Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 25 | The Future Is... Socialism?

Episode Date: August 3, 2018

 I break down what Democratic Socialism is, why kids these days think it's great and the myth that Jesus was a socialist. Cabot Phillips of Campus Reform joins the show to discuss his findings on millennials' view of socialism. Copyright CRTV. All rights reserved.

It's CRTV's Relatable with Ali Stucky, where we talk culture, theology, and political news. Not necessarily in that order or all at once. Today we're going to talk about democratic socialism, what it is, why young people love it so much and why. Oh yeah, Jesus was not a socialist. We're going to talk to Cabot Phillips of Campus Reform, who went out to Alexandria Acacio Cortez's district in New York and asked her potential constituents questions. about socialism. Turns out they didn't understand very much. So first, why are we talking about this? Because democratic socialism is becoming more mainstream on the political left and in the Democratic Party. We've talked about Accio Cortez and her openly socialist platform before on this podcast.

We all remember Bernie Sanders, whom more millennials voted for in the primaries than for Trump or Clinton combined. We've been hearing about the push for free health care coverage. Of course, you know about Obamacare and free college for a long time. It's really no secret that Democrats have been inching towards socialism for a while, and now they are just coming out and fully embracing it. A Gallup poll back in 2016 cited that 55% of millennials now support socialism. So let's define socialism, and particularly democratic socialism, which is the ideology

de jour on the left. Well, we already know what democratic means. Hopefully it means that the people have a say that you vote. So what is democratic socialism? Well, if you go to the Democratic Socialist of America website, the organization that I believe Acosio-Cortez is a part of,

you can see their constitution, which reads, we are socialist because we reject an economic order based on private profit, alienated labor, gross inequalities of wealth and power, discrimination based on race, sex, sexual orientation, gender expression, disability status, age, religion, and national origin, and brutality and violence and defense at the status quo. We are socialist because we share a vision of a humane social order based on popular control

of resources and production, economic planning, equitable distribution, feminism, racial equality, and non-oppressive relationships. that was a lot of words which didn't really for me make a whole lot of sense have a whole lot of meaning so let me at least try to make this simpler. Socialists believe that a profit-driven society, aka capitalism, creates inequality. I am going to explain this in a way that I truly think that a socialist would agree with. So without my own spin, I'll give my opinion on this after. Socialists believe in the immorality of a capitalistic society because a society that is centered on and driven exclusively by profit fuels an unjust power structure where the rich get richer and the poor get poor. That power structure plays a role in all inequality, they say, including racial inequality with mostly white people holding wealth and minority staying poor in this country.

Socialists believe that those who hold the power in this country are able to do so because of the greed of capitalism. Those, these in power happen to be rich white people who through the hoarding of their wealth and influence keep racial, ethnic, sexual, religious minorities down. Socialism seeks to uplift these minorities who are marginalized, making sure that they have access to everything that a rich person has. So health care, education, a job, housing, et cetera. Socialism, so it says, seeks, seeks complete and total equality.

The only way to do that, they say, is to abolish capitalism, which is founded on greed and perpetuates unjust power structures, which, as I explain, leads to all kinds of unfair dynamics. Socialism believes in getting rid of private property. Maybe not the Democratic Socialists of America, or at least they don't say that all the time, but socialism as a rule believes that property should be communal. They also believe in outlying things like inheritance. Acacio-Cortez has mentioned this herself. money should not be passed down to your children.

It should be given back to the state and then distributed for the common good. So maybe that sounds great. And socialists aren't lying when they say that they wish to lift up the oppressed, those who go without, those who have nothing in no way of providing for themselves. They want to abolish poverty, they say. That all sounds really nice and very Christian, might I add. But then you have to ask yourself a few practical. basic questions. The first question being, how is all of this accomplished? Socialism claims to be

for the people, a system that is controlled by the populace, no power structures, everyone is equal. Well, how do you maintain this? Not a single aspect of socialism is possible without the control of the government, because socialism goes against basic human nature, the basic human nature to own and to cultivate property to provide for families and to create power structures based on ability. In order to keep the ambitious from obtaining more money than the unambitious or the unable and create what socialists call an unfair power structure, someone has to forcibly prevent that ambitious person from obtaining more money than the unambitious person. So who does that?

Well, the government has to. How? Through heavy taxation, through the confiscation, through the confiscation, of private property, through the outline of inheritance, through as the Democratic Socialists openly admit, the abolition of profit. There is no way to abolish profit, the chief goal of socialism, without all-encompassing government control. People don't freely give up the money they've earned. People don't freely give up their private property. Socialism takes money from the wealthy and gives it to the poor. It is called redistribution of wealth. And while for the sake of PR, socialists highlight how wonderful it will be for the poor to have

health care coverage and college and housing for free, the means by which this is accomplished is always brutal. It always has been because it forces out of our hands the money you and I have earned and gives it to someone who has it. And in order to do that, the government has to have more power than the people do. The government has to be big enough and strong enough to take away our property, our right to an inheritance, our ability to make a profit, and if the government is big enough to do that, then there is no stopping its power to do whatever else it wants to do. And here's the irony.

A government can only ensure absolute equality through oppression. Socialism doesn't guarantee equality of success or of freedom. It guarantees equality of oppression and mediocrity. Yes, sure, everyone is equal. They're equally poor and miserable. The other question is, in addition to how does this nonprofit equal utopia come about, is how has this worked in other countries? And the answer is not well. Why do you think that socialism and communism, which is the sister of socialism, has met violent in so many times in the past century, in Cambodia, in China, in Soviet Russia, in Germany, 100 million people dead from socialism and communism in the past century.

Why? Because both socialism and communism, while they claim to be different, both require totalitarian governments to ensure that people don't have more power or resources than anyone else. And what happens when a government takes total power, it becomes corrupt. You've heard the saying power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. That's a principle that has never failed. Never has a government having complete power worked out well for the people that it's ruling. This is, exactly what has happened in Venezuela. The government took total control, promised free stuff for its citizens, and now people are eating dogs from the street and using grass for toilet paper. Sounds great. This is why socialism hasn't even

worked in the countries where socialists say that it has worked, like Scandinavia. The Scandinavian countries, of course. Socialists all say, well, don't look at Venezuela. Don't look at the Soviet Union. Don't think about all of the people who have died the hands of totalitarian regimes who have ruled in the name of ensuring free stuff and equality,

look at socialist Scandinavia, who is doing so well. In 2015, at a democratic debate, Democratic socialist Bernie Sanders said, I think we should look to countries like Denmark, like Sweden and Norway, he said, and learn from what they have accomplished for their working people. First of all, these countries are nothing like America. They're nothing like America in makeup, especially. They have been homogenous, cohesive societies with shared values, more ethic for centuries. Very unlike the United States, which is now so fractured that even comparing the two countries for any or these countries for any reason is stupid. But look at Sweden for a specific example. Its success is not founded on socialism, but is really accredited to

the free market. It was a poor country in the late 1800s, then adopted capitalism, lowered its taxes. It was lower than the U.S. and Europe for a period of time, and its economy boomed. Then in the mid-20th century, Sweden adopted socialism. It raised taxes, in some cases, to 100 in an effort to abolish corporate profits in entrepreneurship. Job creation plummeted. The economy tanked. So what did Sweden do? They lower taxes some and they re-adopted capitalism in a lot of ways when it comes to business and free trade. They still have socialism in some forms like heavy welfare through pretty high taxes, but they make up for this through economic freedom, through the encouragement of entrepreneurism. Same thing in Denmark. The New York Times

reported in 2013 that welfare dependency in Denmark had created a society in which basically no one worked. Only three of the 98 municipalities, wow, municipalities, that's a difficult word to say when you're talking fast, had the majority of its residents working. Now Denmark is above the United States as far as economic freedom goes, and that's according to the Heritage Foundation. So no, true socialism has not worked. And socialists actually admit that. They say, well, socialism, real socialism, has never truly been implemented. But what we know for basic human nature is that people don't work very hard when the reward they get for their work is the government taking over half of their money and redistributing it, redistributing it to other

people. People also don't work very hard when they know they don't have to work to get all of the things that people who do work get. And there is a serious moral problem with this. As we've talked on the podcast before, work is a natural and a good part of the human makeup. We are made to work, to grow, to cultivate, to make better. Whether that's writing novels, in giving speeches, or being an electrician, it doesn't matter. There is something inside all of us that urges us to do something, to make something. There is a reason why one of the main reasons listed for depression is purposelessness. When people feel that they're not attached to something bigger than themselves,

when they're not moving a ball forward, when they have nothing and no one to take care of. When they are unnecessary, they grow very depressed and in some cases suicidal. That is what socialism does. It makes people in their work unnecessary because the government compensates for people's laziness. So from a Christian perspective, there is absolutely nothing virtuous about socialism. We know from Genesis that God made work before the fall, which means work is inherently good. A system that punishes hard work and disincentivizes hard work is therefore not good. Furthermore, God calls Christians to be cheerful givers.

As 2 Corinthians 9-7 says, cheerful giving in any kind of generosity is impossible in a society in which what you earn is forced from you and give it to people and causes that the government sees fit. People who say that Jesus was a socialist must have missed the description of the early church and acts when people are freely giving their goods to others out of their own goodwill. If you are a Christian and you are worried about people who don't have anything or if you are concerned about the plight of the poor, get a job, make a lot of money and help them yourself. Give everything you have to the poor. Start a nonprofit or go work for one. Get involved

in your church and go feed the homeless. Hear me when I say this. If you care about the poor, you should be a capitalist. Do you know what has reduced abject poverty by 80% since the 1970s? Capitalism, global trade, free markets, entrepreneurship. Do you know what has done more to cure world hunger than anything else. Capitalism, people learning trades and making money for themselves. Do you know what has been the greatest driver of innovation ever? Capitalism, profit and people's motivation to earn it. Why do you think America is the home to the world's greatest technological advances? Why do you think people come here to start their companies, to build businesses, to manifest their ideas? why do you think that we are the leader in technology in medicine and education and

entertainment because of capitalism? Now, I don't think that people should be motivated by profit alone. I think that there's a really big problem in that. I think they should be motivated by a purpose, whether it be making it easier for people to get to point A to point B via Uber, whether it be to give people easy access to entertainment via Netflix or whether it's helping people in Africa have jobs like Noonday collection, but, but, people eventually stop pursuing their purpose if they are not making a profit. They have to. They have to provide for their families themselves. They have bills to pay if you're making no profit. You don't have the freedom to pursue a purpose. That's exactly why capitalism has been so effective in pulling people up from the drugs of poverty.

That is a huge reason why America is the best. best country in the world. That's a huge reason for the unprecedented economic and entrepreneurial success of this country that has made us the brightest beacon of liberty this world has ever seen. America and the free market have done more to alleviate hunger, suffering, oppression than bureaucracy ever has. If you have compassion and empathy, great. Go out there and show it yourself. Don't wait for the government to do it. And you know what gives you the freedom to do that? To go out and show that compassion?

Not socialism. Capitalism. Of course, we do have parts of socialism in American society. We already have aspects of wealth redistribution. We have welfare programs, social security. Socialists seek to make these things universal, though. They believe everything should be given. But like I said, that denies,

basic human nature and comes to a cruel end when fully implemented. It always has. It always does. There is nothing kind or loving or compassionate about that. Democratic socialism is just socialism that you choose. There's something better about it. The Democratic Socialists of America have Karl Marx, the author of the Communist Manifesto, by the way, on all of their suggested reading list. So don't be fooled by this word democratic. It just makes it sound more Western. It's not. Okay, so that's my long spiel. You can tell how much I just love socialism. But I want to get into what other people think about it. You guys are much smarter than most people in the world. But unfortunately, most people and American young people especially don't know anything about socialism,

even those who say that they are socialist. Cabot Phillips of Campus reform does these man on the street interviews. And he went to, like I said, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's district to see how much her, to see how much her would-be constituents know about her ideology. And here is that. I'm Cabot-Fellas with campus reform. Today we're in Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's congressional district talking to her supporters about democratic socialism. Is it any different from regular socialism and who's going to pay for all this free stuff? Let's see what they have to say. Alexandra Acacio Cortez, just elected 28 years old, self-proclaimed democratic socialist, which has a lot of people talking. What are your views on her so far?

I mean, I've heard only positive things. We love her. Yeah, we do love her. I voted for her because I'm from Queens. It was great, and it's a breath of fresh air, and I hope it follows through into November. I like her spirit and that she's very different. People tend to freak out when they hear the word socialism, like, apply to anything. Why do you think that is? I think there's this old way of thinking about it.

what do you think the government should be subsidizing? So her platform includes free health care, college tuition, minimum living wage. Housing is it human right? Are those things that you think the government should be providing for people? Absolutely. Are those things that you would support? Yes, it is. Are those all things that you would support the government subsidizing?

100%. I feel like everyone should have, like, free education and health care. How are we going to pay for those? Oh, God. I mean... Us. Ah, that guess. Who in your mind should pay for all of the free things?

All of the free things? Well, some of it should come from taxes, but the government should pay for it. But the government is funded by taxes? Yeah. I don't know where the money would come from, but they can figure it out. Okay. More taxes on the rich people? Yeah, for sure, man.

Like, they can afford it. Tax corporations, it's taxed the 1% and find a way to support a living wage. The people with a good idea and a good reason to spend their tax money wouldn't mind. actually paying more taxes. There are so many of these countries out there that are employing a lot more socialism in their government and into their politics and they're doing really well. Is Venezuela doing that? Ooh, I don't know too much about Venezuela, honey. I think they need to... I mean, are they still communist right now?

So there's technically socialist. Okay, okay. Look at other countries, it works. Like other countries, you pay higher taxes, but your government takes care of you. So when you see the social system failing in Venezuela, does stack concern you? I mean, yes. Obviously. My family's Cuban and like I've seen the downfall of like extreme leftism, but also like I see how it like boosts the community and like it has its up and downs and I think we can definitely learn from history on that terms. Our country needs change and if it has to be

on the opposite side, on the extreme polar opposite side maybe it's what we need. Privatized healthcare is a huge issue and if it was a government funded thing that would be, you know, when there aren't... Do you think the government would run it more efficiently? In a perfect world, sure. I'm literally exactly, like, where I stand, but I know, like, Democratic socialists is better than conservative. It's just better than...

It's the better option. In what way? When I think of it, I just think of, like, more open-minded people, people that aren't, like, as economically conserved. Wow, that is really sad. That's really sad. Okay, so now we're going to talk to the man himself and hear what he thinks is going on in all of this. Cabot, thanks for joining us.

Happy to be on. Thanks so much, Ellie. Yeah. So you've been everywhere recently doing your MOS packages or man on the street packages that you've done a lot. And this pastime, one of the most recent ones that I've seen is you asking people in Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's district what they think about socialists. So can you just kind of break down what people know and what they don't? Yeah, so we went to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's district and spoke to a lot of young people there who supported her. And across the board, they were incredibly proud.

They said that she represented them well. They loved her ideas. They loved that she was willing to come out with the Democratic Socialist platform. And so I just started asking them basic questions about what they wanted the government to provide. Everyone across the board said health care, education, a minimum living wage. They wanted free housing for people that were struggling across the board. And I just started asking who's going to pay for it. Person after person slowly either came to the realization of, well, I guess we're going to have to pay for it.

Or they just had the same prepackaged answers of the 1%. We can keep having them pay for it. They have too much money anyway. And then I started to ask people afterwards, hey, have you seen what's going on in Venezuela? Or can you give me examples of socialist countries in the past that have worked? And people slowly, I think, got a little embarrassed when they realized. that they couldn't give examples of socialism working. And also, they realized that there's not really a feasible answer for who's going to pay for

all this free stuff. And so if nothing else, we had some aha moments. I think there were some people that maybe had a light bulb come on and they realized how socialist ideas are really not tenable and in defenseable in many cases. But there were a lot of people that were just repeating these same talking points we hear from the left. And so that was discouraging to see how people just felt, hey, I'm young. I have to support all these things.

And I think that that peer pressure and that pressure from society to support these socialist leftist ideas is also something to know. Do you think it's more Alexandria herself that these potential constituents of hers are attracted to? Or do you think it's actually the ideas that she's putting forth free health care, free education, things like that? Or do they just like her as a person? I think it's a mixture of two. if it was just her because she's young and exciting and has this cool story.

Yeah, she does have a cool story. But how do you explain Bernie Sanders then? He's like an old, boring white guy and still young people were able to relate with him. And so I think it's not necessarily the story and the personality of Ocasio-Cortez. I really do think it's the ideas. And put yourself in the position of like an average college student. You're not really paying attention to politics. You start tuning in and listening to a few politicians.

And you gravitate towards the person that's saying, I'm going to do all this for you. Here's what I'm going to do for you. Here's what I'm going to do for you. Here's what the government will do for you. Here's what rich people will do for you. And it's a lot easier to sell that message many times than to sell the message of here are the opportunities that we will open up for you. We are going to get the government out of your way so that you can do these things for yourselves. And so that idea of free things is really easy to sell. And also the left is winning the messaging battle right now on socialism. If you say that you support free markets or capitalism on a college campus or really just in any segment of society,

Many times you're told that it's evil, that you don't care about poor people, that it's not compassionate. And socialism has been sold as compassionate. It's been sold as tolerant as, you know, wanting to help poor people. And so that messaging battle has been won by the left. And if you can convince people support these ideas and you'll be open-minded and intolerant, then it's going to be a lot easier to get them on board. And I think that's what the left has been doing very well. And the right really does need to improve on messaging, free market, you know, limited government, conservative ideas. So is it the messaging that has made socialism so successful right now in this moment?

Because socialism has been around for a long time. Marxist, Leninists have been purporting the successes of their ideologies, despite all of the failures that it's had for the past century. Why does it seem like young people today are more okay with socialism and maybe even communism than young people say 50 years ago. Why this generation? I think a lot of it has to do with people are wanting to take away personal responsibilities from themselves. So anytime someone is not successful, it's a very powerful message to come to them and say,

hey, if you aren't where you want to be in life, it's not your fault. It is the fault of wealthy people. It is the fault of the top 1% or government officials. And so that message radiates and resonates with people because young people, they like that message or anyone that is not emotionally or economically where they want to be. They can say, yeah, you know what, it's not my fault. It's got to be someone else's fault. And I think that's one reason it's working. And also, I think it's important to look at the way class warfare has really taken off in the last eight years under President Obama.

His entire presidency, he was telling people, if you were successful, you didn't really build that yourself. It was the government and it was that helped you. And also, I think a lot of young people grew up, came of age in a time where wealth was demonized. If you were economically successful, it had to be at someone else's expense. It was a zero-sum game where people think, well, if you got rich, you had to be pushing down the little guy to do that, not realizing you can become rich and also help a lot of poor people along the way. And so I think demonizing that success has made wealth not as attractive as it used to be. and so people would rather pull down that top 1% to their levels than to try to climb up to

where they are. I think that mindset cripples people in early age, and that's why socialism is so dangerous. Yeah. And I also think specifically to our generation, because I think every generation or, yeah, every generation when their young kind of goes through the stage of being politically rebellious, it was obviously true in the 1960s. They were rejecting traditional wars of the 1940s and 50s. Everyone was very, you know, anti-war hippie, whatever. And maybe we can even see. see that mirroring today. But I do think millennials are different, even than baby boomers and the silent generation when they were young, because in large part, and I don't mean to be a typical millennial and blame everything on our parents. I'm not, but you do have to look at how we were

raised. Baby boomers were the first generation since the Great Depression to have disposable income. So you and I probably had a lot more luxuries than our parents had. And our parents had really good intentions in that. They wanted to make sure that we had a better education, more fun, even more things than they had growing up. And we did. My life was a lot easier than my grandma's life when she was living on a farm than my parents' life when they were growing up really poor. I got married at 19, lived in a trailer. They wanted to make sure that my life was really different than that. And I think a lot of millennials experienced that that I didn't have to run the same risks in my life that my parents did. I was raised probably just as much as anyone else in this,

everybody gets a trophy, your completely special helicopter parenting culture, that previous generations just weren't. And so this feeling of entitlement, I think unintentionally was kind of passed down to us and then saturated with the past eight years of Obama and the progressive revolution that's happened in the 21st century, I think it was all just kind of a perfect storm.

Yeah. Let's be honest though, Alan, you may have grown up in the culture where everyone gets a trophy, but you were winning first place. You were getting trophies anyway. Come on. Not in track, Cabot. In track, I was getting honorable mention. And so I probably thought that I was decent at running the 400, but really I got last

place every time. My go-to trophy every year was the most improved because I would set the bar really, really low, like swim team when I was eight. You were doggy paddling. All I had to do was just not drown the whole season. I'd be the most improved because I basically drowned the first go-round. But I do agree with you. I think looking at kind of the bigger scope of what are the deeper reasons for socialism's rise.

I think a lot of it you cannot ignore the role of higher education in the rise of socialism. Yeah. It used to be not to say, oh, I'm back in the back in the, you know, everything was, I think we idealize how things were in the past. True. I think so too. But I do think that when it comes to higher education, we did use to place a higher emphasis on civics courses, history courses, economics courses, and those things which used to be mandatory

for every incoming student, more and more universities are not making them mandatory. Instead, they're replacing them with social justice initiatives, courses in humanities, arts, things like that, which aren't none of themselves bad things, but when they're taking precedent over things out, they're more important, and most Americans would agree history and economics, people don't have a broader context for what they're supporting. And if people were taught history, they would realize the impact that Marxists' ideas and socialist ideas have had throughout history, if they were taught more current events, they would see what's going on right now and the evil that socialism is bringing throughout the globe.

So I do think that's an important aspect of it is our higher education system, no matter how well-intentioned it is dropping the ball and leaving people uninformed and lacking context. Yeah. And I want to go back to messaging because you said that the left is winning the messaging battle on that. And the right isn't. I say the same thing, but sometimes I'm kind of at a loss when people ask me, okay, well,

what do we do differently? Specifically, concretely, what should conservatives be doing differently to change the narrative of capitalism? What do you think? I think first off, it starts with telling about our story. It's something you and I agree on. We've had conversations like this past. And for those of you guys who think that Ali just speaks this way on her show, I can assure

you that even when she's just hanging out, she still, like, I'm just trying to talk about, you know, casual things and catch up and hear about what her husband's up to. She's just like, let's talk about political philosophy. Let's just get to. Oh, my gosh. Whatever. Here's what we need to do better. So she's at least consistent in that regard.

But one thing that you said that I completely agree with is I think conservatives need to get better about making a case and telling stories about how our ideas are going to help people. And not just saying, hey, here's what free market and free enterprise system will do for people. and then just giving off a bunch of statistics. Statistics are powerful only if they are tied to emotion. A person, yeah. Just saying, hey, here's an example of where the government got out of the way, where the government enacted policies.

That's actually people. Let me tell you a few stories of people that were successful. Giving personal experiences saying, hey, Obamacare is bad. It's government-run health care. And here's how it's impacted my family. Here's the personal impact they had on me. Telling stories that you have had experiences.

I think that's one of the quickest ways to really. make people remember a point is by tying it to emotion, tying it to a story and in your own personal experiences. Yeah, I think so. You're right. That was a very good point that I brought up, if I do say so myself. But if you look at like Ronald Reagan, how he changed his political ideology, it was all because for General Electric, he was going around and he was talking to people. He thought that he knew everything about politics. He was hardcore leftist until he actually started talking to people and realizing how bureaucracy can really ruin. people's lives and stifle business. And I think that's true. But there's such a bubble of information

with social media, academia, even mainstream media, that it's very hard and takes a lot of effort for people and especially young people to get out of that. So do you think it's through social media that we conservative millennials and conservative young people can primarily be breaking through that kind of shields, that progressive shield? Or do you think it's talking to our friends or what is it? I think it's not one thing in specific. I do think it's your other things, but I would say that social media and new age media is where it starts. You know, we have a special opportunity. We live in a special time in history where if you turn the TV on and you don't see content you want to see, guess what? We now have every person has a phone, every person has a

computer where they can go out and make the content they want to reach people with. And that's, you know, I think this podcast is an example of that. All the new age media going on social media is an example of that. And if you look at studies, the majority of people now under the age of 30 admit to forming the majority of their political opinions on Facebook or Twitter or YouTube. That's where they're forming the majority of their opinions. And as people that are active in politics, we can either disagree with that and we can complain and say, oh, you know, it sucks that our generation isn't, you know, reading the Wall

Street Journal every day or reading history books or we can wash our hands of it or we can say, no, we're going to fill that space, we're going to treat it like a vacuum, realize that someone is going to fill that space with content. I think it's our duty if we believe our ideas are right to fill that void and realize this is how people are forming their opinion. So go out, start a YouTube channel, start a podcast, you know, do a weekly Facebook live with your friends, get people talking about ideas. I think there's a misconception that you have to start out with 100,000 Twitter followers to begin to make an impact. And that's just not the case, slowly realizing, you know, you can reach people in your own sphere. Your sphere will start to grow the more you do that consistently.

and the more you show yourself willing to have tough conversations, willing to be proven wrong, have a debate. I think those are all meaningful, impactful ways to reach people. But technology is a good thing. We shouldn't just complain. Oh, everyone's on their phones all day. Yeah, maybe I wish people would pick up a history book more often. But let's realize also this is an incredibly unique opportunity we have in this space

to reach people. Definitely. Okay. Speaking of social media and the internet, where can everyone find you? I am at Cabot C-A-B-O-T-U-T-U-S-P-P-E-O-T-U-P-L-P-P-Ls. We'd love to connect with people on there. On Twitter, right? What's that?

Was that Twitter? Yes, that's Twitter, Instagram. Don't have me on Facebook. It's just a bunch of pictures of my family and my pets, so they'll do that, unless you are are into that kind of thing. But, yeah, we'll love to connect with everybody on there. And I'm just, I'm waiting to see how the evil Allie Stucky is going to edit this interview to make me look horrible the way you did to pour a little Alexandria

and I'll claim it I'll claim it was satire after the fact but it's really just to make you look bad because that's my goal. Well you want to try too hard so thanks for having me on very true. Thanks Gabbit. Appreciate it. Okay there you have it. So I hope that this gave you guys some insight into this really I think scary trend and also gave you maybe some talking points to tell to your socialist friends. Thanks for listening. Please give me a positive rating on this podcast, if you so desire. Follow me on social media, Twitter, Instagram, Facebook. Facebook is Ali on CRTV. You can just look up Ali B. Stucky everywhere else. Thank you guys so much for listening. I really appreciate it.

I love being here with you guys every week. And I will see you next Tuesday. Have a good weekend.