How Should We Think and Handle Our Emotions? w/ Stormy Waters

and I are going to talk about this. So how you doing, Stormy doing well?

the from the back, We'll do it. But why do you why did you talk about this? Why did you think we should talk about this on the air?

So you know in the in the BC times, in the before times, you did have a school, a Stoic school, and these these are the three, you know, early figures in establishing Stoicism in in ancient Greece, but later Romans picked up on it like Seneca episode epic Teta, I can never pronounce his name epic Tetus or epic epitet epicoet epic Tetus. I'll go with that. And Marcus Aurelia is built on the foundations, but they're not considered the founders.

So basically, what what uh Marcus Aurelius is doing is a Roman form of Stoics that he got from Greek fathers I would say three hundred years before he lived.

when and how these ideas propagated. So something magical happened when Alexander got to Egypt, because you had two groups of people that were working on the same problem but from opposite ends, and the Egyptians had a lot of what the Greeks missed, but without the Greek's rigor. You know, Pythagoras had a large amount of followers at the time. Even though he didn't survive the Siege of Tire, all of his followers did and from there on out, Greek thought on well in this case to what we're talking

about today, emotions changes quite a bit. And then Marcus Aurelius, I think you're yeah, you're definitely correct. This would be like a rediscovery of it right, because there wasn't a lot of Romans actually, I mean, for as much as they were, you know, Greek fans at this time, I don't think there were anybody else but those three that we know of.

you in context of real situations he's dealing with. So it is both the knowledge and applied knowledge simultaneously, so you're able to grasp the concepts much much easier. And he leaves out a lot of the other stuff that I think would take people of a Christian background, It would probably cause a lot of people to turn their nose up at it. So just the teachings of how the man views his emotions as separate from him, right, they are not, you know, things that he has control

over that are internal processes. Marx's relis views them as external processes, right His you know, the question is for him is how one reacts to these external processes. So it's not like, you know, you're going to get rid of emotion. You're not going to get your emotions under control. Like all these things are impossible. You have no control over the emotions, the emotional information, the content that comes

to you. The only thing you do have control over is how you respond or react to these emotions, you know. And Marcus's take is the same as no, God, I

can't believe I'm blinking aloutsuit the eternal doubt. These things, these are things to be observed studied, let them wash over you wait till they're gone, right, and then internalize time more and more information, and in these emotions that you are socking away, you know, in your knowledge bank, become something you can pull from later and use almost like a power source of infinite immovability, steadfastness, or strength.

And I think that would be something that would be very valuable for people in our day and age, specifically our guys when we have to interact on the Internet and are interfacing with algorithms that are deliberately designed to elicit emotional responses and get them into very non productive moods. Right, it teaches it'll teach you how to not be a reactive you know, loser jump from current thing to current thing.

These things don't mean anything. The emotions they give you are not yours, right, They're not innate to your conscious mind. And the strength to not react to them and to study them, like why am I having this? Why is this particular thing making me feel this particular type of way would benefit our guys a lot, because I think our information environment is extremely more hostile than one in any other age. I think it's actually the biggest hurdle to us making change.

is social media. Social media can be daunting because it is designed to bombard you with information, and if it's information that is going to upset you, if it's information where you've you feel like you have a stake in it, like you're invested in it, and it's not going your way, which, let's face it, most of the time things aren't going to go your way, especially if you have no power over them, then you should know to avoid it. I

mean that's just really the beginning of knowledge. And I fail often at that because I feel like, oh, if I'm not on social media, I'm not on the biggest battlefield in the world. And no, actually, the biggest battlefield in the world is in your skull.

that everybody around you makes independently inside themselves. And what are they basing that decision on. They're basing it on your presence.

are firm and immovable. And when they are these things, how they order themselves internally projects externally?

people decide in an instant who the leader is. And if our guys are ordered internally when crisis hits, which it will, they will be the ones who will be looked to as leaders because they will be the ones calm, firm, and immovable, and they will project the type of safety

that everyone is going to be attracted to. So I think Marcus Aurelius has the best tools to make leaders because I think it's an internal thing and on an external thing, not something that you can, like, I'm going to learn and you know, take a crash course in leadership. I think that it's a waste of time. Well, we've even read the book yet, this is already a pretty good discussion.

And yeah, let's I think a lot of people have in their mind what the emperor of how the Emperor of Rome would act, and how he would think. But Marcus Aurelius's meditations are seemed to seems to fly in the face of what most people would think. So let me read. Yeah, this is well, yeah, this has broken up into parts into verse almost verses, like like biblical how biblical chapters are broken up. So let me just read the first one. So this is the first book

of Marcus Aurelius. This is the first uh, first part of my grandfather Verus. I have learned to be gentle and meek, and to refrain from all anger and passion. From the fame and memory of him that begot me. I have learned both shamefastness and manlike behavior. Shamefastness is in a term that we're very, very familiar with anymore,

but it's basically the quality. I'm going to read the definition the quality or state of being modest, shy, or bashful rooted in a sense of propriety and restraint, rather

than the awkwardness of being shamefaced of my mother. I have learned to be religious and bountiful, and to forbear not only to do, but to intend, but to intend any evil, to content myself with a spare diet, and to fly all such excess as is incidental to great wealth of my great grandfather, both to frequent public schools and auditories, and to get me good and able teachers at home, And that I ought not to think much if,

upon such occasions I were at excessive charges. So this already flies in the face of what most people think a leader is a modern way. It's what most people. Most people think a modern leader is a sociopath. And this is an Emperor of Rome, and obviously he's not a sociopath. He's telling you to do the exact opposite. So Part two I'll just do here real quick of

him that brought me up. Not to be fondly addicted to either of the two great factions of the coursers in the circus, called Parsini and Venetzi, nor in the amphitheater partially to favor any of the gladiators or fencers, as either the par Parmulari or the secut Secutorus, and those are two classes of gladiator. Moreover, to endure labor, nor to need many things. When I have anything to do, to do it myself rather than by others. Not to meddle with many businesses, and not easily to admit of

the slander. I'm starting to feel seen here.

spirits and the like. That's keep quails for the game. Nor to be mad after such things, Not to be offended with other men's liberty of speech, and to apply myself onto philosophy. Him Also, I must think that ever I heard first Bacchius, then Tendasus and Marcianus, and that I did write dialogues in my youth, and that I took liking to the philosopher's little couch and skins and such other things, which, by the Grecian discipline are proper

to those who profess philosophy. Not to be offended with other men's liberty of speech, and to apply myself onto philosophy. What do you have to say to that.

that is completely sovereign in his own mind. He's not if he doesn't want to think about something or think a certain way about something. He doesn't if he wants to think about something. His mind is doing what his mind is tasked to do, and not what it wants to do.

the text, I don't think I ever had. There's an ordering to him thinking taking the time to give thanks internally for every single person that has helped shape him to the person that he is, is hand and tied to him, not busying himself with vain things, him not favoring any excess. How do you be humble? Well, he's telling you. He's doing it in front of you. He is recognizing each every person's contribution to them himself. Well, if you do that, it's really hard to be an

ego maniac, isn't it. This is him checking He is checking his ego. He's humbling himself by recognizing each individual person's contribution to what makes him up. The man that's writing it today or on the day that he wrote it, and he's actually what's actually I forgot was like how detailed he is in like this person taught me to do this or behave in this way, and now this is how I behave in all of these instances. And I was brought up to not be addicted to either

of the great factions. And this is how I don't favor these groups in the amphitheater, and this is how I don't favor these groups in the gladiatorial arena. Has an exercise in humility?

to speak many words. He's also the kind of person who if he's not choosing sides in the most in things of it don't matter, like the you know, like the the arena and what happens you're what happens if you're invaded, say the barbarians are at the gates. How do you act towards that? Do you start to panic? Do you lose your mind? Are you such a stoic that you don't care? No, that's not it at all.

The thing is this is somebody who is in the face of problems is not going to think about how solving them makes him look in the eyes of others. He's just going to solve the problem and it's not going to be for any other reason. Then there's a problem that needs to be solved, and I'm not going to get worked up over it. I'm not going to be emotional over it. I'm just going to solve the problem. And once the problem is solved, we move on, and

that's it. That's one of the reasons why you know, when we say hating your enemies, oh I hate them? Why why are you expending that energy? Why do you think Why do you think that that emotion is profitable? Do you think that one day you're going to have to kill and that that by hating it'll be easier to do that. Someone like Marcus Aurelius doesn't. He doesn't need that. He just knows that if he has to kill, he has to kill, and that's it. It's just a

decision that he has to make. It doesn't have to be emotional. It is just something that needs to be done. And I think hate and emotions is such just weaken you, and it weakens your vision for sure. And I think we're taught to hate. And I think, really, if you really think about it, our enemies have taught us to hate because they know what makes us weak.

every aspect of leading. Right again back to him thinking each and every person he will go on to do more of it. Is this an emperor that heeds his advisor's counsel? Is this a person that thinks that he knows more than everyone in the room. So what Peter has talked about as far as hatred, right, or whether this is a person that is going to take counsel from his advisors when offered, isn't going to dismiss them as like, oh no, I know more than you, I'm

the smartest guy in the room. Right, These are very similar things even though they have they sound like they have nothing in common unless you're a leader than what Pete has described and I just described are blind spots, places where you will make the wrong decision for selfish reasons, whether it be to fulfill your own hate or to fulfill your own ego. Right, this is how you're supposed to rule and not for your own benefit. You can be a macia like Pete was just saying, does this

guy sound like a sociopath or not? He doesn't, Oh, well, then how is he going to get into power and be all machiavellian? This is about exercising power, having the right to rule. I think the Bronze Age barbarianism shit has kind of poisoned a lot of people's minds to what having agency is, to what being a leader is, to what governing is. Having power is. All those things are duties. Having power over your family, over your wife and children. Yeah, they have to listen to you, that's

one thing they have to do. But that means you've got about like three or four different duties to them, right, It is you having power over them. There's a lot more duties in your column to have that power than there is duties in their column. Their column is listened to you do as you say. Yours is protect, provide, lead, plan, Right, you have a lot more duties than they do. And that's what ruling. That's what leading is. It is duties, it is obligations. It's leading correctly. Being a leader is

should be an act of selflessness. Like the eagles nest that was built for Hitler's birthday, You never and he spent he was there once, right. The only person outside of that, the only house that was his or that was you know that he had built for him, was I believe for his mother or his sister. He slept on a cop, the same one that was issued to the Wehrmacht. Hitler slept on the entire length of the war. Right, so for five years, four years, the most powerful man

in Europe slept on a cop. This is a person who thought it was his personal obligation to fix the country. Right. What Hitler was doing was a selfless act. And until you understand that, understand why it is people won't love you like they love him. Right, people, The most common, the the most potent thing in this is from my mother. I have learned to be religious and bountiful and to forbear not only to do, but to intend any evil. It's about intent. You can say a lot of things.

Politicians say a lot of things to us, but we don't believe them, right. Their words are the same words as someone else. But in certain people, when they say the identical words, we believe them. Why is that if person A and person B can say the same exact words, the same exact cadence, even the same exact accent, how do we know who's telling the truth or not? We just know we can feel it in our gut, can sense their intent, And that's something that you see again

and again and again throughout the stext. It's it's intent. Anyways, That's all I've said about that. That was a lot longer of a rant than I planned.

As also that I never, by way of ostentation, did effect to show myself as active, an active, able man for any kind of bodily exercises, And that I gave over the study of rhetoric and poetry and of elegant, neat language, that it had not used to walk about the house in my long robe, nor to do any

such things. Moreover, I learned of him to write letters without any affectation or curiosity, such as that was which by him was written to my mother from sinuessa, and to be easy and ready to be reconciled and well pleased again with them that had offended me, as soon as any of them would be content to seek unto me again to read with diligence, not to rest satisfied with a light and superficial knowledge, nor quickly to assent to things commonly spoken of whom also I must think

that I ever lighted upon Epictetus his hypo nemata, or moral commentaries and common factions, which also he gave me of his own from Apollonius, true liberty and unvariable steadfastness, and not to regard anything at all, though never so little, but right and reason, and always, whether in the sharpest pains, or after the loss of a child, or in long diseases, to be still the same man, who also was a present, invisible example unto me that it was possible for the

same man to be both vehement and remiss, a man not subject to be vexed and offended with the incapacity of his scholars and auditor and auditors in his lectures and expositions, and a true pattern of a man who, of all his good gifts and faculties least esteemed himself in himself, that his excellent skill and ability to teach and persuade others the common theorems and maxims of the

Stoic philosophy of him. Also I learned how to receive favors and kindnesses, as commonly they are accounted from friends, so that I might not become obnoxious unto them for them, nor more yielding upon occasion than in right I ought, and yet so that I should not pass them neither as an unsensible and unthankful man.

who also was a present invisible example. Unto me that it was possible for the same man to be both the vehement and remiss, a man not subject, be vexed and offended with the incapacity of his scholars and auditors in his life. How many people can can even find that strength anymore.

every aspect of his life. Life. He is functionally policing his humility and the where is itself terms about how to take basically how where does he say it here where he talks about reconciling.

you this, you bro? How the fuck is anyone supposed to change their mind? Were you born here on the far right? Like? Yes? Like did you always exist here? If no one can change their mind, how can anyone come to agree with us that doesn't always already agree with us? Right? If someone expresses your opinion, who once expressed the opposite of it, Right, why are you not reconciled and well pleased again with them? Right? This is not how men act. It's more important for people to

hold a grudge and or get a dunk in on someone. Right, then congratulate them for changing their mind and encouraging them to go further. And you know, er elatic behavior.

who you are. You guys, there are a lot of people that you can see on social media, and you know, this is something that people don't do in real life. They don't do it to people's faces. And which is why social media is such a to many because a lot of people don't even know how to talk to people in real life anymore, but they sure do think they know how to talk to people on social media.

And we all fall into it. But if this is if this is like your personality, if this is your if when people think of your account, this is the first thing they think of, Oh, this person is just going to try to own people the whole time. And you know, I mean like I had somebody reach out to me the other day and say and then I haven't contacted you in like five or six years. It

took me a long time to get here. But you know, now I'm reading you know, I'm reading Henry Ford, and I'm like, awesome, man, okay, you know, welcome, and he's like, well, he actually said, he said, let me pull this up because I really let me see where this is. This this was awesome to me, he said. He said, it took me too long, but must admit you were right about the JQ currently reading Martin Luther and Henry Ford. Apologies, my friend from my quiet skepticism. I'm retarded. And I said,

we all reach touch points at different times. It's a never ending race. There is no finish line. And he said, appreciate your grace. I appreciate your grace. That's it. That's it. The guy came and said, Maya Kulpa should have been here all along. But I mean, the only.

Just drop what they're doing and learn all the shit that you don't, right, because they'll have means and tools and relationships at their disposal that they built by doing other shit than not learning about this every day. So the type of people you're going to want are going to be the type of people that take longer to

get here. I like the CEOs, the entrepreneurs, Like these people have already very stressful days and if something looks to them like a rabbit holism, that's going to be like upsetting are going to require a huge amount of mental investment, which this does. Then they're going to put that off because they have to because people depend on them to do things. So it's the people that come to this late that are going to be people that

you want to congratulate. And think about how hard that was for that person to write, because he was full well expecting you to dunk on him and talk shit. So he wrote that to you knowing, or at least he thought he knew that he was going to get nothing but scorn in return, and it was still important enough for him to tell you. I want that guy on my team. I don't want somebody that would excoriate

him or frankly, you know, be an asshole. Because that person that sent Pete that message as a bigger person then I would say most people I see. So, yeah, it took him longer to get here, he probably had shit to do.

To steal a quote from Thomas so Pete's right, that dumb shit will blind you because all of those guys, we all know who we're talking about, there's a whole bunch of them. They can't see the change that's happening right now, and they're going to be the most surprised and the last to realize it. So what use are they then?

about them. What's really interesting is that, like you'll watch Tucker Carlson come out and say something and then the fucking Prime Minister of Israel has to rush in front of a camera in his office, sit down to sit down in front of his desk and try and bullshit his way around something that Tucker said a media person in America and he sends it out and then some random black lady that lives in England does another video

and there it is, that fact. It's running back to his office, setting up the camera again, trying to come up with some more bullshit. That is rear guard action. That is a person who is no longer able to set the tempo of battle and is no longer able to determine the place and time of battle. That person, if we were looking at any type of conflict, that person has lost dominance over a key part of the battlefield.

Ukraine right now cannot set the tempo of battle. Ukraine right now cannot determine the time and place in which their forces fight, and that is because Russia has total air dominance over Ukraine. There is a field of battle which Ukraine can exert no control over, and that is forcing them to respond a different way that is very noticeable on the field that they can still engage in. Right Benjamin and Yahoo's behavior is a man that is

suffering from total information dominance by his enemies. He does not get to determine the time and place of battle. He's running around doing little TikTok videos trying to put out fires his enemy set whenever they decide to set them.

Not him, and none of the fucking guys that'll, you know, swagger around about how much longer they've been here and how much you need to shut the fuck up because I was hearing this, that, and the third thing, All those fagots can't even see it, but they'll tell you how much smarter than they are, they are than you, and how wrong you are because of how long they've been here. Well, have you ever seen the prime minister of a country like arguably the most evil, most powerful

guy in the world. Were you bracketing for them doing six you know, fireside chat videos about how I pinky pinky promise I didn't kill somebody in a period of less than two and a half weeks. No, they didn't because they can't physically even see when they're winning. They don't have the humility, which is I think the overarching theme of this text is thus far and self reflection. That's another thing that we see again and again and

again and again and again. It's almost like he lives in a constant state of self reflection.

of religion, it's politics. Put themselves into this political bubble that they can never allow themselves to extricate themselves from, mostly because they've made their version of politics their morality because they don't have a morality that's based in anything other than materialism. So they have to find materialistic morality. And yeah, I'm not saying that that makes me any better than anyone else, but you know it, once you do it the first time, you realize I'm never going

to get this right. I'm never going to get it one ed to present perfect. I'm constantly going to be adjusting here and tweaking there, and you know, there may

even be some seismic shifts. You know what's funny, this is just Scott Horton and Darryl Cooper have this new podcast Provoked and they had Orn McIntyre on the last episode talking about the hit piece that reason ran on or In and mentioned Darryl in and one of the things Daryl said, And what's funny is Daryl came off even more radical in that episode than Oron because Oran's like, oh, we got to do everything within the law and Daryl's gone to defeat our enemies. And Daryl's like, He's like,

I don't know about that. But something Darryl said was he said, look, I would love to still be a libertarian.

unless they aggress against me. First, well, basically there's a whole class of people out there now who are threatening to kill you if you don't agree with them. So how do you deal with that? How do you how do you put yourself into a box when things change? If you you know, let me put it this way, do.

through the American landscape in twenty twenty five. It's not the same thing as the British landscape in twenty twenty five, or the Japanese landscape in twenty twenty five, or the Indian landscape in twenty twenty five. It's here, and it's for a certain time. It's for certain you know. It's like talking about one of the things that Daryl said that you know it was, you know, just you would hope people would, especially libertarians, would hear it and a

light bulb would go off. Is this whole article was basically saying, they talk about Karl Schmidt, Carl Schmidt was a Nazi, These people are Nazis.

is also contextualized. He's very good at that, and I think I hope he leans into it more because I think it's one of his one of his greatest weapons in his in his toolbox that he has. For me. Oh yes, I'm a nationalist for me, I'm a globalist for you, I am pro life for me, and I am pro choice for you and so on down the line where it's like, yes, these things are index to a people, right my political I don't have any political beliefs. I don't. It is this is a core group of

people that I care about and love deeply. Yeah, is this good for them? Or is this bad for them? And that's it.

let it bother him. He's not going to take It's not like he's not going to take Oran's call. If Oron calls. It's one man's opinion, and he also knows that that man doesn't want it, doesn't want ill it, doesn't want anything bad to happen to him. He just has different opinions on him on different things, you know, on different things, but as a whole, I think Oran would rather have Darryl as a neighbor than some Antifa fuck from Portland, you.

you know, refuse. It's like people who don't want to hear other opinion, opinions other than their own. They don't want to read outside of whatever. It's like, you know, Christians who don't want to read the Koran because they're

scared they'll be convinced by it or something like that. Well, well you don't want to really, you don't want to read one of the most read religious technics, like they probably the second most religious, red religious text of all time and know what's in it and there's like a billion of them in the world. You don't want to know what's.

doesn't exist. But whatever doesn't matter. They as doctrine, refuse to engage with any of our material or ideas, even in a strategic sense. This is why they're always wrong about us, and this is why they are constantly surprised and fall flat. Is because they are not allowed, They don't allow themselves or others to read our stuff, to dialogue with us at all. And that's why they that's

why they lose, and that's why they're always wrong. So the same thing that we cry that we mock in the left, I see just as much of it, Like like in the example you just gave on the right, Oh no I can't read this text, Well, then you're never going to understand these people, and then you're going to lose. Yes, we have no discernment at times, it really frustrates me.

I'm not perfect. I'm trying and I'm not. I hope no one thinks that by I'm talking about things that I know now, things that I've worked through, things that I've struggled with, things, things that like literally caused me loss, like not only like emotional loss, but like monetary loss in the past, by changing my mind and and and saying, you know, I was wrong here, and I really think this is this is the wrong path. I think I'm leading people down the wrong path by talking about this.

And people will be like, no, this is my religion. So you know, you're you're a heretic now, and you're you're immoral now, and you have no principles now, and you're like I literally had somebody in the comments and I didn't say anything about it because I'm I've resigned myself to ignore comments and not even really even unless somebody starts spamming. It's not even blocked during my live streams. But someone said, oh, you used to be a libertarian,

now you're a neocon. How do I argue? How what am I to argue?

is great until it gets introduced to the air. As soon as it gets introduced to reality, it you know, it's like like Mike Tyson said, everyone's got a plan when they come in the ring with me until they get punched in the mouth. Then they're playing. Yeah, that's political ideology. The only political ideology is what is good for me and my people? Is this good for me

and my people? If it's not, we need to change it or we need to fight again instead if you get to the point where you can take power and you can get your people in power, and maybe you can start from a legitimate standpoint trying to shape shape policy, or shape things in your area that lend itself to

your people. You know, one of the most important things I heard, you know a long time ago, was the way America was set up in the beginning, was it was set up so that white Europeans, you know, mostly Northern Europeans and Wasps and Scotch Irish and people can thrive in As soon as you introduce a group of people into that that can't thrive in that environment, one

of two things is going to happen. Either they're going to fail miserably and it's best for them to leave, or somebody's going to come up with the idea that what you built for the people who found it, it needs to be changed so that it's easier for these people. And as soon as you change it for those people now the founding stock, it's harder for them to operate

in it. Now it doesn't benefit them anymore. And what should happen is wherever these people are coming from, even if you need to help them, if you feel like you need to help them if you're some kind of you know, Captain Sava Hooe with frigging an African nation or something like that, figure out a way to design a system that they can benefit from. Help them do that if you feel like you're an Albert Schweitzer or something like that, because they're not going to be able

to thrive in this system. They need to find their own system. And there needs to be multiple systems for multiple people and multiple cultures and multiple not every That's why when people say, oh, capitalism is the greatest for who? Who is capitalism for what? Somalia? For average sixty three you know, sixty five IQ country, And that doesn't work. Capitalism doesn't It doesn't even really work for what we

have now. Capitalism really didn't work for I mean once you got very much past the founding because capitalism more whatever you were calling capitalism and be getting morphed into something else, and whatever it morphed into was not conducive to the actions and the beliefs of the founding stock. So if you're not willing, if you're not willing to look at politics in way of how does this benefit my people and be willing to say, and those people over there, I don't hate them, but they need to

figure out whatever system works best to benefit them. In Singapore, the best way it benefits them is to have a system of authoritarianism, because that's what they need. But they also have a very open economy. Somebody told me that you can like pass through the airport and go to a bank in the airport and not even be from there and open a bank account and deposit.

hundred different answers, monarchists, Christian nationalists, wig nats. And it's going to stay that way for forever until we learn to do what Pete is describing. And this is everyone's like, oh well, we need, you know, right wing billionaires to fund all these things. Okay, why the fuss did they do that? You can't even convince them what it looks like when they win.

kind of cut me. But below the quick I don't know if that's a term people still use anymore, but it got under my seat. It happened to hit like all of my sensitivity buttons, and I will still champion his stuff. He is brilliant and he's doing fantastic work. And I will never say I won't even air our disagreement. I won't tell anybody what we disagree about. That's for me and him to talk and we sit down privately

and we can actually discuss that. But he's on my side and I'm on his side, just like Oran is on Darryl's side, and Darryl's on Orn's side even though they disagree, because they can prioritize things. Daryl knows that having a neighborhood full of Orans is great, and Oron

knows having a neighborhood full of Daryl's is great. Daryl knows having a government full of Orans is great, and Oran knows that having a government full of Daryl's is great, and that whatever the thing that they don't agree on doesn't fucking matter. And I think we need to luck. I think we need to do that at scale. I think that basically what we saw on that episode of What's it Called? I always forget the name. It's like, oh,

it's a one word name. Provoked, provoked. There we go what happened on that show in real time is something that we need to be doing all the time, because it's only when we can do that that we can eventually settle on a cohesive picture of this is what is attainable in the short term, this is what is attainable in the long term, This is how we structure things after that. Now you can paint a worldview that

you can sell people with money on. The One thing about the left is if you ask them roughly what it looks like when they win, they have enough slogans memorized where they can most of the time convince you

that they're in agreement on this. And that's what gives people the ability to donate tons of money to them, because they can paint a picture about what that money is going to be used for and how great it's going to be for the person that's giving that money and for the people receiving that money when they win. And that's why they get money to win, and that's why we don't A billionaire will never not be an

investor no matter what. Like they have a million people pitching them a million ideas all the time, and you need to be able to paint a picture of what it looks like in the future to pitch, like, what are you pitching? And I think the more serious people in our in our thing, Pete, I think we're doing that.

And I think the people that don't want to do that are gonna whether they know it or not, or whether they do it with intent or not, are going to find themselves not in the mechanisms of what's going to happen next.

get done if no one wants to credit for it. Yeah, And that's something I think that's really important, because that's not I mean that there are things that I've done and people I know have done and no one knows that they did it, yet a lot of people celebrated it, and to I think part of the reason it got done is because no one everybody was like, we don't need credit for it, just get it done. And you know, if you get credit for something, puts a bull's eye

on the next thing. If you're like, yeah, I did this, puts bulls eye on you the next time you try to do something. So you know, humility is Humility is important. And I think that you know what we see and you and I have talked about this before that a lot of the people out there who are quote unquote content creators, really they just want credit for being right. I was right about this. I was right about that. See how I predicted this? Now, what did their prediction?

How did their predictions change your life? Well? I knew this was going to happen, okay, so how did you benefit from that? Did you short of stock? Did you buy a stock? Did? What'd you do? Well? I knew. I get to brag about the fact that I watched the guy who told me this, and I told my friends and I was right.

people will have to be ann. I think as things progress, none of us will be. But that only happens if we win. Right, Why do we want to win? Is it because of how it will benefit us? And this is another thing about being ordered internally. One thing you could tell almost immediately about Marcus Aurelius, and this is another thing, is correct me if I'm wrong, Pete. But

the meditations were never published. They were just his internal notes, and I'm sure like if you found out that they did publish, he'd be probably mortified.

these are all separate. And you know they're separate because when a baby is born, it doesn't have any of that shit yet. It has no opinions, It has no beliefs, it has no opinions of others, no thoughts, it's just awareness. It's just soul and body. And that's where an ideal comes from. It is a layer deeper than the conscious mind.

The conscious mind wants recognition, the constant mind wants status because the constant mind can think about the not just mine, can think about how that status will benefit them, or how that credit will benefit them. And what you see him doing by reflecting again and again and again throughout his life, you can see him pushing that aside, that

conscious mind aside. And what matters to my soul well, that these people flourish, that no evil is done to them, that they have the means as God intended to self actualize, to be the best versions of themselves. None of those things benefit him. He's not going to wear fancier robes.

He's not going to get fancier robes. As you say here, To not busy myself with vain things, and to not easily believe those things which are commonly spoken by such as take upon them to mark wonders by sorcerers or prestidigitators or impostors concerning the power of charms and the driving out of demons or evil spirits, and the like. To not keep quails for the game, to not be mad at such things, or be offended by another man's

liberty of speech. I'm sorry I grabbed the wrong paragraph, and then I did not fall into the ambition of ordinary sophists, either to write tracts concerning the common theorems, or to exhort men unto virtue in the study of philosophy by basically grandstanding by public ortions. As also that I never, by way of ostentation, did affect to show myself an active, able man for any kind of bodily exercises. Marcus Aurelius mogged no one. He showed off. Never, This

is what he's saying. I have never, by way of ostentation, what is ostentatiousness, did affect the show of myself to be an active and able man in any kind of bodily exercises. And that I gave over the study of rhetoric and poetry and of elegant, neat language by basically speaking frankly, that I did not use the walk about the house in my long robes, nor to do any such thing. Moreover, I learned of him to write letters

without any affectation or intrigue in gossip. Right, he's basically telling you that the things he does that Rusticus taught him right is to not flatter himself, to not show off, to not seek, more importantly, to not seek the status giving of others to not seek the recognition of others. And this circles all the way back to what his mother taught him, and of my mother, I have learned to be religious and bountiful and to forbear not only

to do, but to intend any evil intent. So why is he not fall into ambition of ordinary sophists or to grandstand with large public orations to show how virtuous he is and how philosophically intelligent he is, or by way of ostentation, did affect the show of myself as an active, able bodied man for any other kind of exercise, or basically stroke himself being a word sell doing poetry and talking in neat, flowery language, or prance around his

house in his nicest gear. Because that means when he does do exercise right, when he does do oration right, or write tracts of theorems, or when he exerts exhorts men to virtue and study, the intent behind those actions is not for his own benefit. The intention matters. And that's why I say like it's it's a it's some things that you would read like mystical texts about why you do something right, and in that like reality isn't

what you think it is series we did Pete. We talked about like consciousness being able to affect random number generators, and they also did that test on money, right, So why you do things matters? Right? So God has built right and wrong into the universe. It's built into the

fundamental framework right that undergirds are reality. So one of the tests that Rupert Scheldric and Dean Rayden did was basically they had people concentrate on a certain dollar amount, right, and then they kept track of them and to see if they would buy any instance this money would fall into their lap through unexpected means that they did not initiate. And you can measure whether something is statistically significant or not right by basically how many how many degrees from random?

Is it like total randomness like winning a lottery ticket for instance. And what they found is okay to give a really dumb down example, when a person, let's say, wishes for not wishes, but just focus their consciousness on one hundred thousand dollars just dropping in their mailbox, the chances of that actually happening to that person were less than random, as in, one hundred thousand dollars will land in the mailbox of somebody not even thinking about it

sooner than it would the guy that is. That's funny. But what's even more interesting is, let's say the guy who's thinking about one hundred thousand dollars landing in the mailbox of his next door neighbor, right because his next door neighbor has cancer and the chemotherapy costs are eating through all of his neighbor's savings. And now his neighbor's about to lose his house because he was one hundred thousand dollars on his house and it's going to get

foreclosed on. Those people that wanted that thought about having one hundred thousand dollars land in their neighbors mailbox. Again, I'm dumbing down, and you know, taking liberties with the experiment and had nothing to do with mailboxes or one

hundred thousand dollars checks. The chances of one hundred thousand dollars landing in that person's neighbor's mailbox was not only more statistically significant, actually statistically significant so enough multiples above absolute randomness to where it is signaling that something else is happening. Right. So let's say if the landing in your your mailbox was negative, I don't know five percent, right, random person mailbox zero percent, So total randomness landing in

the cancer neighbors mailbox ten percent. So you've increased the chances of some random event happening from zero to ten percent because the action, the intent behind it was selfless. And they've proved this a bunch of different ways. So that means the intention in which you do in action affects the success of that action. So a leader that is acting out of selflessness, right, the thing that motivates him is not himself or his own self benefit, that

person is going to be more successful. Random chance is going to break his direction far more than the leader that is doing any such action for his own personal benefit. So God has written morality and virtue into the very

fabric of the universe. Right, there is no randomness. Randomness is something that is affected by our virtue and why we do things matters, And this is you'd only you would only are the only places you pick this up or in like you know, like a cult, mystic traditions or whatever that the intent in which something is done, or as a Christian in whose name something is done will affect the outcome. So are you acting selfishly or selflessly. Are you doing it in Christ's name or are in

your own? Who has the power? Here? Is it you that is making that check hit that mailbox? Or is it God? It's God, all right? So humility and selflessness are very important. So I find that really interesting that the overall theme in his governance and the way he acts in the world is entirely selfless. And he is constantly policing his own mind and reinforcing this again and again and again, so much so that he meditates on it daily. He takes credit for none of his positive attributes.

He is going through and enumerting all of the good things about him. Even his own virtue he does not take credit for because they're not his. They were given to him by something out with someone else. So even the best things about himself he will not attribute to his inate ability or his innate virtue. Marcus, why are you so kind? Oh? I'm not kind. I was shown this kind as how to be kind by this other person. So even in attributing his own virtues, there is selflessness.

Like the order of this person's internal state is I think what people should be focusing on.

talk about it publicly. You know, it doesn't always seem to be the you know, something that people want to do. But you know, I have no problem with it because if my even from a personal standpoint, a if you don't want to get involved in politics. You don't want to be public about anything that you believe if anything can help you just to thrive in your personal life. Yeah, I'll uh, I'll put a little bit of myself out there to see if it to see if it helps.