Joe Rogan Experience Review podcast - 439 Joe Rogan Experience Review of Douglas Murray and Dave Smith

Episode Date: April 18, 2025

For more Rogan exclusives support us on Patreon patreon.com/JREReview   Thanks to this weeks sponsors: Go to get dot stash dot com slash JRER to see how you can receive TWENTY-FIVE DOLLARS towards your first stock purchase and to view important disclosures.     Draft Kings www.draftkings.com Download the DraftKings Casino app NOW use Promo code JRER. Just sign up with code JRER and wager a minimum of five dollars to receive FIVE HUNDRED CASINO SPINS ON A FEATURED GAME That’s code JRER, only on DraftKings Casino. The crown is yours. Apple https://apps.apple.com/ca/app/draftkings-casino-real-money/id1462060332 Android https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.draftkings.casino&hl=en_US&gl=US&pli=1 Gambling problem? Call one eight hundred GAMBLER or visit w w w dot one eight hundred gambler dot net. In Connecticut, Help is available for problem gambling call eight eight eight seven eight nine seven seven seven seven or visit c c p g dot org. Please play responsibly. twenty one plus. Physically present in Connecticut, Michigan, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, West Virginia only. Void in Ontario. Eligibility and other restrictions apply. One per new customer. Must opt-in and make minimum five dollar deposit within seven days (one hundred sixty eight hours) of registering new account. Max. match one hundred dollars in casino credits which require one time play-thru within seven days (one hundred sixty eight hours). See terms at casino dot draftkings dot com slash new player offer twenty twenty four. Go to BUY RAYCON dot com slash jrer to get up TWENTY percent off sitewide!

You are listening to the Joe Rogan Experience Review Podcast. We find little nuggets, treasures, valuable pieces of gold in the Joe Rogan Experience Podcast and pass them on to you, perhaps expand a little bit. We are not associated with Joe Rogan in any way. Think of us as the talking dead to Joe's walking dead. You're listening to the Joe Rogan Experience Review. What a bizarre thing we've created. Now with your host Adam Thorne.

Might either be the worst podcast or the best one of all time. Two, one, go. Enjoy the show. Hello ladies and gentlemen and welcome back to another episode of the Joe Rogan experience review. Today I'm joined by Peter, what's cracking? Oh, not too much. Good day to you. Good day to you, sir. And we are doing the Douglas Murray and Dave Smith episode. Which I got a lot of emails about, a lot of texts about. People were excited for this.

I think maybe they were surprised by this even people that I know that I had no idea was aware of who Douglas Murray was I was kind pressed well it really speaks to his reach and authority in this area of debate. Yeah, he's he seems to be the go to guy for, uh, for, he seems to be the go to guy for, for people our age and a little younger and a little older. Yeah. Yeah. And you know, disclaimer from me, um, I have a lot of respect for Douglas. Um, that I agree on many of his points often,

even when I am unsure or possibly don't, I always respect how he breaks down the argument. Um, you know, and in terms of debate, I love how he can hold court. can hold court, he can get his point across, but he often will take a step back, kind of lower his cadence and bring the energy to a different place. So it's like almost less likely to stay as elevated and argumentative. He does a really good job of that. And in addition, I've got a lot of respect for Dave Smith. And I, you know, the one thing that Douglas was saying through this podcast that I honestly don't fully agree with, though I see where he's coming from,

is that podcasters or just people that are like, quote unquote, doing their own research have a valid voice. It's like, yeah, I get it. Generally and through time, we have taken a step back to the expert class, the professional class, those with the, you know, the scholarly reviews and so forth when it comes to being historians or scientists or whatever, right? It's like there's a reason experts, there's a, well, there's a reason that experts exist and they're respected and listened to because they've put the work in. Um, but I think other

people have a voice and I think where Douglas is coming from is he's like it's dangerous because it can confuse people and just because you're popular and you have an opinion, you know, doesn't mean you should be listened to because you might drive people in a direction that's been debunked. Whereas, I think where Dave Smith and Rogan are coming from is it's like, hey, it's up drive people in a direction that's been debunked. Whereas, I think where Dave Smith and Rogan are coming from is it's like, hey, it's up to the individual to kind of work through this.

And there could be mistakes. Dave says a lot of stuff like, who are you gonna believe, the experts or your lying eyes? Like, we can see this sort of stuff. We can definitely form an opinion about the information that's out there. The information is out there. The atrocities occur, Dave doesn't like that going down,

and he says as much. Yeah. And I think it leans into that whole idea that people can't be trusted to make good decisions. So they just have to wait for the smartest people to tell them. And that takes a lot of power and ownership away from regular folks. It's like, they can make their own decisions too.

And guess what? We've been lied to by the experts before. They're not always right. Well, Dave brought that up. He brought that up as an example about COVID. And I think, I think that that was a tough one for Douglas to defend because he also was kind of on the side of speaking out about it and also not an expert in that area yet they were they were pretty correct on their assertions. I mean, it came from a lab folks.

Racist, bigot. Right? How dare I? How dare I? It's like if there was a marshmallow factory and then all of a sudden there's just this weird Marshmallow monster attack and they're like it came from came from the fairground across the river You'd be like well The Boy Scouts let their s'mores get out of hand Or was it or was it the weapons grade? Marshmallow man there we go that might be the most ridiculous example. I've ever come up with but I like it You know Douglas did come out on the defensive

early on I think he knew that they were gonna be be kind of teaming up, Dave and Joe. And, uh, it's kind of hard to sit neutral in a debate when you know, there's like a type of two V one. Um, but even before we get into like breaking down their points and moving through, I would say as debates go, even potentially contentious ones where people have strong opinions, this is a much better example of how a debate should be. So I do give credit to both of them for that.

And, you know, I don't think they left, I don't think they left hating each other, you know, maybe there's an arm wrestle in that future but now they have they might do a headbutt contest or something mm-hmm I those guys are not the kind to get in to get into it physically no of course not too big of a brain that's it Too big of a brain. That's it Yeah, he did he did kind of come in Douglas did trying to minimize the credibility of some of the opponents of the opinions that he has Which I don't know is is probably a good tactic for debate but

It's I guess if you want to make a debate really short that's a good way of doing it right but you know he nipped he nipped picked Joe's guests you know right off the bat right off the bat he was he was saying maybe you should have some more on this side less on this side, but it's You know, it's his show. So I mean that's a moot point but also Joe's show is very popular and Douglas is saying yeah, but now you have people that are less informed following this because so many people listened and

following this because so many people listened. And I think Joe is always trying to point to the fact that, hey, well, they get to make their minds up. And, you know, is the end result this, you know, ignorant, racist, something, something that comes out of it that otherwise wouldn't have been? No, I don't't think so either because there's other elements to that Like it's one thing to be a conspiracy theorist, but to be pulled down a road of hate Requires your own hatred which you had before you listen to any fucking podcast yeah, the bias was existing already and And if you just read any of Douglas's works he examines

Everything he can get his hands on and I'm I'm I'm inclined to defer to his wisdom and is his authority as a You know quote expert if he even has one His books speak to me Also, I can disagree with a few of his bigger points that he brings to this discussion. Yeah. Well, and that's a big, that's an important point in general, is you don't, you probably shouldn't agree with every point that anyone agree with everything that you're saying. It's like it's fine. People say it to me all the time because I review Rogan. So if they don't like Rogan, they have their two or three points that they

probably didn't even listen to him say on the podcast, but heard about him saying on the view or read some article about it. And they're like, yeah, but you can't agree with that. And I'm like, well, actually I don't. This podcast is brought to you by DraftKings Casino. The great rewards hunt is on. So join the adventure with DraftKings Casino. The great rewards hunt is on. So join the adventure with DraftKings Casino. For fun seekers, follow the trail to huge jackpots, weekly bonuses and exclusive games. But the excitement is only getting started because new players can get 500 casino spins on a featured game just sign up with code JRER and wager a

minimum of $5 to receive 500 casino spins on a featured game only on the most rewarding place to play DraftKings casino the crown is yours gambling problem call 1-800-GAMBLER in Connecticut. Help is available for problem gambling. Call 888-789-7777 or visit ccpg.org. Please play responsibly. 21 plus, physically present in Michigan, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, West Virginia only, void in Connecticut and Ontario, eligibility restrictions apply, new customers only, non-withdrawable, casino spins valid for featured game only and expire in 168 hours. 68 hours see terms a casino dot draft kings comm slash promos ends 427 25 at 1159

p.m. Eastern Standard But that doesn't make me disagree on all the other many insightful and Interesting things that he has done and said and that's not a requirement for me Right, you know, I always like to throw back. Well, who do you agree with? and interesting things that he has done and said. And that's not a requirement for me. Right. You know, I always like to throw back. Well, who do you agree with 100% all the time? And almost no one has an answer. Sometimes some people throw some stuff out.

Somebody recently was like, well, I really think Kamala was just an inspiration. I didn't know what else to say back. Can you say to that? What can you say? What can you say? Yeah. What has been before will be again. But only if you're unburdened by what has been.

The passage of time and also yellow school buses. Those Venn diagrams really got her going. I get that. Yeah. So I just feel like it's such a bad example of, you know, why anyone should listen to anybody else. When you get, when you agree 100%, you're going to get caught up in something that you, you didn't, you're not signing up for. You're carrying along. I mean, they did bring up Winston Churchill and people kind of speaking out

against him or just having different opinions. Um, I don't know if this is like British bias, but if you're the prime minister in a war, like even if you, like you you're gonna make some mistakes, even if you win the war and pull off a miracle victory, which he kind of did, there's gonna be mistakes in there. And I don't know if it's even worth judging anyone just on that mistake. Well, in, in war, there's, it's the perfect example of making omelets where you have to crack eggs. The only way to win war is to be real politic. I don't, I'm not sure when would that term was invented, but I think it was right around then where you have to,

um, be real. Well, maybe we'll look that one up. But it's, when you, you can't adhere to your social values at all times in that instance. You're gonna have to bomb Dresden. You know, people are, it's messy. Right. Yeah. Quite messy. I mean, you know, and are, it's messy. Right. Yeah.

I mean, you know, and it's not to defend or justify any countries that ever have killed innocent people and especially, you know, little kids. But if you're put in the position of having to make the decision of when to attack at what time to save your whole country, that doesn't really mean it's your value, right? I guess your value is to save your people. But it wouldn't be unreasonable to think that somebody that could be like, okay, yeah, we do need to bomb that building also has his own or her own values that say,

I don't want anyone to die or any kids to die. There might be a way about going about that a little bit better. I think that's what Dave's point is often that come on, We're the most advanced country or We are all the most advanced militaries that we have ever had Maybe we could do this a little bit better Other than like blanket bombing an entire city carpet bombing an apartment complex to To get one guy and maybe kill 25 people or families.

That recently just happened. Yeah. Yeah, that's kind of a good point. It's like, I think, you know, the Israelis like lay out on paper your total capabilities and let's see if they match up to like how you went about this. Because...

I think that his big problem was the response from like Tulsi and all the people we really pulled for, even, you know, I really pulled for finding out that while these people are ready to be complicit in this type of terrible activity, not to say that it wouldn't. I mean, what would I do? I don't know, but it's just a... I get it. What did Tulsi say? Oh, after the... after the... what is it? Is your after they was is your bomb or maybe we did it we bombed some bomb maker and his girlfriend's apartment complex and told see what you know there's there was some ash casualties and she was just like thumbs up good job America you know

cuz kind of a bad optic it was in that signal gate stuff when oh and they accidentally signed on to the that one the journalist on the wrong on the wrong teams meeting yeah yeah those sloppy guys it was sloppy anyway it's that's realpolitik for you but it's not cool what do you think it's just like almost the same as kind of what Douglas was defending. They, they notice just like politicians that if you don't only what, but if you, if you don't not only defend your position, but, um, almost encourage things that that could require an apology you're just like no that was the best that's how we need to do it that just the pushback is so hard everyone's coming at you everyone's like see they

acknowledge that it was bad and they still did it. And it was, it's just like an extra excuse to not be, I don't know what the word is patriotic or supportive of whatever the action is, that type of thing. As it's a, and everybody has access all the time to the information that everyone else does. So there's no getting around it or sneaking around. It's all about optic.

It could all be pushed toward the negative. Yeah. Douglas's description of what a libertarian was, was fantastic. Calling them basically bisexuals. Because they... They go both ways. Like it was clever, it was funny, it was at least the first funny thing that was said, which is

interesting it came from him since two comedians were on the show. And it's kind of undeniable a little bit. It's like, it's such a clever little line that it's like, oh, dammit, you got me, bitch. It's kind of like always wanting your cake and eating it too sort of thing. Rather, best of both worlds. But there's no way you can have the best of both worlds ever. Yeah, it's, I thought it was going to throw Dave off a little harder than it did. Like he was going

to have to take a second to regroup and be like, oh, I'm a happily married man. But. Hetero. I'm a happily married man. But. Hetero. No homo. Just throws it. Yeah, right Dave. But yeah, it was also a, it was a clever point of argument too.

Like Douglas knew he was in there a while. It's good to get a break. It's good to reset. It's good to have a laugh. And, you know, even in a time when you can't find necessarily things you agree on. And it did. It did kind of give them a little reset. And there were moments where they agreed on things.

But to be fair, they probably agree on a lot of things. They just weren't in this conversation. This conversation was designed for two people that have opposing opinions and a lot of knowledge. So through that whole action, it was going to be hard for them to have many things to agree on. It wasn't about agreeing. This one was about a certain, this one was about their disagreement. Right. Who do you think ultimately, and this isn't like the conclusion to this, but just to kind of frame it before we continue, who do you think came out of this looking the best? Or was there even a person. I think that Dave Smith really defended his side well. He had great points, he had great references. I really liked when Douglas was talking about the living in the

West. We see the world through the West's lens where all the atrocities and the bad stuff happens to the Western countries because those governments are going to allow it to be seen versus hide it like North Korea or Russia does its best to hide its flaws. We wear our flaws on our sleeve. And I agree with Douglas on that one. It's like we have the freedom here to show the world our mistakes versus the versus the dictators and stuff. They hide all that stuff. So I liked a lot of points from both of them.

I'd say that's a hard question. I can't answer it. Yeah. No, I'm kind of with you. I think it's, um, I'm kind of with you. I think it's, I like them equally. And even on areas that I lean into what Dave's saying, or even like understanding of where Douglas is coming from, you know, I think both of them seem valid.

Like nobody got checkmated. I don't think anyone looks stupid. I think you've got to give some credit to Douglas because he was kind of on the back foot. It's a little rough when you got two people in there that are potentially coming at you. But he handles that shit so well. He's so composed. He's brave. He knows how to just stare right in the face. Like he could be, he's the kind of guy that could be on a debate panel with nine other people that disagree with him. And he'd fucking hold his own as like the one.

The... Yeah, he would just sashay around, flounce around and end up making himself look, and his topic look good. Yeah, yeah. His posture wouldn't change. He would still have a great shirt on. Probably get a little bit extra English and just clean up. That must be a weird, like powerful thing.

I wonder if he, when he gets into debates with like way dumber people, I wonder if he, it he gets into debates with like way dumber people, I wonder if he, it's like when you play chess with a kid, you'll like go a bit easier on him. You're like, oh, that's a good, you know, you're not like going in there like Magnus Carlsen, just to checkmate him and fall. Like you give him a chance. I wonder if he tones down when he's like debating lesser debaters. He's like, I'll just see where this goes. I think I've seen that happen and he does broader strokes. You paint more of a broad picture and maybe you don't bring as much data

analysis or this little fine point or that nuance. You just you have a broader stroke with him. I've seen him him I've seen almost everything I can find on on a YouTube with him yeah with Doug he's fascinating man he's fascinating I'm glad he came on I mean to hear these two kind of discuss these points is important and you know it's better for me than trying to make sense of it watching fucking CNN or Fox News or a 60 minutes or some documentary. It's like, this is a great way to just kind of break down because, you know, a lot of what they're both doing is summarizing feelings that many people have on each side and just kind of like making the big topic like,

hey, there's people that look at it this way. And then the other guy's like, well, yeah, but there's also, this is how people are seeing it. And you get to decide as an individual, like, hey, am I going to listen to a comedian that is obviously has a lot of knowledge and has a different angle of looking at it. Or this guy that's been in the news and a reporter for many years and also is like boots on the ground in those areas. Um, I wonder how Dave would do over there. He's, I'm not sure that the, Israelis would show him the same all access pass that Douglas has got. No, well, probably not.

It isn't of the like a journalistic credentials. He is Jewish, though. So he probably has at least some VIP club passes. It throw amounts some bottle service. Some dancing, Tel Aviv dances. To be fair though, if he went to Gaza, might be a little rough for him. No one's welcome over there.

Yeah, not anymore. I mean, before they were like blowing up everything. Yeah, people could go there. Man, it's devastated over there. Dude, there's nothing left. They barely show it a lot of times because the destruction is so flatlined. I mean, they've completely flatlined that place.

Was Dave saying that? He was like, were they in every building then? Is that the deal? Every building building I guess Guess so. It's hard to maintain a Side on this one when you see what's been going on. Mm-hmm Yeah, but also it's a bit of a luxury of being over here as we don't have to pick a side you know just the hope is that we conscientious about the events and reflect on it.

And I would like to think that everyone agrees that any type of war, any type of death like this is just unfortunate and it sucks for whatever reason. And yeah, and then hopefully we stay out of similar things. You'd hope so. I, it seems like we're fast tracked for the world stage here in a little few years. It seems like there's going to be a, quite a conflict brewing. I mean, Douglas Porter brought up a really interesting point, which is something that's been mentioned a lot. Like there's been a lot of aid going into Gaza for the last 18 plus years from a lot of different countries. Billions and billions of dollars. And you know they elected Hamas and it seems like Hamas siphoned a lot of the money away and the top

people in that organization just enriched their own families to billions of dollars and didn't improve the life of the regular Palestinian people there and it could have been enough money to really turn that place into something livable Really nice Hurts their credibility doesn't it? Hurts the credibility of that whole thing Yeah, it makes you think a little bit about sending aid because

It's like obviously you want to help people that need aid, but if they're only getting one cent for every dollar, then I guess you can still justify it. Well, at least that one cent got to the people and gave them food, which they didn't have. But when 60 cents went to buying munitions to eventually use against other people, that's a difficult sell. It's mostly going to penthouse luxury suites in Qatar for the family of the people who run that organization. From what we're learning about it.

And I, yeah, it's bad news. Yeah. Yeah. But then, you know, this whole motivation thing, I mean, those two got into it about Putin and Ukraine, you know, Putin warning that if Ukraine joins NATO, that's like the firm line in the sand. And Douglas was saying, well, no, that's just always been the excuse. He's always wanted to go in there.

Um, redo the Soviet union. Yeah. Which I don't think is probably not true. You know, I'm sure he has, but like, isn't everything timing? So regardless of the motivation it's like well I need a good excuse this seems like one of them pushing in that direction they're putting NATO troops here they're pushing me to do this I

told him I would and listen guys I'm still like completely pro-america and you know I would say pro-Europe over Russia. But to be fair, I've never been to Russia. I'm not Russian. I am. I was born in Europe and came to America. So I have my biases and reasons to protect those places. But also, I think there's space to reconsider and question things and just be like, well, maybe what we're being told is not the whole story here.

Dave did lay down some pretty interesting facts about former CIA directors trying to come to the table or warning the State Department about the red lines that Putin has set down. And then there was the whole like truce available, maybe was it seven years ago or just before, um, right when Biden took office, I think that, uh, he said, um, I will assure you, I'm not going to go anywhere. I'm not going to extend my borders. If you assure me that Ukraine is not going to be entered into NATO, that never happened. And like you said, maybe we don't know what he's thinking, but that's an

excuse that he can use to invade. Yeah. And you've got to be careful about giving people excuses. I mean, you know, isn't it fair to say that 9-11 ended up being the excuse to invade Iraq that had very little to do with it. It's like, you can build momentum with excuses that allow you to get away with things that ordinarily you wouldn't be able to. Yes.

Yeah, it's a dicey world we're living in. What did you think about Douglas's point when he, and he really held on to this point for a while, about have you been there? And he does this, I've seen him do it on Pierce, I've seen him do doing there is expanding upon or no, justifying his expertise. He's saying, hey, I have these opinions, but also I've walked those streets. Now, is that just a really good play when he knows that he's debating anyone that hasn't been there and maybe he only throws that out when he's like losing an argument or not gaining as much headway with someone who he knows has not been to these places. Do you think it's valid? It's a little less than valid and it's kind of tacky, a little cheap.

I feel it's a little cheap. That's what I'm wondering. Also it's true, like there is credibility from getting there and looking people in the eyes, looking at what they're up to. But if Dave goes there, I'm sure he's going to be convinced to the opposite. He's going to be like, wow, I was right. Look at this stuff. And you know, Graham Hancock does that often when he's talking about ancient

sites, because it's a, well, when he's talking to, you know, many archeologists or like trying to debate them, he's talking about sites that are not well respected by traditional archaeologists, so they're not really checking it out all that much. So he can always throw out there like, hey, I went there, I saw it. You go there, you tell me what you think. And at least in terms of archaeology, that's kind of something true that's missing. Like they are not sending these people to examine sites that are seen as like so old and ancient and impossible. And like imposing. So the thing about archaeology is the thing itself in situ is the only story there is. If you don't go see it, look at it, see the situation, you don't know the story. So maybe that could be translated to this situation as well. So maybe there is some validity there.

Yeah, I think there is, but it doesn't take away from when and how he does it within a debate. Right? So when you're saying it could be tacky the way Douglas does it, it's like, you got to, you got to look at more of his debates and see when he uses that. It's like, if he's already winning it and crushing and never brings it up okay, but then if he's struggling to make his point and Just happens to know this person hasn't been there Does it really add much validity to? His thing because that's that that's why many people don't like to debate

Because you've got two things going on. You've got someone with a lot of knowledge that understands the situation, and then also someone that's very good at debating. And Trump is a prime example of this. Because he has, whether you like him or not, some of the most legendary moments in presidential debating history where he completely derailed the other individual, the crowd went wild and when you look at the context and quality of the point that he made it was mostly like it was close to just being like

you're a nerd yeah everyone knows you're a nerd it's like that but look at his wife she's a dog yeah so so that's like a prime example of like if you maximize your ability to be a good debater and you're coming in with like really no substance at all then yeah it can look like you just win all the time. And I guess that is a win, regardless of if it's a, if it like, if it looks good on paper is maybe less important than a W in general. Yeah, I mean, you've got to take a real step back, probably run the transcripts through ChatGPT,

and then say, take all the insults out and tell me who gave us the most facts. But people aren't hearing it like that. You're not, you're hearing something happen in the moment and there is a lot of credit given to somebody that just goes, well, in your face, fatty. And you're just like, ah, damn it. Wrong. I got wrecked wrong well on the note about Douglas Murray being there and using that in in his in these debates it's also it's always we are people in time and place and the time and the location defines us, the socioeconomic status defines us. So if you don't go there and see the people in

their places then you don't really know about it. You can read all you want, you can dissect the politics and the military action, but if you don't see the hate and the fear and the love, people's eyes, then you're not getting what, you're not gonna feel the whole zeitgeist of a people time and place. Yeah, I don't really know what my takeaways are from this. I feel like those that agree with Douglas across the board,

like let's just say you agree where he is with his understanding of October 7th, the Israel situation where Palestine has been, Gaza and Hamas and, you know, saying, hey, we needed to do what we currently have and it's not great and I wish it didn't have to happen, but it needs to happen. Well, what does that mean next if Iran tries to fire those missiles again at Israel, which they did? Is there then justification to flatline that whole country? And then where does it stop if people are constantly doing that? Now, I get it, defend yourself. I support defending yourself, believe me. However, we never seem to get the whole truth from the news or from the government or any governments.

So we don't know the whole story of why anyone's shooting anyone at any time. And if we're just watching country after country get flatlined to the ground and a lot of innocent civilians die, I'm glad that the Dave Smiths of the world exist to ask a lot of those questions and be like hey Can we fucking reexamine this? Like there are kids in that rubble folks. Oh, yeah It's and like you were talking about excuses and reasons if you know if Iran keeps giving them excuses then If Iran keeps giving them excuses, then, um, if Iran keeps giving them excuses, then there's gonna keep bomb, there's gonna be bombs.

It's just, uh, we got to, it's sickening whatever's happening over there at all times. It just happens to be war. Yeah. It, it just doesn't look good for humanity right we send all those ladies to space We can land rockets The dick the dick shuttle yeah, we can land all these rockets got all this tech We've got you know 5g gigabytes of

download speeds, supercomputers, quantum computers. Yet, what, more people die a year in war across the globe now? There's like more people enslaved than ever. I'm just starting to think we're good at making technology improve, and then we're not getting much further on morality, love for one another, ethics. Only metric that should count, right? Well, I think if, if it's one we took really seriously, if like the new iPhone coming out was equally as important as the new philosophy for humanity and loving each other, not to sound like a huge hippie, but like if we did put

some weight on that, um, yeah, I think we'd take a real closer look at our decision making that leads to people dying. You know, I think, um, is it Tibet? Well, we, in the United States and many countries, we have something called the GDP, right? The gross national profit, I believe. Yeah. GDP, right? The gross national profit, I believe.

Yeah. In Tibet, I think it's the only country that has GDH, gross domestic happiness. Really? And I think that'd be pretty neat if we could get that going on everywhere. How do they measure it? This, you know, I'm not a metrics. I don't know their metrics, but it's, it's, they're concerned about it. We're not concerned about it. Yeah.

I guess we've got to leave it at that. I mean, I didn't, I didn't dislike either of these guys more after this debate. I have the same respect for them I had before and I'm not exactly with either of them. I would say I'm a little bit more on Dave's side only because of the innocent civilians getting killed. Now remember, I'm a stupid podcaster. I don't have to make those types of decisions. Thank goodness. Thank God. I

would never want to do that. But you know, I get their points and it's just, it's a tricky slippery situation and worth a listen. I think this was an important and powerful podcast. That's the PPPs. Adam's stamp of approval. It was heavy. It was heavy, man. I'm less inclined to jump on either side.

You're more central? Yeah, now that I've listened to both these reasonable people, once again, so you're being a bisexual. I'm a little bisexual today. My curious. It's

yeah, I don't know. I would be interested here from anybody that was listening like email over like, did it change your perspective on it? did it change your perspective on it? Did it change your idea of it? Did it have you double down?

Like where did you end after this little debate? And are these debates useful? It seems like debate should be useful, but I don't always know if they are because I've got a feeling that the best the beta Just wins every time just takes the credit and moves away assuming there is one and It doesn't mean that that's where all the facts are It's just the most compelling on listener. The listener generally comes to the debate stage already made their mind up. That's a good point So, uh, yeah, that's a good point. Well, check it out folks. We appreciate you listening and uh, Pete as always pleasure my friend. Thanks for tackling this one with me

And we will talk to everybody next week later