A Beheading In Belfast, A Guilty Verdict In Texas, And More Bombs Over Iran

Key Takeaway

Culture, not race, is what drives human conflict. When governments fail to manage immigration rates that allow assimilation, cultural collisions become inevitable. The solution isn't choosing sides in emotional debates—it's understanding the economic causes underneath, defining what values we want to preserve, and creating policies that encourage cultural integration rather than isolated voting blocks.

Episode Overview

This news commentary episode examines escalating tensions around immigration following a violent attack in Belfast, Ireland. The host argues that the immigration debate has become emotionally charged and racialized when it should focus on culture, economics, and assimilation rates. The discussion covers how both left and right political factions use immigration for different purposes (cheap labor vs. voting blocks) while avoiding honest conversations about cultural preservation and integration.

Full Transcript

Transcript of A Beheading In Belfast, A Guilty Verdict In Texas, And More Bombs Over Iran from Impact Theory. Auto-generated from episode audio; may contain minor errors.

We have got a hot and spicy one for you today, much to my dismay, but Iran shot down a US helicopter. They said they didn't do it on purpose, but that was not taken well by Trump. So, that prompted a series of US retaliatory strikes on Iran. And I think anybody saying that we're in the middle of a ceasefire right now is not paying close enough attention. So, we're going to see just how far that escalates. Carmemelllo Anthony was convicted of murder and sentenced to 35 years and tensions erupted outside the court.

Many are focusing on the race aspect of this. We're going to dive into that. A Sudin immigrant in Belfast, Ireland did something absolutely horrific. He pinned down a man, blinded both eyes with a knife, and then hacked at the man several times, prompting anti-immigration riots in Belfast. the California voting graphs continue to look just absolutely crazy. And I'll say if nobody else is calling for audits. I will. Uh I certainly want to see uh one, if we're going to believe in what we see, we're going to need to have the government go in and do an audit.

And I've got a take on this that I think is very different than what most people are saying. Uh so we will cover that. Argentina has managed to deliver a budget surplus, making them one of only five countries to do so. Absolutely incredible turnaround there under Malay and just uh capitalistic principles. So I love to see it. I love to see a country that struggled for that long get back on its feet. We'll of course be diving into the economic realities there. Speaking of economic realities, HUD plans to block immigrants from getting federal dollars for home purchases.

That one's somehow going to be controversial, but boy will I'd be interested to see how. and anti-aging just took a huge step forward as a new drug has come online that addresses epigenetic restoration if this ends up being real. And we are we're talking about human dosing at this point. So this is not a super uh hypothetical thing. This is obviously something that we're seeing play out in terms of delivering real results. This could be GLP1 big. So uh I'm very excited to see how that goes.

All right, welcome everybody. Uh I am certainly expecting this one to be uh something that triggers a lot of emotional response today. We have two big topics. Uh one, just even setting aside what's going on in Iran, you've got what's happening in Belfast, which is putting his finger on what I think is going to be the central debate of the next 10 years, which is immigration. I understand that um this is a very touchy topic. I get those uh private text messages from people letting me know they feel some type of way uh about this whole topic, but this isn't one that's going to go away.

There is no hiding from this. We are all going to have to be able to have a rational, direct conversation about what's going on, about how we address it in a way where people can state the values and the um governmental policies that they want to see put in place and why. And remember, as with all things weird, there is an economic cause underlying all of this, but we'll get to that in a second. Let's just start with what happened. So, late on Monday night around 10:30 p.m., a man in his 40s was walking through uh North Belfast when another man attacked him with a kitchen knife.

Now, there's some like discrepancies about whether this guy was actually helping uh migrants move into housing or not. I've heard some reports that he was actually a special needs person. Those things are unclear at this point. I've not seen enough consistent reporting on that to put a lot of faith in that, but know that there may be some connection as to how these two men crossed paths. A bystander ended up catching it on video. Within hours, it was everywhere. There's actually some journalist saying that they shouldn't have allowed the video to go everywhere.

If you want to see me become emotionally unhinged, start talking about [ __ ] like that. Start talking about the need to repress true information. Um, that's absolute madness. And I hope that you guys don't tolerate that in any way, shape, or form. But nonetheless, it did get out. And you see the bloodied victim pinned to the ground being stabbed over and over. Some civilians rushed in and tried to drag the attacker off of him uh before the police could arrive. The victim somehow miraculously survived the horrific attack.

He's now in stable condition. Uh but reports indicate that one eye was completely gouged out that the other uh was blinded again just by being stabbed in the eye with the knife. Uh he was left obviously with serious injuries, but he's got him across his face, his back, his neck. Um pretty horrifying. Was pretty shocked to hear that the guy survived. Many people were calling it an attempted beheading. Um which struck me as a unnecessarily vague first of all and then inflammatory way to describe it.

Uh but nonetheless, the guy was left with extremely serious injuries. Police have now charged a 30-year-old Sudin man with attempted murder, possession of a bladed weapon, and making threats to kill. He's going to appear in court today. Uh he may have already given the time difference. Uh so we'll follow up and see what we can find on that. According to PSNI Chief Constable John Boucher, the suspect was an asylum seeker granted leave to remain in the UK back in 2023, having traveled from Sudan Sudan to Paris, then Dublin, then into Belfast by bus, where he claimed asylum in February of that year.

Uh he wasn't on any security database watch list or anything. Apparently, he wasn't known to the police. Investigators say that there's no signs. This is terror related. Um, but honestly, none of that matters at the level of the people on the streets. And so, Tuesday night, Belfast just absolutely erupted. There were tons of calls for marches, uh, for people to just let the political class, as they're calling it, know how they feel, which is certainly coded language for riot and burn things. Mass crowds did exactly that.

They torched the bus. They set cars ablaze, hurled petrol bombs, lit homes on fire with riers specifically targeting the houses of um either minorities or um immigrants. Families were fleeing. The violence spread to uh surrounding towns with smaller flare-ups all across England, Wales, and Scotland. Kirstma has called the knife attack horrific. Um but he's also said that the response for people going out in the streets is just absolutely unacceptable. Uh, and so the big question there is going to be what do you do when you believe that the political class is no longer listening to you?

Um, I think the moment you start burning the city down, obviously each and every one of those crimes needs to be prosecuted. You cannot let lawlessness ride no matter how just uh it may be. But all of this brings to the forefront that there is a real disconnect between the way that people are feeling at the street level and the way that the political class are pursuing this. So when you hear the newscasters talking, did we I think I did pull the um the woman on the news segment saying basically they never should have let the video go.

Um just to give a sense of the disconnect here. I I mean I I welcome them the minister saying that politicians need to be careful because all I hear from the government benches is is dog whistles constantly where they scapegoat migrants for their own failures and they're doing it more and more and more and it is clear pathway that this government has chosen to go down and and I you know that for me I think you know tonight what those scenes we're seeing we have to ask ourselves as a society how this is happening and we have to ask all all of us on an individual basis need to ask how we are either contributing to this or fixing it.

Mary. Yeah. I think the argument has been So, pause it for a second. So, part of the problem and part of what I hope that quote unquote new media like we can do on the show is really just get under the sound bite and get down to saying something specific. She's saying a whole lot of vague things there. People are just going to fill in what they want to believe that she's saying rather than okay, as a nation, we have to go uh are we bringing in immigrants as a form of compassion?

Are we bringing immigrants as a form of economic relief, are we struggling financially and so we're trying to import cheap labor? Is that why even when a government is conservative and they come in literally on we're going to reduce immigration and then in several countries they've ended up increasing immigration. Um, that to me points directly at you have an economic problem that they get into office and realize, uhoh, I have to keep prices low because we've been inflating the currency to hell and back. And so the only way for us to keep the prices low is to have immigrant labor that's low.

We're also in a lot of countries, take Japan for instance, dealing with low birth rates. So if if we start having the conversation at that actual cause and effect level, then we can begin to lay things out. Okay, cool. There's a sequence of cause and effect. We as a nation have to decide and be able to state in a very clear and sensible way what our value system is. And then we've got to be able to draft it up into policy that people can read. It's very simple and it's understandable.

And then we all say this is what we're trying to do. And by the way, you just have to agree on where you're trying to get to. Uh so where are we trying to get in a way that we can articulate? And if where we're trying to get is uh we want to make sure that we're keeping prices low and that's our primary concern now we can at least have the debate and people can say no that's not what we should be doing. What we should be doing is uh conserving our heritage.

What we should be doing is making sure that Ireland stays white. At least [ __ ] say it out loud. Like just say the thing and then people can go that's so horrendous. I'm not interested in that at all. Or yeah it sounds [ __ ] gross but it's what we're here for. we've got a long-standing culture and tradition and we're going to protect it or no, this is about whatever. Insert the thing. But until we have a conversation that's actually at the level of something that you can state in a single sentence of 35 words or less, this is what I'm trying to accomplish.

Then there's nowhere for you to hide. You just have to stand 10 toes down on whatever the thing is that you're trying to fight for. And then we can have that argument, decide where we're actually trying to go. You can elect politicians based on whether they're going to move towards the thing that you believe in or not. And we're having the real conversation instead of somebody trying to throw around uh comments like all I hear is dog whistles. What do you mean by that? So I assume she's trying to get at this is a race thing.

People are just racist. It's that that is not going to be a high functioning uh way to approach this argument anymore because there are going to be real consequences. We'll get to some of that more when we talk about HUD a little bit later. We're here in the US, uh, we're realizing that not only during the Biden administration did we let in a whole lot of people um with the open borders, but we were also giving them access to federal tax dollars uh to backs stop their loans for housing, which of course is going to drive housing costs up.

And so it doesn't matter what their nationality is. It doesn't matter what the color of their skin is. There's just an economic knock-on effect. And so that that's going to be what not just we are charged with here on this show but with everybody that has a long form show is to really start breaking this stuff down. And I I will just tell you the only way forward is to get people out of their emotions. Humans reason emotionally. So just everything about their impulse is going to take them to have a big emotional reaction to display the emotion for people to respond to which person talking what emotion they align with rather than saying we live in a deterministic universe based on cause and effect.

And if we're importing a bunch of immigrants that is going to have uh economic consequences. It will lower costs. It will um increase pressure on things like housing. If there is a culture collision, then we're going to see increased tensions which will lead to increased violence. Like all of these things can be placed very simply in terms of what the problem set is so that we can navigate through it. Japan for me becomes the most interesting way to look at all of this because even the like ultra-conservative prime minister that just came in has only reduced uh their immigration by like 10% or something.

I mean it's really really minor because I think she's stuck in that they have an aging population and they don't have an economic solution for that. And so now you get into a thing where you have to face like well we both want to protect what Japanese culture means but we have a declining population and we're now having economic problems. They're getting inflation for the first time. There's a whole host of knock-on effects. So that it until we start having the debate at those levels and we stop having the debate at the emotional level of hey racist shut up.

Um we're not going to make any progress whatsoever. Um, I just want to set a disclaimer at the show. I feel like we can all opt out of the race war that they're trying to force us into right now with these headlines. But it does seem that we like to highlight certain things and it causes a substantial response. And this is is is When we say we like to highlight, do you mean this show or society? I'm going to say media in general because I feel like this beheading is going to lead to um a protest.

Um, the protest is going to go across spans ac across countries from Ireland to England. In Glasgow, there's a bunch of dudes in all black walking around. There's people getting attacked. And it's it's it's just like this one domino can lead to all these other like second order consequences. And now because of this one domino, we're now talking about immigration in a different way. Whereas if I was to take a step back and say, okay, if we could just say it's like the 8020 rule, like 20% of the immigrants is causing 80% of the outrage.

Yeah. Might even be less. You know what I mean? Sure. Sure. Sure. So, is it right for us to have the conversation of because of this attack, we need to talk about immigration as a whole, or do you think immigration as a whole needs to be talked about and this is just another catalyst to accelerate that conversation that keeps getting pushed back? that so we should have been having the conversation about immigration a very very very very long time ago time ago time ago and as the globalist notion like if I can strip away all of the like howling wolves and dark clouds and I'm being manipulated by an evil cabal strip that away away away there's just an idea that has grown that is really quite beautiful at its core which is hey as a as a um civilization We of humanity realize that these geographical borders are largely arbitrary.

We realize that the um the like uh the the phenotypic um way that our genes express themselves in different amounts of melanin are just completely superficial. And the absurdity of judging each other based on phenotype is crazy. And that to me that argument is so beautiful and it resonates with me so hard. I love that. And then though you are hit with the reality of but culture is why humans have achieved what they've achieved. Meaning we have an evolutionary strategy that says you're not going to have to reinvent yourself every generation.

And you're not just going to learn from mom and or dad like every other species where it's like we're going to pre-program a set of behaviors in you. This this is quite literally the um evolutionary evolutionary evolutionary uh bet that every species has made but us. Every species but us. I mean there are some minor exceptions in like chimpanzees and things like that, but they're on our line. So you get why they would be on that spectrum as well. But every species basically just chooses, I'm going to give you a bunch of instinctual drives and then your parents might model something for you.

And so you will look a 100,000 years from now from a behavior pattern exactly the same as your ancestors. So turtle's going to turtle, shark's going to shark. Like it just doesn't change. And humans on the other hand use culture. And so it's this incredible thing that allows us to go, I'm going to teach you over, you know, call it the 35 years back when that was the average lifespan. Over the 35 years of your life, I'm going to teach you about everything that came before you within reason, within like your specialty and stuff like that.

But now the quote being you're going to stand on the shoulders of giants. And so we've got this cultural layer and it is the reason that we become the dominant species and our genetic ability to adapt. But like you put those together, it's this incredible cocktail. But when we have the conversation, we get stuck at one of the things that is ingrained in us in terms of um the we have an instinctual push towards it, which is what I call school of fish. We want to group up with people that are like us.

Now, there are a whole lot of ways that we can draw those circles. And so, that circle could be men, circle could be women, that circle could be black, the circle could be white, that circle could be Nigerian, could be African-American. Like, there's a gazillion ways that you can draw. It can be humanity, Americans, whatever. Like, you can draw all these weird different circles. Religion is the most fascinating of the circles because it will show you how you can have people that look nothing alike, didn't grow up in the same country, all of a sudden we're both Catholic.

And that one shows that, okay, the human mind has this just absolutely desperate desire to categorize. I need to know, are you like me? Are you not? Are you friend? Are you foe? Are you [ __ ] or not? Can like I mate with you? Like all of these things we're constantly trying to like make sure I understand what box and what context you belong in. Now if you understand culture is like the most powerful transmission layer that we have then you understand oh culture is the thing that people will fight and die for.

Then it's like okay well then we need to be very careful about collisions of cultures. So this cool idea that Tom likes of like hey borders can finally disappear. We've got airplanes we can trade across borders. We can marry across borders. We can find people that we love that don't look anything like us, but they share this value set. Yay, it's amazing. But at the same time, just like states get to run different economic experience uh experiments, they get to um draw people to their state using different incentives.

And so we get to experiment in 50 different ways with what's the best way to run a government. And then if the federal government is wise, it looks at all of those different experiments and it takes the ones that are going to work at a national level. But it's like, cool. I'm glad that you guys are competing and doing different things. Okay. So now if we take that on and we go, okay, people are looking as from a a nation state, from a subculture perspective, it's a bunch of people running a bunch of different tests of what's the best way for where we live, for um the difficulties that we face.

what are the best ideas that we can pass via the cultural layer onto our kids such that they will thrive. And what we're seeing now is you can't just mix and match those really rapidly. It doesn't work because people defend their culture. And I think that's the part that people are missing. If you do it at a rate where they assimilate, you can get away with it. But America is like, we've been showing people for 400ish years what it looks like. You get a wave of white as the day is long, Irish immigrants, and they're [ __ ] rejected.

Even though it's whites and whites, whites, whites, I'm not here for it. You don't represent my culture. You sound different. My circle of us and other triggers. You're other [ __ ] you. Same with Italians. Maybe not quite as white as an Irish kid, but still pretty [ __ ] white. [ __ ] white. [ __ ] white. And they were still rejected. So it was only that we eventually like things were moving slow enough that we would bring them in, reject them and then assimilate and they would become American. Then you would get the next wave.

They would get rejected. But over time they would assimilate because America had enough cultural identity that it was like either you get on board with this or you can [ __ ] right off. And so that became the pressure to assimilate became really strong. now that it it's happening too fast. There are too many different cultures coming from too many different places and I think for reasons that will be way more controversial and become more Tom speaking than Tom being more sort of high level looking at just trends that I think are very defensible.

I think there is also an agenda to get votes based on government welfare programs where now you're not trying to get people to assimilate. What you're trying to get them to do is vote as blocks. And so it's easier if a Somali community selfisolates. So I only have to go win over the leadership there. Now I get them as a whole block. And so because I think there's a political incentive in addition to just a natural [ __ ] man, I'm a Somali who finds myself in Minnesota.

Jesus, I can't relate to anybody. This is [ __ ] weird. I can't believe your country gets this cold. What is happening? So, it's already you're going to isolate down. Now, you're giving political incentives for the political class to be glad that you're also not diffusing, that you're voting as a block. And so, now you're getting these communities that aren't attempting to assimilate. And so, the sense of what it means to be American is no longer being propagated, which means we're not turning into a melting pot. we're staying these like different groups with different values.

Now, on top of that, the left really believes this idea of, well, there's no culture that's better than another that's super [ __ ] judgmental. And so, it's like we need to be tolerant of everything, which once again weakens like, okay, wait, what do we stand for? What do we arrest somebody for? What do we just draw hard lines around and say both from a legal and from a cultural perspective, we just aren't going to tolerate? That starts to get really muddy. Nobody can agree on what that is, which just further creates these uh fractions.

Now, again, just to point people at, race is is completely a construct of a populist moment where it's easy. We know that people it's just so visible that if I'm trying to keep you in your emotions, I'm trying to keep you mad. Then, and people do it naturally. I want to be very clear. You're leveraging it as a demagogue because it's so easy because people so naturally us and other based on skin color that you just keep fermenting that but it's all fake. The real thing is culture.

Now if there's a culture being transmitted through a group that also has a consistent skin color now it's like it's a Jesus trying to tease those out becomes very very difficult. But in reality, they actually are two different phenomenon. And if we keep them apart, we'll have a much easier time working our way through the problem to get back to what am I trying to achieve? What are the policies I need to put in place to achieve it? Okay. Now, with that said, you can have two groups, Catholics and Protestants in Belfast, to bring it back to Belfast, who they're they are indistinguishable from each other.

They look identical. If you 23 and me them, you're not going to say, "Oh, these are Catholics and Protestants." You're gonna say they're Irish. And so they're completely um indistinguishable from that um like phenomenological standpoint. However, they'll still kill each other. And once you understand that they've been killing each other for hundreds of years over something that is not visually apparent in their skin color, then hopefully people understand, okay, when you collide two values that have no interest in meshing with each other, there will be violence.

And that's the part that I'm like, okay, we've got a government that really does seem to be trying to solve for two problems, economics and political power and using immigrants. So, if you're on the right, you're solving for I've got to keep everything cheap. If you're on the left, you're trying to keep everything cheap and you're trying to keep voting power because you're presumably going to be more government handouts, bigger government wherever possible. And so, that becomes just an incredible way to stay in power. And now it's like, sure, but you're blinding yourself to the fact these groups are going to go to war.

And that's where it's like you have to talk about it because it's going to keep being a bigger and bigger problem, but every time you try to talk about it, people just go race. Um, you put a lot of pieces on the table right there. I feel like that was well thought out and well executed. So, I have no notes. Um, where do we go from here in the sense of how do we handle this conversation when it seems like more and more people are trying to silence videos, take things off the table?

How do we do we just have to similar to the red the red left the right left divide in America. Do we just have to ride this populist moment out and then we can have the conversation? I think I think that would be a real problem. So I I don't think we have the timeline for that because I'm not yet optimistic that we're going to get out of this populist moment anytime soon. I think the populist moment may carry us all the way through the economic collapse of America.

So that's you know nine years from now if nothing changes Kevin Walsh and Bessant being sophisticated enough uh if you have a rightle leaning government for the next call it 8 to 12 years you might be able to slow that decline as in immigration or no no because they'll um they'll devalue the dollar so much that the debt will become less of a burden. um that's horrible by the way. I don't want that to sound like a oh yay. It's um they will just lengthen the period of decline.

decline. decline. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Whereas the left will unintentionally accelerate that period of decline because they'll break the economy. But anyway, so it's you're on a finite time period. Uh right now I see only an appetite both on the left and the right to make things worse. maybe at different rates, but they're going to make things worse, which means you're going to stay economically insecure, which means you're going to stay in your emotions, which means by definition, because populism is when people ration when they think emotionally.

They're scared, they're thinking emotionally, and so they're being used to get put on teams. Okay, given that, you're going to have to deal with this now. The only way to deal with this now is to say, okay, um, I'm gonna carefully delineate between culture and race. And I know that nonetheless I'm going to be called racist and all of that, but I want to keep, and this would be my advice to anybody that's going to deal with this subject. I'm going to keep separating those two, and I'm going to keep relentlessly talking about culture.

And if you can get people to admit that culture matters, if you can get people to admit that, uh, England and France, white, white, white, killed each other for hundreds of years, uh, because they were different cultures. They were fighting for their own culture, they were fighting for a sense of, um, I want the things you have, you want the things that I have. We can't always cooperate because we see the world differently, and so we're going to fight. That's just what humans do. So now we have to pause immigration, immigration, immigration, assimilate, see who is going to assimilate, put laws in place that force assimilation or inspire people to leave.

I need to drill on that. What does what's a law that will force assimilation? The easiest one is going to be um stop doing handouts so that people actually have to contribute to the local economies or otherwise they're just not going to be able to make ends meet and they will leave. um force things like we have a national language and it is insert your country. Italy speaks Italian, Japan speaks Japanese, America speaks English, England speaks English, uh Ireland speaks Irish, whatever. So you start doing things language you get deported.

It's not necessarily deported because for me, if you've already let someone in your country and they are a citizen, it's game over. You don't get For me, this is my uh view of the world. You don't get to just kick that person out. They are a citizen of your country. You may say, "Oof, we had bad policies back then." Yeah, okay. But like, you had the policies. policies. policies. Um, so that violates my sense of right and wrong. So, I've got this person here. They're a citizen.

Now, if they're a non-citizen, sure, you can do things, change status, whatever, and say, "Hey, sorry, no more. we're now going to deport people that are violent criminals here seeking asylum, whatever you can, whatever that criteria is going to be. Um, I would advise people to say the people you actually care about getting out of your country are the people that are either um, actively promoting the destruction of your culture. So, Japan becomes the easiest one to look at because for whatever reason, I guess partly because they're Asian, people like give them a pass for wanting to protect their culture in a way that other countries don't get.

England doesn't get that pass. America doesn't get that pass. But it gets a lot easier to talk about with Japan. So cool. Uh you're Japan. You have a very unique culture. You want to defend that culture. If you have people inside of your country that are doing things to attack that culture, then you're going to put things in policy that will um either increase the penalties for those things or just do things like um all public schools are only available in Japanese, all road signs can only be done in Japanese, whatever.

Like you find ways where it's like you're making it very clear if you want to be here, awesome, but here are the things, here are the norms that we expect you to conform to. There are also going to be two ways that this battle plays out. And when Jordan Peterson brought this up, people lost their ever loving minds. Uh so I don't expect a different reaction, but the reality is it is true. So um as a large society, we have to say these are the things that we tolerate and don't tolerate.

And that doesn't mean that you walk up to somebody on the subway and if they're doing something that you don't think fits the national character that you slap them. It's not what I'm saying. But what I am saying is you make it very clear through um social oststerization oststerization oststerization uh through you know literally turning your back on somebody that we don't put up with that [ __ ] here. So now it can also be that you create like I think they've done this in Korea. I think they're flirting with it in Japan that they put nuisance laws on the books.

So Americans act some type of way. It's part of our culture. Great. I was once the uh brash American in China and it served me incredibly well. I won't lie. I was about to miss a flight. Everybody was being so polite. I'm like, "This is [ __ ] insane. I've been standing in this line for whatever, like 90 minutes, and I'm I have a layover. Like, I've got to get to the next flight." So, finally, I was like at the front of the line, but I was clearly if I don't speak up now, I am going to miss my flight.

I'm like 21. I'm [ __ ] terrified of being stranded in a country I don't know anything. Uh, and so I was like, "I'm so sorry, but I'm gonna miss my flight." And so they're like, "Oh my god, please come up." They took care of me super easy. But then everybody else in line suddenly got really pissed and was like, "Well, me too. I'm about to miss my flight. Why did he get to go?" And I was like, "I got to go because I was the brash American that spoke up." So anyway, I get it.

If they're going to be like, "We don't do that here." And they were like, "Get the [ __ ] get in the back of the line." Or if they have a rule that's like up the person who asks, you go all the way to the back of the line and I end up missing my flight. [ __ ] me. That's bad on me. They've got a culture. I stepped outside a line. Boom. Like, you've got your way of handling this. this. this. People, countries should absolutely recognize what I'll call soft power of cultural enforcement.

Not everything has to be the police taking you off, but there's going to be some of that. So, uh, a lot of the streamers acting a fool get treated very differently in South Korea than they're going to get treated in America. every culture gets to make their decision, but that is ultimately how you're going to have to prosecute this. I don't think countries have an obligation to make themselves a place that every migrant from anywhere in the world wants to go. Um, again, Japan, when I was trying to do business in Japan, it felt, I won't say hostile because it didn't feel hostile, but it felt like I was running into a wall that I could not understand.

And now the more that I research Japan, it's that is exactly how they um slow the integration with outsiders is like, oh yes, this is very interesting. Yes, yes, yes. But they it's 100% no. And for anybody embedded into Japanese culture, they know in real time that's what they say when it's 100% no. But as a foreigner, I couldn't tell. So it is um they have that right. Yeah. Uh, okay. The spiciest take in the chat actually comes from Ryan. Um, so Oops. Oops. Oops. You said a lot of this um I I don't want to take your words out here.

You said a lot. Which one is it? Cuz I've been arguing with some of the You're like this is um a false flag. This is just white people trying to put the boots on the neck. Oh, I feel like I don't want to put [clears throat] words in your mouth. So, I'm giving you like like like Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I feel like this situation in particular, this is particular to this story. story. story. Belfast beheading that happened yesterday. I feel like this is a situation where if this guy wasn't white, we wouldn't be talking about this.

I think a lot of times what happens in these situations, while there are, you know, valid concerns to be discussed, whatever those may be, with people, I think a lot of times white people who are too up in arms about race and immigration, tend to put the boot on their own head with these types of situations in that they are making something a bigger deal than it was. Like I look at this case in particular and I'm like, are there serious conversations to be had about immigration race?

For sure. But I don't think that's a result of this. I think this is just some terrible thing happened and the person needed to be punished, right? They need to get prison and jail time as they almost killed a man and it's terrible. But I think it's become a race thing when it's doesn't really need to be. Here's the problem. What you're missing is that back in the 80s, this would have made the news had it been two white people as long as one of them was Protestant and the other was Catholic because it became indicative of an underlying problem that had to be talked about.

Now, it's entirely possible in my fictional scenario that that person was mentally ill and it actually didn't have anything to do with Protestants and Catholics. And so therefore, on this the actual like core merits of the case, it really is more about mental illness. Again, this is a fabricated scenario, but you'll get the idea that it really was about mental illness and it wasn't about Catholics and Protestants, but the Catholic and Protestant issue is so real and is really in the middle of something that needs to be diffused that it becomes a flash point and it gets people talking.

So, the whole idea of never let a good crisis go to waste. So, what you're seeing here, you have a real problem with a collision of cultures. So for instance, one thing if you really want to trigger trigger people say the following. There really is such a thing as cultures typically hurting cultures that have this whole idea of honor. And the reason that you end up with an honor culture when you're herders is that no one's coming to protect you. And so if somebody comes and steals your animals and you don't go [ __ ] them up, then people realize, oh, I can steal Ryan [ __ ] because he doesn't do anything about it.

And so you very quickly learn your own team will be like, "Bitch, you better go do something about that. You cannot let somebody come and [ __ ] with your sheep across the line or whatever because it really is about livelihood." So that culture now has an honor culture and it is very effective when you're a hurting culture and if you don't have it, you have a real problem. So I understand how it becomes born of that. Now, what ends up happening is if you migrate that to a place where it doesn't make sense, you've got to get rid of that cultural problem.

A thing that makes sense back in say Scotland, because this is actually what happened in the US, you have a bunch of these Scottish guys that come over to America, become part of the founding fathers. They're still [ __ ] dueling. And everyone's like, "What the [ __ ] are you doing?" Like, that might have made sense back when you were hurting. It doesn't make sense now. So whatever the [ __ ] we've got to put this soft cultural power to say we don't do that in America. And so we end up diffusing that.

And we would think it ridiculous if two politicians started dueling now. We'd be like, "Guys, this is the most idiotic thing in the known universe." And so when people try to say like, "Oh, this horrific thing happened and now we're just [ __ ] making it about race." And you're pretending there's not this huge brewing thing that a culture has imported. and I'll point right at Pakistan. So, for whatever reason, the part of Pakistani culture that says, um, hey, my if I call my cousin up and I'm like, yo, let's go rape this girl.

That I can expect that my cousin's going to be like, yeah, dope. Now, if my cousin called me and said that, I'd be like, the [ __ ] is wrong with you? So, that's going to be, you know, a thing we're, and now admittedly, I'm maybe not as tight-knit with my cousins as you would be in Pakistan. And maybe we go, but the tight-knitness of the family, there's dope. We love that. But it's playing out in this context, possibly because it's mixed with religious ideology that says, well, if they're not of my religion, then they're lesser than, and this is okay.

Obviously going to be hotly contested, but I'm saying if you put ideas like that together, you start getting a disproportionate per capita thing happening. I'm talking about the rape gangs, right? And so it was a wildly disproportionate number of Pakistani men that were involved in this very specific thing. And so if we can't talk about that that oh there's an echo of culture happening here that's where it deranges and we're not able to have like the real conversation. So for instance people are going to say whoa whoa whoa Tom that's ridiculous.

It's not about that. It's about poverty. It's about the stress of being in a new place and all of that. It's like okay let's break that down on its merits. do we actually see that survive contact with the data? Uh, and so we'll probably get more into that with the metaf thing. You you start getting into things where the arguments just don't match the data. And that's where it's like if you actually want to solve the problem and diffuse the bomb, you have to admit you I would say this will always be nonsensical forever if you don't agree that we live in a deterministic universe.

And all I mean by that is everything is cause and effect. And so a thing is happening, a pattern is forming. It has a knowable cause and effect. Now, we may not have identified the actual cause and effect yet, but it is there to be discovered if we're willing to look at it. The problem is so far we haven't been willing to look at it. We just immediately terminate at um well, this is just racism. And because it is so closely correlated, people stop there and go, "Yeah, it probably really is race." And so that's the thing that worries me is that people aren't really trying to get to the underlying, okay, what's the mechanism of this?

Like even if we were going to say this is racism, what's the mechanism? And if you just stop at, well, white people are racist [ __ ] you're not going to get very far. And that's where it's like, okay, well, break down for me. Why do white people in particular become racist [ __ ] Like, is there actually a reason? I my hypothesis is that that won't survive contact with the data and that white people are not more racist than the next group hypothesis. So you you can test these things.

All of them make a prediction. But right now it's it's playing out at the level of emotion, not at the level of data. And that's where I think we derange each other. I think that's then we're on the same page because what I would say is the emotion I think is the problem with everyone reacting to the situation because I think what you're describing is two very distinct situations. One which is the immigration conversation but also one which is a man killed another or tried to kill another man, right?

And I think to me those are distinctly different conversations. My problem comes in when people start like online because this is more an online thing, right? Because I feel like us on the show, we're always looking at the full picture, but with people online, it's like you said, they're jumping too quickly to, oh, this is just people of color attacking white people. And I feel like that's there is more to it. It's not just that, right? I think that's where my disconnect is in the whole boot on their head kind of thing.

thing. thing. Yeah. When Florida man was eating people's faces off, it wasn't a we need to talk about asslation in culture. It was, oh well, we need to feel bad for him because it's drugs. And so it's like the default response to the um results. That's actually so you're bringing up a really interesting point that I have not heard anybody categorize and it might be worth us starting to do that. So you'll have a hierarchy of immediate emotional explanations for a thing. Like for instance I look at the Carmelo Anthony um Metcafe, forget his first name, but that um whole thing I don't see there.

I don't see evidence that it's race. I didn't hear them saying racial epithets to each other. No one's reported that as far as I know. So it's like you had a black guy and a white guy in an altercation. Uh but I don't know that that was what caused the altercation. So on that level, it's okay. We've got to police a crime. Now it is being read in the public as a thing about race. It has gained prominence and national attention because of the race. And if the race factor wasn't there, to Ryan's point, point, point, I don't think this one would catch fire.

But it's so easy to give examples where it does catch fire, even though race isn't involved because there's a different underlying issue, Catholics and Protestants. So that's where it's like, okay, race is clearly a thing that we're going to have to address. Like, we have to figure out why this becomes that immediate thing. So, in the like hierarchy of emotional things that I'm going to grab for, when it's white-on-white crime, obviously I'm not grabbing for race, at least in an American context. It's very less likely to be um something about uh religion.

But let's say that we had a white Muslim attack a white guy, okay? Can't grab for race, but if that guy is like banging the drum for ISIS, oh, guaranteed. Now all of a sudden it's Muslims, it's immigration. It that will happen immediately. And then people are gonna go, "Wait, this is obviously a madeup scenario." But wait, that white guy, he was he's an American citizen, dude. Like he his family can trace their ancestry back to [ __ ] Plymouth Rock. Like what are you talking about? And he becomes a radical left.

Is is that's what's that's what maybe or it goes to well we let all these Muslims in and they're now converting our own. This is why we really got to stand up. And so people will grab or it could be exactly what you're saying. Uh no, no, no. This is uh the radical left is the problem and we got to [ __ ] get rid of these guys. They tolerate anything. This is [ __ ] So it's like we we've got these different cassette tapes that we can punch in to make sure said thing fits our narrative.

And that's where it's like, okay, hold on. Like let's break this down. What's the actual cause and effect here? Now the bad news is um if if if the meme now of course would be America if America rolls up on your door and America is saying uh we're here to bring you freedom and you have oil all of a sudden I'm like uhoh the cover story might not match the reality. And so if people said Americans act in this type of way they are imperialistic. They are trying to get access to the resources of the world.

I'd be like, there's a lot of evidence there that really might be true. And so now it's like, we've got to contend with that. Now, if the data doesn't back it up and somebody can show me that America doesn't act in America's best resource controlling interest way, cool, I'll accept the data. But right now, my swag is, yeah, America really does do that. So that's where it's like, yeah, you've got a bunch of cassette tapes you can play. Some of them will survive contact with the data, others will not.

Sometimes it'll be a confluence of things, but if you're careful to tease them out and when you hear somebody make the claim, you don't just go, "Shut up, racist." You go, "All right, cool. Let's have a good faith conversation." And if the person is just completely in their feels, then it's like, "Okay, this is an emotional conversation. We are not going to make progress. Ground this for me in a set of facts so that we can talk about those set of facts and then we can just follow the logical thing." But what ends up happening either somebody doesn't know the facts so they have to stay emotional or they encounter a fact that they do not like and so they break emotional it goes ad homonym and that's where it's like again soft power of culture we need to push back and go oh see this person just went emotional here so great example of somebody who's an extraordinary orator I think a very clear thinker an exceptional uh member of the help me think through difficult problems intellectual crowd but derailed in a certain argument.

Um was Oh god, now I'm blanking on his name. Uh he was on Rogan with um Smith. They were talking about Israel. God Douglas Murray. Thank you. Douglas Murray, if you uh clock him as being dumb. That's a full [ __ ] statement. That's somebody who's in their fields. They're not making any sense. Douglas is very intelligent. He's very articulate. He can build his arguments based on reason and rationality. However, in that debate, he did not. And so to be able to go, "Oh, that's interesting." Like, he hit an ejection point here, that was purely emotional.

Why the [ __ ] did he do that? That's so weird. And so if when that happens, because nobody's going to be perfect. Nobody's going to bat a thousand. You go, "Ah, well, he clearly lost that one because he took the strange emotional exit ramp out of the facts." And so what the [ __ ] Um, if we can take each moment like that, we might actually be able to make progress as a society. If we can't and everybody just like, "Yeah, that feels so [ __ ] good. I just want the emotion." Then we're going to be in trouble.

And so that's the one where I'm not entirely sure we're going to be able to pull our way out of this. Uh but nonetheless, it the facts remain there for all of us to avail ourselves of at any time. And this is like it's so interesting to me because obviously people can rightly make the claim this guy used to be so positive. He used to like just talk about mindset and how to uplift everybody. And now he talks about all these dark subjects. For me, this is mindset aimed at these incredibly difficult conversations.

So whether I'm trying to um make my marriage better, make more money, whatever. I'm just like, okay, I'm here. My goal is there. There's some problem, some obstacle that stands between me and where I want to get to, but I now have to face whatever is true. And often times the shitty true thing is I'm not good enough at something yet. I'm doing something stupid. Now, if I'm willing to take that on board, then the cause and effect of life, the universe, comes to my aid and I can now get where I want to go.

But if I'm like, "No, [ __ ] that." Like, I'm never going to get there. It's always got to be cause and effect. Um, you queued up the uh Carmelo thing. Let's uh touch base on that. Yeah. Um, he got 35 years. Geez. 35 years, boys and girls. A Colin County jury convicted. He was 17 at the time he committed the crime. He's 19 now. Carmemelllo Anthony. Uh he was convicted of murder for the 2025 stabbing of then 17-year-old Austin Metaf. Uh the 12 jurors deliberated for only about three hours, which is almost always a bad sign for the defense.

Uh they ended up sentencing him to 35 years. Um they could have sentenced him all the way to 99 years. So, while I know people are um not ne some people are not necessarily happy with 35 years, actually was a fairly middleof the road sentence uh for what they could have done. He'll be eligible for parole in 17 years. So, by Texas state law, he has to serve at least half of the sentence. Obviously, they're going to appeal it, but if it stands, uh he'll spend at least 17 and a half years.

Now, the story in the media is one that's being entirely consumed by race narratives for reasons of everything that we've just been talking about. Uh, but the facts that were presented in the court were pretty straightforward. So, on uh April 2nd of 2025, both boys were 17. Anthony uh was a Centennial High athlete. He entered into the rival Memorial High team's tent at a Frisco track meet. Witnesses testified that Carmelo was asked to leave by several students, including Metaf, as many as 15 times, but he refused.

Metaf approached Anthony and told him to move. Anthony reached into his back uh his backpack and said, "Touch me and see what happens." When Metaf shoved him, Anthony pulled a three and a half inch folding knife and stabbed um Metaf once in the chest and then took off running. A witness ended up showing police where he had dumped the knife. Um, and the wound ended up piercing Metaf's heart. Medical examiner, Dr. Elizabeth Ventura, described it as a large, gaping, non-s survivable injury. Uh, a coach on the scene did apply pressure.

Uh, there was somebody else that was performing C CPR. Uh, but it didn't work and Metaf ended up dying at the hospital. In body cam footage that was played at the trial, Anthony told the officer um that I'm not alleged. I did it. Uh, he put his hands on me. I told him not to. Prosecutors called 21 witnesses during the trial. Students described Anthony as the aggressor, that he was quote looking for a fight, uh, and called it lethal force against non-lethal force. DA Bill Worski said, "You don't get to meet a shove with a stab, especially if you provoke the shove." The defense argued self-defense and rested without putting Anthony on the stand.

A decision that a lot of pundits are now questioning giving the outcome of the trial. But it is possible that that was the best option of look being on the stand is a very difficult thing. You subject yourself to being cross-examined. Uh and so that one's tough and you never get to run the counterfactual. Uh so it certainly didn't surprise me that they would keep him off the stand. Um so yeah, hindsight maybe 2020 or we all play out the well if only we had done that it would have worked out perfectly.

But you don't know that. So anyway, I wouldn't be casting a lot of aspersions on the defense team for that. Jurors had the option of a lesser manslaughter charge, but they did decline it. Uh, at sentencing, they also rejected something known as sudden passion defense, which is basically like a manslaughter defense. Um, that would have capped his sentence at 20 years. They also declined that. Um, now the question is going to be how intense the race debate is going to get on the back of this.

I have a feeling this one's going to dissipate relatively quickly. We'll have maybe a few days or a week uh of this. Um but whether this one dissipates quickly or not, this is sort of if you believe that this is all about race, it's going to be another one that you put in that category. And when you look at this stuff, the temptation is always to be the people that don't feel the way you feel. They're all dumb. Uh they all have some sinister agenda. I think it is far more useful to assume that the people that have the exact opposite opinion of you.

They are smart. They are well-intentioned, but they're reading the world very differently than you. The reason that I say to do that, one, it makes it much harder. It will force you to find facts because if you eject out at the, well, they're just dumb. You dismiss them. You make it seem like there's nothing serious here to contend with. But the stuff builds up and builds up. And so I think it is far more wise of us to figure out why the people who disagree with us, regardless of what side you're on, why do the people, if they are smart and well-intentioned and just from your perspective wrong, what is it that they're grabbing on to?

And so if you're like, "Oh, they're just ejecting out at this emotional stance." Okay, cool. But what's driving that? Is it economic in nature? Is there something being passed on in a subculture that isn't helpful? Like all of these things need to be figured out. Otherwise, we're just going to continue to fail to understand each other. This is why when you're in your most just like aggressive debate with somebody, my instinct is always to pause, to step out of the emotional stream and say, "Okay, I want to be able to articulate your stance back to you in a way that you recognize where you will say, you understand my position perfectly.

I'm going to try to articulate in a generous fashion, by the way, your base assumptions, the things that I think are driving your worldview. And so I'll say, okay, for you to believe that and for it to make sense, you would have to believe these following base assumptions. Are they correct? If they're correct, then it's like, okay, I can now state the base assumptions that are driving your thinking in a way where you go, yes, you understand my position perfectly. Now, at that point, I might go, "Holy [ __ ] by your own admission, I understand your position perfectly.

The base assumptions that are driving your position perfectly, and now you violate these values that I hold dear, but at least I can point at it and say, I think the value system that's driving you is absolutely insane. I can articulate it. You agree that it's correct." And now we're at least like, "Okay, we we understand each other. We disagree, but we understand each other." And you're not always going to be able to achieve agreement with people, but at least if you're touching ground truth, I know what your actual like the mental map that you're building.

Now, it could be emotional at every turn. And one thing I have found oftenimes is people don't understand the own like base assumptions that they have that build their worldview. And so, some people will just eject out. They'll stay in their emotions. They will not be able to have the conversation. Cool. That's not a person that we're going to be able to explore this part of that with. you can set them aside. Whatever epits they throw at you, you can just ignore. So, it's like, okay, I'm moving on to the next person who can at least articulate their base assumptions.

If you go in with that, like, I really want to understand this person before I just assume that all the things they're saying, what they would mean if I were saying them. Because that's often the gap is, yes, it would be a crazy thing for you to say those words, but you don't have their base assumptions, their worldview, their frame of reference. And so try to step inside map first from there. That doesn't mean that you're like, "Oh my god, yes, now I understand and everything you're saying is right." You just want to make sure that you're having the argument at the level of building block of their argumentation.

If they don't have one, then it's like, okay, this is not a fruitful person to have this conversation with. It's a lot of people that it's not fruitful to have that conversation with. It's true. And the thing is, it's like, at least if you have that frame of reference, you don't end up getting sucked into wasting your time with people for whom it's like, this is never going to be fruitful. This is a shouting match. This is ad homonym. And so, okay, yeah, I'll just move on to the next person.

But if we are going, we're going to need to have this conversation for sure, for sure, for sure. it is going to be further exacerbated by immigration that happens to map to um the appearance of different skin color. And so then in something I will just beat the drum on, people's inability to separate those two things creates a lot of confusion around race given America's history that then fuels again the race narrative that has never been fully um come to terms with. And so yeah, I think that even though like uh play Jasmine Crockett, I'll let her say it first and and then I'll tell you how I feel about this.

Jasmine Crockett Jasmine Crockett Jasmine Crockett who lost a telerico now she's looking for for for black women, especially black women who have black male children live in fear and agony every single day. of fear and agony that I promise you the metaps probably never spent a day living that way and we're gonna have to have just some real conversations about race in this country black country black country black so uh we're going to have to have a real conversation about race in this country. I don't think she's wrong.

I don't think this problem is going to go away. Not after everything that has built up since I mean a lot of people clock it as since Obama went into office, but it certainly for me made my radar in 2020 that we were now going in a totally different direction than we had been going when I was younger. Uh and so yeah, it does feel like we're going to have to have a conversation about race, but that conversation can't be emotional. But as she was talking, she was kicking off a lot of things that hint at her base assumption.

assumption. assumption. So, uh, one base assumption that I think she would agree with is that, um, life is harder for young black men than for young white men. Um, I would assume primarily around violence, though I would, that part I would feel less confident based on what I just heard. um that even a mother who has just lost her child to murder can't understand how um painful and terrifying it is to be the mother of a young black male. And it's like, okay, if she would agree with those things now, we can start laying them out.

And it's like, okay, one colliding on the does somebody who actually lost their child have a deeper understanding of pain than a woman who fears losing a child? I think she would acquies on that pretty quickly, but maybe not. Um, then we get into, okay, what about um the fear of violence for somebody raising a young black male? I think the data is unequivocal that a black mother has way more justification to be afraid that her child will end up in a um violent altercation. The data is pretty clear on that.

The question becomes, how do we begin to unwind that? And so, is that a this is systemic racism and it's playing out? Is this a subculture within some part of the black community that like if you watch some of the people that were talking after the Metaf thing, there was a woman who was just felt so convinced if you put my if you put your hands on me, then you are going to be met with violence. And so it's like, well, if we are reinforcing a sense of honor culture, uh, yeah, we're going to have a problem.

So, So, So, that's one where it's like what I would hope everybody would teach their kid is, all right, listen, if you're in an active fight, you're going to have to fight back. Obviously, uh, if the situation can be diffused, step one is always diffuse the situation. And so making sure every parent of every color of every creed is operating under that rubric I think would be much wiser. Now I may be wrong about that but that's the debate that we have to have. And so figuring out if this is something that's being reinforced as an echo, I don't know if people have read, I forget the exact title, but Thomas Soul wrote a book about this where he's saying that um um um I don't know the inner city black culture mirrors the redneck culture from uh I think it's Scotland, Ireland, one of the two.

But like those two cultures, honor cultures, have a lot more to do with each other than people want to realize. Now, I have a slightly oblique lens into this because at Quest, I was dealing with a lot of inner city kids. I mean, young men, but they grew up in the inner cities and they had the same honor culture, but they were all Hispanic. And so, I'm seeing this, which may be part of the reason I'm convinced this isn't race and is culture, but I saw them deal with the same thing.

Now, one of the people, this story to this day, it's one of those where in a movie it's cool, but when you put it into real life, it's kind of terrifying. So, this kid gets beaten up, gets jumped, and he comes home. His mother places a bullet on the table and says, "Does that bullet have a name?" Goes, "Yes, it does." Loads it into the gun. He's 13. Loads it into the gun. Goes back out on the street looking for the kid that jumped him. Now that's culture.

Now he's not black, but that's still culture. That's a mom teaching you. you. you. Th this is how we deal with this in this house. And I was like, bro, if I went home to my mom and said, I got beaten up, she would be like, we got to go talk to the principal. She would not have put a bullet on the table and said, does this bullet have a name? That's culture. So these are once it becomes like if that's just his household, then that's a one-off.

mom's gangster, whatever. But once it's like, oh yeah, like that's how you act in my neighborhood, which given how many stories he told me, given how many other people, they didn't tell me stories, my mom gave me a bullet, but like plenty of stories that were like, "Holy shit." Like, I can't believe that's the stuff that you guys, like one kid was like, "Oh, my mom told me the world does not want," again, he's Hispanic, wasn't black, but my mom told me the world does not want people who look like me to succeed.

And I was like, "What the fuck?" I'm like, "That is the worst advice in the known universe." What your mom should have said was, "Even if the world does not want people who look like me to succeed, I'm still going to succeed because I can get so good at something, nobody can stop me." We'll call that the Kobe Bryant method. So, it's So, it's So, it's culture. Culture. You said this earlier to the point of when something happens, we have the tapes that we go to that we play play play and it's very interesting these two conversations when we talk about the Belfast beheading and it's uh a larger conversation about unchecked immigration and then we talked about Carmelo and um Austin Metaf and how it's an underlying issue of race in America.

And so it's no longer about what these individuals have done. It's now this person who beheaded it is now the face for all immigration and everything that's wrong with immigration in the UK and in Austin Metaf's uh scenario. Carmela Anthony is the thing that's wrong with all black people and black culture that's happening in America. And I think that it's very interesting that in these two crimes, these people are the faces of these races and these uh cultures where um people interact with other people that counteract that daily.

So, I have to pass 16 Somali that I either bought food from, that I see on the subway, that have backpacks on, that are laughing, that are on their phones to get to the one that's beheading people. But, see, they're the problem, the Somali, you know. And then the same thing with black people. Yeah. I have to pass 16 people. I have to pass 32 chicken stands. I have to pass um while I'm listening to Jay-Z, I have to I'm going through all this different culture of counter um evidence to get to Austin M.

See, blacks are the problem. So it's just an interesting perspective. Well, so that's where I would say, okay, you're putting a really important point on. So now how do we get to the layer where it's all solutions? All we care about are solutions. So when people say, okay, look at the per capita crime rates. If people do a Michael Mouse trap, and they just eject out of the conversation because they don't want to talk about that, um, then you got a problem. You want to talk about the perapter crime?

And I'm certainly happy to talk about the about the about the because there is a counterfactual to that cuz everybody's claim black people 13% of the population they uh make x amount of percent of the um arrest but they are also over represented in exonerations over represented in false accusations over represented in actual sentencing over represented in appeals all these other things. So because more people are arrested but less people actually stay in jail. So it's you got more people get caught where if I'm talk if this is like fish like it it's saying that some people get into the boat some people get tossed back less black people get tossed back but then they get exonerated their thing gets expelled there is more uh corruption in their um there more corruption in their cases things like that but then on the flip side we never hear the case that white people are over represented represented in pedophilia cases or child pornography so are white people the problem we should take kids away from white Catholic Church, the priests are over represented in in so should all Catholic churches be closed?

Why haven't we closed any Catholic churches yet? So we care about per capita when it furthers our agenda of something that we already believe. You said this in the deep dive. It hasn't come out yet, but we make an assumption. Blacks are the other people. We take the facts, over represented stats, uh gangster movies, rap music. Okay, based on these four, this is my um now thesis. This is why black people are bad. Let's send them back. And then on the flip side, when I have counter points, we have other op uh cultures that are overrepresented in crime statistics.

Oh, that doesn't matter. All Catholic people aren't pedophiles. All white people aren't you you see? So, it's when it's certain cultures, it's now immigrants are the problem because of one beheading. When it's uh when it's a black person, all black people are the problem because one guy responded with a stabbing. But when it comes to white people, they don't have that necessarily that freedom. It's just one crazy white person. Like um what's the dude that killed Charlie Kirk? Um oh, he was a white guy, but he was Tyler Robinson.

Yes. Tyler Robinson is just a crazy guy, but it's not all white boys who are by themselves who are into furries need to get sent away. You get what I mean? So, well, there is some of that, but cuz the Tyler Robinson thing is caught up with trans and so people, he's definitely going to fit into that narrative. Trans fit that too. like trans are the problem now cuz if a trans person you know know know so that what I see you putting on the table is something very important which is okay there people use these stats as talking points once you're using a stat as a talking point you're trying to win the argument you're not trying to solve the problem the problem the problem what I'm appealing people to do is there is a solution and so until you've gotten to the solution you haven't done the adequate work and so um I will often say, "I know that my approach was right when I get the result that I want, and I know that my approach is wrong when I don't get the result that I want." And the great irony is when I present that, especially in a work situation, people will defend my failures because they think I'm emotionally being hurt by the fact that it failed.

Whereas I am merely trying to understand cause and effect. And so, I'll do a thing and it doesn't work. And I'm like, "Yeah, therefore that thing like that was a poor like approach." And they'll be like, "Well, no. I mean, like it really made sense the time." [ __ ] yes, I understand that it made sense. I know why we did it. But the reality is it did not yield the thing. And so if we're if if battle number one that we have to have is every time that we go to try and talk about um the let's say that the problem we're actually trying to solve for is black versus white animosity animosity animosity and we're like okay first thing that we want to put on the table is um we're getting this per capita thing being thrown around plus media representations equal white people are getting the wrong perception of black people and it creates It's a gravity well for them.

They're unable to get out of that. There's probably jobs that secretly they just never get because people think we're too violent or whatever. And so, um, it's creating a real problem which holds us down in poverty. Poverty becomes an exacerbating factor. And so, we're not able to get out. It's like that is such a cogent hypothesis. But now we can go through and we can start looking at where does this break down or not. And if what we find is, oh, the data is just very clear.

uh we're arrested more as a um identifiable minority. minority. minority. However, once you like eliminate all the exonerations and if you come up with a calculation that says not 100% of the exonerations will go through um and you do the math and when you do that like it just disappears and now all of a sudden there is not more black and white crime. This is all ridiculous. Um, great. But this is one where every time I see people online trying to have like, okay, here are the stats and like let's address each one of these.

There's always a terminal point where somebody has presented a fact that let's just assume good intentions. The other person hasn't done research on it yet. Yeah. And so instead of going, [ __ ] that's interesting. I need to look into that. They eject out, goes back to ad homonym, this is racist. So that's what I'm saying. The the thing I'm trying to do is not say I know what the answer is. The thing I'm trying to do is say if we can actually have the debate if everybody in all like uh what what I would really encourage people to do for instance instance instance if we could make immigration work meaning people are happier they're wealthier uh the country is more um competitive on the world stage middle class is [ __ ] booming all all the ways that I think a rational person would define that things are going great.

That'd be [ __ ] rad. But now let's look at what does that actually look like? So for me it looks like more like 1600 America than 2026 America. It's like yeah if you can make it here uh but you're not going to have easy access. You're not going to have any access to social programs because you've not yet paid into the system. Uh there's going to be a whole bunch of constraints. We're going to filter people for criminal record things like that. We're only going to let in a certain uh type of person that we think is going to be successful.

Blah blah blah. But you actually put together something that you think will survive contact with reality and then you run a test and you put in early metrics that you say this indicates that it'll work not. So I say that to say all right when you're approaching a problem sincerely want a good solution. And if you can sincerely want a good solution then at least you're operating from the place of I've stepped outside of my emotions enough to just look at cause and effect. If people can't do that then it ends up being a death spiral.

And especially as it comes to race in recent memory, it has just been a cudel that people use to get you to shut up and stop looking at something. And we've just made so many things taboo that it will just make the problem harder and harder to actually solve for. solve for. solve for. Ryan, you got anything? Uh, I'll be honest. I was arguing with chat that whole conversation. Right. Right. Correct. Okay. What What is the uh most interesting or high utility argument that you're in?

Uh, the problem is none of this stuff is arguing about what y'all are even talking about. I was just getting mad because people are like, "Oh, you're a communist because you disagree with me." And it's like, I don't think that's like that's what discourse has dissolved to at this point in general is just, "Oh, you disagree with me, communist." And it's like, that's not you're not product. You're not adding to the conversation. So, that's why I was getting mad at chat. But, in terms of Why Why get sucked into it?

The chat. The chat. The chat. No, no, no. Chat is what you're here for. Oh, for. Oh, for. Oh, but the um so the second somebody ad homonyms me, I shift down in gears, I don't find myself getting wound up. So when I'm like, "Oh, they don't have an argument. Cool." They're now just like slinging insults. So one, if somebody said, "Tom, you're a communist or you're I'm more likely to get you're an evil capitalist." Then it's like, "Okay, first I go, is there any truth in that?" And if I detect the truth, I'm like, uhoh.

If there is no truth in it, then I go, okay, what is the base assumption they have that makes them say that? And so if it's an economic slur, if you will, coming my way, I'm then going to test, okay, what is it that they understand about economics? Now, part of what I would warn you against for your sanity is that the method of engaging with chat is good at getting to whether the person has only emotion or they actually have base assumption. So you can delineate that you're not going to convince them.

So the best that you're going to be able to do is identify whether they're just on the emotional spectrum or whether they actually have a base assumption whether they've encountered data that you haven't or not. And so it's something for you to go research. If you go into chat thinking my mission is to convince them chat is not going to be fun for you. You're going to burn out. But if you go into chat and it's like okay the most viciferous, the most hate watcher, the person who shows up Ryan because they hate you and they think you're a communist.

It's like that's the person that you want to find out, oh, what what base assumption are you picking up on? What's the thing that I said that you hate? What what do you want to see happen in that? Not so that you can beat them in an argument so that you can begin building a mental model of like, do we just have a bunch of lunatic emotional people in the chat? Like, what are you really up against? Do you know what I mean? Yeah. Yeah. And so, um, like the there was a, um, comment in YouTube that said, "Geez, Tom, you really surround yourself with did they they might have said lunatics, but they certainly said radical far-left radicals, meaning you and Drew taking over the world." And my response my my response was, "Come in.

They are well-intentioned people that I care about and so I want to understand what they think and I want the challenges to the way that I think. Um, so it doesn't neither their slander nor your guys's difference of opinions um make me mad. So they if you treat chat like that that oh they're going to help sharpen my thinking even though they might be doing it in like an unhinged fashion. uh you'll be in a better place. That would be my advice. That's good advice. I also have four super chats, by the way, if we're ready to go to those before.

Let's do it. Speaking of chat, uh our favorite Marushia Dark first up says, "Did Tommy Robinson saying we'll take less money, we want our country back, affect your confidence in the everything is economics thesis? Recent events seem to be more motivated by ideology or ethnicity than by class?" That they're both real. So, um, you you wouldn't have the immigration problem if you didn't have the economic problem. So, from that perspective, no, economics is always going to be at the bottom. Uh, because you wouldn't be importing people if you didn't have an economic problem to solve.

So, uh, that's why that's at the base. the base. the base. So, hold on. You should think the basis of immigration from the UK was to solve the economic problem. That's correct. In the cover story, it's a twofold problem. So you have those that want to acquire power to stay in government so that they can control the economics and then you have the other side which is like oh [ __ ] for me to stay in power I've got to make sure prices are coming down so I can control the economics.

But when you look at a country that is thriving they and everybody's getting richer. It's you can absorb so much more. People are not in such a heightened emotional state that they overreact to everything. Yeah. So, you're far more able to absorb the um negative consequences of too rapid of an immigration, but I don't think any um economically thriving country would do mass immigration. I think the tour anathema anathema anathema copy. So, the asylum stuff is cover story. story. story. Correct. Correct. Correct. Got it. Got it.

Got it. Yeah. You might do like a one-time thing, but probably not. Um so, yeah. Cool. Cool. Cool. Next up from Marushi Dark, another 20. Thank you for the 40. What is the ethical issue with insider trading as opposed to leveraging any other form of knowledge arbitrage? Why wouldn't a CEO share what's going on in the company with their loved ones or use it to predict market trends? Because what ends up happening is you get an upward spiral of economic control and ability to manipulate that does just ice everybody out.

And so it's one of those where yeah, any one thing it all does seem to make sense. And it's like, god, this is so weird. Like why can't somebody talk to their spouse and tell them this thing's about to happen if they have that insider information? Why can't they trade and why can't they tell their friends? Like that's crazy. I want my friends to do well. But the reality is it creates such a toxic abusive system that you race to a K-shaped economy. You get the robber baron era and you realize that to avoid revolution you end up having to try to even the playing field as much as you can.

And this is where it's like when capitalists don't recognize that especially a purified game of um capital betting and arbitrage has the ability to go toxic so fast because it exists at like this incredible mathematical incredible mathematical incredible mathematical um pattern recognition level that you really can ice out normal people just based on intellect. And so you can sort of economically enslave people by um being too smart. I mean, it really is being too smart and amoral. Uh and so this is precisely the kind of thing that you want the government to have a light touch on, but you do want them to go in and try to even the playing field as much as you can.

Um, so you have to look out for those flywheels where it's like when you think about network effects, if you're familiar with that idea, network effects have this runaway flywheel where like I'm going up against Roblox. Roblox now has decades and decades and decades of onboarding kids. And so you run into a problem of the more kids they have, the more creators they have on the platform, the more attention they get, the harder they are going to be to displace. And so it ends up creating a kind of monopoly and you want to protect against that.

That's not me requesting an antitrust against Roblox. I don't think we're there. But it recognizing that things like that really are something that create um a moat that is just extraordinarily difficult to overcome. You don't want to do that. And so when you have a central banking system that steals from everybody through inflation and only allows you to win if you play in the financial markets and then you let the financial markets get toxic as well. Now now you really have through um the sinister ability to lord your intellectual power over others.

You're doing something that is truly sinister in my opinion. It would be like imagine if Superman came to Earth um but he was bad. That's the position that you put yourself in. Uh because the the economic game played played at that level is like the Jane Street [ __ ] is so wild and so manipulative. Can be not an accusation but just can be absolutely crazy. Uh you have to protect against it. Andrew Whitney says, "First time super chatting. Love your show. I've been watching a few months.

I've asked a few local house reps in Florida on what they are willing to do about deficit spending and they always come back with a non-answerp passive. non-answerp passive. non-answerp passive. They probably don't understand it. That's the first thing. And then second in terms of its negative consequences. Uh and then they know to get elected they've got a deficit spend. It's [ __ ] crazy. [ __ ] crazy. [ __ ] crazy. I do think that super chat's important just on a side note is that if any of you genuinely want to go make change, go do things on your local level.

I think of a lot of people forget that we are so close to politics at the end of the day that it really does just take you leaving your house and going to talk to your um I don't know the word I'm looking for it but the people representative representative representative y y y you can go do it touching grass solves like 70% of the problems in t chat right now just go outside go outside go to a bar go watch the next game relax um and last for now we've got an OG Leblon have a beautiful and wonderful morning everyone make sure to stay hydrated and stay away from media for a few days lots of social engineering ing rings going around on X to get reactions out of people.

Stay positive and I love that. I will also say um just like when I'm fasting, I will go stand next to somebody who's cooking, feel my stomach cramp, smell the smells which make me want to eat so desperately and I will say yes, I'm so powerful that I can overcome these impulses and it makes me feel like a superhero. go into like the most toxic Reddit forum ever and just practice not being triggered. Like stay solutionoriented. Okay, there's a problem here. Even the fact that this po person is getting something out of um putting hate or whatever into the world, ask yourself why.

How' they end up there? Is this a a genetic phenomenon? Were they raised a certain way? Are they feeling a level of desperation and this gives them something? Is this a sociopath? Like there is a path to understanding this that I find interesting. I love that you stopped on that. Oh my god, Tom is the lunatic. Uh so yeah, you're going to see stuff like that. Just here it is. Oh, actually we got a last minute super chat before we go super chat. Uh Morgan Xavier says, "Tom, I strive to be more like you every day, but I'm struggling.

Depression sucks. Have you ever experienced it? If free will is an illusion, then where where's my hope? You succeed because you're programmed to, and I don't because likewise." Not true. So this is where the fact that you have no free will is your greatest ally. Because you don't have free will, it means that you operate on a whole bunch of if this then that statements. So that means that your depression is the end state of a bunch of if this then that. So do this, get this outcome.

Do this, get that outcome. And so depression has an ability to unwind. And so now we're going to do the things where we're going to unwind that depression. And so part of this is just basically entirely a physiological game. And so if I were to audit what you're eating, if I were to audit your exercise routine, if I were to audit your sleep patterns, all of that, I'm going to find that you're taking what may have started as a psychological thing, but now it's like also impacting your biology.

And so we're going to unwind the biology. And then the biggest thing, and by the way, yes, while I won't claim to have been fully depressed, I was sliding towards depression. I would just lay on the floor of my apartment feeling like my life is going nowhere. I have no idea what to do. I couldn't afford furniture. So, I'm literally laying on the floor of an unfernished apartment just like what the [ __ ] am I doing with my life? And it was miserable. But at the time, I was like, okay, what is my way out?

I cannot remember the thing that made me have the intuition to go after my biology because this is the late 90s. And so it was hotly contested whether or not you could quote unquote teach a new dog, teach an old dog new tricks. And so there was this research coming out that we now know is real about the brain plasticity. And I was like, I'm going to choose to act even if it ends up not being true. I'm going to choose to act as if I can get better at something.

And so my advice to you, since we now know the science is just true, that you can begin doing some of these pattern interrupts. Can't stop yourself from having the first negative thought. Call that. It's biologically hardwired, but you can stop yourself from repeating it. And so the first negative thought becomes a jiu-jitsu move to force yourself, no matter how fake it feels, to think something positive, to go do something positive. And if you just get trapped, trapped, trapped, trapped, trapped, go serve somebody else. If you go do rad things for somebody with absolutely no expectation of anything in return, you will start feeling better.

We we are wired to serve other people. And so find your way to do something for other people. Go big brother. Uh whatever. If you've got kids, just go like try to put a smile on their face every day. It's psychotic because it's just a biological response, but your biology will be like you did a rad thing and you'll just feel a little bit better. It's super weird, but it works. Attack the problem from a biological standpoint. biological standpoint. biological standpoint. So when you say you have no free will, it's not that you can't manipulate your current setting.

It's that you are manipulatable. So just go press those buttons to change how you feel. Yes. And the great irony is he couldn't stop himself from asking that question. And I can't stop myself from giving this answer. But he now has that answer. And so it's going to rattle around in his head. Now the bad news is if he is the type of person who is wired to do nothing with that information, he will do nothing with that information. But people really can change. People really can do the things.

You will be impacted by ideas and all you have to do is go out and act upon it. Now the whole secret to the fact that secret the whole secret to the fact that we are automata is you cannot live like it. So rule number one act as if you have free will but the fact that you don't is wonderful news because it means that you will respond to cause and effect. That's it. And so you just have to get yourself on the cause and effect train and then everything else will take care of itself.

All right, we got a bunch of topics to talk about because we spent an hour and a half on racism. Yeah, we did. Let's go. Um, okay. First, we have the police helicopter, the US helicopter that got shot down in Iran. Um, I think two pilots were involved. Nobody was uh hurt. This is Donald Trump's tweet. I have just been informed by our great military that last night the Iran Iranians shot down one of our highly sophisticated Apache helicopters while patrolling over the Straight Horse. There were two pilots involved.

Both are safe and uninjured. Nevertheless, the US must of necessity respond to this attack. Thank you for your attention to this matter, President Donald J. Trump. There it is. I do not think that Iran is negotiating in good faith. I do not think that they're looking for a negotiated settlement to this war. Uh so the reality is we have to accept that limited warfare does not work, which means we are going to be stuck in this quagmire uh effectively forever until we find an exit ramp.

The bad news is I think we have simply made the situation worse. And um what we're probably about to see is more tit fortat violence. So Iran is saying, "Whoa, the US uh overshot the mark. We're now going to strike back." So we're probably just at another return to open hostilities. We'll see. Uh but I don't see an end in sight. I don't think there is anything other than the US finally saying, um, we're either going to hold the blockade until there's so much international pain that we can get a bunch of people to join us in backing down the Iranians.

Uh, but to pull that off, you probably need either China to tell them, "Hey, knock it the [ __ ] off." Um it might be that like you might just need that if China's not going to tell them to do that that you if you walk away the US uh that they're going to put a toll on the straight of Hormuz, which they've already said they're going to do. They've already started a website for collecting the tolls. They've started building the toll booth to actually get it. And so if the US pulls the blockade out, um that's how that's going to play out.

You might end up getting a skirmish between Iran and Oman who both want to uh put tolls up. And if Iran says no, we have the whole thing all the way over to your border. Uh there could be a minor skirmish there, but I don't think Aman thinks that they can stand up to Iran. So you'll have that. Uh if this ends up being the just blatant debacle that it the current phase is now, if it drags on long enough, uh then you lose your potential investment from the GCC countries, I think they all understand, up America's had its Suez Canal moment.

They can no longer protect us. So we've got to diversify. That's going to be what Russia for um some things, China for most things. Uh so yeah, you'll see a growth in the BRICS alliance. Um so it's just it's one of those like the British Empire had their Suez Canal moment. It happens unfortunately. Uh we may be at that moment. Then this will all go back to regional powers, mostly economic warfare, continued move away from the dollar, yada yada. And it just from a cause and effect standpoint, it all plays out and it ends up you tried to make this a way to forestall um the decline of the American empire long enough for AI to give you the growth you need to get out from under your debt.

Uh it didn't work. And so now you're back to my 9-year timeline. Uh next thing, California election fraud is ramping up. There has been a DOJ prosecution for Brenda Bound for Brenda Brown for paying homeless people to register to vote under false addresses. Yeah, the crazy thing is, by the way, uh I can you pay them? I don't know if you can pay them to vote, but you can ballot harvest like a [ __ ] So, I don't yet know if the money is the problem. The the fake address is what they're actually going to get her for.

as a reminder to everybody and this is okay. So, um here is my current stance and this certainly will change as more information comes out. My current stance is um whether or not you end up having widescale fraud probably pretty low. The fact that you have widescale ballot harvesting that is entirely illegal and should be illegal is your real problem. So, this is one of those where just like most of the things in the economy that are rigged against you are perfectly legal. They are happening just out right in your face and they are just counting on the fact that you don't understand it.

California has rigged the elections in a way that's absolutely horrific. It's sinister from where I'm sitting, but it's legal. And so now we've got to go, okay, well, this bad thing that is legal, should we be pushing for policy change? will we even be able to get policy change given that this is effectively a one party state? Um, and so that's where much like I find myself banging the [ __ ] drum to get people to understand that central banking is entirely legal and entirely immoral. I think we have the same thing happening here.

You may have an entirely entirely legal system in California for voting and it's entirely immoral. And so we should be addressing it on those grounds so that this doesn't derail into the election was stolen and it derails into or not derails but that it stays on the track of these elections are being railroaded to one side by creating a system that favors that side. Because again, this goes back to the left is far more likely to create policies that people uh that are call it lowinformation voters or all the way down to homeless and not paying attention at all, um that they're going to be incentivized to vote left.

And so if you just do ballot harvest versus ballot harvest and the right is doing their ballot harvesting, the left's doing their ballot harvesting, it is a method of getting votes that is always going to be wildly disproportionate on the left. And so you create the sort of um election style that is the equivalent of gerrymandering. It's just it's a thing that we do, but we shouldn't be doing it. It's ridiculous and it's creating all these distortion outcomes. Now, I'm building a new mental model for how uh voting should work.

I expect it to be highly contentious. Um and so, as my community here, you guys would never clip this out of context and send it around, of course. Uh but I will thank you as a community that only wants to see my thinking get sharper to join me on this journey as we find the the final um status here. But I think it needs to look something like this. Uh voting shouldn't just be universal. It's probably not going to break along the lines of pay tax, doesn't pay tax, but it probably should break along the lines of something like um if you are receiving benefits receiving benefits receiving benefits to a certain amount within a given voting period that you are ineligible to vote.

And so you can always get your way back out of that and get back into the eligible voting pool by not drawing on resources because what ends up happening is you're drawing resources and now you have a financial incentive to continue to vote for more of those which creates politicians having an incentive to get you to draw more benefits which becomes a bigger drag on the economy which puts us in the populist moment because it creates that K-shaped. breaks the economy, which also creates the incentive for the people that understand the financial structure to be like, "Oh, you're going to steal my money through inflation?

Well, [ __ ] you. Then I'm just going to do this like hyper financialized game. I'm going to beat you with that all day, every day." And so, yeah, go ahead and [ __ ] the rest of the populace. I'm going to be up here doing my thing. That's all. It's so deranging is to be madness. So that's where my initial thinking uh though I eagerly await people pointing out the um inevitable problems that that may cause because it really may I've not thought through this enough but that's like my initial swag is like you you can't keep doing what you're doing because show me the incentive and I will show you the outcome.

So, we've created all these incentives and all the insane voting things that we do from uh ballots being able to come in basically forever. Uh not the signature not needing to match. Um that you don't even have to sign, somebody else can sign on your behalf. The person who can sign on your behalf, I don't think is limited. They can sign like a gazillion uh ballots. That ballot harvesting is legal. So, you can go to homeless people and say, "Hey, um here just fill this out." And then again, I don't know if you can pay them or not.

Uh but they'll find ways to be able to incentivize them. Uh even if it's just, hey, come in and this have a fun time in this community center or whatever. Uh so all of that to me is just pure madness. We've got to break those incentives. So that's my initial thinking. All right, Argentina. Really? Nobody in chats like that's [ __ ] lunatic. [ __ ] lunatic. [ __ ] lunatic. We had this conversation on Monday. No, we didn't. Yeah, we had I have never said those words out loud ever before.

We literally talked about California voting on Monday. Yeah. But I never said that I'm thinking that we should make it based on you don't uh if you've taken money from the government that you can't do it. That you can't vote. Yeah. I've never said that before. Oh, no. Oh, no. Oh, no. I've literally never said those words out loud. out loud. out loud. But no one mentioned anything about that. that. that. Yeah. Well, you talked about institutionalized people shouldn't vote. So, I mean, it's obviously I can't believe that was controversial.

controversial. controversial. Obviously, Obviously, Obviously, that that that is fascinating. I would love to follow. Hey, this person is so mentally incompetent that we've had to institutionalize them. But I bet they'll pick a good candidate. Let's just go back to you have to own land to vote. You know, that would really solve it. And no one's voting. Well, so Well, so Well, so that's what it really comes down to. Like you have to have a certain cuz if you say you have to pay taxes, that's going to eliminate the bottom 50%, right?

right? right? Be part of the solution, not part of the problem. This is where you're saying something sarcastically. So instead, go let me tell you why being a land owner or Tom, let me tell you why putting that kind of restriction on who can vote is a mistake. then walk me through. You know me, I'm like I'm trying to get to a solution. And so we can argue the solution I want to get to doesn't make sense or we can argue the way that I want to get there doesn't make sense.

I'm super open. I really want a middle class that thrives. And so uh to get there, I'm saying you have to diffuse the economic bomb. I can walk people through the cause and effect logic of why I think the way that we're doing it now creates the economic. In fact, I just did. Maybe speed ran it too fast. But the the big beats are there. Okay. And so we can go. But when we start like being sarcastic about land owners, which by the way, when the Constitution was written, that's how the it wasn't.

So what ended up happening was the founding fathers could not get the states to agree. And so they said, uh, whatever in your state qualifies you to vote for the largest, um, member, uh, group. So like I think they were thinking Congress versus Senate kind of thing. So whatever allows you to vote for that person in that big group qualifies you to vote at the national level. Now they well knew that the vast majority of states it was land owners but it wasn't everywhere and very quickly states start dropping the landowner thing.

Now when you ask why did they want people to be land owners? It's actually very it very logical in my stance. You own a piece of the country. Therefore, you're likely to vote for the thing that's in the interest of people who own a piece of this country. Cool. Now, if we go, "Yeah, well, it's too hard to become a land owner, so that's going to create this gentry class. We don't like that." Okay, great. But don't lose sight of what we're trying to do, which is you need to be invested in the country.

country. country. And so, now it becomes, okay, what do we consider investment in the country? And so then it, well, an easy one is you're paying taxes. And I would say, well, 50% of Americans don't pay any meaningful tax whatsoever. And so given that, that's like maybe a messy debate, we probably don't go down that route, though I get the energy there. What if instead we just go, okay, you're not drawing off the system because drawing off the system means you're financially incentivizing yourself to keep drawing off the system to vote for things that will give you more.

That's a it's just economically deranging just by the mechanisms of economies. that's always going to result in the situation that we're in now. K-shaped economy, people hate each other, screaming towards revolution. So from a cause and effect perspective, you can take that one off the table, but that is what we're doing now. And so it's like, okay, well, it's not that, Tom. Because of XYZ reason, great. What is it? Now, if the argument is no, everything is working perfectly now. I'll cycle you back to economically it's broken.

So we know we have a problem. Uh, and if we can agree that we have an economic problem, then it's like, okay, we understand each other. We just disagree. And then I move on to, okay, I'm never going to get support from Drew. Drew is never going to get support from me. Which is fine. Now, at least we understand each other. But it's like when we eject out of the conversation by just going, well, let's just make everybody land owners, which I know is not your real pitch.

Then we miss out on every time I push you on stuff like this, you're really insightful. And so it's like I don't want to see you eject out on the easy one when you could really like show me where I'm going wrong. wrong. wrong. Um this is a circular conversation and I feel like I have 15 minutes to cover four topics. So look that's that's where the intention is. I would much rather go to the other topics than than than All right, let's go restart a conversation that we previously had that's going to have 75% of the same points.

Uh because I do want to talk about Argentina because they were down bad and we did the currency swap and people were saying, "Well, we build them out and we rescued them and this this and that and then we ended up making money off of that deal and then now they're standing on their own two feet and now they just announced a budget surplus which everybody around the world thinks that's impossible but he did it." So I think this is now the a good north star to go to because I feel like a budget surplus is the first step of defusing the economic bomb.

No doubt what what they've done in Argentina is absolutely spectacular. The fact that you had somebody come in to a country that has spent over a hundred years running socialist policies only to constantly be underwater, be making lives worse for everybody in the country. He comes in as an economist. He lays out exactly the cause and effect that I talk about endlessly on this show of all the things that they're going to need to do in Argentina to get things turned around, which largely is just cut your expenses.

And if you don't get people off the government dole largely in the form of just government employees that aren't adding value to the actual economic future of the country, if you don't do that, you will forever drown. And so he comes in, starts slashing government workers, and yes, he puts a lot of people out of work, but those people then find their way into the actual productive economy. And the problem is, I think here in America, we have a delusion that people working for the government are in the productive economy.

they are not. And so getting as few people working for the government as possible should be the goal so that you get them in the actual part of the economy that actually does a thing that people say has economic value. When they say that they mean you've created a thing I want to buy. I would rather have that thing than my money. And so you want to migrate as many people as you can into that part of the economy. Now they're gonna have to compete because for that to work it's all going to be on merit.

And I get a lot of people don't like that and a lot of people don't want to have to get good. But when you, as we see by Argentina, when you force people into that, yes, it is a period of hardship. There is no doubt is a period of uncertainty. But then they start realizing, oh [ __ ] I'm going to have to actually perform in the productive economy and do something that's going to move my country forward. And lo and behold, it's actually working. So I am extremely excited to see that somebody's actually able to turn their country around.

This has had nothing to do with the fact that I also happen to agree as a matter of philosophy with what he's trying to do. I would perfectly happy to be wrong and see the country turn around and then go cool. That's the thing that actually works in real life. I want to be on the team of cause and effect, the thing that actually works. But what he's pointing out is this actually works and that you can dramatically turn a country around by getting your cost in control.

Remember in America, for every dollar, new dollar that we bring in in tax revenue, we spend an additional $1.58. You'll never get out from under that. No matter how much you tax billionaires, you can literally tax their wealth at 100%. And if you keep the ratio of every new dollar that we bring in, we spend an additional $158, then you're going to end up in a problem. Solve that problem first. We have first. Solve that problem first. We have way bigger government than we had even 10 years ago.

So this is not like some thing, well we've been doing it for 100 years and how could we even know what America would look like if we weren't doing this. We didn't do this recently. So we've got to get the expenses down and letting them be our guide is wonderful. wonderful. wonderful. Um this is a perfect segue because the social security trust fund is on track to run out of money in late 2032. Its trustees say trustees say trustees say that is so soon. Would social security count as not being able to vote?

Um, social security. I'm open to that. I'm very open to that. I'd need to really that would decimate the mega class because that's every single citizen. It depends on I mean it is what it is. So this is one where oftentimes people What was the one that Brutus Lugo thought he had me on? Oh [ __ ] I forget. Anyway, what's that? what's that? what's that? Was it today? I can pull it back up. No, no, it was yesterday. Okay. Or Monday. Um, so there is I I would need to think through it because you've paid into a system and you're taking back out what you paid in.

So maybe that one doesn't count and maybe that is um you just getting it's basically a forced retirement plan. Yeah. Uh now it's a forced retirement plan that requires a Ponzi scheme. And so the problem that we have now is um you really do have to extend the retirement age. That's bad news. I get it. But when the system was put in place, it was actually designed for most people dying while they were still working. So the average age, average life expectancy was lower than the age of retirement.

And I would just say that's probably what you got to go back to is something like that. So if the average age of life is 78, it's like, well, average age of retirement might be pushing 80. So we're not going to start there. I want everybody to freak out. You're going to work your way there and see how we do. Um, but that is you you just with the birth rates that we have, you put yourself in a situation where you find yourself desperate and so you start bringing a bunch of immigrants in and you tell yourself the lie that immigrants are net positive, which they are not.

Uh, and so you end up with them further exacerbating the problem and so it all becomes bad very fast. Yeah. What is a social security like solution? Cuz it is I've been paying into it. you've been banging like we've all paid into that we thought we were going to get and then now nobody's going to get to get to get you either have to grow your economy at a freakish level and reduce your spending or you have to raise the retirement age. The the sort of great news is there's nothing fancy like you you have to pay the people later or less.

So I guess that's another one. You could just reduce the amount that people are getting paid in their social security but you could also means test it. Hey, I know you paid into the system, but you're actually doing great. So, sorry. No more social security for you. These are the tough options. But the reality is you put in place a system that cannot support itself. It works for a while, but it doesn't work forever. work forever. work forever. Uh Uh Uh that's interesting because the life expectancy rate now is 79 years average between both males and females.

Uh, so then you'll have to raise the retirement age 85 age 85 age 85 80 81. Yeah, because I think it used to be two years over the average life expectancy. expectancy. expectancy. Now, here's the bad news. People now are living longer, but they're [ __ ] sick for like a lot of the end of their life. So, I think you're going to run into uh just a factual problem. And this is where I always expect this to be more unpopular. Maybe I just don't say it loud enough or enough, but I think families should be taking care of them, their own family.

And so this should not become a government burden. And [clears throat] I think a big part of the psychology of Americans because we've been prosperous for so long is that I don't need a family. I've got the government. government. government. And I think that is the absolute wrong lesson to teach. Now, that has implications for men and women as well. [snorts] [snorts] [snorts] Ye. So, that's going to get uncomfortable real fast. Uh, but nonetheless, I think it's true. I, uh, people need to think of themselves.

I need to be self-sufficient. One of the ways that I, um, protect myself is by having a strong family unit and a strong social group, and that may be religious. Uh, but you've got to push that burden down to the individual instead of trying to solve everything at the government level. Um, and it gets even better because now uh boomers are never going to die because they just came up with a new epigenetic restor restoration drug that is going to allow them to live forever. So, not only are they going to bankrupt social security, they're going to live to 145 and it's only going to be available for people between the ages of like 45 and 70.

Well, the kill all the young people off. The good or the bad news there is that uh they will find themselves having to work again at, you know, whatever 115. So, um, this this is an unmititigated good. I hope that this is real. We'll find out. Um, all of this stuff should be taken with a grain of salt, but this one has me very excited. And so, their estimation is that they'll be able to shave like 10 years of aging off of people within the next year.

We'll see. Again, this hasn't proven, but when you look at what aging actually is, so again, you live in a deterministic universe. So when you look at what aging actually is, it is the um differentiation differentiation differentiation of cells. So a cell should be hyper differentiated. An eye cell should be an eye cell. Heart cell should be a heart cell. When you start aging, there's something called methylation markers that tell your DNA what part of the DNA strand to unwind. Because [clears throat] your entire body, every cell is encoded in every bit of DNA.

And then you put these little methyl markers and you say, "I'm actually an eye cell." And so that part unspools and the little readers come along and read it and go, "Oh, cool. I'm an eye cell." And they rebuild that eye cell. Those methylation markers get put in the wrong place as you age. And so it's like, "I'm an eyeart cell." And so you're like, "Wait, what?" And so what that manifests as is like wrinkly skin, poor performing kidneys, weakening of the heart muscle, all of that stuff.

And so if this works, what it does is it goes into the um those epigenetic markers and it's like, "Nah, [ __ ] you really are an eye cell. You really are a heart cell." And the methylation markers go back to where they should be. And it's like, "Cool. I know exactly what kind of cell I am again." And if it works, oh my god, this could have the kind of staggering results that we've seen on obesity from GLP1 inhibitors. You could see from an anti-aging perspective. That [ __ ] would be wild, man.

That would be wild. Um, do you think that people will live forever? forever? forever? No, but I think that I mean eventually, yes. But at that point, I think we're synthetic creatures. synthetic creatures. synthetic creatures. Well, yeah. Well, okay. Forever in the near future, like us, you think like 150 like what? I think if you if you stay healthy and you're let's say if you're under 40, it's basically a guarantee. If you're under 60, you've got a real shot that in the next call it 10 to 15 years with the assistance of AI that you will be able to radically extend life expectancy by doing the following.

For every year of time that goes by, medicine adds let's say 1.1 or 1.2 years to your life expectancy. meaning your life expectancy is always getting 10 or 20% longer with every day that passes. And so now all of a sudden it's like, oh [ __ ] like [ __ ] like [ __ ] like it's not like all diseases are cured, but now if average life expectancy is 78, all of a sudden it's 79, 80, 81, 82. And so it's like as long as it becomes from 82 to 83 faster than I age from 60 to 61, I'm never going to hit it.

And so then it becomes you only die of trauma. Now I think that that will have its own set of problems. But I do think that we in in in I'm sort of maybe the bubble generation, but I think that for sure people that are 40 and under can expect their lives to be radically extended. That people would think you died way too young if you don't hit 120. It'll be something like that. like that. like that. Gotcha. Gotcha. All right. Um, special shout out to Paleo Valley.

Um, we've been having the beef sticks on the table all day. If you guys haven't seen them, u, this is something that us at Impact Theory eat personally. I'd be tearing them Tyaki joints up. Um, and I know you and Lisa are like big paleo fans. Ultra hardcore about Paleo Valley. These guys know how we feel about them. Lisa's gut is so bad. She has to be so particular about what she eats. And this has been one of the few things for on the- go that she can take with her.

They're absolutely fantastic, delicious. they hit the spot in terms of if you have sensitivities that this is one that you should definitely try. Um, it's grass-fed. They don't have junk or fillers. It's all natural ingredients. They also come in a ton of flavors. By the way, there's a URL that should be uh in the notes that you can click. Um, so take a look at these guys. You can get 30 of these sticks for just $36. So, they're super affordable, delicious, good for you. Yeah, I can't recommend these guys highly enough and and really really grateful for the support that Paleo Valley has given us, especially me.

I know we touch on a lot of crazy things on the show. Uh, and I'm grateful uh for what they've extended to us. So, yes, for sure. These are people that I stand behind big time. And Truth De was like, "When's the last time you had Payload Valley?" Like literally, they have them in a break room. Like, I'd be sneaking and turn them up. I'd be eating Lisa's. Don't tell Lisa, though. Uh, all right. Uh, we got some super chats we got to hit. Yes, we do.

We got four to go through. B O says, "The saddest thing happening right now is that the older people get, the less they seem to care about new gens. My grandma's friend wanted to argue politics with me and when she was losing said, I'll be dead anyway. She voted Trump." Trump car on the table. Well, I'm dead. Figure it out. That is wild. That's such a That's very sad. Now, look, she probably just hit the termination point and she got emotional because you would hope that it's like, I'm going to be dead anyway, so let me vote for the thing that's good for the kids.

The problem is I don't trust them to actually understand what's good for the kids. I trust them to have an emotional take on what's good for the kids, but not what's actually good for the kids. Um, so that one's heartbreaking. The the reason is very simple and and this will play out until the end of time. And I'll say to Gen Z and Gen Alpha, if any of you are listening right now, you will one day be the old people. You will one day be the people that are so out of touch.

And so when you're clowning on your elders for being totally tech dysfunctional, that's going to be you one day. Now, to all the old people, I will remind you, remember what it was like to be young and to feel like old people legitimately were not from the same planet that you were from and like what world are they in touch with? This is the cycle. young people are going to get the world that they want. And so, um, screaming into the void makes no sense. Putting all of your time and energy into making sure that they can thrive, that they have incredible chances, that they get to have a joyfilled life where they're almost giddy, not almost, that they're giddy at the prospect of their future.

That is when you think about like serving, serve the next generation in that way. It's one of the great ways to feel good about yourself is to really go to bat for the people coming up behind you. Um we God has seen it fit to make it such that we pass the torch. And so you should whether you have kids or not, you should hunger to be a part of that to build a foundation that feels good that you've grown a tree under whose shade you will not sit.

And if you can like imbue yourself with that and they're not going to celebrate you for it, they don't have the context. They they're not old enough to have experience enough to even recognize all of the patterns of life. You didn't either. And so don't be mad at them for being young. Like be enthused by that. Lease and I talk about this. And look, I get it. Part of it is that we don't have kids. And so for us when we encounter young people doing young things, even sometimes very noisy, very late, you know, whatever.

Uh that we love it. We love to see that energy. And so if you can find a way in your heart to just be like, I want to see young people do young things. I want to see them have economic opportunities. I want to see them um want to build and create and it's going to be different than the thing that you build and create. That just is what it is. Uh but recognize that pattern. Now, also seek relevance in your own life. Do things that you care about.

Don't consign yourself to the like, well, I'm just [ __ ] dying and I'm on the back half and all that [ __ ] It's like, cool. Look at Arthur Brooks. What do you have to offer right now today? Like you've got a new form of intelligence you can synthesize. It is utterly fascinating to me that historians get better right up until the time they either die or they begin to lose their cognition. That means there is a type of intelligence that only people who've been on the planet for a very long time are going to be able to to accumulate.

I get it. It it is very sad that uh there is a type of genius that is only available to people that are young. It's a bummer. But there's a type of genius that's only available to older people. So figure that out. Tap into that. All right, get off that soap box. But very interesting. Graphs 2 says, "The contradiction of there is no will nor free will for a depressed person to change is jarring. If you're code and programmed have no will to be able to change your own code, how can they get out of depression?

That's not how it is. So you are literally programmed in a way that you can't escape to change your own code. We are both the sculptor and the clay. And so that here's the thing. You you may unfortunately be wired in a way to be stuck in that loop. And there may be no magical sequences of words that I will be able to say to get you out of that. The problem is the thing I'm always afraid of is that you're not wired to be stuck in that.

You're actually wired to be stuck when the person tells you that you're an automata. And it's that idea that now breaks you. So I would just tell you you can change now. Now whether you do or not is entirely up to the actions that you take. So um best of luck. I don't know which idea is going to set you free and I don't know which idea is going to trap you. We are all set free by ideas. We are all trapped by ideas. We are all able to change ourselves and very few of us do.

But it is available to anybody. So I hope that you will take that and absolutely live your life like you have free will. And if you are a person who is wired to be stuck, you have my deepest empathy. It sucks. Uh, I've seen it happen to way too many people that I love. Um, but humans can and do change at all times. You are a slave to your biology, which means you need only press the right buttons. And you can turn the fact that you're a slave to your biology into the thing that makes every day feel awesome.

So, So, So, would you compare it to like a car? Maybe. I think people just need an analogy. Like a car has no free will, but it can stop, it can go, it can speed, it can break. Yes. Yes. Yes. Trying to think of like to show that you you press inputs, it gets to output, but those are predetermined. That's perfect. I think the thing that will lend the right amount of complexity and like how I can get stuck even though this deterministic is you're like a computer running code running code running code and it's complex.

You often can't tell what's going on. But you know that if you move your mouse the little cursor is going to go somewhere. And by the way, you know if it freezes and you can't [ __ ] do anything that you just reset it. And so the reset is the get good sleep, eat right, exercise. Like it will it will do things biologically that are very similar to resetting a computer that's glitching the [ __ ] out. Yes. Yes. Yes. Blake Bullion says, "A point system for how much you vote counts." How much your vote counts.

For example, time lived in country, time served in the military or first responder. If you pay taxes, if you do or don't rely on government assistance, what are your thoughts? I think it's actually really interesting and it's far too complicated and I wouldn't even attempt to get that passed. It's one of those that's actually pretty dope. Um, but now I'm just up against the limitations of what I believe are possible to actually get across the finish line. I think some of the other things here is one really horrible truth about human nature.

It doesn't matter what's true. It matters what you can get people to understand. Uh, it doesn't matter what you can get people to understand. It only matters what you can repeat. And so you need something that people can understand and that is very easy to repeat. And so that's why we're probably not in Iran because of the nukes. But that was the part that's easy to say over and over and over. And so while we go do whatever we're actually there to do, we're just going to say nukes, nukes, nukes.

So we need something that we can repeat over and over and over. You can't uh be on the dole and vote. That's at least easy to understand and repeat. I feel like we can't tie it to taxes yet until we change the tax code. Because if I work a 9 to5 and I make 60 grand a year, it's not my fault I get a tax refund. Um saying where I want like I'm checking all the boxes. I'm doing what society is telling me to do and the fact that I get a refund should not take away my away my away my That's one of the many reasons I was like, "Yeah, you probably can't do tax." Agreed.

Agreed. Agreed. Brutus Luga says, "Raise the cap on social security. The Social Security payroll tax is capped at an annual earned income limit of $184,500. This is part of the whole rich should pay their fair share that could help or even solve the SS problem. Could be absolutely one of the ways that we do it. If you just look at the mechanism, uh you have to make more as a government. So you have more tax dollars coming in, you have to pay the people less or you have to pay them later just mechanistically.

So anything that falls into one of those camps is certainly to be considered. be considered. be considered. And lastly, Blake Bullion should be able to opt out and not receive SS. I think it should be cut off from people who are not 18 currently and retirement should be put on individuals responsibility. It'd reduce government spending and take money out of the government. I love means testing. That's like my personal fetish. So I'm all for that. Um so and then if somebody opts out like is there something that we can do um for them to incentivize more people to opt out?

It's an interesting question I've not thought about enough. Uh but it's certainly an interesting question. That's it for super. I like these ideas, man. Thank you guys, by the way, for uh paying money to make sure that those ideas made their way to the forefront. I'm extremely grateful. Uh it's very generous. All right, you guys are dope. I really appreciate your time. I'm doing an AI master class tomorrow, this Thursday, June 11th, at 1 p.m. Pacific. The link to sign up is in the description. I hope you guys will join me.

I'm going to teach you how to do a business using AI. It is a magical time right now where the human is still extremely necessary and yet the AI is an incredible efficiency tool that is making things possible that were not previously. These classes are very popular. They're hard-hitting. They're going to give you a lot of information that you're going to be able to use. So, I hope you will join me. It is free, free, free. It is tomorrow, Thursday the 11th at 1 pm Pacific time.

All right. See you there. All right. Peace.