Welcome to the Jordan, be Petersen Podcast. This is season for episode. Thirty, and this episode, my dad is joined by one of my favorite humans, Michael Malice, Michael This is the best selling author podcast. Her calmness and media personality he's it. Being an proponent of free speech. Anarchy and many other non mainstream beliefs. My dad Michael talked about his impressive career, canadian politics, western culture, the Woke culture, wars, changes in universities, the crumbling study of the humanities, Newfoundland, Toronto and more Michael Mouse has just released a new best selling book called the Anarchist handbook. I would highly recommend checking out. If you ve been listening to their show for a while. You ve, probably heard me talk about my helix mattress that I'm kind of obsessed with I'm excited to, let you guys know they just launched a new company called all form their makings Cooper customizable furniture visit

all form, dot, com, slashed, Jordan, and you can pick your fabric sofa color of the legs silver size and shape to make sure it's perfect for you in your home, arm chairs and love seeds all the way up to an eight seats. Sectional so there's something for everyone. You can also start smaller and by more seats later on. If you want your all form, sofa to grow and change. to you when you move their midcentury modern style furniture is very attractive. All forms sofas. Our delivered directly to your home with fast free shipping. My producer ordered a giant l shaped sectional six sections of brown leather with ottomans and pillows. He loves it and looks really fancy, but is also comfortable and totally transformed his living room into a room he deserves fit for a king. He wrote that part

It's getting a sofa without trying it in store, sounds a little risky. You don't need to worry. You get one hundred days to decide if you want to keep it that's more than three months and if you don't love, it they'll pick it up for free and give you a full refund the even offer a forever warranty, literally ever to build your customizable sofa check out all form, dot com, slashed, Jordan, all form is offering twenty percent off all orders for our listeners at all form: dot com, Flash Jordan, a l, L, F, o r m dot com Jordan, however one I am pleased to have

as a guest. Today, Mr Michael Melis, an author columnist and media personality, he was the subject of the graphic, novel, eagle and hubris by the late Harvey Pixar of American Splendor fame he's the off. There of dear reader, the unauthorized autobiography of Kim Jong IL two thousand and fourteen, as well as the new right, two thousand and nineteen a book and I've been reading deeply. This way camp that was reminiscent to me of the New Journalism Anthropology of Tom Wolf, the co author of seven additional books, including made in America, the New York it's best selling autobiography of you have sea of hall. You have see hollow famer Map, Hughes, concierge Confidential, with Michael Facile, two thousand and eleven, which was one of empires top five celebrity books of the year.

And most recently, two thousand and sixteen black man, Whitehouse comedian comedian De L, a huge! Please satirical, look at the Obama years also on and why d best seller he served as a cultural and political commentator on podcast with Joe Rogan Dave Ruben TIM Pool, my daughter, Mikhail Petersen twice and has its own you to channel and podcast you're welcome my producer, put it at the bottom of this I'll, Autobiography Michael, is a comedian with a harsh and fast sense of humour, he's a big fan of yours, but be prepared for a little bit of crazy. I got that impression reading your book, but in the best possible way, I would say so. Let's talk about the new right. If you don't mind I'd like to dive right into that, so in the intro that it was reminiscent to me of the Journalism of the nineteen sixtys when I first read

electrical late acid test, which I would recommend to everyone as a brilliant, journalistic invent anthropological investigate, into what became the psychedelic culture in the early nineteenth sixties, it's a brilliant book and I got to since in that, in the new right you were doing. of the same thing for whatever it was. That was happening from the time of maybe two thousand and thirteen to two thousand and sixteen I've got something that actually seems like history already interesting. We often you talk about from an insiders perspective in some sense, because you were an insider in an outsider at the same time in these groups. But you talk a lot about food Chan and Means and all these some cultures exist online that are major forces and social domains in their own right, but that are, if not ignored completely by the mainstream media, so to speak.

Consistently misunderstood and saw, but by the same, so I'd like to ask you about that. We could start with four Chan, maybe, and- and maybe work is through first, what it is and then what it was and then what it is now, if its anything, because I did get the sense as well- that this happened already. Something else is happening now and I dont know what it is, but what it It was you writing about that's five years ago, which is a long time in internet terms, sure I think right now, first, while discussing fortune publicly in a context like this in some kind of studious or serious context violates It shows a fortune one. Big rules about four chapters. Will you know Normie get out ree, so talking about it or automatically unkind of positing myself as someone who is an outsider, I'm not you know and fortune all the time, but before China, kind of emblematic of a broader section. The internet, which was driven wasn't literally only fortune.

but was driven by irreverence II was driven This idea of that which is presented to us with earnestness, should not be taken at face value that this earnestness often uses a cudgel. Addison mechanism of affecting social control are certainly you ve been the subject of many means, I'm sure you're you're familiar way ass yet and the other the point that they figured out there's an expression that they save me magic is real. The premise being you know that before you write, the idea was you'd, have these organizations putting forth some kind of claim or idea, often absurd. its face and the arguing You like well, that's not accurate, that's not fair and the new which was. Why are we taking this agitprop at face value instead of marking it clowning and basically rendering the tool impotent? So,

that was kind of fortunes pull board. Are you had the Donald celebrated on unread? It said there is this but you say that its misunderstood by the mainstream press, I will use the term corporate press because I dont really regarded as mainstream but I don't know that it's misunderstood so much as misrepresented- why think? It's probably both because it's not easy, first of all there's an immense divide between people who don't use it internet as a social mechanism or as their primary source of information and people who do there's an unbelievable divide, and maybe maybe, if you're older than fifty year in the world of nineteen, seventy interfere younger than forty you're in the world of two thousand and ten and those are really different worlds. I mean you talk about the corporate press and I been thinking a lot about the technological impact of Youtube and and podcast so

This is why I'd like to dig into the misunderstood part. First, before we go to the misrepresented part, what I see what I, popping up in your book, continually was two things happening in fortune and there's. There's a there's trouble making That in some senses there for its own sake and I'd like to talk to you about that, there's there is a political there's, political move. Went, but then there is also this exploration of what is actually a technological revolution, so you think about legacy media. So I've noticed that when I've gone to tee stations and been interviewed by a journalist or have a discussion with the and was in the green room and I'm talking a person then, but is it is the cameras go on. I'm not talk to a person anymore, I'm talking to someone who's, an adept, mouthpiece, for a massive corporate organization, but but

actually a necessity, because the bandwidth for television was so expensive that it wasn't possible to grant. the individual, untrammelled access to it and it was inevitable. That cooperation was never going to allow, except in exceptional cases, any journalist to have what would only be an individual opinion and certainly wasn't going to. Let them explore ideas in real time to expand. Of too risky. But then now we're in this weird situation and the fortune guys we're playing with this to some degree where it is the obvious that the corporate media platforms have any advantage whatsoever over one whose technologically able mean the fact that we can have this discussion, for example, so very have got going. I would say they have one very big advantage, which you see yourself, which is the concept of legitimacy, so your previous book than than your tabs refused to. Basically knowledge is being principally man.

so you can't say it's in your tonnes best seller, even though the bird solve these. Just you know, a huge amount is hugely successful right. So dear reader, the book ideas for that North Korea, which actual talk about later, I do that with Kickstarter, As a result of that on Amazon, it looks the same. It's gonna have a cage listing like another page listing, but the New York Times You know all these other elements there in a physician I got an hour on C Span spoke tv, so that is changing in that regard, but it gives them an opportunity pretended. This book doesn't exist so unless a book is being published by certain outlets that have legitimacy. Basically, it's just like the item. If you watch rustling growing up, I We did the double the f. When I was a kid there were rival organizations and they literally acted as if these rival organizations didn't exist and if a ressler came over from the end of your way to dubbed IVF, they acted like he was this new discovery that he had no,

History to him, he was very odd, is all you had to do was changed the channel and there acting in certain other mechanisms, so that is a big advantage, because if you gotta talk to mom and use, I read you hear this. I heard this and CBS where'd. You hear this. I heard this Fourchan it's it's very clear which, when mom is good, to choose, not identify agree, but but what part of what the Fortune guy we're doing by your own account to some degree, was test these new technological platforms, to see how much power actually had so these. These rolling games that you describe. So you describe trolling as something that actually quite specific. It's in its intent when it isn't just being say, adolescent foolishness, it's something like. Can we create a narrative and string along legacy media types and some of that to Joe but some of its also a test is like. Does this new technological platform have enough power to to bend and twist what what has been

the standard means of delivering the cultural narrative for decades? And the answer to that frequently was yes increasingly the leg, Media outlets are suffering from deal it legitimized nation: they lose money, they lose their ability to fact check and because they dont have. This technological advantage anymore, that they have the remnants of their brand. Something like that. and there is also something that is a very big asymmetry between honesty and dishonesty right. If you and a good friends- and I tell you one major lie: will that's ones made out of tens of thousands that one side Many still gonna do much more damage than one honest statement, because I've lost you there's an amount of trust lost, so a brand has been, and they said, This explicitly CNN had adds not that long ago saying this is an apple. We only report facts if you are coming at you in saying that I am only reporting facts as soon as I'm cool, in one misrepresentation

even if its innocent, which I don't think it is, cases right away there that just kind of collapse as the Souffle, because I trusted you I rely on you and now giving misinformation but, most importantly- and this is where I differ from more mainstream conservatives who have think think things have become. Corrupt You made mistakes. I've made mistakes are for next mistake Saul, the time this is it going to be another, go at Sibley from a lack of knowledge. What steps have you taken once mistakes have been made to make amends, and also put yourself in the position that you won't make the same mistake again and if you see with your corporate media, oftentimes dil. do things that are disingenuous, but let's give the benefit that lets. You say there were sloppy, but no one gets fired. There's no me a call, but, like you know what it's like to Thailand, also great counter example back in the early eighties. I believe it was Tyler got. Some was poisoning Tyler bottles, people. I think we're done with the very least we're getting very sick, so title

had? This huge add campaign. That said this is the steps we ve taken. You know you got the child of calf, you got the seal, you got caught whatever it was This is how you know that we are safe. You can rely on tile, you know, see that with CNN or Fox a b c whenever they do these grievous things they just pretend that they never happened all along or say that Is this some kind of you know you can't listen to the conspiracy, here is on the internet. So this is there is this kind of another loss of trust because they see very little effort to maintain and foster that trusting released between the channels and the audience and make him, and when things have gone wrong short. Let's, let's do I want to go. I want to continue with fortune for a bit. Can you walk me through exactly like you, you said one of the mistakes that CNN did made, for example, and also Hillary Clinton campaign was treating fortune like it was actually a person and as if there was someone who could represented and speak

can you lay out what exactly what it was it is and how it works. And then maybe we talk about the mean culture that's associated with it should. a fortune in theirs others there? They chance, there's read it in and other such their message boards, so basically a fortune. I remember how many boards they have some are completely innocuous of fitness. Is their fit, isn't health board a phase their fashion board? Guys can ask, is this? Do these past the good I may, would you know what kind of hat will look at my hair? You know innocuous stuff, Paul P, L is there, politics bored so basically its anonymous, and it's not, I believe, after this fifteen pages and after there's no updates on a thread, the threads vanish into the nether near the nether world, wherever you can't see them anymore, you can only impermanence correct you. Can identify yourself with the flag. If you want when you, when you login, but it's it, there's no usernames, it's not like space book. So basically, you know the Hillary Clinton campaign in in twenty fifteen two thousand and sixteen

we're positing about these sites and like how is it But this is allowed to happen, but it's not the kind of thing It's like Facebook and you call Mark Zuckerberg. He ban certain users. The users are ephemeral. You dont, who they are. It's the posts are ephemeral, you don't you know they just vanish off the board. So this claim that you know it is there at the comparison I hadn't, I believe in the book was kind of animal Al Qaeda, it's very decentralizing. You know you can't really take out one person and then the whole thing falls apart other than you having to take try to take out the site. They try to do I'm earlier this year and in late twenty twenty, but it's an entire different model, and I think people who have a bureaucratic mindset. People have that Just in the sense that you have this managerial elite running things, they can't even conceive of an organization or location or a website which

decentralized and there's no like a big bad vampire to kill. You take out this then I mean, but that is part of what I want. thought boy was in some sense, your documenting something that revolutionary that even the people using it dont know how revolutionary it is. You know one so because we have these massive communication technologies now and they all have slightly different rules and just by tweaking the rules? A tiny bit? You can create a whole new organization like Tik Tok, let's say which has videos of a certain lengthen and at least to begin with, almost no other. It's all of a sudden. That's a huge. Social network doing all sorts of things that no one has ever done before. So the rules Fourchan are really crucially import understanding it. So it's anonymous decentralized and evanescent that's what I said yeah and they have noted what the two

Rules are no child pornography and their. If there's pornography ass, we stick to the pornography board, but so it's pretty much the wild west when it comes to free speech right in the fact that it's not permanent. Also, so it's anonymize Andy Impermanent, which means you'd think, at least in part that that it will encourage a lot more risk taking, because one of the things that would meet again, risk is the fact that it could be attributed to you, but also that it would be permanent, yeah, daddy, the comparison, a fortune, you, let's say Twitter, where You know someone is old. Tweets will be there at the very least, they're gonna be archived somewhere. You're gonna have a cost the user name. I say, even if it's not wouldn't Petersen. If you're gonna be like Jack Smith, thirty seven they'll be able to track Jack's, Miss thirty seven posts overtime. You can't really do that on a site like for China, or a chance but there's other sites. Like this I mean what what what they have figures it is the euro. The corporate press might decide for chance. The devil forecasts, Devil forecast, devil you take,

down fortune? Well, they'll, just gotta discord or their go to these other sites technology is? What allows people is designed in contemporary terms for people to communicate. So you're going to kind of take out one location the gathering and trying to communicate. It's gonna take minutes to find you, patient and now it there's gonna, be a cost because you have to get the word out through other means about This is where we all are now, but it's very very hard when people are basically effectively tell importing right it. For me, too, from one location to another physically actually gonna play in our train whatever, but you're gonna want website to another. It I have to type in a web address so few just ban one address it the amount of effort it takes the shift. Another one could not be more minimal. So ok, so you document input,

no one's in charge of this, but something happens and in its communication network and in its tracks, people who, what it it attracts people who are communicating in a like men, man, it mine, way across time. Why did it become a place that was dominated at least by the observations by the thought that was associated with the new right, what convergence on that, because Fortunate historically has been a site for great irreverence, so they had had campaigns to troll and by trolling levies, say specifically what I mean trolling is it's not just you not you know you have a twitter account, and I say I, Jordan Petersen, you're a jerk f off. That's not trolling, that's just being of noxious trolling! I die regardless Trolls Andy Kaufman there than he median where what by Europe before Since you are turning a third party by exploiting their weaknesses into an unwitting performer on their own, for example, there was agreed

ressler to bring back directly called the hockey talk man from the eighties and his stick was. He was an l Impersonator right and when they viewed him. He would say: oh no, stole my act now Elvis had been dead for fifteen years. At that time it makes no sense whatsoever. Would get the audience really enraged and- and they flew about so when you are calmly, causing someone else to have an extreme reaction that, in this case good trolling. He's exploding explore their innocence and EVA today I mean they're, taking what he sang at face value than those a complete absurdity and what followed suit on some case can be put in their laugh, so they used it. What what fortune would go with it be known for is, for example, you had it. now do right and they name. The next flavour of mountain do wishes. A corporate mechanism talk with its in the book mechanism to sell. You know you should resolve drink What name should we call it and they basin? the gardener people together, and this is kind of like red seeking right. If you have an organized

seeking minority, as opposed to an indifferent majority that organised seeking minorities, gonna be able to punch very much above its weight in terms of getting Dick the achievements and wants how many people are carrying, but that's not undo Paul, very, very few other than the troll walls, so they got the right. The number one result to be Hitler did nothing wrong right now there. Nazis they're. Not they don't think the Holocaust is something that is didn't happen or as bad. There pudding now, this mountain do who's. Trying to use this fund. to sell you this poisonous sugary garbage now the corporation the opposition? Are they going to follow through with this Paul or are they gonna pull?

whatever they choose, they have been forced into making a choice that they themselves would not have wanted, because you have someone in a meeting China hey. This is gonna, be fun for the kids and they ended up pulling the pollack as their like. Ok, the internet, one. So to go from that, and this kind of extreme distrust, if not contempt, for corporate irreverence in corporate humor and corporate fun to have based glee can a curse, and then you can do whatever you want. Ok, well not everything to have someone who was basically a ship poster on twitter running for president, who was just there in these debates, insulting these politicians to their faced and often very below the belt terms. That was that ethos brought to life, because no one could have imagined in decades that you would have it residential contender whose looking at a sitting senator in the face whose who is doing well in the polls and tell that senator I've never made.

May your looks and there's plenty of material there, believe me that much? I can tell you what you know This is something that was completely unprecedented new and we ve been taught for decades that you know politics should be that respect its. These are tough choices. Either people lives. That's all there. True, but there's this very new left from the late sixties perspective idea that these kind of powerful entities use, respect and decorum indecency as a mechanism to stifle descent and basically make their victory, a fait accompli and if you kind of mess that up and force them to show their hand that these are not kind carrying people who care about your grandmother, neighbourhood. These are power, hungry sociopaths who will smile on your face and do whatever they need

when the lights are off. That, I think was suddenly is very useful in terms of exposing our politics for what they are. So it struck me over the last decade or so that the alignment of comedic satire with right wing, philosophy or or political philosophy, your views with something that was completely also completely unprecedented. I thought well all of a sudden, the right wing. The gestures or at least among the right wing. Are these gestures, and I really didn't know what to make of that. I mean you seem to regard it in your book. The new right, you, you seem to regard it as a kind of right wing, anarchic rebellion against. but it's a strange it's strange what their against, because, on the one hand, there is the corporate voice Let's say that- characterises the media and, on the other hand there is the between progressives- and you can't really.

Put them in the same camp. All that easily will. Hopefully, we will be putting them the same camp, but they are in the same camp, because one of my curtseys conservatism is progressive. Ism driving the speed limit, so much of conservatism. Buckley got his start well enough, Buckley who's that I think the big villain of the book got his start complaining how terrible things our, how mistreated he was at Yale, the new right perspective using complaining how things already Elliot's, let's think tanks listened tanks, the harvest Harvard Yard and raise it to the ground. So these are two different approaches and much of conservatism for decades. This, besides being inherently humorless, which is a personality thing which is perfectly fine. If that's your thing, it has been about a reaction, so the left would have some. Idea of the moment, we need to do this and that the right we just did. their heels get dragged along and it's a rat should affect costly bring us toward a more more progressive society than now sure views Slogan was standing. Afford history yelling stop

at a certain point? People realised how, but instead of yelling we actually stop it. How about we act, try to put a ranch into these gears? How about we try to you? Don't metaphorically tarn further some of these people, instead of just complaining that is, a fair, let's, be aggressive and must take the fight to them. Can you see, in our view, clearly see an analog between the tricks, the trump used? Let's say the humorous tricks that he used and and the manner in which he appealed to the public and whatever was going on in places like fortune and on read it and with means as well you spend a lot of time in your book talking about Pepe, for example. So what? What is it that you see as the connection I mean look, I saw this t shirt in Florida last year than I thought was really apropos. It said Trump, twenty twenty, because fuck you twice yeah, and I thought yes there's something about that. That's really interesting and I've. I've talked to my progressive friends about this a lot and

because I'm trying to figure out exactly what's going on and being appalled, at least to some degree it at the issue and against of of the Democrats, among others, especially the identity, politics types, because his look out I'll, tell you what what I see in re relationship to my books, for example. So I that this is the standard legacy media critique of my books, I would say, is that I'm peddling nonsense that, if not trade is outright dangerous and which is kind of a strange combination tune. Air dwells who are so far beneath contempt that any attempt to help them is to be met with suspicion and that is something that really really puzzles me, because when I meet the people that I'm communicating with You know when I walk around or when I go to my lectures you know I see individuals can I look at individuals, icy individuals who are trying to

their houses in order who were ass, often in desperate straits, and they come up to me. And tell me you know some step. They ve taken towards improvement sore. shamefacedly and but also happy about it, and you know I'm very happy that's happening and tell them that, and that's my experience, but then I see in in in the response to my hypothetical audience, which is a misrepresentation to begin with. Nothing contempt that so deep that the contempt is even therefore the attempt to help, and then I think what you progressive types, at least in principle, you all for the downtrodden, but I dont know what to do maybe it's they stay in their place and act like their supposed tourists. There's this contempt. Among the helping class, let's say for those their hypothetically, helping that so deep that and I think it I think it destroyed Hillary Clinton campaign that contempt. Her comments about the basket of deplorable

and the democratic abandonment of the of the working class and and Trump tapped into that somehow and and you draw connections, and so I'd like you to elaborate on that a little bit if you would show and I ve never I try to talk about people. I will try to steal man they're arguments and present them in the most strong position possible when the left is at its best. It says you, as you mention, and it is about concerning that marginalized people. People were forgotten. The far left you historically with care about prisoners, rights and how bad is this prisoners treated for most people, it's kind of like lock above Show me the key and that's kind of a left wing idea that, like this guy's, been forgotten. Let's make sure he has food he's, not being you know, Sultan and daily basis. Things like so they understand also another context that when you have the young males, who have nothing to lose were completely margin. Lies who are spat on and called every name in the Look in other contexts

in the Middle EAST in inner city. They realize you keep pushing someone at the bottom and keep telling him you're nothing you're. You deserve to have nothing that young male is going at the very least try to get some kind of modicum respect. Trotted gets a modicum of status and is often literally very violent consequences, because if I have nothing to lose, but I can make a name for myself like it, for five minutes have a sense of power some People are going to do that. Arithmetic and it's a very, very bad thing, and this is broadly speed. King everyone's dealing at arrhythmia, virtually as unfair equality, multiplies unfair inequality, multiplies that that just becomes more and more likely that response so it, but to your point, is set in The context understand this, but now we're talking about your audience right. These a young man who aren't doing so now, there being told Europe day, they don't have a girlfriend. They desperately want to have a girlfriend another

you're, a loser for not having a girlfriend. It's like will on trying to get out of that situation I'm not trying to be some kind of a date rapist, I'm not trying to be sexual predator, I just want to be normal. I just wanna have masses hierarchy of needs met, but because they have been assigned to be you're supposed to be here at the bottom. You ve had your turn. Your they whipping boy of the moment on an individual level. This is going to have very deleterious consequences. as you are telling them? Listen, you don't have to be an even if you're gonna be at the bottom. It'll be a better person tomorrow then you are today. Will now your kind of guy to their house and rearranging the furniture and messing up their schemes. Of course, they're gonna react in a very aggressive ways towards your teachings. I think well it's funny to because the that notion of my audiences caricatured to begin with. You know, but I don't care about that. Some sense, I'm interested that the caricaturing is occurring. It's like

there's a reason for it. Why? They're all male they're, all angry they're all wait! It's like! No, that's not right, and even if they do skew mailed, that's, at least in part, a legacy hangover from the fact that most of the people who watch Youtube or are male but anyways. Nonetheless, that's that's the categorization, but then there is the emergence of that contempt and I think well that is driving at just, as you pointed out there, that that that that insistence upon the despicable none of that status is driving, I could see that in the fortune right and writing about fortune that you were doing. That's that that there's a there's, a testing and pushing back that's going on there, and some of it is clowning, Some of it is like pointless trouble making. As far as I can but there's more going on in there than that, and that's for sure. So then call this is around these right. These more right wing ideas

I also find somewhat surprising, and so what do you make? What do you make a vat? Exactly? Is it because those ideas are the ones that are most specifically forbidden or In the end, the satirical comic rebellious types just blow mon to them. For that or what do you think it is? I think you hit them on the head. It's that, if you tell someone who's, got nothing going on, and you say you know if you push this button bright here, it's have some really hilarious consequences for some people who think they're better than you and have no problem. Tell you to your face their bare than you. A lot of people are gonna, that bud, especially when the results are often hello- so it is going to give them that sense of power, and I don't know if in the wrong choice. I don't think it's very useful to tell someone who's not really being particularly aggressive. that you know you suck in your terrible? And you know it is like I, don't make fun of people for being overweight, like I got two people for a lot of things. I don't got. Two people were going overweight, ITA friend, who passed away

because he had morbid obesity, another friend who would have gastric bypass because when you make fun of- who's, never wait, you're, making fun of all your friends forever way in other, seeing it as well and here's the thing that person knows there overweight they. they're gonna be treated differently there, no they're gonna be. Do you know look down on and all these other things there painfully aware and the same thing. Here someone is marginalized and your car in him a loser. He knows, he's a loser. The at that point. It just becomes a bit of cruelty, bullying and also anytime, you tried it someone, especially in America or in the west, at least to sit down shut up. It's like. Why were you, to tell me to sit down and shut up. Now you don't have the power to tell me to sit down and shut up. You had that power in school. You have that when the office, maybe you had the power when there were three networks. Now that is infinite networks of you The internet. You can't say, It's me so I am going to talk at if I see that its upsetting you and you hate me, even though you don't know me, yeah it's gonna

a value for media upset you because I do think you're bad actor. I think, is the mindset and I think that mindsets at all rational to let's dig into that little bit, I mean I got maimed like mad. When I first rose to whatever prominence I have risen to or or notoriety or or whatever there were means- and I think that's probably still the case or means being generated in the hundreds like weekly. It was crazy and I was watching them and I thought if I behave myself properly, those won't get unbearably cruel. Ok, I thought, if I can take a joke, then they're going to tilt in a manner that more positive rather than more negative, because I can see that there was a time

still going on there in order that these jokes were being pushed out me and, I suppose, to some degree pushed out. Whoever was listening to me right to that end. It had. I responded negatively to that in any. I remember when I worked on working class working crews. You know that one of the things that almost always happened was that when someone New joined a crew there'd be a test period where various forms of insults and and shared would be hurled at them, and it was an attempt to see how they responded and if they responded with good humour and accepted they're stupid, nickname with some good grace and and could laugh about it, maybe could say something funny in return, then, you know after a week or two if they did their job than everybody accepted them and away they went, but if they got all uptight about anyway. I am then it just

God, meaner and meaner, until they were driven off, and I could see that happening with the means- and you know I was compared to Kermit the frog, for example, and that sort of morphed into a Pepe thing, and I was watching that and and hopefully was able to take a joke when one emerged and at least one of the consequences of that seem to be that never got truly toxic and so on. I am struggling with the morality of the fortune approach. You know, because there's a part of me that thanks Jesus Christ, don't you have nothing better to do, but there is also a part of me. The things well wait, a second there's something really complicated going on here. That has to do with the redistribution of power and also the acquisition of a voice by people who are individuals and not part of a corporate group, let's say but who have access to tremendous technological power and their serving the function of gestures and their serving the function of comedians and, like I think, comedian,

in particular. Are the canaries in the coal mine for a free culture as soon as the comedians are threatened? The you know, something's issue. The committees are nervous. You know something's up, because you should be allowed to make fund the big me of yours that I use this means of yours constantly on Twitter is the catholic human meme. those examples it you know that famous it of you have to know where you were saying things that were pretty straightforward or maybe those agreed with you and she just ask you a question that seem to be complete, not secular, to what you have just said in this kept going on for the whole time than the one that comes to mind is a picture of you saying I had bacon in exile breakfast at her reply. Is so you're saying, kill all regions so in times of someone, if you have something on twitter and somebody responds with a nod, sequitur reproach you reply with a picture of her and people right away now, also what you're saying as it has nothing to do, what is

actually saying. I think what you see, what you are saying to be the opposite of Cathy Newman in this context is accurate in that a lot of power people are there through inertia? Are there through nepotism? Are there through Rita corporate means names because they play the game if I'm not are the game. Why should I be playing the game and here's? The other thing where I think these people are heroes is the thing that their best, that is when it comes to the thing that is the worst, which was war. We are constantly proselytize in corporate media That war is great. We need that people overseas. We meet up more more, more troops, more whatever. If you have a president who is regarded as contemptible, if you look at Trump versus Barack Obama, it's a lot harder for that press who is it venerated to send young men and women to die? Because if there is a sceptic is it about his pedestal that he's on

right away, you really have to make sure you're selling this war or otherwise. This gonna- be this: it's just easy to clown you, because the arguments used for these wars are often so ridiculous on their face. So what would you? What was the conclusion that you ve drawn Now it's been a couple years since you wrote the new right so and What what are you later, thoughts on and on on board? just fortune and what's happening in forging now it doesnt as you go, big fortune is to some extent fallen ways a cultural force. I mean they were. Indeed they were trying to mean Trump into the presidency, and that happened successfully in twenty sixteen Donald, which was the board on red. It was banned during the election. I think they respond as the door that when these other yet again with these decentralized things, if you try to figure out where once going, you know then you run out subgroups people define themselves by opposition

by unity. So anyone who has any kind of ideology will tell you the people they argue with the most once were basically one degree of separation away from them within that ideology. So I think right. Now there is kind of a what happens next now that there is a binding presidency, but the focus has shifted, and I think this is extremely healthy for those of us who value liberty It has shifted from Washington, and this has always been part of the background to corporate media and under standing that Nancy Policy and Joe Biden in which we can all in TED crews. Never despise. You will never have as much contempt for you as the editorial more than your times or the people at the new Yorker. It's it's them or more accurate, let alone many academics. So having the troll and the means be much more focused on. Why not just more back

why do you think that's? Why do you think? That's what do you think? That's true, and why do you think that's true, because that's quite a radical statement I would say, but I think it does speak to this t shirt that I mentioned earlier. You know so you you're you're sense. What you just told me was that there is elite contempt and, to some degree it was associated with the political class, but on further analysis, it's not the political class chattering literati, the chattering, educated literati, and I actually happen to think that. That's the case that that that's actually true. So why do you believe that a sure I'll give it like the rest of the arch billions- and I am not trying to call you- are the university professors, that's where the boy being really really starts, but let me give you an example to demonstrate which is wagging the dog, whether its cost

I used to be the army was not Washington and rewrite bar. You know who certainly falls into this new right kind of context, made the quota politics being downstream of culture. The idea was wait. A minute were fighting in Washington by that it's already leader, fourth down and were down how many points it's it's it's a consequence of what led up to this Suppose I was a democratic congresswoman or congressmen, and I thought president Tromp was it not. see Clansmen horrible Hitler Every, namely in the block? At the same time, I did not think that there was any kind of collusion with Russia or it or any kind of something wrong with that phone call baby a jerk, but I certainly don't think, should be each removed from office. All my constituents have been hearing four months from the televangelist of the left. Don lemon may show that our Trump Russia Trump Russia from Russia. How could I, as a democratic congressmen, go back to my constituents and said,

guys. I agree with you the skies, the worst president history and he's a despicable being, but you dont impeach, someone where this this is. You know ratcheting up a nonsensical as a Congress person. I would not be in a position to make that claim. I think that is a good demonstration of true is in charge of whom this clip on line of shipping confined redundant Don lemon from CNN, case again former, I think House Budget Direct Budget Committee, chairman governor of Ohio? He was a major president reconsidered twenty six and he's yelling at him, John John John, and you're sitting there like it's very clear who regard themselves as the authority and who regards and who is regarded as the subject in their relationship. So ok, so what? If I said? Maybe we should just stop caring about that too, because the technological, playing field for communication, has been levelled so drastically that the New York Times

times and the legacy media types are basically dead in the water and that's just gonna play out like inevitably over the next three or four years. I was let let me give you Quick examined, I just say what the urgently as they were too. If they were dead in the water, the lockdown could have happened. I don't, I don't think they're dead in the water. Now, but I think the right eyes on the wall. I agree That's why I'm going to write a book called the white pill, cuz I'm self, to mystic. I think they're at their barn bar I completely agree, then we can also talk about what happens next and we can talk about the difference between broadcasts and legacy media, to which I think are I'm trying to think through right now and because I think that you too podcast long form structure is very

revolutionary in all sorts of ways that we yet we are just starting to understand. I was talking to us around a week ago. You know anything about voiceless people and how we are increasingly becoming voiceless, and I thought well wait a second that's true in one sense, perhaps, but its very untrue. Another sense that might be more important because now everyone's a tv station, if they want to be in everyone's radio station if they want to be in everyone's of publishing house if they want to be right there at their fingertips trend. There's no apart from impediments to get thrown up now and then like you to banning people and so on its its. If you I have a voice. All you have to buy a one hundred dollar microphone and use your laptop and bang. You know why you have what we're audience you can draw in and so, and that that that is playing itself out in our call

Extraordinarily rapidly? And so maybe maybe that's just like the fortune discussion. That's drawn from your book, the new right, the cultures move past that that's already history. It might be the case. they they continue dominance of the main narrative by the legacy media types. That's already done, we're just mopping up the ashes that that six, that's exactly my purse, Active, and this is why it's often so frustrating with me and social media, because I think its inevitable don't see how, if my, if I'm the New York Times or friendship, I asked myself this question fairly. Often, I said, if I'm CNN, what could I do to regain the trust of this young population like what steps. What I take and there really in a bad it's like Marlborough like one of my quotes, is, I said the battle is one where the average american regard corporate journalist, exactly as they regarded tobacco executive, you and, ever going to have the guy who runs Marlborough, be some

one that you trust and think is like an unwitting, an unmitigated good person you understand his job, you might say: look these have to be legal, it's a horrible habit of it so and so forth and I get how he's getting a paycheck and I get how it could be used in moderation, but regardless this is theirs better ways to improve humanity that didn't selling to bat. Like I look at the BBC, for example, try due to formulate a channel for young people and they did exactly what you D expect appealed to progressive causes, and the truth is that didn't work at all. And why didn't work? It's because for young people broadcasts tv is so dead that they don't even notice the corpse here like right right? It's just not there

it's just not a new issue and no wonder because the technological advantage of of on demand, video, both production and consumption is so that the advantage of that is so great that those old forms are just their terminally dead. And so when I go and and have an interview with a tv person, you know it feels like I'm going back into the Seventys and I'm not doing them anymore. I'm for and I can get into that in a little while. But what happens is you know that the person that you're talking to isn't person in whatever it is that you're? Having isn't a conversation, we're having a conversation when we're doing this right, you know, I'm sure we bring our flaws to this in our urban are arbitrary preconceptions and our biases and all that, but my senses that when a podcast goes well, I can tell because I'm interested in the conversation the reason I'm interested in the conversation isn't, because I'm I've got some viewpoints that,

hammering forward that you have to attend to, but that I've got some ideas that I can throw it you and then I can see what you do with the ideas and take them apart and add what you can to them and I can have different ideas and and and we can do that collaboratively over the course of the dialogue, and we can include all the people that are watching this in the process and that like it's like this long form allows for the truth. Being something like it. Investigation into the truth. Instead of the truth and right, it's well, we don't want like estimate how much of that is purely a consequence of the technological revolution has now time right. We can make mistakes and and and and and it doesnt matter, because the bandwidth is unlimited. If I'm a roulette play player, I mentioned the book as well. All my money is on technology being. What saves us? I do not. I think politics literally only causes

problems, and it's not a place for any kind of solution. You could not look to wash them for solutions in. What's funny, is when you listen to corporate media a lot of times. Will acknowledge something's a problem within went that problem is solved exterior to it. They start to panic. We have heard you and I both older through, were that there was a lot of hand, wringing correctly that live in a sound by culture that it's not me seasonable, that a politician who might have a new innovative way to save sulphur poverty, to solve for the environment as well for it. You know out of wedlock births, they have some programme, but they have to rapid ten seconds. It's very to make that point and as a result, this rewards glib people or people who, with one liners. But someone whose inarticulate, who has great ideas, that person is going to be dead in the water and that's gonna, create results, we note with sir like so then people know what this is true, like you have people talking past each other, the Republic and MRS Democrat,

no broadly what you get they're gonna say it's fun when they get his anger in, but I'm not gonna happen have needle moved on rooting for my team at it's kind of a sports phenomenon. Pod come along with it. Have a long conversation where boy the bus are listening to each other. I might disagree with you, I dont have a political party behind Neither do I go home for Europeans. Agree with me hope that you will do a lot Only. Will you disagree but, more importantly, that you'll do it? Trusting way, that's interesting also to me, because you have you disagree with me. There is some power. Stability that you know something I don't and if you agree, I could learn something from yet in the three largest person, the small Person is ignorant of ninety nine point: nine percent of knowledge. We that I mean this is them the mistake that these kind of over educated people think they think just cause? I'm smart. I know everything you could still can be profoundly eagerly just can be knowledge below a certain things very specifically, but getting back to the

when I was saying earlier now that we have these long conversations and peeping you're, really Dublin two ideas than if people listen. One might think we're both fuller crap, but neither at least challenging their own views be like. Why do I disagree with both of them? You don't have that space. On CNN by nature of its organisation and now what CNN and other outlets had correctly posit is a problem. been resolved, but it's been resolved. expense another. The hue and cry is dismissed formation, people are being tricked salt, told dangerous ideas, yes dangerously her agenda me, it's there, it's dangerous to your prominence, CNN Brien's Delta, had a whole segment. I don't think he named simple by name by saying: how is it that these you two shows new shows have orders of magnitude bigger than us. What do we do about this? It's like this is literally every market, like I been published, or I make apples so comes along their apples. Are people like those apples better? You know you'll call in this. Day. You know regard this. Some kind of

You know abomination against the natural order of things you're like ok, crap. What are they? What nerve is TIM striking that I can learn from but their never etched in that, because they're not interested, earning they're interested in teaching or more specifically, training their audiences? What to think and bleed and use He doesn't social media. I made this joke over the weekend in this. way that Christians regard the trinity is one God and three person you have these inside populations, which is. Why mind in many many persons, because the p we'll watch John Oliver or they'll watch. You know some other show on the right and the next day not only will they be repeating these views, but their repeating them verbatim that is when you realise? Oh there, no mind there. This the were trained since were kids correctly. That is important for us to be informed and current events So what this shows do very perniciously is they will be

not an issue that the person had heard about before, which is important for us to understand sure, but immediately we'll try. in them on how to look this issue and what their correct emotional responses and people are hungry for that, because they want to present themselves as informed but they don't have the time or the capacity to undertake their critical or independent thought to do that, so it comes pre packaged for them. So it's kind of the tv dinner of the mind while there s a good metaphor, but the the the network format, all of it the whole technological apparatus, including the corporate funding as a consequence of the expense the band with absolutely demands that you know like. I never feel more like content than when I go to a tv station. and everyone in there is, is- is in some sense, held hostage to the limitations and advantages of that particular technology, and you know what it well. My Marshall Mcluhan said, the media

the message you know when you have a lot of what were a lot of what looks like even corporate think or corporate malfeasance is merely a consequence of that strange technological limitation, the the the networks have to Us that everybody watching has no memory and no education and no attention span because the bandwidth requirements d- and that and now that's all gone. So let me ask you about this, and now all of a sudden, the network, everyone's a tv station. Ok, so now one thing that that that, the dominance, let's say, of the three major tv stations from Say, nineteen, fifty or thereabouts till nineteen. Ninety five may be something like that there was the position of something like a coherent

national narrative and now you and objective out- and you should because in some sense its imposed. But but you know it's it's a collaborative imposition between these technologically powerful companies and the government. The journalists couldn't go to couldn't be to corrupt if they chased after the politicians, because then they wouldn't get access and the politicians couldn't be to corrupt. Because media, would you know disrobing them, but there was this sense of unity, and now you get this immense multiplicity, and so I mean you're more energetically oriented, I would say temperamental than I am, but I am an anarchist s right, white tat, but but you know there is there is a danger and fragmentation. That's that

that's diversity is fragmentation, but but you know enough fragmentation, you get nothing but endless conflict as people try to work out how they're going to cooperate. So I don't think that's necessarily true, because I don't think it's I think, you're taking it as a given that cooperation is desirable or that there this unity of some kind is desirable. I think what's coming up certain circles, which I was the first one to posit this in two thousand fifteen, is in America at least thirty of a national divorce, recognising that we have had at least two cultures since the very beginning, their being held together through you know, often nefarious means, and if one regards Donald Trump as literally Hitler and at an authoritarian, strong man, which you can bear very easily make the case for that and the other group regards you know. Joe Biden is basically sitting in his own yearned behind their resolute desk, there's no reason other than some a sense of inertia for these two. you or more groups to be

under the same quality or boats theirs reason for you to have the president. You don't want any, Creasy Molly ass conversation becomes a discourse collapses. I think social media does tend to drive our ideologies to their logical conclusions, which leads to extremism, which could be both a good thing or a bad thing. It is going to be hard Harder to the point where it's impossible to you now have these Sort of conversation- and we see it also in europe- I am ok, but there are reasons for four for the the necessity of the unity I mean, so you talk about Jonathan Height in in in your book and in the new right and there's a lot of psychological investigators, myself included when I was doing researcher we're looking into the temperamental basis of political affiliation right and so in a roughly speaking on the left end of things you get the high open people who are creative in there

thinking and and yes, and who are temperamental in favour of the free flow of information and tend to be lowering conscientiousness, particularly orderliness. And then you have the people who allow on the other side of the iron orderliness and lower and openness, and I try to figure out why that was the fundamental political access, because there's five temper once yes, so why only those two as the major determines of political affiliation and what it boils down to me for me. Is that- and I think this This isn't my discovery precisely, but I think it's the most significant discovery and political psychology in the last fifty years is that it's probably that, because borders are the fundamental political issue and I don't just mean borders between countries. I mean borders between concepts. I mean borders between categories countries, states townspeople, the conservative types think you have to hold things together because

if they dissolve they die and the liberal types think we'll wait. A second you bloody well need to maximize information flow and the truth of the matter, is sometimes one of those perspectives, is right for that situation, times the other in its can t mean even with look at the advantages of free trade and then the disadvantage of into a worldwide ep epidemic. That's a great example: it's like well are open borders good! Well, they do facilitate. The transmission of disease and it turns out that the probability that infectious disease will be transmitted in a given political locale is actually a very good determine of political belief within that locale. So, wherever there's more infectious, These people are much more conservative and it's a huge effect. So something very fundamental is going on at the bottom of our political thinking, but having settled it's, that also means you know the both of you

types are necessary because sometimes one has the right solution, and sometimes the other, but even more importantly, as that. there's no way of getting rid of that dichotomy. If you have groups of human beings, and so if we can improve, if we can't unity emerge that allows both those types of people to coexist. Then what we're gonna have it as a consequences conflict like and who knows how severe that can become so we have, we don't have it. We have a choice, it's like unity, ever fragile that might be or the degeneration into something like like caught conflict and that's not preferable to cooperation. All things considered. I disagree. I think it is comparable and I don't think you'll turnips completely out of date for the community means cooperation at the unity means oppression. I lost How do you look? Look I dont disagree with. In some thing all the time unity through.

The ticks always means oppression, because the political system can only be used to silence people and force them to do what the otherwise would not want to do. Otherwise they were doing. Voluntary basis, so any cause of unity. In my view, are you sure, always sleight of hand too, marginalize or for press a certain population do not sometimes as necessary, classic postmodernism that that part both motors. That's the fundamental claim of the power theorist, the french power theorists and there's do some that's not an insult by the way sure! But but look if you take ten kids and you have them play the same game. All the kids get to play the game, but not all of them get to play the game they wanted to at that moment, but at least we'll get to play a game, and so there's cooperation there and there's utility, and now you can say whether the tyranny of the game being imposed in that's true, but both of those things are true. the same time and it doesnt seem reasonable to equate

operation with tyranny, its reasonable to point out that cooperation could degenerate into tyranny. I think you just kind of drop the mask a little bit because You and your example positive. These are children, so by its nature. All these things that you are talking about in a positive sense have therefore some group to be a second class citizen, or at least obedience to some kind of elite. I- and this is something that I think is the benefits of this at the very least, are enormously overblown. I think you could freedom means every It can play the game that they want their might not know. No other people see that's the problem, you know. so I use children as an example, because I was concentrating on games and because it's out of games that the polity emerges over the course of its natural development too. It's not a rational top down in position. All things considered, it's the it's the emergence of a game like structure that incorporates more and more people and see that, if the, if you take two year olds,

to your old play, their own game and end, and each of them plays their own. But by the time they hit three or four. They have to be able to integrate the game there. Playing with, What other children want to play so that they can play com? They can play games with other children which there and it would be motivated to do, and it means that each of have to subordinate their instincts, so to speak for the moment, but hypothetically they gain as a consequence of their mutual subordination to this higher order game I don't see it as a support is so if my choices are play this, by myself or play this game, I like second with a lot of other people I would value this in its the I'm, I'm playing a game in order to have fun. So in that case the first game site, which is mine was favour game. If now wants to play with me, it's not going to be that fund soya is rational, and now,

any sense of subordination to choose. My second prefer game because now, having fun being able to play it well, let's look. I would say that what we are doing here is, as is, is again, and I don't mean that in any new in any what negative sense. you're allowing by participating in this conversation you're, allowing for the possibility and the belief I would say that whatever we're doing collaboratively is of more utility at the moment than whatever you could be doing individually at the moment or otherwise. You would be doing it. Ok, and I would say that we we are. cooperating were competing, and we also might be tyrannising each other to some degree, but there's something in this mutual interaction that were about that were were engaged involuntarily that is cooperative and that isn't being enforced by some external agent it's entirely cooperative. This is my whole point. This is why an anarchist- because this is when people are doing things now-

terribly, they are going to choose the things that are preferable to them. The problem and when you have conflict is when you have a third actor coming into our conversation and being the state and forcing both for us to do something we would not want to do for their sake and that when you play that the game on a national international scale, that is the definition of oppression, instead of you and I having a podcast. Why are we in the factory making socks report? People? That's more you! Hildy says the veto. The third party was not volunteer and that's the danger and I do the legitimacy

Computers party. It is so this development. I picked up a reasonable number of my ideas about the relationship between games and morality and higher order, social structures from the developmental psychologist, Jean Pierre J, and he was interested in the science of ethics. Essentially in his goal, was the reunification of science in religion actually, and although very few people know that about pinochet- and he pointed out quite clearly that a cooperative game without compete tyrannical game over time, because the tyrannical game had to waste resources in enforcement, whereas a cooperative game didn't because people were voluntarily going to go along with it. So that then you say well, it's I think you can make it perfectly credible case that if you could choose between two games and one of them involve force and the other didn't and

have the same end. Let's say that the cooperative game is to be preferred and its also more sophisticated, but I would say as well. We actually dont know how to pull. That off is some of its just just lack of ability. Well, when you integrate so many people, I give a random thirty million people in the United States, its within any hard to organise a cooperative gain with that's the role, the corporate press, the corporate press, outputs forth the agenda of the power class gets everyone persuaded to do that which they had wanted to marry a Cuomo whose book I got pay. I sorry Africa, the governing York, whose book paid to read. He said explicitly in his book that, if this wasn't done through voluntary pliers, I wouldn't be able to pull off half of this and what what? What allowed to happen, is you have? he's centralized enforcement of these rules, and we saw this during the lockdown, were every low status person had an opportunity. certain dominance, every somebody else by going up to them and yelling at them,

they're not wearing a mass, even going up to them, ostensibly, is going to put your life in danger and, just to you made a very cogent about how persuasion is a lot cheaper than force a lot of people, all these orwellian nineteen. Eighty four comparisons and I think that comparison to contemporary terms is much closer to brave new world S through the use of pleasure and the carrot, because it's a lot cheaper to tell people persuade peoples in their best interests, go along you're gonna, give up your free but I'm gonna give you safety and they'll be champing at the bit. Do that each I'll make in the great cynic of the early twentieth century I said that the average man does not want to be free. He simply wants to be safe and for those who are fans of freedom who regard liberal as a high value issue is: how do you engage in a polity with people who don't really fun liberty of use and would rather have every minute their life, whether through their corporate job or what they watch tv or what they wear

pretty much decided for them. I mean the end this speech in the debt. Where's Prada that Miranda priestly makes about how you're wearing that blue sweater? Because the people This room, you know is this really and jacket five years ago that it went to the phrase designers. Then it became in the mall than you stand there and clearance, and you think it has nothing to do with you. But it was because we had made these decisions and a percolated down to you, and I think that top down approach I made at the upper nays talked about this. Walter Lippman talked about this in the books prompt propaganda, public opinion it is something that they figured out a hundred years ago, specifically during the Woodrow Wilson administration. How'd you get over the complete the fascist, take member of the United States, of course, under wartime premises and get every on involved in something that would have been completely aliens american thought just five years higher, that we're gonna send all our kids over to Europe to fight a European. This was a major

evolutionary shift in how America regarded its relationship between the state, the population and between America and the rest. The World Woodrow Wilson was the first president to leave Amerika Ass President F, the largest ones of Panama per thousand american charter- that I'm sorry Teddy, Roosevelt. This was that's. What's a wee bit David at this for a hundred years, so there the long game, and now it's starting to fall apart. Thankfully, ok, so I got three things I want to ask you sure I want to know who they is okay, so then I want to know in the Devil war, RADA? Were you on Miranda, priestly side or on the side of the night The orange anew, who know was hypothetically tyrannised by her, and now I can't remember the third one will we'll stick with those two for the time being so whose they exactly sure so Lord hand right and it's a conspiratorial shorthand. So it's worth pet, it's worth unpacking.

you're. A conspiracy is just an organisation that you don't approve of the constitutional convention was a conspiracy. The founding fathers got together in Philadelphia surreal organized the artist confederation. That was what they had been there assigned ass. If they had sworn do they get in there the doors they go yet restarting override guys that idea and they swore themselves to secrecy. Now we don't. A conspiracy, because we don't like that term. But this was very much spears. Ok conspiracies usually involve deception and secretiveness too, so they did. They swore themselves to see a scenario that Albania and there's a conspiratorial moment there for sure, but there's lots of things that people do behind the scenes so to speak, that aren't necessarily conspiratorial because they do them they're, not hiding them so, but back to the bay in so basically so the model is you get the kids at a very young age? You put them in government schools, they are taught many things that are nefarious such as that. Your self esteem should be a function of this mediocre person from the room than ever

one should have the same work ours that you are forced to be in a relationship with violent. The appears that No, the situation. Are you forced to be locked into relationship with them with it? These are the people who need our disruptive, but this itself to the universities- and this was I designed the American Economics Association, which was started, I think, and late eighteen. Ninety four should Eli, who was Woodrow Wilson Bent or there then use, they always use orwellian language. Can contract myself with the ideas. Retraining the next generation of elites, so basically have an entire population who go to these best. You Mercedes who are taught the same faith, and this was they had something of the time which has degenerated now called the social gospel, the quote: what would Jesus do, which can separate Christian sail the time was positive by a socialist Christian, because the idea was instead of it.

Individual soul being able to be safe, which was kind of the central idea of Christianity in a big innovation in terms of historical individualism, the premise was a nation has a soul and a nation. can be saved now wants a nation, has a soul and can be saved. There is nothing outside your purview, The court's argument: individual saw the bedroom, the boardroom, how you aren't public these all time into your salvation and Eli and other aid in dumb lies in the Eu Kay was the Fabian society whose load was literally a wolf in Sheep's clothing. The premise of was gonna grab she's marshalling institutions we're going train the net, Generation of leaders, they're gonna self identifies leaders because they have the diplomas and degrees and they're gonna go out there. basically be it in fact, and take over the three and it's gonna be this top down idea, and you see that its percolate through these days you have certainly universities. Then you have

The journalists and people working media were trained at these universities in the same ideas and then the final consequence is the politicians now for it, decades, what had happened? Was you had the mercies, oh c of the world, go on tv and say truthfully and honestly give me money. Reelect me I'm fighting which were caught on the wicked Republicans, and Mitchell Mcconnell went on tv and say give me money on fighting Nancy Plus in the Democrats. Meanwhile, while these too are engaging this pantomime, the New York Times Harvard loving grenades over their shoulders and they are not taking any fire at all. What has And now is people are realising people like Biden Mcconnell? These are puppets larger actors and that's where the focus needs to be in terms of effecting change and liberating the west. Ok, ok! So so let me let me act as defender of the patriarchy moment.

Early shoring and so an end to- and I remember I remember, the third question- and this relates back to Fortune- is what an ant anarchism for that matter. Is that there's this there's this critique of the social contract? That's obviously in order and needs to continue in the satirists and so forth, are are our right to do what they do, but then there's the separate issue of what responsibility you, oh you're, Paul, and so on, and maybe none you could know that case, but but I wanted to rest up, but but in any case, let's look at the elite institutions in the United States and what's happened to them over the last forty years for better or for worse. So I know I know how this worked so A hundred years ago, Harvard Yale, the Ivy leagues were essentially aristocratic institutions in U S in them as a consequence of birth. Ok bye, Nineteen sixty that change and it changed to IQ based meritocracy. Ok, the S. Eighty is an acute.

Stop people swear up and down it's not, but that's because they don't know anything about IQ test so to make an iq that's. All you have to do is draw twenty random questions from a set of abstract questions. some up the right answers and run in quarter them across the population. That's basically all and iq test. Is it's that powerful? Nancy, teasing iq test now, increasingly at the elite levels in the universities. I q is the determining entrance Rick, and the average iq of people in the Ivy League. Schools has gone up precipitously since the early nineteenth sixtys, when it wasn't much higher than average, and now it's way higher than average. You know you can debate about whether not that's a good thing, that's a separate issue, but that is what happened and the reason there was a bunch of reasons. For that I mean one was the realisation that I q is actually the best predictor of success in colleges. It's not that good, but it's five times as good as the next best predictor

and it's also relatively fair in that year, Europe S eighty scores: are there a better deal, none of your success in university than which school you graduated from so a very, very bright kid from a very School has a reasonable shot at Ivy League admission compared to say a very bad school student out, a very illegal Scalia. There were socialists who are pushing the use of IQ, as well as people who are more conservative, but in any case, there's no There's. No conspiracy at work there precisely there is there is a decision on the part of the institutions as a whole that it would be better for the elite institutions, to be based on merit, as as assessed by I Q and that for that would be better for the general population, because hypothetically having smarter people make decisions because they can make decisions using more information.

Is better for all concerned so that that so there is a lot more going on at the upper end of the elite institutions. Let's say than the mere conservation of of multigenerational power. There's a positive element that that that I think is overlooked too in in in a way that looks to me like the shirking of responsibility in revolutionary movements like those even that respond spawned off for Chad or that characterize anarchism. It's like what what responsibility Do you have to what it is? That's brought you to the point where, for example, you can have this technology mediated conversation with me criticise away, but like where's, the where's, the where's, the emphasis on where's, the positive contribution and- and perhaps it is rather who'd- it's in the toilet where below

I mean I reject totally the idea that somehow I owe we're on zoom right now. I've got a mic from, I don't even know. What's going to brand, what I owe them is the cost that it paid me to buy their product and what I owe you is to treat you with, which isn't much of a cost at all. With Curtis the dignity and respect any time people start talking about duties, spots abilities and gratitude that stem invoking the honor and we had no. No, I don't I don't. I don't think so. I don't think it's that cut and dried, even in your formulation, because you said well, you pay for it and finds Ali. That being say, that's a perfectly acceptable answer, but you did say that you know that and that that you believe that you have a moral obligation to what we are engaged in right now, right

Furthermore, you're going to treat me with you, you said three words: dignity, respect, something else, courtesy a courtesy. So so you do recognize that there is theirs ethos that should govern our interactions. No, I think you ve earned all those things I'd I can't wait for everyone's find that I have no problem with that, but but I'm not trying to undermine your argument either. I'm I'm curious about this issue of responsibility, because I pushed it a lot. You know what I've tried to figure out what response so look from my perspective, I would say: well you're you're thought centres on the tyrannical element of the great father and like yes, fair enough, like that's a major existential concern, so in terms of problems to focus on its a major problem. It's not the only problem, but it's a major problem. You don't know, could focus on

evil in your own saw you could focus on the catastrophes of the natural world while those is valid, don't large scale, domains of concern as well, but but me it's like. Ok, while there is the tyrannical aspect, but there is the there there's the aspect of culture that, while that you have enough food to eat and that you have heat and that you have here the beneficiary of the structure that you're criticising- and you can say what my criticism is, making the structure stronger, but there's this element in Europe in your book and so on in the fortune, culture and so forth. It seems to have this like it's random destructiveness that that it looks to me it's not driven by its not driven by something that's going to be Clearly, spoken of, and it's not driven by something that's aiming at a good end, I think it's aiming towards a more honest and because very often were told things like this

since a hero that persons a hero, they should be valorize, and even if that conclusion is accurate, you know who are you tell me that I need to valorize that person they one thing if it's sick showing versus telling my good writing right. If you tell me this person has discovered that a culture that accomplishment the net roll rational response. As this is a quality person, then we need more. I would love it if there is a world that more people like this, but if the either so many outlets more than you can count Gretta Thunder example: you have some random, high school dropout, who won't go to back to school until literally everyone earth changes the weather for her answer. I guess you could call it her person the year. I think, to have that undermining of time magazine and I gotta tell you there's lots of things. You could say positive about her. You know it that that's very easy, she's she's made something of herself, but it It's time magazine, that's farmer of the target, then her it's. The agencies that presume to tell me who

I should respect and value, and it's not and my terms its on their self serving terms? You don't need to tell me that black lives matter. I know this I'm from when and you don't need to tell me literally every five seconds and only we just I'd altogether that they matter this month and the next week it's gonna be a guy gauges. Teresa Trans lads, gonna matter, then we go back to block odds, mattering insulation. What fire fighting fair enough? You know, that's it! That's that's! A compelling sequence of statements is like what

it exactly I'm not being smart. I mean that I know now. I that's something I would say when I am big smart. So that's! Ok! Ok! You know about that, but I might have second tell a series of statements that is such a thing. I've got something you know, because you put the argument forward with force and its interesting to me to listen. Ok, so I know there's something to it. So I'm trying to figure out exactly what it is. So then I think to myself what what exists Firstly, is it that you are objecting to like? Is it now? You said: well, it's slave its moral flavour of the month. It's something like that and it's the end. vision of the moral flavour of the month. It's objectionable in that somehow tied to the contempt, the this elitist contempt and I think that's fair, but so, but its way the question to say you say they and the vague contains the enemy in some sense and so minded where exactly what

the enemy and who is the enemy and where is it exactly and Harvard Yard the New York Times offices and Congress and the White House and corporations I'll. Absolutely ok, we're isn't it, It is in the if I hear you and I hate it when why because I right here and now- why is because you're right here and now I'll tell you because neither of us are doing anything presenting our perspective? We are letting p. will agree with us. Are disagree with us from there choice. It's not gonna to me or to you whether someone degrees or disagree, your speaking, your truth, I'm speaking mind user, cliched expression and home at the various. I hope that people are watching this in being entertained and having their thoughts provoked. I am not in any way regarding- and I Shirley. Don't have the power to impose the idea that if you think I'm a jerk and full of crap that some

that makes you a bad person or that you should have some kind of positive social consequences- a result he's different organizations absolutely do, and let me give you one example in this kind of speaks to cancel culture, which is obviously a very hot topic at the moment the head of cross fit which, as you know, this Gay Fitness organization, he came out when we were all carrying that specifically blacklist matter. He said: look we're about dead lifts and Murphy's. Were I dont know we're. We dont regard cases anything whereby fitness than we were very diverse. What is left with us and he got fired a result of this. So again, it's fighting against this. That's the big difference, neither of us are in a position to nor would we. I can speak for you, but I bet you would agree with me ever. dream of telling someone. This is my example, North Korea, right I did my book and North Korea dear reader, it's an issue. That means a lot to me. There's a lot of Americans who just simply don't care. I dont think their bad people, because I think there's

a little they can do about it. There is very little I can do all I try to do with my book was moved the needle and people see the nation and its population differently, but I haven't liberate North Korea so perfectly legitimate if they have different concerns or if they are not interested. But this is, how the cathedral works. Ok, ok, so I've been sitting, I've been spending the last. When I give a lecture, I I I know what I'm doing enough to keep the audience interested, but I also know what I'm doing like I can say what I'm doing. I have the practice but so with theory and they match, and so before I give a lecture, I figure out What problem I am addressing, I have to have that question in my mind, and then I have like ok, I'm going to investigate this problem and I'm going to push my thinking more than I've already pushed it on my feet and I'm gonna use these eight tools or places or stories as investigative tool

and then I'm going to see what comes out of that, and so that and if I sit down- and I really think about it- think it through then the lecture will go well and what I am doing. As far as I can tell us thinking on my feet, people seem to like watching that ok, now I've been thinking alright. What are we doing in the tv, a standard tv interview and what are we doing podcast has now I have this part cast and I'm in joining it, and it's such a thrill for me, because I can reach out to virtually any one in the world and say: look I'd really like to find out what you think and they'll say yes and I can talk to them, and so it's unbelievably it's an unbelievably great thing to do, and then I've been think. well. I can feel when it's going well and when it isn't when it goes flat and when it's going well we're doing what It's kind of engaging in theirs, there's a pugilistic element to it, and but but no ran core there's no outright anger right or it's not.

Erected out the process. We are engaged in this mutual exploration. That's what it looks like to me and I ve been trying to formalised that. So you know when I have a guest, I have a series of problems that I'd like to investigate with them and then I invite them to participate, and so then I think, while to me, that's the logos in operation that and that's why. People like the logos is this, its exploratory verbal activities acting like that, and people really like that, and I talk to a Wall Street journalist Journal journalists the other week about podcast, and he said the reason he likes them is guess he doesn't know where they're going to go yesterday, exactly right, so did so in there their agenda lesson that sense right, caviar and address and sincere that sets because you have to have some element of honesty, its improv. Yes, exactly well- and I also think these new forms really punish people who don't engage in that

so like now and then I'll talk to a podcast hose two's, a legacy journalist and they'll slip into well. Here's a question: it's like yeah yeah! Is that your question or is that act quest, You know when it's sort of like a lecturer who reads the Powerpoint slides instead of talking spontaneously about the topic, completely agree, and I think this also speaks to widen this kind of mechanism for conversation is so popular. People very rarely, and even you and I mean have the offer, We need to see to intelligent in front people whom I disagree about things how the long conversation with virtually no possibility that being hostile with its nodded at parties, you could hear each other. You can listen to it at your leisure and you're. Going to learning, something or you're at the very least, gonna have it's just that then he conversational dynamics you and I were arguing over cake versus pie in which is better and obviously the answers cake is pies are messy, but the same time its fun because there

watching mines at work. It's just like when you what a gymnast, for example its x or the great dancer exciting to see an aspect of the human mind, the human anatomy at its finest or maybe we're getting a b. I dont know the point is to watch action, But when see Corp, when you see corporate anything, it's always unnatural. The theirs. Is there anything more ironic than the exception should reality tv by its own nature. They admit this is not real deal. It's a lot of his improv. It's all stage assault edited, whereas what word we're not editing and we're gonna stay Ahmed on, you know all work it out rediscover yea we're gonna cut up the MIKE's and without GOSH. I wish I could have said that and you're gonna say. something else, but that I think, is what earnestness in a They have, since people are missing out and that's the opposite of corporate Amerika corporate Amerika is synthetic phony

Ernest this I have I had this quote. I say: if you look at the Times Square during gay pride, only corporate Amerika can make sodomy and perversion seem downright boring. I mean, if you looked at the corporate presentation of a people, were gay. You think what that means is hugging each other after brunch, Anne and shaking hands. It's it's, this complete divorce from any kind of reality of any kind of culture. I would say that the the the attribution of this the identification of this with corporate Amerika with the universities with with the legacy media. All of that it's it's not. It's like the Marxists, criticising capitalism for inequality of distribution, its

Inequality of distribution is way deeper problem than any critique of capitalism will ever formulate properly or resolve, and I would say that we were we're getting out. Something here transcends the anarchist critique of structure, but not at least as like or or you could say, or you could say, forces a deeper look. The old, the ancient Gibsons had to gods O serious and Horace, and also what is needed to that its hunted. They ass, they did. They have two main gods that made up their conception of sovereignty sore, yes, that the Faro much more. Himself again over modeled himself on the interaction of the two gods, there was a serious who was the state, for all intents and purposes, sure per se. and his sin was willful blindness and and and and and start suffocation and owes Horace was the attentive

I and another formulations the ability to speak, and so there is a dynamic, there, that was recognised a very long time ago that that that that that centres on this issue that you brought up about sincerity. In truth, you know you're complaining, and rightly so, when you hear stale repackaged ideas that are being presented for reasons other than the actual reason something like that, isn't it it's like. I can't trust what you're saying, because you're actually using that language to manipulate me to do something that you're not stating correct, and that would be mountain. And the naming it's like. Isn't this fine? It's like! Well, maybe it's fun but really want to sell. You know mountain do and if you came out and said that we wouldn't make fun of you, but if you're going to pretend we're going to go after you and when it gets very pernicious, it's your claiming you're fighting racism, but what you really wanting is to promote war.

and killing of many many people. So that is when the critique is more than mountain. Dew is what it is. It's selling its newest fun. I enjoy mountain dew. I don't drink that much cuz, I'm in my late 80s, but basically kids like it the different colors different flavors. It's certainly serves a purpose. You know you want to get buzzed out of your mind on the caffeine, more power to you, this the other than some cavities there's. Nothing here, nefarious. There is something very nefarious. When Amy Roar Bark is caught in a hot MIKE. saying that they had everything on proper, Prince, Philip or Prince Albert, I would get getting confused, whose friends, Jeffrey Epstein, that they had everything on the Clinton's and should they got a call from Bobby Buckingham Palace and because there is a mega Markel interview, you know on the table that they killed entire story. This is her talk in a hot MIKE. Meanwhile, if they Camera turned off and you say Is it true that you have This international pedophile ring and one of the people and Buckingham Palace was involved and that you know date there. Their law

there's call than you killed a story. She would say. Are you crazy? That's a conspiracy theory Harvey Weinstein's another example of this. There was a conspiracy, but do we all knew bill? Cosby was another. One got out by Hannibal births who is a comedian who just said: look it up that all this stuff was bubbling under all these women they work or completely silent. So I think that's the big difference in mountain do and the corporate press we're not talking about people who are promoting cavities, we're talking to people. were promoting warrant depravity: ok suffering unsightly. So if I said well, maybe when I was when I was reading your book and thinking about it a lot and thinking about fortune and all of the things we ve talked about, I thought well, have you been unfair since you usually have you actually looked at it now, I'm I'm complete I'm ignorant about how fortunate works. So it's just a message board right right. Why, I guess I knew that much, but I would also say I'm not familiar enough with message boards to read to really you know to have us. built in a sense of what that guides? That's not

area of social communication that I've engaged in an I'm, not saying that, with pride to form of ignorance. You know I mean I've learned not to despise social media platforms, you're a fool, if you allow your willingness to despise them cause, you don't know anything about them. To stop you from learning how to use right or from taking them seriously. There sir yes, those things. So, oh yes, there revolutionary those technical, ok. So I read and I think what wait a second year you seem to beef, not segregating the critique of corruption from the critique of structure and This is also what I think is happening with the postmodernism. They look at hierarchies and they think well they're, all based on power and here's the evidence of corruption. It's like he had no kidding, but that doesn't mean they're only based on our and it's the same with corporations like. I know lots of people who work in corporate environments and some of them are really admirable and the thing

they do in the corporate environments are also admirable, and I would also say that my experience has taught me that win corporation start to act. The way you centralized them. There's there doom is sealed far more rapidly than people generally realize they, like they collapse, soak. So so you're not object, so its useful to disaggregate the critique of structure from the critique of deceit, I said that I think the deceased baked in I dont like using the word corruption, because that implies these people can be saved and these organizations can be saved. I do not believe that they are and even if they are not interested in saving the Dobryna side, where the busy I dont see them. As this is the problem you see, I look part of the reason I think. I do want to target Walter Durante, I mean it's when you talk of water drain, These are this: these are the same exact actors that have had so much lot in their hanford pants. For decades and have never had any

count a bill. Let me give you one example: we decided that that's me not via that dont wise at you. You know for there. Let me give you one example you can ask if you save the sounds like you were all tat, school about William Randolph hers, the spanish american war. Remember them yellow journalism right and how media would gin up these problems, which had literally thousands of deaths that caught needless deaths, the concept Then there is a record scratch. The sudden. All these outlets have no agenda and our objective decent actors. My point is: there was never record scratch. This has always been a problem for a very long time and especially this is something I do think we very much up your alley. The amount that these organizations and end the equivalence of contempt reactors have their role. in putting over and maintaining the Soviet Union and specifically Stalinism, which

have never apologized, for which they had never know. Count it Billy four and now, presuming to sit here and lecture the layman about being a decent person and being responsible that to me as a complete abomination. I agree with all of that, except the attribution blame so. Let me out, I want you to go sideways just for a second, but it's in certain of this particular discussion. You said a little while ago that you were. You know that one of the rules of engagement for us as far as your concern right now is that you are going to treat me with dignity, respect and through something out of courtesy, courtesy, ok, ok and then I said well, you know those are the corroboree rules and you said to me: no, you earned it, and so I want to ask you like and then we'll go back to this other discussion.

That's ok. What makes you think I've earned it because I know a lot of people whose lives you have personally made better because you're, my friends dad so that automatically, there's no situation. Where can we mean to my friend or disrespectful to my friends? Dad, certainly not public, I think you in many ways self made the fact that Europe success, Lothar and your encouraging a lot of people to you know, get their crap together and and you're not telling them. One of the things I tell and and this something you and I have in common is you're, not you not. The goal is to be approved person, but you could certainly be a better person tomorrow, then you are yesterday and if you have that in your mind, you could say that objectively, with a straight face, that goes a long way towards fighting feelings of anxiety or depression or hopelessness, because when that voice in your brain, which we all have is telling you you you're, never to find a job, you never going to find other girlfriend. Look at you say I'm playing video games. You wait a minute. I went to the

Jim Today- and I've got the numbers here that shows I lifted more than last week- I'm objectively improved in one country. City, that is enormous, belittle diet. I should like to your absolutely right about that. I was stopped by three separate people this week, who said they said they thanked me in so whenever that our legs, it no elects a show off your when what we're not how I have. I always ask people what their name is to begin with, because there are usually they wanna be seen while they don't I'll say, should interact with me. They don't rights are being rude. They don't want to look stupid. You know there's it's complicated, but if I asked their name and then engage then calm down right away and then we'll talk to me, but what I want to find out always if someone says well, you were helpful. I want to find out ok. What exactly was right wonder what do I do to fix that? Helped you, because then I can do it better hypothetically. So,

People told me the same thing this week, which is exactly the point that you just made, which is quite cool, was that they restructure their internal reward system. They stole out impairing themselves with other people, while you know stopped YO. You started to stop and they started to learn how to reward themselves for making incremental improvements. So that was really cool and- and I do think that you picked up- picked up something there- the tabs, be crucial, so, but but then I can also say that you will look, I'm also the face of the prophet sorry it because he I know right right, so so, but but what that was. So what does that signify to you. Does it signify that I'm outlier that now it just means you'll be the last one up against the wall now it in all seriousness. One of the points I have made recently is that as awful as corporate the star and his humorless and self righteous and pompous. They are still better by

All these networks, then university professors item, not speaking that you personally, but you can see if you look at the thing that Twitter did so amazingly, is that back in that and then think, if someone specifically who originate a second back in the day you Think I'm a Harvard law, professor, that, if I don't even over this person, is that's gonna. Tell me certain information. This is when the high quality minds in America. This person knows industry inside and out. If he tells me something I can take it to the bank and that's actually true because harbour the Harvard LAW Faculty, is making Ballade America far more than Congress, as is their interpretation at those people, their train. Then you look at Laurens tribe and Twitter and you look back he's tweeting exact. verbatim, the same kind of miserable anti trump things that your spinster aunt is treating, and you realize wait a minute. This emperor has no clothes, his purse might be very bright, which it has no questions. Brilliant, there's no question. He knows the law,

inside and out, but in terms that this person should be an object of veterans, this is like one of the great minds of all time- it's ridiculous absurdity. When you see them given opportunity to express themselves in public. Ok, so I would say the emperor has some clothes, you know big I've met. I worked at Harvard for quite a long time and many of the people I met there were were genuinely estimable and I've worked out. Ok, ok, well, should they it's the differentiation here, that's a of such critical importance. You know and tankers the blank slate is a book. Everyone should read out the I'd say that without any asterisks, it's an amazing accomplishment. And you don't go beyond that and say well look at the structure that gave rise to that and I guess, if I did, I think, there's not a fund.

Look: it's not a function of Harvard that book is a function of him and his ideas in his work and theirs No! No! I guess I don't know it's. No! It's also a function of Harvard make one or two things that I really noticed about Harvard this site department in particular, when I was there was that it was like this is odd, but one of the things I ve noticed among many academics is, camp for books interesting ways out right. Yes, its farm, far more common than you would ever think, but that wasn't true at Harvard what If you are a professor there in psychology and you wrote books that was valued genuinely valued the peace. Well that I associated with their and that that was the bulk of the department like they were by and large. As genuine and article as I had come across, and so

the end. The institution actually did now. Look I'm not happy with. What's happened to the universities at all, I'm not, I think it's its appalling, its appalling, but when I was there in the nineties, The institution was set up so that people like pinker could exist and rewarded and even More importantly, the institution was set up at that point to actually benefit the undergraduate, so the hierarchy of concern was the undergraduates. Now you could be cynical and say well, Harvard treated its eighteen year. Olds like potent surely generous baby forty year old millionaires, and I think it's just that just it wasn't just wasn't and and after that was the senior professors that full tenured, so so it what it was institution that had its ducks in order. As far as I was concerned- and it was really quite a privilege to work there as a consequence and a tremendous amount of academic and intellectual freedom within

now structure and that was built into the whole structure. So it was was a genuinely respectable and remarkable institution, and it did a great job of of finding students who were of incredibly high calibre. You know like in the typical undergraduate Harvard class. A third of the class would be made of individuals who are as smart as anybody you there, we'll meet. You know I've. So this whole conservative idea that people who they don't like are also dumb is really one of the stupidest concepts in contemporary discourse itself easy to train a smart dog than is to train a dumb one and many the people who are putting over some of these, stream, a level in the various ideas there very, very bright. There's no question about it, but Michael and my respect for the union as a bright. They were they rolled away. They were also ethically admirable in energy, Sense, and you see that with pinker say, and you see that with Jonathan Height, whose assent

first a martyred centrist, but you know, he's a tough character. He stands up what he believes and he makes coherent in cogent arguments and he's no pushover and I praise hide very heavily. We have you, I know. Well, that's partly why I'm I'm not taking this apart, because we are the answer that there's this element of that of the of the anarchy philosophy that that that is, I suppose, evident in fortune is well and but in your writing that it seems to me to have the danger of producing a premature cynicism and- and I would call cynicism- ok, widening citizen. I am a big fan of commercial and come who overcome with affair novelist a philosopher, he regarded cynicism as the enemy. I completely agree. I think it's important to just because an enemy exists just because level and actors exist, even if you don't want to save the harbor graduating class, which I'm not saying in no way means that human beings are inherently evil or inherently corrupt. It just means

there's a population than you have to you know just like an infection work you wear out, whereas so I think cynicism is a very very, very just its aid The cost of cynicism on an individual level cannot be overstated. Cairo, real it's on its worst. Yes, it an end and one of the things I fought for it. this book and I fight for its in what I depart gases the media there are so many people who think it's hopeless they give up and then they're just kind of it become they're my sat, whereas the point is, if there is any chance that you're gonna come out ahead. You better go stand on your feet. go out swinging and even if you lose you're gonna go down at least knowing I did everything My power and you're gonna have happiness, pride and self esteem as a consequence. So I reject

all forms of cynicism and and if that is what I am implying, that I'm doing something wrong. While I'm look, I'm not saying that my reading of what you wrote or or what you're doing is canonical vineyard you're, not the only anarchist in the world after all, and so I'm not going to dump all of this on you but you know that the reason that I have been concentrating on people's individual development. I think well, apart from the fact that I'm a psychologist and- and I think, there's also less dangerous,

that in some sense, because the revolution just occurs within you know and as an example who don't want, your goddamn revolution are aren't forced into it. I am I I guess by concentrating see you said that you, u implied that I'm not the corporation and that you're not the corporation, but you see, I actually don't believe. That's true. I believe that I am in fact the corporation, and that I mean I mean the evil corporation and I'm so tangled up in that world, like we all are that we bear responsibility for that fact, and so, and so I think, what what do you do about that, and it seems to me that you try to get your act together on a personal level it just to do. I dared to fight the enemy within, which is the right place to start and then work outward from that, but your critique is based

We are social critique as far as I can tell that you're, starting with the institutions themselves, even though its not the institutions, exactly it's the corruption of the institution's corruption it makes it seem like this is something that can be salvaged, whereas in my view these institutions are inherently malevolent. I know that's your view, there. No more inherent malevolent than in individuals are. There are plenty of endeavour your sword, apparently malevolent the adults Nick what they go into politics. Well, not everyone who goes into politics is inherently malevolent. You know I've met with many many politicians and I'll give you an example because just means there passing no. No, it doesn't just mean that I had a dinner in Washington with a group of Democrats and Republicans. It was part of an attempt to you know they never talk to each other. They

we have time I would not have wanted to job of American Cotonou. They dont other timeless, shows thats. That then I know they're not they're, not they're, not running ambulance they're, not an e r doktor. It's just not a priority for them. They have time, give me a break out. They just have to just takes that done, call back your lobbyists and combat com they helped. Are you kidding me you're telling what people? If there's one thing, people washed and have its time things go to glacial pace? Look like you, you you're, making a attribution of of corruption. complex structures, and so all, except that. But then I dont you they were corruption, but go ahead while pick a word that pick a word. That's more soon but because only by be happy to use it if its more suitable malevolent gravity malevolent malevolence. It fine fine. Power and malevolence? Ok? Well, when Europe congressmen and you're tossed into the Congress, yet there

structure produces such an intense surround for you that its extremely knit difficult not to just go. along with it, especially when you're new and you don't know what the hell you're doing sooner and upset a tremendous amount of your time, for example, a disproportionate amount of your time even though you hate it in an office that isn't yours in some warehouse phoning people for money and that's like half your time and think what you don't have to do, that it's like well you're, going to have to because all the others who have to write. Ok. So in any case, they don't end up talking across the aisle fruit for four and their time is very tightly scheduled and we brought them together to have them talk, and I wouldn't do a bunch of that, but my health collapsed and couldn't do any more of it, but in any case

each of them went around the room and said why they went into politics. They were. These were mostly younger Congress people and if you would have been there, there's two things that would have impressed you and surprised you. I think one would be how common stories for motivation were across the participants, regardless of their party affiliation, and the second would be how leave ugly and genuinely sincere. They were in that narrative. You wouldn't have walked away with a pretty, with the assumption that those people were anymore corrupt than people you admire and respect. That's what makes them good at being heard because they can pass while? But I would say the same about all of us. I am not voting to have People sent overseas to slaughter innocent human beings. Well diary without, I dont believe it and well I agree or if you dont vote, I agree with you completely that we should be sceptic.

A lot of people in their motivations I do now agree that if someone is nice to their family, I have no doubt that all politicians adore their family that they have joined concerns that the doctor they said they want to make the world a better place. If you are comfortable using force to send armed men to harm innocent people. I don't care if you're nice or have good, but evasions you're a bad human being. So I just I just finished apart guest with Georgia, willing, ok, it released today, and he did all that like really, and it isn't obvious to me that he's a bad person. In fact, jocose a jacket was in politics. How you'd know that he was a soldier commander. While I mean here decisions that you know who he was appalling fishing in some sense, because he had to make strategic decisions about how pop policies we're going to play out on the actual battlefield so because he was a commander.

a political element to his job, because eater stay inside the democracy and he is making decisions, and so you know- and I find it- and it is perplexing to some degree, it's very difficult to walk away from a conversation with Jacko and not think anything other than that's really admirable person, and it does tangled up in this problem that you just described, which is well well what about force and what about the army in and what about the police for that matter? But it isn't them. You know it's us again. It's the same and not up not a cup. It is then I'm not a cop. I would never put my hands on a peaceful person and try to force them to come with me in my car. I would

ever club an old man and the head simply because he's in a park. I would never force people to be defenceless in their own home by enforcing unlawful gun right laws, but no young would you stand up for someone who is being beaten public? It depends The contact life isn't enough. Look Arthur circles, dances under which you could imagine doing that I'm just gonna, say yeah like elicited it's one. Guy versus fifty cops me jumping. It is not gonna help him right, but if the other apsley circumstances I would die. Would do that now? when a question, I was gonna two circumstances that you would use force. I don't I don't know well, I don't goes on the small guy. You know I mean I'm not trying to be glad, but in all seriousness, like you knobs short, small, so if it could be, if there's here's something has happened. This is not particular courageous on my part, if you have to go see we're getting into the get each other's face and the other A posturing thing whether about the fight I have been in between a bullet my step away so

case yes, but in terms of having to use a gun or club someone to death. Thankfully never been in a position where it had to make that decision- and I do not begrudge p we'll have to make that decision either. It's not an easy choice. There's no there's no good answers, not situation, but if you take tax money and as result of your job, you are going to be harming innocent people traumatic ways? I do not agree, you should sleep easy at night, so you know people have criticised me, I suppose, for concentrating on individual development. Moral development say well, there's all these global social problem. that are best addressed at a sociological level and you know who the hell cares if you clean up your room when there's systemic racism and- and I think well, if you're going to dress systemic racism, then you better have it.

We're head. Will you do it and if you can't get the simplest parts of Europe let's say in order. Well, maybe that's what you should be concentrating on sound like. I dont think that people should go off and solve even more complex problems, mean. There is an element. There seems to be an element of external representation in the criticism of power structures that I find psychologically counter productive. You know because, like would look when I studied horrors of the twentieth century, the Holocaust in this Stalinists horrors, and I always imagined myself as the perpetrator instead of the victim. You know because the question for me was how what was that we could do this, that could do this to each other that we are doing it to each other, and I mean we and I do also think the reason I've got away with my finger shaking moralising, let's say to the degree that

have got away with it is because I do include myself in the target of moral reprobates who could use some improvement, and I see the like the emphasis. I dont see that there is much of a distinction between the emphasis that you place on a broad scale. Sure critique, assuming corrupt power is the what fundamental, organizing principle that large organizations adopt to organise and the same thing that leads to identity politics on the left. I don't take every organizations inherently building corruption, Tropicana Smelting, corruption, ok, so ok, so how all right? So how do you make the distinction? Tropicana doesn't use force and doesn't tried. Tropicana says: look. My orange juice is the best freshly squeezed. They get it to your store at a cheap brought at a cheap price, a mysterious she button button a long time

you, are choosing you're free to choose it or not, as you want, your Tropicana doesn't try to make you out to be a bad person if you prefer, apple juice or soda water right these The organizations are playing mind games with people. Ok, so it's for deceit. It's at least in terms of use up to see your objection to a deadlock. Speak someday, you said earlier is different for you and your I was born in love in western Ukraine. I was before we came here with us we have, but I was raised in the house. Although we spoke russian, I'm jewish that way One of the reasons I fought so hard when I wrote my north korean book and I've been talking about. North Korea is an issue because my Emily was the victim you'd have being jewish under Stalin, the OECD during that period. These are really big bullets that we dodged and wondering I went there to write about it. Why talk about us constantly is because there are further. Oh god, I could be a north korean concentration camp right now, so There is enough. There is a duty, but certainly

I am in a position to you now advocate for people who are not in a position to really speak for themselves and the The people who know one disagrees has it the worst one disagrees that whether you're conservative, Trudeau Trump abide whatever that we more liberalism, North Korea, we need more human rights. We need these people treated with a certain modicum of decency, it's just unconscionable, like I'm gonna do something about it in my very very little away. So I think it's different, given your and my background how you are approaching these horrors of the past, because that was my grandma and my grandparents while I nor ice it. Is there a difference? I don't I get it It is clear to me exactly what the difference is Mean Europe. What Europe, I would have been a uses, its deceit and power and strand and finally still I was. I would not have been in a position to have been that Nazi, quite literally, I wouldn't

when the position to be that JP, you agent. and one of the reasons I am an anarchist is, I do not feel comfortable tell forcing another person to live as I see fit. I just think you know who I am. I yes well, I think look I think. That's An admirable moral principle isn't obvious to me that the logical conclusion of that disaster is anarchism. I suppose that would be my objection. I mean and I also I do believe that degenerate power. structures exist and they deceit and that's Rep. sensible and should be fought in in every possible way means my senses being that there isn't anything more powerful to fight that than then spoken truth. I agree and humor well, because you they're using yeah, it's very rare, got going up.

Work about emu mayors losing manipulative tactics in order to further goal, as opposed to rational discourse. As you and I having were put our cards on the table, if you're using things like deceptive editing and either characterising things out of context, I am you're not owed a rational, fair response, you're not acting as a decent, fair actor. So humor very useful in this mechanism because it explore Oh it's not only the particular thing, you're saying your role as someone who is worthy of courtesy, respect and decorum. When I interviewed when I was interviewed by Cathy Newman, there was a point where I asked her. I guess why she felt she had the moral right to offend me during she was questioning me in its stopped her. The question stopped her, and that was when the person emerged from the corporate shell, let's say or the

bitches the corporate shell flash ambitious persona, because that's what I was talking to, what wasn't right up her and she emerged and she was set back, you Know- and I have to a second or two to think then about how I would respond to the fact that her mask momentarily- and I said gotcha and it was a calculated risk supposed to be funny, and I do believe that people responded to it as if it was funny- and I thought well is this time- is this- place where I can drop a joke. Is this a place where I can say something, and I wasn't thinking about it- Logically, precisely I was thinking about it more in terms of its hopefully in terms of its ethical appropriateness, no one. I do believe that humor is it. Is it men's. Ah, what would you say an immensely important element of the search for truth? First, big just. As players and and and humor is, is there something about it? That's inactive!

Of self transcendence do if you can laugh at yourself right because you're simpleton, You see the thing that needs to be laughed at, which is already behind you. If you're laughing at you know, you're you're, moving ahead to the better use in the mere fact of allowing yourself to satirizes yourself. and so what you are saying is you're gonna be a stand, a comedian. Why think I've met affinity withstand comedians in some sense than with any other sort of person? Let us, oh yeah, because you are getting on a stage you're putting on performance there's going to be moments of unexpected twist in terms in the two. What you're saying and is a function of that it's gonna cause. Hopefully things to put together rain so yeah that is allocated by similar funny and guess what I'm not very healthy, it's hard to be funny, but it's a lot. It's it's a loss, the the best lectures than I ever gave, have humour in them and mean hooray for that, and you know that's partly. Why toured with eve. Reuben too, we have to add some levity to what I mean. I look

in the early on that, even if you are discussing things incredible seriousness, genocidal seriousness that that, if your? If, if. Let me give you an example to us all premises, my book dear reader, the North Korea book it's farcical because its Kim Jong IL's autobiography, I went there and all their literature, and I took the things that these people are taught in there since its in his voice, their present their face value, and let me give you one example of this Kim Jong: IL is happy and how the end task shoes comes in between the lines of you know all about it. Does a Kim Jong IL's, at this meeting, the dear leader of north korean someone's, giving a talk and he's working papers and every so often his assistant is asking him for your input, and the speakers stops and Kim Jong. Il was a wise stopping us. Well, you know your leader, your work at those papers. You got your sick because none of you know I could do all these strict three things at once, and they said from that point on people regard

Kim Jong IL as looking at time it's not a plain but a cube and that he had ability to shrink time, and my friends said to me we'd, multitasking and they did, and according to North Korea, propaganda Kim Jong IL is the the person North Korea, who knows how to the task and when you have these anecdotes, put forth in this matter, you realize how remove for reality. It's not that he some magical figure it just like something. That's just apsley banal is being presented as some kind of major historical accomplishment, so humour to you know is and another example. There was an amusement park in one the things how North Korea claims that the different from other algerian states is they have some legal field, the guidance whenever the newspaper only where have they have field field guidance feels zones so whatever you read their newspapers is whoever the current leader is used at the bottle factory he's at the munitions plant he's at the farm.

he's giving them guidance on how to make these things better and as a consequence, There's the application is everyone North Korea's incompetent other the leader, so you better have him in place, but there was one story that I include in the book where there's an amusement park. And it starts lightly raining and Kim Jong IL insists on writing all the rights twice to make are there safe for the children, the elderly and everyone on the platform. Dignitaries are crying at his courage and it's like the guy's. Take a roller coaster. I'd like your brig here s, the kind of like the planning, the flag. Jima but he's on this this rollercoaster, so this kind of contrast between something that is you know finding for kids and silly, but being presented as this great courageous moment in disguise. A hero that absurd distance is what drives a lie. The narrative did you see the strange death of stolen that book is, as close to dear reader, the last he's a stolen in the movie, you either,

Where did I get the title rank? You said strange death, I think its last days. I thought his last days of Stalin, its by Anthony Energy, who may be as well no one I was it stood. Death of stolen we're both adults down the Agora, both road. that's the roses are whole conversation. I was so glad that book came out after dear reader because its eggs Exactly the same tone. I used to the point where I would be accuses steal that movie- and this is just one moment just how they use humour to present Stalin's air of terror. Stalin has a stroke, he's dying he's in his own urine and his upper room in the two guards are out there and they hear this noise inside the bedroom and one that goes Should we go in there and look another guy goes? Should we shut the fuck up so it? But that's the thing is a big. Quiet head down. Stalin. At this point, obvious. We genuinely want your assistance and we want your help, because you have, but it's a little late for that, but it baby

was it didn't know the right to a breakers? These materials are realities. Yeah, these rules are in place. The focus is always on fear and not speaking at a turn, even if ostensibly could say the greatest man, the world. You know so, ok. So when I read your book and when I looked at them that these young guys were generating years ago. You know a ban at me too, and and then consider the all of satire, and all of that now, I'm just remembering what I told my kids when I was raising them, because we we, I encouraged my kids to be funny. very highly valued in our household to be witty and witty and funny is really hard, because you have to push right to the edge yet and not go over and the closer you

to the edge and not without going over the funny or you are the more daring you are because in part, you, you show your sophisticated mastery you're. So such a sophisticated master of the social dynamic that you can go right to the edge of breaking a rule and not your ache. It or maybe you can break it just enough, show that it should be broken in exactly that manner, right and then that's really witty. That's really funny, and so there is no doubt that that ability to be funny to be satirical to be witty is a potent manifestation of the truth. But then you know with my kids. I was also in watching them constantly. You know you can get sibling rivalries that that go completely out of. draw in a household and so I'd watch them teasing each other and playing with each other, and would intervene and say: look you know that funny anymore. That's not a game. that's where it starts to deteriorate: interior dear deteriorates into a power game, so

stay on the right side of funny, you're you're, pretending that you're being funny but really you're being mean ok. We also see that racist humor a lot at times a joker be have a racial Ellen, and its humorous, but lots I'm somebody being a racist, they just putting a feelers were saying: ok, you ve accepted this joke. Can I dropped the Basque or you can just engage in pure? so yeah you weren't, going on at the moment, is right because you're using a something that really is a tool for the good, let's say humor and your perverted at so that your masking something awful so that now in some sense to this corporate malfeasance that you are discussing and so I guess in that sense I get when looking at the the. irreverence of these young guys spent essentially on Fourchan. I think just bloody make sure you stay on the right side of funny, there's always out loud and maybe there has to be but met, but but it still the right moral parity of its like go ahead with your humor man, but like watch your tongue like, why did he hung

It's also the idea of clapped her. Were you all these comedians going after Tromp or whoever and the audience is that of laughing, which is a visceral reaction? Would applaud and it's like they're, not they don't think you're funny. There green with you, it's kind of like people whose favorite right up, music is like religious music? It's like you, dont nests out, which a lot of issues right, good alot of Christian Rock, is very good. Don't get me wrong the right out! People, but do you like the song as you like the BT like how it makes you feel, or do you like this? long as you happen to agree with the person, these are entirely different financial there has to be an element of surprise in human rights, Guess so that, and that that also accounts for that

spontaneous laughter, which is an indication that the arrowhead its mark right, that that the target has been specified properly and precisely- and it really is a form of art to do that and so well, then, I think I always had mixed feelings about that this. This satirists it unfortunate for exactly that reason. It's like! Well, are you really? our king, what you're saying carefully enough like career for your humor heroic courage? All of that, but this is like the Steven Pinker, is in any population. You can have a small percentage who rise above for quality and that today, It is at its best and the vast majority of people bring nothing to the table and there's plenty, people who actually use that mechanisms make things much worse right. Well, that's interesting as well, because it also like. I always think why, wouldn't it be great if there were only good restaurants and then I think well, wait a second. How many bad restaurants did there have to be in order for there to be one right, restaurant and answer isn't zero.

Yeah yeah. Definitely some because people have to practice and they have to make mistakes and they have to learn. Right and so will you look at fourteen June, you can think what how much wretched humorless racist noise do. You have to tolerate in order to generate something of true value, and the answer to that is, I think to one: is we don't know that the first answer and so be air of clamping down on it too precipitously. But this India's. Maybe that's also something that each of the people who were involved in that kind of activity should should be Turning to you know, within the confines of their own soul, so to speak, I mean they're anonymous and its evanescent, but that doesn't mean that you bear no more or less on stability, for what you say, yes and I think the curtain cruelty for the sake of cruel

The is really a sign of weakness. It's the kid pulling the wings of a bug or, like you know, putting tin cans and cats tail it's a way for people to just feel some modicum of power over another human being. But that's a very parasitic way of looking at things using this other person is a means to an end, and this person might not be a great person, but really what are you accomplishing Eu Jude use both miserable now that that is a dare needs to be my view, a joyousness to what you're trying to do, and I certainly hope that permeates my work and Maya output. That's a good place to stop! Thank you, sir. Thank you very much. I hope you enjoy this it so far, so good up such an honor. Thank you. Can I ask you what at about right now? It is time for one question. I have time a question your absence. I've been kind of taking a lot of young men under my wing and kind of measuring them. I saved one kids life when you

reached out to me. He was suicidal and now he's just kind has bad days which, as that's that's all you need that someone matter yet again. Bad days, if you're not a threat to your life, whatever. What did what Did you have to me or to your past self, when the stock happening for you I'm very scared of saying the wrong thing in making things worse,. you there's no way you can pay too much attention. Ok, like ignorant attention one person and you do that when you're in an in conversation in oh yeah, pay attention. more attention and you can offer advice in some sense, you have to listen. Ok, I Let us pay attention like if you pay attention, you're you're, good habits will take over and and you'll walked down. The right course ok Humility attention, that's good humility and attention as ETA. Are you ve seen it's amazing? How many young people just once

want to listen to them and they it's just to have said that they respect and once that happens, they feel so validate out what they really want. You say something that they're doing that's good to some one year and have it be recognized as good yeah yeah, yeah yeah, that's superbly stake is somewhat you're such an otter, Jordan, ok, take airbags, my