 All right, everybody, welcome to your Unbrook show on this Monday, November 13th. Again, the music, I have to fix the music. We will get to that. Thanks, thank you for joining me today. We just crossed 35,000, 35,000 subscribers suddenly overnight, really after midnight, so it's mostly this morning. We added like 50 something subscribers out of nowhere. So that is huge and very gratifying. So thank you for all of you for helping get to that number. My expectation is that it is the show I did last night on Ayan Hirsi Ali that has generated all of this. I don't know. I don't know. Maybe my call yesterday. Please subscribe. I got to people, but yes, Miroslav says 84 new subscribers from the Ayan Hirsi Ali show. So there you go. You have to sometimes, if you really hit it on the head with a topic or if you're super timely, and if then we can grow this thing. All right. A new target, and I really am going to devote some thinking to this and maybe some resources and hire some consultants maybe and see what we can do. But my new target is to get to 100,000, the algorithm I'm told starts favoring you significantly and you get a significant greater exposure. So I will give some thought on how we can really grow this channel and get ourselves on the map there and get some of this content in front of a lot of people. Subscriptions have grown significantly since October 7th. So people do value the content that I'm producing post massacre, post terrorist attack. This is also, there was a lot of interest post 9-11. A lot of this just has to do with getting the word out there and getting people engaged and getting people to know about it. So again, those of you who are listening, whether you're listening live or listening after the fact, please subscribe to the channel. We're targeting 100,000 over what timeframe you should ask. I'm not sure. I need to give it some thought and I need to see if I can find some consulting expertise, some marketing expertise that can help us get to that target. Not easy given the kind of content that I produce. All right. So today, I do have a change for this week already for the schedule shows. There will not be a show tomorrow evening. Instead there will be a show tonight. So join 7 p.m. East Coast time. Not exactly the topic. I do know that for part of the show, I will be joined by Greg Selmiri and Amish Adulja to talk about a project that they're working on, a conference that they're working on, on privatizing healthcare, which is coming up, I think. The conference is coming up maybe this coming weekend. So, but you can also sign up for it via Zoom. So they will be here to talk about that, but I would also be talking about something. I'll figure it out and I'll let you know. I'll let you know soon. Ian says ARI is at 122,000 followers and they just hit 100, like a week and a half ago. So yes, once you hit 100, I'm told that there is a dramatic acceleration in how YouTube treats you and you get massive more exposure. So getting to 100,000 seems to be pretty important if you really want to grow beyond that. So happy to try. Why not? Let's try to figure out what we need to do to get to 100,000 subscribers. I'm open to suggestions. I open to ideas. There's people out there who have marketing ideas, marketing expertise, but people with expertise, please. I get lots of ideas. I need people who are actually in the space doing this and have succeeded with YouTube and know how YouTube works and have ideas on how we can get the numbers up. That is, that is, I think it also helped that I was traveling through Europe and last week through the United States and urging people to subscribe. I think that also helps. It's people being exposed live to me. I think if I started to go on TV again, subscriptions would go up a lot. That is also an option. So we can, we can definitely, I'm definitely thinking about can I, can I do that and how to make that happen? All right, let's, let's start quickly with an update from the Gaza. Is always basically taking control of Gaza City, taking control of the entire north of Gaza. They are destroying 100, dozens, almost 100 last I saw of tunnel shafts. They are also causing tunnels to collapse, not just the shafts, but the tunnels themselves. They're basically taking control above ground at least of a much of the northern Gaza area. Hamas fighters either, you know, there's still some fighting going on in the streets, but most of them have either fled to the south or are dug in down there in the tunnels and are likely to be buried in those tunnels or die in those tunnels. As usual, kind of either smokes them out or collapses the tunnels on top of their heads. The, the big story has been over the, over the weekend is the other hospitals in, in particular, the one hospital, the Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza, which is in the western, southwestern part of Gaza City. Israel basically has that hospital surrounded. The hospital claimed over the weekend that it had run out of fuel, that babies were dying, that patients were dying, electricity was gone, so oxygen was gone. Part of the real challenge, I'll get to that claim in a minute, part of the real challenge of figuring out what the hell is going on there is the very fact that there's just no news that's coming out and it's very difficult to get any reliable news. Most of the western media's reporting out of Gaza is basically the repeating talking points they're getting from Hamas. They're repeating what doctors and administrators inside the hospital are telling them. But the doctors and administrators are also talking to the Israeli military and they're telling them a different story. So it's not clear exactly, or at least that's what we hear when we talk to the Israelis. But there's very little news coming out of the Israeli side of this. A lot of the Israeli networks are now reporting much, I think, mostly for operational security. So most of what you get is basically propaganda from Hamas filtered through the New York Times of the Guardian and Boatas in terms of news. So the hospital is clearly running out of fuel. Maybe it's already run out of fuel. Maybe there is no electricity in the hospital. It is also true that Hamas has plenty of fuel and Hamas could have provided that fuel to the hospital if it so chooses, but it chosen not to. Israel has offered the hospital fuel. Indeed, there was video of Israelis moving fuel into position where the hospital personnel could take that fuel. Hamas prohibited the hospital personnel from taking that fuel. There were stories about Israel helping evacuate babies out of the hospital. I don't see any confirmation of those stories. I don't see any elaboration on those stories. So I don't know. There was the stories, of course, of Hamas trying to stop the Israelis from helping the hospital and keeping the babies alive. Very, very hard to tell in terms of the details what it is exactly happening. It is clear that Israel has, from the beginning of this war, asked civilians to evacuate. They've asked specific hospitals to shut down and to move their patients to other hospitals. They've asked civilians to evacuate south. Indeed, most of the population of northern Gaza has already evacuated to the south. And Israel constantly provides means by which civilians can evacuate to the south, the south which is for the most part not exclusively. Israel is not attacking right now, although there are some strikes on the air, unknown Hamas concentrations. Underneath the hospital, particularly Al-Shifa, but other hospitals as well, but in Al-Shifa it is believed that the main headquarters of Hamas in Gaza are right underneath the hospital. Israel has to take the hospital compound. It is a compound. It's not just one building. And then they have to find the tunnels and they either have to smoke them out or go in there. There's also some suspicion that these tunnels hold the, that the tunnels under Al-Shifa hold the hostages. Although there's a good chance that again, through the tunnel system, Hamas has moved a lot of the hostages to the south. For some reason Israel seems to have pretty confident that they can trap the Hamas in the north. So maybe those tunnels that connect the south and the north are being blocked, I don't know. But again, there's a lot of stuff going on in the ground that we're just not completely aware of. Let's see, what else did I want to say about the hospital? Yeah, other hospitals also have Hamas tunnels and headquarters underneath them. There might be hostages there. Israel is going very carefully, slowly, street by street and then hospital by hospital, building by building to try to rescue hostages if they're still there, to try to kill Hamas wherever they can and to destroy the tunnels and to destroy the infrastructure everywhere they can. They found weapons and missile launches and missiles in schools and mosques everywhere. So again, Israel is thoroughly going through northern Gaza to try to dismantle this. The Israeli Defense Secretary today said that Hamas has lost control of Gaza, that Israel now controls Gaza. I'm not sure if he means both south and north. Israel does not have a significant presence in the south. I don't know how he can argue that Israel controls the south. Missile launches are still happening, although they're far, far, far, far, far. Fewer degree and fewer numbers, but they're still happening. And so anyway, so we will see. Two Israeli soldiers were killed in Gaza on Sunday, which brings the count up to over 40 now, maybe 44, I think. Still a lot of work to be done for the Israelis. They still have to clear northern Gaza. They have to clear the room for the hospital. They have to evacuate patients and babies and whatever. And they have to destroy the tunnel system. They have to find where Hamas is holding the hostages. They still don't have that. Or if they do have it, they haven't reached that place yet. And they haven't freed any hostages or encountered the bodies of any hostages. So there's an enormous amount of work still left. I think it's a mistake of the Israeli defense minister to say that Gaza has, that Hamas has no power in Gaza. It is true. He did say that Hamas has no power capable of stopping the IDF. They never did. But the reality is that Hamas is still there. Thousands of fighters are still unaccounted for, unkilled. Many of them are fled to the south. At some point, Israel will have to deal with the south as well. He is saying that in the last few days, they've intensified operations targeting tunnels. They're trying to get the terrorist out of the tunnels where they can be eliminated or where they can surrender unconditionally. And those are the only two options Israel is giving. Hamas surrender unconditionally or get killed. You've got to like it. According to the defense minister, and again, this is him, each day we eliminate more Hamas commanders, dozens and sometimes hundreds of terrorists, and the army operates in the heart of Gaza City. So basically the northern Gaza, he believes, is under Israel's control and they're operating throughout Gaza City. I think that is where we are right now. The north, as I've told you, would happen. The north is, Hezbollah is becoming more aggressive. You're seeing more missile attacks. You're seeing more attacks on Israelis. Israel is, I think, ramping up to deal with Hezbollah, whether it'll actually do it or not is still an open question. I both doubt it and seriously hope that they do. But it could be that Israel is going to be a lot tougher than I expect in this round. We will indeed see. Let's see. Yeah, so that is Gaza. I assume that in the next couple of days Israel will take control of the hospitals and in the days, weeks to come, we will get a reveal as to what is actually underneath the hospital. We will see. All right. Let's see. The UK surrender, I don't know if you saw the video from the weekend. On Saturday, we had in the United States, we had Memorial Day, sorry, Veterans Day, a day where we honor our veterans. In England, that same day this year was the day that they celebrate every year where they commemorate the soldiers, very, very similar to veterans. Everybody wears a symbol on them. And it's a very solemn day in England. They take this stuff seriously. And it was this weekend. Well, on that same day, both in the United States and in Britain, there were massive pro Hamas demonstrations. And I know nobody likes to call them pro Hamas demonstrations, but that's what they are. And on this show, you don't, I don't mince words. They are pro Hamas demonstrations. And anybody demonstrating right now for Palestine is demonstrating for Hamas and anti Israel. There were demonstrations all over the United States. You saw the video of people tearing down American flags. Pretty horrific during Veterans Day. And in London, you had 300,000 Brits marching in support of a terrorist organization with some of the most disgusting, horrible slogans, some of the most racist slogans possible. You had the police doing very little, certainly not stopping these, but also doing very little when these demonstrators harassed people who accounted demonstrating, harassed Jews on Saturday when synagogue, when people left synagogue, they were being harassed outside of the synagogues as part of these demonstrations. The police with all due respect to London police have done very little. Well, there was one member of the UK government that seemed to stand up against these demonstrations and the ugliness that they projected. And that is, and I can't pronounce the name, Soella, Soella, I think, Breveman, Soella Breveman, who is the interior secretary. She wrote on November 12th after she had significantly criticized the police for being too weak in a dealing with the demonstrators. On September, November 12th yesterday, she wrote the following, our great police officers deserve the thanks of every decent citizen for their professionalism in the face of violence and aggression from protesters and counter protesters in London yesterday, that multiple officers were injured during their during their duty is an outrage. So she's trying to soften her stance on police, which was much harsher the days before this. She goes on. The sick inflammatory and in some cases clearly criminal chance placards and paraphernalia openly on display at March mark a new low. Antisemitism and other forms of racism, together with the valorizing of terrorism on such a scale is deeply troubling. This can't go on. Whoops. What happened? This can't go on week by week. The streets of London are being polluted by hate, violence, and anti-Semitism. Members of the public are being mobbed and intimidated. Jewish people in particular feel threatened. Further action is necessary. And what you're seeing with this by the way, the name of the day in Great Britain is almost this day. And what you're so here she is taking a stand, taking a stand, the sick inflammatory in some cases clearly criminal chance, taking a stand against the demonstrators, taking a stance for tougher policing, for securing for better security for Jews and others in London. What was the reward she got this morning? Well, this morning, the Prime Minister fired her. She was fired for being inflammatory. She was fired for not standing by the police. She was fired for calling the demonstrators sick and inflammatory. She was fired for talking about the streets of London being polluted by hate, violence, and anti-Semitism. I mean, this is basically the surrender of the West, certainly the surrender of Great Britain to the mob, to the barbarians, to the evil that is demonstrating in its streets. These are not just Muslims. You look at photos, half Brits, half immigrants probably, or Muslims that have been in England for a long time, but many of them are just regular Brits. And Selena Breviman, for standing up to this, gets fired. Now, I'm not a huge fan of Breviman. She's not my favorite. I didn't support her when she went for Prime Minister. But on this, she is absolutely right. And to do this on Armistice Day is despicable in that the police and the mayor of London allowed it on Armistice Day is despicable and ridiculous. Indeed, the mayor of London, a Muslim, supported the right of the demonstrators, supported the demonstration going on during Armistice Day, and criticized Selena, for her stance against the demonstrations, criticized the government for taking a stand against demonstrations during Armistice Day. Anyway, the reward is she's been fired. The foreign secretary is going to become interior secretary. And James Cameron, you remember James Cameron, who used to be Prime Minister of England, and he fought against Brexit, lost that fight and resigned. Well, he is back as foreign secretary. Cameron, who is being accused of all kinds of potential corruption. Cameron, who is a non-descript, nothing. Basically, what this conservative government has decided to do is become a nothing. What this conservative government has decided to do is be centrist, standing for nothing, being nothing, representing nothing. And basically, hand the streets over to people who actually represent something, believe in something, stand for something. The haters of Western civilization, the haters of progress, the haters of freedom, who are now taking over the streets of England. I mean, God, I love London. As you know, one of my favorite places in the world by far, what a tragedy. What an unbelievable tragedy. Just a hands up, give it to them, and that's it. All right. Yeah, British police doing nothing, of course. I saw pictures all weekend of British police taking pictures with the demonstrators, with Palestinian flags, little Palestinian flags. And it really is disgusting. It really is disgusting. But the government is doing something about it. They are moving to the center, where they stand for nothing. All right. As we talked about, a lot of talk about World War III, lately. And I think as a consequence of that, Biden and Xi have decided to meet. They have decided to meet in order to show the world that, no, we're not heading towards a World War. We can still get together. We can still talk. They are meeting in San Francisco. It is really interesting. This is at the APEC meeting. I'm not sure what APEC stands for. Anyway, they're meeting in San Francisco. It is pretty amazing. I've seen pictures of San Francisco over the weekend. It is stunning. You know, San Francisco doesn't have a homeless problem anymore. The streets are completely clean of human experiment. Suddenly, San Francisco has returned to its glory days somehow. In order to facilitate a meeting between Biden and Xi, they managed to solve the homeless problem, or at least transport it somewhere else where it cannot be seen. Now, when we meet, when we go to San Francisco on business or vacation or for those people who live there, the leaders of San Francisco don't give a damn. Don't give a damn about us. But when politicians meet important ones, big ones, autocratic ones, then they can clean the place up. The government no longer serves the people. It serves itself. It serves the power structure. It serves those at the top. We are nobody and nothing. It's all, it's all just a game. Anyway, Xi and Biden are meeting, and they're going to have some agreement. So they're obviously going to have some disagreement. But one of the things they obviously agree about is that AI is dangerous. Biden has already come out with massive regulations of the AI industry through executive order. Xi, too, has significantly regulated the AI primarily with regard to what AI tells the people. He wants to make sure that whatever AI tells people is consistent with Communist Party dogma of the moment. So they share this distrust and hatred of AI. So they have come together, and supposedly they're going to pledge a ban on AI in autonomous weapons, like drones, nuclear warhead control, and other things. They don't want AI deciding when and where to drop the nuke. They don't want AI deciding who to shoot and who not to shoot. Who knows what this means. There's AI already in drones. There's AI already in aircraft. There's AI already being used extensively by the military, certainly in the United States. So is this completely autonomous? Anyway, we'll see if this is ever done, if this is ever released. We'll see what exactly the provisions account for. But always funny. I always find it somewhat funny when the leader of the so-called free world and the leader of some authoritarian regime that specializes in lying, cheating, deceiving, its own people, never mind the rest of the world, meet, and then they have a treaty. They sign a deal. As if one can count on authoritarians to keep their side of the deal. As if one can count on the bad guys to actually follow whatever ban treaty is going to be engaged. There's no question. She likes this because he's worried that the US is ahead. Biden likes this because he's anti, you know, he wants to show his creds around AI. But also because he's worried that China might be ahead on AI. Is there any doubt that as soon as one of these countries knows they're ahead, they will implement autonomous weapons, particularly China. China knows they're ahead. But I guess at this point they want to show that they're united, that they can do something together, that the world is not on the brink, and that if we do go into nuclear annihilation, it won't be, you know, the computers that do it, it'll be humans that actually do it, not computers. So yeah, so I'm looking forward to more tidbits from the Biden-Kshi meeting in San Francisco, and maybe more photos of how beautiful the city, how beautiful the city has been made for them. All right. Lastly, Trump and elections. First, let me just say Tim Scott has dropped out of the presidential election. So Tim Scott, one less Republican out there, so basically down to two people, really, I think realistically. I think Vivek is poll numbers are pretty low. Christie was never really a factor, particularly given that he, you know, his attacks on Trump while true have not really resonated with anybody, have not really stuck. So down basically to Nikki Haley and DeSantis, and to Vivek for second place after Trump. I think this is all good. I think the sooner this gets trimmed down to one, the greater the probability is that somebody could defeat Trump, but they can't defeat Trump as long as they are five, six. But I don't think they can even defeat Trump when there's just one or two. I do hope Christie stays in the fight long enough to keep chipping at Trump, to keep creating a question mark on Trump in people's minds. And then let Nikki and DeSantis duke it out. I do hope one of them drops out early so that once we get into certainly for Super Tuesday, it's basically Trump versus rather than Trump is a sure thing, right? Rather than Trump is a sure thing. If Trump is elected as the nominee, again, it's very likely Biden wins while Trump is doing well in the polls right now versus Biden. I think once Americans start listening to him, I think it's probably the probability of him winning will decline significantly. I'll give you just one example. Just over this weekend, Donald Trump joked about the hammer attack on Nancy Pelosi's husband, joking about violence or something very popular in the American people. I mean, the base loves it, but beyond that, I'm not sure that will bring about too many independence. He praised the Chinese use of the death penalty, praised Chinese use of the death penalty. Again, not surprising, but I'm not sure brings, you know, not that many people enamored with China's justice system. I'm not sure he wins a lot of votes there. He referred to political opponents of vermin. Generally, he is doing everything he can to dehumanize the left and to make them, which is the common tactic again of authoritarians. Again, not a good tactic. I don't think if you want to win a general election. He lavished praise on Hungarian proto-facist strongman Viktor Orban. We know that he's done that over and over again. And then he seems confused because he is confused. He's also getting older and he is a little confused about who the president was right now. At some point, he quoted Orban as saying that Obama should resign and restore Trump to the presidency. Obama's not president anymore. Anyway, Orban is a monster. And the fact that he is praising him is, again, plays well to a certain authoritarian type, people who want authoritarianism, people who want the government to impose religion and control over the media on us. But he is a monster. Yeah, Richard, he is your kind of monster, exactly. It's exactly who I'd expect to be attracted to him. But, you know, here's a guy who generally, here's a guy, presidential nominee, who's generally, genuinely admires the brutality of the Chinese. The authoritarianism of Putin and Xi. Here's a guy who finds violence, I think, exciting. I think that's right. And loves the world's authoritarianism. Loves the world's fascist. Loves the authoritarianism out there. Listen to Trump's tweet for Veterans Day. Right? Veterans Day. Is the focus on veterans? No, of course not. In honor of our great veterans on Veterans Day, we pledge to you that we will root out communists, Marxists, fascists and radical left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country, lie, steal and cheat on elections, and will do anything possible whether legal or illegal to destroy America and the American Dream. The threat from outside forces is far less sinister. Don't worry about China, Russia and Hamas. Dangerous and grave than the threat from within, despite the hatred and anger of the radical left, lunatics who want to destroy our country, we will make America great again. That's Veterans Day. That's his respect for veterans, for what they fought for. Half of Americans need to be rooted out, maybe eradicated, who knows. But this is clearly dehumanizing language, vermin, what you're calling other Americans. You might disagree with them. And this is why he's loved. He's loved for this kind of stuff. This is the state of American society, American society today. All right. We will have a lot more on Trump. I mean, his plans to have raids, build giant camps and mass deportation of migrants, that's going to be really exciting to watch. Operation Whitbank, I think they're going to call it. His embrace of the radical right in the United States and his filling of his cabinet and the regulatory posts and other posts with these people. I mean, his first administration will be just amazingly pro-freedom as compared to what he has installed for America in a second administration, where the worst elements of the right will be in control of much of the levels of power in this country. And yeah, it's going to be really, really, really ugly. All right. Richard says, I've got his contempt. That's good. But he's here every day. It's just amazing to me. Like if I didn't like somebody, I wouldn't go listen to him all the time. What an idiot. God. All right. Let's see. All right. Let's go to questions. Remind everybody to like the show before you leave, please. It helps a lot with the algorithm. Those of you who are not subscribers, I'm reminding you to please subscribe to the show. By the way, what I just said about Trump, my guess is I lose about 30 of the 80 people who subscribed. That's the challenge I face on some issues. I gain them on some, I lose them. Although if they came because of what I said about Ian Husserly, maybe I got a bunch of really good, maybe I got a bunch of really good kind of atheist types signing up. So who knows who are subscribed to. But yes, please subscribe if you're not a subscriber yet. And if you'd like to support the show value for value, please consider doing a super chat. Ask me a question about anything pretty much. And you can also do just a sticker where you don't have to ask a question, but you can still support the show value for value. And we can reach our goals. And again, this is what I, this is my livelihood. All right. Rimo says, how did the Fed cause the Great Depression? Oh God. Yeah. Ask a simple little question. The Fed caused Great Depression by doing multiple things, as always, by basically inflating, if you will, the equivalent of inflating the money supplied during the 1920s and causing a bubble, among other things, a bubble in the stock market during 1929. That is because they held interest rates too low and flooded the money with too much liquidity. After the crash of 1929, the Federal Reserve did exactly the opposite of what you'd expect a central bank to do and what the central banks have tried to do since, but again, not very successfully in most cases. What they tried to do is, what they did, indeed, after the crash of 2029, is instead of allowing for more liquidity in the markets, allowing for lower interest rates, allowing for borrowing and lending to happen so the economic activity could continue as the markets collapsed. They actually shrunk the money supply. They actually restricted capital in money and bank lending. They tightened lending requirements. They tightened everything so that what you got was bank runs. What you got was panic. What you got was a shortage of capital. What you got was significant price shrinkage. It's together with other governmental policies like smooth holly tariffs, in other words, and raising the income tax rate, doubling the income tax rate during the Hoover administration, those together, the Federal Reserve tightening money supply as well as, at the same time, tariffs going up and income taxes going up, all of that took what would have been a recession with a fit, with a correction and everything coming back to normal and turned it into a great depression. Now, the certain complexities around that have to do with the gold standard, have to do with the British gold standard, foreign trade, but that's essentially, I think, essentially what happened. And I think this is pretty universally agreed upon. Bernanke, I think won the Nobel Prize for identifying elements of this. Milton Friedman in his kind of big book on the history of interest rates in the United States talks about this. And so, yeah, I mean, that is the short version of how the Fed caused the Great Depression. You can follow, well, I mean, I think you can find a lot of material online about this. If you search Federal Reserve Great Depression, I think you'll find a lot of material on this. There are a number of economists who talk about this quite a bit and thoroughly and systematically. All right, we have 120 people watching live right now. That is phenomenal. Thank you, guys. Oh, thank you, Wes. We're just at $50 cut basically in half what we need in order to get to our target. So basically, what we need is two or three, really three, exactly three, $20 questions, and we have reached our target, which would be fantastic. Okay, friend Harper says, venting and frustration. The meaning of the term genocide has been widely inflated in the culture. The epistemological damage that comes from inflating the meaning of terms seems long lasting and particularly impossible to fix. Absolutely. Once they take over a concept, it's very hard to bring its appropriate meaning back or to present a new so that the rotten meaning gets established and gets to be part of the culture and part of the way people think about issues and you lose both the original meaning and the value of having a concept of the original meaning. And so something like genocide becomes the killing of anybody during war or civilians during warfare. So genocide means a systematic elimination of particular ethnic or particular group systematically. And, you know, but you wouldn't historically have called what the allies did to Japan or what the allies did to Germany as genocide, even though hundreds of thousands, hundreds of thousands of millions of civilians died in the bombing campaigns, both in Japan and in Germany. Yet today, genocide is thrown out every time the side you're against happens to be killing civilians elsewhere. It is automatically genocide. Israel, of course, is accused of committing genocide, which is ludicrous and absurd and ridiculous. Clearly. I mean, there's no doubt about this. Israel is far more concerned about preserving the lives of civilian Palestinians than is Hamas, or for that matter, the other organized group within the Palestinian realm. It is Hamas that cares nothing for the lives of Palestinians. If Palestinians are dying, it is because of Hamas. And Hamas does zero to try to save them. Israel does more than it should to try to save them. All right. Andrew says, when an intellectual like Sam Harris reacts to Ayn Rand by hand waving or distorting her views, I judge it as cowardice. Despite courage in lesser areas, when his views are fully challenged, he evades. Is that fair or too harsh? I think overall, it is fair. And I'd say that the main part of it that is fair is the fact that he won't engage, right? If he was willing to engage in a serious way with the ideas and still dismiss them, I would say, okay, maybe it's a cowardice. It might be still evasion, but it's not cowardice. And it's not not wanting to go there. It's not not wanting to confront it. You know, it could be laziness. I don't know. But he won't even go there. He, you know, he's so many people over the years have recommended to him to have an objective to on or to discuss objective. And he just, as you said, hand waves it away. I think there's real cowardice there, the intellectual cowardice to actually engage with ideas and maybe thinks are so despicable, so ridiculous, so it's so beneath him that that he won't even give them the time of day. He won't even give them the benefit of the doubt. And that is possible. But it's still really, I mean, of all the ideas out there. And he's interviewed almost everybody in a show. These are the ideas that you find most upsetting. These are the ideas that are most horrific. That is, it is weird. Something's going on there. The unique about his attitude towards objectivism and I ran versus his attitude towards many other issues and causes out there and many other people out there. So I'm not sure exactly what it is. All right, guys, basically, you know, less than a dollar for everybody listening right now would get us our goal. So if you don't mind doing a dollar or two sticker or $5 or $10, that would be great just to get us to where we should be on these super chats. All right, Andrew says, Do you think objectivist takes on issues will be acceptable to YouTube? Well, they have been so far, right? I mean, they won't monetize some of my short videos because they're dealing with war. So it doesn't surprise me. But I haven't seen, other than on COVID, I haven't seen YouTube push back on anything I've said. And I've said some pretty harsh things. I've said some stuff about casualties and war. I've said some stuff on how to engage in war. I've said some stuff about all these things. And so far, right, the YouTube has not stopped me, has not demonetized, well, demonetized, but has not said, stop doing this, we're going to take you off if you do. So yeah, I mean, yeah, here's another one of those calling for victimhood. Very harsh towards me, Richard said. Poor Richard. I really feel so sorry for Richard. I mean, if you're a jerk, you deserve the harshness. Scott says, we'll talk about another one. All right, when you say on history, Ali is wrong, do you mean more an era of knowledge or a breach of morality? I mean, I suspect it's a breach of morality. And I suspect that's the case. I suspect that there are certain things where she won't go there, where evasion is involved, which is, you know, objectives on breach of morality. So I suspect, find her soon, Ali, you know, it is a breach of morality. I certainly think she has the capacity. She's has the exposure. She's made certain choices about the ideas that she wants to attach herself to. And that's where she's going. And so yeah, I mean, I have no problem saying it's a breach of morality. But I think I think almost everybody has is breaching morality out there in the world. You know, not going to call it evil or anything like that. But it is, you know, I'm not going to say she's an immoral person, but this is a breach of morality. There's nothing strategic about it. I mean, and again, she's going to church every Sunday. You know, she's, I believe her when she says, I don't think she's lying. Now, does she believe in God suddenly? She doesn't indicate that in her statement. And that's says something. I don't know if she believes in God, but she's on a path to believe in God. She seems to want to believe in God. So I think she's moving in that direction, even though I don't think she does yet. So I do think, I do think it's more, and again, she didn't have to mention she goes to church on Sundays and is learning about Christianity. And again, look at her husband. I think you'll learn a lot from the fact that she's married to an Alphagus and who is a standard conservative, who is religious, as a kind of British religious, not evangelical religious, but religious, goes to church on Sunday, believes values come from religion. Again, whether they believe in God or not, whether she believes in God, who knows if she ever will. We'll see. We'll see what happens from now on. Francisco says, when I tried to defend America, people all the time put out wars America fought, the Korean, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan were pretty bad and killed a lot of people, which were innocent. No, it's, you have to reject that completely. America fought a lot of wars, stupid wars, where it sacrificed itself to bring freedom to other people. On the standards of altruism, America is wonderful, because there would be no South Korea today, if not for America. And there was a small hope that they might be a South Vietnam separate from North Vietnam. But America lost that war in a way that precluded South Vietnam from sustaining South Vietnam from sustaining itself, right? So, but, and Iraq, Iraq was Operation Iraqi Freedom. We did everything, sacrificed our troops, sacrificed gazillions of dollars, not for American self interest, but to bring democracy to Iraq. And the same with Afghanistan. We stayed there for 20 years to try to bring them civilization. So, I agree that all of these wars are rotten wars because they're all wars of self sacrifice. They're all wars of thinking about the benefit to others rather than your own benefit. America obviously didn't kill enough people to win the wars. Innocence. I mean, the Iraqis should have been happy, celebratory, for the fact that Americans were willing to sacrifice their young men in order to rid the Iraqis of Saddam Hussein. Instead, they turned on America, as if America had done something bad. It hadn't. Most of the civilians killed, the innocents killed in Iraq were killed because of the insurgency, not because of America. America did everything it could not to kill any civilians. It killed very few before the insurgency. So instead of the Iraqis being grateful for the sacrifice, true sacrifice that America committed in getting rid of Saddam Hussein, they're at fault for everybody who died there, particularly post the first few weeks of the war. The same in Afghanistan. We got rid of the Taliban for them. We gave them an opportunity to establish a free country. We gave them money. We gave them troops. We gave them education. We gave them a gazillion things. How did they reward us by supporting the Taliban in trying to overturn that? America is at fault here, but at fault towards Americans, towards its troops, towards its soldiers, not towards the Iraqis and Afghans or the Vietnamese or the Koreans. And the Koreans are thankful, I think, because they got a South Korea, they got a free country. James says, is consumerism bad? I was traveling and realized some places are all about shopping and nonstop materialism. Do you think this is a bad thing or a good thing? What does it say about the culture? I think overall, it is a good thing. I think it's over the top and too much when there's nothing else, when people don't appreciate culture, when people don't focus on culture, and when they let the materialism be on consuming for them. So I have nothing against lots of consumerism. Yes, the world, to a large extent, is one big mall. But that's a beautiful thing in many respects. I wish it was also a big museum. I wish there was respect and admiration for good music. I wish there were other spiritual values that people cared about. But I don't want to take away from them caring about some material, a lot of material things. I want to add to that them caring about spiritual values as well. So I am not a critic of consumerism. Although I am a critic of materialism and overly obsessing about the material, particularly when it comes at the expense of your own character, your own soul, when it comes at the expense of kind of a more spiritual engagement with things like aesthetics. Richard, a commentator stated San Francisco cleaned up to avoid she criticizing capitalism. Yeah, it's okay if I criticize. LA lacks civil laws, let people crap in the streets, not capitalism. It's an economic system, not a political system. What do you think? No, it is a political system, but we don't have it. The point is that we don't live under capitalism. We live under the mixed economy, under a mixed political system, a system of some freedom and a lot of not not freedom. In a true capitalist society, the sidewalks would be privately owned. And there would be no extra mint in the street. In a true capitalist society, the government would be our representatives and seeking to protect our rights, not to not to impress foreign leaders. So the problem is capitalism is a social, political, economic system that doesn't exist today. We have a little bit of it and a lot of statism. And it's the statists who don't clean up the streets. If the streets were owned by the store owners that lie in those streets, they would be clean. They would be clean. But the streets are not the responsibility of the store owners, the streets are the responsibility of city government. And city government has other priorities, i.e. appeasing the homeless, catering to the homeless, except when she visits and then they clean them up. I mean, it's disgusting and insulting to the American people. Jai Jai Jigwi says, are political authorities, governments in the West, in the pocket of some way under the spell of Islamic forces, it almost seems conspiratorial. No. Other than we like to appease the Saudis. And by the way, it's an item in the news. I'll mention it tomorrow maybe. The Arab League met in the Saudis, among others, among several Arab countries, like eight or nine of them, basically vetoed a proposition that would have been very, very anti-Israel, and very, and quite pro-Hamas, and very anti-West. And Saudi Arabia, and some of the Gulf States, and Egypt, and Jordan, and a number of others, Djibouti, and I think Sudan as well, basically voted against it or abstained from it, which made it impossible for the resolution to pass. But no, I don't think there's a conspiracy. I think it's just altruism, and it just states, it's just political correctness. It's just world culture out there. And yeah, that is, there's no conspiracy. We do try to appease the Saudis, for a variety of reasons, including oil. James says, is the UK getting worse? I wanted to live in London over the last three years. It appears to feed them economically, speech, and et cetera, getting, yes. I mean, a few years ago, I was very optimistic about England, primarily because the Conservative government, it seemed like it was moving in the right direction. And then suddenly, they took a left turn, and they're horrible. They're really, really, really bad. They need to lose the next election in a landslide. Not that I wish the Labour Party on anybody, but the Conservatives need to lose. They really need to lose. They need to lose big in significant ways. Antonio says, thank you for what you say and do. I appreciate it. Thank you, Antonio. John says, objectivism is a religion. No, it's not. I mean, it doesn't qualify as a religion even by the most simplest basic definition of religion. And mainly, there's just no faith in objectivism. And if you exclude faith and exclude the mystical, and you exclude accepting things just because, then it's not a religion. You might not agree with objectivism, and that's fine. You might think it's a shitty philosophy, and that's fine. But to mislabel it is just dumb. The fact that objectivism has a morality, an absolutist morality, the fact that objectivism views good and evil as existing in the world, not as just metaphysically existing, but existing in human beings in the world, in their actions does not make it a religion. The reality is that the West is so steeped in skepticism that anybody that says anything with any kind of conviction is labeled a religionist, and that's just sloppy thinking. It's just sloppy thinking. It's just not true. All right. Thank you guys. Thank you to all the superchatters. I really, really appreciate it. And thank you for those of you who are watching. Don't forget to like the show before you leave. It doesn't cost you anything to click that button to like it, and it's not like the whole world will know that you like this video, so your privacy is maintained. But if you do want to share it, that would be even better. And then on top of that, if you are not a subscriber, please consider subscribing to the show. That would be fantastic. So thank you guys. Thank to all the superchatters. Thank you for those of you who are respectful for being on the chat. I'm not thanking those of you who are not respectful. And yeah, I'll see you tonight, 7 p.m. East Coast time, and then again tomorrow for another edition of a News Roundup. Bye, everybody.