Nobel Prize Madness, China’s Rare Earth Grip & the Woke Church | Yaron Brook Show - Yaron Brook Show

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
A lot of the fund the metal principles of widow
interest and individual loss. This is the show.

Speaker 2 (00:19):
Oh right, everybody, welcome to you run book show on
this uh Friday, October tenth.

Speaker 1 (00:25):
I hope everybody's having.

Speaker 2 (00:26):
A fantastic Friday and looking forward to the weekend. It is,
my friends, it is the day where the Nobel Peace
Prize was announced. This this incredibly important prize that Donald
Trump has been seeking, uh talking about NonStop for most
of the year, and shockingly, completely.

Speaker 1 (00:50):
Unexpectedly, he didn't get it. He didn't get it.

Speaker 2 (00:53):
No. I know many of you are crushed, disappointed, really upset,
as is most Maga. They're kind of freaking out a
little bit.

Speaker 1 (01:03):
Uh.

Speaker 2 (01:03):
The Nobel Peace Prize actually went to to Maria Karina
Machado Machado, who is the opposition leader in Venezuela, so
who is fighting against the Maduro government, and it went

(01:24):
in recognition for her struggle for freedom and her struggle
against a dictatorship. Actually a pretty good a pretty good prize,
a pretty good person to give the price too. It's
also really good to see the Nobel Prize committee recognize
the fact that Venezuela is a dictatorship. And that people

(01:46):
fighting the dictatorship are worthy.

Speaker 1 (01:50):
So congratulations to.

Speaker 2 (01:52):
Maria Karina Markado for for winning the prize. I think
it's I think it's terrific. And again and the the
I mean, the Noble Price Committee is talks about of
Venezuela's authoritarian regime. So they're not holding back, they're calling
they're calling them what they really are. So terrific if

(02:17):
the world comes to recognize, recognize the Venezuelans for what
they really are, A lot of people upset. A Putin,
for example, is very upset. I mean Putin said that
he thinks this award has lost all credibility. It didn't
lose credibility by giving it Yes, or or by giving
it Henry Kissinger for the peace between North and South Vietnam.

(02:38):
It didn't lose credibility for giving it to Obama before
he ever did anything. Just by being Obama, just by
existing as Obama didn't lose credibility. Then, according to Putin,
it lost credibility. Today the committee discussed the prize for
people who have done nothing for the world, and he

(02:58):
said about Trump, who should have gotten that. According to Putin,
he solves complex problems, crises that last for decades, and
I figured out how to ignore him and actually manipulate
him in ways that Trump doesn't even realize happening.

Speaker 1 (03:14):
He didn't say any of that.

Speaker 2 (03:15):
I said that, but yeah, Putin's upset. He thinks Trump
should have gotten it. Maria c Youno Mercato herself put
out a statement saying, quote, this circugndition of the struggle
of Nezuelans is a boost to conclude our task to
conquer freedom. We are on the threshold of victory, and today,

(03:36):
more than ever, we count on President Trump, the people
of the United States, the peoples of Latin America, and
the democratic nations of the world as our principal allies
to achieve freedom and democracy.

Speaker 1 (03:48):
I dedicate this prize.

Speaker 2 (03:50):
To the suffering people of Venezuela and to President Trump
for his decisive suffort support of our cause. I mean,
leaders of the world have figured out They figured out
one thing. It really across the board. You saw this
with with Mark Connie, the Canadian premiere UH visiting the

(04:13):
United States a few days ago. And you see with NATANIAO.
You see with the Europeans very good at this. Now
they figured out something in the last few months and
that is the best approach to Donald Trump is to
compliment him, to suck up to him, to constantly be
nice to him, to constantly say nice things about.

Speaker 1 (04:35):
Him, and then you get anything you want.

Speaker 2 (04:38):
Then you get and I mean unless your putin and
you have something on him, But everybody else just have
to suck up to Trump and you get whatever you want.
And of course mikado Is is particularly nice to Trump
right now because Trump is.

Speaker 1 (04:52):
Got the navy out there.

Speaker 2 (04:53):
In the Caribbean Sea, and and it is threatening the
Maduro regime. You know, they are rumors that the US
is getting ready to depose my duo. She would she
will Venezuela and and her of course will benefit enormously
if if that happens. But but generally, you know, if

(05:16):
if you want, if you want anything from the United States,
if you want anything from Trump, then the way to
get what you want is by sucking up to him.

Speaker 1 (05:29):
It's it's really, really, really simple.

Speaker 2 (05:32):
You notice how he was so much nice out of
Canada this last visit. And Connie won't say a negative
word about Trump anymore in the interviews and everything. He
spins everything positively because he knows that Trump has thin skin,
and if you criticize him, that's it. He'll come after you,
and it's it's home anyway. The Noruisians have not figured

(05:52):
this out, and the spokesman for the Nobel Peace Prize
was asked by a reporter why didn't Trump win the
Nobel Peace Prize, and the committee chair for the Nobel
Prize said this, we only give their war to people
of courage and integrity. I expect I expect an aircraft

(06:17):
carrier to deployed to the to the North Sea. I
expect tariffs to go up on Norway. And just for
that comment, I expect I expect Norway to.

Speaker 1 (06:29):
Be in big, big, big.

Speaker 2 (06:32):
Trouble, big trouble, just uh, just for that. Uh yeah,
magis freaking out. In the meantime, people are very upset.

Speaker 1 (06:47):
Uh uh.

Speaker 2 (06:49):
Senator Senator from Wyoming wrote, the woke Noble Committee gave
Obama peace spice for doing nothing. They wouldn't know peace
if it stared them in the face, and uh, you know,
we'll see. Uh. You know. Other people have have have

(07:10):
flipped out and accusing the Noah Peace Committee of all
kinds of things. The problem is the nod Peace Committee
actually gave it to somebody good. And a lot of
Maga know that because they're very anti Maduo, so it's
it's hard for them to criticize it, uh too much.
But uh yes, Uh, the compliments rolling into Trump from

(07:31):
all of them is a pretty stunning. And if it
was up to certainly up to Twitter, uh, Trump would
get a nob Peace Prize next year, next year.

Speaker 1 (07:42):
There's always next year. Don't give up. Don't give up Trump,
don't give up. Donald. You will win one. You've got
a good chance.

Speaker 2 (07:52):
All let's see one second, just clean up.

Speaker 1 (08:00):
Yeah, yeah you should.

Speaker 2 (08:05):
Joseph asked if I've seen if I've seen the news,
read the title of today's show, and your answer will
be there. I think the biggest news right now certainly
is stock market thing. So, but I think the biggest
news right now is the news out of China in
terms of the limits they are placing on rare earth

(08:28):
materials and generally their escalation, dramatic escalation in the trade
war against the United States, and Trump's response to it.

Speaker 1 (08:38):
Trump responded earlier today.

Speaker 2 (08:40):
I'll read you some of his response afterwards, and immediately
when he posted his response on to social Basically, stock
market went down two percent, so Nasdak just just just
went down dramatically. But basically China, you know, Trump has
been positioning it as the China stuff is under control.

(09:04):
He's going to beet with she in a couple of weeks.
He's going to visit Beijing, she is going to come
to Washington the best buddies, and uh, yeah, it's all
under control. Don't worry, He's got it, and and uh
he's winning the trade war. And China basically today said
you got to be kidding. Basically, they feel.

Speaker 1 (09:26):
Like they have to. Otherwise they wouldn't have done this.

Speaker 2 (09:29):
Like like they've got They've got Trump's number, they feel
like they've they've got up a hand.

Speaker 1 (09:36):
They basically came out yesterday basically.

Speaker 2 (09:38):
Saying that they are going to control now the entire
supply chain of rail earth materials and including magnets.

Speaker 1 (09:48):
They are going to limit not only the export.

Speaker 2 (09:51):
Of these products, but the countries that then use these
products and then export on. China wants to control all
of that, the entire supply chain. They want to limit it.
They want to they want to restrain it. They want
to be able to control the entire supply chain of

(10:14):
rare earth materials that they use, which basically will give
them gives them, you know, control over much of the
tech world suddenly, batteries, drones, all of that. They would
have complete control over all of that. In addition, China

(10:36):
is imposing new port fees on all US ships.

Speaker 1 (10:40):
This is direct retaliation for the fact that.

Speaker 2 (10:42):
Trump has placed port fees on all Chinese ships entering
US ports. So this is just a reaction to that.
And then China is launching a probe into Qualcomm, again
a response to the probes of Chinese companies, from Huawei
way back to.

Speaker 1 (11:05):
Other Chinese companies.

Speaker 2 (11:07):
This is a response telling the Trump administration, Yeah, we
can play this game as well. We can play this
game as well. I think what China is also basically
revealing is how amateuristic.

Speaker 1 (11:21):
Amateuristic is that a word? Amateur risk?

Speaker 2 (11:24):
Amateur I mean, how completely pathetic the Trumpet administration is.

Speaker 1 (11:31):
They're not serious. They're playing at a trade war.

Speaker 2 (11:35):
Trump basically launched a trade war with China with no preparation,
no allies. Indeed, he spent He not only launched a
trade war with China, but he alienated all our allies
at the same time by launching trade wars against all
of them.

Speaker 1 (11:50):
So we have no backup, and we have no.

Speaker 2 (11:52):
Support from allies in terms of our confrontation with China.
No reduction of vulnerabilities, no beefing up our supply of magnets,
no beefing up our supply of railroad materials. Maybe starting
the process of mining them and and and refining them
before you actually.

Speaker 1 (12:08):
Launch the trade war. No, no, no, launch the trade
war first.

Speaker 2 (12:12):
And as a consequence, we've played right into the Chinese hands.

Speaker 1 (12:15):
They have much stronger cause.

Speaker 2 (12:17):
Than we do in the trade relationship between US and them. Again,
their economy is not that strong. They've got real economic problems, uh,
the real vulnerabilities. But on this on trade with the
United States, they just have more cause than we do.
They can make us hurt much more than we can
make them hoot. So they consider Trump, I think weak.

(12:47):
They consider this trade war a feeble attempt to achieve anything.
And yeah, they're gonna show They're gonna show Trump. They're
gonna they're gonna show him up. That is I that
is I think. I think their goal they're basically tightening
control over the anti global production of metals, which are

(13:09):
essential to manufacture of computer chips and as we said
a bunch of other electronic products.

Speaker 1 (13:15):
Uh. But but but starting.

Speaker 2 (13:16):
From with with computer chips, they've announced the starting on
a MBA eight, they're going to restrict exports of many
kinds of equipment needed to manufacture batteries for electric cars.
So the manufacturing equipment, and remember the Biden administration and
Trumpet administration supported this, restricted the exports of chip manufacturing

(13:41):
technology to China. So ASML in the Netherlands cannot sell
Chinese companies chip manufacturing technology. Well, basically is saying, okay,
you want to play that game, We're going to restrict
the equipment to build batteries. You know, rare earths are
essential for the production of many of computer chips uh

(14:05):
and uh and a lot of kind of the uh
that a lot of the AI where gazillions of dollars
are going in. But on top of that, uh, the
dependent that they're needed for magnets, the power electric motors
and drones, factory robots, off shape wind turbines, uh and
and many systems within cars and of course uh. You know,

(14:30):
China for example, refines one hundred percent of the world's samarium,
which is a rare earth metal used by the United
States to make F thirty five fighters and is used
in American missiles. China wants to clamp down on all

(14:52):
of that. Now, it already done some clamping down, if
you will, in in in previous months. But this is
a significant a significant step, a significant increase, a significant.

Speaker 1 (15:10):
Escalation of.

Speaker 2 (15:12):
The trade war. And of course this is at a
time where Trump is supposed to meet which key. So
this is a real threat to the United States defense industry,
to the entire United States defense supply chain. And the

(15:33):
US is not ready. I mean, that's what's shocking. This
should not have been a surprise, this should be anticipated.
But Trump is just not ready. So this is what
Trump wrote today. Some very strange things are happening in China.
They're becoming very hostile and sending letters to countries throughout
the world that they want to impose export controls on
each and every element of production having to do with

(15:55):
railroads and virtually anything else they can think of, even
if it's not manufactured in China. Nobody has ever seen
anything like this, but essentially it would clog the markets
and make life difficult for virtually every country in the world,
especially for China. We have been contacted by other countries

(16:17):
who are extremely angry at this great trade hostility. I
wonder who started the trade hostility?

Speaker 1 (16:24):
Can't you remember?

Speaker 2 (16:26):
Which came out of nowhere? Really out of nowhere, out
of nowhere? I mean, how delusional do you have to be?
Our relationship with China over the past six months has
been a very good one. That's why there was a
period there where tarifs were what one hundred and thirty
five percent if I remember it, because we had such
a good relationship with them, and Trump is such a

(16:47):
big advocate thereby making this move on trade an even
more surprising one.

Speaker 1 (16:54):
I have always felt that they've been lying in wait.

Speaker 2 (16:57):
Really he had nothing but compliments of she recently, and now,
as usual, I've been proven right.

Speaker 1 (17:05):
No, because you never said that bs.

Speaker 2 (17:09):
He continues, there's no way that China should be allowed
to hold the world captive, but that seems to be
in their plan for quite some time. And if that
was the plan, why didn't you do anything about it? Zada, zero, nada,
not a thing. You're completely unprepared, starting with magnets and
other elements that they have quietly amassed into somewhat of

(17:32):
a monopoly position.

Speaker 1 (17:34):
Who had a sinister and hostile move, to say the least.

Speaker 2 (17:38):
But the United States has a monopoly position also much
stronger and more far reaching than China's. I have just
not chosen to use them. There was never a reason
for me to do so until now.

Speaker 1 (17:50):
All caps.

Speaker 2 (17:51):
The letter they sent is many pages long and details
with great specificity, each and every element that they want
to withhold from out the nations. Things that were routine
are no longer routine at all. I have not spoken
to Presidant She because there's been no reason to do so.

Speaker 1 (18:11):
This was a real surprise.

Speaker 2 (18:13):
I thought he predicted this, didn't he say a few
sentences ago that he predicted this.

Speaker 1 (18:18):
Yeah, well there was a This was a real surprise,
not only to me but to all the leaders of
the free world. But he knew it was coming. They
were laying in wait. Go figure.

Speaker 2 (18:32):
I was to meet it with Presidanent She in two
weeks at Apek in South Korea, but now there seems
to be no reason to do so.

Speaker 1 (18:39):
The Chinese letters were especially inappropriate, and that.

Speaker 2 (18:42):
This was the day that after three thousand years, three
thousand years of bedlam and fighting, there's peace in the
midd least, did you know, there was peace in the
midd least after three thousand years. I mean, this is

(19:03):
the President of the United States, and I know I'm
supposed to admire him and like him and respect him
and think he's just amazing, but he's really an infantile,
pathetic little Anyway, I wonder if that timing was a coincidental.
Depending on what China says about the hostile order that
they have just put out, I will be forced, as

(19:25):
president of the United States of America financially counter their
move for every element that they have been able to monopolize.
We have two, do we really what others? I'm curious
to see. I've never thought it would come to this.
I thought he said he knew they were laying in wait.
He keeps contradicting himself. I don't understand it. I never

(19:47):
thought it would come to this. But perhaps, as with
all things, the time has come. Ultimately through, though potentially painful,
it will be a very good thing in the end
for the United States of America. One of the part
policies that we are calculating at this moment is a
massive increase of tariffs on Chinese products. You mean, like

(20:07):
what you've done in the past coming into the United
States of America. There are many other countermeasures that are
likewise under serious consideration.

Speaker 1 (20:16):
Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Speaker 2 (20:21):
Stock market went down two percent as a consequence. Also, also,
what do you call it? Oil prices? All prices went
down a lot today, So oil is crude. Oil is

(20:42):
down to down over four percent, which suggests that is
a signal of expected recession demand for oil going down significantly.
So it's below sixty again, which is very low and
not very profitable for US manufacturers.

Speaker 1 (20:59):
SMP now is down two percent.

Speaker 2 (21:01):
The Nasdaq is down almost three percent, which suggested we
Bitcoin's probably down. Yeah, bitcoins down three point six percent.
Very correlated, as I've said in the past with the NASDAC.
The dollar is down quite a bit against pretty much
all the currencies. Interest rates are down Tenia, bond is down,

(21:23):
gold is up. You'd expect that more end of the
world fears and interesting how gold and bitcoin don't.

Speaker 1 (21:31):
Always move together.

Speaker 2 (21:34):
Yeah, bank stocks are down three percent, I mean, yeah,
brutal out there because of this fear, this fear of
a potential potential trade war, potential trade war. So yeah,
it's a big story. It's one we will be watching.
It'll be interesting to see what Trump's response is going

(21:58):
to be. And you know, to what extent this has
a really impact on the US economy and maybe on
the global economy. I don't completely understand China's move. They
must sense some American weakness. There must be something they
want from the Trump administration that they have not been

(22:19):
getting and this is a way to flex their muscles
and get it from Trump. So there must be something
the Chinese angling for.

Speaker 1 (22:30):
Visa v. Trump, and it's going to be interesting to
see how they play this.

Speaker 2 (22:33):
But this is more I know a lot of you
don't want to hear this, but this is more of
a just a reflection of Trump's weakness and the weakness
of the whole trade play, if you will, the whole
trade war the Trump launched, particularly visa vis the Chinese,
because we're so dependent on them for these things and

(22:54):
they're not that dependent on us for almost anything.

Speaker 1 (23:00):
But you can imagine the.

Speaker 2 (23:02):
Stock of Apple struggling in other companies like that, because
you know, any decline, any tariffs that affect Apple or
that affect other American companies doing business with China, which
have in the past gotten exemptions.

Speaker 1 (23:17):
If they don't get those exemptions.

Speaker 2 (23:19):
It could have pretty nasty consequences to shareholders of Apple
into Apple's business. So trade wars are stupid. Tariffs are
worse than stupid. This is completely unnecessary and strategically childish

(23:42):
for Trump to.

Speaker 1 (23:43):
Get in in it with China.

Speaker 2 (23:46):
And if you're going to do it, and they might
be strategic reasons to ultimately separate ourselves to China, but
then you first make sure that you're not dependent on
them strategically, and only then do you engage in the trade,
will not or in separation or in detachment from them.

(24:07):
You don't do it the other way around. It just
doesn't make any sense. It's amateur hour, which is what
the Trump administration is on almost everything. All right, Yeah, today,
you know, we kind of got numbers for the end

(24:27):
of the last fiscal year, and so we got numbers
on deficit and things like that for the end of
the end of the last fiscal year at the end
of September, and it turns out shockingly then, in spite
of douge and in spite of the big beautiful, big

(24:47):
big beautiful bill, and in spite of increased revenue from tariffs,
which is it the budget deficit, It did not shrink.
It actually was about the same as it was last year,
at one point eight trillion dollars.

Speaker 1 (25:09):
I kid you not, I kid you not.

Speaker 2 (25:11):
One point eight trillion dollars of.

Speaker 1 (25:16):
Government deficit.

Speaker 2 (25:17):
And this in spite of the fact that there was
a surgeon tower revenue, so income did go up, and
in spite of that, because spending also went up, in
spite of age, in spite of supposedly them Republicans wanting
to shrink spending, spending went up.

Speaker 1 (25:35):
And the deficit is the same as it was last year,
one point eight.

Speaker 2 (25:40):
Trillion dollars, trillion dollars. It also was revealed that for
the first time, the first time, the debts, you know,
interest on the debt, just interest payments on the debt

(26:01):
exceeded last year one trillion dollars. So one trillion dollars
was paid as interest on the debt. You know, I
think that exceeds all. It's more money we spent on
interest on the debt than on defense. I think it's

(26:22):
more money than any other single category, accept soise security.
So one trillion dollars for the first time on debt
revenue was up about one hundred and ninety five billion
because of tariffs. Well, no, I mean total was one
ninety five. It was up, it was up one hundred

(26:43):
and twenty five. So last year was seventy seven billion.
This year was one ninety five, one hundred and twenty
five billion. More. Let me just say easily that these
tariffs cost I mean, these are taxes that Americans paid,
So one hundred and twenty five a billion additional taxes
you are paid uh for for tariffs. You you guys

(27:07):
are paid extra taxes.

Speaker 1 (27:09):
UH.

Speaker 2 (27:10):
But the damaged the economy is far greater than the
increase in government revenue.

Speaker 1 (27:16):
And generally increasing government revenue not good thing, Not a
good thing.

Speaker 2 (27:23):
It's sucking money out of the private economy and destructive
economically and of course morally offensive that we be we
taxed based on whom we buy stuff from.

Speaker 1 (27:33):
Pretty pretty pretty bad, all right.

Speaker 2 (27:40):
So a few months ago, UH, the Trumpet mgistration put
out a an offer to nine universities called the Compact
for Academic Excellence in Higher Education, and UH.

Speaker 1 (27:57):
The Compact had.

Speaker 2 (27:59):
A principles things that universities needed to abide by, and
if they abided by these principles, they would have a
preferential treatment vis a VI government grants, you know, government
research grants and government different government grants, government investments. This

(28:24):
was so I mean, some examples, the compact demanded that
the schools use ban the use of race or section
hiring and admissions, that they free tuition for five years,
that they cap international undergraduate enrollment at fifteen percent. They're

(28:45):
required that applicants take SAT or similar tests, and that
the universities quell great inflation. Much of the documentary have
focused on campus political climate, and uh, you know a
lot of people claimed that the language here was pretty

(29:05):
vague and imprecise, but there was.

Speaker 1 (29:09):
This seemed to be a mandate to get rid of.

Speaker 2 (29:12):
Certain departments that, according to the Trumpet administration, belittle conservative ideas.
And again, if you signed on to this compact, the
benefit you would get is more government money, more more
and preferential treatment in terms of receiving government money.

Speaker 1 (29:36):
Anyway.

Speaker 2 (29:36):
The first university to respond formally to this compact was
m i T today, and mi T basically rejected the compact.
They said that this was a violation of their independence
and violation of of their values.

Speaker 1 (29:58):
This is this is in the president of the University.

Speaker 2 (30:00):
Fundamentally, the premise of the document is inconsistent with our
core beliefs that scientific funding should be based on scientific
merit alone. White House spoken said in a statement, quote,
any university that refuses this once in a lifetime opportunity
to transform higher education isn't serving its students or their

(30:24):
parents that are bowing to radical left wing bureaucrats. The
best science can't thrive in institutions that have abandoned merit
freeing where were in the pursuit of truth.

Speaker 1 (30:35):
President Trump encourages.

Speaker 2 (30:36):
University to join us in the strowing academic excellence and
common sense politics are policies, sorry, policies. The deadline for
response to the compact is October twentieth.

Speaker 1 (30:52):
The other age colleges.

Speaker 2 (30:55):
That were offered this compact or University of Arizona, Brown
Darmouth College, University of Pennsylvania, University of South Southern California,
University of Texas, Vanderbilt University, and.

Speaker 1 (31:09):
The University of Virginia.

Speaker 2 (31:10):
I'm not sure what the criteria is for why these
were chosen, but anyway, and then in addition to MIT,
the only university system that is the university that has
expressed a positive inclination towards the compact.

Speaker 1 (31:24):
Unsurprising is the University of Texas.

Speaker 2 (31:32):
Are the universities everybody still waiting to hear. The University
of Virginia has created a committee, as you would expect,
and we will see.

Speaker 1 (31:44):
We will see what.

Speaker 2 (31:46):
The different different universities, how the different universities respond to this.
But my expectation is that maybe with the exception of
the University of Texas, maybe one or two other universities,
the universities all.

Speaker 1 (31:58):
Will reject us, will reject this.

Speaker 2 (32:01):
Compack, this governor attempt to intervene in their in how
they run their businesses. This is from the letter that
the president of MIT wrote. I write and respond to
your letter of October first, Da da da. I acknowledge
the vital imponents of these matters. I appreciate the chance
to meet with you earlier this year to discuss the

(32:23):
bioities we.

Speaker 1 (32:24):
Share about American for American High Education. Uh da da
da da. Here's some of the you know so, she writes,
we do. We have a clear set of values of excellence.
Above all some packing examples.

Speaker 2 (32:40):
MIT bides yourself on a rewarding merit students, faculty, and staff,
succeed here based on strength of their talent, ideas, and
hard work for instant. The institute was the first to
reinstate the sat ACT requirements after the pandemic, and MIT
has never had a legacy.

Speaker 1 (32:57):
Preferences in admissions.

Speaker 2 (33:00):
Opens its door to the most talented students, regardless of
their families finances.

Speaker 1 (33:04):
Admissions are need blind.

Speaker 2 (33:06):
Incoming undergraduates whose families earn less than two hundred thousand
dollars a year pay no tuition. Nearly eighty eight percent
of our last graduating class left MIT with no debt
for their education.

Speaker 1 (33:18):
I didn't know that. That's pretty amazing.

Speaker 2 (33:20):
We make a wealth of free courses and low cost
certificates available to any American with an Internet connection.

Speaker 1 (33:29):
Of the undergraduate degrees we award.

Speaker 2 (33:31):
Ninety four percent in STEM fields, and as service to
the nation service to the nation, we cap enrollment of
international undergraduates at roughly ten percent. We value free expression,
as clearly described in the MIT Statement of Freedom of
Expression and academic freedom. We must hear facts and opinions
we don't like and engage respectfully.

Speaker 1 (33:52):
With those with those whom we disagree.

Speaker 2 (33:55):
These values, in other MIT practices meet or exceed many
standards outlined in the doc document you sent. We freely
choose these values because they're right, and we live by them,
because they support our mission work of immense value to
the prosperity, competitiveness, health, and security of the United States,
which they weren't so collectivists.

Speaker 1 (34:13):
And of course MIT abide by the law.

Speaker 2 (34:16):
The document also includes principles with which we disagree, including
those that would restrict freedom of expression and our independence
as an institution. And fortunately, the premise of the document
is inconsistent with our core belief that scientific funding should
be based on scientific merit alone. In our view, American's

(34:36):
leadership in science and innovation depends on independent thinking and
open competition for excellence in that free marketplace of ideas,
the people of MIT gladly compete with the very best
without preference. Therefore, with respect, we cannot support the proposed
approach to addressing these issues the issues facing vacation. As

(35:00):
you know, MIT's record of service to the nation is
long and enduring. DA we continue to believe in the
power of this partnership to serve the nation. So they
have turned down the Trump administration.

Speaker 1 (35:12):
Good fam. MIT. I hope other universities do it as well.
I really, really, really would like to see the government
not interfering in universities.

Speaker 2 (35:25):
I'd like to see the shift that has to happen ultimately,
that needs to happen at universities at the philosophical curriculum level,
happen because alumni, because students, because parents, but alumni more
than anybody else, demand it, and not because of the
government demanding it. And I would like to see the

(35:46):
government shrinking the amount of money it gives universities for
all these various things, all the various funding that it provides.
I'd like to see the government get out of student debt,
out of funding people said, you, I'd like to get
them out of ultimately.

Speaker 1 (36:02):
Out of funding science.

Speaker 2 (36:05):
But you know that's that's after a long other list
of things that the government should stop doing.

Speaker 1 (36:14):
All right, Yeah, this strange, strange story the book.

Speaker 2 (36:21):
Today, during a some kind of a press conference that
Pete Hegseth was doing with the with a Katari, the
Katari Defense Minister, and they were viewing different things. Hegseth
mentioned that they were signing a deal between the United
States and Katau to establish a facility. It turns out

(36:45):
a training facility for the Katari Air Force in the
United States at the Home at the Mountain Home Air
Force Base in Idaho, Wait. Katari pilots we trained on
flying and operating F fifteen's.

Speaker 1 (37:06):
I mean, this is just bizarre.

Speaker 2 (37:09):
Why is Katta opening a base with an American base
in America. I mean, they could be invited to come
and be trained in F fifteens at an American base.
They don't need their own base for that. It's just
bizarre the extent to which this administration is has this really, really.

Speaker 1 (37:32):
Really close relationship with Kata.

Speaker 2 (37:35):
You know, obviously President Trump got the four hundred million
dollar jet from them. Of course, the United States for
a long time has had a big military force base
in Katau, the largest in the Middle East.

Speaker 1 (37:46):
But and Trump put a.

Speaker 2 (37:48):
Lot of pressure on the Kataris to put pressure on Hamas,
which seems to be successful at least for now.

Speaker 1 (37:53):
But now they're.

Speaker 2 (37:54):
Opening up a military base on American soil.

Speaker 1 (37:58):
It's just strange.

Speaker 2 (38:00):
You know, maybe some one of you will tell me,
you know, this is it's done all the time, and
other countries have military bases in the United States.

Speaker 1 (38:09):
I doubt that.

Speaker 2 (38:11):
Add to that the fact that is not exactly a
real ideological ally. Maybe it's an ally, you know, visa
visern conflicts in.

Speaker 1 (38:21):
The Middle East. But this is a Emirates.

Speaker 2 (38:25):
Kingdom in other words, not exactly individual rights protecting, you know,
a republic. It is. It is the largest funder of
Muslim Brotherhood organizations in the world, Muslim Brotherhood being the
fountain head of all Sunni terrorist organizations out there, a

(38:46):
Kaita and Isis and Haramas and all of them, and
Katar supports them, houses them, gives them a home. It
is also the base of all Jazeira, a Islamist publication
that's explicitly anti Western and undermines Western values and rallies

(39:08):
Islamist soul of the world to the cause of Islam,
particularly in Europe and in the United States, undermining Western civilization.

Speaker 1 (39:16):
And yet there are best friends. This was so close to.

Speaker 2 (39:19):
Them now that they're literally opening up a military base
in Idaho. Now this is so crazy and so nutty
and so weird that that people who are crazy, weird
and completely nutty are noticing this.

Speaker 1 (39:44):
So out of nowhere.

Speaker 2 (39:48):
I find myself agree with Laura Luma, Laura Luma, Yes,
Luma Luney Luma Louny.

Speaker 1 (39:55):
Laura, Laura Luni, Luma Luma, whatever, right, this is what
she tweeted.

Speaker 2 (40:03):
Never thought I'd see Republicans give terror financing Muslims from
Katu a military base on US soil so they can
murder Americans. All Right, she's a little exaggerating, but you know,
I get the sentiment. I don't think I'll be voting
in twenty twenty six. I cannot in good conscious make
any excuses for the harboring of jihadis.

Speaker 3 (40:26):
This is where I draw the line. Well, I mean,
this is where Laura Luma draws the line. Laura Luma,
you know this has gone really far?

Speaker 1 (40:38):
Right?

Speaker 2 (40:39):
What do the Kataris have on this administration? What do
the Gutaris have on the Republicans?

Speaker 1 (40:45):
How are they managing to do this.

Speaker 2 (40:49):
With very little objection, with nobody raising anything except Lowa Luma. Now,
there were a lot of on Twitter, there was a
lot of surprise at this, But you know Trump is
probably paying five D chess or something like that. So yeah,

(41:09):
Lololum is upset. So, yes, there is this Katai bass.
I don't know what it means. I don't know the details,
but I'll be training. There's a version of the F
fifteen's that especially for Katau, it's an advanced version and
they'll be trained in that version, you know, right there.

Speaker 1 (41:31):
In Idaho.

Speaker 2 (41:32):
In Idaho, if you live in Idaho, if you start
seeing a bunch of Katari's around, now you.

Speaker 1 (41:37):
Know why they are there.

Speaker 2 (41:41):
Drill, Baby, Drill has been much of the motto of
this administration, at least during the campaign, and a lot
of people keep asking me, I mean, what about the deregulation,
what's going on with these things? And there is a
story today. I think it's a very positive story. It's
important to note so it also deals with Idaho. I think, no, Montana,

(42:02):
North Dakota, and Alaska. Anyway, Congress just voted, the Senate
just voted, and the House that voted previously, and Trump
will sinus bill that basically expands, repeals or basically repeals
restrictions on mining and drilling that the Biden administration passed

(42:24):
in Alaska, Montana, and North Dakota. So uh, you know,
the the Center passed three resolutions, one relating to Montana,
one not Dakota, and one Alaska. Each of them overturns
Biden era land management rules that shut down coal, oil
and mineral development. So this would be the vast resources

(42:44):
of earth materials, for example in these in these areas
and uh so uh Trump is gonna sign this, and
what we will see is is renewed mining for coal
and renewed mining for hopefully for for rare earth materials.

(43:05):
To get the United States uh independent of China. We
also need to be able to build the facilities to
refine the materials. Not just enough to mine them, we
also have to refine them. But also this is more
uh drilling for oil. Of course, it's very hard to
drill for oil and oil so cheap, but it's good

(43:27):
to have that ability, so it all gets more expensive.
Of the United States or all companies will be able
to drill in Alaska and and in some of these
some of these other areas. So this is the kind
of stuff. This is the good, if you will, the

(43:48):
good that comes from the Trump administration and Republicans. They
are good on this kind of stuff, this uh mining
and uh and and and drilling for oil and overcoming
environmental regulations. So this is what you're seeing, the more
positive stuff. And I do expect it just takes a

(44:08):
long time because once you pass a bill, and then
they have to go out and get permits, and then
they have to actually probably still some environmental regulations, and
then you can actually mine or drill or whatever. But
the Trumpet administration is actively trying to make all of
that simpler and streamlined. That is the area of environmental

(44:29):
regulation and the area of energy.

Speaker 1 (44:31):
And mining.

Speaker 2 (44:34):
Where the Trumpet administration is definitely a net positive on
the US economy and for the US more broadly. And again,
this is where if you wanted to get into a
fight with China, first you beef up these resources. First,
you create the capacity to refine with material and the

(44:55):
ability to mine it, and then you go to trade will.
You don't re us that otherwise you lose the trade will,
which is what's going to happen to the United States.

Speaker 1 (45:08):
Jennifer says, the comments keep getting deleted. That's weird. I'm
not sure who's the leading him.

Speaker 2 (45:14):
I see all your comments, so they're not being deleted here, yeah,
I see them.

Speaker 1 (45:20):
All Uh, all right, what's it.

Speaker 2 (45:34):
That COVID congestion is still not gone? Super frustrating, all right,
And this one is just a bizarre story coming out
of the Church of England. The Church of England is
probably the most left wing church I know of. It's
it's massively woke and and and and just just crazy generally.
And this one was this one, you know, beat everything.

(45:57):
I'm just reading you from a story. A Church of
England decided this week to cover the interiors of the
oldest cathedral in England in graffiti in order to represent
the voices of quote marginalized communities. The Dean of Canterbury
is the cathedral said quote there is a rawness which

(46:20):
is magnified by the graffiti style, which is disruptive. It
is unfiltered and not sanitized. This exhibit intentionally builds bridges
between cultures.

Speaker 1 (46:30):
Styles and genres and allows us to.

Speaker 2 (46:33):
Receive the gifts of younger people who have much to say. Unquote,
I mean, it turns out they don't really have much
to say. Graffiti usually is pretty mindless and pointless and
stupid and and really has very little to say and
very little to recommend it. It's pretty sad, but it

(46:54):
canst I mean, I'd rather have graffiti inside churches than
outside outside, I'd be exposed to it. If it's inside,
I'm not going inside unless I have great paintings and
a church in England is probably not going to be
beautifully decorated. It's not Florence, it's not Rome, it's not
even Naples. But yeah, I mean this is pretty. It's

(47:18):
pretty disgusting, it's pretty offensive, it's pretty ridiculous. I can
see why a lot of Brits would be upset by this.
And yeah, literally scralling graffiti on the walls of an

(47:39):
of the Cannabury Cathedral is somehow good, somehow beautiful, somehow.

Speaker 1 (47:45):
Graffiti typically is ugly disruptive.

Speaker 2 (47:48):
Yes, it's all the things that he called it, disruptive
and stuff, but not in a good way. It's unfiltered,
it's not sanitized, and that's not a good thing.

Speaker 1 (47:56):
Beauty is important.

Speaker 2 (47:58):
And you know, if you're conveying messages using graffiti, they
use the disruptive, anarchistic, anti civilization, anti progress, anti building,
anti creating kind of messages. But that is the Church
of England elevating itself to the level of graffiti.

Speaker 1 (48:22):
Powerful stuff. All right.

Speaker 2 (48:29):
Finally, finally, bad bad Bunny. I don't know if you're
you guys are familiar with bad Bunny. I was not,
But bad Bunny is is this? Uh, you know, musical.
I guess singer.

Speaker 1 (48:43):
Uh phenomena, you know, uh phenomenon.

Speaker 2 (48:46):
Uh just a extraordinarily successful uh. One of the biggest
stars in the world. And he lives in Puerto Rico.
He's Puerto Rican. He just did a a during the summer.
He basically did a residency in Puerto Rico. It's called
a residency where every Saturday he did a concert in

(49:08):
Puerto Rico.

Speaker 1 (49:10):
Tourist revenue from this shot through the roof.

Speaker 2 (49:14):
People came from all over the country and all over
the world to see bad Buddy and to see him perform.
You know, the style of music Regaton. I think it's
something like Regaton. You know, none of my music, don't
understand it. He sings in Spanish. He is Puerto Rican
and he sings in Spanish. All his music is in Spanish.

Speaker 1 (49:37):
Again he is.

Speaker 2 (49:39):
He is really a huge He just did a you know,
this residency. The last show was live streamed globally and
it had seventy seven million No sorry that that that's
is generally anyway. It was I think the largest concert
ever streamed, did a more p but listening than any

(50:01):
other concept ever in the history of streaming concerts. He
has seventy seven million monthly listeners on Spotify, which makes
him at least one of the most streamed artists in
the world.

Speaker 1 (50:17):
I mean is everybody knows him.

Speaker 2 (50:19):
I travel all over Europe and Israel in places like that,
and I mentioned for Puerto Rico, and the first thing
people say is Bad Bunny. They think Bad Bunny is cool.
I'll tell you he doesn't think bad Bunny is cool,
and that is mag Now.

Speaker 1 (50:34):
Bad Bunny is like many artists, like many musicians, is
a leftist.

Speaker 2 (50:41):
I think he's a big advocate of the Puerto Rican independence.
He is a critic of the United States, a critic
of Donald Trump. He is I don't know if he's
taking a position on the Palestinian thing, but I.

Speaker 1 (50:56):
Wouldn't be surprised.

Speaker 2 (50:57):
Right as I was saying, I'm just looking at this
new story, it says that he did thirty one shows
during the residency here in Puerto Rico. Thirty one shows
that injected they say, seven hundred million dollars into the
Puerto Rican economy.

Speaker 1 (51:14):
So he's good for Puerto Rico anyway.

Speaker 2 (51:20):
He is being chosen to perform in the halftime show
during the Super Bowl in January, so Bad Bonny will
be the live performer during the Super Bowl. Anyway, Maga
is flipping out, flipping out. He doesn't sing in English,

(51:40):
he sings in Spanish. How insulting is that to Maga.
I mean, they're just fuming he is anti Ice. She's
really anti all the deportations. So MAGA is threatening to
deport him even though he is an American citizen by

(52:02):
fact that he's Puerto Rican.

Speaker 1 (52:05):
The the thing.

Speaker 2 (52:05):
To deport all his fans at the super Bowl.

Speaker 1 (52:10):
You know who knows. Anyway, they're flipping out.

Speaker 2 (52:12):
Trump has coming on this, and he's objected, although he
seems to be a little mild uh than than the
rest of the Trump said, I I never heard of him.
I don't know who he is. I don't know why
they're doing it. This is the NFL. It's crazy. I
think it's absolutely ridiculous. So so yeah, but but he

(52:35):
wasn't quite as angry.

Speaker 1 (52:38):
As many of his mega supporters about this.

Speaker 2 (52:41):
But but yeah, there's a big crisis within the MAGA world,
uh and a rejection of the NFL.

Speaker 1 (52:47):
They might they might boycott the NFL.

Speaker 2 (52:50):
They're going to make the NFL into the Super Bowl,
into bud Light And by the way, Bad Bunny is
Benito Antonio Martinez Ocasio and as I said, born in
Puerto Rico and as such a US citizen, he's thirty
years old.

Speaker 1 (53:10):
He recently hosted Saturday Night Live. Yeah, I mean he's
a big shot.

Speaker 2 (53:16):
He's a big shot, but he's Latino and he sings
in Spanish and that's unacceptable to Mega, and they are
flipping out, which should make I think the halftime show
quite entertaining, just to see Mega being upset and and
and flipping out over it. So anyway, we'll wait and

(53:37):
see how that story develops.

Speaker 1 (53:40):
All right, that is the news for this October.

Speaker 2 (53:44):
Tenth fight Fday, October tenth, and I will move to
your super check questions. I'll just say we don't have
many at this point. I know some of you are
probably going to come in with more, but we don't
have many at this point. So there's a lot of
opportunities to ask questions. We have not reached our first

(54:08):
hour goal yet, even though we're five minutes away from
that ending from completing that first hour, so please consider
jumping in with some questions and some stickers and some
support so.

Speaker 1 (54:20):
That we make our numbers today.

Speaker 2 (54:23):
At least let's make the first hour the first hour goal,
if not the second hour goal. And yeah, let me
remind you of a few things. We have three sponsors
for Theron book show. Alex Epstein is the world expert
on things.

Speaker 1 (54:42):
Like mining.

Speaker 2 (54:44):
And and and and drilling and getting resources out of
the ground and freeing all that up. He both has
a solid philosophical foundation on kind of how to structure
property rights around that, and about the role of government
and what the role of government should be when it
comes to when it comes to extracting resources out of

(55:06):
the ground, and a real I think is a real
influence on the Trump administration in terms of deregulating and
getting getting our mining industry getting the permits and getting
the permissions so they can go out and actually mine
and do it is necessary to bring the resources to bear.

(55:28):
You should support him and you should follow him. You
should support what he does. But also you will learn
a huge amount from him. There's nobody you will learn
more about this area than from Alex. Check him out
Alex Epstein dot supsack dot com.

Speaker 1 (55:43):
Alex Epstein dot supsack dot com.

Speaker 2 (55:46):
I know an institute is promoting the Atlas Essay Contest
twenty five thousand dollars first price twenty five thousand dollars
first price. To find out more information about who qualifies,
who can apply, what you should write about, and by
the way, the deadline is the end of this month,
so you should check it out now. Ironran dot Oak

(56:09):
slash start here, I Rand dot oag slash start here.
And finally, Handershot, Wealth dot com, slash ybs, hand a
shot with two t's hand a shot, Wealth dot com,
slash ybs UH. They're offering products related to UH to reducing,

(56:32):
in some cases eliminating and deferring your capital gains liabilities,
capital gains, taxes, liabilities, and you can learn more about
that with an interview I did with Robert that is
available on my YouTube channel on the playlists sponsors. You
can find it there. I think you'll find the interview interesting.

Speaker 1 (56:53):
No matter what.

Speaker 2 (56:54):
But check it out and then you can discover whether
this is a product that is appropriate for you. If
it is in contact them hand a shot. I know
a number of you have already contact them hander Shot,
well dot com, slash ybs All right, Finally, remind you
to support the show. I see audif and jeffre we
have done stickers, two dollars stickers. Maybe we can just

(57:16):
get get everybody to do two dollars stickers. That would
be fun and just just flood flood flood the chat
with two dollars stickers would be amazing. Let's see if
we got other stickers. I think we had other stickers
earlier on Ryan did a sticker. Thank you Ryan, Stephen Harper,
thank you Steven. So we've got a few stickers, but

(57:37):
please consider supporting your show.

Speaker 1 (57:39):
Value for value with some stickers. Uh, let's see. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (57:45):
I want to remind you to support the show on
patreon dot com. It's a way to support it monthly
on a monthly basis, and and and and that monthly
supports makes revenue very predictable.

Speaker 1 (57:57):
This is a show that only.

Speaker 2 (57:59):
Exists because of support from you, the listener, the watcher,
all of you. Wes just came in with a fifty
dollars stick I thank you Wes.

Speaker 1 (58:07):
Really really appreciate that.

Speaker 2 (58:09):
Wes does that almost every day and is a huge
reason why this show can keep going. Joseph with a
buck of ninety nine, Thank you. Joseph's another two dollars
and that was his third super chat ever. Another third
super chat ever is on Jacob who just did a

(58:29):
fifty check Karuna kunas, I don't know when the check
republic is going to go in the euro and that's
a two thirty eight cents, So yeah, we're getting that
two dollars.

Speaker 1 (58:41):
Vibe.

Speaker 2 (58:42):
This is good, This is good. Get a bunch of
people doing two dollars and soon enough will be at
our first hour goal and that will be great. So
thank you guys. We're just we're just thirty dollars short
of that goal. It would be great to get there,
as I'm talking, and ultimately to move into achieving a
second hour ago. All right, let's go to a thought

(59:04):
criminal Thank you. Just the ten dollars, so chipping away,
chipping away slowly but steadily, the rational ip sixty euro,
Thank you, rational ip. If drugs were legalized, would rational
businessmen truly enter such a destructive market or would.

Speaker 1 (59:22):
It remained criminal?

Speaker 2 (59:24):
What about unborn children born dependent due to maternal drug use?
The crimes committed by people under drug influence?

Speaker 1 (59:31):
Thank you? So yeah.

Speaker 2 (59:34):
I mean, I don't know how many rational business would answer,
but there's no reason for it to be criminal because
it would be legal, so it might not be the
most rational, the most able, the most productive, the most innovative.

Speaker 1 (59:49):
Bet it would not be.

Speaker 2 (59:49):
Criminal anymore, so prices would come down dramatically. It would
be a lot easier to get the advantage of participating
in it. From criminal perspective would go away, so you
wouldn't prices would come down, profitability would come down. Profitability
would go to close to zero. It would be a commodity,

(01:00:12):
and therefore there would be very little profitability in it.

Speaker 1 (01:00:16):
So nobody would want to engage.

Speaker 2 (01:00:20):
In criminal activity because criminal activity is risky, and you're
only willing to engage in criminal activity because the profit
margins are so high. But given that it would be legal,
profitability would be out. Now I don't see why. Ultimately,
you wouldn't have large chains carrying a certified uh and

(01:00:42):
and and uh what do you call it? A guaranteed
refined at a certain level and everything cocaine for example,
or heroin or whatever. That way, you would get quality control,
so you'd have a lot less ods.

Speaker 1 (01:01:02):
It wouldn't be laced with fent and all.

Speaker 2 (01:01:03):
Because now people who would sell it would have a
kind of reputational capital involved in selling high quality cocaine
or heroin or whatever it is. You'd have an entire
industry a rising to deal with and to accommodate people

(01:01:23):
trying to get off of an addiction.

Speaker 1 (01:01:26):
Just like we got a huge industry of.

Speaker 2 (01:01:31):
Tools to get off of nicotina nicotine addiction, you would
get a massive industry wising to get us to get
people off of cocaine and heroin addictions. That would become
a lot easier and a lot smooth to do. I
just don't think there would be that many odes. I mean, look,
it would be hopable if unborn children were born with dependents,

(01:01:55):
but there would also be technologies to get.

Speaker 1 (01:01:56):
Them off of that dependence. And the responsibility for that
ultimately is with the mothers.

Speaker 2 (01:02:03):
And just like mothers shouldn't drink alcohol when they're pregnant,
they shouldn't smoke, and they shouldn't take certain drugs. It's
not like we're preventing them from doing that today just
by making it illegal. Plenty of babies are born unfortunately
dependent on some of these. I think fewer would be
dependent because it would be much easier to talk about,

(01:02:24):
information about it would be much more open. Pregnant mothers
would be encouraged not to take drugs. Drugs wouldn't be
such a taboo. In terms of crime committed under the
influence of drugs. I'll just note that most drugs are downers.
Most drugs don't encourage you to go out.

Speaker 1 (01:02:45):
And commit crimes.

Speaker 2 (01:02:46):
More crimes are committed under the influence of alcohol than
under the influence of drugs. But the fundament of point
is you should get penalized for the crime that you commit, not.

Speaker 1 (01:02:57):
Whether you are under the influence or not.

Speaker 2 (01:03:00):
So, you know, we should be very tough on criminals
independent of whether they want drugs, are alcohol, or any
other excuse they might have for committing the crime. They
should be penalized for the crime. So I just don't
see the downside. And the upside is massive. The upside

(01:03:24):
is a massive reduction in crime because a lot of
crime today occurs because rugs are so expensive and people
commit crimes in order to get the money to pay
for their drug habits. If it was cheap, that goes away.
A lot of crime is committed because of gang competition,
warfare over markets, and you know, and this is very

(01:03:50):
violent crime that often involves the death and injury to
people who are bystanders, you know, uh, shootings in Chicago
and shootings where bypass bypasses, just innocent people are killed.

Speaker 1 (01:04:07):
All the consequences of the drug war.

Speaker 2 (01:04:09):
I mean, think about most of the motives in the
United States in my view of consequence of the drug war,
and and that's certainly the case in the rest of
in Latin America. I mean, I think you would see
thousands of people thousands of fewer murtives as a consequence.

(01:04:29):
If you legalize the strait, the cartels would basically lose
most of the revenue that they receive, So it would
it would be a massive, massive change. And of course,
the fundamental points.

Speaker 1 (01:04:47):
Here is.

Speaker 2 (01:04:49):
It's not of anybody's business what I choose to or
not choose to put in my body. Freedom demands that
they have a right to do things that are un popular,
even destructive, even suicidal. That's what liberty and freedom mean.
We should be willing to defend the right of people

(01:05:09):
to use drugs. But much more important than that, I mean,
think of how I'll corrupt the police are because of drugs,
because there's so much money in it, and if it's
so corrupting, all of that goes away.

Speaker 1 (01:05:22):
The police get a focus on real crime where they
are real victims.

Speaker 2 (01:05:31):
So yeah, I think drug legalization would be huge, huge benefit.
Oil w oliw thank you for the stick of buck
ninety nine or that's a pound ninety nine.

Speaker 1 (01:05:49):
It's more than two dollars.

Speaker 2 (01:05:51):
Alan, thank you for the buck ninety nine. And Linda,
thank you for the two dollars.

Speaker 1 (01:05:55):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:05:56):
I mean, let's keep the two dollars going. Guys, just
five of those and we get to our first our goal.
We're two hundred and forty another ten dollars with the
two our goal. Please make at the very least that possible.
All right, Ryan, What is the likelihood that Israel reverts
to the non aggression of the decade prior to October

(01:06:16):
seventh attack? What will cause them to proactively defend themselves
against the next build up of terrorism in the Middle East?
It's inevitable, now, you know. I don't think it's inevitable,
not anytime soon. Maybe in the very long run. Maybe
they'll be lulled to sleep. But I think the memory
of just how bad October seventh was and a two

(01:06:40):
year war that followed, will keep.

Speaker 1 (01:06:43):
Israelis on their toes. I do not think they will
vote back.

Speaker 2 (01:06:48):
To the you know, the just acceptance of whatever the
Palestinians want that OC could in the past. Now you know,
the very fact that this deal is happening and that
they're not going out there and winning and crushing the

(01:07:09):
enemy and all of that is not a good sign.

Speaker 1 (01:07:11):
But I do think on the defensive end, I think Israel's.

Speaker 2 (01:07:15):
Going to be much more poor active at least for
the next ten years, and that I'll buy them a
lot of time because look, it took come Us a
long time to build up its capabilities, and being poor
active in the next few years is going to buy
Israel a lot of time. And again, it's already in
a much better position because of what it did in Lebanon,
because of what it did in Iran, that it's going

(01:07:37):
to be much harder for the Palestinians to do anything.

Speaker 1 (01:07:45):
Ryan also says.

Speaker 2 (01:07:47):
Will the new book call out Christianity for its anti
like principles? When Intellecxos promote that the founding if Anny
Fathers is Christian, it turns my stomach. The rationalization happened, escape,
The rationalization happening escapes people at the perpetual level. Perceptual level, Yeah,

(01:08:07):
I mean Look, the book is not going to be
a screed on anti It's not going to list everything
wrong with Christianity.

Speaker 1 (01:08:14):
That's not the purpose of the book.

Speaker 2 (01:08:16):
It's not going to be call out every anti life
aspect of Christianity.

Speaker 1 (01:08:22):
But it's gonna it's gonna deal with the.

Speaker 2 (01:08:23):
Biggies, the big ones, and and you know, it's familiarly,
it's the anti reason and the anti happiness, the anti
uh individual happiness, individual rights aspects of Christianity. And you know,
in in contrast to the the fact that the very
foundations of Western civilization, the very idea of Western civilization,

(01:08:48):
is grounded on reason and individualism. It's reason and the
pursuit of happiness, and that is incompatible.

Speaker 1 (01:08:56):
Fundamentally with Christianity.

Speaker 2 (01:08:57):
And there for Christianity cannot be respond answerable for the
West cannot be the fund founding ideology of the West.
So it's it's gonna really try.

Speaker 1 (01:09:08):
To nail that.

Speaker 2 (01:09:09):
And and look, the books dollar work in progress. It
won't literally be finished until middle of next year, and
then who knows how long it'll take to get published
after that. But we are in the posts of getting
an agent and then getting a publisher and hopefully we'll
get a publisher this year and be ready for publication

(01:09:31):
sometime next year, late next year. All right, Thank you
Robert for the for the buck ninety nine. Thank you
Nick for the two dollars. Thank you Christos for the
pounds ninety nine. Appreciate appreciate that. Andrew with a twenty
dollars question follow up into my question regarding laziness in

(01:09:52):
the culture a reference point. You've said, how young people
now ask you why they need to work, whereas they
didn't used to a healthy culture, wouldn't young people want
to work? Yes, But that's not an issue of laziness.
That's an issue of just complete intellectual corruption. That is

(01:10:12):
the issue that I've talked about many many times, of
placing emotions above everything else, about facts, above reality, above existence.

Speaker 1 (01:10:20):
That is.

Speaker 2 (01:10:22):
The whole way they phrase it is why can't they
do what they feel like doing? Why can't they just
pursue their hobbies? Why can't they hobbies be funded? And
that's not a consequence of laziness, that's a consequence of
the they be taught that their emotions are primary. That

(01:10:44):
there's absolutely no reason in the rich world in which
we live why everybody can't live in a Marxist utopia.
What we each do, just do what we feel like doing,
and stuff production the need our needs. I just met
magic by whatever, by robots, I guess in the future.

(01:11:04):
And so it's just the elevation of emotion and Marxist
utopianism above all else. I don't think this is essentially
driven by a laziness to work, Tessa, what are the
nations getting from Trump for this peace deal? Well, I

(01:11:25):
mean different nations are getting different things, right, I mean,
Kato got a defense treaty, right, they got they got
a a Auticle five, a NATO like Article five where
any enemy of Kata is the United States enemy and
the United States is dedicated to defending Katto treaty.

Speaker 1 (01:11:46):
Right.

Speaker 2 (01:11:47):
You know, Uh, Turkey expects to get F thirty fives.
They expect to be allowed to purchase F thirty fives
in the United States. Right now they're barred from purchasing it.
Egypt once economic and military help, and it wants it

(01:12:08):
wants to view to be viewed by its own people
and by the world. Is having a good relationship with
the United States. It's in a tricky position visa of
its own population and the rest of it. So each
one of them wants something different, and Trump is quite
happy to give it to them, quite happy to give

(01:12:30):
it to them. I think it's likely Turkey will get
there thirty fives. I mean, Trump certainly seems inclined to
give Turkey they have thirty fives, Linda.

Speaker 1 (01:12:43):
Says, Happy at Lashark publication day.

Speaker 2 (01:12:46):
Yeah, in nineteen forty seven, right, is that right?

Speaker 1 (01:12:53):
What am I talking about? Nineteen fifty seven today?

Speaker 2 (01:12:56):
October ten, nineteen fifty seven at the Shark was published,
So that is I can do the math. Something a
long time ago.

Speaker 1 (01:13:07):
What is it? Seventy eight years ago? And yeah, the book.

Speaker 2 (01:13:13):
That changed the world certainly changed my world.

Speaker 1 (01:13:16):
I'm sure changed many of your worlds.

Speaker 2 (01:13:20):
Christos, I do not understand why people are saying that
Trump plays forty chess.

Speaker 1 (01:13:24):
Trump does not even know what chess is.

Speaker 2 (01:13:27):
Yeah, I mean, I don't think he can play two
D games, never mind.

Speaker 1 (01:13:32):
Three D or four y or anything like that. I
agree with you completely.

Speaker 2 (01:13:36):
He's not very smart, he's not very intelligent, he's not
very knowledgeable. He is a Yeah, no, no chess at
all for Trump.

Speaker 1 (01:13:46):
But they have to.

Speaker 2 (01:13:49):
Explain his behavior, which is often borderline moronic. And the
only way for them to explain why he's behaving in
a moronic way is to say, ah, you're just not
spawned enough to get how sophisticated what he's doing really is.
All right, guys, we're almost out of question, So if
you'd like to ask a question, now is the time

(01:14:10):
to jump in with one. If you'd like to support
the show, now is the time to support the show.

Speaker 1 (01:14:16):
We're going to row two dollars stickers, so I feel free.

Speaker 2 (01:14:19):
Gail did a five dollars sticker, Thank you, Gail, so
jump in, but also twenty dollars, fifty dollars, hundred dollars.

Speaker 1 (01:14:26):
Questions are.

Speaker 2 (01:14:30):
Eagerly, eagerly accepted, celebrated, welcome, so that we can chip
away at our goals here. All right, Michael says, astounding
how college professors, people who have never produced a good
or service anyone ever wanted or needed, have the power

(01:14:52):
to destroy society. Yeah, because society is ultimately built and
destroyed by ide and like it or not, the people
who deal in ideas, the people who trade ideas, are
intellectually many of whom are college professors, and therefore they

(01:15:16):
have a way disproportionate impact on what happens in the world,
because once you understand all of ideas, Yeah, ideas shape history,
shape the world.

Speaker 1 (01:15:33):
Not elite Runner.

Speaker 2 (01:15:34):
Thank you for the sticker, Rafel, thank you for the sticker. Aim,
thank you for the sticker. You guys are great. Thank
you really appreciate it. Can Atiniau win re election if
all twenty hostages come back our life?

Speaker 1 (01:15:48):
Yeah, I think it's going to be close.

Speaker 2 (01:15:49):
There's a lot of criticism of Deftennielle that a lot
of people don't like him, and the Israeli politics is
quite combative and there are a lot of political parties
and there's going to be a lot of jockeying for position.

Speaker 1 (01:16:03):
Uh.

Speaker 2 (01:16:04):
You know, there's as I've said many times before, there's
not that much disagreement about issues within Israeli politics. Uh,
there's just uh, there's just a lot of there's not
a lot of disagree about issues. There's just a lot
of disagreement about personalities.

Speaker 1 (01:16:24):
And Israeli politics is.

Speaker 2 (01:16:30):
Driven by personalities, and who knows what the next election
will bring. I think enough to leave Bennett's political party
at least in polls. I saw before the deal was
leading in the polls would be bigger than then Tenniel Uh,
but that doesn't mean anything. Antonio always overperforms in elections

(01:16:55):
relative to the polls, so we'll see what happens. Only
do you think open immigration is beneficial if the immigrants
do not share Western values or have no intention of
integrating into local culture. I do, because I don't think
it matters what their intention is. I think what matters
is whether they integrate or not. And I see, you know,

(01:17:19):
particularly in the United States now again might be different
on Islam for a variety of reasons we've talked about
with regard to Islam, but clearly in the United States
where Islam is not an issue.

Speaker 1 (01:17:32):
Because they're just it's such a small minority of immigrants.

Speaker 2 (01:17:35):
Immigrants integrate, they assimilate, whether they intend to assimilate or not.

Speaker 1 (01:17:39):
They assimilate.

Speaker 2 (01:17:40):
They've got to get a job in order to because
they're not getting you know that they shouldn't get welfare.
A job requires them to learn English, and it requires
them ultimately to assimilate, and their kids go to school.
Their kids want to learn English because they want jobs,
and they assimilate. So yes, the integration happens whether they

(01:18:03):
want it or not. And it happens within a generation
or two, so I have no worries about that. The
only worry I have is of the Islamist immigration when
the West, you know, what do you call it, capitulates

(01:18:24):
to them, does not insist in assimilation and and actually
helps radicalize them and appease them at every opportunity. If
you know, if you're going to have Muslim immigrants, then
you should also have regular cartoons of Mohammad in your

(01:18:44):
local press.

Speaker 1 (01:18:46):
It should be regular.

Speaker 2 (01:18:48):
Every newspaper in Europe should be required to have at
least one Muhammed cartoon on its pages every week. That's
how you treat Muslims with respect. You demand for them
the same kind of attitude towards free speech, the same
kind of attitude towards controlling the emotions that everybody else has,

(01:19:11):
and that'll ultimately that's how they'll assimilate. But if you
refuse to publish Muhammad cartoons in order to not offend
their Islamic sensibilities, then you're in trouble. Then they won't assimilate.
Then you know you're only emboldening the worst elements within

(01:19:32):
their culture.

Speaker 1 (01:19:36):
Roberts says, here's the land Peacock's essay.

Speaker 2 (01:19:38):
Then only synthetic dichotomy put in an introduction to objectives
to prismology, the essay that answered my last big philosophical
question and so fully.

Speaker 1 (01:19:48):
Won me over to objectives.

Speaker 2 (01:19:49):
And wow, I mean, that's betty impressive Robert, that that
was a philosophical objection you had. It's a pretty sophisticated
philosophical issue.

Speaker 1 (01:20:00):
And god, I didn't know it was an issue.

Speaker 2 (01:20:05):
I discovered it was an issue by reading that essay.
But that's how little I knew about philosophy more broadly,
when I discovered objectivism.

Speaker 1 (01:20:14):
Luckily, I discovered objectivism.

Speaker 2 (01:20:16):
And learned philosophy through that rather than the other way around.
But that's pretty amazing, Jennifer. Could a mom who gives
birth to a crack baby be accused of child abuse?

Speaker 1 (01:20:33):
Maybe, I mean good points.

Speaker 2 (01:20:36):
I'd have to think about it, but maybe, yeah, maybe
that'll be part of how we disincentivize it from happening.
But yes, I mean she's caused palm to the baby,
physical harm.

Speaker 1 (01:20:54):
Yeah, I mean that.

Speaker 2 (01:20:56):
Is reasonable, all right.

Speaker 1 (01:21:02):
I like numbers.

Speaker 2 (01:21:03):
You said that Katcha bombing and squeezing Gaza City led
to the deal. Do you believe Harris would have given
Israel justice free a hand with her base. No, probably not.
Israel might have done it anyway. It's not clear would
Israel have done the whole ran thing? Would Israel have
done anyway? Would Israel have gone in anyway? I mean, remember,

(01:21:27):
Biden didn't want Israel to go to a Raphai. He
didn't want them to go to the to take over
the Philadelphia Cardo.

Speaker 1 (01:21:34):
He didn't want them to do.

Speaker 2 (01:21:34):
A lot of things Israel did in spite of that,
Biden didn't want them to go into South Lebanon, wanted
to hamper their ability to fight Chrisbella.

Speaker 1 (01:21:45):
They did it anyway. So how much Harris would have
been able to control the Israelis I don't know.

Speaker 2 (01:21:54):
But yeah, the fact that the fact that Trump gave
Israel a much freeer hand is very good of the
one of the good things that Trump has done. H
Linda says, did you get a chance to read Adultry
by Quinn?

Speaker 1 (01:22:09):
No? I haven't yet. I haven't yet. It's on my list.

Speaker 2 (01:22:12):
I am way behind on that list, and I've got
stuff that people have paid me to read which I
have to read still. So yeah, hopefully the list will
get small up in the next few months. Dad Yanna
Dan says, Hey, Ron, I discovered you from your conversation
with Destiny. Wow, and have been watching regularly for a

(01:22:34):
while now. That's fantastic. Don't always agree with you, but
I respect your integrity and commitment to the fact. That's great.
I do encourage you to read I RAND. I think
that's that's my main selling point. The thing I want
people to really do once they discovered me is to
read I RAND. You know, it gives a really full

(01:22:54):
of understanding what I'm about and what this is all about,
and it'll have a much more profound impact I think
on you. But yeah, I'm glad you're here. Thanks, thanks
for being here. I'm glad you don't agree with everything
I say. That would be weird. If you just discovered
me and suddenly you agree with everything I say, that
would not be That would not abode well for you.

(01:23:16):
So the fact that you're that I'm challenging you and
some things you don't agree, that's great. That that's a
sign that just still thinking about these things, you're not
just accepting them all right. Refel says Hi Ron, I
hope you're feeling better, a little better still.

Speaker 1 (01:23:32):
This thing is dragging, which pisses me off. Anyway, could you.

Speaker 2 (01:23:36):
Explain what pre Raphaelite brotherhood was they started, help context
behind it and how it connects with Romanticism.

Speaker 1 (01:23:43):
Oh god, that's.

Speaker 2 (01:23:44):
A biggie raphael I mean the pre Raphile Lights were
a school of basically painters, although there was some sculpture
and some poetry, but mainly painters in the United Kingdom
in Britain in the nineteenth century.

Speaker 1 (01:24:03):
It was a small.

Speaker 2 (01:24:04):
Group of friends really who developed ideas and they were
rebelling against some of the formalism that was coming out
of the academy. Uh, you know, they were rebelling against
the formalism of the French Academy and the British Academy,
the Latent and the Almati Damas of the world, and

(01:24:25):
and and they were they were, you know, they wanted
to go to a period of much more emotion being
expressed in painting, less rigidity, less formal formal. They called
themselves pre Raphaelites because they wanted to go back to
the Renaissance, not pre Renaissance, but pre Raphael Rafael who'd

(01:24:46):
elevated painting to a new level and then for a
whole period everybody tried to mimic Raphael.

Speaker 1 (01:24:53):
They wanted to go to a.

Speaker 2 (01:24:55):
Period in which there was there was more spontaneity and
more emotion in the paintings.

Speaker 1 (01:25:00):
Uh. Philosophically they were pretty bad. I think there were
elements of Romanticism there.

Speaker 2 (01:25:07):
The emphasis and emotion is certainly an element that the
Romantic painters ailed on too, So there were definitely elements
of that. And and the paintings are quite beautiful. I'm
a big fan of many of their paintings and many
of the things that they did. There's actually an amazing
pre refral collection of painting here in Puerto Rico, of

(01:25:28):
all places, in a place called Ponce on the on
the western shore of or the southern shore of Puerto Rico.

Speaker 1 (01:25:39):
So there's a really nice collection here.

Speaker 2 (01:25:43):
Uh.

Speaker 1 (01:25:43):
But and if you go to the Tate Britain, the Tate.

Speaker 2 (01:25:47):
Museum in Britain, there's a huge collection of pre refle
A paintings there.

Speaker 1 (01:25:52):
So I'm a huge fan of their paintings.

Speaker 2 (01:25:56):
They a lot of it is quite romantic, if you will,
and emotional, Uh, it very much is an a they
tell they're telling in a sense of emotional stories or.

Speaker 1 (01:26:14):
This style.

Speaker 2 (01:26:16):
Is it's not hyper realistic, which is good, but it's
definitely it's definitely figurative. I mean you definitely, it's it's people. Uh,
they emphasize the thing that needs to be emphasized. I
mean it's hard to talk about them without showing you paintings.
But yeah, I'm I'm a fan, and and they are
I think, a style of romanticism. I would not consider

(01:26:39):
maxueal Parish a pre Raphileite. And Einrand generally did not
like Maxis Parish. She thought he was more of an
illustrator than a real artist. I mean, just google pre
Raphaileites and you can. You can find a lot of
their paintings online. Andrew, I agree with you. The fundamentally

(01:27:07):
emotionalism is destroying the youth just will to work. How
do you think that affects un self esteem caused by
false philosophy also effectory. Well, remember, I don't know that
it's their will to work, right, because one of the
things they say is, oh, I want to pursue my hobby,
which they might work very hard at.

Speaker 1 (01:27:27):
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (01:27:29):
It's the lack of necessity to be productive. They don't
see the point of being productive and that's just pure emotionalism.
They also have no self esteem because of the emotionalism,
so emotionalism is undermined at I think they're afraid of

(01:27:50):
the world, the fate of the productive world, the fate
of the business world, the faith.

Speaker 1 (01:27:54):
They won't fit in their faith.

Speaker 2 (01:27:55):
They won't be successful, and they don't want to They
they don't want to challenge themselves. They don't want to
be out there. They don't understand how you gain self esteem.
They don't understand where self esteem comes from. Again, all
the focus of being as being on all the focus
is being on their own emotions and and and that's shuts.

(01:28:19):
They do not have the tools to actually deal with
the world. So their self esteem is completely shot. And
because they won't go to work, or because they only
resentfully go to work, they won't be have an opportunity
to recoup that self esteem. H Linda says, enjoy it

(01:28:44):
when you do. Part three of Adult treat being released soon. Great,
that is exciting. I'm looking forward to that so I'll
be able to read all three. I want to have
to wait for the third installment when I read the
first two uh in a in a in a Chao
do public schools help immigrant kids integrate. Imagine them going
to private schools run by found governments, as we see

(01:29:07):
the case with higher education. I mean today, the answer
is no, they don't because they're taught multiculturalism. They taught
their cultures are just as good as American culture. That
they're taught in their native language. Sometimes they're not encouraged
to assimilate. And indeed, the kind of American history that's
being taught as anti American, so that they don't something,

(01:29:31):
they don't have something to look up to, which is
what education should provide them with.

Speaker 1 (01:29:37):
No.

Speaker 2 (01:29:37):
I mean, in a proper society, private schools would be
educating them and would be a major tool for assimilation.
We just live in a in a world where that
is not the case. It's a hindrance dissimilation. Hindrance dissimilation rationale.

(01:29:59):
P says, there's no Golts culture. What is the best
country or city and an objective for an objectives to
live in today? And why there is no such thing? Right,
there is no such thing. It really depends on you,
and I've talked about this often on the show. It
depends on your values, It depends on what you want
in a city, what you want in a country. The

(01:30:23):
differences between them are not that great as to say, no,
there's no way.

Speaker 1 (01:30:29):
You could ever live in California and be an objectivest No.

Speaker 2 (01:30:32):
I mean, there are things about California that are good
that things in California are bad, And you have to
decide based on your personal values what outweighs what. And
that's true of whether they live in New York or
the way they live in Puerto Rico as I do,
or where the other place, or Monaco or Florence or London.

Speaker 1 (01:30:53):
It depends on your personal.

Speaker 2 (01:30:54):
Values and the fit between your personal values and that
particular place at that particular time. So there is no
one place that is going to fit all of us.
A lot of people like Austin, Texas. Some people hate Austin, Texas.
It depends on you and your values.

Speaker 1 (01:31:15):
How important is weather to you? How important is.

Speaker 2 (01:31:18):
The state of the government's local government or the state
government or the city government.

Speaker 1 (01:31:25):
How on putting is culture to you? On put a
symphony orchestra to you, How important is the roads, the
restaurant's scene, things like that. I mean, there's a million
different things.

Speaker 2 (01:31:36):
And of course job opportunities, Thank you, Rational ip Vikum,
thank you for the sticker. All right, guys, thank you
really appreciate it. And we'll be doing a show tomorrow.
I'm not sure exactly about what, but we'll figure it out.
Maybe also showing Sunday. Maybe not, we'll see. Maybe maybe
the show on Sunday is going to be a showing

(01:31:57):
Hebrew about the count piece deal find harp I. Thank
you for the sticker, appreciate it. Oh Andrews just coming
in with a question. He says, a senior management told
me to have fun with my files. I thought it
was strange, but it was good advice. Actually, one doesn't
have to work on Puritan grounds. One can allow oneselves

(01:32:20):
to have fun. Absolutely much of work can. It should
be fun, and you can make it fun. You can
find ways to challenge yourself in a variety of different
ways that make the grind, even the grindiest.

Speaker 1 (01:32:35):
Kind of work fun.

Speaker 2 (01:32:37):
So yeah, I mean, not everything is going to be
that way, but you can find ways to do that.

Speaker 1 (01:32:43):
You can find ways to do that.

Speaker 2 (01:32:44):
And I think a good boss A good boss to
somebody who challenges as people not just to do the
best work that they can, but also to enjoy it
while they're doing it to find ways to have fun
doing it. All right, guys, have a fantastic week, and
thank you to all the super chatters and the stickers.
Thank you to all the patron and the and the
and the PayPal supporters. I will see you all tomorrow

(01:33:08):
and if not tomorrow, next week. Uh, have a great weekend.

Speaker 1 (01:33:12):
Bye,

All Episodes

Nobel Prize Madness, China’s Rare Earth Grip & the Woke Church | Yaron Brook Show

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist

Crime Junkie

Stuff You Should Know

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Nobel Prize Madness, China’s Rare Earth Grip & the Woke Church | Yaron Brook Show