World War 3 Yaron Brook Show

Okay, we are back, guys, hopefully hopefully somebody is watching. Hopefully you know we're back. Give it a few minutes and everybody is going to be back, hopefully. Let people know in the other stream to come over here if the chat over there is still running. And yeah, the camera's doing it again. I thought I sold the problem, but I'm not so I haven't solved the problem. Okay, screens still tearing, but might not be fixable in a reasonable time frame. It looks like it's not the Uh.

Something about the equipment on the road was working the other day, so who knows. Maybe it's bannedwidth. I don't think it's bannedwith I think this is it. All right, let's go go. I want to tell you

about my talk at University of Utah yesterday. It was the Federalist Society, so it was at the law school. It was on free speech and Western civilization. That title created quite a still in the universe on the campus. Not only is free speech questionable these days, but it turns out the Western civilization it's not a concept people like, people support. It's a little i

don't know, west centric or something. In a multicultural world, it's not acceptable so anyway, so we got a good turnout for fet SoC is one of the largest fet SOX events I've done. Utah Law School is a relatively small law school is compared let's say a Harvard or something like that, and we got like seventy studence, which was fantastic, and most of them were not Federalist Society students, so they were students from the law school, but

from outside the Federalist Society. Many of them are leftists, And as a consequence, there was a really good mix of questions, really challenging, real positive back and forth. It was videotape, but I think really really poorly. Unfortunately, when I rely on other people to do this kind of works out, it doesn't really work out usually. But they said they would videotape it, they said they would have high quality. Anyway, we'll get some

videotape, we'll get audio. We'll see if it's any good and if it's worth publishing. But the Q and A was particularly excellent. Lots of challenging questions, lots of attend to insult me, or to catch me, or to get me at a contradiction, or to put me into a corner, or to you know what they were really a lot of them were trying to do is hold me right? You know? Is he a conservative? Is the A level? They couldn't figure out what I was. They couldn't figure

out where to pigeon me hold me. So that was a lot of fun. And hopefully that I'll be out at some point and uh and you'll be able to U you'll be able to enjoy that, uh and uh and benefit from it. But so that was a good a good event. Thank you to the organizers, thank you for putting it together, and uh and uh and yeah, really good event. And then today the Leadership program of the Rockies, which is always really good and uh was uh was fantastic, talked

about capitalism and I'll be I'll be doing that again. I'll be coming back to Denver for the leadership program in the Rockies in January. I do. I do two of these talks a year for the program. One is on what is capitalism and has capitalism this capitalism produced good results? And the second is the morality of capitalism. So I did the practical side on January. I'll do the morality of capitalism. All right, let's see. Oh,

so let's talk about World War Three. What a topic, right, But I think it was good, good clickbait. But more importantly, it's a topic everybody seems to be talking about. There's a lot of discussion out there about World War three. It is, I think, in the minds of many, many people, a real possibility. I think people are looking around the world and they're seeing a war in Europe, a major war in Europe, a major war between two very you know, well armed military forces on

the continent of Europe. I don't think anybody expected to see that. They see a war now in Israel, and everybody is looking worth a lot of caution and a lot of angs towards China and to see what's gonna happen with

China and Taiwan. So I think that's one reason why there's a lot of angst, there's a lot of warri when the world sees Russia in China aligned with one another and the two of them aligned with Iran, and Iran being behind Hamas and the Palestinians, that I think is a source of significant warr If you add in North Korea, North Korea is aligned with Russia, it's providing weapons and ammunition to the Russians. And in a sense, if each one of those is a separate conflict, if each one of those is a

fragment, then it's no big deal. Then there's a conflict in Ukrainian, there's a conflict in Gaza, and there's a conflict maybe in China Taiwan, and each one of those can be dealt with independently, and it was probably not that big of a deal, although Taiwan would be. The lenge becomes is if you start seeing them as a pattern, and if you start seeing it as a the the the Russia China Iran block, as a block that

is challenging the United States and the West. And once you see that, then it you know, there's reason to worry, there's reason to be concerned. Add to that the fact that there's a lot of talk out there in the world about about the global South, about bricks, the kind of bricks, bricks being Brazil, Russia, India, China, uh in South Africa, as being an alternative to the West, about an alternative currency and new

currency to replace the dollar. So there is this real potential of of more and more and more real sustainable angst, and people really worried and seeing this not in terms of independent, unrelated conflicts, but it's part of now a real, not yet world war, but a real global challenge. The global South plus China, Russia, Iran really facing off against the United States and the West. And then if China invades Taiwan, does that become a real

world war? It does it become a real world war? Even if China does not face off in Taiwan. If China just continues to support Russia, and if it's willing to support Yuan and willing to support Hamas in the Middle East, what does that look like and to what extent does that evolve into a world war? So it does. I mean there is a real life, a global geopolitical realignment going on right now that I don't think most of

us really saw coming. I don't think any almost anybody, well, there's some exceptions, but I don't think they Many people expected a war in Ukraine. I don't think many people expected China to become to move towards otherraitarianism as quickly as it has to reject kind of the liberal the trend towards liberalization as quickly as it did. And then I don't think people expected China and Russia then to align somehow with Iran. I mean both China and Russia. Both

China and Russia have any islam is a problem. Both China and Russia are threatened by Islam. China have the Uga problem in Western China, which they are dealing with with concentration camps and with you know, collective punishments on a massive scale. China has had Islamish problems. They suddenly had it in Chechnia. If you remember the two Chechna Wars, talk about killing innocence and flattening cities. What Israel is doing in Gaza is like kids play as compared to

what Russia did in Chechnia. Nobody said anything at that time. It is interesting, and this is what you know. It just doesn't aside here. People wonder why everybody jumps from criticizing Israel to anti semitism. And I think the main reason a lot of us jump from people attacking Israel to a broader idea that this is motivated by anti Semitism is the fact that Israel is not doing anything that other countries have not done. Israel is not doing anything that

a lot of other countries have not done. It's not happening right now as we speak, in a lot of other parts of the world, Old Sudan, where the Islam is just slaughtering men, women and children, where there's a brutal civil war, you know, Russia in chechena war Yemen right now where the hoodies and the civil war in Yemen where civilians, hundreds of thousands civilians are casualties of that war. Not a peep out of the world,

not a comment, nothing. Israel's defending yourself, clearly, defending yourself, clearly responding to aggression, clearly responding to an enemy committed to its own destruction. And the whole world goes apoplectic. And every story now has ceasefire somewhere in it. There's this happening, and what about the ceasefire? And this happening? But what about a ceasefire? Is if Israel has some more responsibility to do a ceasefire? Why because you know civilians are dying in Gaza,

Why didn't Hamas think of that? Aren't there the responsibility comas anyway, we've talked about all that. You've got a situation where Russia and China aligned with the Islamist regime, which they shouldn't really be aligned with because it's not their friend. It is indeed their enemy, and they know it's their enemy, and they've taken action against Islamists in their own countries. But it is an alliance of convenience. It's an alliance of convenience focused on one thing and one

thing primarily, and that is to be anti US. So is this the because of four World War? Are we heading towards a major conflict between Russia, China, Iran and the Global South? I don't know what the global South is? Is that Brazil, Argentina? Is it so all of South America? Does it include much of Southeast Asia? Does the Global South include? Is India part of this because they're part of breaks? Does it include in Indonesia and Malaysia? Does it include South Africa? Does include the rest

of Africa? Nobody really says. They talk about a global South as if it's some kind of you know, one thing, one block, and of course it's not. Are they countries in that block or would like to join Russia and China in attacking the West and in the US? Maybe maybe not clear who. So there's a there's a lot of hand waving when people talk about the Global South, and people talk about this idea, this potential, this potential of of of World War three. So it's utly who the who

the combent that's are. You can see Russia and China. You can see ron is clearly being hostile to the United States and to Europe. But what does a World War three mean? A World War three would mean, you know, UH, Russia and China being willing to engage militarily against the United States and Europe, NATO, maybe against Japan, South Korea, Australia, kind of a Western if you will alliance. Does that seem feasible? Does it seem that that's where they're heading now? I think there's at least two

parties that you could imagine would be interested in such a such a would would be at least be flirting with that as a kind of an interesting idea. One is Prutin, who I think is is is UH is a megalomaniac and and and really you know, embraces conflict with the West and UH and believes in some kind of Russian destiny to achieve. But the thing about Russia is that in such a alliance with China and Van Russia is clearly a junior partner

to Sorry, Russia is clearly a junior partner to China. Do Putin really embrace a role as a junior partner? Does Putin really want to conflict with NATO? He's having a hard enough time with Ukraine. Ukraine is undermanned, under equipped, It still has mostly second tier weapons systems from the from the West. Russia is not fighting against F thirty five. It's not fighting against you know, the full military force that a NATO could put together, that

the United States could put together, and it's not doing well. Argue about how badly it is doing, but clearly it's not doing well. Does Russia really want to expand that conflict to armies that I think it is quite reasonable and obvious would completely annihilate it and destroy it. Well, certainly not alone, but would it be willing to do it together with China? And that

puts into question, well, what does China want? Does China really want a war right now, a significant war, a big war with the West. Does it want to risk losing? It's on this path that at least until a few years ago, seem to be leading it towards riches to its success to its power. Does it really want to jeopardize whatever path it's on for the sake of a war now risk losing it probably would lose. Do

either one of those Russia or China want to risk nuclear war? And annihilation does strike me the China or Russia a suicidal that the leaderships is suicidal. China has ambitions, ambitions that I think more realistic and are more substantive than Russian ambitions. But those ambitions first have to be achieved on the economic wealth front inside China before China can be dominant internationally and can take on the United

States militarily. And there's no question China knows this. They're not delusional, They're not as crazy as I think Putin is. So what is the incent of China has to go to war with the United States? I think the only incentive they would have and the only circumstances I think there are probably two circumstances that they would do it when is if they thought they could win. I mean, they thought they could win decisively, that the odds were clearly

in their favor. And I think that's unequivocally just not the case. They would cause a lot of damage to the United States even at a conventional war. But the chances of winning a below fifty percent. I mean, the chances of taking Taiwan are not that great. And Taiwan's a tiny little island

with a small military. You know, partially because America, in Japan and South Korea might come to Taiwan's defense, but also just Taiwan is a strong military and amphibious landing and all of that and the terrain and not easy. None of that is easy. So Chinese not can engage you a war that it is likely to lose. It'll wait. And I think the Chinese believe, I think falsely, but they believe that they will get back on tract

for economic growth. They will back on track to economic wealth. They will grow, they will achieve, they will succeed, they will become the richest country in the world. They'll invest heavily in the military, and then and then they will take over the world. Then, well, maybe not take over the war, but take on the United States and take Taiwan. I also don't think China has ambitions, let's say, to occupy the United States in the same way that I do think Russia has ambitions to occupy Europe.

I do think Russia has ambitions in its fantasy world to basically control all of Western Europe. I don't think China has those ambitions. It's philosophy doesn't drive. It wants to be the respected, dominant player in the world. It doesn't necessarily want to rule the entire world. Just don't see China's motivation to launch into World War three. The other reason it might do it, when I said, is if they thought they could win. I mean thought confidently

they could win. The second is if things are so bad in China that the only way for she to survive somehow is to launch a war. But I just don't I don't see that. I mean, she has complete control of what's going on in China, there's no real opposition to him, and I think a war would completely destabilize his rule. There's no reason to believe that a war would actually solidify his control over China quite to the country. So it is as I said, I am skeptical about China's incentives. Ewan

is different, but Iran. Here it has to be clear, is the junior junior partner. Iwan has no economy to speak up. It has oil exports, but the oil export terminals could be taken out basically in a day by an air attack by Israel or the United States. Iran has global ambitions. Iran wants the domination of Islam over the world. Iran is some mystical

unattached from reality. Sense believes that that is possible. Iran wouldn't mind nuclear war because it is a suicietal death worshiping ideology that many of the people who controlled Iran have. They share that with Kramas. But Iran has no military force, It has no real military standing. It poses no military threat to the West. Israel, the United States, Western Europe, NATO could annihilate the Iranian military and the Iranian regime in a matter of hours if they chose

to do so. There's just no military threat that Iran poses to the West. It only poses a military threat to the West because the West won't go anything right. I mean, American basis in Syria and Iraq are being attacked almost every hour, maybe twice an hour. In the US is doing nothing zero is zilch. That makes Iran seem incredibly powerful, but they are not.

So we have three countries, the one that Creek Mayhem in the world they don't share interests. Russia has its ion, its empire in Europe. China has an eye on being a dominant economic and ultimately military power. Iran wants to control of the world through Islam. They don't share much in common except the hatred of the West, a hatred of Israel, which is surprising coming from China. But I guess not so much hatred of the West, the hatred of Israel. But no positive framework. No, I don't know.

Communism, global communism. We're going to instill communism all over the world. No global global vision for you know, the Arian race and space for the Arian race. Again, Russia wants Russia wants Europe, and it wants to expand its territory. But it's not some global ideology driving it. There's just no basis to take this to World War three. There's just no there there eight They would lose, and they would lose pretty quickly depending on how

it developed. But be there's no incentive. The main party it's such a world would have to be China. China is the only country in the world today they could feel the military they could challenge, if at all, the United States and its allys so with that China, nothing goes. Russia is not going to see leadership of World War three to China. China has no interest in going to the war since Russia can take Europe, so that it's

a distraction, and there are territorial disputes between China and Russia. Who gets the rule Asia. There's massive competition between China and Russia over who gets the influence Central Asia, the Stans, the various countries that are Stans. It's just basically no rational basis for that matter, any basis. There's never a rational basis for there's just no basis for these countries to launch World War three against the United States and Europe. Now we could get there by accident.

I guess that would have to involve China invading Taiwan and then Russia expressing sympathy with the Chinese, and somehow United States getting imashed in defending Taiwan and not being successful, and the Iranians using that opportunity to create format in the Middle East. So you can imagine as something descending into a kind of World War three scenario where there are there's fighting going on in Asia and Europe and in the Middle East, all kind of guided by the same alliance. But even

there, a war in the Middle East cannot be sustained. If if you want is really at war with the United States, and the Unites States takes out the Iranians, war in the Middle East would end pretty quickly, you know. It is all can defend itself for the most part, and and whatever resources the United States has in the Middle East could be deployed to Asia or to Europe or whatever is needed. Again, if NATO got into this war, the Ukrainian war would be over a long long time ago. You

know. So there's so and then what do you do do you do you take Moscow? Or do you fear nuclear war? So you just hold them at the ball. I just don't see it how how the pieces come together.

Now. I'm not saying there will never be a World War three, because the real impetus for World War three is not China, Russia, Iran. The real impetus impetus for World War three is not the strength of our enemies. It's not the strength of those countries. It's not some alternative competing ideology. There is none. It's not like Russia has an ideology other than Russia. That's the ideology. It's not like China has an ideology. Their

ideology is not communism. It's not exactly anything. It's Chinese philosophy applied to China. It's control. It's the Chinese Communist Party, which is badly named because they're not communists controlling China. But there's no like the Soviet Union had this notion of global you know, just like a global jihad, a group global communism. There's no China has no ambitions for global communism. Iran has ambitions for global jihad. But Iran is an insignificant player. So it's not

the strength of their ideology that would lead to World War three. What could lead to World War three the weakness of the West, the capitulation of the West, the lack of any kind of ideology and any kind of belief in any kind of self esteem in the West. It is the West's collapse that

could lead to World War three. If the West descends into chaos, if the West descends into you know, if it starts shrinking economically, if it goes into real stagnation or worse, real depression, if the United States cannot keep up its military, if it's military starts to decay because we don't have the funds anymore, because our government is bankrupt to actually keep up maintaining our

ships, maintaining our tanks, maintaining our airplanes. If NATO starts splintering and fighting within each other, if Israel doesn't have the courage or the determination to finish the job in places like Gaza and ultimately in Iran, If the United States just leaves the United the Middle East with its tail between its legs and never takes care of the enemy, that kind of weakness which we are already exhibiting, which is already part of the West, but not that could lead

to woe. That could lead to somebody Russia, China, Islam taking advantage in trying, trying to test poking the West, poking the United States, instigating wars, and ultimately that could develop into a world war. But it won't happen as long as the West is strong. In the West is not because of any particular virtues right now, but the West is strong because of a history. The West is strong because we still have the best military force

in the world, and we're very rich. We're very rich because of our past, not so much because of our present, but because of our past. As we become poorer, I think China, Russia, Iran become poorer as well. But as the West becomes poorer, and if that poverty accelerates, if that really speeds up and it becomes a real force, yeah, people will want to take advantage of that. People will start chipping away, people will start poking at us, and people will be willing to risk a

world war in circumstances like that. So I have to admit that in the

world in which we live right now, over the next ten years, let's say fifteen years, I believe we will face the World War three, We're gonna face a lot of challenges. I still don't know how Ukraine is gonna end, because I don't know that the West has the resilience to continue to support the Ukrainians and they fight against Russia. I have no doubt the Ukrainians can win if they get the kind of support they need from the West,

and they need to win. They have to win in order to make clear to the Russians how weak they are and how united and strong the West potentially is. That is what to keep the barbarians at bay, What keeps the barbarians at Bay is our strength. A weakness will only encourage them. I don't know exactly how things are gonna work out in Gaza. I fear that is well again will not do everything that needs to be done. It's doing more than it's ever done before, arguably, and it isn't finished yet.

But will it go all the way? Will it do what is Will it destroy Hamas? And more than that, will it destroy the will of the Palestinian people to continue to fight Israel? Because Hamas is not the problem. I know this is politically incorrect to say, but Ramas is not the problem. The problem is the Palestinian people. The problem is that overwhelming majority of

the Palestinian people want to continue a war with Israel. We have to worry about Taiwan and China, and China will continue to test us and test the Taiwanese. China will continue to do that. But again, I think the likely of that China becomes much much stronger than it is today is small because China is facing massive economic problems that are not going to be solved easily and

only going to get worse. China is not going to become as rich as it believes it is, and I think that if we continue to supply weapons to Taiwan, Taiwan will only become stronger and only become a more substantial enemy, a substantial a challenge for the Chinese. Well, you know, you have to keep an eye on China, you have to keep an eye on Taiwan. I don't worry about Taiwan. I don't worry about I worry about

Israel, but I don't worry about it survival. Israel is strong. It's not going to do the right everything he needs to do to crush the Pealstinian people's will to fight it. But what Israel can do is it can kick the can down the road and we'll just all Israel is doing now is what israe will do is to guarantee that that war will continue. But it's not

gonna. It's not gonna. It's not represents the individual anymore than the disgusting, horrible retreat of the United States from Afghanistan guaranteed a the end of the United States. No, it was another sign of weakness, perpetuation of a war with Islamism. But when you know Israel as US, it's just not going to disappear. So I have to admit I'm not worried about World War

three. I'm not worried about external threats. I worry about internal threats. I worry about the disappearance of freedom in the United States. I worry about the decline of economic liberty in this country, a personal liberty in this country. I worry about the state growing and growing and growing in power, no matter who who is in the White House, who runs Congress. I worry about the tribalism in this country, about the hatred that dominates our political discourse.

I worry about the fact that our politicians cannot get anything done, and a lot needs to be done in order to dismantle the power of the American state. I worry about Donald Trump getting re elected and moving us another few steps towards authoritarianism and a complete breakdown of the American system of government. So

the United States is where the problems are. I worry about the fact that Europe, because of the European Union, because of the regulatory state that is the European Union, is not growing economically, sees no real innovation, entrepreneurship is in decline, and at some point Europe will start turning against itself. At some point when there's no economic growth, Europeans will start thinking of it as a zoo some game. The Germans will start resenting the Italians who within

somebody else, and you'll get strife, strife within Europe. So, uh, you know, the United st So the real challenge we face is not

a World War three. The real challenge we face is the weakness of our own countries. It's the lack of any kind of unifying philosophy. It's the lack of any kind of ideals, it's the lack of any kind of values. It's the lack of any principles, and it's a lack of a focus on freedom. And right now it's hard to be optimistic about the direction in the United States is heading. I mean, in spite of the horror of a first run presidency, we're going to get a second one maybe, and

if not, we'll get a horror of second bien presidency. I mean talk about horrors of horrors. I don't think we're going to get a civil war. I feel much more that we ultimately attract a charismatic, authoritarian leader. But even if that doesn't happen, what I do see just this slow decline.

What I do see is the country struggling to pay its bills. By the way, the government would probably be shut down a week from now, not because anybody wants to shrink government significantly, but because you Republicans just don't have a clue what they're doing. I worry that the Western world is going to fragment, disintegrate, turn against each other, be weakened and destroyed from

within. Europe has a massive Muslim problem that it's gonna struggle with and it's going to have to deal with for decades to come, and is not equipped to deal with it. It doesn't know what to do. The United States

has a leftist problem, but it has a right wing problem. It has an incompetence problem, it has a tribalist problem it has and of course all of this leads to the economic stagnation, no development, no growth, no innovation, and that ultimately would lead to military weakness, and that could lead to World War Iie in ten fifteen years, I'll still be a life I guess. So. Yeah, it's it's depressing out there, not so much

because of Russia, China, an Iran. I don't really worry much about Russia China any roon I don't think you should worry much about Russia China any roon. I think you should worry about what's happening inside America. We should worry about what's happening inside Europe. I mean, we should stand up to Russia, China and Iran. We should do all kinds of things to stand up for them, push them back, delay, weaken them to the extent that we can, and in the case of Iran, we should just destroy

them. But the real challenges there were a cause of World War Three, there were a cause of real disaster in the West is going to be the West. What we need is what we've always what I've always talked about,

we need. We need a philosophical revolution. We need a real dramatic change in the philosophy of the culture in the West, in America. And without it, you know, again for talks in four days, and you have to say that the ignorance out there, the I mean the ignorance, are going to give them the benefit of the doubt. That it's mostly ignorance is astounding. The lack of understanding word America is about what it stands for, its value, what it represents, astounding. The lack of knowledge of any

history, of any understanding of history, astounding. We can't survive as a civilization with this level of ignorance, in this extent of bad philosophy. So World War IIE is more likely to be a slow decline. Maybe then there'll be a world war. There might not even be a world war. Then there will just be a slow decline. And that's what I see in the West day slow, slow, slow decline. All right, on that wonderful optimistic note, there's not gonna be a world go through and it's and soon.

That's optimistic. I'm making a prediction. We'll see. Maybe I'm wrong. Let's look all right, We've got a bunch of super chat questions. Thank you for the super chatters. You too can ask a chat question super chat. Let me remind you this show is sponsored by the Rand Institute. And you know, if you if you go to your on, if you go to sorry Ironman dot org, slash let me find this yeah slash start here, you'll find a lot of information about the programs that I'm an institute.

Uh So, as you know, I'm Rand wrote that the Fountain it was a guide post for young people in the world, a very if you guideposts to find. She called it a confirmation of the spirit of youth. It's exactly the spirit that we need today. I know. An instrud is currently experiencing a huge influx of demand from young people requesting Iran's novels. One request every twenty minutes, one request every twenty minutes, hundreds every day.

On Tuesday, November twenty eighth, we're celebrating the success and the inspiration of Ironran's novels that it gives us as well as young people who are seeing who are what this doing, who we're seeing read them for the first time. We're we're gonna do a celebration of this. It'll be Tuesday, November twenty eighth at two pm East Coast time. We'll be talking about the work that Dinmand Institute does, the exciting progress the institute has made. You could go

to ind dot oak start here to learn more and sign up. So don't forget to sign up for this important event that is going to happen on November twenty eight. You can do that now at you at dot oak slash here. All right, let us go to super chat. Don't forget. You can support the show in super Chat or with a sticker. We've got a lot of people watching. One hundred and seventy people watching right now. We're about two hundred short of our goal, So police consider supporting the show.

You can support the show monthly. You on bookshow dot com, slash support, Patreon, a subscribe start all right where you can search your on bookshop. Let's start with Richard. Richard said, this makes this is forty dollars. Let's make sixty out of one hundred for a song with you. I did the last twenty on what I thought was a live show, but it was an applause. I sent you an email with a screenshot when it happened.

I appreciate that. Just send me the name of the song you want me to review, Okay, Chad. Do altruists have to value justice in order to support injustice to make a worthy sacrifice? No, I don't think it works that way. You know it's not that that God. We need an example here to think about this, do do uh? You know, do autrus support Tramas rather than Israel as a form of injustice? Uh? Because they think through and they say, oh yeah, Israel isn't the right.

But what I actually want to do is sacrifice, So I'm going to support Ramas. I don't think that's what happens. Altruism is internalized. It becomes, if you will, automatized. It's part of their value response. They value Haramas because they're altruists. It's not that they and they think Ramas the justices on Ramas because they're oppressed, because oppression defines justice. The sacrifice is internalized. It's not the oh, I need a sacrifice today. It's

not how altruism works. It conditions your thinking to make you sacrifice, to drive you towards the action that is a sacrifice or the idea that is a

sacrifice. Hopefully that's clear. Chat okay, Liam says, I can see how nationalism an existential crisis can bring people together to take life and values more seriously. Look at it as well. Those people love intensely. Yeah, but it'll pass right, So it's not it's crisis does not change minds. Crisis brings people together for a while, It allows them to challenge the status

quo for a while, but it doesn't change anything fundamentally. And it is still the case that you know that as soon as the crisis is over, they go back to the old habits. They go back complacency. I don't think Israel has changed. Israel doesn't love intensely because of nationalism. I don't

even think loves intensely because of extential crises. It's rasy As love intensively because they have a good life, because they value their freedom to some extent, and because they have a set of values that dictates that they want to change the world. They want to do stuff. They are motivated, they are productive, and I think that's what leads to intense loving. It's intense living, and maybe that is intensified by an existential threat. I don't think it's

intensified by nationalism. I don't think nationalists speak people love more intensely. They might love strangers more. That's a really risky proposition. I don't think they

love in the sense that we mean love more intensely. James, what do you think of Mauritius. Mauritius, the country doesn't that potential to be another Singapore? Are there any islands or places that are going to be great to have residents or place to live in? During World War three? How does Southeast Asia come into play in World War Three? You know, I don't know much about Mauritius. There's no reason to believe that it's going to become

a Singapore. Singapore was Singapore because it had something very very rare. It had a benevolent dictator who was inspired by the West, a benevolent dictator who was inspired by you know, British common law, by system of freedom of contract law, somebody you understood that the economic success comes from entrepreneurs who are left free to innovate and produce. And even there, they're not completely free in Singapore. And yet you know, it's also a culture that restricts freedoms

and other dimensions across many other dimensions. I don't know that you're going to find another place that's exactly Singapore. And who would be the inspiration? When Singapore came into being, there were lots of inspirations. The West generally was an inspiration. But the West since then has become such a mixed bag and unprincipled and doesn't have any self esteem and doesn't stand up for itself. Freedom, free markets are uninspiring. So I just don't see it. Is there

a place that could become the next Singapore? I mean Singapore? You know, World War three happens, you could go to Singapore. Would Singapore be safe? I don't know. I mean depends how the World War three comes about. But look, if China lands up having territorial ambitions, if China wants to dominate Southeast Asia, then why wouldn't it occupy Singapore? Why wouldn't it invade Vietnam and try to take Taiwan and that whole region. And maybe

World War three happens because of a conflict between India and China. And if a conflict between India and China, that whole region is going to be affected. I don't know if you want to be in that region. So I don't know how you are saved where you are saved in World War three. Now again, I don't think it's gonna happen anytime soon, so I wouldn't worry about it. But but where do you go? I don't know. You know, maybe South America is not part of World War three. It's

not clear anybody is going to be seeking It's not close to anybody. Any of the combatants right Russia, Europe, Middle East in flames. Who's going to go to Latin America? So maybe somewhere in South America Uruguay. Uruguay is a relatively It's between Brazil and Argentina. It's a relatively relatively free place, relatively good rule of law, relatively stable, relatively low crime relatives to South America. Uruguay. Maybe Iurguay is a place you want to go.

A lot of the rich of Brazil and Argentina have homes in Iuruguay and plan to escape there if things get really bad. So but I don't I think if you assume China is going to be involved, I'd be wary of choosing any place in Asia. All Right, thank you, James. That was

a fifty dollar question, really appreciated. Okay, here's one hundred dollars one from not another account. All right, not another count says great shows. Given that the only way to finally defeat an enemies to destroy its will to fight, it seems to me that the only way to decisively and Islam terrorism is to demonstrate that Allah is impotent by destroying the holiest mosques in Mecan Medina. Thoughts. I mean, I have no objection, ultimately, particularly after

nine eleven, to destroy Mecan Medina. But I'm not sure that would do it. I'm not sure that would be enough. Religionists have the capacity to rationalize things like that quite well. Suddenly Islam is being defeated over and over and over again, and God has not stood by them. So it is it is they can rationalize it away. I don't know what kind of mechan Medina attacking Mekan Medina, what impact that would have on Islam. I'm not

sure surrender is what the response would be. You know, their basic rationalizations could be we have not been dedicated enough to so God is sending out a message. It could be this devil of the West is even a big a devil than we thought. Look, the only way to defeat the enemy is to defeat the enemy first identified and then defeated. What destroying Islamic terrorism requires

is a multi pronged, coordinated attack on the bastions of Islamic totalitarianism. That means the destruction of Iran, of this regime in Iran, not the country, but the regime, the elimination of its military, of its National Guard, of its ability to export oil, of its institutions of governance and of the and of you know, it's institutions of the government and including its institutions of learning where they learn this kind of interpretation of Islam. So I think

it requires the taking out of Iran. Second, it requires the taking out of the various organizations that affiliated now. Taking out of Iran will go a long way to take these institutions out because they take they want ally and they want those of capital. But that means hamas Islamic jihad, Buslim brotherhood and all the varieties there are, which again I don't think would be that difficult to do. Once Israel the United States together are committed to doing it,

the West NATO are committed to doing it. Third, it requires that the Gulf States, Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Gulf States abandoned the radical form of Islam. Explicitly right now they pretend well, implicitly and explicitly right now they pretend, but they cultivate radical Islam on the side. They're afraid to challenge it directly. Saudi Arabia has to be made to understand it to the extent that they will protect the radical Islamists to the extent that they support

them. The United States will either withdraw support for them or just replace them, just get rid of the of the King of the Kings of Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia has no sense of how well it does have a sense, but we don't exploit that sense. How dependent NBS and the rest of the Saudis are in America, how much they need us one hundred times more than

we need them. We need to make that very clear to them and demand demand that they pacify whatever elements of radical Islam they have within the regime. So I think Saudi Arabia needs to be dealt with. I don't think militarily is necessary, but it needs to be dealt with. It needs to have

a solid understanding who the boss is and who they cannot offend. In terms of supporting organizations, it's still true the charities in Saudi Arabia, though hobbies are still popular in Saudi Arabia, are still supporting Islamist theocratic organizations and schools and learning all over the world. And that needs to stop, and he needs to stop yesterday. That's how you defeat them. It's just no other

way. I don't think bomb on MECAD Medina would be enough. I think you need to do that plus everything else that I said, or if you do everything else. I said, I'm not sure you need to bomb Meca Medina. All right, Michael says, I had a prof tell me Hitland and Nazis were copying the American ideal manifest destiny as justification to expand their empire. When people make giant leaps in logic, they have to be dishonest and motivated by evil. That is clearly dishonest, that is so evasive of reality.

It's definitely that is evil, and it's driven by a hatred, hatred of America. To associate America in any way with the Nazis is just the peak of dishonesty, and it's a hatred of America, which a lot of people have. Unfortunately they're out there. Both the left and the libertarians seem to embrace that hatred of America. So no, you know, the manifest

destiny is not a manifest destiny of a race. The manifest destiny is the destiny of a country that is a country based on them all principle, the principle of individual rights, the extent that it was used in various periods of time to justify racism. Racism is bad, but that racism never elevated itself to the level of the Nazis, and when it did, like through slavery,

there was a Civil War in the United States to eradicated. And even then, the slavery was not everywhere in the United States, it didn't infect

vast parts of the United States. Harper, Vivic's absolute asonine and dishonest comments in Ukraine and is constant kissing up the Trump are pathetic. He has lost my vote. I think DeSantis is the most competent and reasonable choice. I certainly agree with about Vivic. I mean, Vivic is just is becoming Nattia as he becomes more desperate, as he drops in the polls and is becoming

more desperate for attention. He is becoming Nattia. He's a guy who I don't think is stupid enough to believe in conspiracy theories, but he's ridiculous comments in Ukraine and even some of his comments in Israel, and his comments about building a wall on the Canadian border and going to war with Mexico all nutty and and and crazy, and this guy should not be a lot in the

White House. Of course, we're gonna elect Trump, so you know, we don't have standards in terms of sanity and uh and and the White House. But yes, I think Vivic is particularly bad. I think is sucking up to Trump is awful. And I think his but I think his positions and these issues, He's got a lot of good stuff, and it's sad to see the mixture of a few good things that he has to say with all this really really bad stuff, really really bad stuff. As with the

Santis, you know, I I don't like the Santas. I don't think he's a good choice. I think in many respects he's terrible, but I would take him over the alternatives. Other than I think the best candidate out there is Nikki Haley. I think she's in some polls leading DeSantis. I think she could win. I definitely think she could be Biden. I think she'd be a decent I think she'd be a decent president, you know, not a great president, but a decent president. And uh, you know,

I don't think Vivic wants to be a VP. I don't think he has any chance in hell. That Trump nominated it takes Vivic as a VP candidate. I mean, Vivic is too charismatic, too energetic, too domineering for Trump to take him out. Trump needs somebody subservient. He needs something, somebody like Mike Pence. I mean, the only person who might have a chance is Nikki Haley. But I don't think anybody else on that stage is going to be a vice president. So candidate with Trump, j J

jigbees. If the uproar driving anti Israeli sentiment is fundamentally anti Semitic, what is driving the pro Israeli sentiment? The issue brings our passion in people, regardless of relations one may have or not have with either side. Look, I think that the modern left and the the mo and left. Let's start with the mode left. I get a show on the left and anti Semitism.

I think the modern Left is necessarily anti Semitic just because of their logic of oppressor and oppressed, and viewing everything from the perspective of oppressor and oppressed. Jews are too successful, therefore they must be their pressor therefore we must be anti Jews in that sense, they're anti Semitic. They're anti Jews for being Jews. So I think the modern Left is indeed anti Israel and anti

Semitic. And it doesn't mean everybody who's anti Israel is antisemitic. Right, but it does mean that some people are in a significant number of people on the modern rights the same thing. The modern right is anti Semitic. You can see it in their statements, in the way they articulate and Muslims Hamas is anti Semitic. You see it in the fact that they don't talk about annihilating Israelis they talk about annihilating Jews. So I'm not sure what the issue

is. So to pro Israel is to be pro Israel. It's to be somebody. You know a lot of reasons why you would be pro is l Your pro isl because you're pro American and you see Israel as an ally. Your pro Israel because your poor individualism and you see Israel as standing up relatively for individual freedom is compared to the barbarism of Hamas. You're pro Israel because you see in the geopolitical scheme of things, it's good for the West if

Israel wins. Your pro Israel because Israel's fighting the same enemy as the United States fighting. There are lots of reasons to be pro Israel that don't have to do with pro Jewish or anti Jewish. But the reality is that the reasons people have for hating Israel depressive. You know the success of Israel. The label of Israeli as a suppressors is something they can easily and do extrapolated about all Jewish people and anti Semitic as well. I think I understood the

question J. J. Decrees. Let me know if I did not lebrn What inspired the positive sense of life in eighteen hundreds, How does it differ from what influences today's negative sense of life? That's a great question. What inspired the positive sense of life in eighteen hundreds? Was the Enlightenment in the seventeen hundreds. It was a philosophical revolution that elevated reason, elevated human competence,

human ability. And one of the things that is common to the Enlightenment and is a theme throughout the Enlightenment, is the possibility and the virtue of progress, of the future being better than the past, which is a new idea because it was never being progress in the past, or very little progress in the past. So the idea that progress was good and progress was achievable

and probably was doable and there was no limit to it. The idea that human beings were able, competent, could understand the world, and achieve great things in the world comes out of the Enlightenment. And finally, the idea that happiness is achievable, the pursuit of happiness, and arguably a unifying factor of the Enlightenment is the idea that happiness is achievable. Individual should achieve, should pursue happiness and try to achieve happiness, and that unify at least I'm

all thinking of the Enlightenment. So it's an overwhelmingly positive view of the world, an overwhelmingly pro man view of the world, an overwhelmingly pro reason view of the world, an overwhelmingly po individual view of the world. And that drove this sense of life, a happy, positive, engaging sense of life. Man's competent and able to be on this earth and be successful on it.

Switch to the twentieth century. Suddenly, since World War One, man is fallible, but worse, he's riddled with the original sin, not just coming from Christianity but from our secular philosophers. Yeah, there's a whole topic there. We'll talk about it another time. Man is falling. So in a sense, taking christian any more seriously, a sense that progress is not that good. Suddenly we get that today progress has limits. Progress is bad,

bad for the environment. Let's say the whole environmentalist issue. People are going to end the world. Individualism is bad. Individualism means, you know, isolationism, depression, detachment from the good, an ambrasive collectivism at least the beginning of the twentieth century, an ambrasi of nihilism towards the end of the twentieth century. But fundamentally, it all boils down to count the evil

thing that con did, which is separate reason from reality. That is, if reason is impotent, impotent, there's no reason I have a positive sense of life. If reason is impotent, things are not going to go well. If reason is impotent, we can't know reality. We can't know the truth with dependent on mystics or dependent relation with dependent on religion, life sucks. The world sucks. Yeah, so it really does bail down to a

respectful reason. In the twentieth century, at least qua intellectuals, we've seen a dramatic decline in respect for reason, which is filtered through the society that has led to a deep pessimism. Whether it's on the left environmentalism or on the right traditionalism, they're all fundamentally pessimistic. About the future, pessimistic of that state of man, pessimistic about the ability of human beings to be successful

in the future, and that is destructive for sense of life. All right, Howard, how should the US and Israel deal with Katu? I mean, the US should first of all le eve qata. Israel should be fear free to assassinate, bomb, do whatever is necessary in Katau to destroy the people Haramas operatives who live in Katau. Katau should be told without any question, to the extent that they are funding terrorism, they are target on the

list of targets for both Israel and the United States. That is, if they send money to Ramas, they become an enemy of Israel, and Israel has the weapons systems to destroy them, and it will. It's a tiny little country with very little resources other than royal and no real military capabilities in Israel or the United States should destroy them to the extent that they support Isis or a Kaida or Ramas or any terrorist Islamist terrorist organization that poses a threat

to the United States or Israel. Thomas says, yes. Mean. While Thomas I would have had many things to criticize about the US in nineteen forty one, but I would have been one hundred percent pro American in World War Two. Equally, one can have criticism of politics of Israeli government, but be one hundred percent Proisal in this conflict. Absolutely, and that's me right.

I was very critical of the Nitenniel government, have been for twenty years, thirty years, forty years, fifty I mean, my whole life, I've been critical of the Israeli government. I can't remember a time where I was happy with the Israeli government. I've always criticized them, I've always saught thought they were terrible, and yet in this conflict I'm one hundred percent behind them, because when you're facing with evil, you have got a side with

whatever elements of good they are in the world to destroy the evil. And we're facing the kind of evil the Hamadrus presents is the kind of evil the Nazis represents. It's the kind of evil Stalin represented, in some ways worse because it's backed by a religious theology that justifies everything to do, that gives them a certain They relish blood, they relish slaughter, they relish humiliation, they relish rape and pillage. I mean, the Nazis try to hide what

they did. Ramas puts it up online for all the world to see. They are proud of it. They call up their mothers and talk about how many Jews they've killed today. So there's a there's a there's an evil like it's very rare, this kind of evil to see in the world. Human beings really have to be depraved to reach this level. You've got a side with whatever elements of good they are out there, and is all fundamentally is a good country. Very critical of almost every aspect of what they do,

and yet they're still fundamentally good. You know, Libertarians, many libertarians can't make that distinction. The state government qua state government is evil and therefore there is no States that are better than states are the worst. They're all evil because they tax you. Right, I said this, and people are horrified. But then people actually wrote on Twitter exactly what I said. Yeah,

states commit evil. That doesn't make them all the same. Some states are more evil than others some states because the state fundamentally is a good thing. This is the difference with libertarians in that they preserve peace some states. What they the positive they do outweigh the negatives they do. I still want to see the negative gone. But I'd rather take I'd rather take a state like

is Well in the United States than anarchy any day, any day, JJGB says, I guess my point is this, this issue gets people on both sides wiled up like no other. If anti Semitism and antipression explains one side's passion, what explains the other side's passion, especially people with no skin in the game. Well, first, I don't think it rolls up. I mean, we've got people on my chat complaining that we spend too much time

talking about this issue, and they're not riled up. I think what gets them riled up is what I just said, the shit evil that Aramas represents, the sha barbarism, and the fact that that barbarism is not only relegated for Israel. People still remember nine to eleven, They remember the terrorist attacks and fans and in London and in other places. They know what these Muslims Islam is capable of. So they get very riled up because they see this

correctly in my view, as is existential threat. How do you stay neutral, or how do you stay calm, or how do you stay unriled up when you see barbarians raping and torturing young women. Of course, that riled you up, and it should roll you up. And it's happening to a Western country. It's happening not in conditions of barbarism, in conditions of civilization. So it's one thing to say, well, this happens every day in Africa. Yeah, Africa is a barbaric place. We expect that, we

don't, we don't. You know, it's not a direct threat on us in a sense because it's barbarians fighting each other in terms of barbaric civilization cultures.

But here it's within a civilized world. This is happening that I think outrageous people, and I think it's should I think there's a difference if these things happen in the United States or in Israel, or in Europe, or if they happen in you know, the Republic of the Congo, which is a place with no real government, a place of tribal warlords fighting each other constantly, that has never really had a civilizing force. How can we tolerate

this under civilization is what really wells people are. Michael says, in the future will if in the future will be we will be able to genetically engineer geniuses. Will we be able to produce billions of Iran's No, because it's not an issue. Iran's genius is not genetic. Ironman's genius is not genetic. Nobody's genius is genetic. Genius are component, but they're not a major

component. To make an Iran a young Ironrn had to make certain choices how to create a certain spirit, how to create a human being she became. That doesn't happen because of genes. Genes give you the all horspower. They don't give you the roadmap of how to use the hostpower where to take it.

So you'd create a lot of geniuses maybe, but you wouldn't create a lot of vine rams. James says, is Tucker Coulson an anti semi? I don't know. I don't know. I haven't seen his commentary in Israel or in Jews or anything else, so I don't really fully know. But I also think that teckle Cousin doesn't really believe in anything. Techo Cosson believes in building Techer couls In an audience. Tucker Cousen believes in catering to the

Tecker Culson audience. Tucker Cosson believes in being on the fringe, and because that's where you get the most passionate, dedicated audience, is on the fringe, not in the center. And that's what techer Colson is. He dabbles with conspiracy theories, he dabbles with all kinds of nonsense. Whether he believes any of it, I'm skeptical. I think he does it because he knows

his audience. I think he thinks. I think tackle Corson thinks that most Americans are dumb, really really really dumb, and that he can exploit that

he can make money off of it, He can achieve fame and fortune because other people are dumb. Bonnie says, did Biden force the cease fire? Shameful? Yeah, no question, you know, not the first time, not the last time. I don't know if there's a ceasefire. My understanding is there's this pause for a pause. But yeah, all of this is engineered by Biden, but with the full corporation of people like Ntenau, and of course the Europeans are putting a lot of pressure on and so on.

So but yeah, it's chainfall. But if you believe that Trump, Bush, Obama, Reagan would have done anything else you're delusional. They all would have done exactly the same. Every American president, every single American president, has tied the hands of Israelis and forced them to retreat and to announced cease fires before their time, including Donald Trump. There were incursions, there were problems with Gaza during Donald Trump's presidency. It's not like he gave Israel a

thumbs up, going and do whatever you want to do. It's not what American presidents have done, any of them. Harp up. It's amazing how effective altruism is at floating abstractions. It's so automatized that our impulses and emotional

lurtures absolutely completely automatized into the culture and therefore into us as individuals. All right, James says, intellectuals today have become masters of using the most words possible to say absolutely nothing. I don't think it's intellectuals today. I think this has a long tradition, particularly in German. Yeah, maybe it's the

absolutely nothing that is more unique to today. At least in those days in the eighteenth century, nineteenth century, they had the pretense of saying something.

Now they don't have even a pretense. James says, is Germany the most intellectual culture in Europe. Ironic. The German philosophy explicitly seeks to destroy the intellect it is ironic. Is Germany the most intellectual culture in Europe? I don't know. Northern Europe is generally very intellectual, so it's the UK. But I don't know. I don't have any measure of who's more intellectual than the rest, and what that even means. If intellectuality boils down to postmodernist

nonsense, is that really intellectualism? What do we count as intellectualism? I don't know. That's a whole topic. I'm not sure about. Michael says, it's hard for me to believe all this anti Israel activity is calculated anti Semitism. Do most people think about Jews that much? No, it's not calculated. I mean nothing here is calculated, and I never suggest that it's

calculated. I don't think people think that much about Jews. They emote about Jews, they feel it, and when you stimulate them, they blame the Jews. It's not like antisemitism in Europe was calculated. Mostly the Nazis were calculated, but jewsually antisemitism was just a response to the other you know,

to the idea of the other causing mayhem and causing destruction. It's embedded into American culture on the left because of what I talked about the other day, which is the left of obsession with dividing everybody up into oppressor and oppressed because of intersectionality and other things. And Jews because they're successful, always going to be the oppressed soul, and Palestinians because they're because they're poor, always going

to be depressed, and that drives a lot of this attitude towards Jews and Israel. Michael, a bit off topic, but do you regard addiction as a disease. That strikes me that low will power, our self esteem isn't a disease. Well, it depends what we mean by addiction. I think

the definition of addiction has dramatically shifted over time. If you talk about addiction as something like addiction to heroid, I don't think it's a disease, but it's clearly a biological condition that is very, very difficult to overcome and requires medical care to overcome it. It's almost impossible to go cold turkey on heroin without having really really horrific physical side effects. What we have today is a pseudo addiction epidemic. Are people addicted to tobacco? Not really? You know,

I know so many people who just went cold turkey. Is it hard? Sure? A lot of habits are hard to give up. Is there some small biological addiction of tobacco that the body has? Sure? I crave coffee. Am I addicted to coffee? No? I could stop tomorrow if I really wanted to, And I go days without drinking coffee and I might feel a little bad as a consequence. But does that mean I'm addicted to

it? So? I think there are certain drugs. There's sudden chemicals that clearly are addictive and it caused a real physical response if you try to go off of them. But is chocolate addictive? I mean some say it is, you know, is pornography addictive? Sex addictive? No, all of those things are not physiologically addictive. There's psychological habits, and it's just a

matter of will, And it's just a matter of you know. Again, anything you put a you put a bag of nuts in front of me, and I start eating nuts and start to stop, it's hort to stop. Does that mean nuts addictive? No? I can't stop if I deploy enough will to do it. So the fact that something is hard does not mean it's addictive. Addictive should mean some kind of biological resistance to stopping it, and a significant biological resistance, not a mild one. And look, some

there's probably variation across people. Some people are more addictive to stuff than others. Is alcohol addictive probably for some people. There's even genes associated with that.

I don't find it addictive, but you know, I don't abuse it either. Harpa Campbell says, what did you make of vivic sexist remarks to Nikki Haley? He's a sexist. He's trying to put it down. He's trying to do everything to put it down. And part of the tactic is to try to shake her up a little bit and try to destabilize her so she comes off she doesn't come off as credible, he realizes and who the enemy is. But yeah, I mean, it's stupid. I hate these

debates. There's stupid debates that anti intellectual. They play into the hands of people who who throw bombs. They're play into the hands of the Trumps and the Vivics of the world instead of you know, you should have five minutes to answer questions, or at least two three minutes to answer questions, not one minute, one minute answer. The questions are stupid. You learn nothing from them. Their sound bites. They're well prepared. That's not interesting.

The ability to deploy insults or to deflect insults, that's not what I need a president to be able to do. I need to be able to president to be able to think. I need a president to be able to be decisive. I need a president to be able to have good ideas. Debates

should be about ideas. They should be about the implication of those ideas for action, and they should You should be able to see an experience whether these candidates have the knowledge and the foresight and the commitment to to to really govern

properly. All right, we have a lot of questions, and I need to leave in a little while, so we're going to do this quickly. Do you consider yourself more how it worked in John Gold I don't consider myself either one of those. I can't think in terms of John Galton hired work. They're both inspirations, they're both things to strive towards. I'm neither a genius in architecture or genius in anything, really know the perfect human being,

which is John Galt. I just can't see myself in those. I'm much more I'm much more sympathetic to dagny which are weird than I am to walk in John Galt. Who are who are complete right, who are who don't change, who struggle with very little, who just know exactly what they are

and what they want to be and what they want to do. Clark says it's hard to calibrate the nihilism level in the culture and amongst intellectuals. Maybe they're not fully nihilistic enough to want to tear it all down. Yeah, they've got nihilistic elements. They're not suicidal enough to tear it all down, but they do enjoy tearing when they have a chance to do it. You

saw that during BLM. You saw that in the relishing of what Hamas has done. Liam says Obama's comments literally made me nauseous. He has no boundaries on his narcissism. Well, I mean, there are people who are more narcissistic. We've had a president who is more narcissistic than Obama by quite a long shot. Obama's problem is intellectually corrupt, but Obama actually has an intellect,

whereas Trump is just narcissism with no intellect. Richard says, in the nineteen sixties presidential debate, JFK and Nixon had three minutes to respond. Do you know what changed culturally since then? Their ideas weren't great, but they were forced to get into specifics on policies and be more thoughtful. Yeah,

I mean what changes. We've become a television addicted, sound bite addicted culture that wants instant gratification and is much more interested with entertainment value then with ideas and with actually policy recipes. We've taken the JFK and Nixon pragmatism to a whole new level, and we're really not really interested in anything more substantive than what we can get in a minute answer that these guys give, and what we want and demand from our candidates are insults, and what get them points

are the insults. I mean. Donald Trump taught us that he called one of the one of the debating partners ugly. He accused that other you know, he made accusation about family members of others. He was just a horrific but he was entertaining and and he won the nomination. People have lunched. That's what Americans want, at least that's what Republicans want, all right, Liam says, I was listening to rashidat Talib getting hysterical about Israeli genocide and

ethnic cleansing. I'm surprised she didn't scream alahcaba and detonate. Yeah. I don't think she's quite suicidal, but she's definitely hateful. She's definitely hateful and irrational and emotionalist. No question ed. What would the response be if Israel decided at some point to destroy Uan's oil fields? Especially the US response. Oh, the US would be horrified. The US would would slam sanctions in Israel, they would stop supplying them with weapons. The United States would go

apoplectic, apoplectic, price of oil would go up. Americans, many Americans, would turn against Israel. Yeah, I think Israel should do it, but let's not be naive about how America will respond. America hates that idea and doesn't want to war with you on and doesn't want to instigate anything, and wants to keep the oil flowing. That's the most important thing is to

oil, keep flowing. James says, we're living at times when the bullies, when the bullies are winning, because the good people are submitting and they have to submit because they don't have Inrand. Well, yes, but they have to submit because they don't have principles. They have to submit because they don't have you know, any kind of principles. It doesn't have to be you know, any kind of pro life principles like a RAND is the end

result. But you know, the West didn't submit. America didn't submit to the Nazis or to the Japanese. America fought them and destroyed them. There were values in America that that prevented America from submitting without Iron Ran, and they can be resurrected without Iran. But some values need to be What we have today is a complete void of values, not just dyron Man. Richard said, I just finished Arthur Human's biography of Douglas MacArthur, very much worthwhile

reading, perhaps one of my favorites this year. The decision of his confidence he exuded seems very fond compared to modern leaders. Yes, I mean that's true of Douglas macarthy, it's true of Patent, it's true of many of

the leaders. Unfortunately, the guy who got the most credit for World War Two and ultimately benefited by becoming president is Eisenhower, who was the whimp of World War Two, who is exactly the opposite of Douglas MacArthur and patent, but he got rewarded for his wishy washiness by becoming president of the United States. Richard Cummings, can you think of a better example of pseudo self esteem than Donald Trump? No? I actually can't. I actually can't. And

I've said this all the time. Donald Trump does not have self esteem. That fake confidence, that in insulting everybody, that inability to take a blow is is are the science of a pseudo self esteem, which is exactly exactly Trump. All right, God, we still have quite a few questions. Okay, too bad. All the energy put towards this is prop up towards supporting the Palestinians. Isn't being put towards supporting the Uranian people? No kidding?

Those Auranian goals could help the could benefit from the support. You think the feminists would be all over that. No, no, no, They much rather attack Israel Black Cat nine ninety seven, The United States and r Zone and Developed Asia dwarf China and Russia with regard to economics, level of technology. Yes, and there's a consequence level of the military. People underestimate us and don't understand how large and the mismatch it really is. Absolutely I

agree with you completely black Cat nine ninety seven. Matthew, given the reporting a back and forth strikes between US and Iran or Uranian proxies, would you say that we are effectively at war with Iran without either side wanting to outright the clear it. Yes, but you know, I think we've been at war with the nineteen seventy nine and we're too cowardly to acknowledge it and to

declare it. But yeah, no question. And the United States keeps this back and forth without doing anything substantive and without dealing with the Uranians directly. But that's been going on since nineteen seventy nine. Michael says, does a humanitarian pause mean that the hostages get to come home for the weekend? Asking for two hundred and forty friends, what do you think? Of course,

not all pauses, all cease fires are one sided. They only involve Israel because as well as strong and therefore it needs to be rained in hamas is week. Therefore it should be allowed to do whatever it wants. James says, do you still recommend London as a place to live based on how things have changed in the last three years? Is there any hope for the UK to rebound? I don't know. I mean, UK is in bad shape for a lot of reasons. Economically, it's a disaster. The Conservative Party

has completely abrogated all its responsibilities and all anything good it had. Uh you know, the police, there's a whole I'll do it. I'll talk about this in a show in a couple of days. The police in London won't rein in the Islamic demonstrators. They're too cowardly, they're too afraid. Basically, the police in the UK of taking the stand that they're that they're pro slav that pro the Muslims and against any brit that stands up to them.

UK is is deteriorating fast in front of ours. I still love London. It's still one of my favorite cities in the world. I still love being there. But the UK as a place to live is becoming more and more difficult and more and more challenging because of the Conservative Parties failure just disastrous policies and because of what they're letting Muslims get away with in London. I'm not

afraid of Muslims. I'm afraid of Muslims uncontrolled by police. I'm afraid of the lack of the rule of law, which is what UK is moving towards. Astix says, keep up the good work you're on. Thank you. JJGB says that answered it, thank you, Thanks Okay, Frank, it's the last word. I think. I asked an anti capitalist to watch Shark Tank and the Food and the Food that Built America. He did. He was unimpressed and viewed entrepreneurs as exploit as. Why well, because shock Tank

and I don't know what the food that built America is. These are not serious attempts to present the value of entrepreneurship with the value businessman. I mean, you got to do better than short Tank Tank is a joke. Most of those businesses don't survive anyway, and they certainly don't thrive. You've got to go to the heart of what of you know, You've got to provide history, you've got to provide context. You've got to show the difference between

life under non capitalism and life under a little bit of capitalism. The difference between the two and it's massive, So shot Tank is not a good example of anything. It's entertainment. It's not business. It's it's entertainment. It's it's it's it's the name of disguise this business. Capitalism isn't about shock Tank. Capitalism is about freedom, about liberty, It's about the use of the human reason. Capitalism is about reason and individual rights and that results in entrepreneurship.

But entrepreneurs, I mean, if you don't have any respectful reason, then you don't have any respect for entrepreneurs. If you don't have any respect for the trade of principle, the trade, what trade means. If you think the will desire some game somehow, you don't have any respect for entrepreneurs. They're just exploit us. If you think all labor is physical labor, you're not gonna have and and Shok Tank is not gonna teach you the value

of entrepreneurship. It might motivate some yao's to go and start a business because they see pretty mediocre business is being started in shock Tank, But I don't know if any significant business, significant business that was started on shok Tank. Sorry, Silicon Valley. You want to do a reality show in Silicon Valley, that would be cool, all right? Should can be inspirational for people who ready are inspired by entrepreneurs. It's not going to create the inspiration.

And by the way, if you look at the companies that Chalk Tank are funded, they don't do that well, they're not that successful. All right, we're twenty four dollars short of our goal. H We've got one hundred and ninety seven people watching right now live. There's a lot of people watching live right now that are not supporting the show. Please do so with a sticker or with a contribution through Patreon on PayPal, but please support the show.

I'd really appreciate that value for value, I produce something you consume it pay for It makes sense. Also, one hundred and ninety seven people watching right now, please consider Please subscribe. If you're not a subscriber already, please subscribe. I hear that one hundred thousand subscribers. The algorithm really boosts your content. So we've only got sixty five thousand to go, so please subscribe to the channel so we can get a little closer to one hundred thousand

today. All right, Frank asks, truly the final question, if you want to support the show, do it with the sticking out with the question, because I do have to go. He says, Dark Days use a highly rationalistic in contrast to Islam, which is dualistic us. This is them and power oriented as an absurd mockery of monotheistic religion. Islam bedfellows with modern ideology. I know. I mean, Islam is a lot more in common

with Christianity than it does with modern and left ideology. Islam is a universalist religion. It wants everybody to become Muslim, just like Christianity wanted everybody to become Christian. Islam is a religion. It is based on faith, just like other faith oriented I don't think Islam is similar in any respects to the left. The left supports Islam not because it's similar, but because the left supports anything that's anti Western civilization, and it embraces Islam. Islamists in particular

because they were anti Western civilization. And Islam is a particularly bad religion because it never went through an Enlightenment, it never went through a Renaissance, it never was secularized. Christianity and Judaism awful religions, but they were secularized,

secularized in the what do you call it, a renaissance in the Enlightenment. All right, thank you, Frank, Thank you to all the super chatters. Thank you to all the people who did stickers whose names I didn't catch. Really really appreciate the support we made our target. And thank you to all the people watching. Again, don't forget to like the show before you leave. Just click that like button. Helps with the algorithms a lot.

Oh ABUSI just did the first super chat he's ever done. Superchat contribution. Thank you obviously. Please like the show and please subscribe. If you're not a subscriber, you'll be notified when I go live. You can always unsubscribe if you land up hating it, but you know, the most subscribers I have it helps with algorithm as well, likes, subscriptions, comments, all of that stuff is very very helpful. All right, I need a run. I'm meeting with some people for dinner. I will see you all.

Next show will be on Sunday, Sunday evening at eight pm California APM put a weekend time, which is seven pm East Coast time. See you all then, buy everybody, and thank you