August 16, 2025 • 30 mins
Are we damaging America by trying to fix it? In this thought-provoking episode, Herbie Kaye explores the ancient Taoist concept of "resisting the urge to act" and how it applies to our modern political landscape. Drawing parallels between the philosophy of Lao Tzu and America's governance challenges, Herbie makes a compelling case that well-intentioned government intervention has systematically undermined our society since 1964.
Taking listeners on a journey through American political history, Herbie examines how the Great Society programs, despite noble intentions, contributed to family breakdown and cultural decay. He challenges conventional thinking about trade deficits, tariffs, and central economic planning, arguing that voluntary transactions always benefit both parties in a truly free market.
The concentration of power in the executive branch receives particular scrutiny, with Herbie highlighting how presidents increasingly rule by executive order rather than through proper legislative channels—a dangerous trend the founding fathers sought to prevent through checks and balances. Madison's brilliance in designing a system where government action is deliberately difficult gets special attention.
As America faces mounting debt and unfunded obligations approaching $200 trillion, Herbie makes the case for a "radical reset"—returning the federal government to its constitutional roles while devolving most responsibilities to families, communities, and states. This libertarian vision offers a path forward based on courage, liberty, and personal responsibility rather than central planning and government intervention.
Whether you lean conservative or progressive, this episode will challenge your assumptions about government's proper role and the unintended consequences of political action. Subscribe to join the conversation about antipoliticism and how we might restore America's greatness through limiting, rather than expanding, government power.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Good morning, good week, good day, good Saturday,
good, whatever you want to say.
My friends, this is Herbie Kaye, your host on Eradical Reset,
the voice of antipolitism and,from now on, through the
election of 2026, also theplatform upon which I a
candidate for Congress as alibertarian in Arizona's CD4,
(00:24):
congressional District 4.
I will be talking about currentissues quite regularly because,
of course, I am running forCongress.
We haven't really gotten gearedup yet.
We're just getting ready forthe fall push.
Being a libertarian, of course,that means we don't have any
money to spend to speak of, sowe will be spending some time
raising money.
We will spend some timeorganizing.
(00:45):
I'm putting together a group ofvolunteers from Arizona State
University here in Phoenix,actually in Tempe, which is a
suburb of Phoenix, but it's allpart of Greater Phoenix.
Those of you who have been here, it's really nice.
By the way, if you've neverbeen to Tempe, it's a really
nice place.
Anyway, and you know, knock ondoors and do the things that are
important, and the goal beingwell, you know, the goal being,
(01:07):
of course, is to win, but I'mnot an idiot, I mean, do I think
I'm going to win?
Not really, but that's not thepurpose of this.
I'm trying to start a movementof anti-politism, and
anti-politism is a republic bymerit and will return our
country to what it once was,which was great.
(01:31):
Now we're doing our best tomake it not so great, and one of
the biggest reasons we're doingthat is central control, and
that's really what I want totalk about today.
I want to talk about resistingthe urge to act.
We have a bad case of resistingthe urge to act.
Okay, we have a bad case ofresisting the urge to act.
You know, when I startedwriting novels, for example, and
(01:53):
I've written a dozen novels,two of them I published.
I've taken them down briefly.
I'm about to put them back upon Amazon, just because it
wasn't the right time.
One is called the Grandmaster,the other is called the
Terrarium.
They're just novels.
I think they're good.
I wrote them while I was inprison.
I have another 10 in the drawerthat are written in longhand
that I haven't transliterated orhad edited, but eventually I'll
(02:16):
publish them all.
But anyway, when you write anovel, you have to resist the
urge to explain.
It's called RUE.
It's like writing 101.
To resist the urge to explainit's called RUE.
It's like writing 101.
Resist the urge to explain.
In other words, when you'retalking about the plot of a
story, you want to bring out thecharacter and the situation and
(02:37):
all the mood.
The plot should all bereinforced through dialogue and
description, not explanation.
In other words, instead ofsaying you know the book opens
and it's a long dialogue aboutthe background of the character,
just kind of listing everythingthat went on, you should learn
all this in the context ofdialogue and description, which
(02:58):
makes a much more interestingstory.
Now in politics I'm just goingto take a play on that Instead
of resist the urge to explain,we should be resisting the urge
to act.
Our acting is what has put ushere and we continually act to
fix the problems that we createdby the last time.
(03:19):
We acted, to the point wherewe've made a horrible mess and
we're making it worse becausewe've elected a president to
office who I don't think donaldtrump is evil, but I think he
suffers from the deadly sin ofpride and because of that he he,
I think in his own mind,extremely well-intentioned is a
(03:42):
machine machine of action, andsome of his actions I agree with
like deregulation, but to mederegulation is withdrawing an
act as opposed to creating anact.
So ripping away previous actsdoesn't count in what I'm about
to say, that's a good action.
But creating new actions tocreate new programs, new laws,
(04:03):
new regulations, that's how wegot into this disaster in the
first place.
And if we had resisted the urgeto act from the very beginning
and the beginning that I'm goingto talk about here is 1964.
And I picked that year I'vetalked about it in the past
before I'm going to talk aboutit here because to me that was
the year when America hit itspeak of all time since its
(04:25):
creation.
In 1964, we passed the CivilRights Act.
That's why I picked that year,which it's controversial in some
circles, but overall, everyonehas to have a right to their own
civil rights, so to speak.
It was the Equalization Act ofAmerica and at that point and it
(04:46):
was not a controversial act inthe sense that most Americans
accepted it and it set the stageto where it was illegal.
It is illegal in the UnitedStates to discriminate.
Now there are lots of parts ofthe act that are cumbersome and
create complications and havecreated all kinds of legal mumbo
jumbo.
But that's why we have a courtsystem and that's why we have a
Supreme Court to ultimatelyadjudicate and determine
(05:07):
precedent and what the bounds ofthese laws are.
But all in all, the CivilRights Act was, to my mind, the
last truly righteous act everpassed by Congress, and
everything since has been adisaster.
And when I say everything, Imean everything.
Okay, so let's just talk aboutwhat we did In 1965, I mean
everything, okay, so let's justtalk about what we did In 1965,
the then president, lyndonJohnson again, because the road
(05:28):
to hell is paved with goodintentions undertook what was
called the Great Society, andthe answer was the war on
poverty.
And I am old enough to rememberit Now.
Mind you, I was born in 1957,so in 1965 I was eight, and
you're going to find this veryhard to believe, but I was
already politically aware ateight.
Our family was just precociousthat way, I think, or I was
(05:49):
precocious in listening tofamily conversations.
I have always been aware.
So I was aware of what wasgoing on with the Great Society
and although I was a child, Isupported it.
My family supported it wholehog, because they were Democrats
and Johnson was a Democrat, andit seemed like such a good idea
.
Why would the richest country inthe world have poor people?
How can we, the richest countrynot only in the world but in
(06:13):
history, have poor people?
And so Johnson set out, throughAFDC, which is what we it's.
What we call welfare is aid tofamily with dependent children.
So, through AFDC and Medicaidand Medicare and all kinds of
social safety net programs forhousing and food stamps, which
(06:33):
are now whatever.
Anyway, now it's a credit cardinstead of a stamp or a debit
card, I don't know, but anyway,snap is what they now call food
stamps.
But all these various programswere created to alleviate
poverty and they were all donewith good intention and they
were all passed, and they areabsolutely the root of why we're
(06:53):
in big trouble today, becausethe road to hell is paved with
good intentions and we did notresist the urge to act.
Now I'm going to get into alittle bit more of that in a
minute, but first let me.
There's nothing new when I sayresist the urge to act.
This is not some originalthought on my part.
In fact, anybody who really isa student of, let's say,
(07:14):
philosophy will know that it isreally the philosophy of Taoism.
So Taoism, which is spelledT-A-O.
It looks like Tao, but it's Tao, is both a religion and a
philosophy.
Let's put the religion asideand let's talk about the
philosophical bend.
It was founded by a man namedLao Tzu, and in about 600,
approximately 600 years beforethe birth of Christ, he set down
(07:36):
the central tenet of Taoism.
And I am, by the way, not anexpert on Taoism.
Okay, I am a dabbler of Taoism.
I want to make that very clear,and so I'm open to being told.
If anyone thinks I'm wrongabout the interpretations I'm
laying down, please feel free toreach out and contact me.
I am open to having my mindchanged when I'm wrong, but I
(07:56):
don't think I'm wrong, becausethe central tenant of Taoism is
that it is better to do nothingthan to be busy doing nothing.
Okay, let's think about thatagain.
It is better to do nothing thanto be busy doing nothing.
Okay, let's think about thatagain.
It is better to do nothing thanto be busy doing nothing.
We spend a lot of time beingbusy to do nothing.
We elect people to go toWashington to do something, and
(08:18):
this is where we have it allwrong.
If you go back and you read theFederalist Papers written
primarily by James Madison, andyou read the things he said, he
was a very prescient JamesMadison might be the greatest
man in American history as thewriter of the Constitution, but
putting all of that aside justfor a minute, he understood the
(08:39):
fallibility of mankind.
Then he set up the checks andbalances of our system, you know
, the legislative, the executiveand the judicial branch, to
limit the power of all three,because he understood that
enlightened men will not alwaysbe in an enlightened position.
In other words and by the way,I'm paraphrasing something that
he said, I think it was inFederalist 10, but I could be
wrong but anyway he understoodthat, for example, the president
(09:03):
would not always be anenlightened individual, the
Congress would not always bemade up of enlightened
individuals and, of course, it'snever been made up of
enlightened individuals andthere's never been an
enlightened president, not evenLincoln, who's very much
misunderstood.
So the bottom line is heunderstood the fallibility of
human beings and set up a systemwhere very little can get done
(09:23):
on purpose.
We have, because there'ssomething in the human nature
that I think it's why the Bibleis full of King talk.
We just seek a King and we it'seasier to focus on one person
than 435.
Or or a diverse and dispersedjudiciary at every different
level from you know districtcourts, superior courts, uh,
(09:44):
appeals courts, supreme court,all the other things I mean.
I'm not an attorney.
God only knows that the systemis so complicated that it's hard
to blame a system as opposed toan individual.
Now, what we've done is theworst of both worlds.
Okay, we put too much emphasison finding a king to save us in
this case it's Trump and we puttoo little emphasis on the other
(10:05):
king to save us in this caseit's trump and we put too little
emphasis on the otherinstitutions, because it's too
hard to follow that many people.
We get lost in it.
And so, as human beings, andwith our, our, our, uh, what's
what's normally for ourpredilection towards seeking a,
a, uh, a kind and just andenlightened king, we have, over
(10:28):
the years, by means of thesociopaths who have become
president for the most part overthe course of American history,
concentrated more and morepower in the hands of the king,
and the legislative branch,which is the primary check on
the king, has delegated more andmore of it because, frankly, as
it became more and more of it,because, frankly, as it became
more and more expensive to stayin office, they had to raise
(10:51):
more and more money, which meantmore and more of their time,
which meant less and less of itavailable to do things like
reading bills and then bills inCongress, because it's so
expensive to run for Congressthat they had to find ways to
raise money to do it.
Bills became longer and longerto hide little special interest
favors and earmarks for veryspecial contributors to these
various campaigns.
To where the average bill inthe 18th century oh, pardon me,
(11:15):
the 19th century, you know theformative century of America,
you know the 1800s the averagebill was five pages long.
To where now the average billis 5,000 pages long, and so
they're not being read by thecongressmen.
Let's not kid ourselves.
None of them read them.
Maybe Thomas Massey does, maybeRand Paul does, but I don't
think so.
I think they have staffs thatdo it for them and they're
(11:36):
ridiculously stuffed full ofcrap and it's all designed to
raise money, which means it's anenormous drain on time to do
all of these things, which meansthe Congress has delegated most
of its authority or much of itsauthority, I should say, to be
accurate to the executive, andso the president, through
executive orders which werenever meant to be abused to the
extent that, for example, donaldTrump has been abusing them, or
(11:58):
his predecessor Biden abusedthem, or Obama abused them, or
Bush abused them.
They all abused them becausemore and more, more and more,
the Congress doesn't object andso, although a lot of these
executive orders would really be, if they were examined closely,
either unconstitutional oroutright illegal, go through and
are honored and followed up on.
(12:20):
Because it's easier for theCongress to delegate, and both
the opposition and thesupporters of the president like
it that way.
Because when the things goright, the supporters and the
party in power can claim thatthey go quote, unquote, right,
we'll get into that in a minute.
And when they go wrong, theopposition party finds it much
easier to attack an individualthan the other party.
To say that all Republicans arecrap is one thing, to say Trump
(12:44):
is crap is easier and providesa focus for the enemy.
That's why Democrats, I think,obsess on Trump instead of
obsessing on Republicanism orsuch as it's become, because
it's easier to focus on oneenemy and Trump is already,
(13:06):
beyond a doubt, the mostexecutive order-prone president
in history, which means the mostcentrally controlling-prone
president in history, andcentral control ultimately never
works.
It cannot work.
Okay, what Trump is doing now,even the stuff that looks good
may turn out to be a disasterbecause of the law of unintended
(13:26):
consequences.
And overall his term is goingto turn out to be a disaster in
many ways because of the law ofunintended consequences, because
he's handing down orders fromthe center that to him seem I am
sure again that he's not astooge of the Russians that's
debunked and he's not Hitler,he's just a well-intentioned
egomaniac who believes for theright reasons he's handing down
(13:49):
these proclamations that hethinks are saving the country,
based on his own predilectionsand prejudices.
And when I say prejudices I'mnot talking.
The word doesn't necessarilymean racial guys, it means
anytime you have an unfoundedfeeling pro or con about
anything.
And he has a real prejudiceabout the trade deficit, which
(14:12):
for those of us who reallyunderstand economics, it's a
phony number, it doesn't meananything at all.
I mean the historian George Willfamously says that he has a
trade deficit with his barberbecause and I only wish you know
George Will is 20 years olderthan me and I got to be honest,
I really envy his head of hair.
He has a great head of hair,okay.
Anyway, he goes to his barber.
(14:33):
He says every month, and he hasa trade deficit with his barber
, because he pays his barber andhis barber doesn't give him
anything back, and that's true,he just got a haircut.
But that's not a deficit,that's, but that's not a deficit
.
Trade is always in perfectbalance.
The point I'm going to make istrade is always, always in
perfect balance in a free market, I should say, because the
(14:54):
buyer gets what they wanted in avoluntary transaction and the
seller gets what they wanted ina voluntary transaction.
It's a win-win 100% of the time.
The buyer gets the product, theseller gets the money.
There's no deficit there.
They just get two differentthings to use.
And in the case of a worldthat's operating on fiat
(15:15):
currency, I would make a verystrong case that the bigger your
trade deficit, the better shapeyou're in, because the more
stuff you're getting and theless paper money.
You're buying it with nothing.
You're buying it with moneywhere the entire value is based
on the confidence that peoplehave in the currency.
Nothing else.
There's nothing behind ourdollar or the Russian ruble, or
the euro, or the renminbi, orthe shekel, or the kroner, or
(15:43):
the franc or the peso or youname the currency.
There's nothing behind any ofit but confidence.
The whole world is running on agiant confidence racket and the
whole world is.
At this point, the world economyis balanced on the United
States' economy because we arethe healthiest of them all,
because, as ugly as ourcentrally controlled welfare
(16:04):
state has become and thebreakdown of our culture and our
society, other cultures havegone further, farther, faster
and are therefore in worse shape.
So when you look at theEuropean, who have taken the
welfare state to a much higherlevel and have done much more to
quote unquote help their poorand their people, they've
created a situation wherethey're now in a permanent
(16:24):
recession and they're going downfast.
If, if the number for gdp wasproperly accounted for, not just
in the united states but ineurope and around the world,
most of the world would alreadyshow itself to be recessionary,
because we count governmentspending as part of GDP, not
just in the United States butglobally.
When we look, for example,china is insisting that it's
(16:45):
growing at 5% right now when infact it's shrinking.
Why is it claiming that it'sgrowing at 5% and how can they
justify that?
Because they're spendingenormous amounts of government
money on trying to prop up theireconomy from the center.
Again, central control at work.
This is all wasted money,creating misaligned incentives
and all kinds of consequences.
(17:07):
As a consequence, all thatmoney being spent, even though
it's being counted as GDP, isactually just more acid, or I
should really say more kerosene,being thrown on the fire of the
underlying recession thatalready exists and is fast
accelerating into outrighteconomic collapse in China.
They're in big, big trouble andwe are behind, but we are not
(17:27):
far behind because we're doingthe same stupid things, albeit
not quite as extreme as Chinayet, but we're getting there
Because, while we're notspending money, like the Chinese
are like drunken sailors, we'redoing things like massive
tariffs.
Now, all of these tariffs, trumpsays, is to set, you know, to
make the playing field level,but I would submit to you that
(17:47):
all the and it's true that lotsof countries had tariffs on us
that we didn't have eithersimilar or any tariffs on at all
, and there was a lot ofimbalance, quote unquote in the
amount of tariffs being chargedby each country and each product
, and so on and so forth.
But what's lost in that wholediscussion is that, by doing
what we're doing, all we'regoing to do is compound the
problem.
We're not going to make itbetter because we're not Trump
(18:08):
isn't.
What Trump should be doing ispulling tariffs down.
America should be a giant freetrade zone, my friends.
There should be the onlytariffs.
The only way I would entertainthe discussion of tariffs, the
only way I think tariffs haveany useful function, might be as
a way to fund the federalgovernment.
So, in other words, if we wereto, here's what I would do,
(18:29):
here's what libertariancongressional candidate Herbie
would suggest.
And when I say suggest, I wantto get more into that in just a
minute.
I'm saying a lot of things.
I'm going to get into it in aminute.
Some of them I will and some ofthem I won't, because I'll
forget I said it.
But the bottom line is let'ssay that we had a 5% tariff on
every import in the UnitedStates and that was how we
(18:50):
funded the government of theUnited States.
So our roughly, oh, $20trillion a year of business that
we do with foreign countriesand I'm pulling that number from
memory, it might be a littleless it countries, and I'm
pulling that number from memory,it might be a little less, it
might be 16 to 20.
But anyway, we take 5% of that,or $1 trillion, and that
becomes the entire federalbudget of the United States.
That's how we pair our bills,including our defense bill.
(19:10):
Everything is covered under $1trillion instead of the current
$6 or $7 trillion, because wedevolved everything that the
federal government shouldn't bedoing either to the states or
oblivion.
Again, I'm going to get to thatin a minute.
So the bottom line is, in ananti-political world, the
federal government would bereturned to its original
constitutional purpose, which isto defend the country, conduct
(19:33):
foreign policy and regulateinterstate trade, to make sure
that, for example, texas isn'tcharging Wisconsin more for a
barrel of oil than Oklahoma.
That was a fractured comparison, but you understand the point
I'm making.
So one state can't chargeanother state more for its goods
and services than any otherStates is 50 little countries in
(19:54):
a free trade zone.
That's what we are.
And so by devolving all this tothe states, there has to be a
way to make sure, and that'swhat the Commerce Clause was all
about.
But I would rewrite theCommerce Clause to make it much
more restrictive.
And when I say rewrite, ofcourse that has to go through
Congress and it's an amendmentof the Constitution.
We'll have to go through theratification process, but we
(20:14):
should amend the Constitution torewrite and strictly limit the
Commerce Clause to only the mostnarrow definitions of
regulation of commerce betweenstates, instead of the excuse
that the government is used toregulate everything.
The Commerce Clause is the rootevil in our Constitution.
Now, having said all that, trumpis let's come up to the present
time of what I'm talking aboutresists the urge to act.
(20:35):
Trump is acting like a maniacand he's passing enormous
tariffs that are going to haveenormous side effects that no
one's even thought of yet,because that's what an
unintended consequence is it'salways going to be negative.
Historically, central controlhas never worked, not once.
There's no example in historyof a benevolent king or leader
or president coming to power andsuccessfully setting up a
(20:57):
long-term program for successfrom the center.
It always ends in disaster, andthis one will be no different.
The fact that it is not beinglabeled socialism or fascism or
whatever you want to call itcontrol from the center, the
fact that we're doing it underthe guise of being a democracy,
which is really just a euphemismfor mob rule, we have destroyed
(21:21):
the republic to a large extent.
The last barrier to ending therepublic is the Electoral
College, which I've talked aboutin other podcasts and is in the
book, along with everythingelse, a Radical Reset available
to you on Amazon.
A Radical Reset the Manifestoof Antipoliticism.
Pick up a copy on Amazon by me,herbie K, and you can read more
about what I'm talking about indetail in the program that was
(21:43):
set forth.
But the bottom line is thefederal government should have
no role in doing anything.
Welfare is at the root of thebreakdown of our culture, and
the breakdown of our culture isthe root of the breakdown of our
economy, and the money that wespent, the debt we've
accumulated, is all a result.
The overall theme is that we asa country have gone from virtue
to decadence as a result ofcentral control and well-meaning
(22:06):
idiocy, where, in 1964, theyear that I set out, is when we
were at our high peak there werecultural ways is that the right
word Cultural boundaries let'scall them Cultural boundaries in
place that governed ourbehavior.
That everyone of every race andevery gender respected is the
way you live life.
You know and I'm being verythis is going to sound very
(22:28):
mundane, but it's the littlethings that reflect on the big
picture.
But, for example, I was raisedthat you always open a door for
a woman.
As a man, it's always ladiesfirst.
You always open a door.
Okay, that's a little thing,but the fact that it doesn't
happen much anymore, it's not agood thing.
It's not some expression offreedom, it's not some
(22:49):
expression of why should I haveto do that?
That's just silly.
Men and women are equal.
It was a cultural boundary meantto define decency within the
confines of how we all knew whatto expect.
And what we had to expect wasalways genteel and pleasant and
(23:12):
manners.
In other words, always pull outa chair for a woman.
Who does that anymore?
Again, that seems silly.
Why should I have to pull out achair for a woman?
We're all equals, blah, blah,blah, blah, blah.
But no, we're not and no, weshouldn't be.
And there's a reason for theseroles and they have to do with
the underlying foundation ofdecency of people within the
culture, and that decency thenradiates out into everything
(23:34):
else.
Premarital sex now is not onlynot shamed, but it's expected.
In 1960, it was a disgrace toget knocked up out of wedlock,
and a child who was born out ofwedlock was called a bastard.
And a bastard was called abastard for a reason, and the
reason for that was to preventeverything that's happening now,
the breakdown of our culture isthe breakdown of the nuclear
(23:57):
family.
You know, for example, withinthe black community in 1960,
before we started all this crapblack poverty had dropped by 50%
and the black nuclear familywas intact.
80% of black children were borninto two-parent families.
Today it's 20% of blackchildren and it is directly as a
result of this that the blackculture is the urban black
(24:17):
culture in particular, wheremost of this is concentrated has
been destroyed and decimated.
It's not fentanyl, it's notgangs.
Those are all symptoms of theproblem.
The problem is we've destroyedthe family and we destroyed the
family by replacing it with thestate for support when things
turn to shit, as they inevitablywill in life.
(24:38):
Friends, you have the right inthe Constitution to life,
liberty and the pursuit ofhappiness.
Not the right to happiness, butsomehow politicians, because
they have to raise money to runmulti-ten million.
I say multi-million, multi-tenmillion dollars.
You know it costs nearly $20million to run for a
congressional seat on average.
(24:58):
Okay, I'm not going to raise$20 million.
This is a libertarian, by theway.
We're going to have to do thison the cheap.
But that's a great thing,because I have the one thing
that makes money, which ischarisma, which is going on to
at least have a strong showing,and, of course, work ethic.
Charisma plus work ethic plus Ihave absolutely no ambition for
power or money makes me theright guy to preach this anyway,
(25:21):
at least in this littleelection down here in Arizona
and hopefully start something.
And that's the goal of what I'mdoing is to get a vote big
enough to be taken seriously sothat on a national stage we can
start to build a movement, andthen we'll see what happens
going into 28.
So the bottom line here isTrump's going to fail and
Democrats and in my campaign I'mrunning to try to primarily
(25:42):
attract Democrats to my side,because I'm sure that there are
lots and lots and lots and lotsof Democrats who know that this
progressive nonsense isrepugnant and yet, while they
may restrain themselves frompaying lip service to, let's say
, multiple genders, they don'tobject to it in public and they
(26:03):
go along with it because they'recowards.
I know I'm jumping around, butas a Stoic, I know that the most
important pillar of life and ofStoicism is courage, and we as
a country used to be acourageous country In 1964, when
we were on top of our game.
We were a courageous country,but we misread that.
(26:23):
We took our courage and ourpredilection to act and try to
help people, that road to hellbeing paved with good intentions
, and we began handing downprogram after program and act
after act, and rule after ruleand regulation after regulation
and tax after tax.
And we've done all this basedon a mountain of nothing, of
(26:44):
paper money.
We abandoned the gold standardin 1971.
Then we've been building up amountain of a multi-trillion
dollar mountain of debt andunfunded obligations.
That's now, between Medicare,social Security and the national
debt, approaching $200 trillionall told.
That doesn't even exist, letalone be payable, and we are in
(27:07):
deep trouble.
We need to stop.
Stop it.
We need a reset, a radicalreset.
We're going to have to defaulton our debt.
We're going to have to startover.
It's an ugly scene and when wedo it, we're going to have to do
it in such a way as to save therepublic, and to save, we're
going to have to kill the systemas it exists a constitutional
system and a democracy based onmerit.
(27:29):
That's all I've got for today,thank you, and have a beautiful
day, a beautiful weekend.
God bless you, god bless yourfamily and God bless America.
Good morning, good week, good day, good Saturday,
good, whatever you want to say.
My friends, this is Herbie Kaye, your host on Eradical Reset,
the voice of antipolitism and,from now on, through the
election of 2026, also theplatform upon which I a
candidate for Congress as alibertarian in Arizona's CD4,
(00:24):
congressional District 4.
I will be talking about currentissues quite regularly because,
of course, I am running forCongress.
We haven't really gotten gearedup yet.
We're just getting ready forthe fall push.
Being a libertarian, of course,that means we don't have any
money to spend to speak of, sowe will be spending some time
raising money.
We will spend some timeorganizing.
(00:45):
I'm putting together a group ofvolunteers from Arizona State
University here in Phoenix,actually in Tempe, which is a
suburb of Phoenix, but it's allpart of Greater Phoenix.
Those of you who have been here, it's really nice.
By the way, if you've neverbeen to Tempe, it's a really
nice place.
Anyway, and you know, knock ondoors and do the things that are
important, and the goal beingwell, you know, the goal being,
(01:07):
of course, is to win, but I'mnot an idiot, I mean, do I think
I'm going to win?
Not really, but that's not thepurpose of this.
I'm trying to start a movementof anti-politism, and
anti-politism is a republic bymerit and will return our
country to what it once was,which was great.
(01:31):
Now we're doing our best tomake it not so great, and one of
the biggest reasons we're doingthat is central control, and
that's really what I want totalk about today.
I want to talk about resistingthe urge to act.
We have a bad case of resistingthe urge to act.
Okay, we have a bad case ofresisting the urge to act.
You know, when I startedwriting novels, for example, and
(01:53):
I've written a dozen novels,two of them I published.
I've taken them down briefly.
I'm about to put them back upon Amazon, just because it
wasn't the right time.
One is called the Grandmaster,the other is called the
Terrarium.
They're just novels.
I think they're good.
I wrote them while I was inprison.
I have another 10 in the drawerthat are written in longhand
that I haven't transliterated orhad edited, but eventually I'll
(02:16):
publish them all.
But anyway, when you write anovel, you have to resist the
urge to explain.
It's called RUE.
It's like writing 101.
To resist the urge to explainit's called RUE.
It's like writing 101.
Resist the urge to explain.
In other words, when you'retalking about the plot of a
story, you want to bring out thecharacter and the situation and
(02:37):
all the mood.
The plot should all bereinforced through dialogue and
description, not explanation.
In other words, instead ofsaying you know the book opens
and it's a long dialogue aboutthe background of the character,
just kind of listing everythingthat went on, you should learn
all this in the context ofdialogue and description, which
(02:58):
makes a much more interestingstory.
Now in politics I'm just goingto take a play on that Instead
of resist the urge to explain,we should be resisting the urge
to act.
Our acting is what has put ushere and we continually act to
fix the problems that we createdby the last time.
(03:19):
We acted, to the point wherewe've made a horrible mess and
we're making it worse becausewe've elected a president to
office who I don't think donaldtrump is evil, but I think he
suffers from the deadly sin ofpride and because of that he he,
I think in his own mind,extremely well-intentioned is a
(03:42):
machine machine of action, andsome of his actions I agree with
like deregulation, but to mederegulation is withdrawing an
act as opposed to creating anact.
So ripping away previous actsdoesn't count in what I'm about
to say, that's a good action.
But creating new actions tocreate new programs, new laws,
(04:03):
new regulations, that's how wegot into this disaster in the
first place.
And if we had resisted the urgeto act from the very beginning
and the beginning that I'm goingto talk about here is 1964.
And I picked that year I'vetalked about it in the past
before I'm going to talk aboutit here because to me that was
the year when America hit itspeak of all time since its
(04:25):
creation.
In 1964, we passed the CivilRights Act.
That's why I picked that year,which it's controversial in some
circles, but overall, everyonehas to have a right to their own
civil rights, so to speak.
It was the Equalization Act ofAmerica and at that point and it
(04:46):
was not a controversial act inthe sense that most Americans
accepted it and it set the stageto where it was illegal.
It is illegal in the UnitedStates to discriminate.
Now there are lots of parts ofthe act that are cumbersome and
create complications and havecreated all kinds of legal mumbo
jumbo.
But that's why we have a courtsystem and that's why we have a
Supreme Court to ultimatelyadjudicate and determine
(05:07):
precedent and what the bounds ofthese laws are.
But all in all, the CivilRights Act was, to my mind, the
last truly righteous act everpassed by Congress, and
everything since has been adisaster.
And when I say everything, Imean everything.
Okay, so let's just talk aboutwhat we did In 1965, I mean
everything, okay, so let's justtalk about what we did In 1965,
the then president, lyndonJohnson again, because the road
(05:28):
to hell is paved with goodintentions undertook what was
called the Great Society, andthe answer was the war on
poverty.
And I am old enough to rememberit Now.
Mind you, I was born in 1957,so in 1965 I was eight, and
you're going to find this veryhard to believe, but I was
already politically aware ateight.
Our family was just precociousthat way, I think, or I was
(05:49):
precocious in listening tofamily conversations.
I have always been aware.
So I was aware of what wasgoing on with the Great Society
and although I was a child, Isupported it.
My family supported it wholehog, because they were Democrats
and Johnson was a Democrat, andit seemed like such a good idea
.
Why would the richest country inthe world have poor people?
How can we, the richest countrynot only in the world but in
(06:13):
history, have poor people?
And so Johnson set out, throughAFDC, which is what we it's.
What we call welfare is aid tofamily with dependent children.
So, through AFDC and Medicaidand Medicare and all kinds of
social safety net programs forhousing and food stamps, which
(06:33):
are now whatever.
Anyway, now it's a credit cardinstead of a stamp or a debit
card, I don't know, but anyway,snap is what they now call food
stamps.
But all these various programswere created to alleviate
poverty and they were all donewith good intention and they
were all passed, and they areabsolutely the root of why we're
(06:53):
in big trouble today, becausethe road to hell is paved with
good intentions and we did notresist the urge to act.
Now I'm going to get into alittle bit more of that in a
minute, but first let me.
There's nothing new when I sayresist the urge to act.
This is not some originalthought on my part.
In fact, anybody who really isa student of, let's say,
(07:14):
philosophy will know that it isreally the philosophy of Taoism.
So Taoism, which is spelledT-A-O.
It looks like Tao, but it's Tao, is both a religion and a
philosophy.
Let's put the religion asideand let's talk about the
philosophical bend.
It was founded by a man namedLao Tzu, and in about 600,
approximately 600 years beforethe birth of Christ, he set down
(07:36):
the central tenet of Taoism.
And I am, by the way, not anexpert on Taoism.
Okay, I am a dabbler of Taoism.
I want to make that very clear,and so I'm open to being told.
If anyone thinks I'm wrongabout the interpretations I'm
laying down, please feel free toreach out and contact me.
I am open to having my mindchanged when I'm wrong, but I
(07:56):
don't think I'm wrong, becausethe central tenant of Taoism is
that it is better to do nothingthan to be busy doing nothing.
Okay, let's think about thatagain.
It is better to do nothing thanto be busy doing nothing.
Okay, let's think about thatagain.
It is better to do nothing thanto be busy doing nothing.
We spend a lot of time beingbusy to do nothing.
We elect people to go toWashington to do something, and
(08:18):
this is where we have it allwrong.
If you go back and you read theFederalist Papers written
primarily by James Madison, andyou read the things he said, he
was a very prescient JamesMadison might be the greatest
man in American history as thewriter of the Constitution, but
putting all of that aside justfor a minute, he understood the
(08:39):
fallibility of mankind.
Then he set up the checks andbalances of our system, you know
, the legislative, the executiveand the judicial branch, to
limit the power of all three,because he understood that
enlightened men will not alwaysbe in an enlightened position.
In other words and by the way,I'm paraphrasing something that
he said, I think it was inFederalist 10, but I could be
wrong but anyway he understoodthat, for example, the president
(09:03):
would not always be anenlightened individual, the
Congress would not always bemade up of enlightened
individuals and, of course, it'snever been made up of
enlightened individuals andthere's never been an
enlightened president, not evenLincoln, who's very much
misunderstood.
So the bottom line is heunderstood the fallibility of
human beings and set up a systemwhere very little can get done
(09:23):
on purpose.
We have, because there'ssomething in the human nature
that I think it's why the Bibleis full of King talk.
We just seek a King and we it'seasier to focus on one person
than 435.
Or or a diverse and dispersedjudiciary at every different
level from you know districtcourts, superior courts, uh,
(09:44):
appeals courts, supreme court,all the other things I mean.
I'm not an attorney.
God only knows that the systemis so complicated that it's hard
to blame a system as opposed toan individual.
Now, what we've done is theworst of both worlds.
Okay, we put too much emphasison finding a king to save us in
this case it's Trump and we puttoo little emphasis on the other
(10:05):
king to save us in this caseit's trump and we put too little
emphasis on the otherinstitutions, because it's too
hard to follow that many people.
We get lost in it.
And so, as human beings, andwith our, our, our, uh, what's
what's normally for ourpredilection towards seeking a,
a, uh, a kind and just andenlightened king, we have, over
(10:28):
the years, by means of thesociopaths who have become
president for the most part overthe course of American history,
concentrated more and morepower in the hands of the king,
and the legislative branch,which is the primary check on
the king, has delegated more andmore of it because, frankly, as
it became more and more of it,because, frankly, as it became
more and more expensive to stayin office, they had to raise
(10:51):
more and more money, which meantmore and more of their time,
which meant less and less of itavailable to do things like
reading bills and then bills inCongress, because it's so
expensive to run for Congressthat they had to find ways to
raise money to do it.
Bills became longer and longerto hide little special interest
favors and earmarks for veryspecial contributors to these
various campaigns.
To where the average bill inthe 18th century oh, pardon me,
(11:15):
the 19th century, you know theformative century of America,
you know the 1800s the averagebill was five pages long.
To where now the average billis 5,000 pages long, and so
they're not being read by thecongressmen.
Let's not kid ourselves.
None of them read them.
Maybe Thomas Massey does, maybeRand Paul does, but I don't
think so.
I think they have staffs thatdo it for them and they're
(11:36):
ridiculously stuffed full ofcrap and it's all designed to
raise money, which means it's anenormous drain on time to do
all of these things, which meansthe Congress has delegated most
of its authority or much of itsauthority, I should say, to be
accurate to the executive, andso the president, through
executive orders which werenever meant to be abused to the
extent that, for example, donaldTrump has been abusing them, or
(11:58):
his predecessor Biden abusedthem, or Obama abused them, or
Bush abused them.
They all abused them becausemore and more, more and more,
the Congress doesn't object andso, although a lot of these
executive orders would really be, if they were examined closely,
either unconstitutional oroutright illegal, go through and
are honored and followed up on.
(12:20):
Because it's easier for theCongress to delegate, and both
the opposition and thesupporters of the president like
it that way.
Because when the things goright, the supporters and the
party in power can claim thatthey go quote, unquote, right,
we'll get into that in a minute.
And when they go wrong, theopposition party finds it much
easier to attack an individualthan the other party.
To say that all Republicans arecrap is one thing, to say Trump
(12:44):
is crap is easier and providesa focus for the enemy.
That's why Democrats, I think,obsess on Trump instead of
obsessing on Republicanism orsuch as it's become, because
it's easier to focus on oneenemy and Trump is already,
(13:06):
beyond a doubt, the mostexecutive order-prone president
in history, which means the mostcentrally controlling-prone
president in history, andcentral control ultimately never
works.
It cannot work.
Okay, what Trump is doing now,even the stuff that looks good
may turn out to be a disasterbecause of the law of unintended
(13:26):
consequences.
And overall his term is goingto turn out to be a disaster in
many ways because of the law ofunintended consequences, because
he's handing down orders fromthe center that to him seem I am
sure again that he's not astooge of the Russians that's
debunked and he's not Hitler,he's just a well-intentioned
egomaniac who believes for theright reasons he's handing down
(13:49):
these proclamations that hethinks are saving the country,
based on his own predilectionsand prejudices.
And when I say prejudices I'mnot talking.
The word doesn't necessarilymean racial guys, it means
anytime you have an unfoundedfeeling pro or con about
anything.
And he has a real prejudiceabout the trade deficit, which
(14:12):
for those of us who reallyunderstand economics, it's a
phony number, it doesn't meananything at all.
I mean the historian George Willfamously says that he has a
trade deficit with his barberbecause and I only wish you know
George Will is 20 years olderthan me and I got to be honest,
I really envy his head of hair.
He has a great head of hair,okay.
Anyway, he goes to his barber.
(14:33):
He says every month, and he hasa trade deficit with his barber
, because he pays his barber andhis barber doesn't give him
anything back, and that's true,he just got a haircut.
But that's not a deficit,that's, but that's not a deficit
.
Trade is always in perfectbalance.
The point I'm going to make istrade is always, always in
perfect balance in a free market, I should say, because the
(14:54):
buyer gets what they wanted in avoluntary transaction and the
seller gets what they wanted ina voluntary transaction.
It's a win-win 100% of the time.
The buyer gets the product, theseller gets the money.
There's no deficit there.
They just get two differentthings to use.
And in the case of a worldthat's operating on fiat
(15:15):
currency, I would make a verystrong case that the bigger your
trade deficit, the better shapeyou're in, because the more
stuff you're getting and theless paper money.
You're buying it with nothing.
You're buying it with moneywhere the entire value is based
on the confidence that peoplehave in the currency.
Nothing else.
There's nothing behind ourdollar or the Russian ruble, or
the euro, or the renminbi, orthe shekel, or the kroner, or
(15:43):
the franc or the peso or youname the currency.
There's nothing behind any ofit but confidence.
The whole world is running on agiant confidence racket and the
whole world is.
At this point, the world economyis balanced on the United
States' economy because we arethe healthiest of them all,
because, as ugly as ourcentrally controlled welfare
(16:04):
state has become and thebreakdown of our culture and our
society, other cultures havegone further, farther, faster
and are therefore in worse shape.
So when you look at theEuropean, who have taken the
welfare state to a much higherlevel and have done much more to
quote unquote help their poorand their people, they've
created a situation wherethey're now in a permanent
(16:24):
recession and they're going downfast.
If, if the number for gdp wasproperly accounted for, not just
in the united states but ineurope and around the world,
most of the world would alreadyshow itself to be recessionary,
because we count governmentspending as part of GDP, not
just in the United States butglobally.
When we look, for example,china is insisting that it's
(16:45):
growing at 5% right now when infact it's shrinking.
Why is it claiming that it'sgrowing at 5% and how can they
justify that?
Because they're spendingenormous amounts of government
money on trying to prop up theireconomy from the center.
Again, central control at work.
This is all wasted money,creating misaligned incentives
and all kinds of consequences.
(17:07):
As a consequence, all thatmoney being spent, even though
it's being counted as GDP, isactually just more acid, or I
should really say more kerosene,being thrown on the fire of the
underlying recession thatalready exists and is fast
accelerating into outrighteconomic collapse in China.
They're in big, big trouble andwe are behind, but we are not
(17:27):
far behind because we're doingthe same stupid things, albeit
not quite as extreme as Chinayet, but we're getting there
Because, while we're notspending money, like the Chinese
are like drunken sailors, we'redoing things like massive
tariffs.
Now, all of these tariffs, trumpsays, is to set, you know, to
make the playing field level,but I would submit to you that
(17:47):
all the and it's true that lotsof countries had tariffs on us
that we didn't have eithersimilar or any tariffs on at all
, and there was a lot ofimbalance, quote unquote in the
amount of tariffs being chargedby each country and each product
, and so on and so forth.
But what's lost in that wholediscussion is that, by doing
what we're doing, all we'regoing to do is compound the
problem.
We're not going to make itbetter because we're not Trump
(18:08):
isn't.
What Trump should be doing ispulling tariffs down.
America should be a giant freetrade zone, my friends.
There should be the onlytariffs.
The only way I would entertainthe discussion of tariffs, the
only way I think tariffs haveany useful function, might be as
a way to fund the federalgovernment.
So, in other words, if we wereto, here's what I would do,
(18:29):
here's what libertariancongressional candidate Herbie
would suggest.
And when I say suggest, I wantto get more into that in just a
minute.
I'm saying a lot of things.
I'm going to get into it in aminute.
Some of them I will and some ofthem I won't, because I'll
forget I said it.
But the bottom line is let'ssay that we had a 5% tariff on
every import in the UnitedStates and that was how we
(18:50):
funded the government of theUnited States.
So our roughly, oh, $20trillion a year of business that
we do with foreign countriesand I'm pulling that number from
memory, it might be a littleless it countries, and I'm
pulling that number from memory,it might be a little less, it
might be 16 to 20.
But anyway, we take 5% of that,or $1 trillion, and that
becomes the entire federalbudget of the United States.
That's how we pair our bills,including our defense bill.
(19:10):
Everything is covered under $1trillion instead of the current
$6 or $7 trillion, because wedevolved everything that the
federal government shouldn't bedoing either to the states or
oblivion.
Again, I'm going to get to thatin a minute.
So the bottom line is, in ananti-political world, the
federal government would bereturned to its original
constitutional purpose, which isto defend the country, conduct
(19:33):
foreign policy and regulateinterstate trade, to make sure
that, for example, texas isn'tcharging Wisconsin more for a
barrel of oil than Oklahoma.
That was a fractured comparison, but you understand the point
I'm making.
So one state can't chargeanother state more for its goods
and services than any otherStates is 50 little countries in
(19:54):
a free trade zone.
That's what we are.
And so by devolving all this tothe states, there has to be a
way to make sure, and that'swhat the Commerce Clause was all
about.
But I would rewrite theCommerce Clause to make it much
more restrictive.
And when I say rewrite, ofcourse that has to go through
Congress and it's an amendmentof the Constitution.
We'll have to go through theratification process, but we
(20:14):
should amend the Constitution torewrite and strictly limit the
Commerce Clause to only the mostnarrow definitions of
regulation of commerce betweenstates, instead of the excuse
that the government is used toregulate everything.
The Commerce Clause is the rootevil in our Constitution.
Now, having said all that, trumpis let's come up to the present
time of what I'm talking aboutresists the urge to act.
(20:35):
Trump is acting like a maniacand he's passing enormous
tariffs that are going to haveenormous side effects that no
one's even thought of yet,because that's what an
unintended consequence is it'salways going to be negative.
Historically, central controlhas never worked, not once.
There's no example in historyof a benevolent king or leader
or president coming to power andsuccessfully setting up a
(20:57):
long-term program for successfrom the center.
It always ends in disaster, andthis one will be no different.
The fact that it is not beinglabeled socialism or fascism or
whatever you want to call itcontrol from the center, the
fact that we're doing it underthe guise of being a democracy,
which is really just a euphemismfor mob rule, we have destroyed
(21:21):
the republic to a large extent.
The last barrier to ending therepublic is the Electoral
College, which I've talked aboutin other podcasts and is in the
book, along with everythingelse, a Radical Reset available
to you on Amazon.
A Radical Reset the Manifestoof Antipoliticism.
Pick up a copy on Amazon by me,herbie K, and you can read more
about what I'm talking about indetail in the program that was
(21:43):
set forth.
But the bottom line is thefederal government should have
no role in doing anything.
Welfare is at the root of thebreakdown of our culture, and
the breakdown of our culture isthe root of the breakdown of our
economy, and the money that wespent, the debt we've
accumulated, is all a result.
The overall theme is that we asa country have gone from virtue
to decadence as a result ofcentral control and well-meaning
(22:06):
idiocy, where, in 1964, theyear that I set out, is when we
were at our high peak there werecultural ways is that the right
word Cultural boundaries let'scall them Cultural boundaries in
place that governed ourbehavior.
That everyone of every race andevery gender respected is the
way you live life.
You know and I'm being verythis is going to sound very
(22:28):
mundane, but it's the littlethings that reflect on the big
picture.
But, for example, I was raisedthat you always open a door for
a woman.
As a man, it's always ladiesfirst.
You always open a door.
Okay, that's a little thing,but the fact that it doesn't
happen much anymore, it's not agood thing.
It's not some expression offreedom, it's not some
(22:49):
expression of why should I haveto do that?
That's just silly.
Men and women are equal.
It was a cultural boundary meantto define decency within the
confines of how we all knew whatto expect.
And what we had to expect wasalways genteel and pleasant and
(23:12):
manners.
In other words, always pull outa chair for a woman.
Who does that anymore?
Again, that seems silly.
Why should I have to pull out achair for a woman?
We're all equals, blah, blah,blah, blah, blah.
But no, we're not and no, weshouldn't be.
And there's a reason for theseroles and they have to do with
the underlying foundation ofdecency of people within the
culture, and that decency thenradiates out into everything
(23:34):
else.
Premarital sex now is not onlynot shamed, but it's expected.
In 1960, it was a disgrace toget knocked up out of wedlock,
and a child who was born out ofwedlock was called a bastard.
And a bastard was called abastard for a reason, and the
reason for that was to preventeverything that's happening now,
the breakdown of our culture isthe breakdown of the nuclear
(23:57):
family.
You know, for example, withinthe black community in 1960,
before we started all this crapblack poverty had dropped by 50%
and the black nuclear familywas intact.
80% of black children were borninto two-parent families.
Today it's 20% of blackchildren and it is directly as a
result of this that the blackculture is the urban black
(24:17):
culture in particular, wheremost of this is concentrated has
been destroyed and decimated.
It's not fentanyl, it's notgangs.
Those are all symptoms of theproblem.
The problem is we've destroyedthe family and we destroyed the
family by replacing it with thestate for support when things
turn to shit, as they inevitablywill in life.
(24:38):
Friends, you have the right inthe Constitution to life,
liberty and the pursuit ofhappiness.
Not the right to happiness, butsomehow politicians, because
they have to raise money to runmulti-ten million.
I say multi-million, multi-tenmillion dollars.
You know it costs nearly $20million to run for a
congressional seat on average.
(24:58):
Okay, I'm not going to raise$20 million.
This is a libertarian, by theway.
We're going to have to do thison the cheap.
But that's a great thing,because I have the one thing
that makes money, which ischarisma, which is going on to
at least have a strong showing,and, of course, work ethic.
Charisma plus work ethic plus Ihave absolutely no ambition for
power or money makes me theright guy to preach this anyway,
(25:21):
at least in this littleelection down here in Arizona
and hopefully start something.
And that's the goal of what I'mdoing is to get a vote big
enough to be taken seriously sothat on a national stage we can
start to build a movement, andthen we'll see what happens
going into 28.
So the bottom line here isTrump's going to fail and
Democrats and in my campaign I'mrunning to try to primarily
(25:42):
attract Democrats to my side,because I'm sure that there are
lots and lots and lots and lotsof Democrats who know that this
progressive nonsense isrepugnant and yet, while they
may restrain themselves frompaying lip service to, let's say
, multiple genders, they don'tobject to it in public and they
(26:03):
go along with it because they'recowards.
I know I'm jumping around, butas a Stoic, I know that the most
important pillar of life and ofStoicism is courage, and we as
a country used to be acourageous country In 1964, when
we were on top of our game.
We were a courageous country,but we misread that.
(26:23):
We took our courage and ourpredilection to act and try to
help people, that road to hellbeing paved with good intentions
, and we began handing downprogram after program and act
after act, and rule after ruleand regulation after regulation
and tax after tax.
And we've done all this basedon a mountain of nothing, of
(26:44):
paper money.
We abandoned the gold standardin 1971.
Then we've been building up amountain of a multi-trillion
dollar mountain of debt andunfunded obligations.
That's now, between Medicare,social Security and the national
debt, approaching $200 trillionall told.
That doesn't even exist, letalone be payable, and we are in
(27:07):
deep trouble.
We need to stop.
Stop it.
We need a reset, a radicalreset.
We're going to have to defaulton our debt.
We're going to have to startover.
It's an ugly scene and when wedo it, we're going to have to do
it in such a way as to save therepublic, and to save, we're
going to have to kill the systemas it exists a constitutional
system and a democracy based onmerit.
(27:29):
That's all I've got for today,thank you, and have a beautiful
day, a beautiful weekend.
God bless you, god bless yourfamily and God bless America.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce
Football’s funniest family duo — Jason Kelce of the Philadelphia Eagles and Travis Kelce of the Kansas City Chiefs — team up to provide next-level access to life in the league as it unfolds. The two brothers and Super Bowl champions drop weekly insights about the weekly slate of games and share their INSIDE perspectives on trending NFL news and sports headlines. They also endlessly rag on each other as brothers do, chat the latest in pop culture and welcome some very popular and well-known friends to chat with them. Check out new episodes every Wednesday. Follow New Heights on the Wondery App, YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. You can listen to new episodes early and ad-free, and get exclusive content on Wondery+. Join Wondery+ in the Wondery App, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. And join our new membership for a unique fan experience by going to the New Heights YouTube channel now!