Talking with Aleks Svetski - The UnCommunist Manifesto

to change the way you think. I try to bring to you the latest breaking news each and every week so you stay on top of this revolution as is happening, play by play, and of course bring to you some of my friends so you can hear some other opinions. But just besides just to me, and that's what we got for you. Right now, I'm in the studio with my good friend Alex Spetzky is also the co author of my new book that we just released this week on Amazon. The title of the book is called The

Uncommunist Manifesto. Welcome Alex, thanks for joining me today, Mark, thanks for having me back. But I think I'm one of these recurring guests. You know, it's like recurring nightmare that doesn't leave you. Alanna ha ha. Well, I guess it depends on which way you view you view you, uh. For many it's a pleasure and for many maybe at is that nightmare. But so you know, something we've been talking about for a while now and I'm just so excited is we got this new book that we wrote

and it is out. Um it's on Amazon again. It's The Uncommunist Manifesto. It was released on Monday. We've already reached best seller status. So pretty excited about that. Um, exciting, right, my my first book? Is this your first book? I think it is right? This is yeah, we've we've both broken our virginities this yeah, it was the first time for each of us. And uh yeah, man, I think we hit we hit the best seller in to our

political reads. We hit best seller in economics economic theory for for about a day there, and there was one other category. So we hit the best seller in a couple of categories pretty quickly, which was good to see. And you know, it's uh, it's it's doing well. There's you know, the sales every single day. So we we're just sort of seeing that book spread. And this is over and above of what we obviously did on the Kicks Out of Program about I think three or four

months ago. So yeah, I'm I really want to see this message spread far and wide. It's not about the sales. It's more about the the message getting out there because I think we've kept it the zodcast at the time in this book. Yeah. So, um that that first category, the two hour read, it's an interesting category. I really like it. Though. I know something that you and I have talked about a lot most books today. You know, I guess it's it's a symptom of short, short attention

spans or whatever. But um, these big books, which which are great, Um, a lot of times they're overwhelming. They're hard to read, and and and and there's a need for them, there's they're great, but but a lot of the great books of history are actually just very short. As those books about ten thousand words, most people could

read about an hour, hour and a half. So I think that's an important Uh, it's important for us because if we want enough people to read it, we need to make it easy to read, right m m. Yeah, there's something to be said about delivering a couple good ideas really concisely. So if you look at the classics, like you know mcavelly, right, Nicola mcavelly, The Prince really short book The Art of war, really short book. Balthasargreation's book on Becoming the Best versions of from Winning Out Life.

It was a short book. I mean, the Communist Manifesto was a short book, despite how ridiculous it was. The Law by Frederick Bastia, short book, easy, one hour read. So there is something to be said about a good idea or a good couple of ideas that can be concisely presented in something that is digestible in an hour or two. And and I think we I think we've

done a good job here. You know, there's I think four good solid ideas in the book that people can read, they can take away, and I hope it helps them kind of place a new lens in the way they view the world. Let's let's talk through those four big ideas. Let's start with the first one. What would you say one of the big first big ideas is with the book. Well,

the first one is how we opened the book. So Mark's opens his book suggesting that the struggle of all of human history has been the struggle between the oppressor and the oppressed, and he just arbitrarily states that the new version of the oppressor and the oppressed is the propertied people, so the bourgeoisie versus the unpropertied people, so the workers, the proletariat. And it's such a like vague

arbitrary definition of like rich verse is poor. And what we sort of come out the gates with is no, no, no no. The struggle has always existed amongst all sorts of different classes. I mean, the struggle exists between your morning self and your afternoon self, between what you want to do with work. It exists with your friends, your family, and everyone. So we suggest that there's probably two ideas here.

One is that the struggle is between the the collective and you know, this sort of coercive nature of the madness of crowds, and the individual who wants to claim autonomy and be sovereign and assert his will. So that's

kind of one access of the struggle. And then the other one is what I would think is the deepest struggle in living life and attaining any form of wealth or resources, which is the choice between acquiring said resources through cooperative means or through coercive means, or another way to put that, through economic means, which is the cooperative method, or through political means, which is the coercive method, And I think that is sort of like one of the

first things we come out the gate with is that that's the real struggle. Like it's not about you know, one group versus another, It's about do you, you know, move forward in life by beating someone over their head and taking their stuff or do you uh co operate with it? So is that the real struggle? So is that regardless of what other class to maybe and so he arbitrary defines two different classes rich and poor. Today cultural Marxism says we're all pitted against each other different racist,

sex as, genders, etcetera. But then are you saying that, then regardless of which class or which identity you fall within, you can still decide whether you want to be collaborative or coercive, if you want to work with each other or not. Well, let's let's think about it. So, you know, you're One of the beauties of economics is that historically, anthropologically biologically speaking, we humans have always formed some sort of tribe and we've got like an in group in

an outgroup. And traditionally the way we've dealt within groups and out groups is that we've we have quite animosity. We have animity with people in the outgroup, and we have some sort of homogeneity and you know, more communal relationship with people in the in group. And you need that sort of variation because not everyone's the same. We

have different values, we have different likes and desires, etcetera. Now, what economics allows us to do, what trade, what what racition allows us to do, is we can actually maintain these in groups. We can maintain some homogeneity, but we can cooperate. We can trade with people that we may not like, that we may not want to be in the same group with. And we can also live as more multidimensional beings, meaning that we can be part of all sorts of different groups. And that's a big piece.

We need something from another group, yeah, exactly, we need something from someone else, we just trade, we cooperate, and that's like a pillar of uh, you know, a functional civilization versus going and just taking other people's stuff. Yeah,

because you think you deserve. Yeah, Like, I mean I have like my friends I serve with, and like that's a whole culture on its own, and like if you're either in or you're out on that sort of culture, that's like pretty deep to get into that and you're you're either on the outside or you're on the inside of that. But then like I have different friends that I might go ride mountain bikes with or and then I have a different set of friends that I got

write your Bikes with. They're a little bit more open, not as not as tight en it as the surfer group. But they're completely different group of people. But I want to align with the motocross people. I want to alyn with the surf people. Then I have like my business friends, so that we have like the bitcoin crowd, and I have all my bitcoin people and we'll go hang out

with them. And those are just different groups and I could align with any one of them, but I don't want to be static and stuck in any one of those groups either. M hmm. Kind of like that, right. So I think that malleability or that trans transmutability is important.

And then this is why identity politics doesn't work, because what happens is we And this is probably another big idea of the book, and this is maybe not a unique idea, but it's that one must define an individual by their individual behavior, not the skin, color, tone, or supposed group that they're in. And then blanket extend that to the individual themselves, because that number one, it's unfair on the individual. But number two, it's just false. It's

just it's just not how it works. Yeah, I want to I want to explore how this fits into maybe some of the what I talked about on the on the radio, which is this decentralized revolution. So this is obviously it's a centralizing theory of Marxism, and I think we're pushing back on individualism, which is more of a decentralizing theories. We'll talk about that in a minute. You're listening to the Mark ma Show. We're talking about, of course,

each and every week, the decentralized Revolution. We're talking about it to the lens of politics, finance, and technology. And I'm in the studio right now with Alex Fetzki talking about the brand new book, The Uncommonist Manifesto and how it fits into that. We're back with more in a minute. Don't go away, we'll be right back. All right, Welcome back. You are listening to the Mark mo Show talking about the decentralized Revolution, talking about the way the world is

swinging from a central system into a decentralized system. Of course, we're talking about bitcoin and looking at through the lens of politics, finance, and technology. And today I'm in the studio with Alex Fetzki. You can find on on Twitter at s Fetzky Rights. He's the co author of my new book. Were co authors together in the new book called The Uncommunist Manifesto, and I talked about these topics

through the lens of politics, finance, and technology. And the original Communist Manifesto is of course talking about that is one of the most read books in political science, politics and economics. UM. It doesn't talk about technology, but it was written at a time when technology was changing the world, and so I think it hits on those three levers. And we've rewritten that book to come up with some better ideas for this. UM. You know, Alex, one thing

that I've seen. I just did this big video on my YouTube channel and I talked about how these E s G narratives are nothing new and how um the attack we've seen on Sri Lanka with the farmers and fertilizers specifically in the farmland and owns in Holland and now even just to Judeau in Canada, and it's the

same thing. And then I showed how the same thing happened in Stalin when he attacked the farmers and took away their ability to go food, And the same thing with Mao and you always attacked the farmers and take

away their food, and then what happens people start to death. Um, And I get all these comments and the saying, yeah, but you're you have this understanding of socialism and communism that you're talking about communism, you're not talking about socialism, and they want to go into that type of I'm like, look, man, communism, socialism, fascism, whatever you want to call it, it's all the same to me, collectivism. I mean, what's what's your take on that? Yeah,

it's all a centralizing tendency. Now, you look at where does centralization work, and it's a it's a it's a function of scale. In the home you have, like you know, the father is the centralizing force. He is the the breadwinner, the you know, the prime property owner, and within his domain, he has the perfect right to tell his children, you know, what to do, what they can't do, et cetera, particularly

when they're growing up. Now, as the children become adults, the owners starts to fall on them to become the decision makers of their own lives and then take their life outside of that domain. Right now, Centralization sort of implies that the constituents that you're managing don't have the

maturity to make decisions on their own. And this is one of the big takeaways of whether it's socialism, communism, or all of them, that they're all predicated on this idea that without some sort of authority in the middle um you people would die of starvation, like you know, kind of and and Frederick Bastia talks about this in

his book. It's like these the bureaucrats of the politicos out there just have this sense that if they didn't grow the food, we would somehow die of starvation, Like if they didn't tell us what to wear, like we would all be running around naked. If they didn't know tell us to build houses and you know, build regulations

with that stuff, we would somehow be Well. We see it even even today, where it's all these people that are like, well, if the government doesn't doesn't doesn't tax us and steal our money, who's going to help the poor, Who's going to help the less fortunate? Same same thing, Yeah, it is it's the like we never it's I think it's tied to just the I think it's a pathology

of of the of the person. Right. So people who and you've used this example before, it's like someone who wouldn't help a poor person themselves then projects that on the rest of the world and assumes that no one would. Um. Also, people who lack self discipline and self control, like you look at these people and you know the casting guy from the international settlements, like he's a he's a physical

example of lack of self control. And they project this own internal inability to maintain and manage their own lives on everybody else, and then they try and impose control. So they have this very low ah faith or belief in the intelligence, the capability, and the ingenuity of the human species in general. So they believe they're morons. Everyone's a moron. So we need to build a a pig

pen essentially and cattle them all in. Um ridiculous, you know. Um, I think I think there's some truth to that though, Right, So the majority of people don't think through these things and and and maybe can't make the best decisions. Um, But that doesn't mean we should force them to I think maybe it's through like influence, So influence I made

the statement before, like influence versus power. So like, um, I could be in the best shape in the world, and I could be living that as an example, and anybody who would like to model what I've done with my physical fitness for example, Hey, here's my plan, and you're welcome to have it. But I'm not forcing anybody

to participate in that. So I think that's influence. And but then if if we go a little bit further, so then you talked about like in a household sit a little bit further, Let's say that I started a new community and I said, well, anybody's in this community, I want them to be athletes because we get together on weekends and we do sporting events whatever, um. And then so I could control maybe this one area, but I'm not forcing anybody because people could willingly opt into that.

But then they could also opt out of that at the same time. So if it's done on a smaller scale, then you think it's okay if people are able to opt out. Influence is an interesting thing. We're always influencing someone. I think leaders particularly defined by having a greater influence of more people than non leaders, right. I think that, like, if we had to really distill what the definition of a leader is, that's what it is. It's someone who

shows by example and has influence over others. And they say the best leaders lead from behind. They lead by example, right, not by in front? Uh No, well from behind right, leading by example, like by by being the servant, right. I mean if you look at in in front, whatever you want to call it, but not from on top,

but maybe side by side. Right, So even if you look at the you know, look throughout history, like the king would typically go into battle with the people, so whatever you want to call it, and I guess they would kind of lead from behind. But what I meant is by example as opposed to by decree. Correct, And that example piece I mean that ties into ideas like skin in the game, et cetera. Is that it's not

making a decision and enforcing something on somebody else. Like I just saw a video clip that came out about the the guy and I don't even know how I should mention this, but it's the World Economic for not the World Economic From but the World Health Organization. Who's the Ethiopian Yeah, that's it, and they literally just asked him, They're like, you know, have you taken your doos yet?

And his response was that I'm Ethiopian, I come from a poor country, and because it's not available there yet, I've decided not to. You've got to be kidding me. So so, but that that's that's leading, non example, right, and that that's that's not leading. That is literally decree. That is literally what we know deep down is fake and fraudulent. But that's sort of how the power structures

are arranged at the moment. Yeah, crazy, you know one thing that you know one thing that I'm encouraged for this book, And I think the point we gave it is actually a matter of fact, just today, based off of that video I put out the other day. Just today I got somebody who hit me up in the d M S and said, um, hey, I was talking to my buddy, I'll talk to someone I know, and they were telling me that they think communism is such

a better system and I was completely shocked. They would say that, could you give me a couple of talking points that I should come back with. Okay, well you could start with what you were shocked by, Like what is that you know, like start there, but like people just can't even seem to grasp um these topics or how to go through them. I haven't responded to him me yet, but maybe we could talk through some of that stuff when we get back. You're listening to the

Mark Moa Show. We're talking about the Decentralized Revolution. I'm in the studio with Alex Fetzki, my co author of the brand new book, the The Uncommunist Manifesto on Amazon right now this week. Check it out. We'll be back with that more in a minute. Don't go away, all right, welcome back. You are listening to the Mark Moa Show. We're talking about the decentralized Revolution. Of course, I'm talking about bitcoin. I'm looking at it through the lens of politics, finance,

and technology. And today I'm in the studio with Alex Fetzki, is my co author on a brand new book we released this week. It's on Amazon, go check it out. It's called The Uncommunist Manifesto, not not the Communist It's the Uncommunist Manifesto. And it's a book that's been written about politics, finance, and technology, but from a different lens,

so to speak, more of a philosophical lens. Now Alex before before the break, we're talking about um people who um they hear they hear people saying that, oh, Marxism or communism is so great. Um, and uh, maybe they think it's not, but they're not really sure why it's not or how to respond to that. And I think this book, I think is is are The goal is to kind of wake people up to better ideas and give them some of that. But what would you say

to somebody who's like asking some questions like that? Well, I think I think there's a couple things that people who trying to assert communism and socialism is a good idea generally cling to. And one that came to mind as we were talking, and I'm just going to give it a name. I'm going to call it the Star Trek syndrome. Is this fantasy that somehow technological evolution is going to transform everything and will come to this utopian

version of the future where we don't need money anymore. Like, why would you need money when you have that what's that the replicator right in Star Trek? You put anything in there and it creates it for you. And what that sort of utopian dream fails to realize is that there's a thing, a pistik little thing called time, and time flows uni directionally like it flows forward, and that's the one thing you can't stop, pause, rewind, at least

not for the next hundred thousand years. Maybe we'll figure out teleportation one day, but you know that that's a very different world. So for now, for the next hundred thousand years, let's just assume that time is fixed and finite and it's moving in a certain direction, and as a result, we are going to need to prioritize things. So even if we could, let's say, in the next hundred years, create the replicator for the next years, beyond that years, we're still going to have the issue of time.

So it's still even if we had complete abundance of energy and materials, we would still need to order things in some sense, so we still need to have correct This is once again why the existence of something like money is necessary. Like the technology of money enables us prioritize And how do we utilize that technology. Well, we utilize it as a means to get information in the marketplace, which is prices, and the only way to do that

is to enable the information flow to occur freely. Communism wants to do away with all of that, get away, do away with prices, set everything stagnant, and create this perfectly engineered closed system that doesn't involve prices, economics and all of this. They're living in a fantasy land. They think that we can live outside of the bounds of time,

never gonna happen. It just doesn't work like that. So so the very premises, and I think this sort of whether you read Marks's work or whether you read any socialist communist people that have come after him, they all seem to basically be these utopians that think that we can somehow escape the physical constraints of reality and live outside of these, uh you know, these very real bounds, and and they don't work. So everything kind of stems

them down from there. It's like whether it's you know, the stupid ideas like the rich get richer and the pool get poorer somehow in capitalism, you know, we need communism to fix that, like everything else has to break down, which we can dig into those, but I think that's the first point is that the utopian and they don't understand that time is always going to be here and

we have to contend with that somehow. I think, just right off the bat, the utopian there's no such thing as that, because what my idea of utopia isn't your idea of utopia? Maybe, so like what I want is utopia you hate? For example, like I might want my idea of utopia might be on might be on a beautiful beach with like huge surf, but a lot of people hate the beach and that would be hell for them to be on the beach, right or for example, So um, right off the bat, we just know that, um,

and I think what that? What that right? Their highlights is back to the individual versus the collective. I might love the beach, you might hate it. And so if we assume that we're all the same, there's your your fallacy right off the bat. Um I saw this morning. There's a little bit on different subject, but back to kind of like these laws of the universe. Um. There is a cryptocurrency a game called Acts Infinity. I don't

know if you've heard of that. Actually Infinity. It got really popular um last year and in this brand new category called play to Earn, And basically, you play games and you earn money. You earned cryptocurrency, so I could UM in this game, I go mine for gold, for example, So I got to buy UM picks and shovels. UM I earned them by plane. And then I take the

picks and shovels and I can go earn gold. And I earned these tokens, these cryptocurrency tokens, and then I can go exchange those cryptocurrency tokens for money, like on exchange. And they've they've they cracked the code and this act Infinity. It blew up and the game got so popular, and then in like the Philippines or wherever, they were like hiring teams to start spending time playing video games to

earn money. And all these vcs put all this money into the game and they finally found a way where people can get paid for their time playing games. Wow, how cool. Well it worked out pretty good for a year until the Ponzi scheme right out, and now there's no money to pay any of these people, and the whole thing has fallen apart. And I was like, of

course it did. I've been seeing this the whole time because they're like, but people finally were getting paid for their time playing games, but nobody values that nobody's gonna pay them. So like they were earning money in the game, but it was being pumped in by vcas and they vcs. I mean it raised whatever, hundreds of millions of dollars from some of these top firms A sixteen or whatever, right, and it's like these people, how far is that from reality?

Like but but yet we're continue to play being plagued by that in real time. It seems like well it's I mean that last bit real time. So the reality today is not too far off from that game. You know, You've got these politicians that basically there, Yeah, they played pretend. It's like, yeah, just just change the number here and you know, put a signature there and I'll say this and make this promise here, and like all of it

is just like one big magic show. You know, it's like a Las Vegas show and or or a game you know in the Philippines, and you know, nothing really matters. It's not real. And I've just finished the new article that I'm writing for this year's edition of the Bitcoin Times. It's going to be the Austrian edition, and I talk about how bitcoin is the thing that makes Austrian economics possible in a practical sense, not just the theoretical sense.

And you know in there I talk about like the communist ideas are much like the Kingsian ideas, and that they they're they're based on this premise of first of all, like entropy. Like remember Keynsian was like, uh, it doesn't matter because in the long run, world dead anyway, right, you know, communism is academic justification for entropy. They're they're

all kind of all anti life modalities of thinking. And it's like it doesn't matter, you know, just like let's just burn it all up, let's use it now and two kids and just change the ledger, change the school print a little bit more money, uh, you know, right in your regulation and pretend it didn't happen. And and all based off of the premise of getting getting something for nothing. That's it. Yeah, and that just doesn't work in the universe. Sorry, there's no like the second lawn.

Thermodynamics holds irrespective of what politicians want to think. And all of nature that's not humans knows that I read a thing. I think it was just last week. And it's like the gazelle wakes up every morning knowing if it doesn't run faster than the fastest lion, it's dead. And the lion wakes up in the morning knowing if it doesn't run faster than the slowest gazelle, it's dead and natured owes that. All right, ants save up for

the winter. We can see aunts in the Bible, it says, uh, we can even learn lessons from the ant, you sluggard, Like, look how it's stores. It's well, look out stores. It's food for the winter. You know. So the whole all all the world knows that. But somehow humans think we can continually cheat that. Um, but we're continuing to uh come back and see that that. Nope, as a matter of fact, reality can smack us in the face. Um.

You're listening to the Marketma show. We're talking about the decentralized revolution through the lens of politics, finance, and technology. I'm in the studio with Alex Fetzky and we're talking about our brand new book we just released called The Uncommunist Manifesto. It's on Amazon this week. Check it out. We'll be back with more talking about the book and how it's decentralized in the world in a minute. Don't go away, and we'll right back. All right, welcome back.

You're listening to the Markma Show. We're talking about the decentralized Revolution, how the world is changing right before our very eyes. Of course, we're talking about bitcoin and looking at through the lens of politics, finance, and technology. I'm in the studio today with Alex Fetzki. He's my co author of the new book we just released and published this week on Amazon. Go check it out, write it down. It's called The Uncommunist Manifesto, not the Communist It's the

Uncommunist Manifesto. It's already hit best seller categories and we're looking for people to help keep pushing it forward. So check it out. Um, Alex. Before the break, I was saying, how, um, you know, we keep trying to get something for nothing, which um, but but reality keeps smacking us in the face. Now, we also made the case for capitalism, which I think a lot of people, um, right off the bat are probably h they don't like that. As a matter of fact,

I told you this video I just put out. I got a lot of comments and oh but capitalism has um led to all these problems and capitalism has left all these people behind and cat right, but but there's this misunderstanding. So we so we break that down in the book um and so I think that in itself is worth the read. But but the put back to the something for nothing peace. So as humans and we make the case that that capitalism is just natural, we're just trying to do more with less. Um. So it

is the human drive for something for nothing. Instead of making ten trips carrying one brick at a time, how about if I just make a wheelbarrow and carry ten bricks at once. And so we're always trying to get not necessarily something for nothing, but more for less. M hm. So I mean, are those two things almost the same but one is just a little detached from reality? Well

it is. It's and this this is where wisdom and maturity come in, right, And this is where all of these tendencies, like even greed for example, has a has a light and a shadow. If there's one thing I learned from reading Young's work was that all of these examples of our personality and our desires and everything, like our energy has a light and a shadow. And the question is how are we manifesting it. The desire to

get something for nothing is always going to exist. We were always trying to economize because remember time and energy are scarce, like material resources are scarce. Like that. There we want to we have a deep seated spiritual biological it's in our dna to try and use things more efficiently, down to the very bugs in the ground and the fishes in the sea, like everything is trying to economize somehow. It's it's what we do. The question is when we

start lying to ourselves. So like there's a there's a difference between an innovation that you know, create that uses leverage, you know, like a pulley or a lever that uses leverage to give you an advantage in order to move more weight across space for example, or power across time, et cetera. That's very different doing that than m than building a fake level of a and pretending I moved something and then just writing on a piece of paper and telling someone I did it because behind the scenes

the work didn't actually occur. Um And that's sort of you know, there's a difference between a lie and an actual uh an increase in the efficient and the effective output of something. They both stem from the same desire though, Yeah, yeah, so it's it's it's that it's that desire, But I love how you said it. It's about maturity, So we start to have we we have to learn most most of us have to learn as we grow up what is achievable, what we can really do, and what we

can't do. And so we're always trying to do more with less economized as you said it, But then we also have to know where those bounds are and the difference of reality. UM so so good point. Um. You talked about four main thought ideas that we had in the book. Um, let's talk about a couple of other ones, like why should people go get this book? What are a couple of things they could get from this that might help, um, go talk to other people, have conversations,

to see the world differently. Yeah. I think the other big one was you mentioned it already, capitalism is. I think we have a very novel approach to defining capitalism. And what we did was most people get stuck in the argument and the frame or the the Overton window of trying to argue capitalism as a political modalities like capitalism is, you know, on the right and socialism is on the left. And we kind of came in there and just said no, no, no, Capitalism is just the process.

It's you know, if we define capital as the scarce stuff, so time, energy, and natural resources, and then if we sort of define metaphysical capitalist like ideas and reputation, right like that, like these things, like the metaphysical stuff is is not as scarce, like you know, we can have as many ideas as we want, but there is something unique about them, like the way we put them together, etcetera.

So if these, if these are capital capitalism is about how best to use them, and the two forcing functions that we discussed in the book efficacy and efficiency. It's like, so doing more with less and doing the right thing is what efficacy is. And if we think about capitalism through that lens, what we come to realize is that

we've been doing this since the beginning of time. And I think we've said this on the show before, but capitalism is just since we first realized that we needed to more efficiently acquire food, and we know created stone tools to break food apart or to throw it at an animal and you know, cut down the amount of energy we use in chasing the animal, and you know, someone else creates a fire, and you know, if I've caught the animal, and we share the animal and share

the fire, etcetera. Like there's division of labor. So like we're always doing this. The question is is, like how do the political bounds that sit around the process of capitalism, like how much do they suffocate it? And you know, we can kind of think of the political bounds as the bank of the river, and capitalism is the flow of the river. It's the flow of the energy it's happening. Do we constrict it to the point that, you know,

the river runs dry? And that's what you see in communists or centrally planned modalities, is that we we trip over each other, creating all sorts of regulations because we we haven't thought about where the wealth is actually coming from. And then we try and control it and direct it and shift the flow of the stream, and then all of a sudden, we've destroyed the river and there's no more water flowing, and we're wondering, oh, it's the fault

of capitalism because there's no more water flowing here. Yeah, we see examples of that. You know. Uh, Bernie Sanders is I'm running on a pro socialist platform. I want to redistribute all the wealth, but yet per the capitalist system the book says, he's written, he's become multimillionaire and owns all these houses. That's the capitalist system that he's talking against. Her or AOC who still you know, pushing the socialist platform tax the rich and you know, in capitalism.

But yet she sells like T shirts for sixty bucks on her website or whatever, right, like not just cheap T shirts, like premium T shirts. That that's capitalism. And so to your point, um, they they push back on these things, they say, we don't need these things, but they don't really understand how those things make this integral part.

And I would agree. Just to get this understand of capitalism as we laid out, I think is probably one of the I have to say, one of the most important lessons in the book, because you really have to understand how the world works, and you have to understand the different types of capital. To your point, that we all have everybody has capital, and then how do we use those and then how does that work in the

greater ecosystem? And this is really uh you know, uh first principles type thinking that then you can start to formulate your own ideas off of as opposed to just out there parody and headlines that you hear from Bernie Sanders. Another thing that I saw in all these comments this week, again because I just made these videos about socialism and collectivism, but they would say, oh, but those Scandinavian countries are

are a socialist and look how good they are. But all those so all those scaninan countries tell you we are not socialist countries. They push back on that, and so I think you need to have that better understanding. In the book. We we have a matrix, and so we actually have UM all the different forms of what people think capitalism is, whether that's crony ism or colonialism,

or people say capitalism led to slavery. We have all these different forms in there, and let me show really what capitalism is, what it is and what it isn't and then we compare it against all these what we call phantom variations of capitalism. And I think just that

lesson alone UM is worth the book on itself. UM. And then if you if you get the book on Amazon, make sure to come back to our website Uncommunist dot com and uh, then you can get access to a bunch of extra materials behind the scenes, commentary, discussions, um download all the charts, graphs, etcetera, so much to more. You're listening to the Mark Moas Show. We're talking about, of course, each and every week, the Decentralized Revolution, talking

about the way Bitcoin is changing the world. I'm in the studio with Alex Swetzky, my co author of the brand new book The Uncommon Manifesto on Amazon check it out. That's what we got. Thanks for listening today.