Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #244 - Grammys Push Pro BLM Riot Performance, Call For Accomplices w/RuckaRucka Ali

Episode Date: March 16, 2021

Tim, Ian, and Lydia join musician, YouTuber, and podcaster Rucka Ali to discuss the Grammy's performance, cultural enforcement of ideas, Trump as a man without principle, the Teen Vogue editor being cancelled, and Bill Maher's thoughts on woke culture. Support the show (http://Timcast.com/donate) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Last night, I think it was last night, was the Grammys. And I don't really know if it was last night, I think it was, because I don't care about the Grammys. I don't watch the Grammys, and I don't think anybody here did watch the Grammys. Anybody? No? No. Nobody watched the Grammys. Nobody watched the Grammys, nobody cared to watch the Grammys. But there was something interesting.

It's either a sign of the expansion of the extremism that we see in the mainstream corporate media, or it's a sign that they're becoming so utterly desperate that they're willing to cling on to any narrative that they think will make them money. Because this rapper performed a song where he actually depicted riots, and they did a very propagandized version of the Rayshard Brooks incident. And then activist Tamika Mallory, who's considered to be particularly controversial, notably when the New York Times called her out for anti-Semitism, came out and gave a speech essentially where she said, we don't need allies, we need accomplices, which could be seen as like advocating for crime and calling for people to do more.

And it's kind of crazy to mainstream program the Grammys would do something like this. But I guess the ratings are in the trash. So probably, probably nobody really wants to watch. And they were hoping that people like me would call them out to generate some kind of buzz for their failing program, which is a part of the conversation as well. So we have a lot to talk about in this culture war space. We also have now Teen Vogue, right? They tried to hire this editor-in-chief lady and employees at Teen Vogue tried to cancel this new hire. So they ended up losing a seven-figure ad deal, and employees at Teen Vogue tried to cancel this new hire.

So they ended up losing a seven-figure ad deal, backfiring, canceling themselves. And we're going to talk about this because we have one of the best people to actually talk about music and comedy, as well as what may be viewed as performances and things like that. We are joined today by Rucka Rucka Ali. Hi. Do you speak up a little bit i couldn't hear you you might want to you might want to take off the mask all right what's up you want to pull

the microphone up to your mouth now there you go how's that it sounds good yeah so uh rucka you said that you're a rapper a musician and a self-described black activist yeah that sounds about right but you mean like an activist for Black Lives Matter or like, you know, black issues, or were you just screwing with me? No, I was telling you the truth. So, do you want to introduce yourself for the show? Hey, everybody. Nice to see you.

Good evening. My name is Rucka Rucka Ali, the last black man on the internet. And you might be asking, what the F are you doing here? I'll tell you. I'm here to ask Tim Pool some questions about the cat. Oh, snap. In the hat, that is.

Oh, the Dr. Seuss thing. Oh, yeah, Dr. Seuss, big fan. Aren't we all? Yeah, yeah, yeah. So you were very concerned about that story about the cat in the hat. Yeah, but that book was fine, so we concerned about that story about the cat in the hat. In the hat.

Yeah, but that book was fine, so we don't have much to worry about on that front. I think people want to hear your opinion about it, you know, anything you might have to say on it. All right, all right. I see where this is going. But no, no, for real, outside of that, do you want to actually get into your politics and your philosophy? Because you're actually a pretty serious guy. Yeah, we'll get in. We can get into anything. Because Biden wants to raise taxes. Mother – Okay, now we're not supposed to swear.

I saw that look on your face. Family show. Listen, you know, there's a lot of anti-corporate sentiment I'm seeing around the world right now. A lot of people saying they're suspicious of anyone who is making money and cares about their money. But you should see the look on Tim's face just now when I was about to demonetize this whole thing with some curse words. How dare you? Oh, what's the matter?

Need your little money? What happened to free speech or die? Yeah, we're about that. But I mean, we're not staunch libertarians here on the show. Oh, you're only libertarian until it's time to protect your monetization status. Absolutely. Yes, of course. And then I think we should have a bunch of armed status. Absolutely, yes, of course. And then I think we should have a bunch of armed guards.

You know, I'm kidding. That's usually how it ends up. I think there's actually a good philosophical conversation about the limits of free speech, you know. I think there's a lot of good conversations we've got ahead of us tonight. So don't go anywhere. We'll be right back after this. We're not going anywhere.

After Ian's introduction. What up, everybody? Hey, thanks for coming. Thanks, guys. Good to see you, buddy. You can follow me at iancrossland.net, but let's get it going. Hey, let me be honest with you. I just met you.

Something about you bothers me. You look like one of these musicians, you know, who goes out, you play the gig, and that's cool. But then we catch you out back of the venue after the show. You've had a few drinks. And you're a little loose with the language. You're dropping a few gamer words here and there. No. Gamer words.

Getting a little handsy with the ladies without written consent. I'm like Keanu Reeves, man. That describes Ian perfectly. One inch off the bat. You've read him like a book. I'm good with stereotypes. You get loud. I don't know.

The stereotype I get from Ian is like DMT hippie. Where's the DMT? Not here. It's illegal. We don't do crimes. We're very much in favor of law and authority on this show. Have you smoked DMT before? I don't think so.

I'm mostly kidding, by the way. But it is illegal. This is a family-friendly show. Your body's making it, though. It's in your muscles and your brain. Hey, man. It grows in the ground. Why can't I smoke it with my infant, bro? friendly show your body's making it though it's in your muscles and your brain hey man it grows in the ground why can't i smoke it with my infants bro it's natural what do you hate god

you showed me a little tour of your house i've seen some hidden rooms that i don't even think the previous owners knew about that's right and the first thought i had when i saw those rooms is like back when marijuana was illegal this would be where prohibition like chicago i'm from chicago see i know what's up you get it you know where to grow that but i actually have friends in chicago you can actually find buildings that are old speak old like i'll put it this way i i used to hang out this house where the bathroom window made no sense because when you open it was a brick wall but then if you reached your hand along the wall you would find there was an opening to your left, and they would transfer little bits of beer,

like jugs and stuff, back and forth. So it was the weirdest thing of a building with a window to a brick wall. But it was kind of obvious when you thought about it. I guess during Prohibition, people were a lot stupider, so the cops were like, this window seems perfectly normal, even though it looks like a brick wall.

Hmm, no problem here. And that's how they talked back then, so that's how the cops were. I don't know why No problem here. And that's how they talked back then. So that's like how the cops were. I don't know why people think that. Did they really talk that way back then?

Of course they used to talk that way back then. What do you think? You weren't there. Yeah. Now I don't know what you're trying to get at but I don't like it.

Let me tell you sit down and hear what I have to say. See? Harry Truman's a great example. Did he talk like that? Yeah. I heard that it was

actually the recording technology we had back then cut off like the mid-ranges so you hear a higher pitched version. Teddy Roosevelt. But they did talk like that? Yeah, it was some Harry Truman. Yeah. I heard that it was actually the recording technology we had back then cut off like the mid-ranges, so you hear a higher-pitched version. Teddy Roosevelt. But they didn't talk like this. Someday they're going to see footage of President Trump, and they're going to think this is just the average guy in 21st century America.

You're right. Oh, my gosh. All right. Well, we also have... Sorry about your leg. I am here in the corner. I'm pushing buttons. We're going to laugh a lot tonight.

I think we're going to have a great time. Ladies and gentlemen, before we get started, head over to TimCast.com and become a member to get exclusive members-only segments and help support the show because I think Rucka is going to try and get us banned. I'm only half kidding. I don't have to try. Oh. Oh.

Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh.

Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh.

Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh.

Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh.

Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Three, four person go, oh. Why?

All right, all right, all right. It's beautiful. Great range. It's never going to happen. Wow. There you go. Imagine. Turn your mic off. Oh, you know what I can do?

No, no. How about this? You super chat or I end this whole thing. Oh, snap. He's going to end it. He's got his finger over the computer. I want you all super chatting very nice things about me or I will not hesitate to turn this thing off. Don't do it.

We will be spending the remainder of the show reading super chats and nothing more or we will get complete silence. All right. All right. All right. This is why you got to join TimCast.com because we got troublemakers on the show sometimes. They just want to turn the computer off. But TimCast.com, don't forget to like, share, hit the notification bell and uh let's let's check out the story real quick so this is from buzzfeed they say lil baby's powerful grammy performance that referenced george

floyd gave me chills he deserves an award just for that performance they say my god he just did the damn thing amazing so he's like wearing this fake bulletproof vest. And they show this mock incident of Rayshard Brooks. Now, for those that don't remember, Rayshard Brooks was the guy who was driving drunk. And he was in the Wendy's drive-thru when he passed out drunk. Because he wouldn't move, someone called the cops, may have been the restaurant. When the police showed up, they were like, you know, out of the vehicle. You've had too much to drink. When they tried to arrest him, he actually fought the cops, punched one of the cops in the face. There's multiple camera angles

of the security footage, body cams, and then actually grabbed the taser and hit one of the cops with it, knocking him to the ground. The cop hit his head, got a concussion. When he ran for it, the other cop gave chase. Rayshard Brooks turned and then fired the second cartridge from the taser. And that's when the cop drew his weapon and shot the guy twice and it killed him. We saw a lot of media propaganda. They put out this fake clip, this fake still from the incident where they tried claiming the cop kicked the guy

when he was down, kicked Brooks when he's down. It didn't happen. But now what we're seeing at the Grammys of all things is they're doing this reenactment where in the reenactment, it's like the guy just peacefully gets on the ground and like puts his hands up. And it is not at all what you see in the actual body camera

footage. For those that don't actually know the story, they would see this and they would believe the activist narrative as opposed to the actual truth. This is one of the biggest problems we have right now, I think, in the country is that a lot of people, they get their information secondhand. They get it distilled by people with political motives and agendas. And that's true of this show. And it's true of the Grammys. Granted, I think we're a bit more discerning and a bit more honest on this show. And there are many other political commentators who will be more honest. But for the most part, when it filters through people with agendas, you get lies and misrepresentations. But the bigger thing about this was that they brought out Tamika Mallory. The reason that's interesting is because she's been accused of pushing anti-Semitic conspiracy theories.

This was by the New York Times. And it made everybody really question the women's march of which she was one of the principal organizers. And I think there was a big controversy. Like some groups broke up. Some pulled out. A bunch of activists were like, we don't want to be involved in this. Because she's got questionable associations. In this speech or whatever,

she said, we don't need allies, we need accomplices. And the crazy thing is when they're doing this depiction of riots as kind of a good thing, and they're having this activist come out and say these things, I think it's actually

fairly worrying. So I guess the bigger question, though, is the political ramifications of this and whether or not we should actually even care about the Grammys, both because it's trash and the ratings are trash should actually even care about the Grammys, both because it's trash and the ratings are trash

and no one cares about the Grammys, or more importantly because should we get all hot and bothered by offensive performances because we don't like it? So, Rucka, considering you do these videos, you clearly have no issue, what's the right word, being a troublemaker, I guess. I'm curious

actually what you think about this kind of stuff. i don't know if you've been following this but i know you're you're you're you're a bit philosophical right yeah well so what do you what's your thoughts on what's been going on this past year and like the grammys for instance i mean it used to be like you know 95 music and five percent you know let's take this opportunity to remember that, like, killing unarmed civilians, you know, and calling them gamer word with your arm, with your boot on their neck in their dying moments is not the way to progress forward as a nation. Now it's like 110% statements and like 1% music. Music. And, you know, people are going people are gonna say oh that's way more percentage points than logic permits so i'm gonna pass it along to the the smart looking guy here

to explain that one i think accomplice is a legal term for meaning that you're there for the crime so i mean that's like a legal term uh it's a weird word to use at the grammys when you're talking about street violence definitely when you're talking about street violence. Definitely. When you're talking about people burning down a Wendy's that had nothing to do with anything. I guess they were mad the Wendy's employees called the police because there was a drunk driver blocking their driveway. And so they called. So then they decided to burn the Wendy's down. Does that make sense?

No, it doesn't make sense. But like, I think they're there. They've got premises that most people unfortunately have so like do you ever hear people saying like um we gotta stop big tech you know we gotta stop letting big tech treat us this way so they're taking all these separate companies grouping them as though they're a monolith and wanting to basically either punish them or hamper them collectively so why shouldn't uh all stores around the neighborhood get punished collectively if people are upset at the police? This is not a stretch.

This is not a reach. I think I'm making a point. You're not going to hear anywhere but the TimCast podcast. Please go to TimCast.org. Calm. Calm. There's a big difference between a fast food restaurant that called the cops and big tech companies that actually have meetings together and are proven to actually collude with each other to remove political dissent.

So like there's not a concerted effort among Wendy's, McDonald's and Burger King to frame black individuals who fall asleep in their driveways. It was just some employee who was like, yo, there's some guy like sleeping in the driveway. Can you help us? And then when he fought the cops, he ended up losing his life, which is bad, by the way. I mean, cops should not be judge, jury, executioner. But this is a guy who grabbed a taser and turned and was trying to fire it at the cop. You can argue if the cops should not have used lethal force or whatever. That's something. But look, you know as well as I do, people talk about Silicon Valley as if it's a monolith. So yeah, maybe Twitter, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube may be met together. But at the same time, there's like a trillion other companies that are hoping to someday be at that level.

They're doing plenty of work. And these companies are also trying to compete against one another. But they're lumped together mentally as though they're a monolith. And I'm just pointing that out. That's all I'm saying. Yeah, that's a good point. Thank you. See, it's a good point.

We can move on. Corporate media, that gets thrown around. I don't trust the corporate media. TimCast is a corporation. It certainly is. It's a good point we can move on corporate media that gets thrown around i don't trust the corporate media tim castoc tim cast is a corporation it's a media corporation i trust it i work for it but like yeah i i guess i agree you know we can absolutely do that i think in terms of big tech silicon valley there's kind of like a theme people tend to be getting at they control technology and infrastructure and then with like wendy's getting burnt to the ground i don't know would you support you know Google being burnt to the ground because activists were mad that there was hate speech on it? Of course not. I don't I don't support even demonizing Google or or condemning these companies in the vast majority of cases or in some cases. Yeah. Criticize them harshly. But obviously, I don't I don't allow any level of violence by private citizens.

We've got a rule of law. Rule of law. I mean, and you see, and I hate to bring this up five minutes into the show, but when you look at the Capitol storming, you're seeing a bunch of reckless people treating everyone in that building as though they're part of this concerted effort to deprive them of their rights or something like that. I mean, we need to think critically and we need to be clear. Yeah. Well, so what are your thoughts on just like, I guess, the woke-ification and the activistification of media and like, you know, the Grammys, award shows, commercials, commercial products? I'll put it this way. You know, you're talking, it sounds like you're in defense of these corporations to a certain degree. Is that fair to say? Depends what they're being accused of.

Sure, sure, sure. I'm saying like, you know, I see two big power monopolies, government and corporations. And I think left unchecked, power tends to corrupt absolutely. So I don't care if you're the government. I don't care if you're big oil or big tech or big Wendy's, you know, or the Grammys pushing out a political message. I don't care if you're big oil or big tech or big Wendy's, you know, or the Grammys pushing out a political message. I think it's a problem when too much power is concentrated in a specific area. You don't think you're what someone could call big YouTuber? I'm big. I'm a YouTuber. You're a big YouTuber. You have a lot more influence than a lot of people. So like you could always look at somebody much bigger and say, oh, no one should have that much power.

But we know it's not power. Power is force. Power is pointing a gun at somebody. Okay, now we're getting demonetized. I meant metaphor. Well, no, actually. No, that's fine. Yeah.

I mean, I talked about the killing of a dude by cops. I think we need to differentiate economic power from political power. And the more we conflate the two, the more we conflate political and economic power, the more we're going to see economic power become the government. That is, corporations have friends in Washington, and we're going to see political power, basically politicians taking over the economy, taking over industry. So it's an ugly thing to watch it but it's been happening over 100 years over longer than 100 years so like keep in mind a lot of the outrageousness we see today is like the culmination of decades and decades and decades of of these changes taking place so there was always radicals talking about killing cops for many decades um we've had all types of shenanigans people burning down the city when they're unsatisfied this goes back probably to the days of like irish people in the 19th century or whatnot i don't mean to insult any irish people i love gingers i love everybody who looks like that um i'm just saying it was like the um what do you guys know what that thing was in chicago

where the anarchists like it was an explosion what was that what was i don't know that much about it i used i used to know a lot more about this i forgot it's been it's been a minute but i think that's a fair point to uh to mention too is that like the extremism used to be substantially worse i think in not just this country but many other countries where you actually had like you know the weather underground was planting bombs and actually detonating them now we have widespread rioting over the past year, which arguably could be worse in that it's causing way more damage, disrupting way more people's lives. But I think, you know,

you go back a hundred years, it's really bad. I mean, you've had treason, you've had sedition, you've had literal plots that involve high-powered weapons and warships, and we're actually, it's kind of like fading a bit. You know, and the conflicts we're getting into now are mostly people protesting and pushing each other and shoving.

Some people get arrested and they scream police brutality. And then they do burn down buildings and stuff. So my fear is whether or not this escalates into more serious violence. That's what I don't want to happen. There's no question that crime has gone down overall over the last few decades. I don't think there's any question of that. So like overall, we've gotten more civilized. But like what we've seen, not just this, not just in 2020. But I mean, you know, there's been plenty of rioting and looting and all types of outrageous

stuff happening, you know, for for some time, but like 2020 was the year of get no more F's to give, right? Yeah. And I don't feel like this country is my home anymore. You know, that's kind of the feeling I got in the summer of 2020. That's how I felt on January 6th. And I know someone's going to comment, oh, that's 2021. How about I come over there and we settle this? Get all of your little DVD collecting Proud Boys, and I'll get all my BLM people and we'll settle this.

All of you internet commenters i'm i'm gonna find every last one of you what do you mean summer of 2020 you're talking about the yeah the the writing the the burning down wendy's and private private businesses and um uh the police stations i mean it's absolutely uh disheartening to say the least and um and i was wondering is it gonna seep into residential areas like what what it did okay but i mean is it gonna basically just be home after home getting broken into and that's it goodbye to any semblance of civilization i just had a horrific uh portent about the chinese military invading and swiftly taking over the united states like a blitzkrieg like if we were

stupid enough to to let our girl like i they've been running war games and they're like no we can't stop the chinese if they attacked us no we talked about this with james lindsey are you familiar with with james maybe he does he's like a very uh he's a he's a the preeminent scholar on critical race theory in in terms of criticizing it and what's what it's doing and it's like wokeness and things like that and what he was mentioning when it comes to china is that they're using political warfare. So it seems more like they're interfering in our culture. They're interfering in our advertisements, our, you know, cultural creations, our TV shows, our radio programs, our schools and things like that.

So you end up with ultra woke Grammys asking for people to basically commit crimes. This is the thing. This performance they did. And the reason I think it's important to bring up is that it's not that they're directly saying, hey, go commit crimes. This is the thing. This performance they did, and the reason I think it's important to bring up is that it's not that they're directly saying, hey, go commit crimes. They're showing riots, viewing those riots as the good guys, like they're depicting that as they're the good guys, the cops, the bad guys, the people burning down the buildings, or the Black Lives Matter activists who are fighting, who are the good guys. Then they say we need accomplices. They're advocating for tearing ourselves apart. This is people in the United

States pointing the finger at the United States and saying, burn it down. Burn it all down. That's a direct quote from a lot of these activists. They've jumped up on cars and they've yelled, burn it all down. Do you think people in China do that? They don't. Now, first and foremost, they're not legally allowed to. And that's kind of scary that you've got these two views. In the US, you're allowed to. So we actually just fight ourselves and scream at each other and then in china they're forced to you know this authoritarian system keeps them in line and they're growing rapidly they're expanding they're engaging in political warfare with us and then we're on the verge of falling apart i mean that was a bold statement just made which statement you didn't feel like this was your country i mean it was a

true statement it was an emotional uh tell i mean, yeah, like seeing, you know, Melrose Avenue, Beverly Hills, seeing, you know, seeing beautiful things destroyed and not only destroyed, but being like apologized for that, meaning like people downplaying the severity of it and people encouraging it. I just, I don't feel like LA is a city where I could meet somebody in the street and feel a bond with them. Now, obviously, a lot of people were not happy with what took place, to put it lightly. But I mean, the fact that culturally people are comfortable encouraging such behavior says that morally, you know, in the way people think about ethics, these people have, people committing that type of violence have the moral high ground. That's why they're comfortable getting on the Grammys and and saying we need accomplices. So, I mean, the question to ask is not I think not so much what's wrong with critical race theory, but what's the alternative? What are you offering as an alternative?

Classical liberalism. Interesting, interesting statement. Now, what does that mean to you? Classical liberalism. Interesting. Interesting statement. Yeah. Now, what does that mean to you? Classical liberalism is typically about protecting the rights of the individual. And I mean, that's the strongest way to put it. So I don't know. Is there any more specific?

Well, I mean, I think versus like what we're seeing with critical race theory is race based collectivism. So we can get into. Yeah. I mean, I like where you're going with this. But is there a period of time in american history for instance you would say that's like when the classical liberals hung out what do you mean like would you say the founding fathers would you say the 1940s like is there a period of time no uh there's some there's some elements of classical liberal liberalism that have existed in the united states at various periods, but it's never been like—

Has it ever been more than less? I don't think the U.S. has ever been mostly classically liberal or libertarian in that regard. Interesting. If you go back to the Founding Fathers, for instance, slavery. There's no question people were kept as property. And more importantly, while the ideas of classical liberalism helped drive the idea that we no longer had to be under the knee of some divine prominence, the king declaring it, we certainly didn't have absolute freedoms. There was cultural enforcement of various ideas, women not being able to do certain things. But we've progressed greatly. My issue now is that we got to this period where it was like it was almost going to get pretty good. In the 90s, we still had censorship. But we had progressed greatly. My issue now is that we got to this period where it was like it was almost going to get

pretty good. You know, in the 90s, we saw censorship. But we had that air. We had people like George Carlin. And we had, you know, he was willing to be offensive and say things that really ruffled feathers. We do have people like that today still. Now we're starting to get hard pushback from more moral authoritarians again.

And so my thing is like, we don't want critical race theory. We don't want race based collectivism. that to me is nightmarish right there's this guy who just went viral early today because he he tweeted to bill burr who's got a black wife that it may be a sign of racism and he referred to bill burr's wife and he's claiming he did but he did as a minority adult use slave we'll put it that way. Like Sally Hemings. He literally claimed like Bill Burr was keeping this woman around for his pleasure as a slave. And it was one of the most shockingly disgusting things I've heard from a critical race theorist.

So I'm like, hey, let's respect the individual. Let's live and let live. Let's have some. We need some regulation and some restriction, but we mostly want individual freedom. There's an interesting debate in the idea of collectivism in that there does have to be some, not none, but that we're going in the wrong direction with it. Does that answer your question? Did I do a good job? I mean, you gave me your point of view.

So I think the topic of slavery and women's suffrage complicates things in a way that's difficult for me to make the point that I'm trying to make. But obviously, in most of history, slavery and ownership of women basically pushing, you know, telling women what to do has been the norm. I think your co-host looks like he still supports those things. Why are you ragging on Ian so much, man? You got to have that guy. It's like a grounding rod. Ian's the opposite of those things. He's like the leftiest guy on the show

he's so nice i can't say too much now now but like in that so i think in their time uh the enlightenment thinkers you know the age of reason as thomas pain i think dubbed it uh people like benjamin franklin thomas jefferson george washington and you know people joke people laugh at you now especially people on the right. They mock you for saying this. But in their context, in their time in history, even though slavery was a norm, even though women were still largely seen as basically trading cards, in their context, they were taking a very bold new step for man in drafting the Declaration of Independence, saying life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And they were going to have property. Did you know this? They were going to have property, life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness. And I wish they had it in there in order to help us have a lot more capitalism for a lot longer, possibly.

But you know why they didn't have property in there? Why? Because they didn't. They wanted to stick it to the slaveholders because they knew they would use their so-called property, their slaves, as an extra vote or something like that. blurry and reckless, ancient and prehistoric, even before that, prehistoric times, to get to a point where you have intellectuals establishing a country and being willing to fight for it, but then once the war is won, to sit and debate painstakingly and to look at, ask, what is human nature? What is the best type of society for a human being to live and to pursue life, liberty, and his own happiness. To get to that point is a magnificent intellectual achievement that we take for granted. So when I say classical liberal, I'm talking about those guys. I'm talking about the age of reason. And I'm not talking about what came after them, especially in America, like intellectuals that

pragmatists, utilitarians, progressives, obviously. And, of course, we get the postmoderns and we get the critical race theorists, which is probably an offshoot of postmodern or something. I'm not an expert like your previous guest. Go. I agree with you on the founding fathers. A lot of people don't realize this, but it wasn't just a political revolution. It was an ideological revolution.

A lot of countries on the world were under the crown or some monarch or some autocrat or some kind of system where it was – these kings would say by divine prominence, I am the king. God wills it. And then they would just tell people, do it or else. And they had people who were loyal to that idea and to them. And then all of a sudden you get this group of people in the US. Some of them – I've read a little bit about this. The authority of the founding fathers was questioned even by some, like based on how they were voted to represent the colony they came from, because it was like, who sayeth this colony that you represent them and want independence? But these are a lot of people who are like, you know, we don't need a king. We can rule by the

consent of the governed. We can create something new. It's truly profound. And there were a lot of ideas. But I think when you look back at history, while I absolutely take the good from the founding fathers, I've got the coin collection for Thomas Jefferson. I love it. I think the dude was a genius. I also think he was a product of his times. There's a lot of things back then we criticize. The reason I don't highlight all of those and emphasize them and condemn the founding fathers over those things is that we've changed and we don't want to be like we hate these people because they did bad things and we say we want to say they did bad things but here these really really good things we're keeping now but i do think it's fair to point out i mean they did a lot of bad things but that we're not here to talk about them as people we're talking about the ideas that they

promoted and the effect that what made them stand out in history and so well i agree with you about the founding fathers for their time was a radical bunch of classical liberal types fighting for the rights of the individual against this king willing to literally fight and die. And many of the signatories of Declaration of Independence had their legacies, their names and their lives stripped away from them. There was there was a bold and amazing bunch of people to go back then, I think would be a rude awaking for a lot of people today in terms of what you could or couldn't do because of cultural and social enforcement.

So that's my big concern today with things like critical race theory, Black Lives Matter, and commercials, that it's not so much about what's legal. You're allowed to go and do things. It's about someone will dig up a tweet from you from 10 years ago, and then you can never get a job again. You're basically being ostracized for something at the time was fine and now isn't. That's cultural enforcement. Imagine having such magnificent technology where you can do such a thing as tweet, and then someone else can dig up that tweet. And you don't need, and nobody's forcing you

to sign up for Twitter in the first place. And the technology we're living with is what they would have called science fiction a very short time ago, let alone going back in the day. And I'm not saying let's go back and live like Washington and Jefferson. I'm saying we need to look at the ideas that they came up with, fine-tune them, and expand them to everybody. Include all races and all 78 genders, I'm saying. There's 144. I think – no, I mean literally. And anyone who identifies at any gender obviously has the right to do 144. I think, no, I mean that literally. And anyone who identifies at any gender obviously has the right to do that.

I think we all can agree with that. But they don't have the right to require somebody else to call them anything or to treat them any certain way. Which is part of what I'm saying about cultural enforcement. So, look, obviously, but also, like, you can't really speak about what's taking place in the culture and not acknowledge the fact that we have a largely meddled with economy. So we have business and government largely blended together, regulation and subsidies. Right. So favors and penalties. You got to divorce the two. And that's exactly what the founding fathers should have done more explicitly.

They did a pretty good job implementing a separation of state from economics. Not a perfect job, but a pretty good job. But they should have put it in writing. So in the Constitution, it should have said separate church from state, separate economics from state. Wouldn't that be wonderful? I don't think separation of church and state is in the Constitution, though. Wherever it is. I think it was just like an ideal of the founding fathers that was enshrined in their writings.

I don't know if it is. Maybe the Federalist Papers or something. I think it is just like an ideal of the founding fathers that was enshrined in like their writings. I don't know if it is. Maybe the Federalist Papers or something. I think it is. Isn't it? Well, I guess the First Amendment is what you would say is kind of where we get that. Right, right, right. The right of the individual to be. This is the place for the highest cutting edge intellectuals on the Internet right now.

We got Tim Pool. We got me. We got this mother. Hey. Hey. Just ragging on Ian. And producer. Lydia. Lydia. Yeah. And producer. Lydia.

Lydia. Yeah. So here's what I mean by, I want to go back to cultural enforcement. If we want to take these good ideas from the founding fathers, I completely agree with you. I want those to be put more in application today. Have the individual, the right, anybody who wants to identify as whatever they want can be respected and live their lives. But it's the authoritarianism. It's the, if you don't say this, you're fired, right?

We had an actor on the show last week, and he was saying, like, he goes to these rehearsals, and they're all announcing their pronouns. And it's not like there's a law, but you know what happens if you refuse to do it? You don't get your job, and you don't work. And then you may as well find a different career, one that's not been infected by this cultural dogma. So if you want classical liberalism, you've got to contend with the fact that, you know, politics is downstream from culture. We can get a bunch of great politicians to talk about a bunch of great ideas. But then if no one is willing to do certain things because they're scared their neighbors will yell at them, it just won't happen.

Yeah. I mean, look, you know, I said you I said you can't look at the way the world is going and people are having their livelihoods destroyed and all types of problems without acknowledging the fact we have a regulatory state and a largely tempered with economy. But I'll go further and say you can't look at the way people behave and what they believe without acknowledging the history of philosophy. So the fact we have a world where so many people think they can invent their own gender or that we live in a world where people think that, you know, calling for accomplices in basically overthrowing civil order is acceptable and that is conducive to life on earth. It speaks to philosophical development. So I will offer you the following. After the founding fathers and the men

of the age of reason, and maybe some women as well, I don't know, sort of came up with their innovations in philosophy, and they discovered that the nature of man calls for his rights to be protected by a government with a monopoly on force. And I think John Locke, John, have you even read Locke? You know, played a large role in providing people like Thomas Paine with those ideas. But after America was established, the intellectuals of the generations after them, they put all of their effort into basically reversing what the founders had implemented intellectually. So what they call the, before the progressives, the pragmatists. Pragmatism is the American philosophy, not the founders' philosophy, but like the post-founding American philosophy.

You go to any public school, you go to any house of learning since, you know, sometime in the 19th century and onward, pragmatism was like the American philosophy, which it was influenced by the Germans. It was influenced by Hegel and Kant and other philosophers who rejected certainty. They said, look, all you know is you can't be certain. I mean, they said a lot of other things, too. But once that was in place, once intellectuals said that the individual cannot look at the world independently, observe it independently and be rational about it and make independently rational decisions and live and should be protected in doing so, in essence, the era of the founders was over. The era of the age of reason was over. And now you had educators basically training students to be well-socialized young boys and girls. They were teaching them to be sheep.

They were teaching them not to think. And with each generation, we've seen it get worse. We've seen people get less independent, less rational. We've seen random acts of violence. You know, in the 19th century, there would be someone who would shoot up people randomly and it was shocking, but it happened. Obviously, jump forward to modern times and before this lockdown, it was like every two weeks. It's actually worse now. Yeah, but I mean, when you reject reason at the highest levels of the intellectual world, then what do you expect kids to be taught in, you know, elementary school? Think about that idea of, you know, divine providence or whatever, that just trust me, the Lord wills that I be king or whatever. You got to take away reason from an individual if you want to establish a system like that. For the longest time, people didn't reason.

It just was. And so long as you had the zealotry, the king could maintain power. I'm going to make I'm going to make a statement that's going to get me in trouble. But I'm going to say it anyway. We go. Donald Trump's presidency is in is in a certain way similar to like the way you're describing the American Revolution and the founding fathers. You're angry now. See, hold on.

Let me let me tell you why. All right. I'm not I'm not saying because I think I why. All right. I'm not saying because... I think I... But I'll get the idea. I'm not saying because Trump was right. I'm not saying because Trump was good. I'm saying because it was basically

an affront to the established order that Donald Trump was not supposed to win. Whatever it is he was doing was offensive to those in power. And so they very much did not like him and said, this can't happen again. I look back at the founding fathers and you have this point where there was a deviation away from the crown and the absolute authority of those who are, you know, willed to be kings. And like you

mentioned, all of a sudden, generation after generation, they've stripped away reason and taught children to be better and better sheep till now here we are. Well, I mean, I think a lot of people who like Trump, whom are not bad people, would probably say they were drawn to him for reasons that you described, because they see a sort of pushback against authority or being told what to do, and they see him as sort of this kind of independent guy that doesn't let the media or anyone tell him what to do. I get that. But left sort of unchecked, like kind of left without without any correction. What Trump, I think, represents is just this dispensing with any sort of rational method. Trump says what passes through his head and that becomes so-called reality.

And his fans love it they're willing to die on that hill quite literally i think so a decent amount of them i would say you know look at a 74.2 million people it was a much smaller i'm not talking about about anyone who voted for him because a lot of people voted for trump as the lesser of two evils or even because they like some things about him but i mean i'm talking about what trump represents the way he's influenced the republican party the way he's influenced the way people go about politics. I think he definitely represents a serious development for the worst. But I get where you're coming from when you say that kind of emotionally, he speaks to people sent sort of

like the ghost of the founding fathers in. I don't even mean that, though. No, I'm just saying, like, you have an established order, You have the Democratic and Republican establishment. And then all of a sudden, Trump comes along and he's a bull just stampeding through and kind of just knocking over their stuff. I'm not saying there's an equivalence in his philosophy. I'm saying that you have kings, you have colonization, you have war, you have monarchs, autocrats. And here come the founding fathers saying, screw you, what are you going to do about it? Well, remember, the founding fathers were intellectuals. And when they weren't killing the British, they were taking a lot of time to make sure they got it right.

And they had beliefs about the nature of man. And they were intellectuals. And it's really the one time in history that intellectuals were also blowing heads off but then carefully crafting out a system of government. So I could basically flip that and say the way Trump behaves, the way he's willing to basically smash the system reminds me of some Attila's in history, some Genghis Khan. So, I mean, by the way, by the way, kings, kings are not a natural fact of history. Like kings, the rule of kings did not just evolve like like the chimpanzee. The king, there was a time when there was like, let's say, democracy in Greece. The rule of kings did not just evolve like the chimpanzee. There was a time when there was, let's say, democracy in Greece.

Far from perfect, but much better than just the king and the pope telling peasants how to live. There was Rome. It devolved. There was Rome, which was also a Senate type of system. There were ancient sort of ages of reason where they highly embraced reason and they really wanted to get it right and so how did we go from that to the dark age which very much exists oh it seems like i think we're getting into that it's possible i think it was the rejection of reason which is why you get brutes in charge but real quick sorry you know just do you think we're heading into another dark age if we uh on the route we're going, absolutely. I'm sad to say

I mean, listen, I can't predict something like that. Like, let's say it's possible that authoritarianism is on the rise. But let's say technology is just developing so fast and people love it so much that the authoritarians don't want to take that away from people. Like there's a there's a number of outcomes that where this can take us that I cannot predict. I can't just rationalistically say, nope, like all the all the things up, like it all adds up, we're going to have authoritarianism. I can't predict that. But the way we're going, the way that reason is being rejected, the way that brute force is being celebrated, and we're seeing brute force a lot. And so to have somebody like Trump in such a prominent place in society, I think, sadly, does not say something positive about where we're heading.

I like how many nods I've been getting from you. You know, I I'm happy. I feel I feel comfortable. I'm happy to be here. Did you get your ideas and your thoughts? You know what I mean? I'll give you mine. But I will clarify, too.

I'm not saying Trump is like the founding fathers. We can argue that there was an aberration in the established order where the founding fathers pushed us heavy towards individualism and freedom and then with trump it was a rejection of of establishment they're not the same thing right so the point i was making more so was that the powers that be were outraged and what i see is with trump there was this this concerted effort to fortify the election as time magazine called it because they did not want Trump to, you know, become president again or to get reelected with the founding fathers, I absolutely believe, you know, what you were saying is true. There's a lot of people, probably just because the system is exploitable. When you have freedom, it's very difficult to maintain because cheaters can cheat.

It's not true. You don't think so? Then how have they done it? How have they done what? Over time, our system has been exploited to push for the lowest common denominator. Our school systems are making our youth institutionalized and incapable. And now we end up with a generation of millennials saddled with massive debt for degrees they can't use. And what skills have they earned from spending all this money and just being extracted essentially by – what is it?

Freddie Mac and Sally May, those are the names of the company? Or these big loans? Freddie May or Sally May. I don't know the companies. This is your place for mortgage info.

Yeah, that's right. We got all the news. No, I just mean like, listen, I mean, to go from the founding fathers, freedom, to now have people demanding communism.

Well, not only are they demanding communism, I don't even know how much people are demanding communism. I think people like, let's say on the far left are demanding some type, something even uglier than communism, like some kind of Cambodian egalitarianism where everyone with any level of privilege is shaved down. That's a scary thought. Listen, I can, I can sit here and throw red meat all day to people on the right and say, these leftists are as bad as you think. But, but we're not only seeing calls for that. We're seeing calls for authoritarianism. People want Donald Trump to

rule, and they want the next guy, Josh Hawley or somebody worse than him, to be like a populist, loudmouth piece of trash who does not care about principles. So how did we go from the Founding Fathers to this? Basically, it was the dispensing of reason. So the Founding Fathers did not emerge in a vacuum. They were part of a tradition of the development of philosophy. After them, like I said, the utilitarians, the pragmatists came along. What did the pragmatists say? They said, you can't really live by principles, right? Principles are too constricting, and you don't really know if they're going to work.

So what do you do? Just act. Just act and see if it worked. And so how do you know how to act, right? Just, well, you can't use principles, right? So just whatever you feel. Do what you feel, bro. That is unfortunately become the American way.

So in essence, I see Donald Trump as like the pragmatist president. He's not the worst president. He represents the worst of the intellectual, or the first worst of the intellectual. There's been worse intellectuals than the pragmatists. But to me, Donald Trump represents the absolute rejection of the founding fathers, which is why a lot of very crappy, see, I'm trying to keep you monetized, a lot of very bad people that have emerged in the last few years, a lot of very anti-individualistic people on the right. They love Trump for a reason. They love

him because he represents America, minus any principles, minus the founding documents, minus any philosophy. You got to break that down a little bit more. Sure. Explain that, because as a statement, I don't understand. So why do you think, let's say, the alt-right loves Donald Trump, or they did when he ran? I don't think they do. do you think, let's say, the alt-right loves Donald Trump or they did when he ran? I don't think they do. Well, they did it. They wanted him to win, no? For nationalistic reasons.

Okay. Why do you think they love nationalism or why do you think they think Trump represents their type of nationalism? Trump was talking about ending free trade agreements and securing our borders. For them, it was probably an issue of immigration and white and like their race and their ideals. It's it is very much that. But also and in addition to that, on a deeper level, it's the rejection of principles. You never see Trump get up there and talk about how the founders gave us these principles that will protect us from government authoritarianism. When when Trump

got was inaugurated, he didn't get up there and talk about the reverence that, you know, we should have for the founders. He got up there and goes, today marks a power transfer from the government back to the people. I mean, this is this has nothing to do with the founding principles of America. This has nothing to do with any principles. I don't think the Trump supporters are rejecting those principles. I think I'm not saying all of them again. I'm not saying all. No, no, no, no, no. I think you'd find they would all agree with you on everything you're saying about the founding fathers. Well, then we need to be very meticulous in identifying what it is we like about the founding fathers. I would say it's that they were men of principles and the principles of individual rights.

And, you know, having getting to a point where we have a guy who just invents facts out of thin air that just occur to him and that people are willing to die for those so-called utterances and that Trump could later change his mind and they'll then change their mind as well. To have that, I think it represents something that absolutely rejects any philosophy. I think the amount of people you're describing is smaller than you realize. I mean, people who take it that far. But listen, listen, the people who stormed the Capitol disregarded the president himself. I don't think they care all that much about him. Those people, the people who support the president and many of them probably blindly were at Trump's rally watching him speak. But the storming of the Capitol started while Trump was still speaking when Trump said peacefully

march. And even people like Alex Jones, according to PBS, Jones was saying, don't fight the cops, please be peaceful. That'll be the narrative. So who are these guys who are like, we don't care what Trump says. Certainly they were, they were Trump supporters, not for, they were not Trump supporters first. They were something else. And they're probably these people, probably the authoritarians who think in their minds that the heroes of the constitution or whatever. But if, if your idea of fighting for freedom and principles and what the founding fathers did is to just barge your way into a constitutional process that you disagree with. That's literally not.

More importantly, if you were going to support the president and his fight and he said to do it peacefully, you clearly don't support the president. So those people I don't think represent a larger faction. What Trump represents from the day that he entered politics is a dispensing with principles. He has always spoken about America like a business he's going to run, like an executive. He's always spoken about economic liberty. Well, he never uses that phrase, but economics as though it's for him to manage and micromanage or to issue declarations. So what Trump represents is a turn away from principles. Again, that doesn't mean all his voters want to dispense with principles, but certainly people that want to dispense with principles, people that want America minus its

founding documents, people that want America to be a land of geography and of genetics, people who believe that America is just a group of people with no relation to philosophy, those people, they see Trump rightfully as a step in their direction. Now I've gone from the nodding with you to the shaking my head. Yeah, I see that. Because the alt-right is not a prominent faction. That's not a large... I mean, do we even talk about them like they're some little group anymore?

Basically, the Republican Party is basically like they all laugh at the founding fathers at this point. You go to a Republican group, they'll laugh at you. Come on, come on. You got to draw a line. When you say the genetics they want, there's a big difference between the Republican Party and the alt-right. So you can point out and criticize the alt-right, rightly so.

But to act like that's Trump's base, that's just absolutely not true. I'm not even concerned with Trump at this point. I'm saying the Republican Party today has nothing to do with love of capitalism, with the rights of the individual. Gone are the days. Absolutely. of the individual. Gone are the days. Absolutely. I completely agree. Gone are the. So I'm saying, look what happened. Gone are the days of Republicans talking about how my, you know, an immigrant could could swim here all across the ocean with, you know, Ted Cruz. My father had twenty dollars in his underwear,

became a dishwasher. There's a guy I absolutely hate. If you get Ted Cruz in here, please bring me on here to challenge him to consensual physical combat. No, no, no, no. All right. Basketball match. We got a basketball court.

He used to play in high school, I guess. Yeah, well, I'll play better. Trust me. I'm from the streets. Look, I think I detest the Republican Party. I mean, every opportunity they've had to actually fight

for what the people are asking for, they don't do it. Well, the people. Which people? Like their voters. Okay. What do the people want? I guess it depends on what you pull. But the number one issue for Republicans is control of immigration.

Why is that the number one issue for Republicans? So a lot of the Republicans live in rural areas. Many of them saw their small towns destroyed by a loss of industry as free trade agreements shipped off these factories to Mexico, to China. That's one of the things that Bernie and Trump both had in 2015 and 16. Bernie ended up eventually just joining the Democratic establishment. Michael Moore, Michael Moore gave the speech where he was like, Donald Trump went to the auto executives and said, I will put a 30% tariff on your car and no one will ever buy your vehicle again. And no one had ever challenged the executives this way. For these people who are in rural areas, one big thing they're seeing with immigration

is the job market is depressed. So their view, I'm not trying to make certain facts. I'm trying to say this is this is the general understanding I have. When you have mass migration and an industry being shipped overseas, so Joe Biden wants, you know, more free trade agreements. He wants higher corporate tax and he wants no deportations for 100 days, which he lost that fight. What ends up happening is you have more workers, less jobs and an incentive with higher corporate taxes for companies to leave and the opportunity to do so. You're going to get a Donald Trump who says, I'm going to reject those things. When you have rural voters who lost their manufacturing plants, who lost their coal

mining facilities, of which there weren't that many, but these manufacturing plants were shipped overseas. Now they're hungry. Now they're desperate. Donald Trump says, I'll get you those things back. So how did we go from being a country where the individual's rights are inalienable to becoming a country where people in rural areas have a right to having their job provided to them for it not being shipped off overseas or anything else? What happened to the days of individuals in America packing up? Back in the day when a plant would close down, they would load up their cart and they would move to somewhere where there are jobs.

Was it the 14th Amendment? The income tax one, the Federal Reserve? Which one was that one? I don't know. That's probably the time. When people were mandated to give a portion of their income for a guaranteed aspect. I'm with you.

So we agree that that was part one of the major steps towards the beginning of the end. I say this too. I say people— So we need to get back to free market economics, and we need to get back to a philosophical view of man that says man's rights are inalienable, including the man who builds his own company and ends up hiring many people and then later decides that the way the world is changing and the way his business is growing, it makes more sense for him to move it to a different location in or outside the country. And the government has no place incentivizing nor punishing that action.

I agree with much of what you just said. I don't want to get into every single point, but specifically one of the problems with making your own company is regulations. How do you compete with a factory in China that has none? And if you're trying, so, you know, they shut down your factory. Now you've got a bunch of workers who want to work and you say, I'd love to hire you, but I can't afford to pay 10 bucks an hour to everybody because I got to compete with China that pays a dollar. So now people here can't even compete with the industry of these other companies.

The higher corporate tax, you're right. The government is disincentivizing and restricting the ability for people to actually start their own industries. Now, you can go out onto your small plot of land, say you have one, and chop your own wood and hunt for your own food if you're able to. But now we've got a whole bunch of government regulatory problems. If you're not legally allowed to hunt, then how do you do it? Now you can't eat. You can't work because you don't have the right permits and you can't compete with Chinese manufacturing plants or Mexican.

And you can't afford to pay the minimum wage. Congratulations. Now it's just impossible for the American worker. They'll vote for Donald Trump. Look, I mean, America today produces more stuff than ever before. There's there's more manufacturing in America today than ever before. I mean, I true. It absolutely is true. And it's sad to me that in a time when what is Google going to give you a quick answer to that? I mean, it's sad that at a time when what is Google going to give you a quick answer to that? I mean, it's sad that at a time when when we're we're basically putting the Internet in in in objects that fit in your pocket, that people are not moving to places where they can learn new skills and look for new jobs. Everyone is just going to sit there and either accept welfare or or demand that the president provide them with the job. Whatever happened to the land of the individual?

Whatever happened to capitalism? Whatever happened to actually capitalism until the Chinese start having some elements of capitalism? Then we're not for it anymore. It's just very sad. But I think, again, I can't argue economics. I can argue more about philosophy. The way Americans see the rights of the individual, the way they see human nature has changed. So we agree. Yeah. So that's that's that's the battle. You are right. NIST

says one point six percent manufacturing growth year over year with from 2009 to 2019, about three percent growth over I think three percent over overall annual growth is around three percent between 2009 and 2019. And I don't know why they're giving me two numbers, but it's been growing. It has been growing. But I think the issue is certain people lose their jobs, and so they vote for Trump. It brings me no joy when anyone loses their job. But believe me, in a capitalist, a real capitalist society, I mean, I know you have some free market sentiments.

You probably agree that in an actual capitalist society, there'd be more jobs than people able to fill them, right? Yeah. I think it's a really interesting point you bring up about everything that's going on in that maybe people need to stop asking the government for help, even Republicans and conservatives who tend to be the ones who argue that they're not the ones doing that. You know what I mean? Voting for Trump to end these free trade agreements is asking the government to bring your companies back. And Donald Trump did that by using the power of government, whereas technology has dramatically changed and the ability to transport products

overseas has made it very, very easy for companies to exist in areas where it's easier to operate. It looks like the lack of restrictions on Chinese labor has made them able to compete better. I'm not a staunch capitalist. And by the way, American standard of living has risen because of trade with Chinese companies. You know, you got people in rural areas going to a big, beautiful, shiny Walmart and buying a wardrobe for their kids, buying, stocking up with plenty of food to eat. I mean, because of, well, maybe not food from China, but you know what I'm saying. There's a lot going on there, though, man.

Their standard of living has risen. Look, I mean, and if China's up to actual crime, if they're stealing intellectual property or if they're ripping off Americans, obviously, or it should be obvious, the job of the American government is to say, no way, like, we're protecting the rights of our citizens. That is the job of the government. But the job of the government is not to bring jobs home. That is not the government. And the job of a proper government, and they can't do is not to bring jobs home. That is not the government. And that's the job of a proper government. And they can't do it anyway, even if they try. They just cause damage.

So when Trump promises all of these things, maybe he can deliver some of it, but it's going to have worse ramifications in the long term. But we don't think about the long term, do we? We only think we're pragmatists, right? We only think about the short term. So the choice today is between pragmatists who they only think about the very short term and go with their feeling versus postmodern egalitarians who they're looking at the, quote, big picture, but their big picture is effed in the A, if you catch what I'm alluding to here. Broken and awful. So these are my options today. I will offer you that individualism is the answer. So don't think of it so abstractly.

Just ask as an individual. You know, you're a successful guy if I've ever seen one. Look at this empire. Good God. I could get lost in this house. Yeah, that's true. I could get lost on your website.

I start going down the rabbit hole of videos with, you know, tons of views. I can get lost. Look in your comments section. I can get lost. That's how big what you've done has happened through all this hard work. Oh, I mean, I mean. No, but what's your point? You don't need me to tell you, but I mean, this is what I'm talking about. I'm talking about you

as an individual looking at the world and asking, what do I want and how do I get it? So that's exactly what you've been doing. I often disagree, let's say, with your beliefs, but the methods you've employed to, you know, from what I know, to pursue what you wanted and to build. I mean, isn't that, doesn't that speak to what it is that capitalism gives us, that liberty to property rights? Obviously, none of us would have any of this technology if intellectual property in Silicon Valley and elsewhere wasn't protected. Finance industry, all the money that was loaned to people who wanted to develop these technologies. I mean, capitalism, other than being practical, it actually is the one moral system. It's the one system that

allows you as an individual to look at the world and say, what do I want to earn for myself? And then you get to keep it. What do you do about monopolies? There's no such thing. The only monopolies are government-granted monopolies. I like your producer, by the way. She nods more than you. I'm just listening. I'm just listening.

I like you. You've got over my shoulder this nodding like, keep going. Why do you think I'm so cocky? I'm getting so much encouragement. No, no, no. Listen, listen, listen. Yeah, yeah. Listen to Tim.

So Parler. Parler decided we're going to make our own app. We're going to have certain rules. It won't be absolutely free, but it'll be much more free than the other platforms. And then they get booted off the Play Store. They get booted off the App Store on iTunes. They get villainized, demonized by this – I don't know what you'd want to call it. You had this – I don't want to say a concerted effort, but in some aspects it was.

Various elements within Silicon Valley. Many of these people know each other, and they work for the same companies, and they rotate around. it you had this i don't want to say a concerted effort but in some aspects it was various elements within silicon valley many of these people know each other and they work for the same companies and they rotate around destroy their competition we saw this with with carl benjamin on patreon he got banned from patreon because some activists went and found a year-old live stream on an obscure channel where he made a bad racial reference it It was offensive. But hold on. Okay. He goes to join Subscribestar, which was a competitor to Patreon. What happens? PayPal and Stripe ban Subscribestar. So what do you do when you do start a new company and then your infrastructure gets ripped out from under you because people with power bully those smaller companies? If we rely on these companies

so much, then I think we're in no position to be making demands of them. We need to have a free market. We have a largely regulated market where luckily some elements of the economy are fairly unregulated. And we've seen such magnificent success stories like Patreon, like PayPal, which by the way, anything financial is the most highly regulated part of the country. So it kills me that we have the financial industry as the most regulated.

So that means that if a bank decides to cut you off, they don't want to deal with you. There's very few competitors. Obviously, in a free market, it would not be like that. So, look, I mean, again, anytime you name a problem, I'll say either the problem is probably being exaggerated or more likely it's a result of government regulation. So we need to solve this. The solution is not more government. When does that ever solve the problems of the regulatory state?

I suppose the issue is that we'll never meet the end. There will always be some problem. And the issue is we're trying to reduce the amount of problems all the time. And sometimes our solutions create more problems than we intended. Are we trying to reduce the amount of problems all the time. And sometimes our solutions create more problems than we intended. Are we trying to solve all these problems? You're focused on your work. I'm focused on my work. Like most people should focus on their own lives and look at their options and try their best to manage. I mean, so we should not be trying to engineer society. We should be trying to fight for the rights of the individual. And what happens when you have, say, a bridge?

And let's say the Brooklyn Bridge, right? You live in Brooklyn. You work in Manhattan. What if one day they said only one type of people are allowed to use this bridge from now on? Too bad. Build your own bridge. Do you build your own bridge? Are we talking about a completely free, laissez-faire economy, society?

I suppose, sure. Well, that makes a big difference, obviously. We should not have public roads. We should have privatized roads. I like how that look people give me, like, oh, come on. In a world where we are talking, how many tens of thousands of people are watching this right now? In a world where we have all this technology, nobody can imagine that road makers would be able to come up with roads good enough. We need the government to provide them with a...

All right, question. If a company builds a road and then another company is like, hey, I want to build a road and they say, you can't use our road. You can't use our road to transport the materials for your road. We did it. Why don't you do it? They would find... I mean... How about my private property? You can't drive on my private transport the materials for your road. We did it. Why don't you do it? They would find, I mean, how about my private property? You can't drive on my proper private property to get to that side of the building to build your road.

They would have to find another way to get there. There's gotta be some kind of agreement between people for some mutual like benefit agreement being the key word here, not force. So if you have an irrational road owner who decides to screw people or trying to own the whole system in some way, then they're probably going to get destroyed by competitors. Business is very difficult. So why isn't that happening with YouTube?

Well, first of all, in a sense, it is. YouTube, they're constantly worrying about their PR. They don't want to look like a frivolous, reckless website, which is why you're able to appeal strikes, which is why there are competitors as well. I mean, it's not, listen, you know, I'm not exactly, me and YouTube have not always seen eye to eye famously, but it's not as bad as people make it seem. And also, again, we don't live in a completely free society. Imagine if we had a lot more capital pouring into Silicon Valley.

Imagine if society was full of people that admired these people rather than vilifying them. So the issue with YouTube is that they've subsidized, Google is such a massive company, they've subsidized YouTube. They lose money like crazy on YouTube. But because of the way they've created the system, no one can get a leg up. No other companies have tried and they can't reach that point. By the way, I'm not opposed to the idea that the government is subsidizing Google if it turns out to be

true, but is it true or is it just that like everyone else, they live in the subsidy state where they get free stuff? Google controls a good portion of online advertising, over 50%, I believe. That's not a favor from government, though, is it? No, I didn't say it was. Oh, okay. I'm saying so when they have all of this power

and they can... Google subsidizes YouTube. That's what I'm saying. when they have all of this power and they can you you google subsidizes youtube that's what i'm saying how much how much advertising was going on online in the 1950s zero obviously so google basically took the internet to the next level and now they're being called a monopoly and so advertising from newspapers and digital is collapsing while skyrocketing and google is buying up and controlling almost all of it. They then use that ability to make it so that YouTube can pay people out more than anyone else can, making sure that all of the top creators stay on YouTube and YouTube maintains a majority control over the digital space, which maintains their ability to control advertising, which makes it a lot easier for people to buy an ad campaign, which can go on YouTube and network websites.

If YouTube lost its view share on the internet and it split up to other platforms, then a lot of people would, they diversify their advertising, their ad buys. But now it's just like Google and Facebook. That's like 95% of all advertising. Which by the way, Google and Facebook, those are two very distinct companies. Absolutely. So it's not like there is a monopoly. But also, look, I'm opposed to all subsidies. I'm opposed to all regulations. I want crimes punished and I want disputes arbitrated. But I don't want Google being given any favors and I don't want them punished for being too successful.

So here's the challenge I see with the staunchly, I don't think you call it yourself libertarian or anything like that. No. But the little L, libertarianism, you know, going way down into the staunchly freedom-oriented – I don't want to say libertarian necessarily because people associate it with the political party. The issue is that authoritarians will build massive infrastructure. know, for instance, subsidizing YouTube through Google, the parent company or Alphabet, gives a bunch of its money from its other networks to YouTube to keep it afloat, even though YouTube doesn't generate enough money because bandwidth is very expensive. This dominates the space.

Then they use that for cultural enforcement. Certain ideas are allowed and certain ideas are not allowed. Your ideas are being purged right now as we speak, and you're okay with it. Look, I mean, even in the highly regulated state that we live in, and even with all of these very big, powerful news companies, look how successful you've been. I mean, we don't live in a world where, like, power-lusting people are able to just suppress everyone easily. It's just not the case, especially in a... To varying degrees. I mean... Well, to varying degrees i mean to varying degrees i understand but like

the best the best situation for you as an individual if you want to live a good life if you want to look at the world and ask what do i want and then go out and get it you want liberty you need liberty it's indispensable so there's you know you could keep on coming with all these scenarios i'm not an economist i'd love to send you some economists to come on the show that i like and and have them address every last point you're making. I'm arguing with hypotheticals right now. I can only say a lot of the mess we're in is because of subsidies, because of regulations, and that's what I'd like to get away from. But let me emphasize again, we need to get back to the view of human nature, the view of man as an individual.

Look, this is a great topic. What are we, like, three hours into the show now? One hour. That's cool. Why don't we jump over to another topic? Would that be all right with you? I got a gift for you. You have a gift for me?

I got a gift. You want to jump? What do you guys, should we talk about China, Bill Maher, or Teen Vogue and getting their ads canceled? What do you think is more interesting? Not China. How about Teen Vogue? Teen Vogue?

Yeah. All right. Let's talk about Teen Vogue. Well, yeah, we'll talk about Teen Vogue because this is – I'm optimistic. This story makes me a little bit optimistic, right? So this is from The Independent. I did cover this on my other channel a couple days ago, but it seems we have some developments. Teen Vogue advertisers pull out over editors' controversial past tweets major advertiser suspends campaign on the same day

incoming editor apologizes for perpetuating stereotypes of asian and lgbtq people in a series of tweets from 2011 that's 10 years ago i mean i get it it was offensive 10 years ago it's offensive today but i think she was like 17 this woman so i'll just give you the gist of it i don't need i don't need to go through all. I know for the most part of the story, this lady is Alexi McCammon. She worked for Axios, I believe. And I think she's an unethical reporter because she was dating the guy from the Biden administration when she was supposed to be covering.

That was her. Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's very, very unethical. Well, she made some offensive tweets 10 years ago. Now you have this letter. First of all, let me put it this way. She got rewarded. She was violating journalistic ethics, sleeping with the guy from the Biden administration, claiming she wasn't writing for him, and apparently she was still writing for him,

or at least in some way facilitating these stories. Very unethical journalism. She gets rewarded. How would you like to be editor-in-chief of ultra-woke Teen Vogue, for some reason praising Karl Marx? It's supposed to be a fashion magazine, but they write praise of Karl Marx, sure. They reward her for this. Well, then around 20 or so employees wrote this letter saying, she is an offensive, racist, bigot, and all that stuff. And this was a terrible choice and she shouldn't be hired. And I'm sitting here thinking like, dude, come on.

10-year-old posts you're not going to hire? That's insane. Now it's backfiring on these employees.. Now it's backfiring on these employees. Well, it's backfiring on the company. The company is now losing a seven figure advertiser because the employees complained about the hire. So the employees effectively got their own company canceled. I think it's the fault of the people who run the company because they hire these rage bait writers who purposefully inflame racial tensions and gender tensions and all these things to make money, they use these people to write anger rage bait so that they get clicks

and can make money from it. And eventually you hire so many, which is critical mass. And then they start complaining about your own company and you lose your seven figure advertiser. So this is more like the area of cultural enforcement and the backfiring. And I'll put it this way. This makes me optimistic. Because if they're canceling themselves now because there's nothing left to cancel, then what do they do? It's like a Ouroboros. They eat their own tail and then.

Well, the people that want to cancel, they don't care if Teen Vogue survives or not. They just want to see Bernie or say maybe Teen Vogue will say F you and just keep doing things their way and other companies as well. So isn't that nice when companies look out for themselves rather than the so-called public good? Because right now the so-called public good is not good. Right. Right. Well, no, but these employees are going to lose their jobs. Yeah.

Well, you know, a lot of people don't really feel bad for them. Maybe they can build solar panels. But listen, I mean, this speaks to the power of philosophy. You know, all these people out there arguing, you know, what drives people? What drives people? I mean, what people believe to be right is largely what they do. They think this is the ethical thing to do. And they do it. So, I mean, you look at these cancel mob.

They were not born this way, as Lady Gaga once put it. She was not born like that. Yeah, she was not born like that, wearing that. Trust me on that. There was my favorite joke from 2010. Offensive. I mean, you know, again, these people all went to school, or they were influenced by artists who went to school, or they were influenced by parents who went to school.

Like, these people all were taught, yeah, critical race theory, postmodernism. We can't communicate. We just can't understand each other, man. You're Korean. I'm black. We are just't understand each other, man. You're Korean. I'm black. We are just living in different realities, man. I mean, people unironically believe that two individuals of different races or genders or sexual proclivities cannot communicate. By the way, chat room, I know you hate me, but see, I can punch left a little bit.

I can throw you some red meat. Guys, we're on the same team. I've worked so hard to provide you with quality entertainment. God forbid I try to help you out once in a while with some red pills. Am I right? Where do you think this cultural enforcement ends up going? Like the wokeness, the cancel culture? I mean, maybe at a sort of surface level, we'll see sort of a pendulum swing, you know, kind of like there was like kind of in the 90s, you had a lot of, like you said, George Carlin, like a lot of like offensive entertainment.

Obviously, that's where I was influenced growing up. Maybe you were a fan as well. I mean, yeah, definitely punk rock rap and being being a badass was cool. Like that was or it was a thing to be. Not everyone liked it, but it was. It's like you don't want to be the parents from Footloose. You wanted to be the, you know, screw you. I'm going to go dance.

You can't tell me what to do. I mean, there were conservatives back then and they were not into that stuff. And they were liberal. You know, there were leftists who said, no, they were pushing for political correctness back then. But there was a big element of the part of the culture that was saying, ah, this is all crap. And I think we're going to see more of that. I think, you know, I live in Hollywood. There are a lot of people. They never signed up for any of this. You know, this whole like,

you know, call me by, don't misgender me, right? A lot of powerful, rich people in Hollywood, they never signed up for this to have somebody half their age telling them, don't misgender me. They're giving away a ton of power. I mean, you could be, imagine you're a 50 year old dude, an executive in Hollywood, and you're worth millions of dollars. And you got to this point where you worked really hard. You're making movies. You're doing great. You got an infinity pool.

And then all of a sudden, some 19-year-old who doesn't even have a job, is still in college, costs you $30 million because you're about to do this big movie production. And you accidentally, you know, they found a tweet from you from 10 years ago. Or look at that NASCAR driver. A NASCAR driver lost a sponsor because his dad sent the N-word in the 80s. But more importantly, like that's the craziness of it. Imagine you're this high-powered, you know, man or woman and you're like, I finally did it. I got my condom in Hollywood.

And then just some dumb kid calls you a racist and you get fired yeah i i i i'm willing to bet a lot of people are going to start being like nah you know yeah but even so like what's the alternative you know where where are they going to turn to next and people need a positive that they're driven towards it's not just enough to say the left is crazy the left is bad anything is better than the left anything is not better than anything like only left is crazy, the left is bad, anything is better than the left. Anything is not better than anything. Only the right, there's the right answer. There's accurately looking at the world

and being rational. That is what I'm about. By the way, can I give you a gift? Depends on what the gift is. You're gonna like it. I'm not being, I'm not tricking you. I think you're gonna like this. Okay.

Can I give him a gift? Oh, yeah. All right. And can I ask you, watching at home, may I give him a gift? We want to know what you think. If you say no, then screw him. He's not getting nothing. I don't know if they're saying anything.

They're arguing. Oh, are they? Imagine that. They're agreeing and disagreeing. Oh, it's a birthday present. If one person watching agrees with me, then I've done the impossible. Listen, I know we've had our differences, a lot of you watching. I just hope we can all agree at the end of the day on what it is that this gift represents.

I think you're going to like it as well. Go ahead. Is it going to get me in trouble? No. Rucka got me a birthday present. You know it's my birthday. Of course I knew it was your birthday. Is this just a bunch of wrapping paper?

That would be a lot of work into a mildly funny joke. A mildly funny joke? I mean, just getting you to unwrap a bunch of stuff, and then we got like nothing left. It's a calendar? What is this? It's better than a calendar, but it is something you can enjoy 365 days. Why did you get me this? Oh my gosh, what is it? I'm scared.

This is not for me. This is for somebody else. Let's find out. I can see what it is. You actually got me this. And you brought it. It's a picture of Carl Benjamin. It's more than that. Get the cardboard out of there. Get the cardboard out of there.

Get the cardboard out of there. Or cut it off, yeah. Get out one of your weapons. Show us what it can do. I don't have any weapons up here. I don't have any knives up here, yeah. Can't open a piece of tape with a gun. Oh, this is gonna be...

This is a beautiful moment. I've never been so... Here. I wonder if Carl's watching and he's gonna be like, what is this? Okay. This is an amazing moment. Oh, no. I don't wanna ruin it. he's going to be like, what is this? Okay. This is an amazing moment.

Oh, no. I don't want to ruin it. It's got tape on it. I think it's like three in the morning there, so I don't think he's watching. Oh, he's watching. Here. Let's see it. Oh, look at that.

It's beautiful. It's Carl Benjamin, and there's something else in here, or what? There's something else in there. Yeah, just rip it open. Oh, snap. Is this going to get me in trouble? I mean, not with me. That I can tell you.

All right, I am opening it. Why Carl Benjamin? I don't know who this Carl Benjamin is. Sargon? Now, be careful with the opening crevice. The opening cleavage. Is this a vinyl? Oh, cool. Is this a vinyl? Oh, cool.

Is this a vinyl record of the... I can't play this. I appreciate that. This is really cool. Is this... So what is this? It's a vinyl record. Is this the one song on the back from your Sargon song?

It's got the Sargon song that you could never get enough of. That's right. It's got... I was with you guys in the UK when you were singing it. Almost the top viewed Sargon related video on YouTube. There's like one more

that's beating us. It's like the one of Sargon roasting some innocent, beautiful feminists. That's right. What's on this side? There's two different songs? We got some live versions.

Me and Sargon singing it together in England. We got the one, me, Sargon, and an songs um we got some live versions me and sargon singing it together in england we got the one uh me sargon and an orchestra we got some got sargon sargon live featuring sargon and sargon with an orchestra it's beautiful beautiful gift so for those for those that may not be familiar carl benjamin hosts the lotus eaters podcast we've referenced him uh every so often here and he's one of like the uh like og gamer gate people i guess yeah is that fair to say i guess i don't really know what gamer gate is really me neither but he was he was an anti-identitarian like you know anti-sjw back in the day now he hosts a much more professional i'm not trying to be i'm trying to be very

respectful in fact um complimentary his new show the The Lotus Eaters Podcast, actually, he's doing really, really well in the UK, I suppose. And this is because Rucka wrote a song about the origins of Carl Benjamin, a.k.a. Sargon of Akkad. So thank you for this gift. It's your vinyl. I'll put it on the wall. Yeah. It's a beautiful thing. Even if you don't have a vinyl player, you can listen to it.

Got to get one now. Adam's got one. Oh, he does. We'll have to. it. Gotta get one now. Adam's got one. Oh, he does. We'll have to... You should also get one. By the way, I've been kind of mean to you, and I want to make it up to you. That's nice of you. Here's a gift for you.

Oh, thank you. Oh, wow. Interesting. Just getting everybody gifts? Well, not everyone. Where's mine? It's not my birthday. Ian's opening a gift now.

So we went from this very intense political discussion about... At the end of the day, all we have is the music. We're having a party. Yeah. Yeah. Is that a CD? It is a CD. It's going to be a Sargon CD, isn't it? It better be. I'll be disappointed if it's not. It's a CD

of Sargon. Yes! I love it. Sargon Live. Look at us promoting Sargon Live. Well, it's really promoting me more than him. These are my CDs and vinyls that I'm selling now. Oh, right on.

So you're saying you already have them and you're pretending like it was a birthday present. I mean, I don't have them. Because you found out at the last minute it was my birthday, so you pretended to go up. I bought these for you. Sure you did. Earlier today, because he was here, he's like, I'm going to go for a walk real quick. I'll be right back. And he's like, oh, I got you a present, by the way.

Yeah, I went to the local record shop and bought this for you yeah no these are yeah these are no i got them from ruckusworld.com they're they're oh yeah catalog very cool thank you so much i hope you enjoy it it's cool i hope you enjoy them every christmas you know i gotta get uh what we i want to get carl to come out and come on the show but covid restrictions and all that i'd love to show him your sargon vinyl i'm sure he'll be happy with this now he has no choice but to come on the show and then he'll he'll autograph it and you know yeah put it on the wall and it'll be i should autograph it honestly yeah not even not even him we don't we don't we don't care about him just just you rucka what does he even have to do with it at this but look how beautiful is this yeah

i'm very happy with it we're very happy with it we're very happy with it i like that yeah i listen to that song yeah weren't we talking about what were we talking about we're talking about teen vogue teen vogue firing somebody yeah um but i i don't know are we done with that should we derailed i think yeah because all of a sudden you know rucka's like i got you a present and i was like i'd like to know what that present is exactly well we had that story uh other than that there's like i think we got bill maher and china stuff i don't know if you if you care a lot that the China stuff. I feel like we just got done arguing about China, but let's let's hear what Bill Maher has. No, I'm not super interested.

Actually, OK, well, a little bit about the Bill Maher stuff. Look. Yeah, yeah. Bill Maher said that the U.S. lost to China to focus on woke competition and lizard people. I've talked quite a bit about the Bill Maher stuff. Basically, he's saying, you know, Dr. Seuss had this book removed because of this depiction of a Chinese man eating with chopsticks. And he says, you know who doesn't care about this? China. All 1.4 billion could give a crouching tiger flying F about Dr. Seuss's book. They're building

infrastructure. They're building coal power plants. They're growing rapidly. So I always have this question for a lot of the more liberty or I don't know the right word is, but capitalistic individuals and less government. How do you provide for the common defense? And I'm not saying you don't. I'm asking you quite literally. I mean, I don't. I think you're right. I don't. The common man doesn't need defense. The common man needs liberty. And Bill Maher, he was a leftist then. He was a left defense. The common man needs liberty. And Bill Maher, he was a leftist then he was a leftist when everyone disagreed with him. And he's a leftist when some people now agree with him. He does not believe in capitalism. He's always mocked the idea of capitalism working back when people on the right pretended to be for capitalism. Bill Maher

was public enemy number one because he said things that, you know, a child thinks about capitalism. And here he is saying the same thing he's always said, that capitalism screws the little guy. And, you know, the difference is now Republicans and people on the right are crazy about it. People hate me. Everyone doesn't want to hear about it. But, you know, the truth is the truth. Well, so look, China's growing rapidly. Yeah. They've got oil exploration in Africa and South America. Yeah. Are you familiar oil exploration in Africa and South America. Yeah. Are you familiar with the concept of Thucydides' trap?

No. That's like beating a dead horse for me to say it because I say it all the time on this show. But it's a general idea that when a rising power is about to displace an economic superpower, war breaks out. So what in your view would this world or this country be like if we did not have the common defense? Would it just be like individuals who are armed guarding their private property and saying – No. So I do believe in police and military. I'm not saying we should abolish though.

I'm not an anarchist. That's the thing. Anarchists, they're like a Dr. Seuss bastardization of Ayn Rand's philosophy, objectivism, which I am. I'm an objectivist. Anarchists, they don't really have an answer. Right. Now that I, there's one group of people I haven't pissed off yet. Now I've got them all on my back.

All right. Now that everybody's angry. Now that everybody hates me. In the event that, you know, war breaks out, what do we do? Like, what do you mean war breaks out? War breaks out, they fire at us, they're dead.

They'll know that when I'm in charge, believe me, it'll be very clear. But do you think that there's like a very strong free market and then taxation

would fund military for common defense? Well, much more. The amount of prosperity we would see in a free market would be just so, just so high.

The average person would have change in his couch. There's a dated reference for you. Change in his couch. Something Zoomers have never seen in their life. Change that they find in the couch. Yeah, those are the days, huh? I mean, in a prosperous society. You're hungry and you like put the cushions over?

I mean, okay, look out. We have a volunteer military right now, right? Like, who the hell wants to go to the military, right? We're busy, right? Like, who the hell wants to go to the military, right? We're busy, right? But still, in a free country where people have that option, you see enough people are passionate about defending America that they're willing to sign up for the military, right? And they get paid for it. In a free society, I think you would see a lot of people voluntarily funding the military. I mean, it would be bizarre to think that, you know,

let's say Donald Trump. See, let me say something nice about Trump. Old Donald Trump, you know, apprentice Donald Trump, doing all these charity events, Donald Trump. We're going to have a concert. Lil Jon and Sugar Ray, Mark McGrath, Sugar Ray, we're going to have a... I never tried doing a Trump impression before, by the way. So I know it's coming off a little bit cringy, as the kids would put it. But I mean, he would have a concert, you know, where Mark McGrath plays every morning. There's a halo. Oh, there goes your monetization.

Your friends. No, that's fine. Yeah, that sounds nothing like him. Yeah. You know, and people would buy tickets and a lot of the proceeds would go to funding the military. That's an example of a fun way to raise money for the military. But other than that, it would just be wealthy, successful people that love America, that want to defend it for selfish reasons, would fund the military. But half as many of that?

I think most people would not do it. I think maybe conservatives who are like, you know, singing for America. I think you're wrong. Even in today's world, in today's largely regulated America, which is a fraction of the level of prosperity it could be, you would have, even if today's top 10%, who I keep hearing about, today's 10% have all the money and 1% have all the money. That 1% could fund the military, right? But would they? They could. And if the alternative is having a weak country that gets invaded by all types of crazy Asians, then obviously they would do it.

But I mean, again, remember, we live in the age of pragmatism where most people are not thinking that long term. To them, everything's short term. And how do I feel right now? So we need people that treat their life the way they treat their business. They're looking at the next 10 years. They're looking at the next 50 years. And just that, you know, that proverb, A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade

they know they will never sit beneath. That's beautiful. And what does that mean? Let's talk about this. I like this. Why do old men plant a tree they will never get to sit beneath? So that the children who come after them will have shade to sit under. Yes. And also, why do they care about children after they're dead? I don't know why. Because while they're alive, they love life. They love being alive. They love many people that they know.

They love seeing children learn to walk and sit under trees. They love life. They love their animals. They love their plants. They're passionate about life and all these things. And then to them, the idea of just planting a tree means at that moment their life had value. Like they were pursuing their own value. They love what that planting represents.

And they get to lay in their deathbed and maybe even be reminded of that little tree and die with a smile on their face. So it's their personal values. It's not altruism. It's not, oh, I'm just going to sacrifice this time and this seed and plant it even though I'll get nothing out of it. That's just such an ugly thing to strive for. It's selfish but in a rational way, in a beautiful way. I'm not one who would favor a command economy quite the opposite end of the spectrum, which would be an unplanned competitive market where you don't know if you're going to have the budget you need to defend yourself from an attack from an adversary like China. I think there's got to be some planning. And if there's some planning,

we have to have some budgeting. So that means taxes. Again, I believe in having a military, the government's, it should be the government doing it, not Bill Gates, not Steve Jobs. Maybe some of the technology those guys come up with should be licensed, whatever, by the government. I'm not a legal philosopher, believe it or not. Believe it or not. I am a dropout. But I'm saying the government should have a military and they should be able to figure

out what is the budget. And then is the society willing to pay for that budget? And then if the answer is no, which I don't think it would be, but if the answer is no, then that country has a problem on its hand. And it's true. Doesn't deserve. Doesn't deserve. By the way, you would you would fund the military. I would not.

Well, not today's military with all their BS. But in a rational society, if you knew the military's job was explicit and clear and limited and I was in charge of it, you trust. You know, I'm a good general. right? You know, I'm, I care, you know, you've seen me talk about the rights of the individual and the American philosophy of its founding and all these things. And you know that the president agrees with that too. And, and I'm his general and we're going out to deal with Chinese forces that are violating the rights of Americans. You would have some money to volunteer. I think you just made a really good point. If people were not willing to fund the military, then we do have a problem. And the only reason we're able to engage in a lot of trash wars

that seem to fail in the Middle East is because people are forced to fund the military. And so I wonder if that, regardless of whether or not you're forced to pay for it or you wouldn't choose to pay for it, shows a larger problem breaking, a larger break in this country in general. Not only that people are forced to pay taxes, but also, again, people, they don't hold dear the rights of the individual. They don't see their own life as their standard of value. They don't see their own life as something to die protecting. How do you feel about conscription? Against it. But the Founding Fathers were for it they were wrong yeah how about that how about that bro good point yeah so uh how do you feel about the second amendment i think i'm for it

but it's not this is gonna okay now if anyone doesn't hate me yet i'm gonna piss them off and say in my opinion in not everyone agrees with me in my opinion the right to bear arms is not as fundamental as the right to property and the right to speech what i mean is your property as a billionaire you're right as a billionaire to own your big crappy silicon valley company is more sink or sink to me than the right to own a gun. I know. I hate to pick which one is more important. Man, I'm the opposite. Right.

That's the problem. I think you're right to own a gun. Without the right to property, without the right to own what you've produced. How do you protect what you've produced if you can't have weapons? The question first is do you have an inalienable right to that property? Yes. If you say yes and from my cold, dead hands, take this property, then we can talk about, okay, well, is individual civilians owning guns a meaningful, effective way to protect property rights?

And maybe the answer is yes, in which case I'm for it. But it's derivative. The first comes property rights. See what I'm saying? Well, I agree. I agree, because the gun is property as well. If you have no right to property, how would you know? Well, but it is conceivable, and you're going to hate me for this, but it is conceivable that weapons, some weapons are not a right to own because they cause more destruction than—

And some companies cause massive destruction like the Cuyahoga River, which was mass polluted and burst into flames. So I think you'd agree that we could regulate those companies. Well, if the rivers were privately owned, then the owner of that river would be able to file a lawsuit and retire very young. And if the roads were privately owned, I could carry a weapon on my own private property. Depending, again, on how the legal philosophers determine what it is that the individual needs in order to live a rational life in a free society. What if people are speeding down my road dangerously and they're violating my rights rights i think gone and try and stop them i think you set the speed limit but this is very advanced legal philosophy so so i'm look you know you're saying that a gun isn't the same level of there may be some guns you should not have for a variety of reasons because they can cause more damage i think massive companies cause massive damage. Listen, those are two very different types of questions. Should an individual be able to own

an Uzi? Like the Bhopal disaster that, you know, kills hundreds of thousands of people versus someone with a gun who might kill dozens? Listen, the right to kill somebody is not yours, like, unless it's self-defense, right? But polluting someone else's property is always wrong, no matter what. There's no such thing as polluting someone else's river in self-defense. I'm trying to find that distinction between some guns can be very dangerous so you can't have them versus some companies can be very dangerous but you can still have them. In what way are companies dangerous? you have, say, a semi-auto 50 BMG, anti-material rifle, you're not intending to use it. You shouldn't be to harm another person who is innocent, using it to protect yourself, your property from, you know, helicopters and tanks that might violate your property. Or for the most

part, we agree in the United States, you can defend yourself from lethal harm, reasonable fear. If like, you know, if somebody is threatening you, you have a way to defend yourself. And it's typically if you think they're going to kill you, right? So it is wrong to take a gun and use it for the purpose of intentionally inflicting death upon someone who is not threatening you in any way or, you know, coming at you, right? Right. So that would be a violation to use that weapon that was too dangerous in a dangerous way. Okay. Well, the intended purpose of, say, a chemical processing plant is to provide petrochemicals to individuals like cleaning solutions and fuels. It is not the intended purpose to blow up and poison hundreds of thousands of people. But it can, as a 50 BMG semi-auto, can be used to kill too dangerous. So I don't know exactly

what should be legal when it comes to like what's too dangerous for people to have. Obviously, a private company cannot build their own atom bomb and then hold it over a neighboring city and say, well, it's my property. No, I mean, you need to look at what is the type of society where an individual, again, can look at the world, choose his rational values, and pursue them without anyone else impeding on them. And I don't think there's any— I think you need guns. Okay, fine. But my point is—and I didn't need to pick this battle, pardon the pun, because I could have just said, yeah, you have the right to bear arms, and everyone in the chat room would stop hating me.

And we would— Yeah, and I would get to throw some red meat to all of the Second Amendment people. But I just want to be philosophical about this and say the right to bear arms is derivative. First comes the right to property. And the reason you have a right to own property is because in order to live, you need to produce. And so you have the right to speak because speech is a expression of thought. So I agree with the property part. And look, I understand your opinions.

I'm not saying they're wrong. I have opinions. You have opinions. I just think that it is derivative. The right to own property comes first. And I think bearing arms is more fundamental to the individual than the billionaire individual. So let me or the corporation. So I'll clarify. If you're somebody who works,

you know, breaks your back every day, you know, farming and raising chickens or whatever, there are bad people who will steal. I mean, this is a thing that exists. There are also animals that don't consider it theft. It's scavenging and opportunism. The right to bear arms can protect you from those animals who would strip away what you've produced, but also criminal individuals who would as well. So we can even remove the bad thieves from the equation and say, all right, what about a fox and a coyote come on your property? Can you protect yourself and your chickens from that coyote? Well, you'll need a gun or at least some kind of weapon.

And I don't think you're going to be going up against coyotes with a machete. I think you'd be hard pressed to find a-market person who is opposed to, you know, either bearing arms or certainly companies protecting themselves from wild animals. I think the controversy comes up when it comes to big weapons and many, many weapons. is able to pursue the life that he wants without being interrupted by outside people, then, again, speech and property are the fundamentals. And then the right to protect your property and person with a gun, it's reasonable. See, again, I could have let this one go easy, but I wanted to be a little, you know, a bit of a hard ass just to clarify that I think it's derivative. And then I think just to kind of cap off this conversation when it comes to corporation versus corporation

or individual just legal lawsuits civil courts and stuff is i think reasonable anybody would agree with right like if like a corporation was say polluting a river and that and that was affecting a farmer who was like a small farmer he would file a lawsuit yeah the courts would river by the way would not be publicly owned. The river owner would be able to sue much quicker than the farmer. How does one person own an entire river? Would it be a corporation that owns it? Either that? Yeah. Usually, I think. Oh, look, I mean, it's hard for me to tell you how it would work. But I mean, back when property was mostly... Corporations were a new thing. It wasn't the Brooklyn Bridge, like the first corporation?

No. Corporations existed in the times of the founders. It was an American innovation, I believe. I just read about this in a journal called The Objective Standard. But wasn't it like they were temporary? I don't think so. I think there's a lot of anti-corporate sentiment in the world, in the intellectual world. It's all propaganda. I was kidding. I said it's all propaganda.

It is. I think it is. I mean, there's both anarchists, a lot of libertarians, obviously leftists, and a lot of these populist nationalists. They all see corporations as some bastardization of the idea of property rights and all that. But really, it is taking property rights and kind of making them better protected in a marketplace. So I'm pro-corporation. Obviously, you're a corporate entity yourself. I'm a corporate entity. We are surrounded by the fruits of corporate efforts. Honestly, this is going to piss off the last person watching this that does not hate me. I liked, because I think I know what he meant. I liked when Mitt Romney in 2012 said, corporations are people. Because I think I know what he meant to say is that we're talking about corporations as

though they're floating, some floating aliens that have nothing to do with the American. No, corporations are people, my friend. The creators, the workers, the owners, and the shareholders, and the customers are all people. Do you think that's what he meant? Like corporations are comprised of people? That's what I think he meant. He did not mean to say that literally these corporations have a name and zip code and

social security. I think they are are legally aren't they legally persons they're they're legal persons for the sake of like lawsuits and things like that you know yeah that was that one but right right i used to be i think it's a man i think the whole thing was a semantic argument to be fair but let's uh let's read some super chats my friends if you have not already make sure you smash the like button because it really does help and go to timcast.com become a member for exclusive members only segments we do little bonus segments after the show and sometimes full episodes but this was actually a fairly interesting i mean is it i think there was a there was a good discussion ruck up because uh you know we've not had uh that kind of discussion or debate before on this show

we've had leftists on the show who have given us very obvious leftist opinions and we've argued quite a bit and uh this was interesting because it's kind of the other direction you know what's interesting to me is i started talking about any of this stuff i was you know i was just an average dude uh neckbeard sitting in my bedroom uh like you know the story of sargon as illustrated in this beautiful uh number uh-huh he uh he was minding his own business when he saw something happening he wanted to speak out about so as much as i hate what he believes today kind of where he ended up i have to tell you it's an inspiring story of a totally worthless stoner lowlife saying no i want i have something to say you read atlas shrugged and like changed your life oh yeah the fountainhead really changed my life when i first

read that and then atlas shrugged it's like that on steroids. It's amazing. So I started talking about objectivism and Ayn Rand around 2016 or 2017, because I saw a lot of people leaving the left. We're leaving the left. The left has gone bananas. Well, the left, what happened to the left? Right. And I said, guys, I get what you're I get what you're upset about. And I think you're right, but where is this going? What's your positive that you're moving towards? And if you're just moving recklessly away from the left, it's not going to go anywhere positive. And what we've seen is a lot of people basically kind of shrug, pardon the pun, and turn back to the left, a lot of those guys. A lot of them have turned to this sort of stringent nationalism that, again, has nothing to do with principles, nothing to do with individual rights being inalienable.

And a lot of people call themselves centrist. They're sort of still trying to figure it out. And they're not going to, you know, they have nothing positive that they're really fighting for. And it's not going to tame the forces of madness on the left and right. So my friends, you know, think about what you truly believe and, you know, and be like this guy. He was just an average dude. Look at that mask. He put on that mask.

He became the warlord he became. That's what I am now. And that's what you can be, too. Let's read some of these super chats again. Smash the like button because it's very important and share the podcast if you like it. If you're listening on iTunes or Spotify, leave us a good review

if you like the show. Let's see what we got. Cryptic says, Tim, you should look into having Chris Dwayne, aka the YouTube channel The Greatest Truth Never Told on your channel.

Let's see. Jean McCloud. Oh, he says, no Luke, no peace. Luke is, I don't know what he's doing. He went to Anarcho Polco. He's back now.

Jean McCloud says, Tim and Lydia, you're a mask maker here. How are all your masks holding? Oh, yeah. Do I need to remake them or send new elastic? Ian, what is your favorite color so I can make you one? Ian.

Blue. I like green blue. Yeah. Mine's doing all right. Oh, yeah. But we don't really need them that much anymore. Yeah. I barely wear mine.

Yeah. Out in the middle of nowhere, it's kind of like no one's really, it's not really that necessary. I have to say, this is my favorite mask that I've wear mine. Yeah. Out in the middle of nowhere. It's kind of like no one's really. It's not really that. I have to say this is my favorite mask that I've ever had. It was custom made for us and it fits me just perfectly. I put a picture of it on my Instagram a while ago and it's still it's holding up really well. I appreciate it. Thank you. All right.

Let's see. Matt McCormick says, imagine my surprise to see Rucka on the show. West B and Pine Grove forever. I know, Matt. What up? What up, Cheeks? Cheeks. No, he doesn't like being called that. but I think in this context, he'll appreciate

the shout out. All right. Whatever and Everything says, Tim, been watching for years. I've learned a lot from your channel. I made a hip hop song called 2 Plus 2 Equals 5. Check it out. I'm an 80s baby with a 90s flow. Salute.

Will do. Zabruzzi Willis says, love you guys, especially you, Tim Chan. Tim Chan. One day, it's son? Timcy, yeah. I'm a man. All right. Adam Austin says,

Happy belated birthday, Tim. My birthday was yesterday the 14th, which is the most important birthday because it is also Karl Marx's death date. Is that real? It's also Pi Day. It is Pi Day. Chesty says,

Get that Star Wars girl on your show. She wants to come on. We'll look into it. Peter A says, Tim, thoughts about starting a record label? I make death metal and would like to put a record out on a label not run by woke people. Most indie metal punk labels are woke or to the line publicly.

I don't know about starting a record label. That's probably outside of my wheelhouse. I just made one song so far. We might make more, so we'll see. Timothy Peterson says, absolutely devastated today. I'm a Caucasian cat that's been married to a black woman for 14 years. Found out from a blue check that I'm racist because of that.

That's right. There was a guy who's like he's going viral because he made some ridiculous claim about interracial couples being a sign that the guy is racist. And it's like the weirdest argument ever. I genuinely think these people are white supremacists. I think they're just lying and using the left to try and manipulate into gaining power. It's cultural indoctrination. Can I jump in here and say that song of yours? I really like that.

Like the video you showed me. Oh, yeah. The Will of the People. The Will of the People. Thank you, sir. I respect it. Production-wise, you really brought that vision to life. Well, Nishra is the one who did all the production, and then iStudios and Sweden are the ones who did the animation.

Delegation takes skill as well. So even if you didn't personally do it, it got done on your watch. There you go. Hey, I supervised. Therefore, I get all the credit for it. I'm saying it unironically. You're putting yourself down because if you give yourself full credit for what took place, that means those green corporations also get credit. What?

I wrote all of it. Yeah, it's your song. I don't care who you hired. I mean, it's great. I'm happy for them as well. Good job. But, you know. All right.

Nate Hammer says, two guys were arrested for assaulting Officer Sicknick and two other officers at the Capitol on 1-6. They sprayed them with something stronger than pepper spray. They are not charged with murder-related sickness death. I saw that. It's interesting. DW said,

sold some crypto for this rucka. I still watch your ET parody about OBL, icon of YouTube's golden age. Can I get a rucka rucka? Rucka rucka!

Okay, guys, I know you wouldn't go with me on the uh, whoa, but can we get an Ali when I go rucka rucka? Ali! Okay, rucka rucka? Ali.

Great. Rucka, rucka, rucka. Ali. Oh, come on, Tim. Even Tim. Even Tim. Nah, that was forever. And I'm the one here with the golden voice. Avant-garde.

I'm kidding. Malcolm McKee says, please ask Rucka to plug The Ominous Parallels by Leonard Paykoff. He'll know what I'm talking. I like this guy. Yeah, what's that about so the ominous parallels is a book that i actually gave sargon back in the summer of 2017 when i met him and i hustled to uh me and my boy kirk hustled to get that book to him and he ended up reading it and he he read an excerpt of it on his channel and he got attacked by a bunch of

people who really really really don't like the Jewish people. They're saying, how can you trust this book? It was written by a Jew. But, you know, Sargon was really moved by the book. It was the memorable line of the book is, ideas are the motor of history. So this book was explaining what took place in Germany. It was not because of the German race. It was not because of the economic crisis. That crisis was worldwide. It was ideas. It was the German philosophers. They made Germany a place where madmen like Hitler could rule the people.

And it was the idea, you know, philosophers ruling the world in essence. It was Mussolini, too. That guy was a psychopath. I mean, why did the Italians go along with it? They were also influenced by philosophy. They did not have the type of individualism that I'm advocating for. All right, let's see. Immediate Casualty Care says,

For the upcoming riots, consider buying body armor before it's illegal. See HR 4568, Responsible Body Armor Possession Act. But even more importantly, get trauma supplies for training. We offer concealed kits on our site. Interesting. The God Pill says, Just did did an 11 hour live today teaching options game gme and amc and how to make life-changing money i don't know what game stops at today but i know it's been doing well for a lot of people austin heartless says hot hey tim and crew saw some stuff this weekend about the epa coming after motorsports might be worth making a video about it or having a car enthusiast on a talk about it.

Oh, interesting. Really interesting. Aliosha says, no, the dark ages is a myth. See history for atheist.com. What is that?

Is that really a theory that the church made up the years between 600 AD and, and 1100 or something and made up this guy Charlemagne to kind of empower the idea of the church made up the years between 600 AD and 1100 or something and made up this guy Charlemagne to kind of empower the idea of the church. And since they had all the data, they just rewrote it and said, this is what it was. It's 500 years have passed. They didn't say that. They just said it is the year 1000. I mean, more like 800 or 1000 years of very little philosophical innovation. And it was the rediscovery of Aristotle, not Aristotle's logic. Now, Aristotle, there were two elements to Aristotle, in my understanding. Oh, you look

so excited to be talking about this. You just looked at me like, why the F are you going here? No, listen, Aristotle is the father of science. So look at, look around. We better think, we better thank the chap. There's two elements to what he offers. Logic, right? Facts and logic. But logic, facts, induction, induction, looking and then observing and acting on that or getting principles from what you observe, not just dealing with ideas detached from reality. So in the dark ages, you still had Aristotle's logic. You had intellectuals having logical arguments and all types of, you know, rationalistic discussions about what is God and what does God want and all of that. But it was the rediscovery of Aristotle's induction, I think,

by Thomas Aquinas. And I think it was the Arabs. It was the Arabs. Gotta love the Arabs. They studied Aristotle. While those honkies, while those crackers were giving Aristotle no time of day. So when you go to your gas station, you thank that gentleman. I will do that. All right, we got one. They're making fun of you. You ready? Oh, here we go.

Loktar says, Tim, appreciate you bringing on a Pee Wee Herman impersonator. Nice to have a comedic breakup and watch you school a low information voter between serious topics. Love the show. Imagine seeing a guy that had COVID-19 barely a month ago and speaking this way to him. Do you know I had COVID-19? Did you wash your hands? Maybe. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. maybe yeah yeah yeah uh i think you know you guys who are watching you gotta be you gotta be nice man you know we have people on the show who don't always agree with everything and don't want that you know we have disagreements i think the the conversations have to happen and it is tough because we have a lot of guests on the show that afterwards are like wow that was that was kind of brutal like your audience was really you know being And I'm like, well, look, sometimes if you want to be in this kind of business, people are mean to me all the time. I mean, what's frustrating to me is not that all these people hate me, but it's like what if nobody is kind of hearing my message?

But I know that's not true, and I know at least one person is going to contact me or at least in their mind think that what i said helped them rethink about things a certain way so if just one person's life can be affected positively then why is it not worth my time to come on here and uh you know give my opinion yeah and i think it's like if you don't listen to opinions you don't agree with or you think are wrong like how will you sharpen your mind and and confront these ideas when you encounter them in the real world? Yeah. Tammy Davis says, dude wants to fight a conservative.

Invite Steven Crowder or the Hodge twins. Bet he will calm his ass down. He has no clue what a Trump supporter believes. I mean, again, people think I'm criticizing all Trump supporters. I'm saying here's what, in my opinion, Trump symbolizes. He is the pragmatist president. He is the American president that wants nothing to do with philosophy, nothing to do with principles. A lot of his policies are probably excellent, but policy does not matter, as a certain formerly gay British chap used to say.

Policy does not matter. And I think although I disagree with everything that that gentleman used to say, he was right on that point. In a sense, policy, of course, matters. It had immediate consequences. But what matters is how you arrived at those policies. And pragmatism, my friends, is what got us into this mess. So let's go back to the intellectual era before pragmatism, back to a time when they knew damn well that the dark ages had existed and they really didn't want to go back. Rob Lowe, Rob's Lowe's, says,

I respect this man for coming on the show, but everything he is complaining about, he is doing it himself. Trump lost. It's over. You are complaining about how loud he is, but all you have done is yell and interrupt Tim. Oh, so Trump lost now? Excuse me. I was not. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. I'm joking. You're going to stereotype all the Trump supporters? I'm just being kind of a i'm a i do stereotypes all right that's kind of my thing look i took this one individual person and i turned him into a stereotype of himself oh man like what i do look you you criticize trump

and this like a lot of people then were like i'm i'm gonna put in my super chats and i'm gonna you know yeah you showed me furry insanity. I got it. I got it. I got to call you out for this one. Oh, no. He says, OMG, this guy is a Dem crony. Let's all thank China for our prosperity. OK, Joe Jr. As much as like I disagree with you on the China stuff.

They didn't think you're like you're like the opposite of a Democrat. Yeah, they didn't hear anything I said. I mean, there are some Democratic points that I agree with. I agree with them, I think, on abortion, maybe not for the same reasons as they're maybe pro-abortion. I agree with them on, let's say, at a time when gay marriage was illegal, I agreed with them that it should be legalized. But I mean, this person did not listen to anything I said. I wanted to talk about philosophy. I wanted to ask, what is the nature of man? What is it that made America great? What is it that made America worth fighting over?

That's what I wanted to ask. And also, all these people hating on me, tell that to all the people who bought the Sargon vinyl in the time we've been doing this show. Tell that to them. Obviously, they agree with every last word that I said. All right. A Magic Monkey says, I live in rural New Mexico.

We always supported Trump just because of the wall. If you don't think guns are necessary, wait till the cartels and caravans come across your doorstep. I mean, if you think the wall is that important, then I'm not going to reach you here today. Maybe someday. I think a confident, prosperous,

strong society does not need to build walls. A confident, strong, prosperous society knows that people want to move here, but they can't wait to prosper. They're too busy winning to worry about people moving in and competing for jobs. You know where I think we agree? People got to be like pioneers again. You know what I mean? We've talked about this on the show before. Think about being in London and then being like, I'm going to get on a boat for three

months. I might die. And then I'm going gonna land on a shore where there's literally nothing and that's my plan for life and they did that they landed on the shores new england whatever and they're like all right we got water we got trees we got to find food we got to find shelter we got to build it they had literally nothing where are the people in america that are willing to do that willing to buy a plot of land in the middle of nowhere and literally start building their own house building their own factories martian exploration it's all gonna to be on Mars. Yeah, yeah, yeah. That I get.

But like at a certain point, there's like, you know, you mentioned this earlier about people should do their own thing. And I'm like, I agree. If maybe you're not having work, start making things. You know, I don't know. And advocate for liberating the economy. Privatize things. Do you know that in financial institutions, the big ones, there are regulators with offices in the banks. Like, this is it. The government and the banks are basically

the same person. We need to separate the two. I mean, the finance and fossil fuels, by the way, are the lifeblood of all human life. And the reason we hate them so much is because we hate thinking such a big picture. We hate acknowledging the fact that to live as a human being is to think long term is to be independent and and to observe reality there's a lot of people in the super chats that are not too happy but i thought this was actually a pretty substantive conversation i mean we can't just have shows where we're like i agree i agree that you agree i also agree with you and like we have a lot of agree we have a lot of guests on the show where it's like, basically,

we just agree on everything and then everyone in the super chat's like, I also agree. And it's like, nah. I mean, we don't,

who wants that? And you know, if we had a good conversation and we got some super chats for you, then that's all I care about. Well, I mean,

I think if people disagree with what you say, then, like one person said, you know, never have this guy on the show again. And I'm like,

no, that's more reason to actually have him on the show. That's all reason, not only again, but weekly. I'm actually, I'm actually moving in. This is not me. This again. And I'm like, no, that's more reason to actually have him on the show. That's all reason, not only again, but weekly. I'm actually moving in. This is not me.

This is not what I'm interested in. I'm not interested in sitting down with someone and hearing my opinions back at me. Yeah, it's boring. The debate between individualism and collectivism is so key. You need both. You have to, like, you can't, if it's raw individualism, you get slavery. And so you need a collective to oversee. I mean, if you give a company no rules they'll hire people

for 30 cents and and monopolize the world with weapons so you need a government to protect us from that that's why we built the government so you want to go now okay but if once you get overly collective then the government becomes its own monopoly it's it's a maze man no it's not it's raw individualism is not slavery you You cannot have slavery in a society where the rights of the individual are protected. But who's protecting it? Well, philosophically, you identify that to live

is to live free, to live productively. It's very utopian, man. It's not utopian. You're talking about writing up a constitution with government, right? Like everyone's going to agree with each other, we'll respect all these values. No, it's the government that's going to protect it. That's why we wrote the constitution. The government is restricted by the Constitution. The government is restricted by the Constitution.

The government is the collective. But the Constitution restricts what the government can do. It doesn't grant the government powers to do anything. Well, I'm sorry. I have to clarify.

The Bill of Rights. The Constitution literally outlines what the government does and the Bill of Rights restricts what the government does. I mean, we have to protect ourselves from mercenary warfare. You know, that's the

individual military source. I'm a middle-of-the-road kind of guy. Of course you need both. I think there's a balance. No, it's not a balance. We need to identify the right principles and then be extreme about them. I'm an extremist.

I'm a radical. So what do you do when 100 people who are communists show up with guns? What do you mean they show up with guns? You have a military and a police for that. So, look, the issue is you have to organize a military and a police right yes i mean they're they have they have uniforms like they are a legitimate part of a free society the government the the courts the military and the executive and the uh so there's to a certain degree you

agree that people will be forced to do things. No, they will be prevented from violating anyone else's rights. How do you pay for the for the police to it? We talked about taxation. Come on. You really want to have that same literal same argument discussion. I just think you have this idea that everyone's going to agree and be happy. And it's very utopian. Listen, I if if I if I could get you to consider one thing, it's that the work that intellectuals do in their ivory towers is where most people get their their philosophy from.

So the fact that most people that that critical race theory is rampant right now comes from the universities. Obviously, we know that the fact that the alternative to critical race theory being posed is pragmatism, again, comes from the universities. So the universities is where individualism, I would like objectivism, the philosophy of Ayn Rand to be offered, to spread. And you will see rational people that understand we're not all subjectively grappling with aimless goals. We are living in reality, and reality is our frame of reference. Why have you and I not come, other than me crapping on you verbally, why have I not taken away your stuff

and started to punch you and violate you sexually? Because we're irrational beings. Well, we were trained not to. I mean, we're violent, wild animals that have been mildly tamed. That's it. That's all there is to you. You don't think in concepts. You don't make to. I mean, we're violent, wild animals that have been mildly tamed. That's it. That's all there is to you. You don't think in concepts.

You don't make plans. I was taught to, so I do. Where are you from? What do you mean? Like, where'd you grow up? I was born in Israel. Oh, there we go. The last of the people watching this that were not planning to kill me.

So I was born in Israel. I lived in Detroit through my teen years and through my 20s mostly, and now I'm in L.A. Right on. And you don't think there are people who just don't care about your rights and just won't take your stuff? Most people not only don't care but are happy to violate them. Because, I mean, this is what we're arguing about in a sense. Even some of the good guys like you are not willing to go all the way with rights

because at the end of the day it is a question of what is human nature. And if we don't agree that human nature is to, in order to survive, must look at reality and live by the data and think independently and think long term, make plans. None of this is trained and conditioned. You need to independently solve the problems. You guys were dragging the TV over because I ruined the camera earlier with my Zoom call. I mean, you got to look at reality and you've got to make plans and you've got to act on it. Nobody's conditioned to live according to the at reality, and you've got to make plans, and you've got to act on it. Nobody's conditioned to live according to the facts of reality. All right.

Well, let's read a bit more. You are taught philosophical principles, but you're not. Nobody can. I mean, brainwashing exists, but most of us are not brainwashed the way I see it. The Duff and Dale Show says, thanks for all that you do, Tim and crew. With the uncertain future and political duopoly, it's best to be better prepared so that we can all lead more safe, confident, and self-reliant lives prepare for the worst work for the best subscribe to the duff and dale show hey thanks duff and dale there's a lot we didn't get to today

yeah like uh remember we were talking about i don't know if we were talking about this but like i was gonna tell you like it seems like you think that when someone made money that they're suspect you know who thinks that like you think that kind of what what that they're suspect you know who thinks that like you think that kind of what what do you mean you're not like suspicious or like you thought that like some people who went from like left to right did it because they were afraid of consequences oh that's that that's about like social enforcement yeah like they don't think like people can just like like evolve or change philosophically and like change what they believe. Well, so I mean look at how much money you're getting in Super Chats.

Does that mean I should be suspicious of you because you can only be motivated by money? No, because the people who Super Chat at Smack Talk and you, I just told them I thought they were wrong. And one person said he actually gave me money to say I shouldn't have you on the show again. And I actually said the opposite. No, that's more reason to actually have you back. But maybe it's all part of your plan. But how about when someone writes a letter disavowing one of their friends because they were accused of being a racist? I mean, like, that's a pretty bold thing to do.

What about someone just all of a sudden, like, disappearing for a while and then coming back totally flip saying, I'm no longer that politics. You know, I'm different now. If you agree with me that at least one person, at least Tim Pool is making decisions based not on raw, vulgar material concerns, but is based on principles, then I'm happy because that means you admit that principles are what drive. There are some people that had like very strange moments where like a wave of censorship occurred. And then all of a sudden someone was like oh i i just i just realized i'm actually not a conservative and it's like oh wow that's a weird that's weird timing and i think it's interesting too like the grift doesn't flow it doesn't make sense that the

grift flows to the right because the right is the dangerous position and the right has a lower market cap it's harder to monetize the left is where the corporations are where the big money is where the grammys are and where you're safe from censorship. I don't think anyone is really grifting. Well, some people are grifting, but I think most people are making these types of decisions based on their judgment. And I often disagree with their judgment, but, you know, in some cases they're making money, in other cases they're losing money as a result of this decision there are some channels that have like done extremely well and i'm not i'm not looking to name them for specific reasons but like you can compare their stuff after certain key moments in the culture war and it's fairly obvious what they're doing like again i'm not only talking about leftists i'm not

only talking about conservatives i'm not only talking about leftists. I'm not only talking about conservatives. I'm not only talking about libertarians or only anti-SJW people or formerly anti-SJW people. I'm talking about literally everybody. And I'm going to avoid saying their names, but it includes the left. It includes the right. It includes people who have made very obvious and strategic moves around things that have happened. There are people who have said that they're in favor of free speech, and then you see them come out and say, I'm outraged. These people should be banned. And they try and morally justify it, saying, well, you got to fight cancel culture with cancel culture.

And I'm like, why banning anybody is wrong. Even if it means I'm in a weakened position, I'm still not going to say people should be suspended or banned or censored. You know what I mean? Anyway, let's read some more. Super Tall Birds has been watching Tim since Sargon gave him a shout out back in 2017. You two have always been my favorite creators. Bitcoin, GameStop, and Loom have made me financially independent, so I'm signing up for TimCast

and the Lotus Eaters. I love Rucka's collab with Chris Raygun. Oh, that was Puncha Nazi. Yeah. That was great. I liked what I did on that very short feature that I had on that. Swing and fist, sackclops. People are going, oh, that's who that was?

That's right. That's right. I gave you that little snippet of that song, and fist, sackclops. People are going, oh, that's who that was? That's right. That's right. I gave you that little snippet of that song and I can take it away. I think a lot of people that were active several years ago, not so much abandoned their principles, but abandoned the fight itself. It's a very stressful industry to be in. You're getting attacked left and right. They're sending you pictures of family members. They're threatening you. And then eventually people are like, dude, I don't need this. I want to talk about video games, man. And then all of a sudden they go from a political show to a, I just want to talk about video

games. I don't want to do this anymore. And there are some people who like stuck their neck out and then quickly recoiled when they realized just how dangerous it was to do that. But if people aren't willing to step up and stand on the front lines during a fight, then you don't win that fight. I agree that people do that. But I also think a lot of people sort of changed maybe their sort of affiliation. Let's say they used to be on the left and then they they thought, well, maybe the right has what I'm looking for. And then they said, OK, no, actually, I'm not I'm not at all on board with this. And they became sort of

back to be left leaning. And maybe this time around, they're not so concerned about social justice warriors. They think that's an overhyped problem, let's say. Or maybe this time around, they support BLM in a way that they didn't a few years ago. But I do see this as a evolution or, in some cases, the opposite of evolution a a regression a regressive leftist direction uh as a result of their philosophical conviction of like where their judgment led them so as much as i uh often disagree with people i i do see it ultimately as that you know that go i don't i i think most people i agree with you but i i'm specifically certain people you think just uh a band like they still sort of believe what they believe, but they don't have the courage that they used to have.

That's the way you see it? No, I think they were probably always just in it as a personality to make money. So there are certain people who spoke up as, like, I saw something and I believe in this and I'm going to speak up against it. Then there were some people who just maybe talked about video games and movies. Politics got real heavy heavy so all of a sudden they were like yo this is dumb i don't like what are you talking about this politics and then later was like dude i don't care to be involved in this anymore yeah whatever the movies are fine do you understand that like from a lot of people's perspective you and sargon and many

others you started off as like reluctantly okay with trump because you really hate hillary but like flash forward a few years and it just seems like Trump is like the figure. Did maybe Trump do something different? Did maybe something change in the past few years that I've specifically talked about? Maybe. Do maybe people like you, instead of watching the content or trying to understand what's going on, just say, how come two years ago he said Trump is bad and now he's saying Trump is good?

Could it be, I don't know, maybe Trump fired 59 Tomahawk missiles into Syria. And I said, wow, this guy's a moron. He hired John Bolton. This is the stupidest thing I've ever seen. And then in the last few months of his administration, he had the Abraham Accords bringing about four historic peace agreements, notably with Israel. And I was like, wow, that's really good. And then he was instructing the Pentagon to remove our troops from Afghanistan, and they obstructed him. And then one federal official lied to the American people about the amount of people in Syria to stop Trump from pulling them out. Could it be that I said we have Joe Biden, who is the VP overseeing Iraq, a warmonger monster who exploited his position in government to make millions of dollars and Trump, the boisterous, lewd and lascivious,

let's just call him chaotic individual who I've been very critical for a lot of reasons. He's increased drone strikes. That was bad. He obfuscated the drone reporting. He Tomahawk missiles in Syria, missile strikes in Iran, potential escalation there. But then all of a sudden I'm looking at school choice. I'm looking at the banning of critical race theory at the federal government level. I'm looking at what are the other things? Abraham Accords, most notably, and a booming economy in 2019. And I said, for what I believe is right, the biggest issues that I think affect me, one, war. Trying to get out of Afghanistan is worthy of my compliments. The Abraham Accords are historic. The actions he took with North Korea,

while not particularly effective in the long run, were still an amazing. You know that Donald Trump crossed the demilitarized zone into North Korea with no security. That was bold and powerful, especially for me and what I know about my family. I saw that I was like, dude could have just been killed on the spot. But he was he didn't worry about it. And that's the kind of effort you have to make even with bad people that even Obama tried making. And I will give him credit for that. And right now I've praised Joe Biden for moving up the vaccine timeline. You see, the people who actually watch the show probably realize there's a nuanced opinion in these things. And there are probably some really good reasons to support Donald Trump over

Joe Biden. But what ends up happening is the people I'm critical of who don't pay attention and only hold opinions for the sake of making money, the real grifters, all of a sudden find themselves on the side of the woke cult-like leftists they opposed for years, right around the time that YouTube changed its algorithm and started banning these people, all of a sudden they disappear and come back with an awakening. Now I'm different. Now I realized what was actually right the whole time. Or if they didn't go that overt, like writing a letter, disavowing their own friends because they were scared about being called racists, they decided that, well, I'm going to

simmer things down, reduce the amount of content I'm doing, and probably just stop talking about it. You want to engage in a fight because you claim to believe in things, but then abandon it the moment things get hot. You are a grifter. You never actually believed in these things. That's what I'm critical of. So perhaps whatever Sargon's opinions are, he actually had an evolution on certain issues. Maybe he realized, you know what, I was wrong about that two years ago. For me, I don't think I was wrong two years ago when I said Trump was wrong to fire Tomahawk missiles in Syria. And I don't think I'm wrong now to say Joe Biden was wrong to do the same thing. Both did not have congressional approval for that.

But guess what? The mainstream media praise both when they do it. Granted, Joe Biden got a little bit of flack for this from some personalities because it seems like the establishment is weakening as the DSA types and more progressive start moving in. But Donald Trump all of a sudden was being called presidential because he was blowing up. He was bombing an airbase with missiles. There are many people who don't seem to have any reasonable reason for transitioning their opinions from where they used to stand to where they are now. And my opinion seemed to be relatively static, save the Second Amendment. When the riots happened, when COVID happened, and when someone tried breaking my house, I went and bought guns, learned about them. And now my opinion's very much changed in the Second Amendment.

Other than that, it's almost entirely the same as it was years ago, even when I made a video while I still worked for Disney criticizing black segregated college ceremonies or black segregated protest rooms during Black Lives Matter when I worked for Vice. All of those opinions are exactly the same as they've been. And perhaps I probably should evolve a bit more on some of those positions, but I haven't. Instead, we get a bunch of people who are scared. They're scared the machine is winning. They're scared the establishment is gaining ground. The Grammys is promoting Black Lives Matter and asking for accomplices. So instead of standing tall and say, I will not move, you move, they say, oh, that was a mistake.

I'm not doing that anymore. I'm not going to talk about politics. You guys see that new movie that just came out? Those are called cowards. I think we got some super chats. Yep. And if you haven't already, make sure you smash that like button and we'll just read a couple more

because I just did a big long rant however long that was luminescent says a country's policy should be flexible not rigid open border is a pipe dream there are countries that don't like america that would camouflage and for to that regard too i seem to recall praising bernie sanders when he said open borders is a coke brothers proposal and when he was actually in favor of building a border barrier. Yeah. Back in I think was that 2007 2008 when Schumer and Pelosi and all these Democrats were like we need to build a border barrier. And Hillary Clinton said the same thing.

Elizabeth Sink says yes. Tim yes. Patrick Massis says good guest. Don't agree all the time but discussion builds mental muscle. That's exactly right that's why i'm glad rucka came on the show and we had these conversations because i don't want to just sit around with people who are saying i agree by the way right and also i was gonna just be like uh try to crack jokes the whole time and just have have a wonderful time and like serious three

minutes in we're arguing about the the nature of man and free will point yeah that's what that's what because we we we did we did discuss this a long time ago we were where were i, we're arguing about the nature of man and free will. That was the point. Yeah, that's what the show became. We did discuss this a long time ago. Where were we? I think we were at the casino at that event. And we were talking about objectivism and stuff like that. That's why I figured you'd be cool to have on. Yeah, and there's a lot more to discuss.

And Charles in Ohio just bought a Sargon CD. So I just want to thank him for his endorsement. That fight with Ted Cruz comment has got a lot of people like, I'm your Huckleberry. When you were like, I'd like to get Ted Cruz in here to agree to a consensual physical fight or whatever. Yeah, so what did Huckleberry do? No, no, no. So you know the saying, I'm your Huckleberry? No.

It means like, I'm your guy. Like, I'll fight you. Oh. No, no, no. Just Ted Cruz. People are like, I'd like to see him come down here. I'll take it. I'll offer him money.

All right. Let's just,. I'll offer him money. All right. Let's just, we'll do a couple more. Race Schwarzbach says, get him, Ian. It's like. Individualism versus collectivism, man. No, I agree. It's individualism versus collectivism. But why would you give this much to collectivism?

Because I think government is collectivism. I don't think it is. I think a proper government protects the individual. But who runs it? Individuals that are appointed for that particular job and have proven themselves. Well, they get the job. When you say individuals, you mean it's a collective of individuals. Conceptually, it's a collective.

But there is no collective that is separate from the sum of its individuals. I do agree with that. The individual should be part of the collective oversight of the individuals. I'll read a couple more and then we'll continue this. Decentralize. I like blockchain a lot for that purpose. We'll talk about that. How about we talk about technology and individualism for the extended members only thing, but we'll

read a couple more Super Chats. JB says, it's time for the Civil War to officially... Oh, no, we can't say that. Nope, I'm not going to read the rest of that Super Chat. Sorry, JB. Furry Insanity says, look, the guy isn't as bad as destiny by any means i just don't get why why it seems he thinks it's okay for us to depend on china from earlier in the talk i don't know if you got the essence of the point i was making but thank you for the first part of that which was almost a compliment

case closed 93 says rucka you you forget you did a Trump impression in My Name's Obama in 2012. Ironically. I just never found myself doing this whole, today power is transferred over. Like, I never really tried to do that type of Trump. My, you know, 25 million view. I was born in my own hospital. Now, like, a few people are like, oh, that's that guy. That's right.

That's right. The guy you've been hating this whole show. Hashtag real name says, I think Rucka is wrong on a bunch of stuff, but over the years, he has definitely helped me work through my ideas. He caused some great conversations. Well, that's wonderful. But next, can you just, like, kind of agree with me so I know this show was not a total waste of time? There's a lot of people that want to fight.

Wow, so many Ted Cruz fans. I never would have guessed this. 37 says you have unlocked JRE Tim Pool for Timcast mode. Is that what that was? That was what, yeah. Oh, dude! Can you do that whole rant again?

Just do it again. I have a better response. All right. I don't even remember what I said. Maybe if they actually would watch the show, they would see. Can you just. Oh, I had one guy, like I've known for years. He's like, I used to be so proud of what you were doing.

And then I realized you were just pushing an agenda. And I was like, what agenda is that? And he was like, it's very clear that you're trying to, you know, just you're pro Republicans and these. And I was like, when have I praised the Republican Party? Certainly, I said there's good things about them, for sure. So I'll take that, you know, absolutely. The critical race theory stuff, pushing back on that. But I'm pretty sure I think I've always said I don't like Mitch McConnell. He doesn't do anything the Republicans obstruct, and they're part of the uniparty but what would you how would you respond to people that are saying you're you're sort of grifting in the sense that you're like you're getting so much

money and prominence and you're you're sort of rising up to be a force to be reckoned with on the right like doesn't that make you on the right doesn't or doesn't that make you kind of suspect and so well i think if you go to the actual forums where, you know, the hardcore conservatives are, they actually don't like me all that much. And I think it's funny. Like when I went on Steven Crowder, it was really, it was really funny. The last time I went on, he was like, you know him, you love him or you hate him. And I'm like, you see, there you go.

And so like, look, my American values test, I just took it. I get moderate libertarian. That's, that's, that's, that's what I get. And my political compass is center left. And I think the issue is this audience that listens, I think the one thing that actually just defines them is discernment of media, right? A critical eye towards media is probably the principal factor. So if someone comes in and or if like a news outlet says, Donald Trump did a backflip, the people who watch the show are the kind of people who looked for the video to see

if he actually did a backflip. And they'll watch my content and they'll criticize me when I got things wrong and send me corrections. Whereas people who watch mainstream corporate press are the people who just believe whatever it is they hear. So what ends up happening? Very critical of Democrats because they're the ones on the offense and Republicans don't do anything.

So if the Democrats are saying something like, we're going to push H.R. 1 and rapidly transform voting in this country. And then I actually did a whole segment where I was like, I actually agree with a lot of this bill. Well, the reason it's the focus on the Democrats and Republicans because Republicans literally did nothing. They did nothing. Nothing happened. Or a good example is when the Republicans pass these tax cuts. Donald Trump gets these tax cuts passed and then progressives start saying there's a tax cut for the rich, which they still do. And then Matthew Iglesias from Vox.com comes out and says it's it's like what did he call it? He called it success that progressives have convinced Americans they didn't get a tax cut when actually Trump did give a middle class tax cut.

There's a lot. Shall I continue? I mean, I'm not getting the anger that I was getting before with that rant. And like when I saw that comment, I realized, oh, I had the perfect comeback. But like, I don't want to say it because what if you have another angry, an angry rant in you? Probably. All right. Words all jumbled up.

Let's keep let's keep going. Well, let's we're going to take it to the we've gone a bit over on this one. We're going to take it to TimCast.com, and we'll make it this exclusive. You can swear in that one. Give me something angry, please. Or what pisses him off, guys? How do I get him to— Me interrupting him a lot?

No, when I get a bad moniker of InHearthStone. Meaning? Well, you've got to fix your deck. No, no, no, no. I'll be playing Tavern Brawl, right? And right now they're doing one where it's like the deck is—the current Tavern Brawl, right? And right now they're doing one where it's like the deck is, the current Tavern Brawl is you choose a class, you get some base cards, and you get hallucinations, which generate, you know, three random cards from your opponent's class. And then what happens when I'm playing? And every single time I use a hallucination, it's a six or seven mana cost card, and I can't even play anything.

And then they're just dropping one, two, three drops, and they're just hitting me, ping, ping, ping. And then I can't even actually play the game. When you build your deck, are you building around them? No, no, no.. And they're just hitting me. Bing, bing, bing. And then I can't even actually play the game. When you build your deck, are you building around it? No, no, no. There's a tavern brawl. Meaning you get a pre-built deck, but there's an RNG in it. So the current brawl is giving you random cards. And I'm like, what's the point of playing the game?

And you know what? I get it. It's RNG. You play the game. That's what you get. So I'll just concede. Like, okay, fine. I get it.

Game over. Video games frustrate me. There you go. He's mad. Unfair randomness. Why do they frustrate you? So I like games where you can understand the system, figure it out, and then increase your ability to get better at the game and then do better. When there are certain games that are just designed to frustrate you by, you know, like a good example of this problem was why the u.s did not release super mario brothers 2 in the u.s they created something called what was it called like doki doki island

the original set at mario 2 for nes had a bunch of tricks in it that were meant to punish the player for no reason for instance in the original mario brothers if you get a mushroom you grow and it makes you strong in the in the in the second one that was in japan you would hit a hit a box or whatever and a like a brownish green mushroom would come out of purple and it would kill you if you got it and in the american companies nintendo of america said but we just trained everybody how to play this game now you're punishing them needlessly so they're frustrated before they even play the original mario the first world shows you how the game works. Jump on the bad guy, hit the brick,

get the mushroom, get the star, it's all there. Get the fire flower, the green mushroom gives you a life. The second version was just ridiculously hard and constantly trying to trick you. Like, oh, you know that thing you normally get? Oh, that one killed you! Ha ha ha. Yeah, so video games can frustrate me when they do that. Thank you for the feedback.

Oh! Imagine if I said that after that big rant. I'd have given you a high five. That would have been epic. That would have been, like, perfect. Either tonight or my life is a failure. I'm still deciding to figure that out. But at least I thought about it after.

We've got some Monday night quarterbacking or Monday morning quarterbacking. All right, let's, okay, we're going to read one more. I mean, we've gone definitely over,, we're going to read one more. I mean, we've gone definitely over and we got to do the members only stuff. But Daniel Bundrick says, do you think the reason politicians don't solve problems is because problems are the reason they get elevated to power to begin with? I call it the save the save the whales effect. Do we even need Al Gore if we had nuclear? I certainly think nonprofits, because I used to work for them, are supposed to fail.

Not fail, I'm sorry. Go out of business. Yeah. So I used to work for these nonprofits. And when you work for a small one, they say the goal of this nonprofit is to go out of business. We should not be needed. However, what happens? They grow, they get donations, and they find a new mission.

The mission changes. Like, you know, Greenpeace. I worked for them. Their mission originally was to obstruct nuclear testing. That's a pretty great mission, in my opinion, because nuclear testing was very destructive in a lot of ways. Blanketed the Earth with radioactive materials and really affected a lot of how we do science.

What is it? Like, radioactive decay testing and things like that. Now it's like, one of the reasons I quit was it just kind of felt like whatever sounded good, they'd find a new thing to fight against. So I don't know, that being said, I agree. I think politicians certainly love problems, but I also think we never meet the end. So there's always something to complain about. There's always something that someone on YouTube will be upset about. There's always some video to make. It's one of the reasons I've started reducing the content on my other channels, because I actually am self-reflective and thought to myself, if I'm doing six segments a day,

because honestly, there's 50 things I could be watching. And as I often say, complaining about on the internet, that's probably not a good thing. And I should shift the focus in another direction, which is why I'm putting more effort in this, TimCastIRLpodcast, TimCast.com. And it's why, honestly, this channel is doing better and growing, because it's where my energy is at. I want to make sure we're having more substantive conversations expressing different ideas arguing with people on certain things and not just being a here's the latest thing i'm mad about today so like to like this episode was very much us having a discussion on government politics economics philosophy and less so us just screaming about you know what thing we particularly hate the

most although we are critical of a lot of things so anyway that being said black people in your case china oh i'm i'm really party i'm afraid when i watch the way the nazis blitzkrieg into france i think that maybe china could do that to the united states and that russia wouldn't do anything about it and if russia didn't do anything about it in india didn't that would be probably China would take over the world. But it's not going to be into the U.S. It's not going to be like that. Well, if they cut out our electricity grid and if it all happened,

I'm talking, they didn't expect them to go into France. I hear you. I mean, if they want a piece of Tim Pool, you know, he'll be their huckleberry. It terrifies me. That's the most terrifying thing. We're going to go to the members only, my friends. All right, hold on to it.

You've got to smash the like button. I can't. You know, it breaks my heart every day. You know, I've got to remember to say smash the like button when we first start because we really need those likes, man. This is the only reason I do this. I don't care about the money. I just look at the podcast every day and I'm looking at the likes. And if we get the likes, then I get a dopamine release, you know.

I'm kidding. You know there are a lot of people like that, though. You don't get a dopamine kick from, like, a bunch of likes? Not anymore. Not anymore. When I first started, I was really excited, like, seeing the views and everything. Yeah. But this is another thing about, like, I don't do weekends anymore, and I got rid of three segments per day because it's bad.

It's bad. It's an addiction. Like, social media is devastating to people, and people need to go outside more and like we got chickens you know what i mean yeah it's simple things man this is not all that there is but i do want to make sure i'm doing right by the people who watch and and and like this content and and you know uh really do i think it's valuable so we're actually expanding more importantly i think it can't just rely on me so when i was doing six segments six individual segments every single day no days off and then monday through friday this show i was like yeah i'll probably die and

then what's left of the company and the people who work here so we need to launch new shows new brands and that's what we're going to be doing soon so that being said my friends thank you so much for hanging out and thank you for smashing the like button can i shout out some stuff like yes yeah sorry to interrupt. That's all I do around here. We'll do, we'll, we'll, so, uh, go to TimCast.com for the exclusive segment we're gonna do next, and, uh, we're live on YouTube Friday at 8pm. If you're listening on the podcast,

leave us a good review, because that also really helps. All of this engagement and interaction, you're basically telling, you know, these companies, whether it's iTunes or whatever, like, hey, this is good stuff, we really like this, and it helps. You can follow me, all social media platforms at Timcast. My other channels are youtube.com slash Timcast and youtube.com slash Timcast News. And Rucka's got some stuff to mention. You know, I mean, I almost wasn't even going to do this. I've been focusing more on like

comedy, music and stuff. What I know that I've excelled at with pissing off plenty of people, but not necessarily you at home. So I think you might enjoy it. Check out Rucka Rucka Ali. Go to ruckasworld.com, by the way. The Sargon vinyl for a limited time can be yours. And if you want it signed, you know, get in touch with me. Maybe we can work something out. And, you know, because I've had some great discussions with Tim in the past, I decided I'll come on here and have this conversation. So if you invite me somewhere and if I say no, it's nothing personal. I'm just I got my priorities focused right now. But I do do a podcast, by the way, a few mornings a week or five days a week.

We got a revolving host host cast. It's me, a hedge fund manager, a famous actor and Nico Sotirakopoulos. And the podcast is called The Daily Objective. So subscribe to us at the Ayn Rand Center UK. That's awesome, man. Thanks for coming. I want to hammer home too how important it is, I think it is, to talk about

things you don't agree with and to have tolerance is very important. We've got to be strong mentally in the next 20 years. Probably more than in the last 200. Well, as important, if not more. We have to be a serious people. We've really got to start accepting each other strong mentally in the next 20 years probably more than in the last 200 well we have we have as important if not more we have to be a serious people yeah we really got to start accepting each other whether for our differences as well as our strength similar but i but i do think like

you know if you if you may disagree with like rucka imagine all of these leftists who refuse to watch this show just because they disagree with me yeah right be a beacon of what you want other people to be yeah be be resilient and listen to the ideas they disagree with me. Yeah, right. Be a beacon of what you want other people to be. Yeah, be resilient and listen to the ideas you disagree with so that you know what those ideas are. You understand them. And by listening to this show, maybe some people agree with you and they've heard your argument with me

and they're like, that's a good point from Rocco or maybe vice versa. Now, the next time you hear that, you're gonna be like, actually, I heard this good point from this dude and it makes you stronger and smarter. I love the way you defend yourself. That type of conviction and certainty needs to be recognized and applauded.

And that needs to be philosophically identified. And, you know, we need to use that type of approach, looking at the facts and using logic. By the way, you can hate the Chinese, but you got to love their food. And thank you for all this hospitality. It's only the CCP I'm a little nervous about. The people are amazing. It's the communist monoparty that bothered me. If they provide the type of food and hospitality you guys have given me while I've been here, then call me comrade.

Hey, guys, follow me at iancrossland.net also if you want to. Thanks. Yeah, I was really glad to have Ali tonight. And I think that having these kinds of conversations is really important. This is way more important than sitting down and just blandly agreeing with someone. I'm Sour Patch Lids on Twitter and Mines. And I'm Real Sour Patch Lids on Instagram and Gab. You know, whenever we have guests that people disagree with, they love to super chat the most to express themselves. And I got to say, I really respect that.

And we don't do it intentionally. But what we do intentionally is try and bring in ideas that will be challenging. But I absolutely am grateful to all the people who super chatted because they wanted to express themselves challenging certain ideas. And thank you all so much for hanging out. We will have an exclusive members only segment coming up at Timcast.com for those that are interested and we will see you all there. Bye guys.