Defining Morality

3:17Ian MalcolmAlright, Joanne. I'm excited for this one. We're gonna get Mr. David Niche here, for what's gonna be kind of an impromptu conversation on a subject that, I feel nobody would be better to deliver than, the one and only Mr. David Niche. And, I'm gonna be covering something that I think is, is pretty relevant after the space that we held yesterday, with none other than Dr. E. Michael Jones, was incredibly humbling Humbled to have him in the room with us. And speaking of humbled, Joanne, not sure if you can name the tune necessarily, although the, the, the lyrics kinda gave that one away. Any idea about the singer or performer of the day for that little track?↗

4:04@joann_marieHey, and thank you so much for hosting. I just, I just got the name of the song, maybe "Daddy, Be Humble," but I don't know who sings it. I've never heard it before. But it was, it was a beautiful song, though.↗

4:17Ian MalcolmYeah, no, "Humble and Kind" by none other than Mr. Tim McGraw. very, just a wonderful country singer. And, I think it's actually kind of a, a nice little intro to the space and the subject, right? Because if you think of- Pop culture, well, you've got all kinds of degenerate rap music that's pushing out all kinds of nasty messaging. You've got lots of, heavy metal, right? very emotional, a lot of angst that's in there along with, perhaps the, the emo music of yesterday. Isn't it curious that that was perfectly aimed at the youth that were going through this, great demoralization exercise, right? So they had music like Green Day that was out there singing all this angst, I, I always joke that it's essentially Yeah, my, my, my dad broke my skateboard kinda music, right? Hate your parents, blah, blah, blah. and then on the flip side, you get obvious, obviously Christian rock, gonna have certainly a religious bend, but you've got country music with the likes of Tim McGraw, and every now and then there's something about, you know, my, my tractor, she thinks my tractor's sexy, I think that was Kelli Chesney, a little bit more lighthearted and silly, but you've also got music like that about↗

5:34Ian MalcolmHold the door, right? Care for those that are in your community, and, and obviously, you know, those are the kind of actions that, that, that make the world a better place, that build the high trust societies that we all are so grateful to once have been part of, that we're watching essentially wither in front of our eyes, but also recognizing in there, right, that, that there are going to be times where if you live by a moral compass, it's, it's not gonna always mean that you're meek, that you're meager, or that you↗

6:04Ian MalcolmYou can't be nice and, and turn the other cheek to a liar. I know that that's the Christian perspective, right? But Christ wouldn't have walked down the street watching maybe one of the Pharisees, unrighteously and, and objectively wrong, in the beating of an elder, right? The shaming of the leper, the sexual assault of a child, right? Christ obviously would have intervened in all of those things. And so while there is a time for, I- I suppose a peaceful message. There's also time to defend that which is righteous and good. And I thought, what an interesting opportunity, perhaps to walk through these concepts with, Mr. Nietzsche, obviously through the lens not only of religion, but also of kind of a philosophical approach. How, how do you conduct yourself righteously when that righteous action might require the sword and the shield? How do you define those types of moral frames? How do you ensure that you live amidst the con- Conflict in a way that is moral and upstanding. And so I thought it'd be a really interesting way to do that. Lots of love for Mr. Tim McGraw for that song. seemingly a pretty good moral character from what I remember in terms of pop culture, but I also of course want to give immense amounts of thanks to the co-hosts, with the most, is Miss Joanne, who rode with us yesterday with Dr. E. Michael Jones. Again, I want to give him an immense amount of thanks. Really wild, that the three of us got to be↗

7:34Ian Malcolmnot only incredibly accomplished in the public life for objecting to some of these insane issues that we've lived through, but in many regards a intellectual celebrity. and, and anybody can visit his Wikipedia page, lots of things about him being, quote, unquote, anti-Semitic, but, boy, it'd be hard to call him a liar, and he certainly was right about a lot of these issues that we're gonna kind of loosely touch on, today in this space. So without further ado, Mr. Nietzsche, I know everybody very familiar with you and But if you wouldn't mind expanding on it a little bit, not in terms of just your, your, let's say, your, your activities here on X, but more so the backdrop that makes you so relevant for this conversation and maybe the pursuits and the passions that you had both in academia and also in terms of some of these philosophical, let's say, wonders and how you apply them to your life, yourself, my friend.↗

8:31Speaker 1Well, I think something that really helped me before I did independent studies in philosophy was reading all the religions. I thought, "Well, what, what's foundational to all of civilization?" And it really is the great religious works. And I, there are some canons that are just, they're far too voluminous to read all of it, but for the most part, really getting a deep understanding of man's first philosophies, which are religions, and of course, all of them, the ones that I would say are legitimate, they have moral undertone. You know, how to order our lives, and of course Morality is how you self-govern. If you didn't have, you don't have morality, you don't self-govern. I always thought it was interesting that, that Ted Bundy was never understood, like he said he felt sorry for people who had empathy and felt guilt, and it was odd that he lacked the self-awareness to see that he was sitting in prison waiting to get electrocuted when he said that. I mean, like, how's this working out for you, buddy? So the self-regulatory quality of-↗

9:36Speaker 1The self-regulatory quality of morality was very interesting to me. Now, the area of philosophy that I engage in almost daily, so the work that I do, and there's a lot of work to do in this area, is epistemology. Epistemology is, Immanuel Kant, it was referred to as metaphysics in his day, and he called it a, a dark shore without, a dark ocean without shores. And it really is a very difficult subject, I think the most difficult subject in philosophy to approach, and it involves the nature and means by which we furnish our minds with ideas, how we know things, how we make truth claims, what exists, what, w-what is it that's foundational to knowing whether something is true or false? So really just how the mind works, and we think of that in terms of Of terms of operations of mine. So the-- I think that I, I'm very, in retrospect, I just did it out of a love or interest in knowing and in desiring to, to be wise. I remember I thought as a teenager, "What do I want most in this world?" And I thought, "Well, wisdom would be the best thing to have in this world before you die." And I wasn't really sure precisely what I meant by that, but I, I just somehow instinctively knew. So I really retrospectively am glad that I went down the road of, of understanding. Understanding things at a spiritual level before I emb-embarked in philosophy. And, and I will say this parenthetically, the first time that I read Aristotle and, and Socrates, by way of Plato, I felt less alone in the world. I couldn't believe how limpid and lucid their prose were. I couldn't believe the clarity of thought, and the main thing was the sincerity of it. I felt like I was in a world as a very young man, a very insincere, snide and clever man, and I knew I didn't want to be one of them. I, I still to this day will never, never ever claim to be clever. But these people were so sincere in their desire to know, and they kept going and going and going. And the unfortunate thing, and you heard me say it in the last space, is that sometimes that will lead you into an uncomfortable places. You can't love the truth without loving the truth that doesn't love you back, that doesn't confirm whatever sensibility that you started out with, or doesn't, doesn't confirm what you're compelled to think by the Zeitgeist or by the people around you. So I, I hope that answers the question. But that's kind of what led me to the moment that I'm in.↗

12:15Ian MalcolmNo, it absolutely does, and I, I'm kind of curious when you were going through, either on the religious side, prior perhaps to recognizing the, the topics that we talk about so, regularly today, when you were going through the religions of the world, did anything stand out, to you, kind of as you went through that journey before we go to the philosophical side, as either, you know, starkly-↗

12:44Speaker 1Hello, Delicia.↗

12:45@joann_marieYes, you did cut off. I thought it was me. Okay, well, in the meantime while, while Ian comes back, guys, please repost this page and follow Ian and David. Oh,↗

12:56Ian Malcolmyeah, thanks.↗

12:58@joann_marieAre you back?↗

12:59Ian MalcolmNo, ex-ex autom-This is so bizarre, the, the microphone's having all kinds of issues. David, I was curious, as you were going through the religions of the world, did anything stand out to you as, as starkly opposed to either, one another or perhaps the compass that you had developed either through your upbringing, or your academic pursuits, up until that point?↗

13:21Speaker 1There's an amazing couple of lines that I re- I was surprised that appear in almost all of them, even Zoroastrianism, which is two of them, "Know thyself" and "It is better to rule oneself than a thousand cities." It's just amazing that they seem to all arrive at the same conclusion, and of course- You see, pinned to my profile, he who rules himself cannot be ruled by others. And, and that, and that really kind of speaks to the moment that we're in, right? Because if they can get you, they-- you notice that it's not enough that they just control you, you know, exogenously. It's not enough that they just control you from the outside. They need you. To agree with them, they need you, in the Orwellian terms, to not just say that two plus two is five, but they need you to believe it. They need you to not just say that The, the word trans by simply putting that in front of woman, that a man can become a woman, but they need you to believe it. So, dominion over your own mind, it's just, it's, there, it's a, there's something through all of the religions where they say, "It's better to rule yourself than a thousand cities," and know yourself. This is the great weapon that we have. You know, the, the depths of what you are is good, is goodness, right? So that's what you tap in when you go deeper in Deeper and deeper within your own soul, within your own consciousness, what you find there is a well of goodness. You know, evility is where you are estranged from your soul. Evility is where you're estranged from that well of goodness. So I found that to be-- and this is why, and you've heard me say this before, if you visit any monastic order of any religion, you notice the people in it seem remarkably the same. Thomas Merton, who lived at the Abbey of Gethsemane, made this point and he said- Great poetic writings, which I've also, I ended up reading when I was a very young man, and he found, gosh, there's so much symmetry here that it's very, very odd. So I don't know if that answers your question, but↗

15:29Ian MalcolmNo, it does. And, and just, to stick on that really quickly, that idea of the well that's inside us, is your thought when you look at some of the religions of the world, and obviously there's gonna be some that perhaps you're more personally aligned with than others. but do you think that those books, the works, the texts, the ideas, do you think that that sprung innately from, say, for example, singular sources that put that into text and therefore was passed down, or do you believe that that was kind of the, cod Of kind of cultural acceptances that would have been inherent in everybody if they had just kind of dug deep inside themselves, tried to find that thing, and then bring it into either text or kind of a verbal form, if that makes sense.↗

16:15Speaker 1I'm not sure I understand the question. Are you asking me if I think that-- I mean, I do think that there, it had to be sufficiently advanced conceptual faculty in order to come up with these things? You know, when you read, for instance, the Epic of Gilgamesh, which is the oldest epic poem in the world, one of the oldest writings in the world, you, you see already the belief in the numinous of something beyond the self. But it takes a certain evolution of self to conceive of that. But I do think that when the mind starts going in that direction, that it will, that it will move towards deeper and deeper discrete truths. Aristotle said that knowledge is superior which is furthest from your senses because it's applicable to a multitude of, multitude of circumstances. And this is the case with that, with, with this numinous thing. And by the way- Very hard to talk about because there are aspects to it that are ineffable, you know, that Lao Tzu, who wrote the Tao Te Ching, you know, he said, "You know, he knows cannot, you know, you cannot speak, you cannot say of that which you know there's a certain depth of it, and it wouldn't be so beautiful and mysterious and wonderful if it could be entirely described." But anybody that has these feelings, you know, I find it interesting that if you, and try this everybody in your personal life, ask people what their most beautiful moment in their life↗

17:34Speaker 1So far, what is the most beautiful moment in your life? I had, I asked a woman that one time, and she said, she was really into horseback riding, and she said she stopped with her horse on a hill under a tree on a very warm day to cool off, and she remembered the butterflies fluttering over the ears of her horse while she was taking a drink of water. Notice that no one talks about how much money they made. No one talks about eating an extra piece of chocolate cake or sort of- Gratifying some sort of carnal desire or some sort of, acquisitive thing as far as acquiring things, it's always some numinous experience where they experience what Thomas Aquinas called, he defined eternity as the everlasting now. Eternity exists between your thoughts, and when you stop the mind from thinking and experience have this unity of the moment, then there is something transcendent that occurs there, and all of these people seem to understand this, but, it's a long winded- To answer your question, I think that the discovery of this secret took a certain evolution of consciousness for humans, and I think that they just-- I think it's sort of like all roads lead to Rome, they're kind of all describing the same thing in different ways.↗

18:49Ian MalcolmNo, that's, that's so beautifully stated, and, and that, that's where I was kind of going or trying to go with that, that question, which was, you know, if essentially some of these great ideas of the past that ultimately found their way into these religious texts, if it was, if because of one superhuman individual tapping into something that was really, you know, only exclusive to, to them essentially, right? We, we've got some of the great scientists of the world that came to these incredible conclusions and helped explain the world, and, and essentially if it's On the religious side, if, if these texts, these ideas, it's something anybody could have tapped into, and perhaps everybody did universally recognize, right? And that's perhaps why they, they've lasted, the, the depths of time, if you will.↗

19:34Speaker 1Yeah, and you know, I'll give you an example. Think about when Jesus had his sort of fully enlightened experience, you know? Notice that he started embracing quotidian things of the moment, whether it be washing someone's feet, like if you read the stories of how he started living in the moment. Mohammed sweeping out his own tent is another good example. then, and of course, we know this absolutely with certainty with regard to, Vedical literature and- Certainly with regard to the Buddha, who, you know, was very much into doing-- even Gandhi, by the way, just as sort of a political guy, you know, really embraced how he lived in the moment with much greater simplicity. It reminds me of, you know, maybe the person who inspired me the most as a young man was Socrates, who walked into the marketplace, the agora, and said So many things that I don't want, you know, is they realize, gosh, the road to happiness is going inside, and it's not inquiring more and more things. You know, Schopenhauer said, you know, when you satiate a want, a thousand more or a hundred more pop up in its place. So the idea is to control the wanting machine and notice that all of them kind of figure this out. And then when they did, and they started feeling this really deep well of happiness, you know, we are the instrument of our own happiness, I guess, as well. What they were discovering or our misery. That's why I love that line of, of Jesus where he says, "Look not here or there for the kingdom of heaven, the kingdom of heaven is within you." Well, by logical extension, so is the kingdom of hell. It just depends on which direction you take, and of course, the choice is all yours.↗

21:17Ian MalcolmThat's so well stated there, David. And, and I, I really do, I'm, I'm curious for your, thought on this one before we go to the, philosophical side of things. So on religion, I, I said yesterday, and I, I thought this for a long time, right, that you can basically construct heaven and hell on earth through your actions. And like you were saying, that idea of the person on the hilltop on the horse with the butterfly, right? That's, that's not materialism necessarily. It's not vanity. It's not↗

21:46Ian MalcolmThat moment that that person experienced, which was almost entirely natural, right? The horse, the butterfly, the sunrise, they're all things provided essentially free of, of cost. And so I'm, I'm kind of curious, for your thoughts there on the idea of creating heaven or hell on earth merely through our actions and pursuing that which is, is good in line-alignment with kind of some of the religious tenets of, of yesterday, and then we'll kind of pivot to the philosophical arguments behind it.↗

22:17Speaker 1Yeah, well, I would say that the, you know, the other line that seems to be recurring among all religious works is the idea of losing yourself to find yourself, to giving up yourself to find yourself. And Super rationalist people that sort of don't believe in the numinous, they think this is some sort of bad thing, like you're self-sacrificing, but that's not what it means. It really means giving up the illusory sense of what yourself is for the real sense of what yourself is. So many things are mere constructs of identity that actually aren't really you. We've all had this experience. You know, you've had this feeling of an about face of, gosh, why did I ever believe that? I used to identify with that, I used to be proud, you know, that, that was part of me. I used to believe this, and then of course, you don't believe it anymore. I've always said, for me, that one of the greatest qualities of philosophy is its capacity to help me dispossess myself of spurious ideas of self in favor of real ones. So I think that, and doesn't that describe the word enlightened, right? Enlightened like Like a hot air balloon, like you throw the weights off so that you naturally float up in the air. Well, what's holding you down? It's these spurious ideas of self, and they often involve being more acquisitive, existing as a zero sum game between you and your, your fellow human being. really it comes down to the motive force within you controlling that, thinking about it, and of course, not being controlled by licentiousness or wanton desire.↗

23:54Ian MalcolmAnd so David, along those lines, I'm, I'm kind of curious for your thought there on the, the value of or detriment of materialism, right? Just, and, and perhaps this could be from the religious perspective or again maybe a, a lead into the philosophical argument behind it, but, you know, if you look at a lot of the happiest people on earth,↗

24:15Ian Malcolmyou could actually make the argument that a lot of the happiest people in America are those that are on the lower spectrum of the income brackets, and, and that doesn't- That doesn't suggest that it is, you know, pleasant to be in poverty or despair. That's not what I'm suggesting at all. But if you look at the highest levels of, say, reported depression, things of that nature, it's often those that are in the big cities, those that aren't actually the, the poorest of the poor, right? It's o-often those that are dealing with a lot of these, perhaps the keeping up with the Joneses experience, right? They're constantly just trying to satiate their own either vanity or security by just acquiring more things Kind of curious for your thoughts on that.↗

24:56Speaker 1You know, Epicurus, we founded, you know, inspired by Pythagoras who did the same thing. They were basically founded these communalists, I mean, I guess you could say it's communistic, but this wasn't, there wasn't, it wasn't by force, it was just by voluntary consent. These communalists, these communes, where they would be predicated upon three principles. And those three principles were to have sufficient resources so that you weren't living in exiguous poverty, and the second one was that you would have your friends around you all the time, and the third one was that you had time for reflection, you know, the, the Socratic idea that an unexamined life isn't worth living, so you had time to kind of work through your problems, kind of evolve your consciousness, which is really kind of the point of being, of being on this planet. And so I want you to transpose that now to a beer commercial.↗

25:53Speaker 1I want you to think about the three versions of a beer commercial that you see all the time. One of them is Is having friends around you. So you're in the bar and everybody seems like there's a whole big group of friends and they're laughing and they're really getting along together. What do you think is making them happy right there? Is it the beer or is it the friendship? So they're conflating the beer with the friendship. So they're admitting how important that is. They're saying Epicurus was right. And then the second one was, is the, the sort of like, you, you're not Want of things. So kind of like the wealthy life, you're, you're doing okay, you have your needs met. So that of course is makes people feel good 'cause they see that. And then, is it the beer or is it being self-sufficient? Well, obviously it's being self-sufficient. And the last one is the Corona commercial. The Corona commercial is where you're sitting on the beach and you can hear the wind and you can feel the calm and the quiescence of the moment, and you see, you don't even see the people, and you just see the The Corona beers with the limes in them, beautiful commercial, by the way. Well, what is it that's making those people happy? What is it that's inspiring you about that commercial? Is it the beer? Or is it the time for self-examination, the time for reflection? Of course, it's the time for reflection. So you see, these deep needs that we have are being con- with the fetish, of course, of consumerism and commercialism, are being conflated with the consumption, and so don't fall for it, because when you fall for it, of course- Is taking you further away from happiness, from joy, tak- taking you further away from queasiness and deepening of your life, you end up, of course, going more towards emmiseration and less towards happiness. So↗

27:38Ian MalcolmThat's, spectacularly stated, David. I, I, I had never heard of that analogy with the three commercials and kind of the, the typical format that they follow. It's, it's so accurate. Which would actually really quickly as a little, a segue, we're gonna come back to this topic. I'm curious why then, because you're exactly right in, in terms of those formats, I see them all the time. I then, however, think back to the Bud Light commercial from-- or I don't know if it's Bud Light or Budweiser Where it's just all the degenerate insanity with, I think it was Peyton Manning and, and one of the, the white rappers, I can't remember the guy's name. i-is that just intentionally being thrown in so that those people that perhaps are watching the Super Bowl surrounded by their friends, is that just some little demoralization slop or do you think that that is a indicator of kind of how far people have ventured from, the traditional idea of, of socializing with one another? I'm not sure if you remember the commercial. them all like running down a hill and all this other nonsense.↗

28:42Speaker 1Yeah, I mean, I know that a lot of commercials are just-- it is the idea of just being nonsensical and kind of amusing, and of course, you know, I guess maybe that's successful to some degree, but if you want to be really great in marketing, right? You'll conflate it with deeper things. Right? You'll tap in, or even if you tap into some anxiety, you know, it could be some human anxiety that you tap into, some fear. I guess that would be true if you're, if you're selling things that assuage fear, you know, maybe, I don't know, insurance or something like that, you know? Which is perfectly rational, by the way, but, But yeah, there's of course the slop is there too.↗

29:21Ian MalcolmNo, it certainly is. And, and, real quick before we pivot and, and gonna move on to the philosophical side of things, I saw one of our, our good friends, Mr. Rayaad, raise his hand. Always love his, his takes and thoughts. So kind of curious, we'll do a little pit stop with him, and then we'll come back to how you then pivoted from religion into philosophy and, and, and some of the findings that you arrived at when you dove down that rabbit↗

29:49Speaker 2Thank you so much, and I'll be quick because I love, the, the, the, what do you call it, if you will, the, the, the back and forth between you, Ian and David, and I know I'll learn a lot and I'll see a lot of things that I, that I don't know or I probably forgot, but I just wanna quickly add to the topic of advertisements, the, the quick story about how, when big tobacco in the nineteen twenties saw that they have only the male,↗

30:17Speaker 2the male, what do you call it? The male group of, of, of smokers, and they wanted the female smokers, that, that part of the population, and they went to Edward Bernays, and Edward Bernays, I mean, dig him up, you'll know who, who I'm talking about. He came with the brilliant idea that on the fourth of July, he, he's gonna use all the prints, the main, major prints in, in America to slap on the cover page, beautiful w- models, women, carrying their, their cigarettes. That little torch thing, that, the pipe, like, I don't know what it's called, that this long thing that you see in the twenties with the cigarette at the top, and he slapped them on all the major newspapers on the cover page, and he slapped under them the torch of freedom, and women thought that, oh my God, I want freedom, let me go buy a torch, because this is how they manipulate, they bring the emotions into it, and then they, they play us, and unfortunately that That these techniques moved into the political sphere where now it's, it's called PR, not propaganda, but it's a beautiful, beautiful topic. I'll just, shut up and listen. Thank you.↗

31:29Ian MalcolmNo, and isn't it curious, of course, Edward Bernays, the, the author Literally wrote a book, propaganda. Yeah, he's the father of↗

31:38Speaker 2propaganda, actually.↗

31:41Ian MalcolmExactly. The, the, and, and of course, downstream from, Freud, right? So I, I, I tried to codify this into a post one time, and I said, "Wait a, wait a second. So the, the origin of, psychoanalysis begets the origin of propaganda, which then begot, Mark Randolph, Bernays, the origin of Netflix, and it's like, wait a second, guys." Right? But, but David, this, it's a perfect segue, right? Because what we're essentially seeing is the various renditions of propaganda and programming used to basically, normalize that which would have been controversial or antithetical, if not antagonistic, towards the norms of yesterday via advertising, Hollywood, and all these other mechanisms, and obviously we know who, who runs and controls those. But so if, if you were to look at, not just the religions Of the world, but also some of the great philosophical works. I'm kind of curious for, you, you went through this experience, you unpacked all the great religions to understand them inside and out, and then was it at that point that you pivoted over, or did you start kind of blending into philosophy, as you were going through that exercise in the religious aspects?↗

32:55Speaker 1I, I'm, I'm moved over to philosophy. So I felt like I had sort of gotten what I needed out of the religious studies. And then I just started reading philosophy, and I just absolutely, completely, and utterly fell in love with it. And again, you know, you can't really, you can't really read philosophy without reading moral philosophy, right? And the, the basis of it is, what can we know? What moral claims can we make? We have this confusion when we say that there's such a thing, our morals objective. The question is, do morals exist in logical space? You know, this is why, you know, when John Locke wrote his Second Treatise on Government, he did it after his epistemology. This is why, which is the study of what we can know, I'll just put it that simply, the nature and means by which we gain knowledge and furnish our minds with ideas. And the same with Immanuel Kant, the same with David Hume, the same with,↗

33:52Speaker 1with Thomas Hobbes, the same with Rene Descartes. Every single one of these people, by the way↗

33:59Speaker 1so was Schopenhauer really, and all of them thought about the mechanism, the function, the operation of the mind. You know, if I, if I ask you, if I ask five people in this room, what's eight times sixteen? Even if they all arrive at the correct answer, they-- you might have different steps in your mind that you take to get there. Like if I ask you how you got there, this is why your math teacher makes you show your work, and you think, "Okay, what operations of mine?" Because it is-- there are a finite number of steps that the mind can take when it is arriving at truth, right? So this is-- this is why I'm always telling people they're getting the term Hegelian dialectic wrong, you know? we can talk about that later, but the point is That there is a truth. All, every single one of these people believed that there was such a thing as, as truth. In my opinion, the disingenuous philosophers are the ones that are trying to prove to you that that doesn't exist, which of course is oxymoronic. How could you make a truth claim that truth doesn't exist? Where, where, where would your evidence be if you say there are no absolutes? You'd be stating an absolute. Again, you know, these, this is what an axiom is, is something that you, you contradict by, by, by denying You know, so for instance, if you say I'm not conscious, there's an active consciousness to say, to do that. so that's, that's really how I fell in love with philosophy. And so truth claims and moral truth claims have to be made in logical space, meaning they have to have the pleasure of agreeing with themselves. The math has to work forwards and backwards. I'll give an example. Of course, we talked in the, in the past space about, the exploitation of religion. If it is true The blessed are the peacemakers, doesn't it naturally follow that cursed are the war mongers? How could it possibly be, and I'm saying this to all the Christian Zionists, how could it possibly be that mass extermination in war makes you, you know, embracing that makes you a Christian? So obviously that's a contradiction, and, and no moral person, accepts contradiction within their consciousness.↗

36:06Ian MalcolmAnd, and David, on that, so, for everybody that might not be, as deep into the subject, w-would you mind kind of giving your understanding not only of philosophy, what, what does it mean at fifty thousand feet? You obviously walked through a number of, of some of the greats, there within, but when it comes to the, the initial dive into the subject altogether, would you mind kind of giving the audience that might not be as familiar kind of the origin of this entire effort and why it was initially valued, to begin with?↗

36:37Speaker 1Well, the person who coined the term philosopher is Pythagoras, and it means lover of wisdom, and that is why I refer to myself as a philosopher, because if it said wise, I wouldn't make that reference, because I don't think any real philosopher would refer to himself as wise. And so when people say, "You're not a philosopher," I'm like, "Well, I could not be a good one. I'll leave it in myself in your safekeeping on that one." And also, I'm not professing to be wise, so I'm neither professing to be very good↗

37:06Speaker 1Again, I don't think that's my job in the world. I don't, even if I'm Michael Jordan, I'll let other people to determine whether I'm good, you know? And it's my, my thing is just to practice it in its purest form. By the way, there is a difference in studying philosophy and doing philosophy in the same way as there is a difference of being-- and I'm saying this because my wife is a research scientist, of actually being a scientist and just learning science, like getting a degree in biology, the methodology of it requires you to put away your↗

37:37Speaker 1ideologies because ideology is a truth inhibitor and honor certain principles of reflection. It doesn't, it's not enough just to be, intellectual, right? There are principles to this. So I would say foundationally, it's really learning, a lot of philosophy is thinking about thinking, you know? Which again makes it kind of esoteric. In, in fact, the word esoteric, just to come back to Pythagoras, you know, there was the exo-, exoteric and the esoteric. You, you weren't allowed to really participate in the discussion, you had to be on the ex- the exoteric for like five years, and really think deeply about things before you could enter into the, to the esoteric, meaning the interior group, and actually have the discussion. And Aristotle, you know, what, hundreds of years later, echoed the sentiment when he said, you know, that you, you sh- Should get a few years on you before you really approach philosophy, because you need a little wisdom about you. It's kind of like if you involve yourself in economics, you should probably own a business or participate in the economy. So that's sort of the genesis, I would say the very first sort of great philosopher might have been Thales, but, but those, those religious philosophers, even Zoroastrianism and, and things like that, there was a, there's a lot of deep philosophy in that too, so I'm not sure I'm gonna- Give anybody the ultimate claim, but obviously it's thinking about thinking, trying to think and understand more deeply about things, and the last thing is to come up with a holistic experience or explanation of the universe, both physical and moral.↗

39:13Ian MalcolmNo, really, really well, articulated there. And, and it's, it's why, I, I wanted to kind of level set that idea, right? That, that this is thinking about how we think about the world, right? It's essentially like examining-- it's, it's almost thinking about the yardstick that we're gonna use to apply to determine how big or small something is, right? In physical measurements. So that gives us a frame through which we can then look at something and try to determine, for example, if it's, if it's moral So we'll, we'll kind of pivot to that in just a second, and we got Mustafa here with his hand up, so wanna check in really quickly with him, then we'll come back to David and start unpacking this idea of using philosophical arguments and religion to try and understand what is moral when it comes to objecting that which is, of course, detrimental to your people or its peace. but Mustafa, feel free to jump in.↗

40:06Speaker 3hi, hi everybody, hi, Yan. I'm Mustafa, and I'm in Iran, living in the capital city of Tehran, for those who don't know, and I'm very pleased to be here. First of all, I've, I've, I've got a lot of things to say because, and I'm very much enjoying what David has brought up, so I'm not going to be very long, but, first of all, can I have a very quick question?↗

40:33@joann_marieYes, of course.↗

40:35Speaker 3we, I mean, Ayan and David and some, some other members of this space were on, another space and no, half an hour ago, and the coyote was the host. What happened to that? I mean, can Ayan, can you, I, I, I, I don't know what happened. Well, my understanding↗

40:54Speaker 1is that the, that the universe heard my mic drop moment and decided that the space could end right there.↗

41:02Speaker 3I mean, I, I, I thought maybe that, that space was reported. No,↗

41:06Speaker 1no, I, yeah, I think it was reported. No,↗

41:09Ian Malcolmit may have been. David, it may have been, and, and I'll just throw this out, so, I, I say that because, and I tagged Joanne in some of the pictures. I mean, obviously I've, for whatever reason, every space that I host at the top of it, I get every forty-five to sixty seconds, I get attempting to reconnect to space. I'm-↗

41:33@joann_marieDid you cut off? Did you cut off? Oh my God, I'm not getting it. Oh my God, I'm not↗

41:37Ian Malcolmgetting it. It keeps↗

41:39Speaker 1turning↗

41:39Ian Malcolmthe mic↗

41:39Speaker 1off. I'm not even getting it. Very weird. I wonder who's doing this.↗

41:43Ian MalcolmIt's, it's unbelievable. My microphone goes on and off. I've looked down when David was talking, I'm like, why is the microphone on? so I apologize if it is opening at any point or closing, like it just did there. But I've shown Joanne over and over again images I get attempting to reconnect to That I host, and it also happens in al-almost, not every, but almost every space that I join. And so I find it really curious because I was in Coyotes, everything was fine, then I started talking about the Jews, all of a sudden the space started giving me that same little icon over and over and over again, and then Coyotes started saying that he was having issues with the space, and then the whole thing shuts down. And-↗

42:25Speaker 3Yeah, but- No. The whole thing just fell apart and that, that was, I was surprised. I mean, it, it looked as if nothing were there. I mean, it just, as your president always, emphasizes, it was obliterated, yeah.↗

42:42Ian MalcolmNo, it absolutely wasn't. And I'll put into the nest, I'm sure people are saying, "Oh, yeah, this guy again, making these claims."↗

42:50@joann_marieI already posted it. I mean, yeah, it's, it's in the nest. Oh, you↗

42:54Ian Malcolmdid, you did,↗

42:54@joann_marieokay,↗

42:56Speaker 3perfect. Yes. I have some remarks to make. Can I go on? yeah. So, as I told you, I, I really do enjoy this kind of deep philosophical, let's say Speech by our friend David, and I just, I, I really thought maybe, someday we could, in these kind of spaces, share the thoughts of, as you know him as Rumi, and we know him as Molavi in Persian, because he's a very great thinker as far as this kind of- Actually, thoughts are concerned. Actually, I was, preparing in that, I mean, the previous space that we were talking about, I was, preparing to,↗

43:40Speaker 3read one of his poems. But now because the subject here is something different, I wanted to tell, speak about the kind of, let's say, the kind of the, the kind of bond that could be made between different wisdoms in the world. I mean, David talks about the, as some people call it, Greco-Roman wisdom, the wisdom of the West, and we know that in the East, again, we have↗

44:18Speaker 3different wisdoms. If you could, we could call it, and especially Persian wisdom, which is again very, let's say, well known for its being, having very transcendent, transcendental actually notions. But I wanted to talk about here at this moment is the, notion of mindfulness, which has been present In the American culture for decades, as far as I know. And this is the very thing that I'm, I wanted to emphasize here, is that the American culture as usual has just brought down a very high, let's say, concept. I think it's,↗

45:12Speaker 3inspired by Buddhism or some other, thoughts. And it's the very thing that David just referred to, and it's to, to be present at the moment, because, as far as so many insights and wisdoms are concerned, there is nothing beyond what you think, what you have, what you perceive in your mind. So this is, when we say what, where is happiness, as David just, made it very clear Happiness happens in your mind, nothing out of your being brings you happiness. And mindfulness actually,↗

45:57Speaker 3sorry to tell that, but this, this kind of mutilation of that great thought, it's, it, it, it just, Americans have just, brought it, down to the kind of, pragmatic way of living. I mean, this is very important to, yet they have made it Something commercial, something, something to be sold. But the reality of mindfulness goes to the very inner state of mind. Are you present at the moment? Can you have the,↗

46:34Speaker 3perfect perception of what you are? I mean, the being, the that goes to your being. And this is emphasized in Persian Wisdom, a lot. I mean, the Rumi that I'm very, I will be very pleased, maybe in, let's say next spaces, if I can be, as a speaker. Yeah, I want you to know,↗

46:59Speaker 1keep going there, but I'm very f-familiar with Rumi and a, and a big fan. So I, yeah, yeah, he perfectly speaks to what you're saying.↗

47:08Speaker 3Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. That, that's, that's the-- And I'm, actually, I got goosebumps when I'm talking about how could Rumi makes us, makes us close together. I mean, that, that is-- And, ironically, or let's say very, very beautifully, he lived actually geographically in Konya, which is at the border of the east and the west, and it's very interesting. I mean, be- and that, that, that, that, that, because of that very reason, he's called Rumi, and, and you know, his old poems are in Persian, I mean, our native language. That's very interesting. I mean, he could be a bond, he could be a, let's say,↗

47:50Speaker 3figure who can connect us together. So this is the thing, I'm talking about that the, the very notion that David just- Referred to is, resonated in the Persian, wisdom, which actually Rumi is a part of, and we have other figures like Hafiz, for example, is a very well-known poet he, I think, let's say, the German poet Goethe. Goethe is under the impression of Hoffa, and, and the, all of them, as David just mentioned, all of them are talking about that the peace isn't some-somewhere outside, it's not something that you are going to strive for, you are going to just catch it. You are not going to catch anything.↗

48:39Speaker 3The only thing is to have The kind of good perception of yourself, everything that you are looking for will be there. I mean, I don't wanna be long and I wanna enjoy, the beautiful speech of David. So this is just for a beginning. Thank you. Yeah.↗

48:58Speaker 1You know, my favorite quote of Rumi is right along the lines of what you're saying. He said, "The inspiration you seek is already within you. Be silent and listen." So you see, it's coming right back to the same thing, right? Of finding that peace within you, and the opposite of that is the excitation of the mind. So the people that danger rule you, and let's just say life itself, if in the ways that it might conspire you↗

49:24Speaker 1against you, conspire against you, is, it's, it tries to cause confusion. And tries to make you feel helpless, like you're the helpless plaything of the universe instead of the master of your own destiny. Well, the instrument of control is right there within you, and it is in that listening, it's in that coalescence. You notice, if you sit somewhere and you get very quiet and very calm, you are going to be able to think of wise things. Almost everybody is going to be ta- able to tap into some kind of wisdom when people say, not just "I'm gonna think about this," but "I'm gonna meditate upon this." That's kind of what they mean. This is why I'm a real believer in going out in nature when I do my thinking. I like to go walk in the woods because there is just some feeling of connectivity to nature and sort of the quiescence that it kind of inspires, and then I'm able to, oh, yes, okay, this problem that I thought was really big, it's not so big. And oh, gosh, this is a thing I should be really thinking of. So absolutely, my friend.↗

50:29Ian MalcolmAnd perhaps we could do a, a space, Mustafa, if you would want, in the future with, David and, and specifically go deep into rooming some of those ideas and, and further explore that. But it's a nice little, kind of, kind of segue, right, David, because we were gonna talk about how some of these great philosophers of the past, how we could look to some of their work to try and understand, well, how do we define morality when it might involve things that perhaps are a little bit uncomfortable, right? You, if Being bullied, if you witness somebody that is doing something evil or wrong, right? There, there's, I, I heard somebody in a, a space, earlier today that basically was advocating for what I would describe as laissez-faire morality, where they were saying, "Well, don't worry about it, it's all part of God's plan, so just kind of Jesus take the wheel, and whatever's gonna come comes, with it." And, you know, in my mind, that, that basically makes you not only a pacifist, but it makes you an accepting↗

51:26Ian MalcolmStand by and you witness somebody attacking an old woman, right? You're essentially somewhat responsible for it happening if you don't do something to intervene. So I'm kind of curious, David, for how you would start to recommend that people look at, maybe we can start with the religious aspect, right? In your understanding of those great works and of the religions of the world, how do you think they would, kind of appropriately react today in modernity where we see so many forces that are supposed to represent the good, whether it's the politicians, it's the media? The academic institutions, they're so clearly antithetical, if not antagonistic, towards that which we would define as the good for society.↗

52:07Speaker 1The idea of being peaceful and being revolutionary aren't antipodes. So a good example would be either Henry David Thoreau or Mahatma Gandhi, right? Both of them were really, really great revolutionaries, and they changed civilization. And by the way, we can say this about all the spiritual leaders as well. Every great revolutionary moral thinker is, in a sense, a destroyer. They destroy the bad ideas. It's like the sun coming in and sort of melting away that which is illegitimate, that which is bad, that which is-- that which is basically wrong thinking or, or, let's say, thinking that's at the expense of humanity. So when I hear someone say, and we heard someone say this in the last space, "Well, do you think that God would, do you think if God didn't want, you know, this other civilization to be destroyed, That, that Pete Headset could, could do it, or, you know, could he do it against God plan? And I'm like, you do realize you just made an argument for a pedophilia and genocide, right? You're saying, "Well, if they exist, it's part of God's plan." Absolutely nonsense. This is the silliest thing. The responsibility the individual has, I want everybody to think about it in this way. Nature is a hundred percent consistent. We have every reason to believe, despite its miseries, that nature is a hundred percent consistent. The function of your mind is to conform to nature. Consciousness doesn't have, have primacy over existence. By whim or wish, you can't change things. It is your responsibility to understand things. Now, from a spiritual standpoint, you couldn't be moral if that wasn't true, because morality exists in the context of choice. That which constitutes our, constitutes our nature is our volition, our capacity to choose, to choose over a what? A knowable universe, right? If the facts were always in flux, if the realities of nature were always changing, if a, if a chair came up tomorrow instead of the sun, we would have no capacity to choose between right and wrong because the constituents of our choice is the things out in palpable, knowable nature,↗

54:16Speaker 1existence, I should say. And so the responsibility is to always-- you really always have one binary choice. The good over the bad. Now you could say the best over the, the better over the worst, or the just over the unjust, but they're the same things. That's just terminological. Basically, these are all synonyms. So the responsibility of the individual and, and not acting in that case of defending that woman or not speaking up, but the person at work is being castigated unfairly, then you are-- that is a moral choice. This is, this is why we've heard, you know, the famous saying, "You know, for nothing, all that's required for evil to prosper is for good men to do nothing." I don't think I got that quite right, but the idea is that you're always making the moral choice. When I talk about the Great Awakening and participating in it I'm always saying, I'm defending my soul by doing this, so I don't feel, I don't feel like I'm in quiet desperation. I don't feel like I'm screeching or I'm desperate or I'm, I'm getting worn or beaten down. No, I'm just doing the right thing. I don't know whether it was Rumi or some other Sufi, he gave this example that I think Raya read, you've heard me say before, which is where Jesus is walking down With a friend, and he gets absolutely castigated by a passerby, and he's kind in response, and, and the, his friend says, "Well, why were you kind to that person who was unkind to you?" And he said, "I only had to give him what I had in my purse, which is to say, I don't have hatred in my heart." So you're operating when you are, let's say, throwing the money changers out, when you are calling out ability, you're operating on principle, but you're not, engendering hatred within you, you're not beating yourself down, you're just always waking up every morning and making the good choice over the bad one, the just over the unjust, the better over the worst.↗

56:15Ian MalcolmYeah, it's wonderfully stated. And, and so when it comes to that, this idea of, of, trying to even define the, the, the right versus the wrong, the good versus the bad, the, the, that which is evil versus that which is moral, I'm, I'm kind of curious, David, are those things that we have to be able to define in flux in real time, or is there some way to kind of anchor those towards something that I suppose is eternal, if that makes sense?↗

56:40Speaker 1Well, the universals are That the standard of a logical or moral philosophy is the, the life of the individual, because you can learn nothing about the individual by studying the group, but you can learn everything about the group by studying the individual. And the fact of the matter is, and this is, this should inspire us to more solicitude and human solidarity, is we are all composed similarly in Are in this way, that which constitutes our nature, which is choosing, and this is why the golden rule is so intuitive. You know, do unto others as you would have them do unto you. It is disingenuous, the math doesn't work in both directions when you say, "I'm going to treat these people badly, but I want them to treat me well." Well, what do we call that? Well, besides illogical, we call that In this case, Jewish supremacy. I mean, I'm sorry, I don't wanna put too fine of a word on it, but everybody who has a real, honest, earnest moral philosophy, the math works in both directions. They don't treat people badly and expect those people to treat them well. Of course, that is an insincere, not only immoral, but I would say anti-moral philosophy, because what you're really saying is, "Morals themselves are my enemy." And if you do believe that morals are your enemy, then you would be Want to demoralize people, then gosh, who are we talking about now? You would want to take away their morals, which is their instrument of rebellion over evility itself.↗

58:17Speaker 1No, and, and↗

58:18@joann_marieit's-↗

58:20Ian MalcolmRight, because if you think about it, the thing that's, that's so fascinating about that, that idea of morality and, and its application, if we think about this group of people that we often talk about, you look at the behaviors, and it is, at times it's completely out of alignment with morality while claiming to be, right? In fact, they will actively suggest the most moral army in the world as we witness the UN saying, "Yeah, they can do it." To genocide. It's like, how can these things be possible? And that's why I asked about the founding of what is good versus what is wrong, because it seems like this group that's currently in charge, the, the, the idea of morality is whatever is convenient at the time for the power structure, right? Which is what the-- it's essentially the exact antithesis of what we're trying to not only measure here, but also to figure out how to best apply.↗

59:12Speaker 1Yes, and you know, C.S. Lewis was right when he said that we become a little more or less moral every day. in, in, in Greek sort of ideology or thinking, moral, morals is ethos, it's habit, right? The habit of being moral. If you could get one generation to dispossess themselves of that habit, then they would become immoral, right? So the important thing is in our thinking, and also in, in terms of the directionality of towards happiness, is to increase your morals, to become a better person every day. How can I become better? How can I-- And it does begin with self ownership, with self dominion. It is very hard to be acquisitive, it is very hard to be licentious, it is very hard to be hedonistic and moral at the same time, because your mind becomes very distracted, your soul becomes weaker. And thus it's easier for you to drift away from your morals, and that's kind of what C.S. Lewis was talking about as far as becoming immoral. Well,↗

1:00:14Ian Malcolmand isn't that exactly what we see today, right? Where it, it's almost as-- and I, I really believe that this is perfectly exemplified on X, where after its acquisition by Elon, there were a lot of promises made about free speech and all these other things, but what we've seen is the further pushing, just ever more of essentially the slop, right, as part of that demoralization, which Normalizing that which is more and more and more degenerate. And, I mean, I'm not sure about your experiences, David, but if I look around on the app, all that I'm seeing right now, no matter how many times I click "Not interested in this post" or "This content," it is shoving me things about clavicular, it's shoving me things about fights in McDonald's, between the races. It's, it's, all it's doing is fueling, anger, resentment, and other things that I would loosely just define as demoral↗

1:01:05Ian MalcolmBy design, by intent, and to normalize this, the absurd as that which we should expect tomorrow, which just further drifts us away from kind of a righteous society.↗

1:01:17Speaker 1Yes, and of course, if, as you've heard me say many times, the phrase I use, if you turn the chessboard around, this is what I would do if I wanted to have absolute dominion over society, I would want to weaken their morals, and I would do it in this way. I mean, the, the, the whole thing of the, the Koizawa, I guess, the fights in McDonald's and everything. Why would anybody really want... You notice the Chinese, by the way, don't do that. Remember when they own TikTok and their version of TikTok didn't do that and ours did? That was kind of funny. But absolutely, you're right. I mean, that distraction is obviously on purpose. I can say without a doubt that we know for-- It's, you can see it, right? You can see that the distraction is, is-- Like trains and things in schools, these people don't have good intentions for us.↗

1:02:06Ian MalcolmYeah, and when it comes to that, so, so this is a great, a great way to pivot, right? So we see the slop, we see the insanity, we see the influencers that are just pushing the degeneracy, whether it is Kim Kardashian or, you know, the, the, the latest individual that's, I guess getting endless surgeries on their face in pursuit of, quote unquote, looks, Maxine, which I think is essentially the, penultimate example Of just rampant insecurity run amok, right? We see all this insanity. So how are we then supposed to look at that which is degenerate and while still being moral, how are we able to, in a way, righteously object and reject, which is going to obviously involve calling things out and at times being aggressive, if not abrasive, with either our rhetoric or perhaps, in some occasions, even our, our physical beings?↗

1:02:59Speaker 1I think the most important thing, though, is to remember what inspires you. I think when you call out the immoral, juxtapose it against that which is beautiful. The word "meretricious" comes to mind, that's probably one that not many people know, but it's sort of like the fake trinkety, you know, like a, a prostitute, the way she would dress herself sort of in this cheap, rather, trinkety way rather than real, true beauty.↗

1:03:25Speaker 1But if you stand them against each other, you can really see where the beauty lies. So make sure when you're calling out this, this basically illegitimate attempt at our, at distraction, whether it be on a beauty level or moral level or so, make sure you juxtapose that against what is truly beautiful, what is truly moral, because boy, they don't even compare. The, the idea of the latter is to make you forget the former. That's why I posted that about the first great, Renaissance Science artist, and you just look at how luminous it is, you look at how inspiring it is, and then you're like, "Oh, wow, this other thing is..." Like if you stood up, you could take art from six hundred years ago and stand up, stand it up against ridiculous postmodern crap, and go, "Okay, what they-- this is way better. This is, this is clearly way more beautiful. I can't stop looking at this. Gosh, my soul is just drawn into this." And you realize what the other stuff is, is it's meant to demoral↗

1:04:23Ian MalcolmNo, for sure. And, and, I, I, I wanna call out and massively thank, congratulate, and maybe inquire with, Dr. Rechtenwald. Really honored to have him, in here with us. And, and, Dr. Rechtenwald, I'm, I'm curious because, essentially Dave has been walking us through his thoughts on both the great religions, which he then found himself pivoting into philosophy and the pursuit of essentially knowledge, how to obtain it, what to do with it, and, and this idea of using those to build Of morality that can oppose that which is aggressing upon our society, right? This idea that, you, you don't have to just be passive and forever just take insults and abuse to be a moral person. You can righteously reject something. I know obviously you've been doing that with Asda PAC, standing in opposition to APAC. So just kind of curious, Dr. Recktenwald, for any of your thoughts on how you have kind of grounded yourself in either a set of, religious principles or perhaps a philosophical, let's say, morality That you would use to oppose that, which obviously is just, it's, it's aggressing upon us at essentially every turn.↗

1:05:31Speaker 4Yeah. Hey, thanks for having me up. appreciate that, and it's good to see David, and I always come and try to hear what he has to say. he's such a brilliant philosopher, so, I appreciate what he's doing. I, I think that the, the moral question comes down to this, We, we must, I think we must have a universal value system that is, that it applies to every person on the planet, regardless of their race, their ethnicity, their religious,↗

1:06:03Speaker 4Con, con- adhesions and, and what have you. So I think we need to be universalist in our values. And I think, you know, for me personally, that comes out of Christianity. I find the, the va- my value system's really come out of the Sermon on the Mount and the, you know, the Beatitudes. I think that's the heart of Christian belief in terms of behavior, moral, in terms of morality, the ethical component. I, I do think that There's also a↗

1:06:35Speaker 4transcendental component, there's the, the transcendence that you get through, belief. but, but in terms of the morals, I, I think that the key here is that we assert a, a universal system because the, the enemy has a very particularistic- And ethnically, oriented and, ethnocentric and exclusionary ethics and morality. they don't include everybody in, their morality, and they don't judge their own behavior by any universal standards or↗

1:07:13Speaker 4ethics. So I think we have to be perfect with reference to them. We have to be better. I agree with what David said in terms of not just seeking what you don't like and trying to destroy what you don't like, but actually seeking for what you want and what you believe in and trying to live that, and then everything else follows.↗

1:07:37Speaker 4for me,↗

1:07:40Speaker 4That is a Christian basis, a Christian belief system, and I think is the basis of our universal values in terms of human, human values, human rights. Every person, and, you know, I'm not a strict egalitarian from certainly not, not in a de facto sense, I think that everybody should have the same legal standing in, in the world, and, and likewise, that that should be honored universally. But that doesn't mean I think that everyone is equal. of course that's not the case. This, this, this is an abstraction for legal purposes.↗

1:08:21Speaker 4it isn't an evaluation of sameness across the board. I think there is a definite difference and that it comes through, genetics and culture, and, that that's-- you can't even that playing field, and to try to do so is to do violence against the majority. I↗

1:08:40Speaker 1would, I would add that You know, tolerance implies a disparity of views. So the idea, for instance, one of the horrible things about the American government is the idea that they're going to go to another civilization, in another culture, and force them to be like us. I mean, this is of course, I mean, talk, by the way, talk about anti-Christian, right? I, I don't think Christ's answer was to go, you know, shoot someone if they didn't accept his point of view. So, so really is that, that is an important distinction with regard to tolerance, don't you think, my friend?↗

1:09:14Speaker 4Yeah, absolutely. I think, We, we have to be tolerant of other people's views, but we can't be tolerant of behavior that is actually, you know, nugatory towards the whole society or, or a good portion of it. So I think, we, we still have to have standards and we have to hold people to standards that are the same for everybody so that we don't have prejudice as a, as a↗

1:09:44Speaker 4I mean, right now we have a zio-jewish preju-prejudice running, you know, our moral system, and, that, that prejudice is, you know, propagandized to the public regularly on a constant basis. So that's, that's what we're up against, and I think in order to, to fight it, you have to be inoculated against it. And the best inoculation, I think, is the truth. And, so I think my↗

1:10:11Speaker 5grandma's white.↗

1:10:14Ian MalcolmIn the long history of completely irrelevant comments, that ranks amongst the all-time greats, iconic. Thank, thank you for that interjection. Dr. Eckman, well, back to you.↗

1:10:26Speaker 4Yeah, what did he say? My grandmother's white? Is that what he said? I guess↗

1:10:29Ian Malcolmso. I'm not sure the, the relevance to anything, but, I once ate- Yeah. I once ate fried chicken and watermelon. iconic. Therefore, I like↗

1:10:39Speaker 5fried chicken, but I don't eat watermelon.↗

1:10:41Ian MalcolmWell, that's fair.↗

1:10:42Speaker 5Iconic. Yeah, stop.↗

1:10:45Ian MalcolmAt least that was somewhat relevant to the comment made prior to it, iconic, so that, that- Yeah.↗

1:10:50Speaker 4Also, Hitler breathed there, so you're also, you breathed there, so you might, you must be like Hitler. so anyway, the, yeah, I think that David, you know, what David's saying is great, I'd like to hear more, but, yeah, I think, the, for me, it's, it's, we must hold people to a universal standard, and we must hold ourselves to it primarily. This is the key, because we have to be perfect in terms of our moral str- our moral system. We can't be,↗

1:11:24Speaker 4you know, condemning other people for their slaughter of innocent people and their theft of land and their theft of, property and so forth and so on if we're doing the same thing. we just can't be like them. That's fine. No,↗

1:11:41Ian Malcolmabsolutely. And, and, maybe it's an interesting way to ping-pong back from that, Dr. Recktenwald, over to, to David, because, right? You, you made the reference and the, the joke there on, Adolf Hitler. And so I'd be curious because, what I believe that we're going to see, David, is the continued labeling of anything and everything, that points the finger in the general direction of Jewish supremacy as Adolf Hitler, right? They're gonna say, "Oh, you're a Adolf Hitler was, which clearly he was, right? So, so how do, if in fact, let's just as a hypothetical, let's just envision the Jewish supremacy, that we're correct and Jewish supremacy is the problem, that we then get the point to as a pack being so nationally recognized, supported, funded, and, let's say significant in terms of its ability to move the needle in the political sphere, right? And all the while, the television and every one of these own politicians is saying, "You're- Hitler, you're Hitler, you're Hitler. How do we then say, amidst all that propaganda, no, what we are doing, in spite of the fact that we are labeling this group of people, we're being very specific with that, perhaps that was done by Adolf Hitler in the past, but that doesn't mean that what we're doing in the present isn't in any way immoral, right? How do we, how do we demonstrate with something that we can use as a solid foundation that we are moral in our claims, even if they are, as, as the television would tell us, either↗

1:13:11Speaker 1Well, I'm not clever in my response in that way. I say just keep saying the truth. You know, ideas don't have guilt by association. They don't have guilt by association. For instance, when I used to debate Marxists and someone would presume, would, be repeatedly on my side, and they would call out Marx's personal life, which there's a lot of grist for the mill there, and I would say, no. It doesn't matter what his personal life is, let's take his claims on the face of it and either dismiss them or find some truth in them or whatever, but let's, since I'm arguing against Marxism, I want to play the A-team, in other words, the idea itself. So when people- Are avoiding the discussion of the idea either by straw man, any other logical fallacy, including the idea that, the, of course, irrational idea that ideas themselves have guilt by association. You know they're losing, so just keep saying the truth.↗

1:14:08Ian MalcolmYeah, no, absolutely. And, and that's, that's the thing that I, I continuously try to go back to, and I'm sure, Dr. Recktenwald can appreciate this 'cause I know he gets similar, critiques, right? If, when I say things along the lines, whether it's about Jewish supremacy or perhaps race realism, I just keep going back and saying, "Here's the data. Like, you can not like what I'm suggesting, it might make you feel uncomfortable, but if it's true, it's true." And if that's the↗

1:14:38Ian MalcolmAccurately accurate statistics, even when they are uncomfortable in the conclusion that they arrive at. So I, I really appreciate that, that suggestion there, David. And I'm curious, we've got, Mr. Blue Sky with his hand up, so kind of curious for his thoughts on that. May I quickly↗

1:14:51Speaker 2ask a question to David? Sure, go for it. Then we'll go to,↗

1:14:54Ian MalcolmBlue Sky and then back to David.↗

1:14:56Speaker 2Thank you, thank you, and sorry, Blue Sky, but, but, but because it is a serious question that,↗

1:15:08Speaker 2Part of the evening with, anointed and, and stuff. But, but my question is that, as such, and, and I've argued with, with a few people, actually ruined one dinner, and they're mostly people who live in the West, when they, when they posited the, the, the, the idea that there is no truth, and they were re- they were really serious, and, and I was really serious because it was the first time I hear it. And, and, and, and, and then sometimes here on spaces I hear, "But, but this is my truth." I know, I↗

1:15:40Speaker 1love that one.↗

1:15:42Speaker 2And now it's, okay, so we're on the, where did this philosophy or idea originate from? And how come it is, it is, it is very much a lot found in the West? It, it, because, because how can we talk about morality when even truth now is, is mine and yours, and it's like there's no ultimate- With one truth, if you can unpack that, I, I would really appreciate it. Yes, yes,↗

1:16:06Speaker 1and boy, what a sly trick that was. It was a combination of Foucault and Derrida obviously, the subjectivism. It,↗

1:16:16Speaker 4it goes back further to Lukas, George Lukas. Yeah.↗

1:16:20Speaker 1Absolutely, right. And, and,↗

1:16:22Speaker 4phenomenology, yeah.↗

1:16:23Speaker 1And, I'm trying to-- Oh, yeah, Freud, of course, participated in that, who would famously accuse you if you disagree with him as, of needing more psychoanalysis. You know? Well, of course, all of it is, you know, in postmodernism itself, it goes nowhere, right? It is a blind staircase. It is self-defeating. This is why it's really lost its steam. You know, when I make the point Ian about the dialectical move from the lower to the higher through history, it is because the bad ideas-- you know, I keep saying that, you know, every lie has an expiration date, the truth lasts forever. But when we realize the falsity of these, to-- at some stretch of time we do, then people just, they stop motivating people, and this idea that when someone ever my ears prick up if, if we were friends in person as we are on, on Spaces, Ryaed, See the corners of my mouth go up when someone says my truth, you'd know what's coming. Oh, your truth? Oh, do we have different truths? Or my reality? You know, oh, oh, your real- Oh, we- Do we have different real- How shall I know when I enter your reality and leave my reality? How shall I know when I enter your truth and leave my truth? And if we had- If we each had our own truth, wouldn't that be the absolute destruction of truth? And then the other thing you mentioned was, "We can't know what is true." Really? How can you know that? You just made a truth claim. How can you make the truth claim that we can't know what is true? You know? Well, of course this isn't true. This is silly. And by the way, you can't convince yourself of this. You can't convince yourself. Anybody who doesn't believe that in an objective reality, just throw a rock at them, see if they dodge it. You know? Obvious- obviously They, they, they believe in an objective reality. Everybody believes in an objective reality when a rock is coming at them. So of course it's all very, very disingenuous. What's the point of all this? Because↗

1:18:23Speaker 1Really, all authoritarianism is a war against the mind. It's a war against thinking, because no authoritarianism is rational. An irrational mind, a strong mind, a moral people can never-- and this is Thomas Jefferson talking, not me-- be tyrannized over. An enlightened people cannot be tyrannized over. So you have to convince them that their mind doesn't work. Philosophy departments, sadly many of them, less of them today, but many of them have just made war on philosophy. The whole raison d'être of the whole department is you can't know anything. Well, then how would I know that? How, how do you know that I can't know anything? I do a funny little thing, and I'll finish with this, Ryo-Ed, is actually when I used to do this in, in university settings, in Ivy League settings. I would get a one of these relativists to admit to me, I'd say, "So in conclusion, you believe that you, your mind, doesn't have the capacity to discern that which is true, to know the truth?" And they would say, "Yes," and I would say, "Well, we finally come to an agreement. Both of us agree that you don't have the capacity to know what is true." How are they gonna argue with me? It's always a mic drop, I always win, because they have literally disarmed themselves. They have no weaponry to fight back. What are they gonna say? "You're wrong." How would you know that? You know? So all of a sudden, I've become the arbiter of truth, and I'm happy to be that in the face of such disingenuous↗

1:19:56Ian MalcolmI love that idea, David. Thank you for that. There's no such thing as the truth. Oh, really? Okay. So the thing that you just said, I guess, is also not the truth, right? It's a very self-defeating argument to be made. And↗

1:20:08Speaker 2just quickly on, on the humorous side, so it happened to me two years ago, I was in Cape Town, it was a dinner, just most of them are Westerners, and it was a French woman, she's like, "No, Rade, but you have to understand, there is no truth↗

1:20:26Speaker 2Being, me and, and I couldn't, I had to answer back because it was in a, in a political connotation, you know, of, of Israel and all that, and then, and suddenly I was the only one on that table saying there is a truth and everyone agreeing with that woman, there is no truth, and, and then I, you know, I got angry and then, and then I said, "Listen, listen, Françoise, if I slap you now across the face,↗

1:20:55Speaker 2you would..." Be slapped. Both of our truth is that I did slap you. Everyone else would recognize that this is truth, and I will go down in history as having slapped you, and it is the truth. And then, yeah, but I'm just, I'm just to laugh, but I, I, I was going crazy, man. I thought I was a crazy guy, but thank you for that, anyway.↗

1:21:16Speaker 4This, this isn't com-- this is coming through postmodernism, but it actually goes back to the, to the Soviets, It was, Lenin, first of all, who had this idea of a standpoint epistemology that is, that you had a better access to truth depending on who you were. Like, th-th-this guy George Lukacs, who was, also a Soviet philosopher, but he lived in, Czechoslovakia, I believe. He said that the working class had a particular standpoint, and that standpoint allowed them access to the- Truth that the bourgeoisie couldn't, have access to. So this became known as standpoint epistemology, and then when postmodernism took it over, it gets siphoned through all these other identity filters like feminism and, queer theory and, and on and on, so you get All these different truths, my truth, you know, and, this idea of my truth only becomes possible after you relativize truth through the standpoint epistemology and then into postmodern epistemology where there's no objectivity. Yeah, this is,↗

1:22:34Speaker 1this is of course dialectical materialism, you know, from Marx. And Diamat, the first sort of widely propagated material and dialectical materialism was actually by Stalin and Yeah, we made everybody learn it in schools. And this, of course, is all completely irrational because the idea that you can conjure reality through, through majority thinking, you know, the idea that the veracity of a given point is dependent upon the number of people who subscribe to it, all-- As much as all of the, the Greek philosophers disagreed with each other, and they did greatly, they never disagreed on that point.↗

1:23:08Speaker 1What you say?↗

1:23:11Speaker 1Yeah, and, and the, and also the idea that you can conjure reality just in discussion with words. Like, this is-- These are the sophists of old, right? This was, of course, Socrates was a rebel, rebelled against the sophist, the idea that, "Oh, if you can just be clever with your words, well, no, they have to correspond to reality, right?" And what's the point of all this? And he used to make them look very stupid because it was very hard for those people to, to maintain, you know, self- Agreement to have the pleasure of agreeing with themselves, which is the first rule of an honest man is to agree, agree with themselves, to be consistent.↗

1:23:46Speaker 4Derrida was the one, and he's a French, Jewish French, actually, I think he was Algerian, as a matter of fact. that was Camus,↗

1:23:56Speaker 1right? That was Derrida? No, I mean,↗

1:23:57Speaker 4no, I think also, I think, that Derrida was also- No.↗

1:24:02Speaker 5Five hundred K after finish my degree and- I↗

1:24:06Speaker 2can. I know↗

1:24:09Speaker 2But, but this is, sit, sit this one out.↗

1:24:15Speaker 6Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah.↗

1:24:17Speaker 4In any case, Derrida basically made it such that he said there was no outside of text. There's no, nothing outside of text effectively. What he's doing is reducing everything to language. And then, and then that dictates just what is reality. So that's where you get, like, because I say I'm a man or a woman, then I become one, because all- Well, it's language, it's discourse that's all powerful. And, this, this is just a recipe for totalitarianism because when you have no standpoints, no, no objective correlatives for anything that you say, and you, you basically, it, it comes down to force. If you have enough force, you can, you can enforce certain truths on the population regardless of whether they're true or not, like, like they did in the Soviet Union with Lysenko. Lysenko is- Was, the most ridiculous bi-biology,↗

1:25:13Speaker 4available at the time, and the, the Soviet Union adopted it and made it basically illegal to oppose Lysenko this kind of neo-Lamarckian, ideas that he, that he propagated, like the inheritance of acquired characteristics and all that, that became the rage in the Soviet Union and, and the, the cause of a, a basic manhunt against, anti-Lysenkoism. Oh,↗

1:25:42Speaker 5oh, I'm sorry. was you insinuating that↗

1:25:47@joann_mariewhere you-↗

1:25:47Speaker 5I am unintelligent for disclosing? How much money I may have. Well, I↗

1:25:54Speaker 1would say, I wouldn't, I wouldn't insinuate that you're unintelligent because you can't conjugate the most common verb in our language. I mean, do you speak another language better than this one? I mean, that, you know, if you want to, it'd be hard to, it'd be, you know, the big, the biggest misapprehension about language is its main value is the social organization of humans, when actually its primary value is the organization of your own thoughts. So if you can't speak The language, the only language that you know, and I'm gonna presume this, then maybe you're not gonna be able to have such a rare thought. I want scholarship money from-- Then why can't you conjugate the most common language? Why can't you con-- Hold on, hold on. Here's what I want you to do.↗

1:26:38@joann_marieEnglish is my second language, and I can't even do this. Like, I don't know. Yes,↗

1:26:41Speaker 1here, here's what I want you to do. I want you to conjugate the verb to be. Give me four conjugations of the verb to↗

1:26:51Ian MalcolmDo you know what David means when he says to conjugate something?↗

1:26:55Speaker 1Oh yeah, I guess I should have known.↗

1:26:57Speaker 5I, I, I'm, I'm sure at some point I did know. You know, I could easily Google that. I could easily Google that.↗

1:27:08Ian MalcolmBut, but, but,↗

1:27:11Speaker 1but without Google-↗

1:27:14Speaker 5Without Google↗

1:27:19Ian MalcolmWait, you're asking for an icon without using Google, iconic. And it's, it's fine to say you don't know, and that's, that's the challenge, is that↗

1:27:28Speaker 5I'm telling you, I re- I researched a lot of stuff in school. So iconic, what we want to do is, why don't,↗

1:27:34Ian Malcolmiconic, why don't we do this? But at some↗

1:27:35Speaker 5point I know I know what that is. Iconic, why don't we do this↗

1:27:37Ian Malcolmfor anybody that might be listening in that might not be familiar with David's, inquiry? Why don't↗

1:27:48Ian MalcolmRather than us just kind of taunting you about it. And then maybe the next time we're in a space, you won't look quite as ignorant. That might be a, in the best interest of everybody. So↗

1:27:57Speaker 5I'm not concerned about looking ignorant. I understand. I got↗

1:27:59Ian Malcolmit. That, that must be the case, 'cause otherwise you wouldn't keep coming into these rooms.↗

1:28:02Speaker 5Public education at home. Really good public school education. I don't think so. Do you know what the↗

1:28:08Speaker 4verb conjugate means? Do you know what the verb conjugate means?↗

1:28:14Speaker 5Yeah, yeah. You know, I, I got high school diploma, I know what that means.↗

1:28:19Speaker 4What does it mean?↗

1:28:21Speaker 5Let me go Google it. You know, I gotta, I'm, give me your iPhone and I'll↗

1:28:24@joann_marieGoogle it. So, so you don't know, it's fine. Like, it's, it's, oh my↗

1:28:28Speaker 1god. Don't think you know what knowing means. So that's maybe our starting point there. Well, maybe we should drop our friend down here. I think he's- I did administration↗

1:28:37Speaker 5for↗

1:28:39Speaker 1top pharmaceutical↗

1:28:40Speaker 5company.↗

1:28:41Speaker 1I see that. Well, very nice, my friend. Joanne, why don't we let Iconic sit in listener mode?↗

1:28:49Speaker 4Diversity is gonna be the death of us, really.↗

1:28:52Speaker 1Well, I think our friend is dealing with maybe some more challenges, and I don't really wanna drag him through this. Let's move on,↗

1:28:57Speaker 7let's move on.↗

1:28:58Speaker 1Yeah. But I wanna get back to, what I- Oh, no, no, no,↗

1:29:02@joann_marieIan, the space is gonna crash. Well, if it doesn't crash, it will open. I'm gonna message↗

1:29:10Speaker 1Ian, can you hear us? Three, two, one. We can hear, I can hear you. Yeah, but it↗

1:29:21@joann_mariesaid the host is having connection issues, so- Usually those face↗

1:29:25Speaker 1crashes. That's what happened to Coyote's face. They're like, "You guys are on to something. " Kalomalehem. They're like, "You guys are on to something. " Yeah, go to the left, brother. I'll let Samuel ahead of you.↗

1:29:36@joann_marieIan, are you back?↗

1:29:37Ian MalcolmIs that working now?↗

1:29:38@joann_marieYes.↗

1:29:39Ian MalcolmYeah, thanks for coming back, man. Yeah, trying to talk to her, I was like, "Yes, you make us nervous, man." No, they're, they're coming for us. I, I was gonna say David just for, iconic in the event he is still in the listener panel, would you mind just kind of educating him and the rest of the room on where you were going? And if so, maybe we can treat this as a teaching moment rather than feeling like we were just picking on somebody.↗

1:30:03Speaker 1Yes, Inflection, so like I have, you know, or I am, you are, that sort of thing, and it's just pretty pathetic when, when people aren't able to conjugate, you know, the most common verb in their language, so↗

1:30:21Ian MalcolmBut, but I, I has to conjugates two Bs. Yes, I was told.↗

1:30:26Speaker 1I be↗

1:30:27Ian Malcolmor↗

1:30:27Speaker 4I not to be. Conjugate also means to have sex.↗

1:30:30Speaker 2I act. All right, don't act. All right. Act. No, not chopping↗

1:30:34Ian Malcolmwood, Ryan. We all know that one.↗

1:30:37Speaker 1To be and↗

1:30:37Ian Malcolmclearly can't be what was suggested. Well, there's no blunder in the↗

1:30:39Speaker 1mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, nor take arms against a sea of troubles and by opposing them, so I, I did wanna respond though to Michael, so, About Derrida. So I divide in solving philosophical problems, I divide them into three categories, fact of the world problems, language problems, and then logical problems, just, just as in terms of their logical sequence. And The language problem is, you know, Derrida, I'm sorry, but it's just nonsense, it really is. I refer to what he's trying to do, I, I came up with an idea of this abyss of no meaning, to basically, basically, try to extract all the meaning out of any word. Of course, what's the purpose of this? Is to reduce the power of your mind. It is just such a nonsense. I- I, I, I really flatter myself that I think I would just destroy this kind of debate, because it's just all such nonsense. It'd be so easy to say, "Well, that doesn't mean anything," you know, help, help me understand. This is-- when we say that reality is knowable, remember this, and this is the beauty of it. Language is a simulacrum of reality, right? So it is, it is a representation of reality. It's not-- language doesn't-- the way language is formed in our consciousness isn't by accident, right? We have objects and, you know, nouns because the universe is full of things, right? We have verbs because things are in motion, we have adjectives because things have certain qualities, and then we have all these relational words because there's all sorts of change and mutation and these things bumping into each other. to each other and interact with each other like in chemistry. So you see, language inherently exists for an implicitly logical purpose. That's the first of the two things I wanna comment on, Derrida. The second one is every word and concept exists in community and contrad-contradiction with every other word and con- and, and, concept. So when you think of, for instance, cold, do you think of it relation-- in relation to hot? If you're saying something is cold, you're saying it's not hot, right? If you think of something, you know, the idea of blueness or hardness or all of the qualities, if you wanna put it that way, you think of them in contradistinction to something else, but also you'll think of them in community with another set of, of identifying characteristics. If you're playing dice, just think of the dice, it has, it has, may have one Whiteness and a little bit of black spots or blackness, it might have squareness, it might have density, you might define it in terms of size. So, darada, it's just nonsense, and it's not useful. What is the point of all of this? Why are you trying to convince people that their minds don't work, that language is the, that we conjure reality out of language? This doesn't help anybody. It wouldn't, in the, in the ancient Chinese sort of proverbial sense, they would say, "How does this change the taste of my tea?"↗

1:33:38Speaker 4Well, I mean, Derrida himself said it was, he, he was doing it all for Marxism at the base, that the whole thing was for communists, was a communist tool to undermine, you know, philosophical and other ontologies so that we're left with, whatever they dictate as, being true. They, they first take the, the signifier, the language, they divorce it from what it refers to, and likewise, it's just in this, sea of other signifiers, they say that are, you know, effectively, they say, Derrida says that the language has no relationship at all To anything in the object world is completely arbitrary, which of course would be↗

1:34:23Speaker 1impossible, right? So absolutely, and, and that really, that really in the beginning when I was surrounded by these people, I would really have fun with this. It really is easy, I'm sorry, but I can bind these people with the web of a spider because they contradict themselves so obviously. And, and I also v-view it as the height of cynicism. This is meanness, this is cynical. Like you're saying, the idea of course is in favor of authoritarianism. If everything is up to the plebiscite, is-- if everything is just a matter of opinion, well, who wins there? The shapers of opinion. And so does it surprise you that those very same people now control the media? The idea that if we own the j- Giant megaphones, then gosh, we can sway opinion, and after all, reality is what we say it is. Reality is what we, we can get fifty-one percent of the people to agree with it, well then that's reality. No, it's not.↗

1:35:20Ian MalcolmSo, David, I'm kinda- That's a↗

1:35:22Speaker 2Talmudic concept, by the way. Sorry. It's a Talmudic concept. I, I, I looked into it. So, so the, the concept is that there is no truth. The truth is what I say it is right now, and that is a Talmudic concept par excellence. Thank you. That's all.↗

1:35:40Speaker 1And then you ask that person, "Well, what if you change your mind?"↗

1:35:44Ian MalcolmWell, and, and, David, isn't that what we essentially see, right? Is the shifting of language as suits the interests of the, the group in control? And it, it's very Orwellian at day's end. It's, it's, it's, it's doublespeak, right? It's the ability to say, "I'm going to apply this logic to this because it's convenient," and then turn around tomorrow. So Genocide bad, unless genociding those that hate us and would like to kill us, in which case genocide good. And if you then ask, "Well, why do those people wanna come after you? Is it because of things you did in the past?" No, no, no, no, no, 'cause the, the past was also good. Everything we've ever done is good, right? And so at any point in time, whatever is the present becomes all that is, right? It's, it's the rewriting of even reason itself, which would bring me to kind of this Go to some of the additional hands, including to Krista, right? But, but when it comes to something that has to therefore be abrasive, right? You were saying just live in truth, even when truth might be uncomfortable. What if the-- What if we arrive at the situation where the truth is that the only solution to something is something that is, I, I suppose, kinetic or therefore violent or therefore what have you, right? I, I mean, I would deem that a self-defense. How do you define- Something as moral when it might include something that might be perhaps self-defense and therefore perhaps, veering on violence. Not advocating for such, obviously, but just as an intellectual exercise.↗

1:37:16Speaker 1Well, okay, well, self-defense is a universal moral principle. So if it works for all people at all times, then it's moral, right? And of course, offense-- initiating violence is wrong all the time, right? So I can see why people would want to invert that. And get-- getting back to the inverting of morals and truth, think about the fact that↗

1:37:38Speaker 1you are objecting to the one country that kills all the Semites around them, and so you're anti-Semitic. I mean, if you can invert the language that severely, why would you be doing this? You know, evility changes nomenclature the way criminals change disguises. They want to-- the, the reason why that they perpetrate these terminological tricks is because the truth doesn't favor them. So what does that tell you? The truth's a real thing! They're agreeing with you that the truth is, is a real thing. If they're trying to undermine the truth, if they're trying to confuse you, if they're trying to distract you with all of the trappings of modern, of modernity, well, why would they do that if they themselves don't know deep in their hearts that the truth is a real thing, and then it really does, isn't that a cliche, set us free? So yeah, all of these examples where they're trying to invert the morality of things, I mean, think about the con-- the trans movement. I The people really care about this. I don't really think the majority of the people think this is somehow a good thing, but notice that they actually were conveying this idea. That the word, that the prefix "trans" has the protean power to change the identity of anything or anyone whatsoever. This is a war on the mind. This is completely illogical. If "trans woman" is true, then what about "trans giraffe" or "trans space alien," right? Or "trans rock," right? If you can, if you can become this thing by putting this prefix in front of whatever you are, of course- Of course, this is a silly idea. Then why can't it be infinite? Why can't you become anything, things that exist or even don't exist, trans,↗

1:39:25Speaker 1you know, trans fairy, tooth fairy, whatever, I don't know. So, so really ultimately, it's a world in the mind itself.↗

1:39:34Ian MalcolmWell, and, I'm gonna go into a bank tomorrow and say I'm a trans billionaire, and then I'm gonna use all of the funds to object to Jewish supremacy, and therefore I win. And if the bank says no, I'm gonna say, "Why are you anti-Semitic?" And you notice it never,↗

1:39:49Speaker 1it never works in our favor, right? I can't, if you, if you give, when DEI existed, I could never walk into a university and be a trans black person. Like, how come it doesn't work in the opposite direction? How can, you know, can I be a trans lesbian maybe and go hang out in women's showers? I mean, you know, what is-- Well, I guess they actually wanted us to be able to do that. But anyway, yeah, never works in our favor.↗

1:40:14Ian MalcolmWell, they wanted you to do that, but only if you didn't agree with all the other things that are, are logic-driven, right? but, very, very well stated. Okay, so, so we're all gonna apply for trans-billionaire status, and, and then we'll↗

1:40:33Speaker 1Elon Musk, so I get to share his trillion.↗

1:40:36Ian Malcolmthere we go, okay. Well, it, it sounds like a reasonable suggestion. We'll, we'll have to aim in the post on that. but let's go to Blue Sky and then check in with Krista, and then we will go to Anointing.↗

1:40:48Speaker 7Yeah, thank you, thank you. And please go ahead and retweet this space, let's make a hundred. man, last night I was by myself and I was laughing, and I was- Thinking about the space that you had, because I was home watching, around eleven, twelve o'clock, I was watching the NBA draft, and, and I swear to God, I was just laughing. Somehow, all those players, I said sixty-five, seventy percent of them were mixed race.↗

1:41:17Speaker 7Think about that. And I was like The guy, your friend is still here? You need to bring him back because he was up to something yesterday when he said this is the future. Because I was looking at NBA, the only thing I saw as white Caucasian was, I think, three or four guys. Two of them, first guy from Spain, he plays Michigan, and another guy from Germany, and I think it was another guy from,↗

1:41:45Speaker 7Utah State. I remember those three. And when it comes to black, hundred percent black, Woodburns, I just saw the first draft. I was Jamaican descent, I saw another guy from Nigeria, and I think I saw another guy. So very much out of thirty players that was draft last night, one hundred percent white or one hundred percent black was very small. Overwhelming majority of them, I said seventy percent to six percent, was mixed race, either their parents, their mom is white or their father is white.↗

1:42:18Speaker 1Okay, so what do you↗

1:42:19Speaker 7make of that? What I was making that because we had this base yesterday and, and his friend, the guy we were just talking to earlier, he said, "This is what..." If you wanna make America, blah, blah. I don't know how he framed it. He was talking about this, the future. So we laughed at him yesterday, making fun of him, but when I watched the NBA last night, I was like, "Yo, maybe the guy was talking about something. Just think, something to think about it. it's kinda weird↗

1:42:45Speaker 1way."↗

1:42:45Speaker 7But anyway, let me- When he was making the point↗

1:42:48Speaker 1that on a level of intelligence, right? So I asked him, he said that people that, that were mixed, the black people that were mixed were more intelligent than black people that weren't mixed. And I said, "Okay, what are they mixing with?" And he said, "White people." I said, "Okay, so you're basically saying that when you add in white people, you've become..." No, they were↗

1:43:09Speaker 5mixing with the↗

1:43:09Speaker 1super rich white people. Hold on, that's exactly what he was saying. He said, "When you add in white people, it makes them more intelligent." Now, it doesn't make white people more intelligent. He very logically didn't make that conclusion. He was simply saying that when you mix a lower People with a higher average IQ, intelligent people, that the lower get smarter. He didn't say the s-the higher get, get smarter or s-maintain their intelligence. So that's, that was kind of the, where that went.↗

1:43:40Speaker 7Exactly, and very much he's talking about the way America is going generally. It was giving me a picture when I saw that last night.↗

1:43:49Speaker 1But his ultimate, but his ultimate claim was that it benefits that you make the black people become more intelligent when they mix with white people. That was his ultimate claim. He,↗

1:44:00Ian Malcolmhe was saying it was good for all people involved, and for anybody that's struggling with the connection there, it's basically like, "We're going to take all of these five-foot-tall people from Mexico," which Has an average height, if I'm not mistaken, around five foot three. We're gonna import them to Sweden, right? Or to the Netherlands, where people are like six foot two or six foot three. It's gonna be way better for the children of the Mexicans. It's like, yes, that is true. It's also gonna be worse for those that aren't from, Norway or from the Netherlands in that case. The Dutch are now gonna have shorter children, right? So there's a detrimental effect to one group and a positive effect to the other group, right? If you're then Which clearly is being done by the media, you gotta ask why, and it's, in my opinion, so that the future generations are less intelligent overall, because then you have less critically thinking individuals that aren't able to object to, oh, I don't know, maybe the doublespeak that we've been talking about in this conversation. There is a curious piece though to Blue Skies' comment, 'cause he's saying that it was the NBA draft. Right? So you've got individuals that are obviously very athletic, and perhaps there is something to that, that maybe there's a benefit of that combination for sports. That doesn't mean that it's applicable to everything, but perhaps we could look at, and, and if I'm not mistaken, I think the, I can't remember his name, but the quarterback for, what is it, the Kansas City Chiefs? very popular young guy, obviously Patrick Mahomes. Mahomes, there you go. Obviously of some kind of nebulous mixed, racial background. Right? And you, I, I mean, I'd be perfectly willing to concede, for what it's worth, that when it comes to athletics, there might be a benefit of taking a group of people, African Americans, let's just say, that do have a higher level of fast twitch muscle movement, which obviously is a benefit for athleticism, that there could be a benefit of mixing that with an athletic white person who might have a higher average IQ for positions like quarterback, which historically have been dominated largely by white people And I think that the, the reason for that is perhaps something about the cognitive benefit that maybe whites do have on average, not saying all people are anything, but over those that are African American. And, and so it's a reasonable thing to call out blue sky, it's a very interesting observation, and again, maybe there is a benefit of, oh, we've got a, a group that are higher typically in athleticism, a group that are higher typically in intelligence, merge those together, maybe you get something that's a benefit for the basketball court or for the football field. It doesn't necessarily- Wait, to that it's better for society or civilization at large, and I think that's a whole different argument to be had, but it's, it's a very interesting observation you brought up. Yes,↗

1:46:43Speaker 7it definitely was very observation to me. I was like, I was looking at it, when you look at the overwhelming majority of the population in the United States, majority white, and they were just like less than, I said, ten percent, fifteen percent of the total draft, typically, and when it comes to African American, talking about real, I mean, black mixed, I'm talking about people↗

1:47:03Speaker 7Skin, non mixed, and we are also a very minority of that thing. So I was like, "This is really interesting." Well, you have to, I spoke to that.↗

1:47:10Speaker 1You have to think of it though, you're-- I think you're ignoring part of the selection process there. Because, and Charles Barkley talks about this. He says when you ask all of these black young men, "What do you wanna do for your life?" And they'll like overwhelmingly say things like, "I wanna play in the NBA," or "I wanna play in the NFL," and he said, "That You kinda have to win the genetic lottery to get one of these spots. There aren't that many of these jobs. But with, of course, white kids, they're thinking about hundreds, if not thousands, of professions. And so if you have a small, smaller population of people, meaning the black population↗

1:47:51Speaker 1And overwhelmingly, the people are thinking about one profession, then you're going to see more of them cons-consolidated in that direction. But white people simply think that they have lots of options. White kids think they have lots of options, so they're not concentrating on this one thing. By the way, you noticed there's an influx of Eastern Europeans because they come from poor background, well, that is so. For instance, in the NBA, for the past seven years, the best player in the world has been one guy. Who is it? Nikola Jokic. And what is he known for? He is seven feet tall. He is very good, but what is he known for? His thinking, his mind. They constantly say, "Well, he's thinking way ahead of each, he's outthinking people." He's playing chess, where they're playing checkers. They're using-- And by the way, these are black people talking about him, you know, and also talking about playing-- Okay, hold on. Also talk, hold on, one sec, hold on, one sec, hold on, hold on, hold on. Also talking about playing against him↗

1:48:53Speaker 1I don't care, dude. I don't need- Exactly,↗

1:48:55Speaker 7you make a good point because I was watching, for example, when they were picking, this, Blair, both of them are tall, actually very tall, one from Spain and one from Germany, they were using exactly same words that you used in smart, intelligence, even though they're tall and size-wise are very seven foot, six nine, German and Spain, I'm talking about the Caucasian players, they were using those terms, I'm talking about, you know, intelligence and understanding. Exactly, when I and actually the funny thing was, first time in history, I would never seen, I couldn't believe this when they said that there was one guy they picked, it was, they said the first Mexican↗

1:49:31Speaker 7in NBA, I was like, wow, I didn't know that And that was interesting too. So let me just land it, please go ahead to share this space. I can't-↗

1:49:40Ian MalcolmIsn't, isn't that an interesting comment? And, and look, there's probably two reasons behind that, exactly like David was just suggesting, right? The first Mexican ever drafted into the NBA. Well, that would tell us a couple things. Number one, there's probably a genetic disadvantage of the-↗

1:49:58Ian MalcolmYou got a phone call. I did. Golly, maybe you got a phone call. The, yeah, I was just gonna say that, that perhaps the first Mexican, NBA player, that could be a result obviously of genetics. And like I was saying, the, the average height for Mexico is far shorter than it is in some of these other countries, right? but also it could be a result or a, let's say, a combination of--↗

1:50:19Speaker 5I, I would call this subject of given, what↗

1:50:24Ian Malcolmdo we call that again? Oh boy. this is-- That you've got genetics, right, that are at play, but you also have the cultural bias, and so those individuals that might be Mexican, that might be extremely athletic, well, perhaps instead of playing basketball, they're spending more time playing soccer or some of these other sports traditionally associated with Mexican culture, right? So it's probably the influence of both of those things, it's the degree of each and their role in that overall outcome that would obviously be up for interpretation. But that is a very, it's a very curious observation, Blue Sky, and the last little thing I'll say on it is This is obviously a result of essentially Western culture being propagated to the rest of the world. I would say it's largely because of the, the macro culture that is, that is pushed out by the Jewish supremacists. It's the, the uniculture, right? They're trying to get this or the monoculture on to everybody. How do we make- I, I↗

1:51:16Speaker 5have a question. If my ancestors made the platform- No, no,↗

1:51:20Ian Malcolmno, no, no. We're just, we've played this game. So iconic, Speaking of genetics, right? We could go on conversationally about genetic predispositions, perhaps the inability to recognize the flow of a conversation, the indifference to being, oh, I don't know, brash and obnoxious, right? We could look at these things. Stop perpetuating the stereotypes. We're trying to have this conversation to break down some of these things and intelligently discuss them in a way that is productive for everybody, and then you come in and you're like, "Let me just demonstrate every single one of the stereotypes." That you are going to deny, are reasonable, right? It, it, you actually, you do, you do yourself a disservice, right? Every conversation I can have that you've come into, you end up embarrassing not only yourself, but also the culture that you would, I suppose, try and be a, a reflection upon. but David, I apologize for that. Let's, let's go to Kristen. Oh, wait, I, I just,↗

1:52:17Speaker 1I do, I do wanna make one point. So, Blue Sky also, the-- I wanna just advocate for He sort of has a, you know, a heightened level of athletic ability maybe to, as an admixture for that super intelligence. But then think of it in reverse, where Kobe Bryant, for instance, who was just maybe the most skilled player to ever live,↗

1:52:43Speaker 1even, even the coach that coached he and Jordan said that he had a real, he was pretty much a black guy, you know, and his intelligence was very high. So when that variance happens, where the superath-- the normally superathletic person has a heightened intelligence, or the super-intelligent person has sort of surprising gifts in athleticism, then that's where we see these extraordinary players. So I just wanted to sort of advocate there are some pretty black, you know, players that have been pretty damn smart. So I just wanted to advocate for those people too.↗

1:53:16Ian MalcolmWell, and, and David, on that, it's also worth noting, and, and, I, I can't go in. I, I, I know Kobe not only intelligent, I know he spoke multiple languages, also came from a culture that he, he seemed to be a very stand-up guy, right? And I assume that had a lot to do with his, his parents and the culture that he was raised around. But you could also look at some of the absolute greats that were black at night. I think of people like David Robinson, who, obviously, I, Right? Dikembe Mutombo, if I'm not mistaken, obviously had a very deep voice, right? But a, a very smart individual. And, and, and these ind- you know, the, these, these superstar players as a result were not only bringing height and athleticism and all these other things, but also they were bringing intellect onto the, the court, or in the case of the NFL, the field, right? And that, that was in and of itself somewhat of a superpower. And so I wouldn't be surprised if you were to look at some of From all of these sports, Michael Jordan included, and if you would find that not only are they extreme athletes, but they're probably also higher on the average intellect than a lot of the other players that they were playing against. And, and that is just, you know, pe-people, they really take a lot of, offense, to these discussions around things like IQ, 'cause it can be very uncomfortable to discuss. But what you end up recognizing is that while it presents itself very differently, so does athleticism, right? There's a difference between being- Being a great sprinter, a, a great high jumper, and a person that can dribble a basketball and, and, you know, marvel on the court, right? That, that is an amalgamation of a whole lot of different athletic capabilities. Intellect works the exact same way. There's people that are wonderful in terms of engineering, that can kind of orient their mind and physical realities. There's others that are great with numbers, with delivering content, with whatever it might be, right? All of these present themselves differently, but those, those incredible athletes, I wouldn't be surprised at all If it's not just the athleticism, but if it's also the intellect that they're using to make those determinations in real time, you know, kind of second by second in terms of what they're doing on their, their given- Yeah, and I think that-- And no, Iconic, you're done. Stop requesting. I think I've had enough of you.↗

1:55:31Speaker 1Yeah, and I think Iconic, I think he actually has some genuine issues, so I-- But I think, a great example of what you're saying is the reputed greatest football player of all time, Tom Brady. I mean, how do you win seven, seven championships? It was his decision making. You know, the average quarterback that's pretty good can check down on about three options. But the great ones can check down five or six options, and then their feeling of timing, their intelligence, their understanding of their personnel, their capacity to lead. Well, this is really the, the sort of the confluence of what makes Tom Brady, Tom Brady. And so yeah, the intelligence aspect really-- it just depends, right? I mean, if you're just a straight-out sprinter, if there's something that just really is just, okay, the raw athletic ability, then, you know, maybe intelligence isn't so much required. But- But, but when we think about the complexity of team sports, invariably intelligence has to come into play there, and how you-- and also the intelligence to marshal your efforts and how you think about your training and, and how you gain dominion over yourself and how you delay gratification that other players do. You know, Michael Jordan famously said that he, he got to a, a door where people were doing drugs on the other side, and he turned away from that door because he said, "If I go through it, That door, I'm never going to be the same person. And so that was a, a sort of a, some wisdom and intelligence, some self-awareness about him that I think is sort of endemic to that thing we're talking about.↗

1:57:07Ian MalcolmYeah, no, Michael Jordan, obviously, a, an absolute superstar. and, and it is kinda wild, David, when you think about it, the last, thirty, forty years, there have been some of the all-time greats of all sorts of, of, of sports. You've got from the likes of Tom Brady, right, to, to Michael Jordan, you could go, I suppose, to Mike Tyson. talk about a sport that's certainly far more physical than it is, you know, based on intelligence, but nonetheless Deliver speeches that aren't all that intellectual, right? Nonetheless, in real time, obviously doing a lot of processing to make himself so, phenomenal at, at, at the sport that he was participating in. So it's pretty wild to see these things in real time, but I know we've got a lot of other speakers. I wanna go to, to Krista, and then we'll check in with Amiru, which might be kinda interesting speaking about, intellect and, and IQ.↗

1:58:00Speaker 8Hey everybody. Well, I jumped up here ages ago, so I'm gonna return back to a topic we were kinda discussing before. and I just wanna preface, some of my information is coming from my history. right after 9/11, I went out of my way, out of sheer interest, to study more all the major world religions and many others up to 200, and I put them into a board game called Enlightened. And, you know, it got out to some schools, and schools used it just a little bit, but, you know Didn't go anywhere too far, but I learned a lot in the process, and so that's where my reference is kind of coming from, is just, but I'm also-- I grew up Catholic, I also am a yoga teacher, I also am a Kundalini teacher, so I do have, I, I, I loved what, Dr. Reckner-Wal, Walden was saying about, and David actually, about this idea of that we've gotta kinda, zoom out a little bit, 'cause I think we're stuck in,↗

1:58:56Speaker 8these,↗

1:58:59Speaker 8If you will, and this universal idea is going to be really important to our future. And, just speaking to what you guys were just speaking to before, I think of, you know, when, George Lucas was, you know, wrapped his car around a tree when he was like eighteen and laid in bed for a year and he dreamed up Star Wars. And if you look at Star Wars, we're gonna be walking amongst crazy, crossbred individuals in the future. I think that is our future, and I think we're preparing ourselves to have a A lack of judgment and an understanding that we are all one on the level of universal consciousness, and we're, we're, we're, we're needing to zoom out into that place. And it got me into a discussion yesterday that I think lines up with defining morality in a, in an interesting way because we were talking about the difference between the devil and Satan yesterday at a coffee shop, and, there is-- it really got me as a download. I'm not saying I'm correct, but this is what came to me is that the devil is, temptation. And↗

2:00:00Speaker 9it is an energy that we are all up against taking a human incarnation, and we are constantly being tempted, just like the prayer that says, "You know, lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil." The Our Father. I think we're up against that all the time, everyone who's human. That is just part of our Earth school and our evolution, and we make our choices on that premise of- Then being conscious or unconscious or allowing ourselves, because we're lazy, to become unconscious. So like, take drugs, all of a sudden we're taken over and we're starting to do things we wouldn't ordinarily do.↗

2:00:38Speaker 9Then there's Rudolf Steiner, which I went into a deep dive into his work, and when he was studying the different iterations of Planet Earth, you know, he started with Lucifer's time period, then coming into Christ Consciousness, and then coming into Arman. Now, Arman's are really interesting because Arman is machine learning. it is noted that Satan would come in on the heels of this incarnation, it was to begin in the fifteen hundreds, and that Satan would have a- Main like, time it would be on planet Earth for like two hundred years, and we're coming to the end supposedly of that two hundred years, as I understand it and what I read. And so this is something that needles into individuals and takes them over, literally. And, and it doesn't have a gender. Satan doesn't have a gender. So I think a little bit of what we're dealing with right now in the fascism role and all this is that this energy, and it's coming on the heels of technology and it's- Coming down the heels of AI and everything, and it's like our opportunity at this time to raise our consciousness and to operate from a place of knowing who we actually really are. And what I learned from all the religions is that every single religion refers back to light And we know that when you're in the darkness, you're in ignorance or you're in kind of like a low vibration, and when you're in the light, you feel happy and it's a higher vibration. And so I'm, I'm just seeing this whole thing as an opportunity for each one of us to literally, I think feeling and heart is super important in the evolution of our, our morality, and it's, and it is studied extensively through heart math and what have you, that we have a toroidal Energetic field around our heart that goes out numerous feet, and we can literally, if we were to drop out of our minds, which our minds are very busy and very analytical and very judgmental on many levels, and it's just conditioning, it's not, I think, where we operate from, but if we were to drop into our hearts and start really operating and letting the universe work through us, through the heart chakra itself, I think we would see just such exponential change, and we'd see the lower frequencies literally going down and fading out. Like literally. But I think we're afraid because we like the temptation. I think we're, like, we're a little seduced by the temptation and, by the devil, if you will. I think we all are. And so I think it's just a process of making-↗

2:03:13Speaker 9I don't know, just an agreement within ourselves, and I think it, it is within each one of us individually. I, I think trying to change another person is like a waste of time. It, it's like, and I'm not, and if I, and I'm not trying to change anyone, I'm just telling you about my experience and my journey and what I've learned. but I just keep going like, I can't change the person in front of me, but I can be the best version of myself and in, and use my heart first and my mind as↗

2:03:43Speaker 9I just feel like things go better, they go well, and, and so I don't know, I, this is-- so when morality, I think morality has a lot to do with our consciousness and universa-universality and where your consciousness is, and if you wanna stay awake and alive and astute or do you wanna get lazy and let- Temptation take you over and, and then, and then I think Satan can actually get a hold of you, and then it's really hard to get out from underneath. Like, I mean, you can, but I think it's very hard. I don't think the devil grabs you, I think the devil tempts you. I'll leave it there.↗

2:04:21@joann_marieAlright, thank you so much, Krista. And guys, please repost this space and follow Ian and David and Michael and everybody in the panel, and also if you guys go to it, I will also repost it. And thank you so much for, for being here. Alright, Amiro, go for it. Welcome, my friend.↗

2:04:38Speaker 10Thanks, Joanne, and Ian. Like, you're, you're being targeted. You're getting death threats. You're crashing spaces, like, and you've been busy. I, I'm seeing you. So it's, it's maybe a good sign, but it's kind of annoying to be, you know, in the listener panel or the speaker panel and to experience that, like, I was there with you at YotSpace, and you guys were talking about some serious things, very relevant things about our favorite people, and,↗

2:05:03Speaker 10then that happened. So, but David, Cooking and, and I'm absolutely loving all of this, and this is a very interesting topic, a topic that I really care about, not only because of the PFC being relevant, but also, 'cause of course it's gonna be relevant, when I'm around, but also because it's so important to human beings more than anything else.↗

2:05:27Speaker 10With the PFC, the prefrontal cortex, the thing that makes us human, it gives us agency. Once we've gained agency, we've have the ability to choose our own actions and make choices, and it's almost like by gaining that ability, the moral dimension, a more complex moral dimension, opens up, and that's where we see ourselves here with, with religion and morality being what it is. And I even feel like we're experiencing maybe right now on a global, you know, global level, kind of like the climax of the religious wars, the, you know- This kind of like try, this, this unconscious attempt from humans to discover what is the ultimate religious system or belief system or moral system, and for me, who's agnostic, and I, I guess you were religious, David, and now you're not, I don't know if you're atheist or agnostic, but regardless You believe that morality exists because all, everything points to it. Nature is consistent, like you said, and our brains conform to reality, and all humans have conformed to reality, even the Jewish supremacists have, and Judaism in general has conformed in its own way. It recognizes morality, but it's twisted it and bended it for their own ethnicity, making it therefore a perversion of what it's supposed to be.↗

2:06:38Speaker 10but for someone that doesn't believe in God or, sorry, religion in general What, what, what are they supposed to think about, like objective morality? How do you quantify, how do you measure that? And I think we only got approximations and, you know, the, the sharpness of our mind and our reasoning, like that's what we have right now. There's not necessarily like a thermometer that you can use a machine that can give you like this perfect kind of breakdown scientific explanation for why, you know, let's say the golden rule is moral and↗

2:07:10Speaker 10The other moral, what we're relying on is kind of like our dis- disgust response as humans. When we see evil, we feel disgusted. when we see something antisocial, we react like it's aversive. There's a lot of intuition and kind of like, like I said, kind of like eyeballing it. Like a lot of us are eyeballing it, and the rest of us are, you know, kind of following doctrine. But of course, morality is gray, and even Jesus said like, he doesn't like the, the kind of the repetitive nature of certain,↗

2:07:40Speaker 10Amir, if, if you↗

2:07:41Ian Malcolmcould, could you go into-- and, and I'm, I'm familiar with it and, and had a really interesting conversation with, Rabbi Malia on it, but the disgust factor, for those that might not be familiar, it's a, a very interesting piece of human psychology that you could almost treat as a intrinsic moral compass that perhaps is built into us.↗

2:08:02Speaker 10Yeah, so, so the same, this is, something that, Jonathan Haidt writes about in, The Righteous Mind. Definitely, he explains it way better than I will. but it's, it's a pretty simple concept. The, the same thing that makes us get disgusted by, like, odors and, someone being dirty or stinky or, you know, feces and all these things that we all intuitively know are disgusting. We have this discussed response to them, and when we see what we perceive to be a morally reprehensible act, that same circuitry is, is activated. So it's almost like when you see someone stealing, it almost smells bad in a sense, like you have a similar response to that, and that seems to be, and you know, if something really makes you like, really irks you, like a rat covered in piss You know, eating all your food, and you're like, you kinda get a little murderous, and so it can kinda explain religious wars even. We're so serious about morality that we are willing to die for it because it's that important to us. but yeah, that's basically the, the moral disgust response. And when it comes to Jewish supremacy, I think what I call it is the moral disgust overload. We are experiencing way too much of it to the point that we are fed up. And everyone that awakens to it, once they see it, they also get fed up, and it can go too far. we can lose ourselves in our response. Like I said, you see a, you know, there's this thing, I think it's called a king rat, or I forget what it's called, the rat king, where it's like a bunch of rats tied to each other via their tails, which are kind of stuck together because of feces and urine. It's disgusting, and when you see it, I'm sure you will at least consider killing it. So what I'm saying is, when you come into contact with great evil or something that's very disgusting,↗

2:09:51Speaker 10you might lose yourself, you might lose your, your, your core principles in reaction to something so extreme, and, that might be what happened in Nazi Germany, and so we have to of course proceed with caution. But morality is definitely kind of like one of the main things that need to be thought about as we deal with the Jewish question in America, if I'm being real with you.↗

2:10:13Speaker 10so, but yeah, very interesting topic. I have more to say, I'll stick around if you guys will let me and, I'm loving the space. Everyone's, everyone's has their interesting takes, especially iconic. Well,↗

2:10:22Ian Malcolmwould love it if you do, Amir. It's always wonderful to hear from you. And that disgust factor, it's, it's very curious because, and, and this goes back to the demoralization that is via our media, and this is gonna be very uncomfortable, for some people to hear. But that disgust factor, Think of it as a, a motor in a car, right? You press the gas pedal, boom, the, the revs go up, right? You can observe something. It, it functions essentially the same way in the human brain. They've been able to study this, and the reason I say this might be uncomfortable is because when they were looking through that, it would fire off if you showed it feces, a dead animal, a person in a high conflict, environment, right? The, all kinds of, of, of war or fighting, that disgust factor would go off↗

2:11:12Ian MalcolmWhen individuals, even those that were of this persuasion, it would go off for individuals when you showed them homosexuality, when you showed them interracial couplings, right? Those pairings would fire off that disgust factor almost as if there's something built into the human brain that says, "This isn't, th-this isn't what should be," essentially. And, and we can debate the morality around that or all these other things, but scientifically speaking, that was an observable phenomena even within In individuals, for example, that were homosexuals. And the reason that I bring that up isn't to disparage those individuals, but rather, now think about that as the case, knowing what I just said and knowing that they're-- and again, you can go look at Hite and the study that he did on this or the work that he's done around it, right? You can go and you can read about that, then recognize that almost every piece of media that you observe, the advertising, whether it's in a shopping mall or on television, the movies that you see, right? All Littered with those two things that I just mentioned. So your brain is constantly being bombarded with things that at a very deep level, a subconscious level, that you can't necessarily process, nor can you reprogram. You are constantly being just inundated with things that at a subconscious level, again, that trigger the quote-unquote disgust factor, no different than if you were witnessing at every turn dying animals or feces or all these other things. It is part of the- Moralization exercise. I'm not trying to say that to disparage anybody, but for you to recognize that when you sit down and you look through Netflix or you see another advertisement in the media or on YouTube, and they have those types of things just jammed in there, just know that your brain is constantly-- you're getting kicked in the back of the head over and over and over again by this machine that continuously shoves these things in front of you, that's not only social engineering, what they now define as the new norm, but it's reinforcing That disgust factor that just endlessly breaks down your ability to stand in opposition to it. Again, I know it's an uncomfortable thing to look into. You're welcome to go and grok what I just said. It'll reaffirm the exact, commentary that I just provided. But with that being said, let's go to, Yeshua, and then we'll check in with Raed.↗

2:13:30Speaker 11Well, hope I say something that, gets to where it needs to go, but, you know You guys are, you're always talking about truth and looking for truth, and I always say God is truth. And, and the way I demonstrate it and to, to speak on what He was talking about, the proof of God.↗

2:13:54Speaker 11you know, everything, when, when we're in alignment, then with, with God and we act in alignment, then our bodies don't, pick up the energetic- Response, and you end up with a backache or a neckache or a headache or something like that. So everything can be, I, I teach energy, that's, I do energy work, I, you know, I wrote a grant to the National Institute of Health,↗

2:14:23Speaker 11and that's what I teach, and that energy is God, and that's, that's also provable because, and when we operate from that energetic world,↗

2:14:34Speaker 11Well, first you get the, the amazement of working with God, and then,↗

2:14:41Speaker 11you get to experience a world that, I don't know, you people seem to miss. It's, we're not living in a physical world, we're living in a spiritual world, and we are spiritual beings, and that is the truth, and our bodies and nature and everything aligns with it, and it only comes in, and we can only do the amazing things that is possible, is when we align with God.↗

2:15:04Speaker 11Thank you.↗

2:15:07Ian MalcolmNo, absolutely, and it's why I think a lot of these, concepts around morality, they intertwine between philosophy and religion because they obviously reinforce one another. but that being said, let's, let's go back over to Ried, and then we'll check in if Cultivating wants to, to join in here.↗

2:15:27@joann_marieRied, Ried, disconnecting. Wait, is he? Ried?↗

2:15:33Speaker 12Yes, sorry, I,↗

2:15:34@joann_marieI don't- Welcome back.↗

2:15:35Speaker 12Thanks, I got, yeah, thrown out of, out of the app, almost out of my phone. Only happens in our spaces. But, yeah, no, no, something that I, that I just touch on quickly, of the, of the Talmudic philosophy. I'm not bashing, I'm just describing of, of there is no truth, and truth is- What is said right now, by whoever is saying it. A, another thing that I had to contemplate on a while back from a Jewish thinker that he, he posited back then that even, stealing is bad is a social construct And, and I really had to really contemplate on it, that-- Is it, is it us hum-hum beings that you, you know, agreed all together that stealing is bad, or is it fundamentally inherently bad and, and it's not a social construct? And, and this is what I find, mostly amongst, you know, people who are Talmudic, like who believe in, in that thing, that the Talmud, if, if people belonging in that, that tribe Always,↗

2:16:49Speaker 12I don't know if they believe that or they, they sell it to us, but, but th-this is wh-where, where morality has gotten mishmashed completely, almost, disappeared because of these, understandings, because of this philosophy in life. I mean, imagine someone telling you with, with very seriously, and it's not he's telling it to the goal, he's, he's, he's posing out loud that Even stealing is bad, that's a social construct, you know, stealing i-is good because the guy who stole will, will, will live more and will live better, and it, and, and it's, there's no morality when it comes to that. And a-again, that Talmudic concept of there is no gender, there is no,↗

2:17:43Speaker 12man and woman. And I, I think it's fundamentally what I, what I- Was able to gather after all of it, looking at it from, from, from a distance, it's all an assault on God, God's creation, God's wisdom, God's design for us. The whole idea, for instance, of mishmashing all tribes and all cultures and all races into one is an assault on God. If God wanted to create us, create us all as like one tribe, one race, one- People, he, he would have done that. So, so, yeah, I don't know where I'm going with this, but this is-- it was crazy that the guy was so serious that it is a social contrast, con- construct that stealing is a bad thing that I had to personally contemplate on it for a few days. It's like, if I put sweat- Into something to create, something for myself. If someone takes it and doesn't produce the same sweat and, and, and, and into it, that's bad. Like, this is how, how, how hard it was for me to just make sure that, because I always go with, you know, anything, you know The, what do you call dismissal prior to investigation is just craziness. So I like to investigate everything that I, that I, that I eventually believe in. but, yeah. Anyway, I don't know. That's why I want you to go ahead. I want↗

2:19:14Speaker 13you to think of it this way, so truth and beauty and goodness are, are corollaries, right? They're natural corollaries. That's why, for instance, Christ said, "I am the truth, the light in the way, " right? So goodness, God, which is derivation, these are corollaries to truth. If you wanted to make war on these things, you would want to reduce people's capacity to know them. If the devil's ruse is that he doesn't exist, then by extension,↗

2:19:48Speaker 13his ruse is also going to be that the truth doesn't exist, that you can't know the truth, it's unknowable. So If we say that pedophilia versus, b- treating children right are the same thing, who wins there? The pedophile. If you say that genocide is a virtue, on the same par Is not committing genocide, who wins there, the genocidaires? If you say that stealing is no more inferior morally to w-honest work, who wins there, the thief? So the whole point of deracinating the meaning of these words, of demeaning them, of denuding the value of them, of casting them, as I like to say, into the abyss of no meaning, is of course to get away with a crime. It's completely disingenuous, of course, and we all know this. Whenever you see this game from Now on, whenever they're trying to really just sort of parse out the meaning of a word until it just sort of dissolves in their hands, the whole point of that is to get away with something. You can just see the motive right there. You can't separate motive from meaning. There isn't no instance, no statement, no proclamation that a person can make without me-- without motive behind it. That's the reason why we talk, that's the reason why we act, and the motive here, whenever you want to- To create an absolute cloud of no meaning is because you want to, beneath that cloud, get away with something, and I think we're all waking up to that very fact.↗

2:21:20Speaker 12May, may I ask a quick question, Ian? Sorry. Yeah,↗

2:21:23Ian Malcolmno, right. I was just gonna say, when the individual said that stealing was a social construct, he should just grab his car keys and said, "Hey, I don't, I don't abide by that one."↗

2:21:33Speaker 12Yeah, hundred percent. But I have, I have also a question that I, that I'm trying to figure out. we, we have a conscience, right? They, they, some, some tell you like, "My conscience is clear," my conscience isn't clear. Like we have, we have a, a, a, a, what do you call it? something in our brain that is called the conscience, right? Regardless of how I get raised, whatever I believe in, except if I'm a sociopath or a psychopath. And, and I believe that, that, that faculty in my brain that's called the conscience is like an antenna linked to, to somewhere, outside. Like I can brainwash myself into anything, but regardless if I do, l- I'll give an example and then just to elaborate my idea. And I always tell it to people, like, if I'm walking home And I see a homeless person outside, you know, the gate of my building,↗

2:22:27Speaker 12asking, like, cold and asking for a warm meal, and my, my idea would be just to kick them in the face and keep on walking. I go and I put my head on the pillow, and I sleep, right? The, the quality of my sleep. In contrast, I'm walking home and I see this guy, but I decide to go in, make a warm meal, and then give it to this person, and then- I, I sleep and, and what would be the quality of my sleep, and a-anyone with reason and logic and some wisdom of life experience will tell you, well, the second option, you would sleep better, and that'll be my, my conscience, and it, it's not linked to↗

2:23:08Speaker 12my intellect or my view of life or anything at all, it's just, it's just completely outside of my control, and this is why I, I think that conscious thing is, is, is linked to some- Somewhere that is, you know, godly, the, the creator or whatever. Do you have anything to say on that, David?↗

2:23:30Speaker 13If, if someone goes into, if they hear anything that inspires them from a moral standpoint, it could be this happens in a church or a mosque or even just somewhere out in the world by some individual saying something. Well, it's also part of the- The connection, if you just think of two links, for instance, that make two cars of a train work together, the connecting part is your own consciousness, right? That thing that you're hearing outside of you with your ears, the sound coming into you, the, the ideas that are being transferred to you, you wouldn't have, you wouldn't have this-- sometimes people have this road to Damascus experience or this feeling of incredible transformation or this deep feeling of peace, of, of being changed by some sort of wisdom thing that they're hearing, it wouldn't happen when we say it resonates with us, it, where is, does it resonate? i-i in our soul. See, that's the thing is, we're being convinced that we have no inherent morality within us, but we do You see, that average person, the person that doesn't have the pathology, the sociopathic pathology, does-- they are, we are inherently moral beings, and it is that, whenever I talk about the divine spark within us, if you listen to it, you'll find you'll generally make the right choice, and it is, again, the devil's ruse, and I would say, Jewish supremacists are doing this today, to convince us that that is nothing. You notice whenever you, you know, Ian makes reference to- Like Netflix and these things which are just horrible, well, you notice they're always trying to show you degradation, like the ugliest thing, like cheating, lying, people, and they're trying to make that alluring, right? Well, of course, if you went down that road, it wouldn't be the case. You would be taking yourself further down, down, down to emmiseration. You'd become a darker, more ugly, more self-loathing soul. We know this to be true. So really- It really is true that, that the goodness is inside of us and we just have-- when we feel bad about what we have done, when we see virtue, we recognize it as the tender shoots with which we wouldn't allow to grow within ourselves. So it's just very important for us to understand that in our nature as moral beings and to embrace that, grow it, and move in that direction to becoming better and better people.↗

2:26:04@joann_marieThat was beautiful, David. Should we start with, with, defining morality and, and the religion stuff or should we keep, we keep going to hands?↗

2:26:15Ian MalcolmWell, no, let's, let's go through a couple of hands, 'cause I, I, I feel like we, we got a really good, kind of summarization around the, the religion, the philosophical perspective, and then also kind of how we would apply that. But, why don't we get through a couple more hands? I know that we've got cultivating, we'd be curious if she wants to Game of Thrones, then we'll go to superlative. if anybody else wants to jump up and, and offer their take, certainly feel free. And then what we'll probably do is, is start to wind down that space as we conclude those, those three speakers.↗

2:26:44@joann_marieAlright. Constantine, welcome. Go for it.↗

2:26:50Speaker 9Yes.↗

2:26:55@joann_marieOkay, you're also rubber banding a little bit, so if you want to recycle, that would be really cool. Alright, Game of Thrones, welcome, go for it. Hola↗

2:27:04Speaker 14hermana, qué tal? what a wild day today. I mean, the ziles are popping out of their shells on other spaces right now, sp-just spurring the, the bullshit. The Goychop is over the top today. and it's amazing, and this is like the, they know they've been caught, it's like the mouse that's in the trap, and you're struggling to get away, not knowing that there are cats outside of that trap zone that are just waiting for the wrong move or, or the escape mechanism. Too many people have awakened to the genocide, and what's really telling is when Israelis, the Zio camp, all right? Are in other spaces, and they're called out on the genocide. My God, they deflect↗

2:28:04Speaker 14like, "No, no↗

2:28:17Speaker 14But, we've been fused at the hip we're, we're being told for decades. What in the flying fuck is going on? I'll be seventy-one in a month, in a few days. I've seen every conflict, first, I mean, both sides, friggin' Vietnam, before that, Korea, when I was a little kid. It's nonsensical. It's a war machine, and it's paid for with usury. With the, military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us to beware of,↗

2:28:50Speaker 14the last president that wasn't selected, that wasn't elected, got killed over this very diabolical bunch of people. It's ridiculous. We have to call out what this forty-eight year experiment of oppression is. Synagogue of Satan, pure and simple. These are vile people, alright, and there is no reasoning with them. We must educate people and be on the right track. God bless you all.↗

2:29:17Ian MalcolmCarry on. No, really well stated. And Game of Thrones, I'd be curious if you wanted to add in, some thoughts, and then I see Dr. Rechtmanol add, raise his hands. We'll go there. on this idea, Dr. E. Michael Jones yesterday, he described, the Third Republic, of the United States, which is basically the post-JFK assassination, everything that America became. I'm kind of curious because I, I, I believe that you're roughly around a similar demographic as, as Dr. Jones, who kind↗

2:29:48Ian MalcolmHis, his recall of the JFK assassination, living through that, and then seeing the world up to today, I'm, I'm kind of curious if you listened into that space, if you had any thoughts on that.↗

2:29:58Speaker 14I listened into a bit of it, I didn't catch all of it, Ian, but honestly we were shocked, but for all the wrong reasons, when we saw Kennedy go down. and, and I was in third grade, I, I remember it vividly, the, the teacher bringing out this like a hundred and fifty, two hundred pound black and white TV on rollers, I can still hear the squeaking, and then to hear, Cronkite, you know, Walter Cronkite on the CBS News. Telling us that, Kennedy had been assassinated, that it was over. But the biggest hubris of it all, Ian, and what told me that we really are not looking in the proper places, is the, is the way that,↗

2:30:43Speaker 14LBJ just, you know Matter of factly, just took the oath right next to the body of a slain president on Air Force One. It's like this son of a bitch couldn't wait to turn and unleash, and of course, he was totally bought and paid for by Israel, and amazing, I mean, he was the guy that directed,↗

2:31:09Speaker 14the basic firing on the Liberty And, you know, no, we're not supposed to do this, we're not supposed to protect our own ships? Well, wait a minute, I mean, something smells real fishy in Denmark. It's ridiculous what's going on. It's refreshing, though, that the world is waking up and calling out this, oppressive state. That has gone in in the name of whatever, these people aren't even godly, alright? They're pornographic, they are slothful, they're dirty, they don't value family, all of the morals are flipped on their head, Ian, it's all upside down. So whatever generation is to come after this, I pray God that they, you know, put their sights Ungodliness, and not this evil. God bless you all.↗

2:32:05Ian MalcolmOf course, and, and, real quick before we go to, Dr. Recktenwald, I'm curious, David, if you had any, any thoughts on that.↗

2:32:14Speaker 13no, I don't, but I love what he had to say. I love it.↗

2:32:17Ian MalcolmAbsolutely, no, Game of Thrones is always so wonderful, and, and absolutely, honored to have you here, my friend. let's go to, Dr. Recktenwald.↗

2:32:25Speaker 15Yeah, hey, so, you know, I thought that, there was some discussion. I think maybe it was game, game of, Game of Thrones or not. I don't know. Yeah, I fol-↗

2:32:35Speaker 14I followed you by the way, Michael. Oh, thank you. Thank you.↗

2:32:38Speaker 15And I,↗

2:32:39Speaker 14I, yeah, I'm, I'm the old guy in the room here, but no, it's refreshing to hear you, sir. Go ahead.↗

2:32:44Speaker 15Oh, sorry. Thank you so much. Yeah, I mean, I think what happened is, you know, with this Trump administration, so this, the whole MAGA, movement, I think, turns out to have been basically a Trojan horse You know, w-we've seen the meme, you know, w-inside this Trojan horse, of course, is effectively Israel, and, Zionism, and that's really what's happened. So really the mask came off with this administration. They've been infiltrating and subverting the government for some time. The occupation has gone on for decades, but just now they've taken off the mask. And it's become like blatant in our faces. So I think the confidence that they have, or the hubris that they, display is amazing because they're sticking it in our face now, basically just saying, "You can't do anything about our power. We have it, and we will wield it over you." And I think that's what we've seen with this Trump administration, this, this MAGA Trojan horse carrying inside of it a Zionist, core.↗

2:33:53Speaker 15and, that's been basically what happened. And, the, the, you know, it's gonna be difficult to overthrow it. And, you know, I mean, we, we saw some victories for anti-Zionists in New York, but it turns out they're also Democratic socialists. So, I mean, that's not gonna get us where we need to go. so that's why I, I founded Asapac to, to get people behind what I think are candidates that are America first, one hundred percent America only, really when it comes down to it. And, and, they will, you know, they, they aren't afraid to be endorsed by an anti-scientist organization, like some, some candidates, have been.↗

2:34:40Ian MalcolmNo, and, and, I mean, Dr. Recktenwald, that, that is why we are always going to continue to support the work that you're doing, the program. I recommend everybody, if they have not, to certainly not only follow Dr. Recktenwald, but the Azapac page directly. consider what you can do in terms of supporting, whether that's liking, resharing, reposting, perhaps taking some of those ideas, offline, sharing them with their friends, bringing attention and awareness to what he is doing. It, it is a↗

2:35:10Ian MalcolmYou, if not the only, political movement right now that has a serious opportunity to put a dent in the side of, of this machine, right? And we, we see lots of people coming into these spaces and saying, "Well, what don't we do next?" well, I think, Asapac is precisely that, right? Is, it is the mechanization of a, an opposition to this machine, right? It, it, it is bringing this all to a head, and, and so as a result, gonna continue supporting that every way we can.↗

2:35:45Speaker 16hello, can you hear me?↗

2:35:46Ian MalcolmWe can.↗

2:35:48Speaker 16excellent. I, I'm going to go back to the point about, morality, and I will try, and I will try to condense it as much as possible. if, well, I, I, I'll start so that, so that you don't delay the, the space further. well, I will start like from an ontological layer, like, I think that the reality is, can be understood as like a mathematical or informational before it is merely material. Absolute nothingness cannot exist since that would me-mean to make it something, because, and that's not a physical vacuum, because it isn't nothing, it represents laws, its structure, fields, and whatnot.↗

2:36:28Speaker 16And I think therefore that, creation out of nothingness is more like, the materiality being grounded on formal, formal or informational possibility rather than prior or assumed, material existence. And I think that, that the mathematical universe hypothesis, It makes sense in this context, and from this perspective, I think that life is a, in, within our anthropic universe, is a fragile local order against dissipation, and persons are self-maintaining centers of experience, reason, autonomy, and, out for, self-authorship. And I think that the integrated information theory of consciousness helps explain how consciousness may arise from or correspond to unified informational structure which fits with panpsychism, pan-panpsychism or neutral monism.↗

2:37:18Speaker 16and I think that the theological frame is panentheistic, all realities exist within or through a greater absolute that exceeds them, but finite persons aren't illusions or mere parts of a collective whole, but rather like each person re-me-remains a real, specific, morally relevant center of self-determination. And I think the ethical core follows naturally from this,↗

2:37:40Speaker 16so it can be justified in the penalty of the larger metaphysical picture, picture. I think that One should prefer actions, norms, and voluntary arrangements that increase the self-determination of at least one individual person without decreasing the self-determination of any other similarly situated person to the extent that it's possible. the unit of moral concern isn't society, aggregate welfare, or cosmic whole, but rather like each individual person as a being with a substrate for self-awareness, reason, and from there, autonomy and reflective agency.↗

2:38:12Speaker 16I think there are two converging paths to this principle. The first is a negative or nihilistic or minimalist route, ra-route. start with a little prescriptive-- to start as with, as little prescriptive baggage as possible. Once morality is even discussed, one is already dealing with beings for whom reasons, choices, counterfactuals, and I re-- and I think that counterfactuals are pretty important because without the possibility of engaging with con-- in counterfactual thinking,↗

2:38:39Speaker 16should- Or other kind of sentences are impossible, and, well, and direct action, only then this can make sense, and from there, universalism and the rejection of special pleading requires that similarly situated, situated beings are treated with comparable, comparable regard. If I claim my own self-direction matters because I'm the kind of being capable of, of recent self-authorship, I can't arbitrarily deny the same standing to other beings re-re-relevantly like me. So even from near moral nothingness, consistency forces are restricted with universalism centered on persons, and I think that this similarly situated, situated, clause, also applies for, like, for example, I don't think that it will necessarily apply to psychopaths, for, for example, even if they are self-aware, because they are probably coming from be-very different extents. Obviously, I don't think this is absolute, there might be, degrees when it comes to these, disorders.↗

2:39:38Speaker 16And I think that the second is a positive or naturalist, path. W- beings like humans have a nature, and part of that nature is rational self-directed agency, and self-determination is therefore not merely a procedural minimum, but part of a, of a flourishing proper to beings of our kind. This same nature also helps define who counts as similarly situated, as I just mentioned, beings with a substrate for self-awareness, reason, autonomy. that kind of thing, because the negative path yields self-determination as a least arbitrary moral minimum, while the positive path yields, yields it as part of a good proper of rational persons.↗

2:40:19Speaker 16well, and I think that over, on top of this, one can build, richer moral systems that include virtues, traditions, loyalties, and what, and spiritual visions of what this is. And, and I just wanted to say this because, sometimes when notions of, of cosmic consciousness or collective consciousness come into discussion, I think that people think that we are merely,↗

2:40:43Speaker 16one brick of this greater whole of this cosmic tapestry, and that has, hides the danger of, trampling the individual, which I think, the, the local maximum of, of casual power, so to speak. That, which is what is creating your mind or syn- or synchronizing your mind right now, right? So I think that that's a hidden danger from, in those, conceptions of, of morality. That's all. Thanks.↗

2:41:11Speaker 17question. Did Israel commit a genocide? Sir?↗

2:41:20Speaker 17Hello. Did Israel commit a genocide? Just a question for you, sir.↗

2:41:28Speaker 16if Israel, Israel committed genocide, I'm not, that informed about that. I would say that at the very least it's some sort of ethnic displacement or ethnic cleansing, but, I, I wouldn't affirm it with the, with the knowledge I have at this point, so I wouldn't want to, to say something. How about↗

2:41:47Speaker 10this? What's a synonym for ethnic cleansing?↗

2:41:51Speaker 16Well, I won't, I won't say that I don't think it's the same necessarily the same thing because, for example, if you have like, a genetic engineering program that wants to destroy like a race just by genetic engineering, you couldn't have the explicit genocide, but rather more like, The genetic, direction of, of a particular, particular group of people. So that, that will be, that will be a difference, I think. So↗

2:42:18Speaker 13you're, so you're saying that if one country bombs all of the schools and hospitals in another country, you don't consider that to be genocide?↗

2:42:28Speaker 16is that what I said, or are you making another sentence entirely? That's the question.↗

2:42:32Speaker 13Are you, so, are you saying- No, you↗

2:42:34Speaker 16ask, you ask, you ask if that was what I was saying, but that was not what I said. If one↗

2:42:38Speaker 13country- Okay, well, let me ask you this question. If, given that Israel has bombed all the schools and hospitals in Gaza, do you consider by so doing, that constitutes a genocide?↗

2:42:52Speaker 16I think that if the intent is to exterminate a particular group of people, then that would be genocide. If that's not the intent, then it wouldn't be genocide. It would depend specifically on the aims.↗

2:43:02Speaker 13By definition, right? By definition, genocide doesn't require you to wipe out all the people, right? If you attack- The general civil-- the general population, by the way, they admit to this, including the death of over twenty thousand children, and that is inevitably a low number because it's hard to count them since so many are buried under the rubble, because if this isn't a genocide to you- Then tell me what is, if that's not a genocide which we've seen in 1080p, what is a genocide to you?↗

2:43:34Speaker 16I, I just provided like the criteria, the criteria is that the aim of the actions taken to be- Okay, so let me, I posted in the↗

2:43:41@joann_mariejumbotron four hundred and twenty-two genocidal statements made by Israeli political, military and media elites, and this is from twenty twenty-four, so, by now it must be way, way higher. So the intent is there, they literally talk- About it every single day. Just look at Ben Givier's page, and you can see it. So I, I don't know why you think that there is no intent because there is. I found it↗

2:44:05Speaker 12fascinating that he gave us a, a, a fifteen minutes, a fifteen minutes, a fifteen minutes spiel about morality, and he still hasn't noticed a genocide going on in our lifetime.↗

2:44:22Ian MalcolmMy, my You defined that if I have the, the power and the authority to drop a nuclear bomb on a nation because I'm curious about what sound it will make, and I record it because I think it'll be really curious and interesting to, to hear whatever happens when the bomb goes off, and it, I don't know, it just happens to mass murder a million people. Is that a genocide or is it not a genocide 'cause it wasn't my intent, and rather I was just curious about the sound effect?↗

2:44:57Speaker 16Well, then I think that we can figure out the intent based on the actions too, like, for example, in criminal, in criminal, in there's this, notion in law, like, this is really not okay. Let me,↗

2:45:08Ian Malcolmlet me restate it again. If I decide to nuke the entire world with the exception of my people and my nation because I'm curious about the sound effect that it will make, does that make that genocide?↗

2:45:24Speaker 16I think that it would be re- reasonable to say that it is genocide because then you can use the action to deduce the intent, regardless of the people's being- Okay, so↗

2:45:32Ian Malcolmnow, so now we're gonna look back. So what would be the intent of mass murdering all of the people in Gaza and blowing up the hospitals and the schools if not to conduct a genocide?↗

2:45:48Speaker 16I mean, again, I'm not close to the possibility that it is a genocide. What I'm saying is that based on information that I have- Oh my God, I'm looking at you. No, it's not so. Are you two- But can I finish my statement? This isn't↗

2:45:59@joann_mariescientific.↗

2:46:00Speaker 16No, I'm not doing this. You're not, you're not doing this. But I'm not,↗

2:46:02Ian Malcolmokay, but you are. You're squirming around rather than just declaring something that the UN and various other authorities that have done immense amounts of research have concluded. I'm↗

2:46:13Speaker 16not- But I don't care about those authorities. What I care about is what I can honestly affirm based on what I know. Do you↗

2:46:19Ian Malcolmthink that you know better than those authorities that have done that research? Is that what it is?↗

2:46:23Speaker 16No, I, I am explicitly saying that since I don't know because I haven't personally, read all of that. Do you think that you have been to the moon? I cannot make that superlative.↗

2:46:34Ian MalcolmHave you been to the moon?↗

2:46:40Speaker 17No.↗

2:46:40Ian MalcolmOkay. Can you tell me roughly what the moon looks like?↗

2:46:47Speaker 16And, yeah, but that's irrelevant for what I'm saying. Okay. So you have to go↗

2:46:50Ian Malcolmto Gaza and witness the bones and the graves of the children in order to define something from afar that you can view as a genocide?↗

2:47:02Speaker 16no, but I never said I have to be right there in order to know more about it. But you are saying I haven't↗

2:47:07Ian Malcolmbeen there. I'm so confused why↗

2:47:10Speaker 16the line is getting thinner and thinner. I, I, I know, I know, I, I didn't, I didn't say I haven't been there. I↗

2:47:18Ian Malcolmsaid I haven't read in depth. That's what↗

2:47:22Speaker 16I said. I didn't say I haven't been there. It's not going very all over again. This is, it's wild. You just don't know what you're talking about. It isn Ignorant on that subject, and therefore I don't want to make declarations based on my limited knowledge. That's exactly what I said. And to, and to try to frame that, it's something else to be honest. Why are you interrupting my sentence?↗

2:47:41Ian MalcolmSo you're going to deny the experts that-- And look, I'm not one to do a appeal to authority, 'cause I think often it's a very low benchmark. But if various global organizations, including the UN, come to the conclusion that children, women, and civilians were directly targeted Targeted and intentionally murdered en masse by the Israelis and the IDF, I don't understand what else you would need to arrive at that obvious conclusion.↗

2:48:13Speaker 16I, I would need to, again, read in depth because I want to make another example of something that is called again, so, but can I finish a sentence? Because it's kind of, it's kind of weird that I can't finish a single sentence. But, but I've been, I've been- Well, what I'm saying is that I will compare it to something else that is called again,↗

2:48:30@joann_marieso↗

2:48:32Speaker 16can I finish my point? I'm-↗

2:48:38@joann_marieIt, it's just really weird that you're like teaching us about morality and you're- I don't↗

2:48:43Speaker 16want to judge, I don't know, I don't know if you're an expert or not. I need to get a PhD in genocide↗

2:48:50Speaker 13before I can answer this question. Hey, hey, right, good job. No, no, no, no,↗

2:48:54Ian Malcolmno. What they need, what, what they↗

2:48:55Speaker 16need, I'm↗

2:48:55Ian Malcolmsuspicious. Superlative. Was Jeffrey Dahmer a mass murderer?↗

2:49:02Speaker 16Wasn't he a serial murderer? I think those are two different things. Okay, so you're now↗

2:49:04Ian Malcolmdefining him as a serial murderer. Have you read extensively about all of the murders that Jeffrey Dahmer committed?↗

2:49:13Speaker 16not really. I haven't seen a couple of documentaries. But you just↗

2:49:15Ian Malcolmdefined him as a serial murderer, right?↗

2:49:19Speaker 16But surely, but surely you've got a↗

2:49:21Speaker 13PhD in criminology, right?↗

2:49:23Speaker 16Well, but I'm not saying that we have to have PhDs or anything. My point is that I am particularly ignorant.↗

2:49:29Ian MalcolmBut your logic defeats your reason. Do you not recognize that?↗

2:49:34Speaker 16No, but it isn't my logic because I never said that you have to have PhD. I said that I am, I don't have enough information in order to make that statement. But you↗

2:49:42Ian Malcolmjust made the statement on Jeffrey Dahmer, having not read anything about him.↗

2:49:47Speaker 16Well, but it, it really depends because you have to see how, like, one situation can be more directly or you can build on the other. But you arrived↗

2:49:56Ian Malcolmat the conclusion having not read anything about one while being unwilling to recognize the conclusion about the other on the basis that you haven't read everything that there is to read about it.↗

2:50:08Speaker 16Well, what I can say is that, based on my limited information, I can say that apparently it was a serial murderer, but I haven't, like, examined each one of the cases.↗

2:50:16Ian MalcolmYou just called him a serial murderer. You, you made that declaration, right? But you're unwilling to recognize that Israel conducted a genocide because you wanna squabble around the intent of the bombing of hospitals and, schools.↗

2:50:29Speaker 16Yeah, maybe. If it makes you happy, if it, if it makes you happy, so, if it makes you happy, I can say, okay, Israel is a genocide, but I want to explain why I am suspicious of those different organizations. That sounds right. If it makes↗

2:50:37Speaker 13him happy, I see. Yeah. I'm learning more about your moral↗

2:50:41Speaker 16philosophy. No, no, no, no, no. I'm↗

2:50:45Speaker 16trying to explain why I am suspicious of those different organizations. Hey, it makes you happy. Two plus two is five, Ian. Well, okay, I want to tell This is where↗

2:50:56Ian MalcolmI just say, "No." Yeah. We just waltzed around as you were unwilling to recognize and to affirm that which is obvious to everybody, so much so that even organizations like Reuters that refuse to be critical of Jewish supremacy, that even they are willing to print the headlines about the UN's findings because it's so flagrant. The whole world is so tired of seeing the media run cover for this group of people. No, I'm, I'm not, I'm not interested in a dis- Original parameters that you would like to use to define how we can and can't label something or how we should think about them, because you just ran around in very, very redundant circles refusing to note the obvious. So why would I care at all for the definition that you're going to apply to something to be ridiculous?↗

2:51:43Speaker 13Yes, and you know, just to piggyback on that I just wanna let you know from the bottom of my heart, as someone who's really, really deep into moral philosophy, you, my friend, are in no position to lecture anybody about anything. When you can't call out genocide that we've seen in 1080p, then everything else you say about morality is completely and utterly devoid of value. So, thank you for playing, there is no door prize, you can be on your way, but remember that on behalf of those Children buried beneath the rubble, the rest of us are going to summon up the infinitesimally small monad of courage to simply say that a genocide is a genocide. That is the agency that you talked about, the ability to say, "This is wrong, this is genocide, this is evil. You can't do it, we can. Be on your way. Hopefully, you can find that divine light within you sometime in the future and summon it up. But until then, no interest in what you have to do." Say, let's move on.↗

2:52:48Speaker 16Or like, sorry, but that, but that's a, a silly criteria, like they, that's, that's what you said. I don't care, dude. I don't care. You're just using silly criteria. And also, so I don't know where, where you are with your position. But this is, but this is completely rational. This is, let me. This is completely↗

2:53:03Speaker 13rational. Let me help you. Do you think that you can defend your position↗

2:53:06@joann_marierationally?↗

2:53:07Speaker 13Yeah, there you go. Sorry, let's move on. Not great, right? Someone,↗

2:53:12Speaker 12by the way, sorry, David, super or whatever you are, someone is recruiting, they'll pay seven thousand per, per post. Go, go get a job. You're, you're, you're really talented, you're really talented. I hope you're paid there. There's↗

2:53:23Speaker 13money out there for you.↗

2:53:27Speaker 15I mean, he had time to write a whole book, you know, on human action and autonomy and morals and ontology and so forth, but not pay attention to the most significant event of our lifetimes. Unbelievable.↗

2:53:41Speaker 13Right. The big things, genocide. I got nothing. Oh, okay. Alright. The one we saw on TV. Yeah, that one right there. Shooting children in the head, specifically targeting them. And by the way, killing more journalists. There's people there to observe than all the other countries on the planet Earth combined during that period. So, yeah, yeah, that's, you know, Aristotle, you know, Socrates, Confucius, any moral philosopher in history, step aside, this is, this is your guy right here.↗

2:54:17@joann_marieAmigo, welcome back, co-fores.↗

2:54:22Speaker 10Well, like I said, more like super laxative. Scott is a, a joke.↗

2:54:28Speaker 13It's, it's like us suddenly, suddenly dis-discovering that a dietitian was lecturing us from McDonald's, you know?↗

2:54:35Speaker 10Exactly. He's like, "Yeah, you need two Big Macs per meal or something." Bro, get out of here.↗

2:54:39Speaker 13Everybody be healthy. Oh, excuse me, pause again. Yeah, I'd like two Big Macs with a fry and apple pie. It's↗

2:54:48Speaker 10just, yeah, something else. not to change the subject, but, You know, your name is David Nietzsche, and I've always wondered what you think about Nietzsche's idea of the Uberman or the Overman or the Superman, because autonomy plays a big role in there and also morality. Yeah.↗

2:55:07Speaker 13It does, it does. Well, you know, what Nietzsche's idea was that you should evaluate all values. Now, I am not a Nietzschean in that way, of course. I love all philosophers. In fact, I view Nietzsche as more of a philosophical commentator. What I loved about him as an original thinker is his commenting on other philosophies. My, the favorite thing about him was, and he, he sort of, you know, foreshadowed what we're going through today Is the idea of how morals would be used against us. So the thing I like about him is the fact that any sort of like dogma that you don't think about yourself, any sort of like, if it's being foisted upon you, is it being, you know, the idea of it being foisted upon you to take advantage of you, to weaken you, was something that he was obviously aware of and concerned about. But, but, but as far as like his general philosophy, it doesn't The, one of the best things about him is he thought about why civilizations fall into decay, like what happens to them. Why is it, for instance, why was the height of Rome, why did that civilization fall into de-decay? What is it that happens within those civilizations that makes that occur? So I love that about him, but as far as his epistemology, no, I don't, I'm not really, he didn't really have one, you know, since he was Schopenhauerian, he really didn't have an epistemology.↗

2:56:35Speaker 10What's cool about Nietzsche is you don't have to agree with him for him to affect your mind, and, that's what makes him, like you say, he's an original thinker and, his critique is sharp and, o-obviously he's one of the smartest people we have, in history but he's not obviously right about everything, but he's on point on a lot, and, but the whole Uberman idea,↗

2:56:58Speaker 10I think there's something there, but it's not exactly-- We don't, I don't know if we know what the right word for it is, like maybe the best example of it would be Christ as like the archetype of the perfect man, if every Greek god is representing, you know, a trait like love or war or, you know, whatever, it's like, you know, the god of, I don't know actually, I don't know what it would be, actually. I just think Jesus is the closest, maybe God of morality, maybe, I'm not sure. I don't know if you know what I'm trying to say, like the archetype of, you know, perfect morality, 'cause we have all the other categories as Greek gods, but not necessarily morality, as far as I know.↗

2:57:39Speaker 13Well, you know, it's funny because when he thought about, in his birth of tragedy, when he thought about, the Greek gods He, he was wondering why do they seem so pitiless, you know, why do they seem-- they almost are mocking you for not enjoying life. He, well, he, he surmised that civilization was so inherently difficult that they needed to interpose between themselves and reality a reason to go on, right? That you, that you had to keep going, that you had to, you know, in, in living in exiguous poverty. And then of course, in, in a more decadent civilization, you know, there was a sort of an evolution. Of thought. But it's just really interesting how the interplay in his mind of history and circumstance and morality. So he's just really good at-- It doesn't, it doesn't matter what conclusions he drew, it's the questions that he asks that are amusing.↗

2:58:32Speaker 10Absolutely, yes. And, one last thing about Jesus or the archetype of the perfect man, Superman, Uberman, you know, the best human we can imagine and copying them essentially. it might be a necessary step for Americans to take in, in this battle that we're in, I think. And, and for exa-- meaning like, I think Jordan Peterson, the way he describes it is something like, using the least amount of force necessary,↗

2:59:04Speaker 10and trying to keep your sword sheathed and, you know, performing good and fighting evil with the least force necessary or something like that, That might be something that we need to like become experts at, I believe. And that's-- this is something that I actually get angry about, and I'm agnostic, so I do kind of believe in God in my own adi-sec-secular way, and I get angry at God when I think about the game that the highest, you know, people of the highest morals have to play, which is- You know, let's say Jews are the archetype of evil right now, and, everyone that's trying to emulate a perfect man, that doesn't have to be Jesus, but someone that is very good worth emulating,↗

2:59:49Speaker 10we don't get to break the rules, we don't get to, use their shortcuts and their tricks. which, you know, there's a lot of instant gratification with that. We have to play the long game, we have to be patient, we have to not corrupt our own soul. They have not-- they don't care about corrupting their own soul, but it is, of course, corrupt.↗

3:00:10Speaker 10so we have to keep our soul clean, and obviously evil actions will taint it. They're, they're, they don't get to have a soul, but that still gives them an advantage in a sense. They're not tiptoeing against immoral acts like we are. Therefore, there's so many shortcuts and tricks, and there's no way Israel could have so much control in America, without playing dirty. And I mean, is there anything dirtier than what happened with Epstein? I can't. I try to think about it. And I think it's sometimes like, it's easy to think of like the most evil person, but I feel like God always wins in the end, and He'll create a, a real life event that beats any fiction. so I don't know what you guys think about all that. Well,↗

3:00:51Speaker 13yeah, it's the opposite of universalism, right? So the moral relativism, the opposite of moral relativism is moral universalism, which is really another way of saying, in intuition, we all have this moral intuition about- What's good for us, you know, the golden rule really applies here, is good, should-- what's good for someone else should be good for us and vice versa. And of course, these people aren't playing by these rules, so we know it's disingenuous, right? So notice, for instance, that with the Epstein thing and the Charlie Kirk thing and the nine eleven thing, notice that their ultimate efforts in all this, even the US's "liberty" thing, is to make us not talk about it, right? You know that you're dealing with lying liars with their lying↗

3:01:36Speaker 13No, no, no, no, no, you're not wrong. You shouldn't be allowed to talk about it. We should, let's move on, let's talk about something else. Hey, look at the, look at the birdie over there. Well, of course, you know, doesn't matter how clever they are, you kinda know you're being lied to when they treat you this way.↗

3:01:54Speaker 10Yeah, and, and despite this frustration I have with reality that we have to tiptoe like this while our enemies, you know, get to cheat and, and rise to power faster We have the truth on our side, and that's why truth-tellers and are very articulate people, like a lot of the people on this panel, are the biggest threats to this.↗

3:02:16Speaker 10it is our weapon, right? It destroys without, without, you know, shedding blood. And, especially if you're, you know, silver-tongued like, David Nietzsche, but I'll stop simping for you. This↗

3:02:29@joann_marieis in such an amazing space My brain is exploding. Okay. Ciaran, welcome brother, go for it.↗

3:02:41Speaker 18Hey, everyone. Hey, David. Hi, Michael. Game of Thrones, all of you guys. Thanks, Ramiro.↗

3:02:51Speaker 18I wanna share a, a, little bit of news with you guys, through a report earlier today, about Israelis going to Thailand now. And, trying to purchase property, although the, the Thai laws,↗

3:03:14Speaker 18doesn't allow foreigners to purchase property, so they're, they're circumventing these laws by, setting up companies with the, a native as a partner, a fifty-one percent partner. and that company basically purchases the land. So they're, they're doing communities, gated communities with, about whatever they call it, that synagogue, you know,↗

3:03:45Speaker 18you know, at the center. so I guess that's plan B for them.↗

3:03:51Speaker 13and of course they would pick like the sex trafficking capital, you know, of Asia, wouldn't they?↗

3:03:59Speaker 18please, we beg them to do that. sorry, Tyler.↗

3:04:05Speaker 13Yeah, if they're listening, yes, Thailand's a great option for you. I think the Thai people really, are looking forward to the wonderful things that you're going to bring, bring to their country.↗

3:04:17Speaker 18There's, there's tons of, those, what do you call them, those boys that, The Lady Boys, yeah. Lady Boys, yes, yes, yes, yes, tons of them. David, no, we prefer Israel.↗

3:04:33Speaker 12Oh, here he is, we missed you. Hi,↗

3:04:38Speaker 18hi. No, no, no, Thailand is perfect for you. We'll meet again, Guillaume. It, it's Thailand, Thailand is perfect for you. Or I'll tell you what, New Kazaria, New Kazaria, yeah, yeah. But, David, earlier you, you, you touched on something, the soul you mentioned the soul. in, in Islam, we have the, the human being is,↗

3:05:08Speaker 18is, what do you call it?↗

3:05:13Speaker 18is, consists of three parts: the body, the spirit. and the soul. And the soul, there are like three types of souls. we call them the, the, the,↗

3:05:32Speaker 18the, tranquil soul. the second one is the reproaching soul, and the third one is the demanding, commanding soul. So religion basically,↗

3:05:49Speaker 18the purpose of religion is to align the, the soul with the spirit, and that's, that's when people or an individual be, you know, becomes, peaceful inside. so this is, this is how Islam looks at it. Thank you.↗

3:06:10Speaker 13Wow, I, I think that's really beautiful. I like that. And you know I've said, and people have heard me say this in the past, that if you will cultivate these things within yourself, find the calm and the beauty and the kindness within yourself, then it'll give you a magical power to see them outside of yourself. Well, couldn't think of a better example than in the Quran, and I can't remember it at the moment, but the tables 82, where it's saying, "Well, how Christians are like these humble people, and they're believer, they're sincere people." And, they're not arrogant, so it's just interesting that like versus, you know, game sees game, beauty and kindness seems beauty and kindness, and so I, I definitely think that the capacity for that to resonate, the power of getting in touch with your own soul is, is this universal,↗

3:07:02Speaker 13benefit in terms of the capacity to, to interact in a peaceful way with other people that are like-minded.↗

3:07:10Speaker 12Yeah, and just a quick thought before, Tamer goes just for Anoitheen. Israel is the Titanic, Gaza is the iceberg, and we know what happens later. Anoitheen is like the band on the Titanic. It's gonna keep on playing the music until it's almost too late.↗

3:07:34Speaker 13Thank you. Wait, what's the water? We're never gonna stop playing the music, you know what I mean? What's, what's the water? I'm trying to think of what the water is. I don't know, the gully. The icy cold water.↗

3:07:50Speaker 12It's reality, I guess. It's reality, it's the truth, the one truth from God. That's it. The truth,↗

3:07:56Speaker 13yes, yes, the icy cold water is the truth, and when it hits you, it's gonna be an unpleasant awakening.↗

3:08:06Speaker 19I live for that song.↗

3:08:11Speaker 19You just said the Celine Dion song?↗

3:08:16Speaker 19I live and die for that song. Again for the Celine Dion song or a different one? Yeah, that one. Well, alright then, on to the next speaker.↗

3:08:29@joann_marieSameer, welcome, go for it.↗

3:08:33Speaker 20Hi guys, how's everyone doing? Good, how are you? Fine, thanks. Thank you for the space. I've been working on some things, and it has to do with philosophy, and I wanna share it with you, and then ask David a couple of questions. and then I'm going to share things that I understand much better, and, open it for the floor to critique.↗

3:09:03Speaker 20the first thing is, and I probably need David's help here,↗

3:09:11Speaker 20I looked at all the major branches of philosophy. I've been doing this for some time, and I am really confused in terms of its division from between five to seven major branches. Number one, number two.↗

3:09:30Speaker 13I don't know if we're gonna be able to cover all this, my friend.↗

3:09:33Speaker 20I know, I know, I know. I'm just gonna give you the bottom line. Just please listen. and then they have fifty-two sub-branches. So what I did is I developed a program. Are we gonna↗

3:09:45Speaker 13go to the twigs afterwards and then the leaves?↗

3:09:49Speaker 20No, no, no, no, just listen, please. If you want to see what I'm doing, you'll actually, I think you'll really like it. So I decided to go with seven and fifty-two different sub-branches, and then I ran through it the, what is it, Section two one nine, and, you won't believe the results. The results say In all of them, it, which was really strange, because I never got such a confirmation, not to do it at all.↗

3:10:27Speaker 20And if you want to do it, there should be an approach to do it.↗

3:10:32Speaker 13What is the antecedent to, to it?↗

3:10:36Speaker 20we're talking about section two one nine. You said to do it.↗

3:10:40Speaker 13What is it that you, that you say not to do?↗

3:10:44Speaker 20Not, not to let it go through Congress and the House of Representatives.↗

3:10:48Speaker 13Oh, the, the Israel-- Oh, I'm sorry. Everyone else in the room, Nike, David, is where he was going. He's talking about the, he's talking about the provision in the- You have imagination of grandeur. Yeah. Okay, go ahead.↗

3:11:02Speaker 20Yeah. So basically, the results, I, I'm really summarizing it a lot because the different runs, which are fifty-two runs, give you a different- Angle. Then I said, "Look, I don't understand philosophy very well, you know. I like to think of myself as a stand-up philosopher. When I was studying in England, I used to go to the Hart Park, and I used to take with me a little, portable pedestal, and I put it over there, and I start something. Most of the time, I didn't know what I was talking about, and it would-- it was just really fun on Sundays. Anyway." Then I said, "Okay, something I understand. So let me run this test using Anscombe's matrix, BCG matrix,↗

3:11:52Speaker 20butterfly effect, consequences of first and second order effect, law of requisite variety, Parkinson's law, the Peter principle, Porter's competitive advantage." SWAT analysis and the US Constitution, and all of those ten also confirmed not to proceed with it as it is represented. Now, I'm willing to share those with people,↗

3:12:24Speaker 20so you can read it. So I'll probably do something, in order to share it, especially the ones I mentioned last Ansoff's matrix, BCG matrix, by the way, those are very few of the tools that we use in management and leadership, and those aren't the best tools for a turbulent environment, but David, if you have some time, if we can sit down and discuss the philosophical side, because we'll bore everyone to death. If we, if we do it, so please let me give you a,↗

3:13:03Speaker 13let me give you a great approach, I think, to philosophy, right? Before you think of-- because philosophy gets very messy when you start talking about the nomenclature and, and the various branches and these sorts of things. So go back And think in very, very fundamental, basic questions. Assume nothing. Ask yourself, you know, how do I know that I'm alive? What is, what is, what is this I? And go for a walk and think about these things, right? Don't think about anybody else's terminology or anything. What is love? Ask yourself that. What is beauty? And before you study it, research it Think, think, think, think. Epiphanies are overrated. Just spend time thinking. And so, I, I teach my nieces and nephews how to write dialogue. So I'll have them write a question And then I'll have them answer the question, and then I'll have them challenge the answer that was just given as though they're arguing with themselves. So what am I teaching them? Critical thinking. There is so much that you can do within your own consciousness, and it makes you, uninhibited by all of the creations of the different schools of philosophy. You know, if you'll read the greatest literary work of all time, which is the dialogues of Plato, pretty much the beginning of every branch of philosophy is There, but they don't name it, you know, solipsism, epistemology, everything. It's consequentialism, you just mentioned, everything is there. So, but what I recommend is begin by asking yourself these big, broad, almost kind of like dumb questions about the fundamental big things of meaning, of identity, all these things, and then go from there. Then go back, and you'll start to see the answers or new ideas or thoughts or perspectives on the very questions That you've already considered, I, I, I think that will help you, and it's a lot more fun, and it creates a more original thinking in your own consciousness. What do you think about that, my friend?↗

3:15:05@joann_marieThere is a really beautiful book called Sophia's World, and I don't know if it's in English, but in Spanish it's El Mundo de Sophia, and it's about this little girl who gets these letters that ask, ask her all of these things, and then teaches her about philosophy and stuff like that. It, it used to be my favorite book when I was little. I gave↗

3:15:22Speaker 13that to my niece.↗

3:15:23@joann_marieit's so-- it's, it's just what you're talking about, David, I love it. But sorry, go for it, Samuel.↗

3:15:30Speaker 20thank you, David and↗

3:15:36Speaker 20if, if you have time, I'd like to share those with you. they're about, maybe fifty, sixty, seventy pages, and if you'd be kind enough to critique them,↗

3:15:51Speaker 20the philosophical part. And then,↗

3:15:56Speaker 20I'm working on, like, I've been working on this for a long time. I call it strategic democracy, and I have like seminars, I give seminars on it. And I don't wanna talk about it today, but, I'll be trying to organize something for it. I already organized two Zoom, sessions on it, and those were public ones. I, I always,↗

3:16:24Speaker 20have sessions at least once a quarter about, strategic democracy. But what I want to really share with you is some of my findings there. And,↗

3:16:38Speaker 20originally I started from President Carter until President Biden. And then as I progressed,↗

3:16:50Speaker 20originally it was very quantitative I discovered errors in the different kinds of, numerical reporting, so I took the quantitative part out with the exception of a few variables. Then I went back and said, okay, you know, I really need to go-- to go back to Nixon. One of the major findings is since Nixon until now None of the real problems that pertain to the societal institutions and the individuals and the groups are really addressed.↗

3:17:30Speaker 20Yet we have a lot of legislation, over a thousand, that don't really address the issues, which led to the conclusion that really the United States is a cash cow, if you, you know, look up the BCG matrix Catch cow means it's good for the milking, so you keep milking it.↗

3:17:52Speaker 20and then when two one nine, I think it was called two four four,↗

3:18:02Speaker 20appeared, let, let me go back a little bit. So basically I defi- I divide the events into operational events, things we know how to solve, like unemployment, hunger, polluted water, contaminated food, all these things we can solve, and I call them operational issues. And then the other part is strategic issues, which are things that surprise us, we're not sure about. Sometimes some people may anticipate it, which is referred to as a white swan, and sometimes people are totally oblivious to it, which is called a black swan.↗

3:18:46Speaker 20Regardless, it's a case of strategic myopia, which is misperception of the future. So anyway,↗

3:18:53Speaker 13I mean, okay, but, and I appreciate you're kind of doing a six sigma thing here, and I understand it, but, you know, until we overcome Jewish supremacy, which is obviously by definition parasitic and predatory, you know, these other problems really aren't-- it's not a matter of, oh gosh, the smart people aren't in the room, you know, we're not talking about- Incompetent firemen, we're talking about dedicated arsonists, right? We're talking about slavery versus freedom. So, I, again, I appreciate the way we conduct forward, organize ourselves, solve problems, hierarchies, and everything. All worthy discussions, but, you know, when the White Walkers rule us, you know, the other tribes in the Game of Thrones, you know, really, they have to focus on that, right? I mean, don't you agree?↗

3:19:39Speaker 20Well, I agree with you about, influence of Jewish supremacy and stuff like that, but I think there is a better approach, and that's what I'm talking to you about. Basically, I think the, the right approach, is as follows. Instead of focusing one issue at a time, we have about Right now, I have two teams evaluating the reliability and the validity of the issues. We a-have over two hundred problems in the United States. I'm only talking about United States internal.↗

3:20:16Speaker 20And those two hundred problems come↗

3:20:19Speaker 12from Jewish supremacy. Sorry.↗

3:20:22Speaker 20No, no, no, dear, right. Please listen. I'm talking to you about something that you might have not heard before. And I've been practicing this in business for over forty years, and the reason for me talking like this is because of two things. Well, there is more, but I'm only going to talk about why we should talk about this two things. One of them is called the law of requisite variety, which says,↗

3:20:50Speaker 20that when you have an environment that's, full of complexity, you must make your response must match the complexity. So part of the response is what you're saying, but there are other parts that you in-- can include at the same time, and the main reason, which is the second point, is because of something called capacity. Because you waste so much time on one topic while there's five hundred topics, or I, I mean, couple of hundred. Why don't you package all of them together and expose all these at the same time? That's what↗

3:21:29@joann_mariewe're doing, Tamir. We're telling People, what is, what is happening and who's doing it, and so people wake up and, and make a change.↗

3:21:39Speaker 20I know, but what I'm saying is the approach isn't systemic. It's not, only social media, there should be more. there is so many different things that could be done, and it should be organized in a systemic way. Otherwise- There's↗

3:21:56Speaker 13nothing more systemic than calling out Jewish supremacy. Now, I understand that what you're saying is, if we are slaves on the plantation, we can run this plantation better. But calling out the slavery itself is kind of the big thing, and there is a great awakening happening. This is obviously very effective. So some of what you're saying about how to organize ourselves better is great. Some of it, I would respectfully say, is rearranging the chairs on the decks of the Titanic. But it is very effective to call out the problem in very simple terms, and there is much historical proof to bear that out.↗

3:22:37Speaker 20Yeah, you see the thing is this, the future is going to be even more turbulent than it is now. And by extrapolation, giving historical facts is helpful, but it's not necessarily what the future is going to be like. And the contemporary mod-models that are being used for solving problems in the future are really not working. That's why we have a deficit right now ranging between a hundred and seventy-two trillion to a hundred and eighty-two trillion. It depends how you want to calculate it, while it's fully advertized as about four Forty trillion. Number one, number two, a lot of people now believe AI, AI, AI↗

3:23:24Speaker 20doesn't exist. It's basically a decision support system With an expert system that we've been using for twenty, thirty years, it's just now faster, it has more range of collecting data, and these are the kind of errors that we have. And whenever we have an error, what happens with an error is it morphs, it compounds, and then it surprises us.↗

3:23:49Speaker 13Okay, well, thank you, my friend. sounds like it's worthy of consideration, but we are, we do need to move on here.↗

3:24:00@joann_marieWell, I don't see any more hands for this. Oh my God, David and Ian, we need to do this. This space is like once a month at least. I love them so much. Excuse me for↗

3:24:08Speaker 20the interruption. David, I still need your help in terms of, looking over the material I put on philosophy. Do you mind?↗

3:24:18Speaker 13if I see it on your, on your page, I can look at it, but I'm not gonna commit to editing it.↗

3:24:26Speaker 20it's like, I tried to put, PDF in the, I don't tweet a lot, didn't let me put PDF. So maybe I will put it in a, Google Drive and send you the link or I'll figure something out.↗

3:24:42@joann_marieI↗

3:24:43Speaker 20don't think anybody should click links online.↗

3:24:46Speaker 19A thousand percent.↗

3:24:48Speaker 20Okay, well, I'll figure something. Maybe if I can. Thank you so much, Tamir. And, and↗

3:24:58Ian MalcolmTamir just, recognize that was not at you. I, I advocate for that, across the board. everybody on X, please don't click on links that will take you to other pages, whether it's YouTube. Certainly don't click Spotify links. I know lots of people were hacked via that, right? Avoid those things. Ask people to send you screenshots rather than files. Try to minimize anything that you download, especially to your device, and, don't click links that take you offline off the platform, you might find yourself with your, login information getting, let's say compromised. but with that being said, why don't we go for some final commentary? I think it's been a really wonderful space. We got some wonderful, loving individuals up here that are really trying to make the world a better place. Why don't we go to Raed? Then we'll check in with Joanne for some final commentary, and then we will go to the man, the myth, the legend himself, Mr. David Niché, for some parting remarks.↗

3:25:48Speaker 12Yeah, mine is gonna be quick. I, I, I may have shared this with, with some of you guys. some-- I met so many beautiful people on this, platform, seriously, that I have a lot of positive emotions towards, love and respect, and sometimes I worry if this, you know, this, this whole microcosm of the world that is X is lost, I'll be really sad to lose connections with you. But on the other side,↗

3:26:20Speaker 12it is a blessing to be part of the tribe of the truth, battling the, the, the tribe of lies and deception and the Talmudic tribe. It is glorious, and I think, and I agree that we are winning. And then, you know, they say you can lie, you can, you can lie to some people, sometimes you can lie to all the people sometimes, but you can, you- I can't lie to everyone all the time, and I think these people thought they can lie to everyone all the time, and the truth is, is like a wall they crashed into. And, yeah, all, all the love and respect. Thank you, people. Thanks.↗

3:27:04Ian MalcolmNo, wonderfully↗

3:27:04@joann_mariestated. Thank↗

3:27:05Ian Malcolmyou so, oh, yeah, no, I was gonna say wonderfully stated. And, and Joanne, I, I know, you're suggesting that we start doing, philosophy space, once a month, if not more. certainly think that's a wonderful, idea and a way to think about what we think, right? With regards to the things that we're thinking. And, as redundant as that sounds, it is good from time to time to challenge the way that we're looking at the world. And in↗

3:27:33Ian MalcolmAnd understanding so that we can tackle such difficult, challenging, let's say, realities that we find ourselves in, that sometimes require that we be a little bit blunt, direct, and perhaps even abrasive, with those that are pushing out lies. but Joanne, any thoughts on kind of the space and this idea of defining morality before we go to Mr. Nietzsche for some parting words?↗

3:27:54@joann_marieNo, I, I, I just loved it, Ian, so much. I, I love hearing David's perspective on things. Like, my brain was exploding like the entire time, and it's just, it's just beautiful. So, yeah, no, I really do hope that, that we make these spaces like once a month, and because it's, it's so important. We, we live in such a crazy world, and the reality they try to push on us is just insane, and I just love people like, like you. Guys that push against that, and it's like, no, we don't want that. We want beauty, we want truth, we want↗

3:28:32@joann_mariepureness, you know? And, and they're like, no, it needs to be this, and it's death and destruction and degeneracy, and it's, it's like, no. So I love this resistance against that, and it's so inspiring, and I, I love being here with you guys. I, it's just So it's like a light in such a dark place, but it, it's kind of like the, the one really beautiful run that you made that it's people that awaken to this, it's like a little like match or a lighter, you know? And in such a dark place, it starts Lighting up the world, and it's just beautiful. So, no, I, I love it here. So, thank you so much, Ian. Seriously, thank you so much for hosting this beautiful space. I'm David, National Treasure. I, I, I love it. Thank you. Yeah,↗

3:29:26Ian Malcolmof course. And, and look, I, I, I do think that that is what we're doing. I was, I was talking, via DMs with a individual, I really value the, the input and, the output that they, they construct Not demoralized, but that it, it is exhausting to go up against this machine every day. We see all the games that they play, whether it was Coyote's space just getting completely shut down, whether it's the absurd suppression of our content or the newest one where we're getting-- Oh, man, Yitz wants to come up. I, I don't even know what to do sometimes. or i-if it is the absurd, new thing that they're doing, and I don't exactly understand the mechanism of this, but, the, the fact-- I posted yesterday a screenshot where I got three hundred and thirty-eight impressions or views in twenty-three seconds. today, I had five hundred and fifty-five in the first fourteen seconds of, of something getting posted. And I, I mentioned this just because they are doing all sorts of things on the back end to try and give us the illusion of reach that we don't have while minimizing the effectiveness of the posts and the contents that we construct. I just got a message, somebody put in the purple pill saying that, When they go to my page, it doesn't show if I'm speaking in spaces. Surprise, surprise! I'm sure that's the exact same for all the people up here on the panel with us, and the likes of Mr. Truth Teller as well, right? This is, this is just what they do, 'cause they live in the shadows and in deception, so they can't stand the sunlight of truth that are these spaces, and we're gonna keep doing what we can to try again to educate, to inform, and to put us in formation, to steal a little line loosely from But it's information to make a better tomorrow, right? How do we get all the ammunition, intellectually speaking, how do we boost you, in terms of, of your spirituality and your morality so that you're willing to stand out on the street corner like, Christopher Wood, who, who obviously a wonderful friend of ours, gonna be joining us for the space, tomorrow to co-host, right? How do we get people comfortable with standing up and saying, "Look at this problem. It's uncomfortable, but we know that it exists. We know that we have to deal We discussed it, we know that we have to essentially bring attention to it so that we can do something about it, right? We will continue doing that as best we can, and in doing so, from time to time, we'll dive into both very serious matters like philosophy, trying to educate, all of us equally from the, the brilliance of people like David. We'll also try to have some fun from time to time. I was talking with Joanne about doing a game show style space, just for a fun little reprieve, right? To, to maybe have a little And humor with all of you, and I mention that because the with you aspect, I, I find this little community that we are continuing to build and to grow and to foster, that is one of the most important pieces and the most valuable ones that I've gotten out of this. So Raya's comments there about this community that we've built and what would happen if X just went down tomorrow, right? It'd be, it'd be a big loss, for not only our efforts to bring these truths, but just personally speaking, I, I would, I, I would miss all of you Description. I say that with absolute sincerity. but we will not allow that to happen. life will find a way, as, Ian Malcolm would say, right? And so with that, I wanna turn things over to Mr. Niche. before I do, really quickly, one final comment. We are going to be having, I, I just sent a reminder, request to ensure that he's still down for it, but if so, we've got a space later today that's gonna be with Tyler Dykes, who ran for Congress. So we will be discussing the aftermath of the campaign trail, the things that he learned along the way, the hope and the ambition, just like with Asapac, is that each one of these individuals that steps out into the, the daylight and speaks these truths, you know, whether they win or lose, let's learn from it so that we can↗

3:33:28Ian MalcolmThe next time that we go up into, these political battlefields, let's call it. so we got lots of other additional conversations coming. I wanna thank again, Dr. E Michael Jones for yesterday. It was wonderful to get to speak with him. Felt very humbled that we were able to have that conversation. and with that being said, Mr. David, to turn things over to you for your closing thoughts on this space, the subject, and just kind of the world at large, my friend.↗

3:33:53Speaker 13Well, I love the space, and I never forget in such spaces that people come as much to be heard as to hear, and I heard so many wonderful things from all the speakers, so thank everybody for coming. Joanne, I like your bringing up the, the metaphor of the light, because that is always how I see it, is one candle in a room full of darkness can destroy that darkness. Now just imagine a thousand candles. Just imagine, to Rayed's point, a million candles, and that's us. We're bringing light to a dark world, and that is why we're winning. Because no one is guided by the darkness, they're just confused by it. No one's inspired by the darkness, they don't learn because they can't see. There is just nothingness, which is for them nihilism. We're always fighting Two, on two fronts. One is against evil in the outward world, but also in pursuit of goodness on the inward, in the inward space of our own consciousness. Don't forget that second part. That's why I love this discussion. I've never had an academic discussion in my life because I'm only interested in discussions that make humanity better, that advance the species, all of us. And of course, a big part of that is, ultimately, in your pursuit of the truth, it's going to drive you inside And you're going to find capacious mansions where you thought there was a mere, just a small little space. It's the most wonderful thing to realize that you are the instrument of your own happiness, and of course In order to be happy, you have to find your goodness and your kindness. There's so much there. Someone earlier was talking about Rumi. Well, there are so many wise people, and they all directed you inwards and how to self-govern yourself, and how to not be confused, and not be attracted to little shiny little bubbles of life, and instead put the fool's gold aside and find the real gold within you. And I just, I just think that that's one of the big takeaways, hopefully, that we should take from spaces like these, is find Fighting that which is evil on the outside, but really, if we-- the better we become, the, the stronger we become, the more moral we become, the stronger we become. And they can't defeat us. They are counting on us to become demoralized, frustrated. I'm never any of these things, by the way. I'm never these things because I'm doing this on principle. But just don't forget the other front of the two-front war, which is that which is internal to you. Become a better person, a happier person. And you won't ever argue in quiet desperation. You'll simply make your point knowing that the truth, spoken but once, can destroy a lie spoken a thousand times. That as I said before, every lie has an expiration date, the truth lasts forever. So you're part of, of course, the future, since you know the truth is ultimately gonna win the day by advocating for it. So you needn't do that desperately. So wonderful space, can't wait for the next one. I guess the next one's tonight.↗

3:36:56Ian MalcolmNo, and, and absolutely, and, and so much love, for everything that you do, David. You, you are-- we talk about that idea of the candles in the wilderness, right? David, in of himself, is a, a bonfire and one that I think is extremely welcoming to so many, right? Because of the way that he delivers his ideas and also the intellect with which he puts together those positions. So, he's an absolute hero for our cause. I wanna give him an immense amount of thanks, for the suggestion that we just kinda do this little↗

3:37:26Ian MalcolmTo explore for a long time. For anybody that just arrived, you're welcome to go back, listen to the recording, and of course, we'll go live the moment that we shut this down. Like was just mentioned, we've got that conversation. I did get the confirmation from Tyler, so we're gonna fire up that space in something like three hours. Again, we'll be talking to him about the campaign trail, all the lessons learned on it, what his aspirations are next, right? And, and we're gonna continue to try and foster all of those learnings back to Asapac with Dr↗

3:37:56Ian MalcolmThe likes of, Bill Zarian or anybody else, Casey Puch perhaps, that is gonna go into this ring against this machine, that they are as armed as they can be, with whatever lessons we're able to pull out of each of these experiences. So I just wanna give everybody, Raed, to Miro, to Zaid, so many individuals that came up here were so wonderful, so loving, appreciate you all so very much. We look forward to that next conversation. In the interim, just wanna wish everybody a good morning, good evening, good afternoon. Certainly, You are God's speed on our continued journeys into this abyss that we are going to rise like a phoenix from. So lots of love to everybody, we will see you a little later, and until then, have a God blessed day.↗