Turning Point; White Pride; Bondi Hero; Murderer; DOGE; Trade; Stagnation; Tech | 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 them fund the Metal Principles of Aledo
sell of interesting and any individual lots.

Speaker 2 (00:14):
This is the show, all right, everybody, welcome here run
Brook Show on this Friday, seven nineteenth. I hope everybody
had a fantastic weekend.

Speaker 1 (00:30):
It's it's less than a week to Christmas and you're
looking forward to that. I'm looking forward to the weekend.
I hear it's snowing in Michigan or there's snow on
the ground in Michigan and it's really pretty okay, but
it's gold. Let's see. Yeah, let's just jump in this.

(00:53):
The last few days there's been a big conference, a
big event out in Phoenix, service own, the Turning Point
USA America Fest America Fest. It's not even a conference,
it's a festival. It's it's it's a big confidence the
Turning Point USA does every year, and I guess this

(01:16):
year is the first year, you know, after the murder
of Charlie Cook, the founder of Turning Point USA, and
you know, all the leading I don't know what would
you call them, America first, right of center, right of
center conservatives, people call themselves conservatives. All they're they're all speaking.

(01:40):
It is it is a big gathering. I understand thirty
thousand people assigned up for this, many of them, many
of them students, I mean, my dream, my dream, and
yet they did not invite me to speak. That's the news.
The news is I was not invited speak in front

(02:00):
of thirty thousand, thirty thousand of these of these students
and young people, which is a shame, but not surprising
at all. Anyway, It's turned out that turning point, you
will say, has become this battleground, battleground for the future

(02:20):
of I guess the conservative movement, a certain segment of
the conservative movement. How to tell who you know, who
they're fighting for? The hearts of minds, I think of
the young people a turning point. Turning Point is a
massive organization. I think it's got over a million members now.
And who is going to shape this organization, Who's going

(02:41):
to shape the direction, who's going to be the influential
voices within the organization is really a bat between. I
guess you would have to argue two sides, one represented
by Ben Shapiro and the other represent by Tucker Coffs
and candas Ow uh and uh and Uh, Steve Bannon

(03:07):
and others. Uh and others uh uh and and they're
or making Kelly making Kelly's probably in that camp as well.
And they're going at it at each other's throats yesterday
and today in Phoenix. I mean, if you're there, it
must be a lot of fun. It's it's really quite
quite exciting. Anyway, Shapiro started off yesterday morning. I think

(03:30):
it was the first main speaker after Erica Uh, Charlie
Cook's wife spoke, and he just went all out on
on Candas and on went all out against against Tucker
uh and uh, you know, just just explicitly named names.

(03:53):
I mean, he has a segment that the people who
refuse to condemn Candas's truly vicious attacks, and some of
them speaking here today tonight, he's talking about uh, Tucker
Coulson and Megan Kelly a guilty of cowardice. Shapiro said,
if you host a Hitler, apologist, Nazi loving anti American

(04:15):
piece of refuse like Nick Frentis, you are to own it.
He's talking about Tecker Carlson and he names them. So
it was a it was an all loud Also, Free
Press published Ben Shapiro's comments uh in full at least

(04:40):
a version it's likely edited for print, but in full
and he you know, holds no ball, goes after them.
It's not exactly what he's advocating for, but he's clearly
advocating for the deep platforming of certain people within with
in the movement. He goes. So, for example, if Candae

(05:02):
Owens decided suspense every day since the murder of Charlie Cooke,
casting aspirations at TPSU Turning Point USA and the people
who work here, and to imply or outright claim complicity
in the cover up of Charlie's murder, the few absolutely
baseless trash implications implicating everyone from French intelligence to Macade

(05:25):
to members of TPSU and Charlie's murder or cover up
in murder, then we, as people with a microphone, have
a moral obligation to call that out by name. Every
TPSU should never, never, should have been put in the
position to have to defend themselves against suspicies and evil attacks,

(05:46):
particularly in the time of morning. And the people who
refuse to condemn Candace truly vicious attacks. And some of
them are speaking here tonight. You heard what you know,
I already quoted that. Uh she he continues to take
again Candice's own situation as an example. Friendship with public

(06:08):
figures who do or say evil things is not an
excuse for silence on the matter. Politics isn't the sisterhood
of the Traveling Pants. Politics is about principle. And if
you are willing to go sacrifice basic truth and simple
principle in favor of emotional emotional solidarity, you have betrayed

(06:29):
your fundamental duty to the American people. I wish he
took his own advice. That's all I can say to
to Ben Shapiro. You know, his pandurin to uh Trump
and Mega has been a pathetic and not and and
that was placing politics about principle. But anyway, anyway, he

(06:52):
goes after all these people. Uh, he goes after tech
A coss him by name, and he goes you know,
he basically says, you've got to make a choice. You
got to make a choice. Is what is this movement?
You know? He says, for those of us who talk
for a living, that is our job to discuss America's

(07:14):
problems with truth and evidence, to provide possible solutions, and
to encourage people to succeed. We who speak to people
on a regular basis, who have a microphone and an
audience of a duty to you, the duty to speak truth,
the duty to speak from principle, not personal feeling. The
duty to take responsibility for our actions, the duty to
provide you evidence, to do more than conspiracize or just

(07:38):
ask questions, ask questions. If we fail in those duties,
we ought to listen. You ought not listen to us.
But you you know, he says it all begins with truth.
We owe you that question for truth. You owe yourself
that question for truth. Truth, Victory only comes truth. So

(08:02):
a lot of what Ben Shapiro has to say here
I can't argue with. It's true. Uh and uh, and
I give him kudos for standing up and speaking the
truth and challenging the Tucker Cousins and the Canvas Owens
and and the rest of them. He is, you know,

(08:25):
relatively speaking, in this world, one of the better people.

Speaker 3 (08:30):
Uh.

Speaker 1 (08:31):
He's still really problematic. And there's still real problems, uh
with with Ben Shapiro. And uh, you know, he's religious,
and and he's he's too much of a fan of
a fan of Trumps, and in many respects he sold
out principle in order to be a fan of Trumps,
but he is a fan of Trumps. But he suddenly

(08:54):
is head and shoulders, head and shoulders and half a
body above. Uh. All these other creeps who either worked
for him at the Daily Wire or or speak for
TPSU right after Ben Shapiro. Funnily enough, who came up
to speak right after Ben Shapiro, none other than Tucker

(09:16):
calls it and Tucker's Tucker's was, you know, a speech
a lot less articulate and uh in in logical and
rational than Ben Shapiro's. That guy's pompous calls has said
saying he laughed at watching the watching Shapiro's speech backstage. Uh,

(09:41):
he calls for deep to deep platform at a Charlie
Cook event. That's hilarious. No, that's exactly appropriate. They have
to be standards at every event. They have to be standards.
Some people should be invited to speak and others not.
I I was deep platformed by Charlie Cooke. Yeah, I
was not invited back after my my one speech at

(10:06):
a major Turning Point USA events and after a few
other Turning Point events USA events, not invited to speak again.
They deep platformed me. How dire they I should sue.
Is there a way to anyway? You get my point? Uh.
Colson went on to reil against you know, the so

(10:29):
called cancel culture on the rights, and he promised everybody
he was not an anti Semite at all, at all,
at all, even though Israel and the Jews were behind
it all. He's not an anti Semite at all that
you know. And he he he he just he just
went on and on. Uh. I guess there was one

(10:53):
speaker between Shapiro and Colson, Sorry about that. There was
one speak up between Shapiro consun I was wrong and
I was actor Russell Brand who wanted to bring peace.
He wasn't going to get in the middle of this.
He kind of talked about his version of Christianity and
is anti vax and hating the pharmaceutical industry and uh

(11:17):
and and and stuff like that. So I'm so glad
they didn't invite me to this conference. Uh. Anyway, Uh,
this was this is going on. If you missed any
of it, you can you can still catch it. One
of the things Takokousan did say, which is important, you know,
he called out bigotry. I mean, he's very, very very

(11:39):
anti bigotry, and he really really really doesn't like it
when you go after Muslims. I mean, he really got
upset by the fact that people are going after Muslims. Uh.
He said, the Muslims are mostly good. It's evil to
be anti Islam, and it's just strong. It's just wrong

(12:02):
to go after Muslims. And he's very anti Muslim bigotry.
And the fact that there are people a TPSU attacking Islam.
He just found that horrible. That's the bigotry. That's the
one thing, the one group that actually, as a group
you could argue deserves some criticism. Because very few Muslims

(12:26):
come out and criticize Islamist, criticize the violent, criticize the
anti American, then the Islami community deserves criticism. In another segment,
in the name of loyalty and commitment to group and

(12:47):
to I guess family and tribe and whatever, Tucker Kasta
said that if his brother went on a drug induced
murder spree, if his brother went on a drug induced
murder speed, he'd defended He would defend him because he's
a brother after all, and blood. Blood is thicker than murder,

(13:11):
thinker than justice. So Techo was there to straighten out
these conservatives and give them some real conservative values. It's
all about family. Even if the family's evil, even the
members of your family evil, you've got to defend them,
to help with justice. Tell her truth, tell her responsibility.

(13:35):
It's all about the tribe. Candice On in the meantime,
who was not invited. She was deplatformed after spending all
this time criticizing Erica Coke and implying that Erica Cooke
knew the truth about the real killers of Charlie. She

(13:55):
was not invited. She did not speak, but she did tweets,
and she was very upset at Ben Shapiro and as
usual as usual, you know, this is what she said. Right,
every time Ben speaks, I feel more certain that Israel
is evolved in the killing of Charlie Cook. He's just

(14:19):
way too invested in Charlie's murder. He never liked Charlie,
and he's now suddenly pretended that he has a duty
to defend his legacy. Ben only cares about Israel's interests,
So Israel's involved. And she's such a deep thinker. She
sees through, you know, the many layers, the many layers

(14:46):
of what is going on. So, I mean all these people.
I mean the fact that I have to say Ben
Shapiro is a good guy in comparison. That's kind of
scary because Ben's wrong on so many things, and he's
been wrong, and he's become so much worse with the
Trump he is and he's religious, and he talks about duties,

(15:07):
and I'm against duty generally, but you know, so the
fact that Ben stands out as this amazing person relative
to all the others says so much about these people
now circling around TPSU. It's pretty pathetic, Pretty pathetic, sad, sad. Yeah,

(15:34):
I mean Techolsa said during his talk killing tens of
thousands of children, making excuses for it on behalf of
a foreign government. Is you know, it's not that in there.
It's anti ethical to that he's talk about the Bible.
It doesn't make me a hater. It makes me an
opponent of hate. And I'm not an antisemite. And I

(15:55):
don't obsessed about Israel. Well maybe I do, but it's
not because right to send it. It's because they kill children.
Somebody asked if I'm against duty, really, duty is the
is the is the enemy of morality? You can ask

(16:17):
me that about that in a super chat. That would
make a great super chat to ask about why I'm
against duty anyway, sa Tucker spouting his regular lies, you know,
praising Muslims, attacking Israel. That's part of the course. Erica Cook,
who did open the confidence, did during her opening speech

(16:39):
make it make one thing clear, and that is that
she was on a mission. And her mission was to
get Charlie Cook's friend JD. Vance elected in twenty twenty eight.
So maybe she doesn't know that Trump is running again,
but but she is all in on Vance. It's going

(17:06):
to be really, really interesting because if they can mobilize
turning points USA to back Vance, who's not very popular
in the general among people generally. Vance is also very
close friends with Tucker. Coulson Foyantess hates Vance and slams

(17:27):
them all the time. So this struggle within the conservative movement,
the turning point the young Conservative movement is going to
continue and it's going to get ugly. It's going to
continue to be ugly. It's going to get uglier, but
it is it is going to sustain itself and the

(17:49):
kind of the It's going to be interesting to see
how JD. Vance positions himself if he gets too close
to Tucker Causon, he'll beccause of anti Semitism, which emsy
and all of that. If he gets if he if
he you know, moves away from Tucker Corsa and he
risks getting all the people who support Tucker to come

(18:10):
out against him. It's it's going to be interesting. It's
going to be interesting. It'll be an interesting Republican primary.
I think JD. Vance it's his to lose, and he
probably is a shoeing for the Republican nominee in twenty
twenty eight. And you should all prepare for that and
decide whether you can vote for JD. Evans over I

(18:34):
don't know over probably the governor of California seems to
be the leading candidate. Maybe AOC, maybe AOC. See here's
one AOC versus JD Vans. That that that should trigger
you'll that that should get you going in terms of
who you're going to vote for. All right, talk about

(18:56):
you know, contentious people on the right and the kind
of people that that I don't know where they fall
in the Tucker Costa and Ben Shapiro. But Matt Walsh
works for Ben Shapiro. So, I don't see how I
don't know how all of that works. But you're seeing

(19:18):
more and more of the language of white supremacy, the
language of white nationalism, the language of you know, tribalism,
not just in terms of political tribalism, but racial tribalism.
And one of the lines that you're seeing here is

(19:42):
not just to equate Western civilization and the achievements of
Western socilization are successive a Western civilization with Christianity, which
is a huge push in our culture. There's a huge
push to do that in our culture. But Matt is
also pushing the idea the Western civilization and all its

(20:04):
achievements are basically the achievements of white men, not even women. Women.
Forget it. You achieve nothing, You have no responsibility, you
have no no, you did not help bring about Western
civilization at all. It's all white men. Now I'm curious

(20:30):
how he defines white, but you know, we'll get to
it anyway. I thought i'd showed you a video about this,
maybe you'd be convinced as well. I mean about the
great achievements of white men. Uh and uh. But note
no extent, no, the extent to which they are collectivists

(20:52):
and tribal and racists. I mean just talking about white men.
The way he talks is a racist mentality. Racism is
not just about condemning somebody for uh, for the color
of their skin. It's also about praising somebody because of

(21:13):
the color of the skin. It's taking credit for something
because of somebody's color of skin. So let's watch this
and then we'll talk about, Yeah, they Lee's skin color.
I don't know what they's skin color was? Was he
it was a man? I think it was a man.
Did he identify as a man? Uh? Bet? Was he?

(21:34):
Was he? Uh? Was he a? Uh? Was he white?
Let's let's watch uh, let's watch Madwealsh and and look
at that.

Speaker 3 (21:45):
Now, the context of this is this this uh article
that came out describing anti white discrimination in the workforce,
which is clearly horrific.

Speaker 1 (21:59):
And discuss and you know, it's the same kind of racism.
The difference the issue is what is the response to racism?
How should you respond to anti white or anti any racism. Well,
you can take the kindy approach, which is we need

(22:20):
to recognize our race and we need to fight in
the name of our race, and there were racists, and
everybody's a racist. And so you can take the identitarian
politics of woke left, or he can be an individualist.
And what about walshes as he's basically adopting the Kendy mentality,

(22:42):
He's basically adopting racism to fight racism, which is what
woke did forever. Woke fought racism by being racist, and
that's exactly what matters doing. All Right, here we go.

Speaker 4 (23:01):
The biggest and most important downstream consequence of this open
discrimination against white men is that everything in society gets
worse as a result.

Speaker 1 (23:12):
Everything in society gets worse because we discriminate against white men.
Now there's a sense in which that's true. There's a
sense in which everything gets worse when you discriminate. But
when you discriminate against white men, everything gets worse because
only white men can run big American businesses like Microsoft

(23:33):
or Google. Oh wait, they're run by Indians. About only
white men could run a complex, innovative breakthrough company like Nvidia.
Oh wait, it's it's run it's run by a by
a a Asian. I think he's Chinese. Maybe only white

(23:55):
men can can can run a company like Apple? Does
gay white men count. I don't think gay white men
count because you know, CEO of Apple is gay. I mean, really,
this guy's a moron. I mean, Met Walsh is a
moment everything gets worse. Everything.

Speaker 4 (24:19):
That is the second order of fact that the compact
piece doesn't really get into. It's the third rail, the
part you're not supposed to talk about. But the truth,
which everybody intuitively knows, is that things were a lot
better back when white men were not being discriminated against
by every institution in the country, but instead we're running
most of them.

Speaker 1 (24:40):
What was better, what exactly was better? American business is
better then than they are today. No evidence of that,
more entrepreneurs back then than they are today. No evidence
of that was I don't know where in what realm.
I mean, sure, a lot of things have gotten worse.

(25:01):
Academia has gotten worse, intellectual spite. You know, maybe maybe
the movies have gotten worse, But back then a lot
of the movies were at least being produced by I'm
just looking at a history of Hollywood, you know, the
founding of Hollywood, and they were all Jewish men and

(25:23):
at least one woman, Mary Pickford. It turns out maybe
Pickford the actress had a really important role in shaping
Hollywood in the early days, so women maybe so note
here that how anti intellectual this is the reason things

(25:48):
are bad today. And you know, you could argue things
are bad today in a variety of different areas. It's
not intellectual, it's not philosophical, it's not ideas. It's not
ideas shaping the world that I'm make in the world
worse the reason, I mean, just think about how racist.
This is blatantly racist. The reason some things are worse

(26:11):
off today now in his argument is everything is worse
today is because they're not off white men in positions
of leadership. But Biden was a white man, Bush was
a white man. Nixon was a white man. Clinton was
a white man. Jeffk you know, Johnson was a white man.

(26:42):
They didn't do good things politically. I mean, there's only
being one non white male president in American history. I mean,
he was bad, but he was that much worse than
the white men. God, I'm looking for fields areas in
which white so superior. You know, basketball is much better. Right,

(27:07):
Let's go back to Mattwalsh. I mean, it's just I mean,
why Ben Shapiro And here's the thing, right, here's the thing.
Why Ben Shapiro would keep this bastard on I mean,
this igno reimus racist on his platform? Why he would
keep him a Natucker calson, Why you would keep him

(27:31):
but not Candae on it. This is why, as much
as I can, you know, once in a while you
I'm tempted to say a nice thing about being Shapiro,
I can't be on board with Ben Shapiro because he
has this guy working for him. This is straight out racism.

Speaker 4 (27:55):
And the fact of the matter is that a hugely
disproportionate number of our greatest leaders in a vaders, pioneers, explorers, philosophers,
and so on have been white men.

Speaker 1 (28:06):
Now that is true, a hugely disproportion and I like
that's much better than all hugely disproportion have been. Yeah,
I mean the reasons for that that we can discuss
that have nothing to do with the whiteness of their skin,
that have something to do with the geographic area with
these ideas were successful, were adopted successfully, and you know

(28:34):
there's an element, there's an element of accident in it,
if you will, But does this make white men superior?
Couldn't Indians, Chinese, even you don't me the Middle Easterners, Arabs, Persians,

(29:00):
Central Asians. Could they achieve as much under the right circumstances.
I mean, there's no doubt in my mind, But certainly
Matt Wallis doesn't think so, not at all. It's whiteness,

(29:21):
and there are lots of white people, like ninety nine
point ninety nine percent of white people who haven't achieved
much on the scale of shaping Western civilization, explores you know, uh, scientists, philosophers,
and of course a lot of really horrific things like communism, Nazism, fascism.

(29:47):
I don't know, decount Italians is white. I guess so
in this context also white people. But let's not talk
about that. Mm hm.

Speaker 4 (30:00):
I mean without white men, we wouldn't have airplanes or spaceships,
or trains, or phones or light bulbs or computers or
the Internet or batteries or I.

Speaker 1 (30:09):
Mean, I like to say, without the white Brothers, we
wouldn't have planes, or maybe we would there were other
people working on it at the same time, but you know,
without Thomas Jefferson, we wouldn't have had it when we
had it. But is what made any of those people special,
is what made the culture in which they lived special

(30:30):
is what made the culture of entrepreneurship special. The fact
that they were white. Won't go to Silicon Valley today.
Go to Silicon Valley today and you will see that
the next white Brothers, and the next Thomas Edison and
the next whatever not necessarily white. The Indians, the Jews

(30:59):
again not cliffed use a white, and there the Chinese.
They might even be from the Middle East, from Central Asia.
And what is again, I need to ask this question
because I don't know. Maybe one of you has an answer,

(31:20):
But what does what does whiteness even mean? How do
we measure it? Does he mean Northern Europeans real white? Yeah?
Then I'm not that impressed, because I mean Southern Europeans
have advanced civilization dramatically, particularly during the Renaissance. What is

(31:40):
who is he talking about? Exactly? Who are these white people?
And what degree of genetic purity is required for you
to be a contributor to civilization? Like you know, if
if if, if you're Spain and you have some Berber

(32:04):
blood in you, blood Berber Jenes in you, because many
Spaniards do, because the Berbers were there for a long time.
How about Arab a lot of Arabs settled in Andalusia
and southern Spain and conquered much of Spain and intermarried.
There was much, huge amounts of in the marriage between
the previous people who lived there, which happened to be

(32:27):
Northern Europeans Germans who had conquered Spain before the Muslims did.
How much? What percentage of your blood needs to be
white to be considered white? It's disgusting, despicable, stupid, irrational, meaningless,

(32:51):
and but it's you know, it's it's this fundamental tribalism,
and it's a sceptual level mentality. I see the color
of your skin that I can see, evaluate your character,
understand history, pursue causality over history that is way too difficult.

(33:14):
That's conceptual. That means elevating myself. I mean, Matt Welsh
is really the epitome of a kind of a He
exhibits kind of the missing link what we talked about Sunday,
a mentality that hasn't reached full conceptual level. Or maybe
he just treats his audience as if his audience is
that way. It's hard to tell what he actually believes.

Speaker 4 (33:36):
X ray machines or jet engines, or rockets or a
thousand other things that our society depends on to exist.

Speaker 1 (33:43):
I think he said the printing press, and just a
starical note that the penning press movable type printing press
was invented in China. China, as was paper. So the
use of paper as we know it was an Asian invention.
So it turns out that.

Speaker 4 (34:04):
The flourish we never would have had a railway system
or the printing press.

Speaker 1 (34:09):
Yeah, there's a penny press. We wouldn't have this, really
never had a printing press if not of white men.
H That technology was not invented gun power. I mean,
the Chinese invented a lot of stuff, a lot of stuff.
There was a silk uh, weaving of silk and uh
and of course uh printing press and gunpowder and and

(34:34):
many other innovations Indians. Can you imagine Western engineering and
science without the number zero, without the concept of the
number of zero that was invented or discovered by Indians
Indian civilization and transported to the West by the Arabs.

(34:59):
The Arabs also made dramatic innovation in algebra, which is
not European algebra was Indian and Indian Central Asian Persian
Arab So where would we be without algebra? Just the

(35:20):
ignorance of this guy, the stupidity of this guy. I mean,
for a thousand years, white men pretty much didn't do
anything from four hundred to fourteen hundred. While Persians and
Central Asians and Arabs you know, and Chinese and Indians

(35:40):
had flourishing civilizations, white men went nowhere. Maybe it would
be interesting what happened to change that? What was the
causal link that made it possible for suddenly white men
to achieve things? What Maney had to do with a
rediscovery of the ideas of a civilization in Greece which

(36:01):
is white. Who you know? Do we know that? Do
we know what the genes of the ancient Greece were?
Who cares? What does it matter? Its ideas.

Speaker 4 (36:15):
Country which was founded by white men and led by
white men, and expanded from coast to coast and settled
and built up mostly by white men.

Speaker 1 (36:24):
Maybe that has to do something with the fact that
the same white men also enslaved black men, enslaved them,
treated them as subhuman. David says Greece Greek were definitely
not white. I have no idea. Again, I don't know

(36:44):
what any of this means. These are concepts that are
bogus concepts. Race, as I told you, I don't think exists.
There is no such thing as race.

Speaker 4 (37:00):
Now, these are all facts, fact, historical realities that cannot
be denied.

Speaker 1 (37:05):
I just denied it, just true. I denied the fans.

Speaker 4 (37:08):
While Black women are encouraged to be proud of the
historical achievements of black women, whatever those might be, and
Asians to be proud of Asian achievements, and Native Americans
of Native American achievements, and so on, white men are
the one group on in the entire face of the
planet who've been forbidden to even acknowledge what other white
men have accomplished, much less to express any pride in it.

Speaker 1 (37:33):
What does it mean to express pride in achievements of
other people whose only connection to you is having a
superficial outwardly resemblance in the form of skin color. I

(37:54):
mean that's true of Black pride and Asian pride and Natives.
I can pride and all these stupid I mean troy ballistic,
collectivistic views, Jewish pride, I mean, what do they mean?

(38:19):
Can I be pride proud of Einstein? I'm proud that
people from my genetic lineage, you know, responsible for the
theory of relativity. Isn't that cool? No, it's not cool
at all. Einstein's achievements have nothing to do with me.

(38:41):
I am happy for Einstein's achievements. I celebrate them and
the culture that, in a sense it made it possible
for Einstein to achieve what he achieved. It still was
up to him, but he needed a culture, a culture
that in a sense embraced new ideas. Otherwise, like many

(39:08):
geniuses before him, he would have never had an opportunity
to express his genius. But that does nothing to do
with the fact that he was Jewish or the fact
that he was white, or was he white? I don't know.
It's not an issue of pride for me. Pride as
an individual virtue. You can't even really be proud of

(39:28):
your children. You can't really even be proud of your
children because you didn't create them, not in the sense
of their soul, their achievements, their success. I mean, in

(39:52):
my view, when a child does something really good, you
shouldn't say I'm proud of you, because I think that's ridiculous.
It's not about me, it's about them. I think what
you should say to them is you should be proud
of yourself. You did that. Good for you, that's amazing.

(40:16):
I mean, you create the material manifestation of a child,
but the child still has to create itself from a
perspective intellectual and a soul, and whatever it is that
they do, they have to do it, and they should
be proud of their achievements. It's not for you to
be proud of their achievements. You can only be proud

(40:37):
of yourself. The values you teach your kids do not
cause them anything. We are not automatons, we are not deterministic.
Children are not treat them well, they will become good.

(40:58):
It's very dangerous to go into parenthood believing that you
will shape your kids. You can help, you can contribute,
you can make it easier, you can make it harder.
But objectivism's view of free will is that it's the
individual's responsibility to make something of themselves, to make themselves

(41:22):
into whatever it is. They're going to be the only
responsibility for a child, unless you've really abused them. The
responsibility for what a child is is on them. It's
the only kind of modern pseudo psychology that you know, Oh,
I did this because you know my mother this or

(41:43):
my mother that, or you know my edifice complex or
this complex or that complex, as if were some kind
of deterministic automatons. To raise a child right is to
give them and to leave them open to the opportunity
to take it, to take advantage of opportunities, to make

(42:06):
themselves the best that they can be. But I know,
I know great people, really amazing people who had horrible childhoods,
really tough, really difficult, with very limited opportunities. And I
know people who raised by parents who gave the kids everything,
you know, who really treated the kids well and gave

(42:28):
them opportunities and treated them alllly and taught them the
right values and everything, and they turned out completely rotten,
completely rotten. You shape your soul. You're not a product
of your environment. You're not a product of your genes.

(42:50):
You're not a product of your skin color. You're not
a product of your culture. All of those things, genes, culture,
parents make a difference. But it's the choices you make.
Didn't make you who you are. Choices you make make

(43:13):
you who you are. And to a loge extent, much
of the field of psychology has been wrong about these things. Wrong.
I mean, most psychology doesn't recognize free will. How can
you do how can you do psychology without recognizing free will?

(43:37):
All right, there's influence. You can have influence, but that
influence is not binding. Influence is not binding. All right,
let's finish up this clip. God forbid.

Speaker 4 (43:52):
Instead, our society set out on a campaign to punish
and exclude and alienate this very group. That is their
reward for having carried the weight of Western civilization on
their shoulders.

Speaker 1 (44:06):
You didn't realize that the real Atlases of the world
are not the individual's a great ability, but they're white men.
White men. I mean God, I mean iman, woman philosopher,
Madame Cooree, I mean there plenty of women. And again,

(44:31):
whiteness is meaningless. Oh right, I'm gonna I'm gonna skip this.
You get the point. This is kind of the collectivism,
the tribalism, the racism that is eating away at the right.
It's destroying the right. It's exactly what I meant predicted.
It is an anti conceptual mentality. You just gotta those

(44:52):
of you who attended the Members only show on the
missing link. And if you didn't and you're a member,
you can check it out. You have access to all
those all those shows, all the members only shows, so
you can you can check it out. But those of
you attended, you should be You should recognize in what
he says the mentality of a perceptual level human being.

(45:19):
He positions himself and presents itself to the world as
an intellectual leader, a commentator, a cultural critic, but an
intellectual and yet he has not graduated for a pre
human state. He's not elevated himself to the conceptual level
to see cause of relationship, to be able to, you know,

(45:40):
trace ideas skin color. Skin color because he sees it.
Because if you line up all the great achiever, most
of them are white. There must be something special in
the in the in the stuff that makes white white.

(46:03):
I know I go after Matt Walsh a lot, but
he deserves it, and he's got a huge following, and
I think he says what a lot of people believe
he has. Okay, let's go to Bondy. Just a reminder

(46:24):
that we have targets for support of the show. The
show's made possible because of you. We have targets to
do und fifty dollars an hour. We're short of that,
we're going to hit the first hour. We're definitely, we're
definitely going to be well into the second hour. I
can't go more than two hours today because I've got
a hart stop. But let's at least make the first hour.

(46:46):
Before we reach the first hour. We've got ten minutes
to get about one hundred and twenty dollars. So six
twenty dollars questions, six twenty dollars questions, not ten dollars questions,
not five dollar questions, twenty dollars questions. All right. So,
one of the you know, amazing heartening stories coming out

(47:06):
of the horrific massacre, just just a horrific terrorist attack
on Bunny Beach was this Ahmed al Ahmed, who is
a Syrian immigrant to Australia who actually you know, jumped
on one of the terrorists, managed to disarm him, saved

(47:27):
the lives of many many people, saved the lives of
many many people in the process, got injured because the
other shooter shot at him and he was injured. He
is doing fine, he's he's gone through surgery and doing fine. Anyway,
he has this this hero, legitimate, real hero. You can

(47:47):
see the videos of it. I mean, it takes a
lot of guts to do what he did, and we'll
talk about some other heroes who weren't quite as successful
as he was. Sadly but Meant has now been labeled
a traitor in the Arab world for stopping a terrorist attack.

(48:10):
The Facebook page of a Palestinian useus right in Ramala.
Ramala is in the West Bank, Uh. They posted Ahmed story.
Almost all the hundreds of comments that followed were hostile.
A day he saved Jews. Here's some quotes. Treason comes

(48:32):
to you from the closest people. He sold himself and
his life for the safety of the Jews. These are
the Palestinians that Israel is supposed to have a peace
with and is supposed to, you know, give them a
state of their own right next to Tel Aviv. I
wish it was I wish the bullet hit your heart.

(48:54):
May Allah not heal you. This is uh you know,
some some of the who representative representative of it anyway,
Some people, some people in Australia did not feel that way.
And there was a fundraising campaign to raise money for him,

(49:18):
to support him, to reward him, if you will, for
his bravery. The fundraising campaign who raised one point sixty
five million dollars US dollars. That's well over two million
Australian dollars. He was handed a check in hospital and
he said something like, you know, do I really deserve this?

(49:38):
And the guy who gave it to him said, yes,
you do, and you know it's it's it's hot, warming
and good for the people who donated, and yeah, he
definitely deserves it. He's a father of two, he's you know,

(49:58):
he works in Australia. As far as I know, he's
not a welfare recipient, but on there and uh yeah.
Bill Akerman, the American hedge funt guy who took a
couson happens to hate I gave one hundred thousand Australian
dollars as part of the fundraising campaign. I wonder how

(50:20):
much Tucker Cosson gave to a Muslim who stopped Islamic terrorists.
But they were killing Jews, so maybe Tucker was for
the terrorists. Akman, not Akermen, Sorry, Akman, yes, Akman sorry, anyway,

(50:43):
this is terrific. I guess there's people all around the
world who gave the money. But but yes, good for him. Oops.
I just closed something I didn't want to do it
is so I didn't want to point out. If you
haven't read this in the news, haven't seen any who
else that right at the beginning of the attack, Early

(51:06):
in the attack, there was a couple, Gummann and Sophia Goodman,
both in their sixties. He was sixty he's sixty sixty nine,
she was sixty one, who noticed the one attacker with
a gun starting to fire. They both jumped on him

(51:28):
and tried to take the gun away from him. The
terrorists overwhelmed them and shot them both and killed them.
So there were people, civilians mostly who actually took an
initiative into their own hands and engaged with them at

(51:49):
the risk of their own lives, and in this case
they both lost their lives. In the case of Ahmand,
at least he managed to survive, which is good. They
you know, both Boss and Sofia Yuh lived right there.
They lived in in in bun Dai ban Dai Beach
in Sydney, Australia, and they were both killed while trying

(52:12):
to stop the attacks. So incredibly heroic and incredibly brave. Again,
there's some questions about the police performance. It was ultimately
a detective who would run from the station, who was
a really good shot, and managed with his handgun, with
his pistol to shoot the one attacker, you know, to

(52:37):
shoot him from a distance. Uh, and and and and
and stop him. So the police did stop it, but
it took it took them way too long, and and
some of the police there were just very ineffectual. Even
though they had handguns, they were not going to risk
their lives. They were not going to take the risk,

(52:57):
which I think is part of a policeman's job to
stop this kind of shooting. Finally, it's worth noting that
a couple of days after the Bandai attack, law enforcement
identified seven men en route to Bondai. They'd received a

(53:21):
tip about a possible violent act. The police rammed these
vehicles and stopped them and arrested seven Middle Eastern men,
as my understanding is, who supposedly were going to do
a follow up attack in Bondai. So supposedly the men

(53:42):
that's set out for Melbourne, We're heading to Bondai Beach,
a nine hour drive. They were rested in a place
called Liverpool, which is about forty minutes away from Bondai. Well,
the reason is unclear. Why they were driving there. The

(54:02):
suspicion is that they were that they were going to
engage in terrorist attack. The police are investigating this as
a terrorist investigation, so there's more way that came from. Sadly,

(54:23):
all right, let's see the funder. Yes, we talked about
this a little bit the last few days. I wanted
to wrap it up. It turns out that the guy
who murdered people at Brown University and murdered two students
and injured another eight kind of almost randomly. And then

(54:45):
it was the same guy who murdered the physics professor physics,
the physics scientist in Bookline, Massachusetts. Same guy. We don't
know exactly what the motive is, and but it is
the same person. So these Raelings were wrong. There was
no Iranian conspiracy here. It doesn't It certainly doesn't seem

(55:08):
that way. This is a guy who took some It
was actually knew the MIT professor had studied with the
MIT professor back in Portugal when they were both younger.
He had come to the United States on an F

(55:28):
one visa and had studied for a year, I guess
two semesters at Brown. He had been accepted to Brown,
but then left the university and got a green card
as part of one of the lotteries. He got a
green card from a lottery and stayed in the US.
It's not clear what he did, but he stayed in

(55:49):
the US. This other guy, the guy was murdered, was
also from Portugal, and he stayed in Portugal and got
his PhD in physics and then worked there, and it
was hired by MIT and came off of MIT. They're
both about the same age in the in their late forties.

(56:09):
How to tell what exactly is a particular grievance, but
it sounds like he had a connection to Browne University,
had a connection this guy to the professor of the scientist,
and he killed them both. He killed in both places
and then committed suicide, then committed suicide, killed himself. So
they'll they'll they'll never find out directly from him, what happened,

(56:33):
what exactly happened? What else did I want to say
about this? So a lot of the theories about this
is a leftist who wanted to kill the leader of
the Republican students. That turned out to be bogus. The
theory that this was Iranians turned out to be bogus.

(56:54):
It turned out to be some crazy, frustrated, angry widow
who did this. Uh, the break really came in police
identifying him when somebody who had encountered him on the
Brown campus before the shooting came forward and described him

(57:17):
in great detail and described his car and described all that,
and that's h and that's when it when it really
broke and when they identified who it is. And then
once they had the car, they identified the car and
then him as being around the physicist in Booklin's place,
and it was just a matter of tracking the car
and finding way it went to and where it led.

(57:43):
So that's just to wrap up that story, all right,
Doge a quick coin on Doge. There's only there's really
one thing that dogs did well well well is qualified,
but did and satisfy a lot of people from the
US government. So I mean you have to give them
at least credit for that. These government went from over

(58:05):
three million people, they probably fired about two hundred and
fifty to three hundred thousand people from the US government.
You know, it's a question of whether those people will
be hired. It's a question of any of those people
we're doing anything The government should be doing and they'refore required.
So it's down by two hundred and seventy one thousand jobs.
Two hundred and seventy one thousand jobs. Now it's still

(58:29):
a very small number overall, out of three million. It's
less than ten percent. But yeah, I mean, goverment who's
bloated too many people. I did mention that the day
that in spite of this goverment spending is up significantly
during Trump's first eleven months. The deficit is it's also

(58:54):
I mean, debt is also dramatically up. The deficit is stable.
It's about where was Underbiden. Maybe a little a little
smaller because there is some revenue coming in from increased taxes,
increased taxes that have to do with tariffs. All right,
ten percent is significant, not in the ballpark of kind

(59:15):
of the cuts that Melay made, not in the ballpark
of what really needs to be done. Of course, what
matters is not how many people you employ. It's how
much money you spend. And employing fewer people but spending
more money doesn't help you, doesn't help the economy. And
that's exactly what the Trump administration has done. They're employing

(59:38):
fewer people, but they're spending more money. So Beckett square one. Yeah,
tariffs are awful, really really bad, just like all taxes,
but they're particularly bad tax. But it's a tax. Americans
are paying higher taxes, and spy spies revenue is higher,

(01:00:01):
all right. A quick trade story. This sart of Europe.
So for years years, I mean, I'm not exaggerating. For
twenty six years, the European Union has been negotiating with
South American countries to establish a free trade agreement, a

(01:00:23):
massive stree trade deal. There would lower tariffs and lower
trade barriers between Europe and South America, a massive positive
move for both Europe and South America. And it's taken
them twenty six years to negotiate this. I could have
done it in one day. I'll charge you zero tariffs,

(01:00:47):
and you charge me zero tariffs. Done. Finished. Oh and
no trade barriers, no other barriers. You can do. Sell
whatever you want in my country. I'll sell whatever you
want in your country. That's my kind of trade deal.
But anyway, the Europeans and the South Americans took them
twenty six years, and they were going to sign the
deal this weekend. They were they'd finally gotten everything lined up.

(01:01:14):
I mean this is a deal with Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay,
Paraguay and Bolivia. And then on Wednesday, Maloney, who have
said some nice things about but I take them back.
Maloney had new reservations and the French suddenly woke up

(01:01:36):
INTI yeah, we too, and what are the reservations? Their
farmers upset because the one sector in Europe that is
most protected by trade, the one sector in Europe that
they that they put massive trade barriers and other barriers

(01:02:01):
in order to protect them is agriculture. Farmers are the
most cherished of all workers in Europe and they don't
want competition from Latin America. They know they will lose.
I mean, look, you want to solve the cost of

(01:02:22):
food issue, if there is an issue in Europe, start
inputting food from Africa. Africa could become the bread basket
of Europe. Africa could produce food much cheaper than Europe.
It has massive quantities of fertile land, It has people
eager to join the workforce and to start gaining wages

(01:02:42):
by selling stuff to Europe. And of course Europe is
not going to do it because of its local farmers.
So food is expensive in Europe white because it's all local.
Local food is expensive food when it's in a first
world country because in a first world country, the actual

(01:03:04):
value of labor is not an agriculture. I mean, the
United States has seen a massive shrinkage of the number
of people working in agriculture. Now europeas too, but far
less than the United States. And the interest group that
is European agriculture is massive, and they so back to

(01:03:25):
the negotiating. Back to negotiations. I mean, the reason for
this is farmers and tractors blocked roads, They set off
fireworks in Brussels. They were demonstrating and rioting. The police
that are used tear gas and water cannons to to

(01:03:46):
you know, to to break up the riot. Farmers bought
potatoes and eggs to throw to throw a police. They
burnt a wooden coffin bearing the wood culture just you know,
we're fighting to defend our jobs, our jobs. We are

(01:04:08):
we have a righteous job to our particular jobs. What
about anyway, So, I mean, if this deal goes through,
it's a huge deal. It benefit European Union dramatically, the
people in the European Union, It'll benefit people in these
Latin American countries and yet there they're stopping it because

(01:04:33):
farmers might lose their jobs. Free trade has nothing to
do with national interest. It has nothing to do with
all this stuff. It has everything to do with special
interest groups pushing and pulley for what they want. All right,
I want to point out this, God, this is going
longer than I thought it would. I want to point out, uh,

(01:04:56):
this movement in America now that is really left and right,
historically left and is now joined by the right. I
called it the stagnation movement, the movement that wants us
to stop stop, stop developing, stop growing, stop investing. And
specifically where they're applying this ideology is to artificial intelligence.

(01:05:24):
And of course we've talked about Steve Bannon being a
huge opponent of artificial intelligence and wanting to put a
molitorium on it. Well, Bernie Sanders is joining him. Not surprising,
Bernie Sanders is now pushing for molitorium on the construction
of all data centers. He says, I will be pushing
for molitorium on the construction of data centers that are

(01:05:46):
powering the unregulated spint to develop and deploy AI. The
molitarium will give democracy a chance to catch up and
is sure that the benefits of technology work for all
of us, not just the one percent. He also said
in the next two years, AI data centers will not
only cause electricity builds the sore when you could solve

(01:06:08):
that by building a lot of new poplines, then they
won't cause them to sow. But I expect that to
generate the same emissions as driving over three hundred billion miles.
Oh so it's climate change again. They're going to stop development.
Oh we've heard that again. We've heard that before. That's
not new. So you know, you'd expect the someboding. It's

(01:06:29):
not a surprise. This is part of the course. And
of course the kind of fearful Republicans who are afraid
of technology and want to support the working class, you'd
expect it from them as well. It's the same mentality
as the farmers in Europe. What I find really upsetting
is this is all to be expected. Is that the

(01:06:52):
only argument that seems to have any punch against these people,
the only argument that seems to work against these people
that conservatives or people in the center right are using,
is this this is from the free pass. But I

(01:07:13):
wonder who will still be doing AI work oh right, China.
So the problem with Bernie and Bannon and all these
guys is will lose to China. China will do AI
and we won't again this collectivistic bs No, the reason

(01:07:37):
this is bad is that we as individual Americans won't
benefit from the amazing stuff that AI is going to
make possible for us. It's also a massive violation of
the individual rights, property rights of the investors of the CEOs,

(01:07:57):
the workers, the companies that are heavily invested in AI.
So this is we want to stop AI now for
national security reasons. We don't want to stop AI for selfish,
egoistic reasons that have to do with the well being

(01:08:18):
of Americans. We want economic growth because it's good for America,
not because we'll lose to China. Lose to China is
a side issue that's not the main issue. The main
issue is us. I'll give you another example. Well, yeah,

(01:08:40):
another example of this. Just the stupidity behind so much
of what the central planners do. So early last year,
twenty four I robot that makes Roombus, which is like
the vacuum cleaner, the robotic vacuum cleaner. It was on

(01:09:04):
track to be purchased by Amazon. Amazon wanted to buy
them and invest and maybe create other robots because Amazon
sees that the future might be household robots and they
want to invest. But the Biden led FTC Lena Kahan
and European regulators basically said, no, Amazon's stupider ready, that

(01:09:26):
would create too big of a company or whatever, right
it would be any empty competitive and they killed the deal. Now,
just so you know, the Trump Anti Trust Division functions
under the same philosophy. You know, there's no big difference.
But the point is, so the deal was abandoned right instead.

(01:09:53):
I Robot has struggled, partially because of tariffs, partially because
of competition from China, from Chinese row body companies that
are advancing significantly, and of course, on Sunday last week,

(01:10:14):
I wrote, abut the Clay bankruptcy and a Chinese company
is now taking it over and you going to run
it Now, that's great. I'm glad the Chinese are willing.
A Chinese company is willing to take it over, and
we'll still benefit from the fact that they'll probably innovate
and they'll probably be these things. But the reason, and
I'm sure some people upset, Oh my god, it's China's

(01:10:35):
taking over. Isn't that horrible? No, what's horrible is that
this company is not allowed to thrive, and we weren't
allowed to benefit from it thriving by being bought by Amazon.
We our own worst enemy, not China. China might be

(01:10:56):
an enemy, not the worst. All right, I want to
give I want to add on some good news. So
we'll talk about the fact that just America is an
innovation machine. This country, in spite of everything, in spite
of the horrific politicians, in spite of the long line

(01:11:17):
of statists that have existed in this country, in spite
of the regulations and the tariffs and the taxes, and
in spite of California, and in spite of all this stuff,
this country is an innovation machine. I mean, look at
this graph. This is a graph of the number of
tech companies that report net annual profits are one billion

(01:11:37):
dollars or more. There are sixty two such companies in
the United States, only fifteen in China, only nine in Japan,
nine in Taiwan eight. In the entire Eurozone, they're only
eight one billion dollars a profit for tech company. France, three, Korea, three, Germany, two,

(01:11:59):
United Kingdom, one United States sixty two, more than all
of these combined combined. Now people ask why is the
stock market so high? This is why we have the
best businesses, the most profitable businesses, the most successful innovative

(01:12:20):
businesses in the world. It's not even clothes. So yeah.
Among the world's ten largest companies, eight are US technology companies.

(01:12:42):
Among the ten most innovative companies, ten are based in
the United States. I mean, the United States dominates when
it comes to tech. And the reason for that is,
you know, so basically three things, well two really relatively

(01:13:08):
mild regulatory environment for technology. You can easily start a business,
you can hire people relatively speaking, so freedom, economic freedom
that still exists in the United States. In particular, one
of the areas in which this is important is still,

(01:13:29):
in spite of how difficult it is to hire and
fire in the United States, we still have much more
freedom when it comes to employment than for example, Europe,
so people can move around. And on top of that, immigration,
which Trump is trying to kill, that golden goose. But
how many of these sixty two companies are run or

(01:13:51):
were founded by immigrants? A big chunk immigration and economic
freedom to the extent that we have it. That's what
you can only imagine what that number would be if
we're really at economic freedom in our dreams. All right, That,
my friends, is the news Friday December nineteenth, so the

(01:14:15):
last Friday before Christmas. Thank you all for joining me,
and I will now take on some of your super chat.
I will also remind all of you the super chat
is a great way to support the show, a show
made possible through support from you. It is also you

(01:14:39):
can also do stickers to support the show and us
not have to ask a question. You can also support
the show with Patreon at Patreon that would be a
monthly support not live here right now and Patreon just
go to patreon dot com and type in you on
book show. I also want to remind you that December
thirty one is going to be our You and Show.

(01:15:01):
It'll be four plus hours. It'll be a big fundraising event.
I'll ask you to support the show going into twenty
twenty six and to allow for the show's growth, to
allow for us to continue doing the interviews and continue
doing the daily new shows and everything else. There will

(01:15:23):
be a very very very very very very ambitious fundraising goal.
So I'm going to need all the help I can
get to get there. The max you can support the
show on a super chat is five hundred dollars, So
if you want to do more than that, I know
some of you have in the past done more than
five hundred dollars, then please consider doing a one time
PayPal contribution and just say in the contribution in the

(01:15:48):
note there that it's for the New Year's Eve show,
and that way I'll count it towards our goal. All right,
I'll just remind you of that. Iran dot Oaks. Let's
start here where you can sign up for heinrand Aarri

(01:16:08):
live courses. I'll be teaching a course in public speaking.
They're going to be courses on objectivism, deep dive into
the philosophy. These amazing courses that will improve your understanding,
your knowledge, and it's fun. You can take them live
and participat in class. You can take them after the
fact and just listen. You can do homework and get

(01:16:29):
it graded. You cannot do homework andnot get agraded. Really
up to you, and you get a discount ten percent
discount for being a listener of this show. So ybs sorry.
Twenty six YBS ten. Michael Williams the support of the show,
and Michael has a project called Defenders of Capitalism dot com.

(01:16:53):
Defenders of Capitalism dot com check it out. Check out
the website I've worked on with Michael on the program
for for for many years and is both offend and
a colleague. Check out defendersocapitalism dot com. And finally, Alex
Epstein Epstein uh the leading authority on all things power

(01:17:16):
and why electricity places don't have to go up with
the AI boom. Build more, build build build build more
electricity production capacity. Uh. So follow Alex. Expand your knowledge,
make your better, make your better. You know, he has
these talking points to just give you the material from

(01:17:39):
which to argue and debate people. So great to have
that under your belt before family gets together on Christmas
where politics is the main topic of discussion. All right,

(01:17:59):
if you have questions, use the superchet to ask them.
Five dollars, two dollars, one dollar. All right, let's get
started with the super chat because they do have a
hot stop and I want to get through all the questions. David,
at the risk of psychologizing, Shapiro reminds me of an
Orthodox American Jews that are ultra religious because it gives

(01:18:19):
them cover for the identity crisis and the fact that
they need a tribe to belong to. I don't know
Ben well enough. There's certainly a tribal aspect of religion
which is part of it. But look, he grew up
in this world. There's a certain you know, he's he

(01:18:43):
studied this. Yeah, I don't know what the psychology is,
but he is very much committed to that world, and
I think both socially family wise, he's also convinced himself
that there's no possibility of values without religion. I mean,

(01:19:04):
he comes at me with this silly what about the
hot girl at the bar? He needs he believes he needs.
I don't think he does. He believes he needs religious
commandments in order to give him morality. So I don't know,
but but there's certainly a tribal aspect to it. And
but look, I don't know how many of the tribes

(01:19:28):
support him politically. Certainly many Jews are not supportive of
his views politically, although maybe maybe among conservative Orthodox Jews
he's more popular. Yeah, I don't know what drives him. Ultimately, Alex,

(01:19:53):
what is that to training be legal? In a capitalist society.
Why or why not? No, it would not be illegal
because basically it's a victim of crime. There's no victim
when it comes to the side of trading. The fact
that you have more information than somebody else is not
a crime. That's reality, it's life. Now, there is an
aspect you could imagine of inside of trading that would

(01:20:16):
involve contractual or fiduciary violation of your responsibility. So if
you were a CEO and your contract says you can,
I think the contract would say this, you cannot trade
on certain types of insider information, and you did it,
then you would be in violation of your employment contract
and you could be fired. You could imagine that if

(01:20:39):
I had a contract with a printer printed on my
financial statements that he couldn't use the knowledge he gained
from reading those financial statements in the trade, and then
he did again, he would be in violation of a contract.
But there's nothing prohibiting if it's not contractually specified inside

(01:21:04):
of trading. I'll give you one other context in which
you know, you could imagine inside of trading regulations but
private regulations existing. If I wanted a list on the
New York Stock exchange and my shares we traded in
the New York Stock Exchange. The New York Stock e
Change could say, you know, we don't allow inside of trading. Here, here,

(01:21:26):
here the specifics. Here's what we mean by inside of trading.
That's the other thing. Inside of trading is one of
the least defined, one of the most amorphous terms in
law that exist. But let's assume they exchange said here
are the things you cannot do, and we do this
because we want to make sure that we get a

(01:21:47):
lot of volume of trade that people feel comfortable trading
on our exchange. Then that's again a contractual thing between
the firm and therefore it's managers and employees and the exchange.
So to the extent that there is fear to the
extent that put it this way, to the extent that

(01:22:08):
inside trading might do damage to the exchange because people
won't trade or to the firm in some way, then
that is easily dealt with through contracts. Through contracts. But
the fact that I saw my stock and somebody buys

(01:22:28):
his stock, and the guy who bought the stock has
more information than I do, that is not the basis
to prosecute him. Thomas would arguably returning to the gold
standard cause significant problems. At this point, what would be involved.
I know it isn't going to happen. No, I don't

(01:22:51):
think it would cause problems. I mean it would involve
massive deregulation. You couldn't just return to the gold standard
and keep everything the same. That would be a disaster.
The gold standard that I and those of us who
believe in real free markets advocate for is not a
central bank gold standard. It is a private banking gold standard,
which means you'd have to completely deregulate the banking sector.

(01:23:14):
You would have to make them private instead of basic
arms of the government, and you would have to give
them their ability to create their own currency, their own
money if they chose to, the government would have to
stop printing. It would have to shut down the Federal Reserve,

(01:23:34):
and banks could then take in gold and print or
issue not print, issue currency paper money in exchange for it.
And you know another shows I've described in greater detail
system like that will work. The best authors about this

(01:23:56):
George Selgian and Lawrence White. But you know, the transition
would be complicated. It would have to be a number
of years. You'd have to be very transparentted the deregulation.
You'd have to get rid of the FED. You'd have
to set a date where gold becomes bore, the dollar
becomes convertible into gold. You'd have to set a date

(01:24:16):
for closing down the FED to reserve and reallocating all
its reserves to the banking system. But it involves a complete,
complete reshuffling of the banking industry, which would require massive deregulation.
And it ain't happening, Andrew. If one suffers for mysticism,

(01:24:39):
one should fight like hell to overturn it and establish
the proper metaphysics. Reality is worth it, and it is
and it is being for reality, not just against mysticism
that is required to integrate it. Yeah, well, I mean
it's being for reason. It's being for your life. You know,

(01:25:03):
your life acchoires adherence to reason. Your life requires the
use of reason. Mysticism is damaging for your life. So
the motivation to overturn and to basically get rid of
every last element of mysticism that might be in your
thinking is that your life depends on it. Your happy

(01:25:26):
life depends on it, your successful life depends on it,
your flourishing life depends on Barry. Barry also did a sticker.
Barry did like a big stick of fifty dollars sticker.
Thank you, Barry, I really appreciate that. Thank you john
for the sticker. Let me think the sticker is quickly,
and thank you Johnny for the sticker. Who else do

(01:25:51):
we have? Fred Hopper whoops, called my spa and Johnny again?
All right, thank you guys, really appreciate it. Okay, Barry
has a question. I was told that all humans have
intrinsic value. Is this true? It tends to raise a

(01:26:16):
red flag for me, but I'm not sure how to
answer it. I mean, the answer is fundamentally that there
is no such thing as intrinsic value. All value is
a value to someone for a purpose. So whenever there's
a value, it's to whom and for what. Chocolate doesn't

(01:26:38):
have intrinsic value. It has value to me. It might
have value to you and for what purpose, for the
purpose of taste, taste good. Other human beings might have
value to you. They do, indeed objectively, for what to

(01:26:58):
trade with. But there's no such thing as an intrinsic value.
That nothing has intrinsic value. All value must answer the
question to who and for what all values of values?
To me, this is the big issue about environmentalism. The environment.
Nature is not intrinsically valuable. This is why it's okay

(01:27:21):
for human beings to change it. So uh, you know,
environmentalists view nature as having intrinsic value. That's why they
get upset when we carve up a mountain to build
a highway. But the mountain only has value to whom
and for what to some people as nice scenery to hike,

(01:27:45):
for other people as a place to put a highway
in order to get to the other side of the mountain.
And then it's just an issue property rights and who
gets his values manifest. But it's only individuals have values.
Things don't have value other than two individuals. Thank you,

(01:28:06):
very good question. All right, Michael. How does reputation matter
in a non secondhanded way. Well, it matters somewhat in
that if you have a good reputation, then people are
more likely to hire you, or to want to befriend you,

(01:28:31):
or to initiate contact with you. So if I have
a good reputation as a speaker, then I'll get more
business than if I have a bad reputation as a speaker.
So it's not a source of self esteem, but it is,
you know, and it's not something you should strive to establish.

(01:28:53):
Bet you should have a good reputation because you're a
good person, because you do good things, and that reputation
is a value to you because it can generate relationships
in business. And that's not second added. Somebody who cares
about reputation lies for its reputation, manipulates for his reputation.

(01:29:17):
That's being second added, Michael. Has technology reached the point
where it can't be effectively regulated into stagnation like other industries.
That's why we're going to keep seeing exponential growth. Well,
we're not seeing exponential growth. We don't have exponential growth
and we're not seeing it. So I don't think it

(01:29:37):
will continue because it doesn't exist. Well, keep seeing growth.
That's an achievement in and of itself. You don't have
to be exponential for it to be an achievement. But
I don't think it's impossible. But it's to regulate tech,
but it comes with a heavy political cost. So for

(01:29:59):
now it's not going to happened and will continue to
see growth, but that could change. So we have to
be very, very diligent in fighting against the regulation of
tech technology. Nick, thank you for the sticker. Oh Wes
came in with fifty dollars question. In addition to his sticker,

(01:30:19):
he says, I finished the collapse of the Western mind.
Holy cow, The world would be a better place today
if paganism won out. At least it wasn't hostile to
rational thinking and science. Yeah, I mean, but rational thinking
science is almost everything, right, That's where we get the
modern world. So yes, I mean, you know the closing

(01:30:43):
of the Western mind, which happened in the first four
centuries from zero to four hundred, the five hundred, that
is the victory of Christianity over paganism, and not paganism,

(01:31:04):
but over Greek ideas of Astatilian Greek ideas, over the
ideas of this worldliness and science. And just imagine what
the world would be like if Greece had won and
the Christians had lost. We could be one hundred, one
hundred and fifty years or maybe a thousand years. We

(01:31:27):
would know. A thousand years, we could be a thousand
years ahead of where we are today. A thousand years
of stagnation we could have avoided. So yeah, I'm glad.
I'm glad you enjoyed the book. It's striking. Now you
have to read the book, The Reopening of the Western Mind.
The Reopening of the Western Mind, Michael, the same author.

(01:31:53):
How can you argue that culture has less tribal was
less trouble one hundred years ago, when blacks weren't considered
human beings and women were considered property. Well, I don't
think a hundred years ago that's true. Most Americans one
hundred years ago did not consider blacks as subhuman, and
I don't think they considered women as property. That was

(01:32:13):
dramatically changing. But the reality was that when you went
out into the wilderness to homestead in America in the
nineteenth century, it was you. You weren't looking for tribe.
You were looking to build a life. You might have
been a bigot in some part of you, but that
didn't really manifest itself when you went out into the

(01:32:36):
wilderness in Kansas or Nebraska and put up a farm
and started, you know, working. The same is true of
people who went out there and started an industry or
built a railroad. So there was an immense amount of individualism.

(01:33:01):
So today the tribes are not quite as crude as
racist and sexist, although those exist as well. Today the
tribes are more political, but the tribalism is much worse.
I mean, part of the feature of tribalism is a
lack of individual thinking for themselves. And you got a

(01:33:22):
lot more group think today than you did back in
one hundred years ago. G Jeffries, thank you for the
Thank you for the stick. I really appreciate it. Somebody,
says John Lion says Johann I think you can get
you can generate more super chat questions by splitting the
super chat into two segments one news, one super chats,

(01:33:45):
three more news, four more super chats. Maybe, I'm not
sure why exactly. I'm not sure why because almost all
the super chests are unrelated to the news, so I
don't know why it up would increase the number, Michael,
are young people getting the sense the traditional conservatism is

(01:34:08):
a failure, the alt right Nazi ideology is a winning strategy. Well,
they're getting a sense that traditional conservatism is a failure.
Trump gave them that sense that he succeeded by rejecting
traditional Christianity, but they don't really have anything to unite
them as an alternative. Some gravitate towards Groypiism or whatever

(01:34:32):
you want to call it, Nick Foyentes, some gravitate towards Tucker. Others,
you know, are still holding on to kind of a
more traditional view of Christianity. Of conservatism. There are all
kinds of variations, and there's a battle going on right
now within within that world, particularly among young people, and

(01:34:53):
what will be the winning, the winning ideology of conservatism
moving forward. Eric says after mentions speech, I think you
owe him an apology definitely, not how it is we
need more like Ben call out the evil in the
Republican Party. Yes, but I don't think I owe him

(01:35:13):
an apology at all. I criticized him for things that
I think he deserves criticism. And I think Ben, he's
drawn his line at anti Semites. That's not a hard
line to draw. That's not a hard line to draw.
And he should have drawn the line at anti freedom,

(01:35:34):
and then he should be criticizing Miller, and he should
be criticizing Trump, and he should be criticizing Bondi, and
he should be criticizing Hospital. And when he is willing
to draw a line where I think his ideas justify
him drawing a line, I'm not putting woods in his mouth.
Do I think that?

Speaker 4 (01:35:55):
Do?

Speaker 1 (01:35:55):
I think Ben Shapiro thinks it's a good idea to
have ICE, fully armed ICE agents roaming the streets and
harassing working immigrants. I think that says No, I don't
think he believes in that. Will he criticize it? I
don't think so. I mean, you guys can tell me
if I'm wrong. But I absolutely think he's a coward.

(01:36:18):
It's just he's not quite a big of a coward,
like when it comes to anti Semitism. That really goes
to the root of his identity as a conservative Jew
and everything. So he's willing to stand up for that,
but he should be willing to stand up for other things.
And if he stood up, and this is my argument
when I criticized him, if he stood up on principle

(01:36:42):
for the things he really I think believes in, if
he stood up for the Finding Fathers, for capitalism, for
freedom as he understands I'm not as I understand If
he understands them, we would have never gotten to the
point where Tucker Costs and Nick foyint this was big
as they are. He helped create them and I still

(01:37:04):
stand by that if he didn't employ Matt Walsh. I'd
like to see criticized Matt Walsh for his racism, but
he's not going to do that because that would alienate
too much of his the audience. He is a coward, Kim.
If it's Alec versus JD in twenty twenty eight, is

(01:37:24):
us finished? Well? I think freedom is clearly on the demise,
and us, as the funny Father's envigionate is finished and
will go through a period of much greater authoritarianism of
left or of right. And then it's a question what

(01:37:46):
comes after? Can we resurrect America once it's finished? In
that sense, there's a sense in which it's already finished. Right,
Just look at Ice. Just look at what's happening in
this country and the kind of debates that are going on,
in the kind of arguments. It's not a lot there.
I mean, we have toteologist and we're starting for scratch

(01:38:09):
or even hi. Thoughts on flipping houses, I'm in the
market for buying and identified an apartment. The flippers demand
a high premium in a slow market. Tips, I'm not
sure what you mean flipping houses is you buy a
place you renovate it and you sell it, or just
buy it and sell it. If you're buying and selling,

(01:38:31):
then you're risking the price going down in the meantime,
and prices do go down sometimes, but renovating adding value
and then selling sure, But again you're very very much
dependent on the market, on the real estate market, and
whether it keeps on going up. Now, some places that's safe,

(01:38:53):
some places that's not so safe. So it's it's it's
it's it's risky, like any investment. It's not a sure thing,
all right, Andrew, it struck me as important when I
heard rants say the metaphysics and epistemology cannot be separated.
Can you expound on this point? Yes, I mean metaphysics

(01:39:19):
is the nature of reality and consciousness is a part
of reality. Epistemology is how we know. But that is
to some extent, you could argue a metaphysical question, right,
it's it's it's it's a question about the nature of man.
It's the nature of his faculties, the nature of what exists.
And then know what, no metaphysics, So how do you

(01:39:40):
untangle that if you have a bad metaphysics. Let's say
a is not a how can you advocate for a
epistemology of reason? What does that even mean when there's
nothing to identify out there? Or what's identifiable is shifting constantly.
So the two are completely interrelated and interconnected. It's true

(01:40:05):
you cannot separate them. How you know and what it is?
You know what it is there is to know, a
dependent on one, the other, another, one another. The kind
of metaphysics you have will to some extent, determine what
kind of epistemology you have, Jason and the meaning. After

(01:40:25):
the strike ended, I made a three minute pitch to
Moses Lake School District one sixty one, encouraging Iron ran
free books and essay contests, and offered an additional two
thousand dollars prize to the district winners. That's great, you know,
I don't know if they're going to take you up
on it, but that's great. You got Iran's name out there,

(01:40:48):
you got the program's name out there, and maybe some
teachers will jump on it. Good for you. That's how
you fight for the future. Malcolm, Would you happen to
know why? Surely who Shirley Temple is? If so, any
general thoughts keep it up. I usually make the live shows.

(01:41:09):
I usually can't make the live shows. Shirley Temple was
a child actress, so then grew up and became an actress.
She was a singer, dancer. She was super cute when
she was a kid, and and uh, quite talented as
an adult. So I think she was I can't remember.
She was the daughter of somebody. Was she had daughter

(01:41:29):
of somebody important, of a of a performer, I can't remember,
but yeah, I mean somebody that was very, very enjoyable,
a very benevolent personality in the movies at least. Uh
and yeah, fun and and and a good good singer

(01:41:54):
and dancer. She was funny too, and yeah, I mean
have a generally positive view. Generally positive view. Jennifer said
she was an ambassador Lada, but I forgot to what country.

(01:42:16):
Nick says that he watched all her movies when he
was a kid. Linda said she became a un ambassador anyway, Yeah,
I mean definitely fun movies, very and again good good voice,
good dancing, funny muz. How on earth did I miss

(01:42:40):
your chat with Jesse Lee Peterson until yesterday. I listened
to it while driving and nearly crashed. I was laughing
that hard. Yeah, that was years ago, years ago. God,
I get harassed for that constantly because he called me
a beta male and uh and all of that and

(01:43:01):
he he The number one argument I get on immigration
is but what about Israel? And it's a it's a
it goes back to thee Man's missing link. It's a
perceptual level argument that can't see differences between Israel and America. Uh,

(01:43:24):
it's it's a it's a stupid argument. It's an unsophisticated argument.
It's a mindless argument. But he he did it well
and uh and people have repeated it since then, over
and over and over and over and over and over again. Yeh,
but he is a white now you know, white supremacist.

(01:43:46):
He's black, but he's a white supremacist, which is pretty
pretty ludicrous but true. Uh. Loan des Center. The day
after you answered debate question, I saw a CD box
of Zell's Symphony Cycle at a U shop. Got it

(01:44:06):
and it's magnificent. Up there with the Guntha Wild and
kliber Big recommended. Yes, I mean Zella's phenomenal. He was
one of the best interpreters of Beethoven ever. The entire site,
all of his Beethovens are good. I mean, the third
is exceptional, but his fifth is seventh, is sixth, is ninth.

(01:44:28):
They're all good. So sell in the Cleveland. I mean, yes,
that in the nineteen fifties and early sixties he had
some amazing orchestras and conductors in America. It's just amazing. Andrew,
as an expert public speaker, what do you make of

(01:44:48):
the constant tone of yelling in Trump's last speech? Many
dictators yell this speech. Is it is intended to be threatening?
Does it projective fear? I think it's pretty yeah. In
this case, I think projected anger and fear, frustration. I'm
doing so much good for you guys, and you don't
appreciate me. You know, he knows what he's doing is

(01:45:11):
not working, and American people know it, and he's trying
to convince them that in spite of the evidence of
their senses, it is. And it's frustrating to him. And
he's yelling out of frustration and anger and fear. It's,
you know, hoping to through the yelling, get their point across.

(01:45:39):
He's I mean, I also think Trump is slowly cognitively
losing it. And I think that that's part of it.
I don't think he's I mean, some of the answers
he gives the questions are so ludicrous, so crazy, some
of his tweets are so ludicrous, so crazy, that you
have to say, cognitively, there's something. There's a schools loose

(01:46:03):
Andrews says. I feel the same blunt, though harsh certainty
expressed in James Carvell's famous campaign line, it's the economy
stupid applies to solving the world's problems. It's altruism stupid. Yeah,
there's no question. And then, of course the question is
why is it so difficult? Why is it so difficult

(01:46:23):
to eradicate altruism? But yeah, if it is altruism stupid,
over and over and over and over and over again,
in every aspect of our lives, it's all right, guys,
thank you, thank you all the super chatow is, thank
you for all you being here. Don't forget to go

(01:46:44):
to patreon dot com and become a monthly supporter, don't
forget to join us on December thirty first, and yeah,
I will see there will be a show tomorrow. Actually
a change of plans, schedule shifted and I will be
doing a show tomorrow, topic to be determined, to be determined.

(01:47:12):
Let see you tomorrow, if not Monday, Bye, everybody,

All Episodes

Turning Point; White Pride; Bondi Hero; Murderer; DOGE; Trade; Stagnation; Tech | Yaron Brook Show

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

Betrayal: Weekly

.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;}Turning Point; White Pride; Bondi Hero; Murderer; DOGE; Trade; Stagnation; Tech | Yaron Brook Show