive Advantage um it's
it's not the case that like you know um
whatever the all types of different
examples you can look at this uh
throughout history and so I would just I
would be careful from telling the story
that in any way way we decided to have a
more centralized government or something
like that that wasn't a decision made
from the people and there's really
fascinating history uh about this but
believe me John D Rockefeller and JP
Morgan did a lot more deciding about
having strong centralized government
than like the American people at some
point just deciding that they they
wanted that and obviously there's it's a
little more complicated than that like
people were propagandas there were
groups of people who were calling for
more government but really in terms of
what actually moved the needle in these
cases it's like but as you know today
you know what Goldman Sachs wants the
government to do believe it or not has a
little bit more influence than like what
me or you might want the government to
do as far as um you know talking about
the situation in Gaza I do get your
point yeah there in many ways it would
be better if we could get everybody on
the same page at least in terms of
strategy um to just be like hey listen
okay I know you want to resist here's
the smart way to resist like the way
you're resisting is not helping you guys
at all so maybe this way would be a lot
smarter you know there there's a a fair
point to that I would just say
that is that is that achievable at
all well number one part of the reason
why you would want that is because
they're currently under attack you know
and and so that changes the calculation
that's not necessarily something you
would want at in peace time everyone to
be acting exactly the same way you'd
kind of want people to be pursuing their
own interests but regardless it's like
the question really comes down to like
if that is desirable is it achievable
and what's the best path to achieve that
because currently Hamas is like the gang
with the most power there and they're
pretty into enforcing their will on
other people and even that doesn't seem
to be working out very well it's not
like Hamas ever really had control of
the Gaza Strip they they're kind of like
a gang they'd kill the people who were
in their way or whatever but I just
don't know that you know and even when
um you know even when the Palestinians
were trying to play ball more um it it
was never you'd have some who wanted to
negotiate you'd have some who wanted to
fire off rockets and you know I don't
know whether it's possible at all to
kind of get everyone to buy into one
strategy but I don't see any evidence
that forcing them to do it is going to
work better
yeah it's interesting uh you definitely
want the consent of the Govern this is
where all of this stuff really starts to
break down for me the reason the
exploration is interesting is I look at
America uh I share a lot of the deep
concerns that you have I look at a
couple things one the nature of the
human mind as
manipulatable and I look at the nature
of um the cycle that a government mental
body runs through and how it tends to
either uh aify and it just becomes so
rigid that it breaks or it becomes so
corrupt that it becomes like a gigantic
cancer that can't do the things that
it's actually meant to do um and I think
obsessively because I actually by my
nature I'm optimistic and it's
interesting people that have followed me
for a long time feel like I I gobbled an
entire Pharmacy of black pills uh
because as I Orient myself to uh
basically I succeeded in the system so
the system worked extraordinarily well
for me and when covid kicked off and I
suddenly needed to orient myself to help
people that I because I didn't
understand money printing so I thought
oh my God all these people that I've
just been working side by side with in
the inner cities they're about to get
absolutely demolished because they don't
understand money they don't know how to
save uh they don't understand
entrepreneurship so they're really going
to get brutalized by this and um I
started learning about Finance so that I
could help them and because I know how
to make money but I never understood
investing money or the nature of money
and it felt like somebody lifted up a
curtain and I got to see behind the
curtain to see how the world really
works and so uh the largely the focus of
the show has become that because if you
don't understand how the world actually
works then you're the mark and in trying
not to be the Mark I'm trying to figure
out which of these things make sense in
theory and which of these things makes
sense in practice because I would very
much like to find myself in a situation
where we can uh because it isn't a 100%
of the time that you have the debt
problem that we have that you end up
with Bloodshed so there there is some
narrow window that we can go through
where we can unwind this in a more
sensible path uh but I want to find out
what those real strategies are um
yeah so that's why exploring the edge
cases whether that's what's happening in
Ukraine what's the real nature of that
uh whether it's what we're doing with
the debt what's the real nature of money
Printing and all that whether it's
what's going on in Gaza um
libertarianism not something that I um
have a great degree of understanding in
but while I understand the principles I
worry that in in a fight maybe is the
right way to think about in a time of
Peace yeah like when you have a high
functioning country and you want to
subdivide it even more like I get that
I'd rather see that happen like stronger
states rights than suddenly Texas isn't
a part of the us and you know there's
some crisis and bloodshed over that um
that seems like a a pretty horrible
outcome um knowing the weird year that
we're in right now uh what what do you
see in the near-term moving forward does
the 2024 election go well uh is it is
there literal Bloodshed I mean we had an
attempted assassination on a former
president what do you see in the near
term man there a good question and it is
tough this is a tough one to predict
because it's so
unlike anything I've ever seen and even
literally just uh on my way uh here
before we recorded this show I just
watched RFK drop out and and endorse
Donald Trump and so there's right away
there's another like kind of X Factor
that I wasn't you know I guess I've been
thinking a little bit over the last
couple weeks but I certainly wasn't
taking that into account a month ago um
and uh especially after just you know as
we're recording this it's just yesterday
was the last day of the Democratic
National Convention and this whole
convention was like unlike anything I've
ever seen before and so we're kind of
running through a real a very
interesting test in how propaganda works
and how the Machine Works um there's
something really fascinating about this
to me that I don't know that I
completely understand you know I'm uh
the to some degree outside of political
tribalism this is something that I get
both criticized for and complimented for
I'm not sure if I deserve either but I'm
not a partisan at all I'm not even a
partisan to the libertarian party and
I'm a member of them but I just don't
sometimes I'll support people not in the
libertarian party because I think
partisanship is stupid um but but there
is as somebody who never really uh never
supported Donald Trump certainly never
supported Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton
or any of those people it's it's kind of
wild to watch where there's been a lot
of people one of the major criticisms um
from Democrats of like Maga people is
that they're a cult like that you're
just you know you're just blindly
following Donald Trump no matter what he
does and there is at least a kernel of
Truth to that accur ation I mean Trump
kind of has a cult-like following and
people really do love Donald Trump and
i' I've certainly found myself on the
other end of some angry Trump supporters
when I've criticized Donald Trump for
something I don't think he did a good
job in and they will they do defend him
with a blind loyalty at least a lot of
them do that is off-putting to me
however I must say I find the cult of
the Democrats to be like a thousand
times crezy
there's something so much creepier to me
about woring a machine over woring an
individual and the way that they're able
to like pull Joe Biden out and put
Camala Harris in and there's not one
person in the United States of America
who's like now I I can't support her
could have supported Joe Biden but can't
support Camala Harris like that person
does not exist and they count on that
they just totally know that's true Joe
six weeks ago these people would have
given that reaction to Joe Biden th this
week Joe Biden speaks on Monday and it's
like he get out of here old man and no
one even cares no one even cares say
what you will about the Trump supporters
try pulling him out and putting someone
else in they'd be like nope we liked
that guy we don't like this next guy and
you'd have a even if they got another
good Republican who Maga kind of likes
if you pulled Donald Trump out and put
someone else in you'd be like I don't
know are they going to get % of Donald
Trump's voters to vote from maybe 60%
but there'd be tens of millions of
people who would like wouldn't go along
with that on the Democratic side it's
like there's no one it's just the
machine if they had not if they had
picked Gavin Newsome instead of her the
exact same reaction would have been
there for Gavin Newsome if they and and
there's something really so anyway I'm
getting away from your question but my
point is I'm almost watching this like a
sci science experiment at this point I'm
like how [ __ ] can they actually do this
can they actually take someone who none
of you liked who we all would have
agreed six weeks ago we all would have
agreed pretty unimpressive person but
now she's a rock star she's a beacon of
of Joy she's a phenomenon and all of
these things it's like wow can they
actually make that happen um and then
you know I I just think there's major
questions over whether Donald Trump
would be allowed to to get into the
White House again I mean are we really
having free and fair elections you know
according to YouTube yes and I'm not
allowed to question that but you know
what's what's rattling in between my
ears I I don't know I don't know if
that's true and there I mean look this
I'm not trying to say anything that I
don't know and for people who do follow
my stuff I'm not like a conspiracy cook
um I don't just like jump on
conspiracies if I don't have solid
evidence that they're true but
everything we do know about that last
assassination tempt is
pretty wild and pretty you know enough
to scratch your head and go wait a
minute what what like I mean of all the
the targets if you're if you're a in the
Secret Service of all of the different
people Donald Trump has to be the number
one who you're like listen this guy is
the most likely to deal with this type
of thing and you know that the entire
establishment has been stoking hatred
for this guy and that half of the
country hates his free guts with a
passion and not like in the same way
that like yeah there's a lot of people
who hate Joe Biden but no one on that
side kind of feels like if Joe Biden was
gone then the problem's gone just like
no one feels that way about Camala
Harris right now no one thinks if she's
gone then the problem is gone everyone
knows that there's just another one of
her waiting right behind her but on the
other side they do at least seem to have
the attitude that like this guy is the
problem and if he were just gone we
wouldn't have this problem anymore that
is essentially the CNN MSNBC narrative
that democracy is about to be
obliterated all because of one guy and
if he just wasn't there we would this
would all be fine and and so in that
environment you're telling me that this
kid is on videotape scoping out the roof
for over an hour before he gets up there
and then he's allowed to get up 130
yards away from the former president and
have a direct shot while people on the
ground are screaming that man's got a
gun and like and the president isn't
rushed off State and again just coupling
that with all the other things they've
done to this guy I'll just say it's it's
just starting to look like what it's
what it looks like and so will they try
again yeah maybe I don't know maybe they
will or or maybe something else crazy
happened so it the long of the short is
there's just so many variables this time
I have no clue I my gut tells me that
the whole Camala Harris thing is
astroturfed and fake and that if there
was a real Fair election today I think
Donald Trump beats her but I could be
wrong about that and in some ways maybe
we'll never find out because I don't
know I don't know that there's going to
be a free and fair
election now when you say that it's fake
in what way just that the um the the
Beast the machine the blah whatever you
want to call it of the mainstream media
is so behind her and so so painting her
so perfectly asking no real questions uh
that people just like word I have my
shortcut I know what to do I know how to
vote yeah I mean I think there's like
there's no question that there is like
tremendous relief amongst people who uh
are are democratic voters because they
were kind of being forced into this
weird emperor's new close game for a
while where they had to you know pretend
that they didn't see what was right in
front of their face um the the crowd
reaction by the way at the uh at the DNC
when Biden spoke was weird they kind of
had a weird reaction to and these are
like Rah cheerleader events you know and
as he's speaking you could feel the
tension amongst the crowd because it's
just like a reminder it's such a crazy
reminder to them it's like hey yeah
remember remember last month when you
had to pretend you didn't see a problem
with this guy as like he is he gets up
there and he's not he's not even like
somebody at a nursing home he's like the
guy at the nursing home who's not doing
very good like he's not even doing good
for a nursing home I mean it's really
something um and so I think there's
relief amongst people but I don't know
man I me look I don't really know what
the answer to this is I can tell you
that they keep coming into me I I've
gotten
like 30 to 40 text messages about Camala
Harris since she's been the nominee and
I don't i' I've only I donated to tulsey
gabs campaign is the only time I've ever
donated to a Democrat ever I don't even
know how they get my number but there's
I know that there was something uh there
there was $90 million that was
immediately was was held back from Biden
then immediately released into Camala
Harris's campaign after that uh after
his resignation or whatever exactly that
was and that she's and then since then
she's raised I think over a hundred
million more and the they say a lot of
it's come from small donors clearly a
lot of it's come from big donors and
then I've seen some of these like
investigative reporting going around
saying like ah there's a lot of people
who are on these small donor lists who
claim they never donated anything to her
I don't know I I just I I I can tell you
that I feel when these propaganda waves
come on and we're in the middle of a big
propaganda wave and it's almost like it
you know like okay you know when the war
in Ukraine first broke out and how every
single person would say provoked like
Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden and the
everybody every powerful person when
they talked about it they always start
with the word unprovoked Vladimir Putin
LED an unprovoked invasion of Ukraine
and after a while you're like why do you
have to keep saying that like it's
almost like your own guilty conscience
in some weird way like you have to say
that because otherwise we might all
learn that it was you know it's like um
I I the example I like to use is like it
it's it's like if you came outside and
there were like some of the kids in your
neighborhood and like a dog bit one of
them and you were like oh what happened
and they were like okay well we weren't
throwing rocks at the dog and then the
dog bit us so we were just right here
not throwing rocks at the dog and then
this dog just bit us and and we were
just hanging out not throwing rocks at
it and like by the fifth time you're
like I think you were throwing rocks at
this dog like why do you keep saying
that and in the same sense it's like
they have to keep telling you how much
energy she has and how much everybody
loves you it's just very clearly like
you're trying to will this narrative
into
existence to what degree they'll be able
to do that I I don't know I'm kind of
surprised they've been able to do it to
the degree they have
already man I think it's going to work
uh I think it's going to work
extraordinarily well this is uh if
you've ever heard Eric Weinstein talk
about the idea of kayfabe and how uh if
you consider yourself tribally a
Democrat you are having a hard time when
it was Biden because it was just so
obvious I remember like you I I'm not on
a side I just want to know who's gonna
lead the country to the goals that I
think are um going to lead to human
flourishing that's my shtick uh and I
was at the debate uh for RFK where Trump
and Biden were off on their actual
debate stage and then he had hired a
space so I'm there it was legitimately
depressing it was just boring they were
like Biden clearly just
wasn't uh wasn't capable and you hadn't
heard all of the people going oh my God
this is obvious now so I'm just like I
cannot believe that they're going to be
saying that this guy was fine like this
is bananas to me and then RFK at least
had substance uh which was interesting
but the the whole thing of it was um
this mading sense of being inside of uh
The Truman Show and sure I'm just an
extra but it's like I'm so aware that
I'm a part of a TV show that I'm just
like God so then when everyone flipped
on him the way the speed with which the
veracity the language I was like this
was planned ahead of time like it had to
be it was just all too similar and I'm
sure you have seen the Super Cuts of
like this is bad for our democracy this
is bad for our democracy or this is a
threat to our democracy over and over
and over and over and over and over and
over all the same exact
words it it's it is a
exploitation of the fact that humans are
tribal they are
manipulatable they want to be
manipulated they want to believe like
just give me the words I need to say
because I already I'm prescribed to
being a democrat or republican or
whatever so they they want you to give
them the way to beat somebody in a
debate and once they have their words
which is why the mainstream media just
repeats like simple phrases over and
over and over so it's like you have them
oh and here's just a stupid statistic
something that rhymes is like 70% more
likely to be believed to be true and
anything you repeat goes up dramatically
in perception of truth even when people
know it's a lie if they've simply heard
it over and over and over there's this
process in the brain called myelination
so you make a stronger connection
memory with that thing so that it's
calorically easier to remember that
untrue thing and that creating that
super highway creates the sense of like
oh yeah yeah this is true it it is it is
people's lyic systems being knowingly
hijacked but they're and this is the
worst part they're giving them the thing
they want which is please just tell me
what to say to uh my mother-in-law who
thinks that she loves Trump and I just
need to tell her that k is better I just
give me give me the talking points and
so it it works so well especially if you
can capture the energy that was the
thing that I thought was very impressive
was the ads were dope uh the music was
awesome it felt upbeat energetic like
they just really leaned into all the
youth and vigor that had been drained
out by Biden it's crazy but I think
it'll work well it's okay so there's a
lot that's really interesting there and
particularly just like the way that
propaganda works and this is what I was
was kind of alluding to before but the
the they study this stuff and are really
really good at it and there's a reason
why because it's very effective I would
also say that there is even outside of
politics right and this is why I'm
somewhat sympathetic to people who fall
for this stuff because there is you
know for all of us don't know anything
about the vast majority of things and in
order for us to survive
we as as we were talking about before we
get into specialization and with that
comes expertise and with that comes
trusting experts and I certainly do this
constantly you know I mean like there's
whatever it's like I like I'm not handy
at all um but you know my hot water
heater broke down the other day and I I
do realize when the water isn't hot
anymore and then you call your hot water
heater guy and they're like well you
need a new hot water heater and I'm like
yeah it looks like I need a new one like
I don't know maybe I don't need a new
one but he told me I did and I have to
trust him and I do this Con with my
mechanic with my you know like with my
plumber there's a million different
people I'm just kind of trusting and
they have the expertise so I defer to
them and so I understand where and even
in those fields too you know we all have
this uh this this type of thing where
like if you just learn something and
then someone asks you about it a few
days later you might present it as if
you just know that even though you just
found it out like a few few days before
cuz we all kind of have our own
narcissistic you know thing and like
you're kind of like oh I like to sound
like I know what I'm talking about or
whatever and so when it comes to
politics most people have a lot of other
things to worry about and God bless them
you know thank God everybody doesn't
obsess over Politics the way I do
because we would all starve to death if
we did and um you know it's good that
other people are focusing on making food
um but you know you turn on CNN and a
guy in a suit who's an expert is talking
to another guy in a suit who's an expert
and it feels a lot better for you to
just remember what they said and then go
say that to your friend and now you kind
of sound like you know something about
it so there's that aspect of it too just
regular human being just how we are with
everything except this one area happens
to be particularly corrupt and filled
with Liars but so the flip side I would
just say to what you were talking about
before which is again what's so
fascinating about being alive today is
that so you have this um so say there's
the tactic right of repeating things
over and over again and before say the
internet you might not have even noticed
it like even someone paying attention
you may not have noticed that like
they're saying the same exact thing in
the same you know Michael malice uh who
you mentioned earlier he was the first
one to point out to me I thought it was
a really uh great observation he goes uh
this was back when Joe Rogan was getting
uh viciously attacked over taking Ivor
mechon and he goes notice how they they
all say horse
dewormer there's like 5,000 things that
ior mechon does they picked this one and
every single one of them will say it
over and over again horsey warmer hor
horsey warmer horsey warmer it's like
they they drill home this one thing you
know what I mean but now so in the 90s
if you were just watching CNN all day
you just kind of leave and you're just
like oh horsey warmer huh you know but
now you see a compil
on the internet and it's almost like
their own weapon gets turned on them
because now you can use it to unprogram
someone and go yo what are the odds that
they're all saying the exact same thing
I mean I was just talking about it the
other day it's amazing you watch Bill
Clinton uh one of the best public
speakers you know in in the last 30
years in American politics in the last
50 years in American politics and he's
up there and in the middle of this this
Bill Clinton speech he just goes and
Mala Harris brings joy and you're like
oh what a shocker that you picked the
same word what a weird coincidence that
you had the exact same word you also
thought Joy you know but so and then I'm
sorry I'll wrap on this but one of the
things that is interesting to me if if
you kind of zoom out a little bit is
like okay so the George W Bush
Administration lied us into war in Iraq
and they like the case for this is
undeniable they knew Saddam hin did not
have weapons of mass destruction the
neocons and his administration had been
trying to fight this war since well
before 911 they knew he wasn't involved
in 911 they even wrote in a project for
a New American Century that they would
need another Pearl Harbor type event in
order to get the wars in the Middle East
that they wanted so they they just lied
through their teeth now what were the
consequences of that I mean aside from
the war and the hundreds of thousands of
dead people and the trillions of dollars
wasted and all of that the the
consequences were enorm I mean like the
you have conservatives today who have no
trust for the FBI and the CIA and the
military that that was Unthinkable 20
years ago that you'd be in this
situation and so a lot of these
government lies especially on massive
issues they have they have slowly and
then all at once eroded trust and you
know I remember cuz I was I was totally
against the lockdowns at the beginning
of covid you know I had easy priors to
be against the lockdowns I'm a
Libertarian and I think government's
corrupt and people ought to be free so
it was pretty easy to be against the
lockdowns from my perspective but I
remember getting so much push back from
people about how dangerous this was to
not before lockdowns and when it really
when the floodgates really started
opening and people really started
listening to me about it was when the
Black lives matter protests happened and
the entire media flipped on a dime and
said no no no now you can go outside now
you can go outside it's okay cuz you're
protest testing racism and it was like
however you feel about George Floyd
however you feel about black lives
matter however you feel about Co that's
[ __ ] you know what I mean like it's
[ __ ] that because of science
yesterday you had to stay inside but
today you can go protest racism you know
and so there is this thing where the
more desperate they get with the
propaganda it can also backfire now and
so that's the that's the thing that's
really fun to me it's like yeah this is
why I'm not as convinced as you that
it's going to work it's like yeah maybe
maybe it will but there's a whole lot
more people aware of propaganda now and
especially with the internet it just
gives you this tool it's like now like
the son who's on to all this stuff can
go talk to his mother and father and be
like you know they're playing you oh and
by the way here on my phone here's a
clip of them all saying the exact same
thing you see what they're doing to you
and so I just think we have a fighting
shot to beat this thing in a way we
never did
before yeah I'll agree with that very
wholeheartedly which is why I do my
podcast like you I think people do
respond to ideas I just think that it
the the political Machinery is probably
right you're really all pitching to The
Independents you're pitching to the
small group of people who will actually
take in new information and make a new
decision I am just terrified by the
number of people that either are
manipulated and don't realize they're
being manipulated or the people who
actually want to be manipulated which is
a
very fascinating thing there's a an old
80s song by the Ure rhythmics uh and the
line is some people um want to abuse you
and some people want to be abused and I
always thought whoa that is dark but
nonetheless true all right man I have to
ask now that I have you on in particular
um help me think through Israel Gaza um
what I really want to understand are the
base assumption
that drive your thinking so I've watched
a lot of debates on this and what I find
is people don't argue at the level of
Base assumption and so they end up um
take Norm finlin when he was on Lex with
uh Destiny and what was driving me crazy
as a viewer was Norm said uh Israel
shouldn't exist the state of Israel
should not exist and every word out of
his mouth after that is simply in line
with that and so if you don't
go okay well if if it just ought not EX
ex then the only thing that we should be
talking about is either me trying to
convince you that it ought to exist or
us talking about what we do with the
fact that it exists and we have to in
his Paradigm unwind it but of course
they don't they just go back and forth
about what deal was offered when and all
that and it's like Norman's been very
clear his base assumption is it should
not exist so as you somebody who's not
partisan as you think through what this
very complicated conundrum is what what
are the I mean handful I would assume of
Base assumptions that you have that
guide your thinking well I guess my
starting point is more that um that
people have rights or that people ought
to have rights and it's immoral to
violate the natural rights of human
beings and that includes you know the
the right to live your life uh to own
property to um not be killed or or you
know uh injured or things like that
unless you're initiating violence
against somebody else so that is kind of
my starting point for all matters
political is like self- ownership
private property rights and the
non-aggression principle and so that's
what I that's how I try to judge all of
these conflicts including um the the one
in between Israel and the Palestinians I
do not agree with uh Norman finlin on on
that I I don't remember that part where
he actually said Israel shouldn't exist
um it was a long debate though uh but I
would I I do agree though that let's say
the way Israel was founded was was
illegitimate and immoral I think that
Norman finlin and I you know he's a very
uh
left-wing um I think socialist type and
I'm a like hardcore La Fair libertarian
and so I do think while we you know and
and I've learned a lot from him and he
has like en encyclopedic memory of every
UN resolution that's ever been passed on
the subject and it's is very impressive
um but I do think that there's probably
some fundamental disagreements there and
so in a sense you know I would say look
even if you want to say what the
Europeans did to the Native Americans
was horrible and was illegitimate at the
time that it was done my conclusion from
that would not be there for the United
States of America shouldn't exist and we
should all go back to Europe or
something like that it's like I don't
think that's right I think the fact that
um injustices have happened in the past
it shouldn't warrant injustices uh
happening in the present or in the
future however I would say that to the
extent that there are Native Americans
still around which there still are some
uh they ought to have their full rights
protected and so I would also uh like
why say in Israel I don't think it's
practical um or morally correct that
Israel should cease to exist and all the
Jews living there should like go back to
Europe or something like that but I do
think it should at least be acknowledged
that the way Israel founded the country
involved violating a lot of Palestinians
natural rights and at this point you got
to stop doing that and you got to allow
them to have their natural rights and
and that that means either a one-state
or a two-state solution um I'm kind of
open to either although I personally
tend to to lean toward a two-state
solution okay um that certainly all
makes sense to uh me as somebody who's
on the outside of this and that I
haven't studied it nearly as much as you
um what is the push
back from people who are being sincere
not [ __ ] push
back um well I mean I guess I I do
generally
speaking find that the the
pro-israeli side of the argument
typically relies on a double standard in
terms of the value of Palestinian life
versus the value of Israeli life and I
do think they they tend to rely on a
kind of very one-sided rewriting of the
history uh um which is you know I mean
again I'm not I'm I'm I'm trying really
here to take on the best argument and
not take on the worst argument but I
mean I'm I'm just saying that like in I
mean I've been in debates where people
have presented it as like Israel never
did anything wrong and the Palestinians
were always just the aggressors and
Israel was always just defending
themselves I think that probably the
best version of the uh the other
argument is that um well Israel has to
do whatever they have to do to defeat
Hamas and they it's it's horrible that
they have to kill these innocent people
uh along the way but if they don't then
more innocent people will die as a
result of that I think it's Pro or and
and you know they have to get the
hostages back and they have to have a
full surrender from Hamas the I just
that's kind of the best argument I could
think back and I think it's a very
flawed one and the you know I think that
um there's certainly no guarantee that
more people would die
if Hamas is short of uh being completely
annihilated uh I don't think as all the
intelligence reports seem to indicate
it's it's possible for Israel to um
completely eliminate Hamas short of
killing every man woman and child in
Gaza and um and I think that this type
of uh military campaign is is likely to
produce a lot more Hamas or Hamas like
groups okay uh is this a moral uh
framework that you use to assess the
conflict yes I mean there's there's a
there's a practical component to it as
well but yes I would say primarily it's
a moral component okay and uh when you
go into the Practical component what
framework do you use is it like real
politique is it diplomacy what's the
framework I mean I I think that the
framework would be um what's best for
the United States of America America
what's best for Israel and what's best
for Palestine um with primarily what's
best for the United States of America
being my my primary
concern what is our interest in
this well
um you know
there's in in
actuality our interest is that um number
one there are the same interests that
support all of these wars like War um
there are people who are
ideologically um very like on a
foundational level who are in very
powerful positions believe that
protecting Israel um and protecting
Israel's interest is the most important
thing that the United States of America
can do um and I think there are also do
they give reasons for that because so um
I'm I'm not so new to this that I don't
have um you know understanding of
basically what's going on but the one
thing that I have not spent any time
researching is um other than that this
is a very longstanding Ally and I
certain hey if we've told somebody we're
going to do something we should do it
that to me is um going back to this is a
moral thing if you tell a friend that I
hey I would if XYZ thing happened I will
show up for you and you don't show up
that's bad from my moral calculus um
well I mean unless you're telling a
friend you're going to do something
really really immoral then maybe it's
better to break your word than to do
that immoral thing well I would hope
that you just never offer to do
something immoral and that sort of part
of The Pact because then we can tease it
apart right so you're taking a moral
lens on this and so that it makes it
very easy to start asking those
questions I will give the US that um
it's just understood if you're doing
something that's immoral we're not going
to back you um so I think these are teas
out able things so for now I'll say uh
the moral lens is the right lens that
the US is not going to do something they
think is immoral but this is an ally
that they have made a promise to they
don't yet feel that um we've gone uh so
far past whatever Gray Zone that this is
obviously immoral because I think the
Biden Administration even is hedging
their language please tone it down
please don't do this like they're
they're saying those things so I don't
want to um pretend they're not so I get
it it's going to be super gray it's not
you know just a super clear-cut line but
anyway that um moral framing they are
there to help an ally who they don't
believe has gone too far if you will but
what I don't understand is um and I just
don't understand what is the historical
relation between the US and Israel that
has brought us together so closely is it
just that it's the only democracy uh
western style democracy in the Middle
East well that is certainly what a lot
of people say um that it's the the only
democracy in the region and so we have
to support them um there's I've heard
people make arguments that we have a lot
of common enemies and therefore that's
why we have to support them um I've
heard people make arguments that you
know there's uh they're a good trading
partner and uh we you know our
militaries help each other and things
like that again I just think um I think
all of these arguments are very very
flawed um and that's not out of any like
hatred of Israel as a country or
certainly of a hatred of Jewish people
or anything like that but I do just
think that there's uh I think all of
those arguments are wrong I think
essentially Israel is not a democracy um
they they're you kind of I mean are a
democracy inside Israel proper um
however you know they've had control of
Gaza and the West Bank since
1967 and none of those people have any
voting rights or any rights whatsoever
for that matter and I just don't think
you know I mean maybe you could get away
with that for like a few years after a
war you occupy an area and then turn it
over to them being independent but if
you've kept an area to totally
controlled for you know since 1967 and
none of those people have any voting
rights at
all I I don't know how you can consider
yourself a true democracy I think the
the term apartheid state makes a lot
more
sense okay and do you believe the
narrative that Israel does not want to
be controlling that area they would
rather be hands off I know I think it
was back in 2005 they withdrew and it's
like hey cool you guys do your thing
we're just protecting the Border does
that narrative just ring completely
false yeah I mean you know like I think
if you don't want to be occupying an
area then you know well they're sure
going about it all wrong if they really
don't want to be occupying that area and
you know the the pull out in in 2005 is
totally
um let's just say what actually happened
there is much different than the way
it's spun by a lot of pro-israeli people
and it is true that they ended the
military occupation and they um and they
ended the settlements in Gaza there
something I I'd have to double check the
numbers on this but if you go check it's
something like 8,000 people uh that they
pulled out of those settlements and then
in the next year they put like 15,000 in
the West Bank and they then you you can
read about this in their own writing
where they essentially said that they
were like well the whole you know the
whole purpose of this is to freeze the
peace process because now we can say hey
look we gave them their own State here
in Gaza and this way we can keep
building up in the West Bank it's if you
if you uh go go uh search um uh smotrich
uh Google smotrich and um uh for
Malahide as he said what we're doing
here is essentially putting the peace
process in for Malahide and yes it's
true that since 20 5 Israel has not
technically militarily occupied Gaza as
they had from 1967 to 2005 as they do
from 1967 to this day in the West Bank
but they put a total blockade around the
country and they they control who and
what goes in and out they control the
airspace the sea space I guess there is
no airspace anymore because they don't
have an airport um they they control how
far you the you can fish off the coast
of Gaza I mean they have they have the
thing under complete control it's as
Sheldon Richmond uh put it where he said
it's as if the prison guards all left
the prison and surrounded the prison and
then they said look we freed
everybody but that's not really freeing
everybody that's just imprisoning them
without there being guards in the prison
and so no I don't think there there has
been a ton of deals on the the table
over the years to give the West Bank and
Gaza some degree of autonomy and the
pro-israeli side will say well it's
these the Arabs just always keep turning
down the deals and we offered them all
these deals and they keep turning them
down but at the end of the day you don't
really even need a partner to stop
occupying a place you could just stop
occupying them and so I don't I don't
buy into it at all that they really sure
do hate that they have to do this but
they've just had to do this for over 50
years do you think that the Israelis
believe that um the Palestinians are a
security
threat sure yeah yeah no AB absolutely
and and the I mean you know when you say
the Israelis there are obviously like
you know we're collectivizing here and
there's there's people in the you know
there's the the war cabinet and some mom
are not all the same people um I think
it's I think it's pretty uh it it's
probably widely believed and for good
reason that there are legitimate
security uh concerns terrorism is
something Israel's been dealing with um
since its Inception
essentially okay um the base assumption
that I run about why the uh the
right-wing Coalition that Netanyahu
represents uh wants wants to put it on
from Malahide wants to sponsor homos
wants to make sure that they stayed in
power long enough maybe he even turned a
blind eye my thinking won't change
whether he turned a blind eye or was
completely um taken off course but that
he Because he believes that they're a
security threat of significant enough
proportion that they have to be um dealt
with in some way that um that drives all
the things now the policy might be a
terrible policy but if I'm right about
the underlying base assumption I at
least then understand meaning I can
rearticulate their decision-making
process not that I agree with it but
that I can rearticulate their
decision-making process do you think
there's anything else um underlying that
that keeps them wanting to blockade so
they're not the prison guards aren't in
the prison but they're still standing
outside the prison so um okay so there
are these hard right- wiers in Israel a
couple clicks to the right of Benjamin
Netanyahu who he's now Allied himself
with um a lot of this is because he had
he had lost all the liberals so badly
that he kind of had to Ally with some of
the more far right-wing uh parties their
constituencies which are a minority to
be sure in Israel they I I think are
largely motivated by religious uh belief
beliefs and they believe that Judea and
Samaria as they call it is supposed to
be part of Israel um and there's a lot
of their holy sites and stuff are in
there so I think those guys are largely
motivated by wanting the West Bank by
wanting the West Bank to be part of
Israel and of course Netanyahu did show
up to the UN a couple weeks before uh
October 7th with a map of Israel that
included the West Bank and Gaza all is
Israel but they certainly don't care
about Gaza as much they really care
about the West Bank that's why the
settlements continue um to this day in
the West Bank and so I don't think
exactly that they're first and foremost
motivated by the security concern
although the security concern is there
and it is real I mean it's not as if
there aren't Arab terrorists who are
trying to kill Israelis Benjamin
Netanyahu I've always thought is more
motivated by um by kind of not that it's
a religious thing with him but that it's
more like a legacy thing that if he gets
the West Bank is part of Israel then he
goes down as the next great Israeli
Prime Minister and and all of that stuff
now I'm not saying the security concerns
don't play into this but the truth is
that Benjamin Netanyahu up till October
7th at least in his rhetoric was almost
always downplaying the threat of Hamas
we can control the height of the flame
was what he bragged to his other uh you
know concent members there
um uh or his other lud party members in
the knesset and so I don't know I you
know I'm sure it's true for certainly
for a lot of the Israeli people that is
a major concern of theirs and
understandably so I mean these are
people who you know lived through the
second in tiata the many of them lived
through October 7th you could understand
where their concern would be uh security
issues um th this was also the concern
of many of the people who were opposed
to abolitionism uh in in the United
States of America many of the people who
didn't want to abolish slavery said that
they had real security concerns that if
you freed all these slaves all these
people you've been enslaving for so long
they were going to try to kill you if
you gave them their freedom and I can
also understand why they had those
concerns you know like those are
legitimate concerns the thing is that
you just go like in the it's an old
Thomas Jefferson quote right which he
said I always butcher this I bring it up
a lot too but where he said uh we have
the wolf by the ear and we can neither
afford to hold on to it nor to safely
let it go and that was him talking about
the slavery dilemma it's like well what
are we going to do we going to make them
all citizens and then they have second
amendment rights you're telling me these
people we were just enslaving can go buy
a gun now they're going to come kill all
of us and you could understand where
that's a legitimate concern but any
decent person looking back at that now
also recognizes that you're going yeah
but you can't enslave people
you know so I do think there are
security concerns on the Israeli side
and I think even legitimate ones the
thing is that you just you can't hold
the wolf by the ear forever and at a
certain point you got to just pull the
bandaid off and say like okay we're not
going to be in the business of occupying
other people
anymore yeah it's interesting and look
everything is so different and I fully
understand that but given what happened
in Japan and uh Germany in World War II
the fact that even with all of the
horrendous
atrocities um we were able to help
rebuild and then get the hell out so um
look there's geography concerns I was
asking about that I don't know about the
get the hell out part but we did help uh
rebuild think we still got tro feel like
we I think we still got troops we have
anything you would consider an occupying
force in Japan no I'm not suggesting uh
it's it's an occupying Force exactly but
uh I'll just say that the military
presence in in Germany and Japan the get
the hell out part comes a lot later than
the uh the rebuild part is all I'm
saying but no I'm not I'm not really
taking is yeah that that that'll open a
can of worms that unfortunately I know
we don't have time for but the the one
last thing that I want to map your uh
base assumptions around is the argument
that you're going to hear a lot is the
um lack of moral equivalence between
what happened on October 7th which is a
barbaric Act of terrorism
uh versus a military response to a Barb
barbaric Act of terrorism plus them um
having hostages uh does that make sense
to you does that ring Hollow is it yes
that's the right way to think about it
but the response is just
disproportionate or how do you think of
that no I mean I so I understand it and
it does make some degree of sense to me
but I think it's the wrong way to think
about things and I think that on a you
know on a human level there sometimes
more advanced societies and more
advanced governments what they end up
doing with is they they institutionalize
things um and they they make things much
more advanced and less primitive and
barbaric and so it's very easy to see
you know say like if you're you know if
if you're driving around in Mexico and
this is kind of a famous thing in Mexico
right that if you get pulled over by a
cop you can often just throw him a few
bucks
and they'll leave you alone and it's
very easy for us to look at that and go
like look at the corruption down there
you know and clearly it is a much more
corrupt system it's a much more nakedly
corrupt system um our corruption comes
in different forms now if you get pulled
over by a cop in the United States of
America probably don't try giving them
money that that's almost certainly not
going to work that's just not the way
our corruption works because our
corruption isn't primitive and barbaric
our corruption is more like um the
prison guard Union will Lobby to keep
mandatory minimums for
marijuana now that's a much more
sophisticated form of corruption that
doesn't feel quite as gross and
primitive but it's on a much more
enormous scale and the result of it is
that people's lives are ruined over
something that is clearly very very
corrupt every bit as corrupt as paying
off aop to leave you alone and you can
argue much more corrupt and so on a
human level I understand where someone
breaks out of their cage and comes out
to like just rip apart any person that
they come across that feels a lot
different than like someone pushing a
button and sending a missile into a
building that kills 40 people even if
that guy only killed 15 people it still
seems much more primitive and corrupt
and there's not nothing to that like you
know if you if you had to go out to
lunch with like an IDF pilot or a Hamas
terrorist you'd probably pick the IDF
pilot like that's a more civilized
person who is kind of doing a job and
can probably compartmentalize that and
not be a monster at home whereas I'd
imagine that Hamas terrorist is probably
unable to compartmentalize that and is
probably a nightmare to live around or
to go to lunch with however
the fact that this terrorism if you will
is so much more sophisticated and so
much more
systematized does not really remove from
what it what it is and you know as
somebody like I have two little children
um I think that most people out there
who have kids or maybe have nieces and
nephews or like some kids you you
know if somebody were to kill your kid I
I I don't know that it would be like it
would be of much uh relief to you to
find out that like don't worry it was
just collateral damage in a strike don't
worry we just we knew your kid was in
that building but we knew a bad guy was
also in that building and so we decided
to blow up the whole building you know
bro on the other side of that it's still
the same thing that happened to you like
the same crime is the same crime that
happened to you and so there is this
kind of tendency for us to even like
even to look at things like terrorism
verse collateral damage you know what do
you call it here look if if there if
there was a really bad guy um and he was
a murderer and he went into a a school
and you know he's using them as human
Shields or whatever you know and he's
hiding behind all these kids and then
the local police department came in and
just blew up the school and killed all
the kids and the we wouldn't sit here
and go like well that's collateral
damage and hey it's on this guy because
he was using a human Shields we'd be
outraged at the local police department
and we would be like you guys are a
bunch of monsters who just murdered all
of these children now I understand for
practicality reasons things are a little
bit different when you're dealing with
conflicts within you know a police
Force's jurisdiction than within
different territories but in terms of
the moral act like if you're on the
other side of that if you for a second
put yourself in the Palestinian shoes
you can understand where that's just
like a totally unacceptable thing to say
to them like no it's terrorism when
anyone breaks out a Gaza and kills
people in Israel but we can absolutely
decimate Gaza and you'll just have to
accept that that's that's just
Collateral Damage I think that's an
unreasonable thing to ask a group of
people to
accept um I get why it's unreasonable to
ask the group of people to accept it and
I think that you have accurately
identified that um not only will it just
be totally meaningless to them whatever
weird distinction you're trying to make
you're also going to create more people
that will hate you and they will come
and kill you later and so from that
perspective it's just a god- awful
strategy uh and I know that you heard um
Coleman Hughes address this on Joe Rogan
but I found his argument pretty
compelling which is that um this is
actually Hamas is very intelligent you
can think what you want but it is a an
unbelievably effective strategy to turn
the Western World against Israel to um
be willing to let your people die to not
want them to leave because you know
they're going to be bombed to have
specifically done this to court a
response and that you want the footage
of um the women and children just being
slaughtered endlessly
um that's a that's a really smart
strategy and if we go well we're just
going to let him get away with it
because we're afraid to kill them and to
have this footage and quite frankly just
to do such a horrible thing um then they
can you know Peck us to death forever
coming over and doing these pot shots
killing a hundred here a thousand there
500 here um it would really be the
perfect get out of jail free card and I
don't see how you can let that stand
yeah but yeah but I mean I I I think
there's a there's a false binary being
created there because it's not a choice
between doing what Israel is doing and
just letting them get away with it I
mean it's like look after not look this
is this is the TR this is true with all
terrorism with all asymmetric Warfare in
general that they're always trying to to
prod you into an overreaction because
that's the whole game right like Osama
Bin Laden didn't think he could take
down the United States of America by
knocking down the Twin Towers but he did
think he could get us to invade
Afghanistan and bankrupt ourselves just
like they had done with the Soviet Union
and so okay so the answer then is to not
invade Afghanistan and bankrupt yourself
but that doesn't mean you couldn't have
done the special ops uh attacks that
took out 90 plus percent of the al-Qaeda
bases which is what we did immediately
after 911 by Christmas of 2001 almost
all of al-Qaeda in uh Afghanistan had
been destroyed we then invaded the
country and decided we were going to
fight a regime change war against the
Taliban which went on for another
catastrophic 20 years so the look before
Netanyahu the Israel always dealt with
their terrorism problem with targeted
assassinations special ops things of
that nature they never dealt with it as
just a problem for the regular old
military to go in and just totally
decimate the place and so look nobody's
suggesting that you shouldn't find and
target the people who were directly
involved in October 7th no one
suggesting you shouldn't do everything
you can do to get the hostages out but
if the game from Hamas was that which I
think it was I think Coleman's correct
about that was that we're going to
provoke Israel into this overreaction
that will turn World opinion against
them well then they certainly didn't
have to do it in this Reckless of a way
and and who knows how many of their own
hostages Israel's killed I mean they
admit to a few but who really knows when
you see these cities
destroyed what who's really accounting
for where all the hostages were um I
think that again it's it's not a choice
between oh we do absolutely nothing and
let let him get away with that or we
level the place um the truth is there
were a lot of different possibilities
for how Israel could have responded to
this and almost all of them would have
been a much better idea than what
they've done so is your base assumption
that uh keeping with the things that
Netanyahu has said himself that have
come out that um he wanted this frozen
piece he wanted a moment to be able to
get rid of them that really it was just
this attack happened to meet a threshold
where it was like okay now we can do the
real gloves off and get to what we
really want which is just the the total
um decimation of Gaza itself you know my
my best understanding of the situation
is that netanyahu's plan for propping up
Hamas was that um he would thwart the
creation of a Palestinian State and it
would kill the peace process and then he
could embark on negotiating with the
other Arab countries without ever having
to make a deal with the Palestinians and
he essentially felt like that was
working and he in his own words Hamas
was the the fire which whose flame they
could control the height of I don't
think October 7th was part of the plan I
think it has totally decimated his
legacy and he knows that and now he's in
this desperate game of number one trying
to be you know it's like it's not like
911 that happened like on George W
Bush's first year you know like he's the
longest serving prime minister in
Israeli history and it just happened at
the end this is his like and he's the
guy who took the hard approach that
we're gonna thwart a Palestinian State
and we're going to prop up Hamas and all
of this stuff I think he realizes he's
politically done after this and so now
he's searching for some type of Victory
and he also knows that as soon as the
war's over he's over and so he's kind of
got to keep the thing going so I don't
necessarily think it's as
as like he wanted this war all along I
think he had awful Reckless policies
that ultimately culminated in October
7th and is now in a politically
impossible situation and seems to be you
know as uh as John mimer has pointed out
seems to be almost um in some type of
like psychotic self-destructive spree
here there that he's unable to like pull
himself back in from
and how do you make sense of the fact
that the um that Hamas won't give back
the
hostages oh I mean I I think that it's
as easy as um look the part of it is is
what you and Coleman were just saying
that they they see this as a victory
they think that they're turning World
opinion against Israel and they are
they're not wrong about that um and then
also I think part of it is that that is
that's the leverage that they have so
they're trying I mean there's been all
types of like negotiations going on and
there there's been some of them that are
probably the fault of Hamas some are the
fault of the Israelis some are the fault
of the Americans but Hamas just uh the
other day it was reported said they
would work out a deal to return the
hostages but they didn't agree to
Israel's terms so I think they do see
this as their last bargaining chip which
it kind of is and they're trying to get
the best deal they
can brother this is a much bigger
conversation I know that we are out of
time uh hopefully this is the first of
many thank you for walking me through
through um all of the base assumptions I
think it is a super uh helpful way to
really map somebody's thinking uh where
can people follow along with you oh um
uh part of the problem.com is uh where
my show streams if you want to support
us you can you can go over there and
then it's of course YouTube and Spotify
and all the other places that you can uh
you can get internet shows um and comic
Dave Smith if you want to come see me
out on the road uh that's my website I
love it all right anybody that's deeply
invested in the Israel Hamas Palestine
uh drama please forgive that I know we
are just scratching the surface and
there's much more complexity that we did
not get into I do not consider this a
full full exploration uh but did want to
start the conversation with Dave so
thank you guys uh for sticking with us
this far and hopefully there will be a
part two at some point in the future all
right if you haven't already be sure to
subscribe everybody and until next time
my friends be legendary take care peace
if you like this conversation check out
this episode to learn more first of all
to answer your question directly
destabilizing the United States would be
very difficult because at the end of the
day the US is a we are a strong unifying
culture when we are attacked it
supersedes all other things that's that
we saw that with 911 we saw it in the
Vietnam