Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #383 - Democrats New Bill Mandates Vaccine Or Test For Domestic Flights w/Jeremy Kauffman

Episode Date: October 1, 2021

Tim, Ian, and Lydia join chairman of the Free State Project Jeremy Kauffman to discuss the Democrats' new bill to require vaccine passports for domestic travel, supply chain workers who are warning about a global economic collapse, a majority of Trump supporters who favor Democrat states seceding - and how the feeling is mutual, New Hampshire's free state project's origin story, and Cenk Uygur's bold claim against Joe Rogan. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Democrats have introduced a bill that would require proof of vaccination, a negative test, or proof of recovery for domestic flights. This is already alongside the $3.5 trillion spending bill, which has vax mandate enforcement in it. And I'll tell you this, I don't see Republicans doing anything to stop it. So it seems very likely and perhaps a bit, I don't want to say pessimistic, maybe just realistic that this is what's going to happen. And I'm willing to bet by the time 2022 comes around, maybe the Republicans come in and they win the House. We are already going to have these laws

on the books or something to this effect. It's going to be handed down by edict, and it's going to further erode this country. There's some polling data we got we'll get into in the show talking about how basically both Democrat voters and Republican voters want the other to secede from the union or basically just peaceful divorce this country. And so we'll be able to talk a bit about that. We're going to talk about New Hampshire, the independence movement, as I guess some people prefer to call it, but secession. And we're being joined by Jeremy Kaufman, founder and CEO of Library and board member of the Free State Project. It's great to be here with you, Tim. You want to just quickly introduce yourself? Yeah, sure. So the Free State Project is the most successful libertarian movement in the world. It's the best attempt, it's the best chance that we have to actually achieve liberty in our lifetime,

and I'm going to talk to you about why that's possible. And then I'm also a founder of the technology that I think is the next generation to the sort of Web 2.0 world, and it fixes a lot of the messed up stuff that's been happening with big tech. And that's a company called Library, LBRY. Although that's a decentralized open source technology, the easiest way to use it is odyssey.com. And you're on there as well, Tim, although you're not on there live.

So this is YouTube only right now, but all of your content is available on odyssey.com. And it was used by more than 40 million people last month. So it's growing very fast. Wow, big. Well, we got to talk about censorship too because YouTube censored Ron Paul. And they said, oops, we didn't mean to do that.

And he's now doing exclusives on Odyssey. Oh, there you go. And they also announced they're banning any anti-vax content. So they banned a bunch of people, mentions of the person's name. It's crazy stuff. So we'll get into all that stuff. Thanks for coming. And we definitely got to talk about New Hampshire.

We got Ian. Odyssey is fantastic. We're looking at what the Fediverse build-out that we're doing with this metaverse is using Odyssey as one of, or library technology as part of a possible server to host your content for your own, so you can kind of have access and control your own stuff.

Oh, yeah. I mean, it's the future, and the thing is a lot of these other ones, they are alternatives. They're literally trying to clone. We're not trying to clone. We've built something that's better than what comes before. It's genuinely different. It's all open source. It's all decentralized. It has the properties of Bitcoin where you own your following, you own your channel. We've handcuffed ourselves. It's not possible for things to play out the same way that they've played out on the web 2.0 big tech world. And the other side of the equation is I feel like a monkey in a cage and they're experimenting

on me. And if I start screaming and banging on the glass, they're going to ask me to step aside and step out of public view. So I'm going to stay calm. But I do feel like that. Just put it on record. Chicken in a chicken coop. Yep.

I think we should all stay calm tonight. But I'm really excited about tonight's conversation because the New Hampshire thing is big news. And seeing how many people are in favor of the other side seceding is kind of refreshing actually so but before we get started my friends head over to timcast.com become a member because we're gonna have a members only segment up around 11 or so p.m but it's not just about that it's about our massive library of members only segments you can search someone's name find the all of the podcasts we've done with them or just go through the huge list going back this entire year basically of all of the podcasts we've done with them, or just go through the huge list going back this entire year, basically, of all of these bonus segments, just getting better and better as we

go along. And as a member, you support our fierce and independent journalists, like Cassandra Fairbanks, for instance, who wrote about Senator Feinstein's bill. So go to TimCast, be a member, but don't forget to like this video, subscribe to the channel, share the show with your friends. If you really do like it, give us a good review if you're on a podcast or whatever. Let's read this first story from Timcast.com. Senator Feinstein introduces bill to require proof of vaccine, negative test, or documentation of recovery for domestic flights. The U.S. Air Travel Public Safety Act would order the Department of Health and Human Services and the Federal Aviation Administration to develop national vaccination verification standards and procedures. The text of the act says that it is necessary to reduce passenger, crew member and airport personnel risk of exposure to COVID-19.

Decrease the risk of transmission of COVID-19 on board aircraft in the United States and to United States destination communities through air travel. And protect children and other vulnerable individuals by preventing further spread of COVID-19 in the U.S. Under the bill, a passenger would have to provide the air carrier with documentation demonstrating they are fully vaccinated, provide proof of negative pre-departure or alternatively written or electronic documentation of recovery from COVID-19 after previous infection. All right. Well, that last part, at least I can give some respect to. But across the board, I just don't have much respect for this at all. I think it doesn't go far enough.

Let's put a scale like there when you check in. Just check people's BMI. If it's too high, you can't get on the plane. I mean, it's about saving lives. Actually, you're right. That's a great point. So there's actually an issue with overweight people on airplanes because when an individual comes on a plane, there's a load manifest.

I used to work with these, and you write down average weight of cargo. Depending on how many people are in the plane and how much luggage in the plane, the pilot has to behave differently and move people. Sometimes there were issues where there was very little luggage, and they're like, okay, that's going to displace the weight and put all the weight in the front so they'd actually ask people to move to even out that weight things like that so yes people would complain because they'd be like sir you're overweight you have to occupy two seats because we can't have the displacement on the plane this way people didn't like it so what are they allowed to like if someone has the flu can they not fly? You can fly sick.

You always have been able to. It's kind of a dick move, but I guess some people are in a bind. They can kick you off the plane for any reason. They're a plane. Private company. Well, they're not. I mean, that's what we're seeing is they're not. There's an example of companies that aren't really private companies.

It's airlines. They're not. The fact that the government can do this is an example of how they're not remotely private companies. If we had private flight, think about how awesome it would be. It'd be like, not that Megabus is like the most awesome experience. It'd be way closer to Megabus.

There'd be tens of thousands of airports. You'd drive out to the middle of nowhere. You'd get on the plane 20 minutes after you got there. You wouldn't have to show ID to anyone. There'd be all kinds of flights. It would be way more decentralized. Some random pilot can rent a plane and fly you places. That's what a free market in air flight would look like.

We don't have anything that remotely looks like a free market. You'd also be standing up. So they've actually experimented with this. There are seats where you're slightly sitting down. They're straight up and they have a little hump on it where you can lean against, but you stand the sitting down. They're straight up and they have a little hump on it where you can lean against but you stand the whole time and they're like, we can get way more people on the planes if we do this.

You know what? That can feel awkward and disturbing, but just give people choices. That's the point. If people want to fly on a flight where everyone is vaccinated, let the market provide that service. If people don't give a shit, let the market provide that service. When the government is stepping a shit, let the market provide that service.

When the government is stepping in and saying this is the way that planes have to run, that's not a choice. That's the government coming in, the gun in the room and saying you have

to operate your airlines. You could do a roller coaster flight as long as it's safe where every so often the plane just drops a little bit and then keeps going and drops as long as it's safe

and then you get the roller coaster feel on your flight. That's perfect. That'd be fun. Yeah, if people, why don't they do vax and no vax flights? Sure. But it's public and then you get the roller coaster feel on your flight, you know? That's perfect. That'd be fun. Yeah, if people, why don't they do vax and no vax flights? Sure.

But it's public health. This is the thing. We don't want to spread COVID. Travel should not be privatized, in my opinion. The roads, the railroads, the planes should not be privatized because someone can be like,

no, you can't travel because I don't like you. I don't like what your dad said to me 20 years ago. You're never allowed. And then he's like, all his friends that own all the other companies are like,

yeah, okay, him and his family forever. That's a problem of monopolization. Yeah. Which is maybe an argument for roads, but I don't think it's an argument against planes because planes, it's so easy. There's so much space. We're not running out of space. There's no monopoly on it. There's no reason there shouldn't be 100,000 possible ways that you could fly. Think about how many people are Uber drivers. Flying would look like Uber, much closer to Uber, not necessarily where you're getting on your plane in 10 minutes, but it would look much closer to that where you have this vast variety of providers.

It's heavily centralized in a small number of companies because the federal government made it work that way. Well, they actually are doing Uber for planes. There's companies where it's a private plane, and then you basically say, I'm going to this this place the faa shut some of these down by the way oh wow yeah it's a it's a story to check out there were some successful companies doing this the faa faa came in and said that's illegal wow yeah sounds right well that's the government i guess they think of planes as weapons because they're so big and move so fast they can cause

destruction if they ram into stuff so they're treating them kind of like dangerous weapons. You're going to what this basically means, what they're doing is all putting pressure on anyone who opposes their agenda, because, you know, for the most part, a lot of most people are like, oh, the vaccine's fine, I guess. But it's really a decision between you and your doctor. That's what they're eliminating. They're taking your private choice out of the equation and they're doing it in a way that most people are probably fine with. And what I mean by that is most people are like, I get it. Vaccines are fine. They see the data, they see the news. There's an argument. Some people don't like it. But for the most part, they're like, well, you know, I get it, right? There's a pandemic. There's a crisis. You want

to get a vaccine? Fine. The problem is they always use issues like this to erode your rights. They're never going to come out and demand you do something ridiculous, like you can no longer have shoes. And people would be like, what? You can't do that. No, they do something where they're like, in this one instance where it seems reasonable, you'll agree with us. And then once you give us the ability, we'll do it for everything. So this is going to turn into a negative test but then it's going to turn into a negative test for everything then it's going to be like you can't travel if you're sick in any way that's insane 15 days to slow the spread just because we don't want to overload the hospitals but we know it's going to be here 15 days is all we need they want to stop people from flying it's gone so haywire look look

aoc said they wanted to stop people from flying. That was part of the Green New Deal. And it seems like, I'll tell you this, they're exploiting a crisis in every way possible to stop people from using... Look, the market's collapsing. We've got economic crisis, money being printed like crazy. People are fleeing cities. Shipping containers all jammed

up in California, unable to come in. They don't want you buying stuff. They don't want you making stuff. They don't want you making stuff. They don't want you burning fuels. They don't want you flying on planes. They don't want you driving. And so you've got all these people in the cities locked in their little cubicle apartments losing their minds. I think one aspect of this is

politics is about tribal dominance. And the best way to dominate someone else is when you can say, this is actually for the good of everyone. And that's why the situation has reached this kind of front. Democrats want to dominate Republicans. Republicans want to dominate Democrats. And this gives the Democrats a chance to dominate the others in this way that is ostensibly pro-social. But it's really about punishing people that they don't like. And I will, I'll say this is also why the free state movement is so important is because libertarians need their

own tribe. And it's not working nationally. Libertarians need their own tribe and it's not working nationally libertarians need their own tribe as well but right now a lot of this is it's about tribal dominance and the fact that it's about public health i think that's pretend well it's the the problem with libertarianism is that people are individualist collectivists naturally have people who will get behind them and say just tell me what to do and i'm down whereas libertarians are mostly like don't you tell me what to do. So have you found decentralized methods to unify individuals? Well, the free state movement is pretty decentralized. So I'll give a little bit of legalese here. The Free State Project, which is the organization that I'm representing,

all we are is the marketing department. We don't engage politically. All we do is try to talk about how awesome New Hampshire is for libertarians. The Free State Project is 1 100thhundredth of what the Free State Movement represents. So I'm like BLM Inc., and then you've got the Free State Movement, right? Like when someone puts that BLM sign and decides to hold a rally, they didn't consort with BLM Inc., they just did it on their own. And so most of what happens in New Hampshire is bottom-up, it's decentralized. Is there fighting between some of the libertarians?

Of course there is. You can't get three libertarians in a room without them fighting each other. But I think it's by far the most successful libertarian movement out there. And the nature of it is it selects for people that want to win. It doesn't select for people who want to be popular online or want to go into their DC crowd and be friendly with people that are their enemies or that want to dominate them. It selects for people who want to actually achieve, who actually want to win. And I don't think you're going to find a movement that's much more effective.

Have you experimented with like decentralized voting for localized voting, like on apps and things like that and finance with tokens and things like that? Yeah. I mean, I love that stuff. Of course, you'd have to actually change New Hampshire laws to get that. One thing that does exist in New Hampshire, because there's seriously like 100 different organizations that play these kinds of bottom-up roles, and I'll give you an example of one that's related to that.

There's a group called Liberty Ballot. And for people, like, I hate voting. I think voting's dumb. I don't want to vote, honestly. Like, I like the idea. My ideal society is that of restaurants. You know, I have no say on what's on the menu, but I have the choice of where I want to eat. Competitive dictatorship. But I want to support freestaters, so I vote when I'm in New Hampshire. I don't pay attention to politicians. I go onto a website called Liberty Ballot. It's run by freestaters. Freestaters do the job of parsing all the candidates and saying these are the liberty ones. And I go in and I just check the box for who they tell me to vote for. And so there's like so many institutions and organizations like this that are filling all these roles that make the movement successful.

That sounds crazy to me. Which? Like not knowing who you're voting for. Well, I trust the people who researched it. You can't – I mean like it's no different than any other consumer decision. Like I don't know everything about the – I trust reviews. I trust things that – I trust – like people trust you, right? You say everything about the phone. I trust reviews. I trust things that I trust. People trust you, right?

You say something on your show, they trust you. They know that you're authentic and real and honest and they trust what you say. So if your friend said, hey, this guy's a really good guy, vote for him. You trust what your friend says?

That's usually because I'm like, you guys got to make sure you fact check this one and do your own research. You shouldn't just blindly follow. And they'd say the same thing and if they get it wrong, there are people who will criticize them in forums and stuff like that. It's not a process without feedback. But like, I don't want to pay

attention to politics, right? That's not my thing. I think politics is mostly dumb. I mean, I want to win, so I have to engage in it, right? But I don't really like politics. And so if someone else that I trust is willing to do that research and identify the candidates that share my values, why not outsource it? Why not free ride? Peer review is very powerful for anonymous social media. If you want to be anonymous online but you have enough peers that can verify that based on what your account is doing that that is Ian Crossland, then you can kind of trust that it's me without knowing who I am. Yeah. Yeah, that's what identity is.

Identity is all statements that other people make, right? Like my idea is the New Hampshire government saying that I'm Jeremy Kaufman. Let's make the case for a free state project in probably maybe in a way it wouldn't be your first go to. Let me pull up this story. This is from CNN. The workers who keep global supply chains moving are warning of a system collapse. Seafarers, truck drivers, airline workers have endured quarantines, travel restrictions, and complex COVID-19 vaccination and testing requirements to keep stretched supply chains moving during the pandemic. In an open letter Wednesday to heads of state attending the United Nations General Assembly, the International Chamber of Shipping, and other industry groups warned of a global transport

system collapse. If governments do not restore freedom of movement to transport workers and give them priority to receive vaccines recognized by the World Health Organization. We got trucker shortages here. We got them in the UK. The idea that you will be able to just float in this system and things are going to go like normal, like you can walk to the grocery store and there are your strawberries, is a joke. It's not true. People need to start being responsible for themselves because they are telling us the system is collapsing. But I got one more for you from timcast.com. 82% of Americans are scared that supply chain issues will ruin their life plans. All right then. 82% of people already know this. Well, here's an option. You can get 100 acres

in New Hampshire for like 200 grand and then just start getting to it. Start working. The Free State Project is social security for people who don't believe in social security. So what do you think is going to happen? I mean, what's the ultimate goal? Free State, New Hampshire secedes or what? So the project takes no stance on secession. So the idea is, again, just to get people here. I think this is my, and I'm now giving my personal opinion. I'm totally cool with secession.

I would love it if it happens. I think there's a huge opportunity to simply push nullification, right? Like nullification gets done a lot. What's the most successful anarchist or libertarian movement in the United States? Anyone want to venture a guess? No, what is it? The Amish. Yeah? Yeah. The Amish don't pay Social Security. What, really? Yep. Why not?

Because the 200,000 of them got together and said, screw you. We're not doing it. The Amish don't have to participate in the draft. What? Yeah. They're the only organization, they're the only people exempt from the draft. Wow. Yeah. So when you have, there's an aspect of government that's like very much sour grapes in terms of what it wants to control. And by that I mean, if the government can't control something, it acts like it never wanted

to. Right, right, right. Right. And so if you have enough people who are willing to get together and say, no, screw you. Like people started their own city in Seattle and there was not the government will to go in and control it. Well, until they went to the mayor's house or – Right, right.

But if you get enough people together in one place and they're willing to say, screw you, like the federal government is not going to wage a civil war. And so like I think if you want to achieve secession, which I'm totally cool with, I'm not trying to, this is not like an anti-secession, I support it. But you can do a lot of things. You can say, well, we're not going to participate in these federal programs. We're not going to give you this money. We're not going to collect income tax from New Hampshire residents.

And you can play this sort of game of brinksmanship where you're pushing it on them to do something. The reason I ask about secession is, watching what happened, what we're seeing in the economy, right? People need to understand that the M1 money stock is just skyrocketing. They opened up savings accounts so that everyone can use savings like checking. They removed the reserve requirements. Apparently, we're just finding this out from Bob Murphy. They removed reserve requirements for giving out loans, which means banks can literally just be like, here's money, whatever. We have no idea. Yeah, the system's on fire, right? Now, here's what happens. We have a lot of people who watch and their attitude is the system is too comfortable for me to do anything differently, right? I don't want to stand up and

risk my family and my house and my job. I got kids to feed, So I'm not going to put them at risk for a political cause. But I think all that they're really saying is I will not prepare for what is happening right before me. So I just want to ask you, what do you think happens to a New Hampshire in the event of a breakdown of economic trade lines? I mean, are people there going to just farm their own food and be self-sufficient or what? I mean, I think New Hampshire could be self-sufficient if necessary. I think self-sufficiency doesn't have to mean that you're doing everything yourself. It's about like how it can also be part of having a network, you know, to do that. And, you know, there's a huge agorism community. There are a bunch of farms in New Hampshire. There are a bunch of people who

are doing their own thing. And I'll say to your point about people not wanting to stand up, I have some sympathy to that. It's hard to go first. But one of the things you can do is get together with 10,000 other people who all want to go 10,000, right? And then you can all act together, right? Or just go to New Hampshire now because a bunch of people are already there. Exactly.

You'll have a better life immediately. You'll get to live with people who share your values. By far the greatest density of libertarians in the entire world. And if there's ever going to be something also a very good choice because you'll still get to be a part of it but you don't have to be the very first guy and get your head chopped off. So let's take a look at the economy from a more libertarian perspective, I guess. Your thoughts on everything I mentioned about the banking system, what they've been doing. Obviously, Ian talks about the Fed a lot. We criticize this system. But like, what's your view of what's going on with this? I mean, I think it's I think it's very messed up. I think it's clear that there's like a lot of inflation happening. I mean, as a

libertarian, like my perspective on this is like you want free banking. You want a competition in currencies like let let the best currency win, allow there to be competition in terms of how currencies are going to be provided and how they work. I mean, I think there's all kinds of interesting things you can do with money beyond even Bitcoin that can't be done because of government regulation. I think David, like David Friedman had some very interesting ideas, you know, about how to design free money that was stable and track the price of goods going back to the 70s.

Those could be done on the blockchain, and there's all kinds of things that you could do. But there's no doubt that the system is very messed up as to what degree it collapses. I mean, I'm not an economist, so I'm not going to venture that, but I think it's clear that there is a house of cards type situation here, and to what degree it collapses you know i don't know usually all at once yeah especially when you look at the way gradually then suddenly yeah with the way demo it looks like yes it is collapsing but it also looks like it's being demolished with this behavior shutting down the entire almost the entire economy a large percentage of it and mass printing of money that's like a

demolition move so i would imagine like, like you said, all at once. Well, there's that meme where they say the carbon they're trying to reduce is you. Have you ever seen that? No, I'm seeing so many people in prominent positions that don't understand you can recollect the carbon from the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and turn it into graphene.

Maybe that's not the issue, Ian. Yeah, it's no different. The global warming stuff is no different than the COVID stuff, right? Like the people who push it, and I'm not trying to say like global warming is real, but like the people who push it, they're pushing it for reasons of dominating other people. And that's why the focus is so much on the communism aspects. That's why they don't care about nuclear power. That's why they don't care about removing carbon from the environment, right?

That's why they don't care because it's not about that. That's not why they care. I mean're they're they're like wow this is a problem and here's what ends up happening they say okay climate change is a problem right we got a whole lot of people cranking out a whole lot of waste mercury in the waters dead zones bugs disappear and all this stuff because humans are affecting the planet what do we do well we can reduce carbon in the atmosphere we can clean up up our oceans. I'm like, yeah, but that doesn't stop the human behavior. It won't change the fact that humans are expanding, are growing and eating and consuming and wasting.

So how do you stop it in the long run? And they say, authoritarianism. Take away their stuff. Don't let them live the way they want to live. Convince them to live a certain way that you want them to live because we are right. The problem is as much as we can look at a lot of the global problems and be like, yeah, these are bad things. Climate change is bad. The dead zones in the ocean, the constant droughts, whatever you want to attribute these things to, these are bad things affecting us.

And we need to be better in tune with our environment. Why should we blindly trust other people who just think they're smarter or better? That's ultimately the problem. There was a quote we read. I forgot the guy's name. Maybe you guys know where he was like, if humans are so dumb that they need a special class to rule them, how are these individuals who claim to be better actually any better than the people they claim are too stupid to rule themselves? So what ends up happening is they say the solution isn't to pull carbon from the atmosphere. The solution is stop the chickens from taking a dump in their water or just get rid of those chickens that are taking a dump in their water.

It's honestly just like COVID. Like COVID's real and it kills people. Is the debate and discussion around COVID actually about preventing that? No, it's not. Like climate change is real and it's going to cause changes and potentially harm to our environment. Is the way that climate change is discussed and the way the policies that are being

proposed, is it about solving that problem? No, it's not. Yeah, it's about preventing the problem rather than treating the problem. The problem is here. The problem is not going away. You can't stop people from pooping. They're going to keep pooping. You got to reuse it. Unless there's less people. But technically, but that doesn't scale because there will always be more people. That's not true.

Well, they will continue to reproduce unless you sterilize the population and make clones forever. That's not true, Ian. I believe in the United States, they're below replacement now, aren't they? We are, yeah. And Japan's been below replacement for some time. Greece and Europe. Yeah, most of the West is below replacement. Free staters are above replacement. Oh, snap. Is that true?

What is it globally? You don't know? Freedom for freedom. Are you joking or what? I don't know. I got three. I'm doing my part. I'm kind of looking at the ocean cleanup. This is Boyan Slat's project in the Pacific.

They're cleaning up the Great Garbage Patch, the gyre. And they did this. It's on my Twitter page. This amazing, they found all this trash. This is from one run. And it's not even from America. This is from the middle of the Pacific Ocean. And they dumped it.

And he was like, we're 160,000th of the way there. We're going to clean this up. And that's not even from America. This is from the middle of the Pacific Ocean and they dumped it and he was like, we're 160,000th of the way there. We're going to clean this up and that's like 80 years away if this doesn't even scale, which it will. And the problem is that garbage didn't come from America,

from the United States. It came from the entire planet. It came from our species, basically. It mostly comes from China and India and Southeast Asia and that part. We know that.

So there's no stopping this from happening. We're going to keep dumping in the water. It's not we. It's humans. It's China. I'm saying humans are're going to keep dumping in the water. It's not we. It's humans. I'm saying humans are going to continue to dump in the water. We just need to figure out how to reuse the stuff.

I think you need to be more specific because when Greta Thunberg comes out and looks at one of the most environmental – one of the countries with the most environmentalists and says, how dare you, and doesn't talk about China and India and these other countries that are just polluting like crazy, we're not going to solve the problem, especially if China's 1.4 billion people, the United States and the West, who are actually environmentally conscious and the ones leading the charge against climate change, they're in decline. To be honest, if I have to be the world's custodian, I'll do it. I don't want to clean up everyone else's mess, but if that means that's what we need to do to survive, I'll do it. The problem is, Ian, you can't legislate for China. No.

So in the United States where we already ban plastic straws, even though we're not contributing for the most part to these big garbage patches, and then we go to China and these international agreements and say, you agree not to do this. They say, you bet. We agree not to do this. And they say, we don't care. We're not going to listen to them. We're going to do whatever we want. Yeah. Well, in a way, waste can become

very profitable because if you can break down the plastic back into sugar or into oil, you can reuse it. So it becomes a commodity. I think that's a way to spark cleanup. Are they, and I'm not a climate scientist, are they related? Litter and waste

is not necessarily the thing that's causing climate change. Isn't climate change mostly being driven by the use of fossil fuels? Yeah, mostly methane and carbon dioxide, I think, which is carbon, mostly carbon. CH4 is methane. I think the issue with climate change is that it's a very specific claim, very narrowed down to humans producing too much carbon, causing the climate to change, when the real thing we talk about, because we had Chris Martinson on, is just ecosystem stresses and potential collapse. I'm not, look, climate change, I get it. But it's one facet of we have dead zones in the Gulf of Mexico

where chemical runoff creates this patch with no oxygen in the water so nothing lives. We have fisheries that are so overfished that jellyfish are coming in, and then the people start eating jellyfish, which is kind of gross, but I guess they do. These are the problems we face. The windshield phenomenon, bug populations being decimated, colony collapse disorder, bees or pollinators are disappearing. It is not just the one thing. It is, in my view, when you get 8 billion people consuming and producing tons of waste, even though we still have massive amounts of space on this planet where humans aren't, you still have a disproportionate amount of waste that isn't being absorbed by the ecosystem quickly enough. That's the big issue. Now, how we solve

that? Well, it would be great if we had like a real green new deal you know in my opinion where it was actually like hey we all agree to like stop spending money on dumb wars and stuff and then decide to just hire people and do uh nuclear energy investment and energy research infusion carbon recapture instead the only thing we can get is for one republicans are totally opposed to this and it'll never happen to republicans and then when the democrats finally come around aoc is like i propose I propose a Green New Deal. And I'm like, OK, I'm listening. And she goes, free college for minorities. And I'm like, what? That's making the problem worse. If you're if you're complaining about immigrant, if you're complaining about America producing too

much carbon and then you're saying bring in more people into America where they will use more carbon, the left is literally just arguing to make the problem worse. And there is almost no one in this country saying we should have more nuclear energy. We should have modern advancements in nuclear. The libertarians say that. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, so what do we end up with? Yeah, the planet's still in trouble.

Humans are a disproportionate force on this planet. And it's not going to get done through the Democrats because they're too worried about minorities not getting health care, I guess. It's not going to get done by either of them, and it's not going to get done by the libertarians either. No, for sure. I will, to give at least a little bit of an optimistic spin, and I think a lot of the pollution stuff where we're actually damaging ecosystems, I think that stuff's pretty bad.

But in terms of climate change being this existential threat, I'm skeptical of some of that. I think that like – I bad. But in terms of like climate change being this existential threat, I'm skeptical of some of that. I think that like, so I don't know if it's like Scott Adams, like rule about slow moving disasters. Like, I think human beings are actually like very good at solving these kinds of problems. And I think that a lot of the hysteria, I'm not saying that's not real, but similar to COVID, a lot of the hysteria is driven by a desire to create changes to subjugate people that the people creating the hysteria don't like. No, no, no. Exactly.

Why is it that AOC's Green New Deal had more to do with social justice than a Green New Deal? Because that's not her agenda. Her agenda is not the climate or the planet. Her agenda is identitarianism. So she'll hold up a big thing that says climate, and then everyone says, I would like to buy on to your climate plan. Because they don't actually read it. Inside it, it's like racism. She abused, what's the guy's name?

Roosevelt's New Deal. She just abused the name. Just reused it like this stupid media culture where they keep making sequels to dumb stuff. You know, here's the thing. If I go to the store and I see in the newspaper and it says, you know, special moon boots. You wear them

and you can jump two feet higher than normal. It's a kid's toy. And then I go there and I buy it. It's a skateboard. I can be like,

I open the box and there's a skateboard and I'm like, this is not what you advertised. You actually, I can file a claim against that. The government recognizes you've lied. But the politicians, that's all they do.

Literally everything they have is the Patriot Act. Are you a patriot? Do you want to hear it? Right, now we can spy on your bathroom. Here's a libertarian solution to this problem that will literally never happen, like most libertarians do. And it's make politicians make actual concrete predictions

about the effects of their legislation. So, like, literally when you pass a bill, you have to say what it's going to accomplish, and you have to make predictions. This is going to reduce carbon by this amount. This is going to create, you know, this specific amount of jobs. Not that the government can necessarily create jobs. But the point is, like, you have to make specific predictions, and then you judge, did it actually happen? And you make them make concrete predictions. You know, I found there's two types of problems, or at least in this analogy, there's two types of problems.

There's problems like you can solve them by making them not happen. That's like your son hits your daughter, smacks your daughter, and you say, no, don't do that. Don't ever do that again. And then he stops. But then there's problems like global warming creating waste. You can't tell people to stop creating waste. That's not an option in this situation. It's an endemic issue.

You can consider it not a problem. Problems aren't bad. They're there to have problem solution. It's in math. They're not bad. But this isn't a problem that can be solved by stopping the behavior. We need to alter the solution. I think you need to actually adjust the cost.

And it's much more straightforward in the case of waste where you can track it down and attribute the blame and say, hey, whoever is dumping this stuff, you need to pay this amount of money to fix the problem. I actually think from a libertarian perspective, the hardest one is something like climate change where it's like it's quite unclear what the externality is of me burning a fossil fuel of a gallon of gas. What was that externality? What was the cost to it? There are people who argue that it's not even clear that it's a negative externality. There are some people who argue that the Earth getting warmer is actually better for humans. And I'm not endorsing that view necessarily, but there are people who argue that. I've seen evidence that we're still at the end of the last ice age,

but because the comets hit Earth 13,000 years ago and melted all the ice, it doesn't seem like we're in an ice age, but we're actually still in an ice age coming out of it, which is why things are warming. And by the way, that's from Utah. New Hampshire getting warmer is not bad for New Hampshire, so from a self-interested perspective. Right. It's not bad to have no glaciers on Earth. It might be

great. Yeah. I mean, seriously, it's not. It's not clear. A lot of the climate change stuff is from the status from accepting that the current status quo right is what's best like cities on the coast yeah right and and obviously there would be costs to moving or adjusting things or damming things but like it's not clear that uh you know uh an average earth temperature of two degrees celsius higher is actually worse for humans than yeah the temperature. I think the fear that floods and things is legit.

Fear of flooding fresh water into the ocean, killing life is legit, but it doesn't mean it's going to be worse after it happens. Fishery collapse is a bigger problem. And so this is the issue with almost all political debate. You get two people, and one's like, climate change is a problem. The other person's like, oh, climate change is not a big deal. Meanwhile, the problem is actually much larger people hyper focus on an issue because they want that to be like the core so for instance right now the cdc is saying you know new evidence suggests that covid can cause premature birth and so they're recommending women get vaccinated

and the story is that the cdc said pregnant people instead of pregnant women. And so I'm like, there's your culture war. No one talking about the risk to pregnancies. Now, if you don't trust the CDC, well, that's you and your trust. You can go to your doctor and figure that out. But the story instantly turned into a culture war debate and not a medical issue. And that's what we get often in politics. They can't help themselves.. They can't help themselves.

These people can't help themselves. And it's, again, just more evidence that – and they know when they're doing it. Like that clearly harms – if your goal is to get people vaccinated, then when you say pregnant people and you talk about – like you've just set off maybe a majority of the population because i can't believe that many people are actually on board with pregnant people particular yeah it's a microscopic uh minority but if you're targeting the group that is the skeptical and they also overlap with those who don't like the phrase pregnant people it's almost like they intentionally said that just to rile people oh yeah they do um you mentioned fishery collapse is a big problem of the oceans. I agree with you.

There's evidence, if you look into what's called iron fertilization, where you distribute iron oxide dust into the ocean, it regrows plankton. Lots and lots of it. That's what plankton eats. And then massive fish booms. So I think we can regrow the fish population pretty easily. I don't want to call him crazy because he might be a hero, but there was a guy who did that.

I don't remember. Yeah, I was just looking him up right now. Yeah, so did that work? I haven't looked. He said it did. They had like a 20 or more than they expected, like 20 times. He lost his job. Yeah, it's incredible.

Let's talk about where this partisanship takes us because we got this. This made me laugh. Oh, sorry to interrupt. 50 million to 226 twenty six million fish. The salmon catches. This is from Brian Wiggett. Next big future dot com. Yeah.

Immense recovery of salmon population from these experiments. So let's let's talk about where we end up going when you have this hyper partisanship. We have Larry Sabato. Red alert. Fifty two percent of Trump voters somewhat or strongly favor blue states seceding to form a separate country. 41% of Biden voters want the red states to do the same. Strongly, 25% of Trump voters strongly feel this way and 80% of Biden voters. He says, look at the report.

And that's basically it. More than half of Trump supporters are like, Democrats, go do your own thing. Almost half of Democrats are saying the same thing. I think it's beautiful. And I can be unlike some other libertarians in this regard in the sense that I don't view libertarianism as some objectively correct philosophy. I view it as the way that I want to live.

I think it's bad that communists aren't allowed to be communist. I think they'll be very unhappy. I don't think they're there. But I'm not trying to take it away from them. I don't think that they're wrong. Right. I think they'll be very, very happy. Yeah. I really, really. I hope they are. I hope they are. Look at California. Yeah. They vote for the same thing over and over. No matter how bad it gets, because they like it. It's good for them. They can have it. I'm out. I'm not going to be there. So let's let people sort themselves out. Let's let people

live according to their values. We'll all be happier. So I think that's a huge white pill. I think we should be optimistic when we hear that. Well, I certainly think that people have mentioned the peaceful divorce because it's the alternative to violent separation. So yeah, definitely. And be it Texas or New Hampshire, I'm all for self-determination. It would be really interesting. We actually had a debate on what would happen with Texas and New Hampshire if they tried to secede. We talked a bit about New Hampshire. We were like, Manchester will get occupied by the feds, the major urban center, so they're not going

to let that go. The roads would be shut down. What do you think would happen if New Hampshire said, yo, we out? I'm actually quite skeptical of the federal government's ability to do something strong here. At least anything strong in the sense of actually sending in troops, actually exerting force. I think if the federal government was against it, you'd much more likely see a response that's like, and I'm not saying that this wouldn't be very impactful, but attempting to shut down trade attempting to shut down the borders outside of the state uh or attempting to make things hard on people uh going in and out rather than actually i think i think there is zero chance regardless of what state secedes that there that there would be troops in it well what do you what do you think

the feds maybe not zero but uh but what do I think they would do? Some of the things I'm talking about, right? Like I think they would attempt to make it hard for people to get in and out. I think that's like plausible. So in the surrounding states, they'd set up checkpoints or something. Yeah, on the roads and stuff like that. That would be like I-95 north? Yeah, yeah.

Which we have to leave as federal government property anyway. Oh, all the freeways are federal. That's right. Well, no, no. I mean, Maine needs to be able to get to the rest of the U.S. And then there's all the federal buildings and federal employees, the post offices. No, those are ours. The post offices?

The post offices. Yeah, no, we're going to take those. Exactly. Someone was like, Ian, why are you so hard on it? Because I think it's a terrible idea to be like, we out. I am into other ways I'll mention in a minute. But someone was like, why are you so down on it? These people that want to succeed don't want to take anything.

And I was like, well, they want to take land. They want the federal government's land. We'll distribute it to the population like what happened in Afghanistan. I mean, so like the people in New Hampshire will be that much richer because we'll get to take all this federal property, distribute it amongst the citizens. I guess I feel like any kind of seizure of federal property could get violent really fast. Yeah, maybe we'll pay them. I think the play is concentrate people, leverage nullification, and then if the federal government gets aggressive with you, then you push secession.

But I'm not like, I'm forced to cede now. I'll do it tomorrow. What I've been thinking about is creating a parallel system that can operate through the United States federal government without it. So like a new economy that works alongside. Go for it. Sorry, but I want people to see this image right here that just pulled up. This is a post office in Tilton, New Hampshire. And I just think, you know, when you say we'll take it, it reminds me of Fort Sumter.

You know, the Union troops are there and you got all these post offices. So I'm just, is it going to be, you know, like the historic Battle of Tilton? I'm trolling a little bit when I say that we'll take it. I think the goal is to keep it as peaceful as possible. So if we need to buy the property from the federal government, then we can buy it. The post office.

There's a whole bunch. And then there's military bases. Yeah. So it would be really interesting to see what would happen. I think if anything did happen, it would probably be this weird pseudo-secession where the federal government would still operate within the borders of New Hampshire completely and totally as they normally do. I think that's the kind of thing that would lead to conflict, though.

Well, what would happen is, like you mentioned with the Amish, they don't pay Social Security tax or whatever. The people of New Hampshire would basically vote and just be like, you know, we out. The federal government would be like, I guess we're still going to keep using these bases in this land. And the people of New Hampshire are going to be like, don't care, but you can't get taxes from us anymore. Yeah, I'll take that deal. Wasn't there – there was this famous story about a family in New Hampshire that didn't pay taxes. Do you remember that story?

Yeah, I can't remember the name, but they ended up getting in a standoff with the federal government. Yeah, that's crazy. So what happens when you have mass noncompliance? For how many people? It's like 1.3 million people or something in a place like New Hampshire? I think you win when you have mass noncompliance.

That's what I think happens. You'll have a siege. So it'll seem like you win at first, and then you'll slowly be choked out by economy and no travel, no flight paths over the thing. No pollute. If you have pollution that goes over the borders, boy, are you going to pay for that?

I think I think I don't think you understand what New Hampshire is like. I think you're imagining New Hampshire is like New York with massive urban requirements and it's like very dense. Like it's very difficult to get food. You can't grow food anywhere. New Hampshire may maybe like Manchester, it's harder to do. But most of the state is just like trees. And people are going to homestead, I'd imagine. Also, you have ports.

So even if they control the roads, it's much harder to actually – unless they're going to – again, they'd have to start shooting down boats in international waters that are from other countries and from other places and saying they can't come into the port. It is American U.S. territory, though, isn't it? Because of Long Island, the water is controlled by the U.S.? I mean, I'm sure, again, this is all, like, very difficult to kind of, like... Very hypothetical.

Yeah. Very nebulous. To kind of larp out. I think that, like... Oh, no, no. Direct ocean access. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Oh, yeah.

13 miles of coast. So not the largest amount of coast, but enough. And look, I think there's so much... I'm not trying to talk down secession. I just think there's so much more that you can do. You don't have to jump from where we are today all the way to secession. The more libertarians control the state government, they can repeal an incredible amount of state laws. They can make it very hard for the federal government to operate. And we already have a roadmap for this. And this is exactly what I was talking about with this sour grapes thing.

How many states have nullified federal marijuana laws? Does the federal government send in the... Or immigration laws. I was just going to bring that one up. Sanctuary cities. All kinds of cities literally nullify. The federal government doesn't send just going to bring that one up. Sanctuary cities, right? All kinds of cities, literally nullified. The federal government doesn't send in troops to stop that. And so that's what you do.

And this isn't quite as sexy as seceding tomorrow. I understand. So I also want to talk about the sexier topic. But you just go piece by piece. And so rather than going for trying to eat the apple in one bite, which causes a conflict, you take one bite of the apple and then they don't come out. You take another bite of the apple. And you just keep doing that until you've eaten the whole apple.

And when each step is so small that force seems like a disproportionate response, they don't do it. And then all of a sudden you've eaten the entire apple. And so I think that's a much better strategy. Yeah. Well, so is there like a five-year plan? Or a better question is like, what do you think happens in five years? I think that libertarians continue to concentrate. I think we continue to have more political power. I'll talk briefly about the

political power we have currently. We have 40 elected free staters to the state legislator. We have more than 100 libertarians total. And this is, they're graded by a third. This is another one of the institutions in this massive web of institutions that are creating the liberty movement. There's an institution called the New Hampshire Liberty Alliance, great institution to support, and they grade every bill on whether it's libertarian or not. And then they grade every representative in terms of did they vote the libertarian way. So we have grades going back 15 years on, maybe longer, on every politician and were they a libertarian. So when I say there's 100 libertarians,

I'm saying there were 100 libertarians that got an A. They voted libertarian 90% of the time or more on the bills in 2020. What if I want a tank? Do it. I want a tank and I want a 50K full auto. I think if anyone deserves a tank, it's you. So people don't realize this,

but I love it. Tanks are legal. And depending on what kind of weaponry you have on it and where you have it, it's legal as well. It's funny because you often hear from these Democrat establishment types, the authoritarians, about gun control. And they're like, you can't own a tank, can you? And you're like, yes, you can. You literally can. A story, I think it was BuzzFeed that wrote this. A guy had a.50 cal full auto on a tank, and he was shooting into a lake, and some state troopers pulled up, and they were like, howdy.

And he was like, he stopped, and he's like, how can I help you? And they were like, is this your property? He's like, yes, it is. And they're like, have a nice day. And they left. I'll plug New Hampshire. Highest machine gun ownership per capita. Wow, really?

Yeah, highest machine gun ownership per capita. That's like full auto machine when you say machine gun ownership per capita. Wow, really? Yeah, highest machine gun ownership per capita. That's like full auto machine when you say machine gun? I'm pretty sure that video of Luke with two full auto guns was New Hampshire. Did you see the picture of Luke with his dog and a goat? Yeah. I hope he has more than one, though. You're not supposed to just have one goat, right? Yeah, but you keep doing stuff like this, and as we get more political control, you

get more people in office, you repeal more more laws you do more nullification type stuff we there's so many clever ways you can do it where you can just like you're we're doing this with guns now where we're basically saying like hey federal agents can't operate in the state there's not allowed they'll be breaking state law and you play these guys yeah exactly like it was a big thing in ohio where they were like if any atf agent tries to enforce us, arrest them. Oh, yeah. Something like that. Right. So you do stuff like this.

And I think this is the way that you can win. What if we bought like 100 acres and then just told people, like, have at it? I would be thrilled to welcome you to the Free State, Tim. I think it's great. I mean, I wouldn't. We're out in West Virginia, basically. So we actually are just finalizing a deal on a big plot of land, of land, Freedom City or Fredomistan, we jokingly call it. And we're going to have a recreational facility, and we're going to be producing a lot of content, doing more shows.

We have a new show that's actually already live. I guess we can announce the name now because it's already up, isn't it? We'll save it for tomorrow. Yeah, we should save it. It is, but we soft-launched launched it and then we can officially announce it. So we're doing a bunch of shows. And these are like fully produced podcasts, editing, sound effects and stuff like that. So we want to do this mini little freedom city in West Virginia.

But what if we just bought 100 acres in central New Hampshire if there was a group of people who are willing to go there and just start using it? So I think if you're interested in that in the chat, if you could just sound off and say, yeah, I want to move to New Hampshire. Well, is there like a free – does the Free State Project have like land for like organizational use or what? The Free State Project, again, it's 1% of the Free State Movement. So the Free State Project has like two employees and a budget of like $200,000 a year. It's a small organization. The Free State Movement owns like a billion dollars worth of property in the state and the total organizational budget of all the different organizations is in the like tens of millions or hundreds.

It's a huge amount of what's happening. So are there real estate companies that are owned by freestaters that prioritize freestaters that try to do this kind of thing? Yeah. They're not explicitly under the auspices of the Free State Project. Is there a concern like the government might come after people for sedition or something? When's the last time that happened? Has that happened? I mean, I think- Probably not for a long time. I think they're more likely to come after you in like oblique ways. Like you can look at how they've targeted like ian freeman over some of this crypto stuff free the crypto six by the way um where like they're trying to say he violated federal money transmission

laws i mean you can look at how they're coming after me right i'm being sued by the federal government in civil court um i think they're more likely to do things in this way where they don't have to make it explicitly about what it's actually about. I came up with a little bit weird spitballing ideas about secession or what it might be. And let me know what you think about this, that if the government and people kind of laughed at it, because it's not really well thought out thing. But if, say, New Hampshire were to secede, but they set up a smart contract or some sort of automated system where if the United States government, federal government met the terms of these secessionists, they would automatically be re-implemented back into the federal system.

Yeah, I think that's a very clever way to do it, where you can do it with these triggers. That's the way the Free State Project started, by the way. The Free State Project, like, it wasn't like people were like, New Hampshire is awesome, let's move there. It started by, there's a guy named Jason Sorens. He wrote this essay, and the opening of the essay was basically, the Libertarian Party is a failure. The notion of the Libertarian Party

ever achieving its agenda in my lifetime is like literally hopeless. I bet all this money that that will never happen. He made this 20 year prediction 20 years ago. It came true just very recently. He was completely correct. And he said that like, but there are enough Libertarians in the country that if we concentrated, we could actually achieve our agenda. And the said that like, but there are enough libertarians in the country that

if we concentrated, we could actually achieve our agenda. And the way that started was people signed an assurance contract like a Kickstarter. And so it started with 5,000 people saying, well, we're not sure where we're going to move, but we'll all move to the place that we agree on. And then we'll continue to keep the movement going from there. So there was this whole selection process. Like Wyoming was the second state and Alaska, I think, was the third. And they went through, I mean, there was a longer list, but that's the way it came out. New Hampshire came in first, Wyoming came in second, and Alaska came in third, where they went through and debated all the possible states. And a key target was low population, right? New Hampshire only has a

million people, right? So that's part of why we're able to have such an outsized effect with only, you know, 10,000, you know, or so. So if a million and one people move to New Hampshire and then you vote, you get exactly what you want. Yeah, exactly. I don't think you need anywhere near that number. And I was I was talking to Lydia about this, about like, you know, a big part of libertarians tend to be either like they tend to be independently minded. Right. And so they they tend to do commit the typical mind fall to be independently minded, right? Yeah. And so they tend to do, commit the typical mind fallacy and model other people as independently minded. It's a big part of why the Libertarian Party

is such a failure. They're like, people make their decisions as independent, rational animals and they consider the policy and then our policies are better, so they'll vote for us. And it is like the most absolutely wrong model of how people actually decide things.

Most people are agreeable. They decide things to feel like they're being agreeable, to feel like they're getting along and going along, and this is what other people believe. And so when you have, it's another way of Nassim Taleb's tyranny of the minority. If you have this small minority of people that are extremely vocal about what they believe, they pull a ton of these agreeable people to their positions. And it's a big part of how we're succeeding. It's even how the libertarians in New Hampshire are making the Republican Party more libertarian

is because they go in and they're Republicans now and they're advocating these really libertarian positions. And so they've pulled these like, you know, these like Trumpian conservative types to be much more libertarian because they're there, they're Republicans and they're being loud about what they believe. What's like a state, what's the state budget? Like, I feel like we could bring billions of dollars in industry into that state. There's so much money in defecting.

There's so much money in for one country or one state to defect from the, not just the U.S. regime, but the global regime in terms of the way that it shuts down creative entrepreneurship and all kinds of other things. I think, you know, New Hampshire is not the best choice. I think West Virginia is better. Ooh, you're landlocked, though. I mean, if we're role-playing all this out. That's true.

Landlocked is bad. But the issue is New Hampshire is blue. And I'm looking at their election results. I think that is a result. So New Hampshire is a Republican governor, 60% of the vote. Republican Executive Council, which is this organ that other people don't have, but it's part of the executive body. Republican Senate, Republican state legislature. The entire state government is red.

So it was just like an anti-Trump recoil maybe? A lot of New Hampshire conservatives do not like Trump. New Hampshire's like traveling back in time. This is one of the weirdest parts where it's like they're like decorum and the process and rational, and we're going to debate things and let's all get along. And so

the kind of brash style that Trump had was very off-putting to a lot of New Hampshire citizens. Yeah, that's true. And I mention it all the time. Regular people were like, I don't like the way he talks. It hurts him. It helpedting to a lot of New Hampshire citizens. Yeah, that's true. And I mention it all the time. Like, regular people were like, I don't like the way he talks. That hurts him. It helped him in a lot of ways. But, you know, landlocked is a big issue. But it's actually, the other issue is who you're surrounded by in New Hampshire.

So I had this debate with Luke all the time. He's like, New Hampshire's the best. And I'm like, yeah, but look what you're surrounded by. Canada? And then you got Massachusetts. You got, what's the, Vermont? Vermont's not bad. I actually think this helps in terms of acceleration because the truth is, like, it's awesome. We have people move from California and all over the country.

But the truth is more people move from closer nearby, right? And so if you're in a place like Wyoming, where are you pulling people from? It's a big – Everywhere. Right, right. Yeah. If you're in New Hampshire, it's – there's a lot of libertarians in Massachusetts. And in New York.

There's a lot of libertarians in New York. Exactly. And it's not that hard to move from those places to New Hampshire. It's a little more palatable. So I actually think it's been a good choice by the movement to be in this population center. I agree with you now, I guess. Yeah, okay. And look, we're movement to be in this population center. I agree with you now, I guess. And look, we're going to be the Hong Kong of America.

So as America turns into China, we're going to become Hong Kong with more guns. That's what New Hampshire is going to become. It's actually very valuable to be on the border with Canada. Especially if global warming is real, Canada is going to be a tropical paradise. Maybe not tropical, subtropical. It's going to be a beautiful, beautiful country. Even the IPCC consensus estimate is like 2 to 3 degrees C. Things would change, but they wouldn't. I hear you've got black flies in New Hampshire.

I know we don't have one of the most common types of mosquitoes. They don't come that far north. But you've got black flies. Pretty sure. Probably. I know in don't have one of the most common types of mosquitoes. They don't come that far north. But you got black flies. Pretty sure. I know in northern Maine. So we were actually looking for a bunch of places to set up outside of cities. And I was like, Maine, maybe. But Maine is insanely expensive.

And there's cheaper areas and there's limited infrastructure. It's because all the really rich people go to like the shores of portland of maine to get away and it's just like yeah you got to be pretty well off for the most part i was looking at property and comparing it you know identical infrastructure substantially cheaper in the west virginia area than basically anywhere else i've been thinking about setting up um like a university for uh scientists that want to learn how to use to make graphene because i don't know if you're familiar much with graphene, but it's going to be a 21st century steal. We're right about 2029.

We're going to start to see it in flex. And I was going to do it nationally, like do it in Chicago, get the federal funds to fund it, build an American thing that we manage for 15 years and show all these Americans that get two weeks for free with their tax money to come and learn how to use it. And then all the graphene we produce is free for all Americans forever. And then after 15 years, it becomes a utility. And we just

produce and use free. And it's like space elevator travel. But we could do it on a state level. Makes a lot more sense. Yeah, let's do it. New Hampshire, graphene capital of the world. There you go. It's going to happen. You got to get some industry to come in. And I got

to be honest, there's a lot of very, very, very wealthy people. And I'm surprised we don't see more of this. I am surprised more wealthy people don't try to defect. But I mean, New Hampshire is like, that's the thing. It has like a small population. And in some ways, it can feel rural, but it really has everything. It has a huge tech industry. The average income in New Hampshire is like in the top five for states. Like it's the median income is like $75,000 a year or something. Constitutional carry? Oh, yeah. Constitutional carry, standard ground, castle doctrine. We've got like the median income is like $75,000 a year or something. Constitutional carry? Oh, yeah.

Constitutional carry, standard ground, castle doctrine. We've got like the best gun laws in the country. What's your state motto? Live free or die. Wow. Maybe we should slowly start moving production up to New Hampshire. Yeah, and we mean it. Like seriously, people mean it.

It's like people have a libertarian – and this is, again, part of why the state was chosen. Like people have a natural libertarian bias. They don't want to be in your business. They don't want to bother you. New Hampshire had the highest vote percentage for Ron Paul in 2012, right, like of any state in the country. I mean, there was a natural libertarian

leaning to the population. Well, there you go. Yeah, that's where the future is. What if we like lived there three months out of the year or something? Only in the population. Well, there you go. Yeah. That's where the future is. What if we lived there three months out of the year or something? Only in the winter. Yeah, only in the deepest winter.

Well, I like that we're centralized right now. We're closer to D.C. But I don't know if that is going to be necessary. Look, I think, like, whether you would be happy in New Hampshire,

like, listening to this conversation is like reading a dating profile and deciding if someone is going to be your wife or husband. Like this is a dating profile. This is like do I want to go on a date with this person? It's not do I want to marry them. So you don't have to be convinced that New Hampshire is the best place for you. What you have to do is be curious. And then the next step is you come for a visit.

You come check it out. You come to Porkfest this summer. You buy your tickets tonight because it's going to sell out you come you come to liberty forum in the fall which is not quite as as laid back as as uh pork fest but it's for like the people who want to be like i want to get stuff done i'm a serious person at new hampshire nhlibertyforum.com you can buy tickets right now come for a visit anytime the fsp will literally be like your personal tour guide. We'll plug you into all the secret stuff that's not available online if you contact us. We'll teach you about the secret clubs.

And there's a public calendar, but there's also stuff that's like not on the calendar. So you got to come for a visit. You got to get in touch with us, and we'll let you check out the state. And then you can decide if that's a place you want to be. I don't care if it's West Virginia or Wyoming or New Hampshire. The idea of people coming together. And so at this point, it's like the Free State Project has been around so long, and New Hampshire probably does make the most sense just based on what's already built in its foundation.

And, man, New Hampshire is a pretty free place. I see Luke firing the flamethrower. Yeah? Yep. He fired it at Porkfest this summer. That's a great video of it. Nice. The idea that we could affect government change

is very exhilarating. As an American, I'm like, as if that should be anything but the norm, but I don't know. What's like the libertarian political movement

in New Hampshire right now in the government there? Yeah. So, and let me first say that, like, I agree with you completely. Like,

I hated voting when I lived in Philadelphia. I basically didn't do it. I did it begrudgingly because your friends are like, you have to vote, Jeremy. Don't be a bad person. And I'm happy to vote. Every time I go in to vote, every single election, I can vote for someone who I feel like shares my values

and wants the world to be the kind of way that I want the world to be. And that does feel, it's the first time that voting has felt good to me in a very long time, since maybe when I was in my early 20s and actually believed in it in a more genuine form. So it's ended a lot of that cynicism. And libertarians run for every kind of office,

position in office. They run as Democrats. They run as Republicans. They run as libertarians. Most of them do get elected as Republicansans but they get elected under every party you only descend a libertarian candidate to congress i agree i think i think one of the most important things is to have like a duly elected like formally elected libertarian go there probably cox with republicans i'd imagine yeah i mean i i i would love to see it. I mean, I think it's,

I do think it's really hard to win third party. And I'm like, I'm a supporter of the, like, Libertarian Party seems like it's becoming more libertarian again with, you know, with the Mises Caucus and Dave Smith, he's awesome. And all of these people who are like, you're really giving this full throated support for libertarianism rather than like the woke neoliberal party or like whatever it had become. But I think it is really hard to win as a third party um i think that you have whatever that law is like duveter's law or whatever that like you know just like it everything trends towards two parties and so it's really hard to win as a third party um i you know so i would love it if a libert you know i would love it if a libertarian party candidate could win i really just want libertarians to win. I don't care what

letter is next to your name. Like a libertarian governor? Yeah, there is. So the current he was a past candidate for governor and he's currently the head of the school place organization. What's the branch of government?

Department of the school. Department of education. Education state, yeah. I clearly attended one. We're deep right now. Anyway, he's like very libertarian and he's decently likely to be the next governor. So the current governor is like,

he's like libertarian financially but he's like not as libertarian on other policies. Run as a Republican, win, and then immediately announce you're in the Libertarian Party so we had republicans do that that's how new hampshire had three um libertarians in the state legislature like four years ago and that was exactly what they did that's how they did they ran as republicans won and they were like all right we're libertarians yep the libertarian party is so wacky though that's the problem it's the only way you know the libertarian Party likes to tout these candidates.

They're like, oh, we have these. They've literally never won a three-way race. Literally never. All of their candidates that are in the state legislature either won and defected, defected whatever changed parties, or they ran a two-party race. So like they have Marshall Burt in Wyoming. He ran Libertarian against Democrat without a Republican in the race and was able to win. And so if you can somehow get it down to two parties, I think the Libertarian Party could win.

And I think it would be great if Libertarians could run under the Libertarian Party. Like the Libertarian Party platform is more Libertarian than the Republican platform. Although in New Hampshire, this is another way that Libertarians win. They're so – I got to say, if you've never been part of a cabal, you need to get a cabal. Like cabals are awesome. They're really fun, right? And so then one of the ways they win is like they go in and they write the Republican platforms. Like the Republican platform, you can look it up for the Republican platform of New Hampshire, not nationally.

It's like pretty libertarian. And if you look at the scores of state reps, the libertarian ones do better because the libertarians wrote the Republican platform. Not entirely. There's clearly some things in there they didn't get that they would have liked to have. But it's much more libertarian than most Republican platforms. I think we could set up free software machine learning algorithms to advise the governor. If not, I wouldn't want him to act as a governor because I want a human to make the final call. But I want people to be able to watch the advisement that the governor is receiving.

And then, I mean, we could really create like an art project. Yeah. I mean, I'm actually not fully getting this idea. Like if we need some sort of having one human controlling all this power is insane to me. And I would love to disperse the power of the governor amongst many people. I don't know if that's functional for like split second decisions, but usually governors don't have to make those. That's like the president.

So, but I'm also interested in utilizing AI to ease the political thing. Like you said, you hate voting. No one wants to deal with that. We send representatives because we have to because it's the least worst system. What if there was a system where machine learning just figured out what people tended towards? I'm not saying this is a good thing. I'm saying what would a system be like if YouTube says, man, people sure do love clicking on boobs or whatever whatever so they show you more and more of that stuff then eventually

a human has to intervene because people are complaining like this goes against their values what would a government government be like if laws changed based on how people reacted to the system in place so it was amorphous almost it depends on how good the system is like i mean i think i'm i'm like yeah yeah i mean i'm like, yeah, I'm like relatively anti-democratic and like anti-populist. It's like I think libertarians need to face the fact that most people aren't libertarian. Most people don't want to be libertarian. Most people don't actually like freedom and personal responsibility and individual choice. But they don't. So you need to level up the Free State Project and not just attract libertarians, but also attract people by saying, if you want to be a sheep in the flock protected by a strong sheepdog and a shepherd, New Hampshire's the place for you.

Just do as you're told. Vote the way we tell you, and we'll keep you safe. Yeah, and I think there is a way that that happens, and almost kind of already does, though not quite that explicitly. But there are all kinds of libertarians that are like large employers, right? And a large employer has the chance to kind of like, they are kind of playing that role, not always, but you know, they're giving you a job,

but they also have this chance to kind of push political perspectives. They have this chance to influence the way that you think. And if you're agreeable, you kind of, yeah, my boss is good to me and so on. And so when you have these libertarians, and this is part of,

this is what the libertarian party doesn't understand, but what I think the free state movement does, whether implicitly or explicitly, is like the way you actually change people's minds is you become an accomplished person, you attain status in your community by being a good person, by being a good father, by being a contributor, by being a volunteer, by being successful, you know, by having your life together. And when you do all of those things, people look up to you. And then people copy and adapt your values and what you believe because they see,

well, look at that person. Look at how he is or she is. And I want to be more like that. Have you considered just using your funding for propaganda campaigns to just trick people into supporting you? Well, I mean, again, people do, the libertarians do run under every party.

We don't have that much money. Our money is going to get people here. We're the bus, right? So, you know, get people on the bus. But so, I remember reading about,

like, all these rich people got a cruise ship so they could do weird stuff in international waters that was illegal for, like, their businesses or something.

Where are the billionaires to be like, let's just go to New Hampshire and fund this so that we can have laissez-faire? Puerto Rico. A lot of them went to Puerto Rico after the hurricane and started to rebuild a new utopian

Bitcoin utopia. So I heard. That's the last I heard of it. A billionaire could conquer New Hampshire, as it were. Come with massive funding. Everything you mentioned about the low population and people you like. For all billionaires listening, please contact me.

2020 tax revenue was $800 million in this state. I mean, we could bring billions, especially with the amount of money that's been printed lately. Yikes. Geez, we could bring a lot of money into that state. It's not really about the money, though. It's about what we produce, the production.

Well, really, all that needs to happen is employers need to relocate to the state. If you've got any amount of employers and you relocate to New Hampshire, you bring those employees with you. Not an easy thing for everybody, but if you can do that, that not only brings more money to the state, but it brings those people and their taxes and it just makes the economy

of New Hampshire better. Wouldn't it be funny? Just imagine 100 years from now, you look at a topographical map of the United States and it's like everything looks kind of the same, but New Hampshire is a massive megatropolis with flying cars. Oh, that's the future. Have you ever seen – I love this video. It's from – I think it's called Gray Still Plays.

Is that the guy, the YouTuber? I don't know. This guy, he was playing a game called City State, I think it's called. And you basically are building a city state. You can choose to have taxes, low taxes, high taxes. You can choose to regulate or deregulate and things like that. And so he decides to play this game where he's like, I'm just

going to, it's going to be anarchy. It's going to be whatever. I don't care. No rules, no taxes. And what he thought was going to happen was it was going to be poverty and chaos. And it's a hilarious video because he's like, what's happening? And like, there's no poor. There's zero poverty. Everyone's

wealthy. Ski resorts keep popping up all over the place. And he's like, what? And all he did was say no taxes, no government, no intervention, and it just... Everyone lived in luxury. City State 2's out, by the way. Awesome game. Shout out to Raptor Games on YouTube. Well, I think

this is another thing that some libertarians can miss because like most we let everyone lives in luxury now, right? Like seriously, I'm not trying to say they're psychologically healthy or they're physically healthy, but in terms of like if you could work like a minimum wage job and in

terms of what you have available to you in terms of like quality food technology, all these things, it is a better life than most people have had throughout history. The difference is that human beings, technology, all these things. It is a better life than most people have had throughout history. The difference is that human beings, some, a lot of libertarians don't feel this way, but most other people do. They experience

a psychic pain when other people have more than them. They literally, like, they do. This is part of what libertarians, and libertarians tend to not experience this, and a lot of them don't believe me when I say this. But that's why, that's what so much of this stuff is about. That's what the Green New Deal is about. That's why socialists don't actually care if their policies would make people worse off because it's about bringing people closer together because they're pained by the fact that other people have – why do so many people hate – why do so many environmentalists hate Elon Musk who's doing more to make the world green than like anyone else because he's really rich yeah right why is there so much hatred for

jeff bezos who again gives lots of 15 20 an hour jobs that anyone can go and get right because he's really rich and like there are a lot of people i don't have this feeling i don't have it myself there are a lot of people who just have that feeling. And simply the distance in resources makes that person bad. So the envy, I guess, is what? Yeah, maybe. I used to feel that when I'd wait tables in LA and I'd wait on, I was just telling the story with you guys a couple of nights ago or last night. And I would just get it. I'd be like, gosh, I wish I could not have to work in the middle of the day and go walk my dog with my sandals on and eat $30 meals every day, five days a week. And I just go about my business thinking like, oh, that'd be awesome.

Think it back to it, you know, just dealing with my reality. But I felt it, you know, it's not as much anymore. But, you know, I've also done more that I'm proud of. So that's part of it. Yeah, that's socialism. It's envy. People not realizing that you have better dental care today than Rockefeller did. He's got this massive wealth, the wealthiest guy, and you can get better dental care. You've got air conditioning.

He didn't. You've got a refrigerator, luxury items. You've got a TV. You've got a big screen TV. You've got VR headsets for a couple hundred bucks. You know, I was talking about this a while back. Someone said something to me at Occupy. They were like, you know, we're the first generation that's going to be worse off than our parents, our parents' generation.

And I was like, my dad didn't have a TV or a phone. Like, because they were not, it was like TVs were expensive. Now people got TVs in their pockets. And you got to pay the bill for that like if you could take this device back in history and it still somehow worked it would be worth like all the world's wealth like all of it or half of it or something like tremendous if you downloaded the contents of wikipedia onto this device and had like a charging cable and a battery pack that could easily recharge it because or you know just a wall charger you brought it back 50 years.

It'd be worth $100 trillion. Now, to be fair, future information is worth an infinite amount of money. But let's say all it had, let's say you downloaded a Wikipedia database, an encyclopedic database from 1970, identical information to what that at the time, nothing beyond their level of knowledge. The device would still be worth billions of dollars.

Trillions. Trillions. Because they could be like, I can pull up all of the information we currently know of 1970 and no one else can? Oh, yeah. Governments would look for it. It would be. It's fascinating. I love like these shows, the superhero shows, you know, Heroes did it, where they like, you know, how do you handle people with powers and people who don't? So in like X-Men, they have the Mutant Registry Act,

because they're like, this is dangerous, these mutants. And I think about, there's this, this is a common trope in sci-fi. And I think it's just often said, the reason why aliens would not give humans technology is, what do you think they would do with it? They'd wage war. What do you think would happen if you went to, you know, a village in Africa and said, here's a stockpile of M16s or something and crates full of ammo? They would be like, we're going to use it to empower ourselves and we're going to take care of our enemies. So what happens in the US, or I should say in the world, is that typically all this technology arises simultaneously in different ways. So you do end up with world war and conflict and crisis, but for the most part, we're always kind of, you know, at an equal level. What would happen if you came and gave this power of knowledge to a, you know, a prior generation?

To us, it's a cell phone. We look at pictures of cats and we argue with strangers on the internet. Back then, it would be one of the most powerful weapons the world had ever seen. The fact that someone could be like, i can know everything humans can know like that yeah the envy thing seems like an emergent phenomenon because obviously people have enough i mean we have enough to become super gods if any one person wanted to study everything on the internet and remember it memorize it you'd be yeah i mean i think it's driven by evolution like no one wants to be like we've always lived in some sort of social hierarchies throughout our evolution and and

everyone wants to be at the top and no one wants to feel like they're at the bottom and so it's it's for the people at the bottom of any sort of hierarchy they want to gang up on and take down the the the person at the top i think it's i think it's something that's been i think primates do it i think all kinds of other think primates do it. I think all kinds of other social animals do it. I think another point of evidence in this favor is if you look at happiness research, people in countries that are much poorer than the U.S. aren't substantially less happy

than people in the U.S. The distribution of happiness is pretty similar. Well, because it's not really about how well off you are. I mean, it plays a role. I'm not saying they're literally the same, but it's much more about, hey, if you're doing well in society, this is also why you see this research sometimes is like, oh, you know, if everyone made $80,000 a year, they'd be happy. Look at this research. Once people make this amount of money, they're much happier. It's not about the money. It's not about the resources. It's about that once you're at that certain level, you experience happiness from having achieved the success that distances you from others.

This is like a kind of like cold and uncomfortable way to talk about it, but I think it's the truth. I will say though, having a little bit of money, having enough money to eat whatever I want whenever I want and to sleep as late as I want is life-changing. Yes. When you're talking about abject poverty, there's clear differences there. So I'm not talking about quite at that level. There are clear differences. I once read that a paraplegic,

a year after their accident, and a lottery winner, a year after winning, register the same levels of happiness. Yeah. We experience these hedonic adjustments. Jonathan Haidt has some really good research on this topic. We're going to do a hard segue. The hardest of hard segues.

Do it. Because I have to. Because there is a trend on Twitter. My friends, I give you Cenk Uygur of the Young Turks claiming he could beat Joe Rogan in a fight. All right. Next MMA celebrity match.

Just for everybody, Cenk is an overweight, progressive YouTube host. And Joe Rogan is not only an MMA commentator, but he used to fight MMA and he trains and he has a gym and he is massively ripped. But we have this tweet. Mr. M says,

I'll make a $1,000 donation to your trash network or your charity of choice to see you call Rogan, who is not only the most successful podcast in history but also a black belt in mma a loser to his face and jank uger said deal easiest one thousand dollars i've ever made you think he's going to assault me sure whatever that's incredibly dumb but also wouldn't work i'm much larger than joe and i've fought my whole life i'd end him

but grown-ups don't do that i'll send you the po box to send the check later i'll end him this is wow a whole new level of stupid but come on man is this is this is the political discourse we get in this country yes let me let me let me pull up we got we got another tweet here let me see if it loads jen kooker says if joe rogan believes the government is violating your bodily autonomy is that the government violating your bodily autonomy is tyranny, then he must be furious about anti-choice Christian mullahs in his country. If he isn't, then he's an effing hypocrite, sucking up to his right-wing audience out of either stupidity or cowardice.

Except I'm pretty sure Joe Rogan is pro-choice, pro-UBI, pro-Bernie Sanders. This is what these people don't get. Cenk Uygur is plastic. He represents the non-player character that dominates our political discourse. I, for instance, pro-choice. Vax mandates are wrong because it's a liberty-minded approach, not a traditional value-minded approach. But Cenk doesn't know or care. And so the parent factions, the Democrats and the Republicans, now the Republicans mostly not so much because Trump really just splattered that whole party, changing it very different nowadays.

But the establishment Democrats only seem to recognize dichotomies. So Cenk Uygur goes on his show and says, either you agree with us, you're on our side, or no matter what else, you're wrong. Even if what you're saying is scientifically true or factually correct, doesn't matter. And so they'll come out and it just, what's the point of this tweet?

Cenk, did you just watch Joe Rogan's podcast? Well, I mean, this is the point of the tweet. Do we talk about it on TV? But good. You know, I understand that and I'm fine with it. You know why? We need to explain to people who are watching, give them something they can share and say,

my friends, you deserve actual political debates. What Cenk is saying here most likely is driven by, I will say Hanlon's razor, never attribute to malice, that which can be explained by incompetence or attributed to incompetence. Perhaps he's just not that smart. However, Cenk Uygur runs a multimillion-dollar network that's massive, and you need to have abilities and passion and drive to do something like that. So that says to me Cenk knows he's misleading his audience.

He knows he's pushing trash to fill their minds with garbage that will not move this country forward. Rogan's a black belt in jujitsu, I believe. I know he's a kickboxer. I don't know if he practices, but I mean, I think Cenk just doesn't understand that if he's really being serious here. It sounds like a high school athlete who's in their 30s or 40s

and is a little overweight and still talks about how badass they are. Yeah. I don't know. I don't know, Cenk. I don't know. Maybe he's are. Yeah. I don't know. I don't know, Chang. I don't know. Maybe he's a great fighter. I don't know.

He's a union buster. See, this is the problem we have. The young Turks are on YouTube TV. They're propped up by YouTube. They have massive investment, and they are as fake as they come. I used to love him, man. In 2007, 2006, they were speaking out against the war in iraq he was revolutionary in a good way it's not even i don't it's look i don't know if you've seen this but

have you noticed a change in people like something changed yeah people like like like jank for instance you know uh i've known him for a long time and not like the friends or anything but you know i've he had me on a show a couple times. I saw him at VidCon several years ago, and he walked up, and he was like, Hey, how's it going? We shook hands, and we talked about YouTube and metrics, and I was doing my YouTube channel, and I was doing what I was doing. And then two years later at Politicon, he's screaming in my face, just like screaming at me. And I'm like, Why are you yelling at me? Like, dude, what's going on?

I should clarify, Joe's not a kickboxer. Taekwondo. That's meant to say taekwondo oh really he's taekwondo he won a uh tournament like in his late teens early 20s and then he kind of got out of the game after that he's getting hit in the head too much dude is ripped yeah he's a maniac he loves looking out but so so something happened to people man and i don't i don't know what yeah i'm not this isn't like a strong explanation but i think part of it does have to do with social media and the way that it's sort of like i to me that matches up with the timeline of like the politics has gotten much more divisive. Like Democrats and Republicans have moved away from the middle and are like much more outside of the middle. But have you seen the Pew Research?

The trends on this? Yeah, it's Democrats, not Republicans. Republicans are slightly more moderate. I thought it was Democrats more than Republicans, but Republicans also did it. Republicans shifted leftward a great deal from during the 2000s into the early 2010s and then moved only a little bit to the

right. So depending on what time frame you're using. But based on where Republicans were in the 90s into the 2000s, they're actually much further left than they traditionally had been. I mean, they're progressives driving the speed limit and so on. Right, exactly. Yeah.

Yeah. But it definitely does like – it incentivizes conflict. It discourages us seeing the other side. And it's also like created this phenomenon where like we're living in these like separate realities where they're like – who is like – who are these people that both sides still trust? There's basically no one. None.

So my favorite was, I mentioned this for many of you may have heard this, but just so you know, when I went on Russell Brand's show and he asked me, I was on Russell Brand's show, he asked me about civil war. And I typically view this as people are like, they think they're going to get me as though like I'm some shock jock being like civil war and like being on the table when I'm actually like going through all of the details, the Princeton professor, the Atlantic articles, the conversations around Thucydides trap and what it means, fourth and fifth generational warfare, all of these very like, you know, specific examples of why we are facing some kind of civil conflict. Then you've got, I'm like, first and foremost, we had two shootouts in the Pacific Northwest between the left and the right. I mean, that's kinetic conflict.

It's been going on for years and getting worse. And then you have the storming of the Capitol and all this stuff. The comment section was hilarious. People on the right saying Tim's a leftist. People on the left saying Tim's right wing. And I'm like, well, there you go. There's no middle for any real conversation.

But the interesting thing is libertarians are kind of like in the middle because they're like all i care about is freedom do you care about freedom so i suppose i'll put it this way when i look at uh when we have libertarians on the show with conservatives they agree on so much but the libertarians and the left do not agree and the conservatives and liberals do not agree. And it really does feel like the overwhelming majority of the left, as we describe it, be it establishment or leftist, is authoritarian. Masquerading as libertarian because no one will come out and claim to be an authoritarian. No one will do it. It's not going to win you any favors. But then you see people like Hasan Piker.

You know, you see the Young Turks. You see Vosch in favor of rule by edict, the president issuing a decree and then everyone being forced to adhere to it. And they're celebrating it. That's the definition of authoritarianism. Yeah. What's the, does everyone know the dude quote? I can never do it right. Like when I'm weaker than you, I ask for you to follow the principles.

And then when I'm stronger than you, like when I don't adhere to the principles because it's good for me. Yeah, I'll look it up. But that's exactly what the – that's exactly the phenomenon. And I don't know how much of it is, like, conscious. I think part of it is that, like, human beings are deceitful to themselves. And so, like, when they're on the losing side and the underside, they have this like genuine feeling that principles ought to be important. And when they're on the winning side and the dominant side, they have this feeling that

I don't know, principles don't matter. Like what matters is accomplishing my objective. I have the Dune quote from Frank Herbert, the writer, Children of Dune. When I'm weaker than you, I ask for freedom because that is according to your principles. But when I'm stronger than you, I take away your freedom because that is according to mine, to my principles. Sorry, I got cut off freedom because that is according to mine. To my principles. Sorry, I got cut off in the middle. That was a little anticlimactic, so pop up.

But I think that's the phenomenon. We need a new word. So the right says communism, the left says capitalism. There's a corruption element there. The left says fascism. We need a new word. What's happening is a new type of... Proprietary technocracy.

Kind of, but that doesn't explain... It does, I think, cover a lot of what's happening. But, you know, you look at what's happening with authoritarianism. Rule by edict. How does proprietary technocracy explain Joe Biden saying, I hereby decree? Because he can reach a trillion people a million people with once with radio he uses technology to like that's what hitler did too he was a yeah but radio is 150 years old or whatever yeah hitler did a lot right

right so that's always convincing people with mass media it's not a proprietary technology he didn't have the ability to stand up and say it and everyone hears it on tv i don't think that we it would have that kind of impact. It's, technocracy is the government control of society by technical experts. So we certainly have a tech. Twitter banned the Hunter Biden thing.

But that doesn't explain Joe Biden coming out, that doesn't explain Joe Biden coming out with an edict and then everyone just adhering to it. It was on my Twitter page when I loaded Twitter for like five days. Did you know that what he did isn't illegal? Yes, they're serving. Legal experts say.

That's why I'm saying we need a new word. They've usurped the governance in those. We're seeing an element of big tech corporations wielding their power, but it's not so much the technology. Mass media has been around for a long time. It is you have the private sector and the public sector have merged, which some people might say is fascism. But fascism is also like traditionalist and nationalistic.

So that doesn't explain what they are. So we need a word that represents global corporatism with state, you know, yeah, global government corporatism. A word for all of that in one thing. Do you hear me typing? Jerkism. I just typed it in. Global government corporatism. Corporatism goes global. Corporatism goes global. with the state under the under the mask under the guise of democracy towards a a you know global international new world order is that what they said is that what laurie lightfoot said i don't

know that's what that australian lady said so communism means something fascism means something capitalism means something and so when you're trying to describe this i hear all these different words thrown out and it's like it doesn't capture the essence it's definitely a corporatism like we were talking about earlier with contracts if a company has owns the rights to your likeness and then they start building artificial intelligence generative deep fakes and can make you look real and say whatever they want forever that's like you're a digital slave to a corporation so like disney owns the rights to thor they can make chris hemsworth's face say anything they want on a cartoon or on a TV show now. Do you think it's all driven

by corporations? No, what's happening is there's a very dense, powerful corporate centralization of power that is colluding with a very dense centralization of government power. And it's

authoritarian. It's detrimental to the working class, to the people. It's exploitative. It enslaves. It is overt's authoritarian. It's detrimental to the working class, to the people. It's exploitative. It enslaves. It is overtly authoritarian. And so what's the word? I typically would say the lucrative merger of corporation and state would be fascism, Mussolini's fascism. But then you get all sorts of arguments about the fascists were traditionalists.

They were like women at the home. And that's not what these people are. These people are ultra-progressives. But they're not communists because they work with corporations. So it's like Chinese state capitalist – it's Chinese communist capitalism. It's like woke neoliberal corporatism. But there should be just one word. Yeah, no, obviously. Yeah, yeah.

I'm going to say technocracy, final answer, because without the social media, none of this could be happening right now. Oh, that's not true, Ian. Without the government, Twitter wouldn't have the legal protections to make it happen. Without the government, Twitter could do whatever it wanted. Without the Democrats coming in. So when Congress comes in and gives special protections to the tech industry, they're then able to propaganda. I will say I think a lot of big tech is protected by federal laws.

I was talking to you about this before the show. I'll talk about this idea maybe a little bit now. There is an ability, a technical ability, but not a legal one, to embrace and extend these platforms where you build a Facebook 2, you log into it with your Facebook credentials, and it gives you everything in Facebook 1 plus more. And when you like a Facebook 2, you log into it with your Facebook credentials, and it gives you everything in Facebook 1 plus more. And when you comment on Facebook 2,

it backports to Facebook 1 for the people who are still on there and so on. And this is a way that we could evolve our way out of the status quo. So we wouldn't be trapped in this equilibrium that no one is happy with. It's laws that stop these things from being built. So big tech companies use laws to shut down competitors. I mean, the fact that IP is a big one. You're still $10. Apple owns rounded black corners. Oracle,

I think they ended up losing the case, but it went on for 10 years where Oracle potentially owned the set of Java APIs, which made it so that you couldn't be competitive with phones. There's the Computer Fraud Anti-Abuse Act. This is a big one that a lot of people don't know about. It says basically unauthorized access to a computer is a federal crime.

And what these big tech companies do is they say, well, if you're scraping public data and we tell you to stop, you're now violating the CFAA, and that's a federal crime. They don't even need to tell you to stop. The government just literally says, eh, we decided it's a crime. But this kills Padmapper, if anyone remembers that service. Yeah, that was illegal. It was showing apartments on a map. So you could pull up a map, and it would show you listings for rentals.

There was a small company. It was like one guy. He built this service where if Southwest changed their flight fees, it would tell you, because if you call Southwest when they lower the price of the flight, they'll give you the money back, but you have to contact them. And Southwest said, stop scraping our site, and if you don't, we're going to call the FBI. So you can't look up our public price data.

You know, government, misappropriation of government can stifle innovation, but no government allows corporations to send armed men into the other startups and kill everyone in the building and then make sure that no one starts up. Well, all right, so that, I mean, that's a much different debate as to, like, how would these competing interests play out in terms of violence?

And I'm not going to, if we want to do the, like, ANCAP versus minarchy debate, we can do it. But I think that's separate from, like, we can assume a Menarche, so we can assume there's some small government that stops the companies from doing that. But if they didn't have these additional laws that they were allowed to leverage to shut down their competitors, I actually

think competition would be more robust. Yeah, I think you're right about that. Big time, actually. So, hmm. Repeal the CFAA. Build an island in the middle of the Pacific. We could build islands and live on them. I mean, I don't know. I'm an optimist.

Like, I think, and this is why the world is getting better despite government getting worse. Entrepreneurs always win. Human creativity always wins. Human ingenuity, the ability for humans to be creative, to come together, to work together, to come up with novel solutions. Like, I think it's why the world continues to get better. And I think it's why I think we'll get out of where we are with the big tech stuff. Part of what's frustrating about it is it takes time. It takes time for the new solutions. I mean, you've had mines on, you're having me on, you know, I run library and which also owns Odyssey. And these things, they're getting big. Odyssey grew from nothing

to 40 million people a month in a year. And it just takes time to grow to a billion people no matter how fast you're growing. What do you think about federating minds and library? Yeah, I'm all for interoperability. And that's part of the beauty of all this stuff. And when everything is open source, when everything is permissionless, we're able to innovate so much faster. And I think all

of the creative energy, like, you know, Google's a zombie, man. Like the smartest, most creative people, they don't want to work at Google. They don't want to work under a culture where you have to adhere to a woke ideology. And if you don't, you're going to lose your job. They don't want to sit through three hours of diversity and inclusion workshops a week and have to go through all that training and have to put, you know, pronouns in their signature and all this stuff. I'm not saying none of them do, but most of them don't. I was thinking last night, Google, is it just that it's too big? It's part of it that it takes just such a long time.

Look, I mean, IBM has been like sleepwalking for more than a decade, and it's still such a large company. You know, look, it doesn't usually happen overnight where some startup takes down the incumbent. And so when you're going through that five to ten year reality, which is how long it actually takes for these things to play out, it feels really slow, and it feels like it's never going to happen. But I think it's happening. I think it's happening right now. I think we're going through it. It's like a constant resurgence, and then it falls away and then fertilizes the soil where new things appear.

With Google, I remember when Google Plus came out, and they had YouTube and Google Plus, and it was like, why didn't they just make YouTube the social network? They were trying to. And then they had this company, this part of it running Google Plus and part of it running YouTube. And they didn't know what the other hand was doing. And it was a mess.

YouTube was trying to turn, Google was trying to turn YouTube into Google Plus. And it was backfiring bad. And it was causing a lot of problems. But the intent, it was happening, was that YouTube would be Google Plus. And then they were like, it's not working. Yeah. So it makes me think that it's too big. That you can't, it's just too much authority

and too many levels of authority of things getting passed down that it's less effect, loses affectivity. Yeah, no, that's such an important concept and I think it's a mistake a lot of people make in their thinking is they think of like, oh, Google's like a coherent entity.

Like, oh, the CEO just says stuff and then like things happen. It's like, you know, true of government, it's true of large corporations. It's a bunch of individual agents all with their own local incentives. A lot of times inside of the large thing, they're competing interests. They're competing

branches of government that are at odds with one another. They're competing factions of Google that are at odds with one another. There's not an ability for one person to just issue some top-down order and then everything happens. And the most creativity, the best stuff happens when you have people with that bottom-up incentive where they believe in the mission and they want to do the right thing. Like very few jobs, especially creative work, can be like purely quantified where it's like

you produce your 40 widgets of stuff and we're going to win because we're producing 40 widgets of creativity per week and we're highly – it's not the the way it works it's not the way uh true creation happens let's go to super jets if you haven't already smash that like button subscribe to the channel share the show with your friends go to timcast.com we'll have a members only segment coming up later around 11 or so p.m let's read what y'all have to say. Dragon's Pride says, all disrespect intended. If libertarians would have voted for Trump, we wouldn't be in this mess. The problem with that is the assumption

that libertarians share the values of Trump supporters. And I think as we can see with New Hampshire, a lot of libertarians don't. Yeah, I mean, look, Trump grew the federal budget. Okay, Trump, you know, Trump had followed his impulses.

He might have been better on covid than he was but he didn't trump said he was going to end the wars but he didn't and i say all this as someone who thinks trump would have been better than biden right those are my choices so but like you know trump was not a particularly libertarian president and trump would have continued to grow government and so on and so like would it have happened more slowly? Maybe. But this is, these are two terrible choices here no matter what if you're a libertarian.

All right. Michael Fernando Melo says, nice, Free State New Hampshire is on my short list. Best city, T.C. Is for Domestan

going to be in Maryland or West Virginia? Sounds tempting. Only one is constitutional carry, though. It's going to be in West Virginia. Of course. There's a lot of land in West Virginia, like hundreds of acres.

It's relatively cheap. And apparently there are investors who are interested in a freedom community and wealthy ones. But I don't know if that's for me. There are some other people I know who might want to run something like that. We want to do mostly more like a hacker acreage a hacker farm where people can we you know build blimps and stuff um oh yeah and we're moving on the zeppelin project right yeah yeah big announcement um so there's a story i'll just tell you real quick for a long time for some reason wikipedia claimed i invented some kind of live streaming zeppelin i don't know why they claim

this it has something to do with some article where i think a friend of mine made like a passive comment and then a journalist you know someone said something like it'd be really cool if we had like a zeppelin that could just be resting on your roof and then like just go up and anywhere in the world you could dial in and just have access to this live streaming aerial camera and then someone claimed I did it and then Wikipedia put it in and it said Tim Pool invented the theppelin stream or something. And then I was like, this isn't true. And they wouldn't remove it. Finally, they removed it. And as a point of spite, I said, now I'm actually going to invent it.

And so it's under, it's under construction. It's going to be here and we're going to film it. And then the funny thing is, this is where it gets confusing. The original article will retroactively become true. So what happens? Can Wikipedia put that article in? Because what it's saying is true, even though it's missing the context of it,

it wasn't true when it was written. Yeah, isn't that amazing? How does that work? Like, if there was an article that said, Ian has long hair, and they put it in, but then Ian didn't have long hair. He had short hair. And then people are like, this is fake news.

Get rid of it. And then Ian grew his hair out, and they're like, this is fake news. Get rid of it. And then Ian grew his hair out. And they're like, now it's true. Put it back. But that article is not true. You need to write a new one. Isn't that crazy? It says that.

It'll make it. And then you know what we're thinking of doing? We're thinking of naming the Zeppelin something like in, well, we're going to name it like. In 2012? Yeah. We'll name the hangar in 2012. So in 2012... No.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. We'll name the hangar... 2012 or whatever. Quote, in 2012. Or 2012. In 2012, Tim built a Zeppelin. It'll be called... Yeah, in 2012.

So it'll say, Tim Poole built the Zeppelin in a hangar in 2012 no no in the hangar we would just be called 2012 we're like welcome to 2012 and they'd be like in 2012 tim built that zeppelin no they would say like a hangar called yeah if you guys have ideas man so we were thinking about naming it something so that when they write in the article it would confuse people and they wouldn't know when it was made yeah i think i is perfect. Yeah, Zeppelin's going to be maniac. It's going to be awesome. Man, Wikipedia's gone so downhill, though. But I'm really just

interested how they'll respond to this because it's like a really interesting bind for the editors to be in. We've officially... It exists. We've been working with some people. We've got it. I think it's mostly done. And so we're going to unveil it, but it's happened. So now, I will say say this definitively that article that claimed i did invent the zeppelin is

now correct well what effectively we didn't invent it we're using technology what does that mean exactly we pieced we had this one pieced together for us i don't know i'm gonna go with the article still false because it wasn't true when it was written exactly yeah i think that means it's false but if someone said read it to you without the date it would be a true statement yeah but i don't think that's how the truth works i i agree with you okay i'm just curious how wikipedia oh yeah yeah but also ian you underestimate what invention is maybe i do yeah you really do so like you know when when an alarm clock is invented they're like we have speakers and we have these things and like oh i know i can make i can buy the timer from jim so that when the timer stops it rings oh yeah we'll be modding it out we might even the heck out of that thing that's

what invention is it's standing on the shoulders of giants so certainly you know uh a lot of this is what you're really gonna say about phones too and like all modern tech it's basically a company shops around saying can you build something like this and they'll be like we'll make it and they put the pieces together and say, look what we've created. It's a new invention or something. Let's read some more. Let's see what we got. Alright, let's see. Nightingale

Mori says, what's the Safe and Ready Meals promo? What is it? Safeandreadymeals.com? I am not doing a promo for them because that would be a specific thing but we sometimes do promote safeandreadymeals.com. I don't know how that works because normally when you read the promo, you have to tell YouTube, but if someone asks us

and we just tell them what it is, like – What if I ask you? That might be a promo. I want to ask you about what's in your water bottle over there. The Eternal Reds? Do it. We're not doing – Those are delicious, by the way.

Yeah. We shouted them out yesterday. It's like, I legit drink this stuff, dude. It's amazing. It's so good. Yeah, put it in the water and get that vitamin C. Timothy Peterson says, never laughed as hard watching Shimcast as I did last night. Ian, mid-tangent, said,

what were we talking about? I was honest. Ian is an enigma. That was during the members only, right? We were talking about souls being devoured by Cthulhu, and I was thinking of the magnetic fields going to bigger magnetic fields. I'm like were talking about souls being devoured by Cthulhu, and I was thinking of the magnetic fields going to bigger magnetic fields. I'm like, what if the biggest magnetic field is Cthulhu?

All of a sudden, mid-sentence, he looked at Jack and goes, I forgot what I'm talking about. I was looking at his eyes, you know, one of those connections. Distracting. Alright, let's see. Adam Spalding says, NH here 100 support the free state project yeah that's right adam hope to see you at some free state meetups

bogdanoff says tim just 200k pool well um how about i can help give some uh some lessons to those who aren't familiar with the market? $200,000 for a property is actually really, really cheap because you don't walk in with a check for $200,000. You need – and often maybe only 5% of that. And then you walk in – which could still be a lot, mind you. But you go to a bank and you say, like, a loan for property. This is how you get a mortgage on property. So if you're looking at 100 acres and it's, what is that? $2,000 per acre?

Ridiculously cheap. You look in like Western West Virginia and it's like 30 acres for a million dollars. So yeah, that is really, really cheap. If you live in the suburbs or like the south side of Chicago, the houses there are a couple hundred grand 180 to 200 you go to a bank sometimes you can do no money down and you get a loan to buy it so yeah 200k is cheap it's all relative yep preston tem says student pilot here something that i have found so asinine about the green new deal is that it views turbines jet engines as dirty when turbines are easily twice as efficient as other ICEs for aircraft. Interesting. I don't know. Wait,

you're saying that the authors of the Green New Deal got something scientifically incorrect? That doesn't sound right. It doesn't sound like that. I have doubts about that. That was interesting. Coldilocks Production says, YouTube isn't liking this stream's topic right now. Lots of stream freezes means Tim's talking about the right topics. Keep it up, guys. It's probably

you. Yeah. I really doubt YouTube likes you. They do not. We have had our Odyssey app has been in review at YouTube for seven weeks. And I have some inside. I don't want to say too much. I know I have good information that it has been sort of flagged to the highest level.

I don't know about your experience with library. My experience in mines is whenever there's technical glitches, very, very, very... 98.9% of the time, it's like a back-end glitch. And people think they're being censored, and they're freaking out.

And I'm like, dude, this is tech, man. We rolled out a new update. Yeah, I mean, especially... I mean, look, some people are sort of more more conspiratorially minded and so everything is a conspiracy yes all right i don't know how to read cyrillic so i'll just say it like it's not tabby says or taboo oh okay that's taboo last night's members show with jack got pretty heated hope you guys were cool after the fact now this is the part where i say first time super chat oh yeah but the two weeks before was even more heated on the show.

We debated for like a half hour, went viral. So, oh, yeah, dude. If you can't, you know, there's no principle to stand by or you're not staying by your principles if you're not going to get into an actual argument with people that you know and trust and be willing to, like, recognize you disagree on very core issues. That's literally, like, the purpose of what we do here for the most part is, yeah, I disagree with Charlie Kirk when he came, and I'm like, wow, I really don't agree with him on this or that issue, but it's just the way it is.

What are you going to do? Are you going to get all mad? I think mature, responsible adults recognize they're like, man, I really disagree with Jack on those points. Cool dude. Great guy. We're looking forward to having him back in a couple of weeks when he comes back. This makes me feel like we haven't disagreed enough.

Yeah, this is just the beginning. Yeah. Yeah, I think my strongest moral foundation is probably liberty. So when it comes to like a lot of issues on government stuff, I'm like, man, we can make a lot of good arguments on that one. And then when it comes to should the government have the authority, I'm usually like, no, probably not because they screw things up and kill people you know so yeah yeah i i do think the great the the uh the crossover we needed most was the black lives matter anti-mandate you know protests yeah which of course will get zero coverage it'll get co-opted harvey slayer says i don't think secession is the answer necessarily a seceded state can become more tyrannical

than it was before. Take California, for instance. These problems will persist unless people oversee Gov Operation More, always hold their feet to the fire. Yeah, but I've been thinking about this. Why should I care how Californians live? It's not tyranny unless you don't like it.

That's true. This is, you know, I've gotten heat for saying this, but I think libertarians are the most oppressed minority. I think the most oppressed minority in the country. Because if you support what the government does, it's not oppressing.

If I want to be whipped, I'm not being oppressed, right? Yeah. So if you look at how much is any group of people dominated, how much does the government dominate a group of people, how much is it absolutely taking away their right to live the way that they want to libertarians are more oppressed than any minority 100 i agree although i have heard the phrase benevolent tyrant like sometimes people can dictate through tyranny but do really good stuff with it no there was a guy in ancient athens that did that turned athens

into the greatest trade colony in the world sure and hugo chavez you know taught people this guy legit walked into this nothing backwoods Athens and turned it into a global anomaly. And the Communist Party of China lifted a billion people out of poverty. Hey, George Washington had to act as a tyrant for a short period of time, and then he gave up the power. Yeah, but that's – so I don't believe there's benevolent dictatorship. Look up benevolent tyrant. I mean, there's lots of – I understand the concept.

I'm saying I do not agree with the idea that you can be a benevolent tyrant. You don't think you can dictate by decree and do good things with it? I think you can do good things. That doesn't make you benevolent. It makes you a tyrant. Is there a local restaurant here that you like? Yeah, I guess. All right.

Do you think they're benevolent to you? Define what you mean by that. Do you view them as benevolently? I'm not trying to. This isn't like a trap. I think there's no right answer to this question. But what do you mean by benevolent in this context? Well, like in the same way that benevolent would mean, are they kind to you?

Are they being good to you? The restaurant? Yeah. I honestly would say indeterminate. When you sit down and they're like, hi, thanks for coming. Here's your menu. And then say, I'll have the chicken wings and say, okay. And they come back and give you the chicken wings. It's not really an interaction there. Yeah, they might not be benevolent. Because most restaurants are dictatorships. Most

companies are dictatorships and they're serving you. All corporations are basically authoritarian. There are laws stopping companies from doing certain things. But they're not necessarily dictatorships. I mean, there's a trade agreement there. There's a mutual understanding. They're not going to spit in your food and you're not going to throw it on the floor. Sure, but I mean, like, they're typically owned by

a single person or a family. They have complete authority. If they want to kick someone off the property, they can do that. If they want to fire someone, they can do that. They can change the menu the next day. They can make whatever they want. They can change. They set all the prices. They decide everything about the way the restaurant is. Yeah, make whatever they want. They can change. They set all the prices. They decide everything about the way. Yeah, but you're comparing like a government to a building. This defines tyrant as an absolute ruler unrestrained by law or constitution.

So it doesn't say anything about good or evil. It's just the issue is. Absolute ruling authority. The reason why I say you can't be a benevolent tyrant is that there will always be people who say I disagree. And if the tyrant says I'm not constrained and can do whatever I want, he will be crushing and oppressing those people who disagree, even if they disagree for stupid reasons. You can have an individual

who is genuinely the smartest, most the kindest person who says I know how to solve all the world's problems. And if someone says, I demand my voice be heard, and he says, no, you're wrong, shut up, tyrant, not benevolent. Well, what if there's like a hundred people and one guy says, I'm in charge

and I need to get us across the river because the wildfire's coming. And one guy goes, no, we need to stay here. Then he can stay. And the tyrant says, no, we're going. And takes everyone. So he saved everyone's life. They would consider him a saint. They would love him and praise him for

saving their lives. What are your thoughts on that? It reminds me of the drunk driving hypothetical. So I can say what I'll do. The scenario is like your friend is extremely... I'm curious. Direct answer to what he asked. There's a hundred people on a shore, in front

of a river with a wildfire approaching. One man says we do not cross. He takes him by force across the river. Or he leaves the other 99 and leaves the guy, whatever. Well, certainly I see no reason with taking the 99 and leaving the guy. To be honest, I don't really have a problem with also forcing the guy

in terms of what I do. I don't really think there are very many absolute moral rules. I think they all break down. I think forcing the person is authoritarianism. Sure, but it might be good it could still be good but who are you to decide for someone else when they make a decision for yeah i'm not i'm not gonna go to the mat on this one like i'm fine with leaving them if you

use the force of a large crowd on a person who says you know what's funny is the problem with that circumstance is that it turns out the reason the one guy says don't cross was because the river was full of piranhas okay and then he forces him in the river and he gets killed. He all died. Here's one you might agree with if you don't like that one. Your friend is extremely drunk. And he says that, yeah, I'm going to get in my car and I'm going to drive home. Drunk is very different.

Well, but in other words, you decide to wrestle him to the ground and take his keys and throw him into the woods so he can't drive home. You violate his property rights and you act – you dominate his hand. Yeah, I disagree. That's absolutely not the same thing. A guy is bleeding on the ground and you're like, if I don't put pressure on the wound, you'll die. Don't you dare touch me. I'm putting the pressure on the wound. I'm not saying these are exactly the same scenario.

Well, if you put – wait. If you put – so that's – so all right. The drunk driving one, the idea is that the behavior is creating some externalities. So maybe it's different. But if you put pressure on the wound when the guy says no, how is that different than carrying him across the bridge? You don't know what's in the river. You don't know why he's objecting. And so you also have to consider that when someone's – so there's extreme circumstances where, and uses the force of the mob to shut you down, often you could end up walking into a river full of piranhas and then you all die.

Maybe the guy bleeding to death wants to die because he's about to – Wanting to die is different from saying, I object on these grounds. But you might – the tyrant may know that there's danger, whereas the person who's objecting doesn't know. It's still complex social situations. We cannot create a circumstance in which a tyrant can just say, I'm smarter than you, therefore you must. No, but if they have knowledge that you don't have and there's a dissension, a familiar dissension.

Then let's play the game. 99 people come to the river and the one benevolent tyrant says, I know the river is safe. He's wrong. Let's force him across. And then the next 99 people come to the river and the one benevolent tyrant says i know the river is safe he's wrong let's force him across and then the next time they come across the river the moron says i'm in charge and then throws everybody off a cliff and they and they and the guy's like don't throw me off the cliff please and they're like you do as you're told and then do it so history would write the first guy as a benevolent tyrant the second guy would be an idiot the point is this is why we don't allow absolute power that's why we prevent against it yeah because it can go haywire because it will go not always will yes no there are definitely instances throughout history of tyranny being very good it's the exception not

the rule i agree with you create a circumstance where someone can oppress people because they think they're smarter and that is what you will get now if there's an emergency and someone's lying on the ground and they're bleeding and they're like don't touch me don't touch me that happens all the time and it's like bro the ground and they're bleeding and they're like, don't touch me, don't touch me. That happens all the time. And it's like, bro, this is a very different circumstance where we legit know you're bleeding. Or a drunk driver where they're not within their right frame of mind. I don't think you would get the outcome of sort of like evil behavior if there's competition between tyrants. Well, yeah, a tyrant has absolute power.

If there's competition, they're not a tyrant. Okay. Well, he's talking about a tyrant. I suppose there's's competition they're not a tyrant okay well he's talking about a tyrant i suppose there's still tyrants of a city state i mean there's competition in the case of city states i think you know this is a very specific example but for the most part there's there's always going to be someone who either doesn't understand who understands better or quite frankly just refuses to comply and the idea that a tyrant is going to go to someone who says, I refuse to comply and says, we're going to force you, that is not

benevolence. It is just someone who has convinced the people he is better for some reason. But sometimes the ignorant person really is making a bad decision and the tyrant has to correct for that. The issue is that, it's like the quote I mentioned before, the idea that some people are just stupid, so they need smarter people to lead them. But they're the they're basically the same. There's an average. Are there smarter people? Sure. Look at all of our leaders. Man, imagine if Joe Biden got dictatorial power and could just demand by edict people be forced to get vaccinated. So there's that. And you have all the Democrats saying, what a good leader. And they're cheering for him, saying that's a benevolent dictator, a benevolent tyrant. And I'm saying it doesn't matter whether you think you're right or wrong.

This should not be allowed because you're not always right and often could be wrong. And we need a balance of power. We need to decentralize. Centralized authority, in my opinion, is almost always bad. I'm not big on absolutes because sometimes George Washington needs to say, we have to do this because we're in a war and there are emergencies. Sometimes Abraham Lincoln says, I'm going to do some things that are really awful that we think are still bad to this day.

But we're like, man, was slavery just really bad. So we kind of accept that he did bad things. We still will say it was tyrannical. Let's read some more Super Chats because we got to read more Super Chats. Mark Neal says, what's the free state view on immigration? Asking as a Canadian who wants to escape and be free. If you are liberty-minded,

we want you in New Hampshire regardless where you come from. We obviously don't control federal immigration laws, but also we're not darks. So do what you got to do. I know some people who have – what's it called when you get married to get into a country? There's like some term for that. Anyway, come and meet a partner.

So if you're having trouble getting citizenship, come for a vacation. Come meet some nice New Hampshire woman or nice New Hampshire man. Your best and your brightest. Yeah. nice new hampshire woman or nice new hampshire man and best and your brightest yeah the tj drummer says oregonian here sick of the pacific northwest and democrat control wife and i are looking at west virginia and new hampshire and would gladly join the liberty movement you see it's tough i tell people to go to west virginia because you know we're we're expanding here we're bringing people down we've moved quite a few people out here. But we don't have this grand mission of anything like the Free State Project.

Although maybe I would say maybe we should, but I don't want to take away from New Hampshire. You know what I mean? It would be amazing if there were two of us. They can't chop the heads off of all the gophers if they all stand at once. But it would also split the power. If people really want a Free State Project, New Hampshire is the way to go. West Virginia has got its freedoms, and we're happy there. Maybe we'll set something project, New Hampshire is the way to go. West Virginia has got its freedoms and we're happy there. Maybe we'll set something up in New Hampshire for the future.

Yeah, I don't think it's something you can really dilute. Look, what I'd say, number one thing is come for a visit. Come check it out. Like don't window shop the rest of your life. Like come inside, try it on, see how you like it. And that's what you should really think of mentally as the next step. You know, it's it look, some people go all the way to Seoul, and that's awesome. And so if you're ready to move tomorrow, get on the plane, we're happy to welcome you. But I think

that like, the number one thing is to come up for that visit, come check it out and get plugged in and meet the people here. We'll connect if you have a family will connect you with similar families, whatever your interests are, we'll connect you with people similar. So if someone was going to do that, would they get like an Airbnb somewhere? What would you advise? Like where would they go to stay? So we have a website, fsp.org slash visit has a form. You fill it out. A human being, a real

live, real one, not an AI, not a chat bot, a member of the FSP staff, typically a woman named Chris Lopez will reach out to you. She's awesome. Shout out to Chris. She'll contact you and she'll talk to you. She'll help you plan a to Chris. She'll contact you and she'll talk to you. She'll help you plan a trip. She'll learn about you and that kind of thing.

Easy times to come are Liberty Forum, which is the first weekend in March, nhlibertyforum.com, Porkfest, the end of June, porkfest.com. But you can come out for a trip anytime. There's events nonstop. There's a calendar at fsp.org slash calendar. It's like there are like four Liberty events a day throughout the state. There's always stuff going on regardless of when you come. But is there like a Fredama

stand? Has someone set up a large acreage where you can just come and it's, you know, hang out, have fun? There's a place called Croydon Farms which definitely some vibes to this place where people come in and out of there. They have a farm.

They have a bunch of animals. They have like regular potluck dinners and stuff like this. And that's definitely a lot of people, especially people interested in sort of like farming and like more rural off the grid type living. A lot of people enter the community that way. But people who want to do it more like urbanlyly, like, I run an Airbnb. I have three different rooms for libertarians. People are coming, and I do it off Airbnb too, but people come in all the time

and just come in for a visit. I talk to people who are more interested in entrepreneurship and blockchain. I'm not a farmer. But I think it's, you know, there's all kinds of people, and so that's part of why, like, I don't know you, but if you contact the organization, we'll learn about you and we'll help you figure out what makes sense for you. What we're doing with our Ferdamistan is it's going to be – I mean it's almost 50 acres.

So we can set up a shooting range. We're going to have like a biking area. We're going to be very, very strict with our range. It's not going to be a very open to the public kind of thing. But we are going to have – it's going to be a private space, mostly invite only. Only public in the sense that members of TimKids.com might gain access in certain circumstances when we do events. We're going to do events and then we'll sell limited tickets. We could probably accommodate several hundred people.

But we're going to have a big facility with skateboarding, biking, scooters, blades, all that stuff. We're going to have music. We're going to have a big stage. We're going to have music. We're going to have a big stage. We're going to have dirt jumps. We have a pond. We're going to set up all this just cool freedom stuff. And the facility is going to be like a hackerspace. So we're going to be making drones and blimps.

We're going to build gliders. I'll make a flight suit and jump off the building with it or something. Just having fun, experimenting, having a good time, and playing music, playing video games. It's going to be amazing. That sounds sweet. And I think this is the future. Getting together with like-minded people, I think it's a much better way

to live. I'm so happy raising my kids in New Hampshire compared to what it would have been like if I was still in Philadelphia. Oh yeah, someone said free Kekistan. I'll buy a big piece of land and we'll give it to some memers. Yeah, you might need an embassy, yeah. Someone said free Kekistan. We'll buy a big piece of land and we'll give it to some memers. Yeah, you might need an embassy maybe. Maybe you need an embassy.

Isn't there like – there's like some small plot of land in Nevada that declared independence and the federal government just was like, get out of here. That's actually what makes the federal – if you don't like it, leave is a valid principle. Like if there's actually this competition for government, the governments don't follow their own rules. We saw it with Liberland. We saw it with Sealand. If people know the story of Sealand where they knocked this island off, violated all the rules. And they do it.

So when people try to start something new, the governments get together and they shut it down. And there is effectively – The shirami. It's awesome. You want to know why government is so bad? Imagine if we went back in time to like 1900 and we said all the restaurants in existence, that's it. There's no one that's allowed to ever start a new restaurant.

The existing chains can continue to operate, but that's it. There will never be a new one. Like would restaurants be good today? No. They would suck. Doubtful. And that's what happened with government. The beauty of America is there was this new thing.

It was an experiment. It was people putting their own skin in the game to come and try a different way of living. And it was better than everything that came before. And it was so good that Europe copied it, that other people copied what happened in America. And that's what we want to happen again is people getting together, putting their skin in the game, saying, let's try a new and better way to live. And then if it works, people will copy us. We'll do one more. Garhant says, please have Ian do the political compass.

He's the millennial authoritarian who says they aren't. He doesn't like New Hampshire seceding, and now he wants a computer program to rule a state. It's long-haired Stalin plus herbs. You misrepresented. I don't want it to rule the state. I want it to advise the governor um also i think secession is dangerous so i'm war gaming the the potentialities of mismanaging something like that i don't i'm not against like creating new states of union though

all right let's see we'll do one more we'll do two more stephen d parker jr says tim i am a teacher not far from you our vax mandate goes in November 1st one creepy rule is that unvaxed must register with the county health department wow

William Barger I am a New Hampshire native Mises Caucus guy LP member Timcast listener for years New Hampshire is the best

you'll be blown away when you see how many libertarians are here and really plug into the community come visit and see let's go let's go I think we'll have to set up our like new hampshire campus and start yeah yeah totally when they're on the possibility you want to do uh can you do road trips to pork

fest or something like that come out if we where exactly is pork fest held uh it's about two hours north of manchester so if we can get land near that area so we can set up a production facility, we can actually just schedule the show for our New Hampshire site and then go there. There's a space that we could give you to use as a studio for when you're there. We'd have to build something and have something static. Totally, okay. People working there, maintaining

the property, making the equipment, make sure it's safe and all that stuff. Gotcha. Well, the space is set up for that. It's at a campsite where it's like, so like, basically you can actually literally buy a lot. That's the trickiest part. Well, they got Starlink in upstate New York now. Yeah.

So that's active and maybe we'll have to test that out. It's fast enough. But we'll see. My friends, if you haven't already, smash the like button. Go to timcast.com.

Become a member. We're going to have a member segment coming up at around 11 or so p.m. Plus, we have a huge library. You really got to check out the last Members Only we did with Alex Jones. It was an hour and a half.

It was a long conversation. It was a whole lot of fun. The man is out of control. He is a powerful entity who will speak, and there's nothing anyone can do to stop him. But it was great. It was really fascinating. You can follow me at TimCast. You can follow the show at TimCastIRL.

Again, smash the like button. You want to shout anything out before we get – Well, they should also follow you on Odyssey. Follow Tim on Odyssey. So follow the Free State Project. We're on every social media, like literally every single one. So if you're on YouTube, follow us on YouTube. If you're on Twitter, follow us on Twitter,

Free State NH, Facebook. We're on every platform. So follow the Free State Project. If you liked what I had to say, I'm on Odyssey as well at K-A-U-F-F-J. I'm also on Twitter at my full name, Jeremy Kaufman. So if you want to hear more to say uh i'm on odyssey as well at k-u-f-f-j i'm also on twitter at my full name jeremy kaufman so if you want to hear more from me there i've got a lot of a lot of shit posts so be careful uh and then uh and what i'd really say is like if you're if you're frustrated with big tech you don't like any of that stuff create an odyssey account and

and check that out as well you'll earn some cryptocurrency for watching videos uh and you can enjoy tim's show on there as well yeah i think you can port your youtube account into odyssey yeah seamlessly if you're a youtube creator it is it's one of those things where i actually lie to people and say it's harder than it is because if i tell them it's as easy as it actually is they won't believe you like i'm like it takes under a minute they're like that's not true so i started telling people i'm like it takes like five minutes because that's more believable uh but it's very, very easy. You click one button. It brings over your entire channel. Wow.

It's incredible. Mines does that too. Ongoing, not just the past. It will bring over your future content. Awesome. Thanks for coming, man. Great stuff. This was awesome.

Ian Crossland, peace out. And you guys, I hope you enjoyed tonight's conversation. I'm going to have to visit New Jersey. You guys are welcome to follow me on Twitter at SarpatchLids. I'm about to roll over 100,000 followers. I'm excited about that. I don't know what it means, but I'm stoked. Come join me over Twitter at Sarpatch Lids. I'm about to roll over 100,000 followers. I'm excited about that. I don't know what it means, but I'm stoked. Come join me over there.

It's a good time. I'm pretty sure we're going to be in the new studio on Monday. Yes. So that's big. The table is bigger, and we'll have some surprises for everybody come Monday in the new studio. Tomorrow is going to be a lot of fun. Shane Cashman will be here because we're launching the new show, which I suppose we'll save the name for tomorrow. But go to TimCast.com. Check out the members-only segment. We'll see you all there. Bye, guys.