 fundamental principles of freedom, rational self-interest. And individual fundamental principles of freedom, rational self-interest. Alright everybody, welcome to your Unrocks show, on this Sunday. It's not where I am today, but it's nighttime over here. What are we? 9pm in Tbilisi, Georgia. We are 9 hours ahead of the east coast, 12 hours ahead of the west coast. It feels like you're on the other side of the planet or something, when you're out here in Georgia. Particularly this time of year, I don't know about the clocks. Does everybody, maybe they don't change their clocks or something. It seems like it's further away than usual. Anyway, Tbilisi has been, so I'll give you a quick update of Tbilisi in about the rest of the week, then we'll talk about a couple of small topics and then we'll jump into the main topic, which is national divorce. So of all the places in, I'd say of all the places, really in Europe, the place where it seems to get the biggest crowds and the most motivated audiences and the most activity. When I come, they absolutely utilize every second of my time doing something. Of all the places in Europe, by far the most active and engaging is Tbilisi, it's Georgia. I arrived here on Friday, I did three talks on Friday and then on the last talk on Friday night, we had over 100 people at the talk, all young high school students, college students, pretty amazing. And then on Saturday and Sunday, they ran this colloquium called A is A and you know, we spent the first hour talking about Ayn Rand's Essay man's rights for an hour and a half, then we broke for lunch, then another hour and a half, we talked about the nature of government, Ayn Rand's Essay. That was on Saturday, then on Sunday, we did the first hour and a half, we talked about my essay on inequality, and then after lunch we had another hour and a half talking about the money speech, Francisco's money speech. So it was a blast, it was a lot of fun, so kind of more seminar-like, smaller number of kids, most of them high school students, so that was fun and I think these kids are going to continue with different programs around Ayn Rand. So wow, so much objective activity in Georgia. And then on Saturday, after I did these three hours of kind of seminars, I then went, I did a couple of interviews, I'll tell you about one of them in a minute, one for a classical liberal program here in Georgia that specializes in educating high school kids about free markets and about politics, but primarily economics and politics of free markets. And by a local businessman who has his own podcast and is interested in objectivism but is interested in generally in free market ideas. All of them will be recorded, all of them will go up, all of them will be published on, at least the ones I did for the classical liberal group will go up on my website, but it was really funny, I almost laughed during the interview with the classical liberal group and I'm glad that Abouyin is here and he can hear this because they just said come and do an interview and we did the first half, no I think it was in the first interview. So we're doing the interview talking about classical liberalism and the challenges it faces and what it is and how objectivism is different and what the progress is and what the past was and generally what the prospects are and of course they ask me this question of, I'm starting to laugh because I think it's kind of funny, they ask me this question of why are libertarians in America so pro-Russia? This question that I was told yesterday, nobody in Europe asks, nobody, not a single person, not a single libertarian. Well, these libertarians asked me out of the blue, we had a long discussion about that. It was actually pretty good so I'm looking forward to posting that on the website so you guys can hear my answer, I think you pretty much know, what was the light switch? I can't find the light switch. Anyway, I think you guys pretty much know my answer but I think you'll find it interesting kind of how, the exchange. By the way, you won't find more pro-Ukrainian people anyway than Georgians because Georgians live with the Russian occupation. Georgians realized that the next country on the list after Ukraine was certainly going to be Georgia if the Russians won and that the Russians, they completely understand the motivations of Russia, this idea of NATO expansion, motivating the Russians, it seems to them like a joke and bizarre. And so I found the Georgians, and I expect I'll find the polls, I found the Georgians to be really, really good on Ukraine and Russia, really, really good on understanding Putin and understanding the Russians more broadly. And so anyway, so in addition of course to all these intellectual events, there were dinners, huge amounts of food, Georgian food is really, really good, so we ate a lot and it's been exhausting and I'm wiped out. So I'm wiped out, that's why I didn't do a show last night but I decided I would try to do a show tonight. I don't expect tonight's show to be very long but I did want to do a show and I know it's kind of morning for many of you so we'll see how many people join us live. I expect that this is one of those shows that will be viewed a lot more after the fact than live. In the Super Chat again, I don't put as much emphasis on the Super Chat. I don't know if Catherine is here, Catherine is here. Catherine, zero dollars so far so come on, let's do it. We need to meet some goals because while I travel I do fewer shows and yet my monthly bills don't shrink so let's try to raise some Super Chat money in spite of the fact that there are fewer people. Hopefully we can maybe not make the goal but make a good showing in spite of that. I have no idea what Catherine is talking about, face to kiss, drinking coffee. What the hell? Coffee time. All right, you got to get that coffee in you to get motivated and let's get the show rolling. Okay, two quick stories both of them related to presidential politics I think for next year or later this year really. One is I found it interesting that DeSantis was asked on Fox News over the weekend while Biden really was in Ukraine, what he thought about the Ukraine war and support of America for Ukraine and he completely avoided the question. He used opportunity to criticize all kinds of things about Biden. Some of them relevant to Ukraine, Biden's weakness, Afghanistan withdrawal, all things like that but nothing, nothing, nothing, right? That, you know, but he ultimately evaded the question, didn't give any indication what a DeSantis administration would do about Ukraine, how it would handle it, what it would do, what it would say. And so that's kind of interesting and it's obviously politically sound because so much of the Republican Party today is split. It's split across the lines of kind of the mega crowd being very pro-Putin or many of them being very pro-Putin certainly anti-Ukraine and anti-U.S. support for Ukraine whereas I'd say more traditional Republicans, mainstream Republicans are very pro-Ukraine and anti-Russia and he doesn't want to alienate either one of those groups. So it's going to be very interesting political campaign. How a presidential candidate is going to have a Republican presidential candidate has to find a way to appeal to these very different groups, very different constituencies who have very, very, very different priorities and very, very, very different ways of looking at the world, particularly when it comes to foreign policy but also domestic policy. It'll be very interesting to see how DeSantis handles questions about maybe tariffs, maybe what do you call it, industrial policy, how he differentiates himself from Trump, how he shows he's the same as Trump in order to get his voters aligned. So yeah, I'm definitely looking forward to seeing DeSantis wiggle, wiggle his way through the presidential elections and all the other candidates of course seeing what they are. Remind you, if you want to ask me a question, if you want to direct the answer for me, there is a super chat. If you don't want to or can't support me at the level Tesla is with $20, thank you Tesla. Then you can do $2, $1 so there are no excuses not to use the super chat. So I am going to focus on questions in the super chat and not in the regular chat. I also can't follow the regular chat all the time. The super chat questions on anything, they all get answered, all of them. Unless a technical problem happens and it gets dropped and then I answer them later. All right, let's see what else did I want to say? Oh, so that's one presidential candidate, that's DeSantis, which I think is interesting and wouldn't it be nice if presidential candidates could actually just say what they think, say what the policy is going to be, say what they believe and try to convince the people, use rhetoric to convince the people that their position is right rather than stick their finger into the wind and try to figure out what the people are thinking and what the people believe in and then accommodating the message to them. I can dream people, I can imagine a candidate that does that maybe one day existing? Not right now obviously. All right, I also wanted another candidate, this one kind of out of left field a little bit, but I think really interesting and certainly going to throw a lot of dynamism and I think some real discussion and real debate into the fray and that's Vivek Ramaswamy. I don't know if you followed Vivek if you haven't, you should. Vivek is a businessman, a former biotech executive. He is the guy that has led the charge against ESG. He founded an investment company that specifically is not ESG, does not invest in ESG companies and gotten a lot of traction and the investment fund is very large. Well, I think he's basically said he's running for the, in the Republican primary to be a presidential candidate. He is super dynamic, beautifully articulate. You're not going to get any wishy-washy BS from him. He is the antithesis of a politician, but this is the big difference with Trump. Super smart, off the charts smart, off the charts articulate knows exactly what he's saying and really engage. Now he's Indian, Vivek is his name, whether American people are ready to elect a Vivek Ramaswamy. I don't know, but this guy is interesting. Now it turns out that I agree with a lot of what he says and then some things he says I disagree violently. But I think he is, he is so radical in many of what he says, even when the bad stuff, but also the good stuff, that he's going to force a real debate, he's going to force a real debate in America. I mean one of his lines is America's lost sight of their ideals that make it great. So he is explicitly referring to America's past as a great nation and the American principles that made it a great nation. He explicitly refers to the founding fathers and the constitution and declaration in terms of the documents that shaped American culture. He is definitely so far as I've seen a free marketer and good on that. I'll get to a couple of things, I mean there are only a couple of things that I disagree with him that I don't know of now. I have a theory that I disagree with him on other things as well, but it would be interesting to see this. So here's some things that he stands for, right? Dismantle Affirmative Action. I mean this is a Republican candidate for president saying affirmative action has to go. That's great. Abandoned climate, religion. That's amazing. This guy's obviously been influenced by Alex, by Alex Epstein. He's probably read Alex's book. Okay we'll get to that in a second, let's see what else is good. Shut down the Department of Education and other agencies. That's good. Fire most federal bureaucrats and have I think he wants to have an eight year term limits on all government bureaucrats. And he says this is just the beginning. He's got lots of other, but then he says things like, so that's the good stuff. And it's not just good, it's very good stuff, right? It's radical, it's dramatic, it's big, it's country changing in a positive way, not a negative way. And he says this in an articulate way, in a passionate, super charismatic. I've seen him up on stage, not live, but on video. He is super charismatic. You want to look at this guy, you want to listen to this guy, you want to pay attention to what he's saying. And then, but this is the stuff I don't like, right? Use military force, the military, to secure the border. So obviously anti-immigration is some significant way. How much I don't know yet we'll find out. But this one is ridiculous and decimate the drug cartels. So one of the things he's really running on is, I think Trump has mentioned this. We should use the American military to crush the drug cartels. In other words, we should send the military into Mexico and we should wipe them all out. We should kill them all. We should have a thing and we should get really, really, really, really tough on drug dealers and drug smugglers and drug this. So sadly, he would continue, enhance, put on steroids the war on drugs, which I think is a massive mistake and very, very, very unfortunate. But you know, this is his tagline on his website. Capitalist, capitalist, proud capitalist. That's pretty good. Capitalist and citizen on a mission to revive excellence in American life. That's pretty good. You know, so while I would love, I would love to, you know, I'd love to be able to see more from him. I hope he makes it up on the stage in the debates and articulates these arguments and gives some energy and he'll be the only charismatic guy on the stage. And, you know, really, you know, create some dynamism on stage. So I encourage you to follow Vivek Ramaswamy. Again, some of his views, I think his views on free speech are bad. His views, I think he wants to make political speech a civil right, which means force, use the government force to force the digital media to force them to allow all political speech on their platform. In other words, to deny them free speech. I think on a number of issues he's probably very bad. This idea of going to war with the drug cartels is a really, really bad idea. But on other things, he's super good. And if he can bring that energy and these ideas onto the Republican stage and force them to talk about it and force a dialogue about actual ideas and some of which are very good ideas, that could really change the dynamics of the election. So I'm rooting for Vivek. I'm rooting for him to be on stage. I'm rooting for him to have the opportunity to express these ideas to the national audience and to force the Republicans, if you will, to confront and deal with his ideas and confront and deal with all of these things. So that is my, that's Vivek. So those are my two, yeah, that's it. Let's see, what do we want to do now? Yeah, as Moslav says on the chat, Vivek was actually on Alex Epstein's power hour. And look, I'm not endorsing Vivek. I just want him on stage. I want him to bring that excitement to the stage. But I'm not endorsing him, but at least when it comes to energy, it seems clear that he's been influenced by Alex and on other issues. It's almost like he read maybe my State of the Union address and has taken some ideas from there. I don't think he has. Maybe he's heard some of my talks on capitalism. I would not be surprised at all if he has heard my morality of capitalism talk or my inequality talk or any of my other talks. So I'd be surprised if he hadn't. I think a lot of people have listened to those talks, heard those talks on YouTube, watched them. So, yeah, that's it. All right, let's see. Okay, so let's talk about this idea of a national divorce. And this comes from a tweet by Marjorie Taylor Greene. Marjorie Taylor Greene is a congresswoman from the state of Georgia. And this is what she tweeted when it was February 20th, so about almost a week ago. She tweeted, we need a national divorce. We need to separate by red states and blue states and shrink the federal government. Everyone I talk to says this, from the sick and disgusting woke culture issues, shoved down our throats to the Democrats' traitorous America last policies. We are done. We are done. So, sapé, red states, go red states, blue states, go blue states. And let's get this over with. Right? Let's have the national divorce, the separation. You could call it a divorce. So what do we think of this? I think this expresses a lot of different things. And it says a lot about the American right today and how bankrupt it really is. And how defeatist it really is. This is Marjorie Taylor Greene, who in her Twitter description calls herself a proud American. What does that even mean? What is America? Is America blue states? Is it red states? Is it both? The combination of all? Is it just one? Is it just the other? Obviously, she wants to break up America. One could argue and I would argue that she wants to destroy America. She wants to annihilate America. She doesn't want America. So what does she want? She wants red state. I don't know what they'll call red state. I don't know what name they will give it. But she's not a proud American. So first, she should change the title. She should change the description. She's not trying to change America in her image, which is what Americans have done. Americans who were patriots, Americans who loved America did. They fought for their country. They fought not on the battlefield necessarily, but they fought in the intellectual battlefield. They fought for their ideas. What the right has come to a position today of not wanting to fight for their ideas. Maybe realizing that they have no ideas to offer in its place. Maybe the right has now recognized that there is nothing to argue. There's no point in arguing because they don't believe in reason anymore. They don't believe in argumentation anymore. They don't believe in logic anymore. And you can argue neither does the far left. So that there is no way to reason ourselves out of this conflict because both bodies have given up on reason. And if all that's left is divorce. There's no talking. There's no convincing. There's no arguing. Because all of those make a very basic assumption. And that assumption is the truth is achieved by reason. The truth is something that we can figure out. Now we know Marjorie Taylor Greene doesn't believe that. She is not an advocate of reason. She's not an advocate of rationality. This is one of the most irrational people certainly in Congress, but maybe in America. You know she is an emotionalist, a conspiracy theory advocate. I mean wacky conspiracy theories. QAnon nonsense. She is a religionist. And people who hold a religion and hold tight to it and hold it firmly. You can't reason with them. It's not about proof. It's not about logic. There's no argumentation to be had there. I mean some religious people you can and some people you can argue them out of religion. But Marjorie Taylor Greene is not one of those. She is just like the left she criticizes. She is an emotionalist. She is a subjectivist who has chosen emotionally and subjectively a religion, commandments and a set of pseudo-principles to follow. But not based on reason, logic, not based on argumentation, not based on an argument that she could articulate, but based on how she feels. And given that she realizes that the other side is similar to her in that the other side, the left, is also subjectivist, emotionalist, can't reason, has abandoned logic and abandoned reality, she comes to conclusion therefore that we can't get along. There's just no way to get along. The visions of these two emotionalist sides do not align. So what we need to do is separate. Of course how we separate, we'll talk a little bit about how we separate and what that would mean and the practicality of that. And then we'll talk about what I think of the whole idea and what I think about America, because I think that's important. So one of the people commenting on a tweet, I thought this was a good, he says, if that terrible thing were to happen, to which red state would you move? Marjorie Taylor Greene. Because she is from Georgia, remember, and Georgia has just elected three Democratic U.S. senators in a row and actually went from Joe Biden in 2020 and is represented by two Democratic senators. And this is the practical problem that the secessionists, of course people like Michael Malish jumped on this. Oh my God, they were so happy to hear it. And the libertarian types who want to see secession and generally want to see America destroyed and in ashes, thought this was amazing, thought this was wonderful. They jumped on this opportunity. But how do you actually implement this? Rural America, I mean the reality is that it's not true that there are red states and blue states so much as. It's to the generally rural areas tilt red and that's true in blue states, upstate New York, rural New York, tilt red. Farmers in rural California, there is such a thing as rural California, tilt red. We know that Austin tilted blue, but did you know that every single major city in Texas is blue? Dallas is blue, Fort Worth is a toss up, San Antonio is blue, Houston is blue. So what do you do with Texas? Texas is maybe 55 Republican, 45 Democrat, but the cities are flipped, 55 Democrat, 45 Republican. Do you do like the Cameroos and you empty the cities and you get rid of the people in the cities? What do you do? Do you force them to migrate out? Do you force Democrats to leave red states and Republicans to leave blue states? Or does red America maintain its blueish cities? I mean cities, the areas that are vibrant, the areas where there's culture, the areas where there's industry, the areas which actually produce an overwhelming majority of our GDP, those cities are blue, like it or not, they are. So how do we deal with that? I mean if you just took rural states and you create a country from all the rural areas, it would be a very poor country, relatively speaking. Aren't the cities where the wealth is created? What's the practice? I mean you could do what Pakistan and India did. When India declared independence, they basically had a national divorce. India basically said, we don't want Muslims here. We're going to create a special country for Muslims, Pakistan. And all the Muslims can go to Pakistan. They also created ultimately, also Bangladesh, what was called Eastern Pakistan. And most cities in India were like majority Hindu, but a big minority, not a little minority, a big minority of Muslims. So a lot of those cities kicked their Muslims out and forced them to go to Pakistan. And the Hindus that actually lived in Pakistan were forced to go to India. And in that transition, in that moving people and forcing them in each direction, two million people died. Two million people died. That's a lot of people because of the violence between these groups. I mean, is that what we want? Do we want an ideological test to be a member of the red state nation or the blue state nation? How is this going to work exactly? So the whole thing is stupid, impractical, anti-American. And at the end of the day, it's basically defeatist giving up on America, giving up on Americans, giving up on reason, giving up on the ability to persuade, and wanting to see America burn. I mean, this is truly nihilistic. This is the end of America. A national divorce, a separation of blue states and red states, not only to mention that they're not contiguous, so you'd have to have red states in the middle of blue states and blue states in the middle of red states and so on. It would be a total disaster for America. It would be a total disaster for Americans. I mean, you should really think, where would you want to live? I mean, it's one thing to live in Texas if it's part of the United States of America. But do you want to live in Texas when it's just Texas, an independent state of Texas? And maybe all the Democrats or some of the Democrats have all left, so it's a true one-party state. And then do you want to live in that one-party state? I mean, this is just horrific. And Matt Walsh, of course, Matt Walsh, one of my favorite conservatives these days, favorite conservatives to criticize, Matt Walsh came out and said, yeah, you know, I don't have anything in common with Americans, with other Americans. What do we have in common? People who vote Democratic, I don't have anything in common with them, and they don't have anything in common with me. We live in a different world, a different culture, different values, different priorities. So yes, we need a national divorce and there are a bunch of these, you know, new right conservatives who just love this, who think this is a fantastic idea, without thinking. And I consider these people fundamentally anti-American and fundamentally anti-reason and divorce from reality, basically. And one of the reasons I think this, one of the reasons I think this is, as you know, I travel around the world. I spend time in many countries and many places. Here I am now in Georgia, in Tbilisi. And to say that America and Americans have nothing in common is bizarre. When you visit Prague and you meet Czech people and you visit, I don't know, tomorrow, you'll be visiting Poland and you meet Polish people and you meet you here in Georgia. I mean, wonderful people everywhere, particularly the people I meet because they're self-selected. But there's definitely cultural, you know, language, fundamental differences. Even Americans who disagree with one another are far more similar to one another, you know, in terms of attitudes, in terms of the way they think and the way they dress and what they eat and the sports that they love and all this other stuff. Then the difference between Americans and pretty much anybody else in the world. So, first of all, you realize that there's a lot, maybe not yet at the level of, we'll get to the level of ideas, but maybe not explicitly the way we think about ideas today at the level of ideas, but in many other respects. But even at the level of ideas. And put aside the crazy left and the crazy right. Most Americans. The most Americans share some basic values, some basic set of ideas. And I think the answer is yes. It's not necessarily explicit, it's not something they could necessarily state. But I think that most Americans even today have some semblance of a commonality, of a common ideas that are, that they've inherited from the American past, that they've inherited from the American founding. I still think after traveling all over the world and seeing people everywhere, in Asia, in Europe, in South America, that there is a individualism in America. Not the kind of individualism I would want, not the kind of individualism I would strive for. Certainly not at the level of the consistency. But there's still some sense of an individual should be left alone to pursue his life. To some extent. Again, take out the extreme left and the crazy left and the crazy right. Take those out. People, most Americans, people who are not part of those, whether they vote Democratic or vote Republican, they generally, inconsistently, have this general notion of, yeah, if you push them, people should be allowed to do what they want to do. And, you know, as long as they don't hurt others, as long as they don't hurt themselves, as long as they don't, and they've got a long list of as long as they don't. But more so than in other cultures. Other cultures, even at their best, there's a certain element of ethnic tribalism that exists in the culture that Americans just don't typically have. They're Americans. They're not, you know, I was in Czechoslovakia, Czech-Slovakia. A divorce. They had a divorce. Why? What was the disagreement between the Czechs and the Slovaks? Well, the disagreement was, these were Czechs and these were Slovaks. They have different language. They have a very, very similar culture. But they have a different language. And they come from a different tribe. And they have slightly different histories. And they come from a different tribe. But here you are in a country that should be united. There's no reason for there to be a Czech and a Slovakia. But they're not because of stupid tribal reasons. Because they look a little different, maybe. They speak a little different, maybe. They have a different history. And they certainly belong to different tribes sometime in their history. That kind of attitude doesn't exist in America. It doesn't exist in America. I mean, yes, the critical race theory people would like to, we created in a sense of we all identified by a skin color or whatever. And yes, the people in extreme right, many of them, would like to form their white nationalist whatever. Fundamentally, Americans are not tribal in that way. People have become tribal in other ways. But they're not tribal in that way. And in that sense, they're much more oriented towards the individual and towards moral character and towards that than Europeans. I mean, Mike says Czech and Slovak are mutually intelligible. They can understand each other. That's how close their languages are. But the differences are so stark that they have to have two different political entities. Which, by the way, is mainly the Slovaks that have embraced market reforms much slower than the Czech Republic has. Both slower than they should have, of course. So I think when you travel around the world, one of the things that happens, so one of the things is that Americans still have some sense, some leftovers of individualism, at least pretense of individualism. And they're not as tribal in the same sense as the Europeans certainly are. And other countries are like, you know, even the Japanese or the Koreans. But it's also true that Americans have a certain respect for technology. Americans have a respect for business that you certainly don't see in Europe. You don't see in Europe. I mean, there are exceptions, of course. Many of the people I meet are the exception. But generally, Europe has this deep mistrust of business that goes much deeper than it does in the United States. Generally, Europeans have a distrust of tech. You can see that in the resistance of GMO and anything GMO and a panic about GMO. Although, again, that's changing in the U.S. You can see that change with people's resistance to vaccines and the whole craziness around the vaccines. But it's still true that Americans are more respectful of science, technology, business, progress, success, wealth. Americans are less envious. And when I say Americans, these are kind of common things that I think unite Americans. They're not of the extreme left and not of the extreme right, but people in the center. And so, you know, the idea that Americans now are so divided that they cannot live together I think is just bizarre and absurd. Now, I think Americans are wrong on so many things and deteriorating and getting worse. But in spite of that, they are more in common than they have differences. Now, it's true that the extremes, that is not true. If we're going to have a divorce, the kind of divorce I would like is I'd like to take like the BLM types, the CRT types, the kind of the crazy leftists. And I'd like to take the Marjorie Taylor Greene's and the really the crazy right. And I'd like to give them a territory of their own and let them fight it out. I don't know. Could we give them Alaska? Alaska is too many natural resources we'd have to give up. I don't know. We'll have to think of a really good place. Maybe we can carve out the middle of the desert somewhere and just let them be there and then we'll divorce them. Now, the rest of Americans, what I would call sane America or semi-sane America, could divorce the crazies. Another thing you realize when you travel around the world is really how good we have it in the U.S. It's so easy to focus on the negative. It's so easy to focus on the wackiness, on the craziness, on the insanity of the different political crazies trying to pull in each one direction. But the reality is that we live wealthy lives. We have a lot of freedoms. We can do a lot of different things. I know a lot of people out there, a lot of objectivists, a lot of libertarians, a lot of conservatives left us, I'm sure. The problems in America today is excuses for their own failures. Excuses for not trying. Excuses for not producing. Excuses for not having a good career, a good life or whatever. But these are excuses. You can still have an amazing life in America. You can still produce and create and build in most professions. I've articulated in the past the kind of professions that I think are more difficult. But you can do well in America, even today, even with the wackiness. You know, critical race theory does not touch you that much. Yes, in employment, this DEI is insane and it's really hurtful. It seems to be shrinking a little bit, but it is going to stay. We are going to have to fight it and live with it at the same time. It is going to hurt. There is going to be massive injustices. But again, compared to most other areas in human history, as compared to most other countries in the world, you have amazing opportunities to express yourself, to do your thing, to build businesses, to create values, to trade in those values, to build wealth, to create wealth around you. I mean, when I talk to people around the world, there is still a longing to come to the U.S. with all its problems, with all its challenges. There are still people knocking at our borders trying to get in and not just poor, middle class, rich. They would love to get in if we would allow them in. So, you know, we get so bogged down with negativity. We get so bogged down with the daily political events that are happening. We forget that America is still the place where, you know, a significant percentage, far greater than its share population or even share of GDP in the world, a significant percentage of GDP actually happens. And we forget that. You know, innovations in biotech, innovation in technology, innovation in almost anything happen in the U.S. Yes, other countries do some. And the fact that it's a big country, the fact that there are many states, allows you to move, allows you to live in different places, allows you to experience different things. You want to live in rural America? You want to spend a year or two in rural America and move to a big city? You can do that. You can live in New York and then in Austin and then in LA. You can move and travel and see and do a variety of different things in ways that are unimaginable in most of the rest of the world. Now, I'm glad for the European Union that it makes it possible for you to do that at least to some extent in Europe. You can travel. You can go across borders. You can work in different places once you have a European Union passport. You can experience some of that, but it's just not the same as in America where it's one country with a very similar culture in spite of blue and red, with a uniform language and a very, very similar values in spite of us always highlighting the differences, highlighting the challenges. Like it or not, and I know many of you don't like it, America is a pretty great place to live even today. And I'm not willing to give up on America. I'm not willing to say it's a lost cause. And I am certain, no, I am absolutely certain that a divided America, a divorced America is much worse than the whole. I would not want to live in red America. I have real fears that red America, particularly if it becomes dark red, particularly if the blue people leave, is a place that's dull, that lacks culture. But it's also a place where it approaches theocracies. There's no accident that the big conservatives are not talking about the girls in Iran. I don't want to live in a place where Matt Walsh's attitude towards women is the dominant attitude in the culture. I don't want to live in a world in which the conservatives' attitude towards Putin is the dominant attitude in the culture. I wouldn't want to live in a dark red place. And of course I wouldn't want to live in a blue place. I don't want to live in the socialism. I don't want to live in a place that makes me feel guilty for having a particular color skin. I don't want to live in a place that regulates and controls everything. Now whether if there was a divorce they would become bluer and redder, and they would stick to that. I don't know, it's hard to tell. But I have no, there's no question in my mind, no question in my mind that a blue America is worse than America, and a red America is worse than America. What I want to fight for is America. What I want to fight for are the right values, the founding values of America. And by the way, those founding values of America are not red and they're not blue. Republicans years ago, maybe decades ago lost the claim to the founding fathers. They have no clue what the founding fathers represent, what they wrote, what they meant, what individual rights means, which is the founding concept of this country. And of course I don't have to explain to you that blue America has no claim to the founding fathers. I want to fight for the founders. I want to fight for the enlightenment. I want to fight for the values that made America great and can still make America great. I want to make America great again, not in a superficial, stupid way. I want to make America great again by resurrecting the ideas that made it great in the first place. Ideas that remnants of individualism, respect for science, respect for technology, respect for progress, respect for achievement still exist in the culture. I want to take those little ashes, little sparks that exist in the culture and elevate them and turn them into a raging fire. Not give up. I'm happy to give up on Marjorie Taylor Greene. I did that as soon as I heard who she was and what she stood for. I'm happy to give up on AOC. I did that as soon as I understood what she stood for. Happy to give up on the crazy left, on the crazy right. I'm not willing to give up on normal Americans. Not quite yet. Now, maybe I'm being naive. Quite possible I'm being naive. And Americans do no matter what, so who cares, divorce, no divorce. I'm not quite there yet. And the more you travel around the world, the more you see other countries, the more you realize how good life is in America, and the more you realize how much upside there still is there and how much harder the battle is in these other countries because you have to overcome history, you have to overcome ethnicity, you have to overcome a certain status quo of xenophobia that they just can't give up. They just don't know how to get rid of. If I can't change America, I'm not sure we can change anyway. All right. So, I mean, I consider Marjorie Taylor Greene to be a treasonous, this statement to be treasonous, not treasonous in the legal sense, treasonous in the intellectual sense. I find her and everything she represents and all the people she represents despicable and horrible. Let's not give up on this wonderful country. And I have to say one of the things you discover when you travel around the world is how much people all over the world still look to America to be inspired. How much they hope we don't give up on America? How much they hope we can somehow salvage the American? How much they realize that their own fates as individuals, as countries, lie with the future of America and what happens to America. So, if they don't give up on us, we shouldn't give up on us. And yes, I get a lot of questions and I know people disagree. I get a lot of questions of what's up with American libertarians and what's up with American conservatives supporting Putin? Well, what's always been up with them? They've always been inconsistent. They've always had ideological problems. Don't focus on them. Majority of Americans support Ukraine. A majority of Americans are not CRT and then a majority of Americans are not crazy right-wingers. All right. So, yes, I am not exactly optimistic, but I don't see any other option but to fight for America. I don't think there are any other options. There are no other realistic options. There's no, when I'm going to split up a state that's going to have freedom and this fantasy that people have about red states and blue states is nothing but a fantasy and not a very, you know, fantasy should be wonderful and sexy and cool and joyful and pleasurable. This was a nightmare. All right. Let's see, what are we doing? All right. We've got some super chat questions. So, thank you, everybody. We're still quite short of our granted ambitious goal for a show this time of day, but, you know, I'm always hopeful. And a show this time of day, which I didn't announce in advance and all of that stuff. So, and it's probably got a title that's not super attractive because it starts with life and Tbilisi. Most people, maybe my audience is a little different. Most people don't know what Tbilisi actually is. They wouldn't even know, certainly wouldn't know where it is. All right. Let's see, let's start with $50 questions. We have two of those. And then we'll go to some of the other questions. Again, thank you to everybody who's contributed. I'm just scanning to see who I've missed. If I've missed anything dramatic. All right. I think we're, I actually think we're good. So, thank you. I know there's a number of you who've given without actually asking a question, so I appreciate that. All right. Adam asks or says, national divorce already happened in 1776. Restitution of a constitutional republic along with states rights and protection of all individuals is what we need. Not more division. I agree. I think, I think, you know, fragmentation is good for dictators. Fagmentation is good for the authoritarians. Fagmentation is good for the wacky side of things. And what we need today is education, education, education. What I say all the time, what we need today is more understanding, greater understanding of individual rights and so on. I mean, I am super excited again about being here in Georgia because of the reception and the understanding and the level of intelligent interaction I get from Georgians. You know, I really wish that America made it easier for these people, for these amazing people to immigrate to America because maybe what America needs is a fresh dose of immigrants who understand the value of America and why they're immigrating to America and the ideas that made America great and made it so attractive. So, yes, we need individual rights and we need unity. Surprisingly, I mean, it was very much for unity. Some kind of finding, you know, and defining the things that we can all agree on even as we disagree on particulars. I need to reread that essay. There's an essay where she talks about national unity. I should reread that and do a show just on that. All right, Frank says, the mind is so skilled at creating patterns that it isn't value-focused, that if it isn't value-focused, we will find ideas of fear to comfort ourselves. Reading the Invasion of Europe by the Barbarians. Who wrote the Invasion of Europe by the Barbarians and they said, did they mean by the Barbarians the Muslims? I mean, what, or did they resist the historical invasion of the barbaric tribes from Central Europe into Europe? So, I'm curious about that. But yes, when you're not focused on values, when you're not focused on being rational and connected to reality, the most powerful and motivating emotion can be and usually is fear. Fear is a driver and it's a driver of most crazy causes, most detached from reality causes, where again, extreme left, extreme right, crazy left, crazy right, fear drives much of it. And I think what drives something like national divorce is fear of the other and fear of your own impotence. Your own impotence to stand up to them, your own impotence to challenge them, your own impotence to convince them, to debate them. I'm still an advocate of reason. I still believe the only way to change the world is through ideas, arguments, discussions, debates, presentation of positive ideas. Mike says, Mike Diles says, Taylor Greene should read the Federalist Papers. I suspect she's a little bit. I am pretty sure she's a little bit. She can read probably QAnon messages, but I doubt she can read a sustained intellectual argument. All right. Tessa says, will the polls let you speak? Oh, God. No, not at the university, it turns out. I don't have the details. I don't know exactly why. I'll find out tomorrow when I get to Poland. But it turns out the university has decided that I'm somehow and in some way pro-Russia and they will not. Let me speak at the university, which is super discouraging and upsetting, particularly given how pro-Ukraine I am and how even more than I'm pro-Ukraine, how anti-Russia I am and always have me. And to be accused of being pro-Russia without any evidence and without anything and then to have a talk canceled because of that, it's just sad and pathetic, not only because they feel like they have to cancel the talk, no matter what talk it is, but also because there's a real misrepresentation of fact. So I'm curious what's going on. I'm curious what is actually at the heart of the issue. I'm not sure I'll ever find out because I'm not talking to the administration of the university. Certain people in Poland are. I'll talk to them tomorrow. So we'll be giving the talk, but I'll be giving the talk in what's called the Freedom Café, Liberty Café, which is in downtown Warsaw. It is a bar. Maybe it's Freedom Bar. I think it's Freedom Bar. And it has like a cellar where you can probably fit maybe 40, 50 people if you really scrunch them together. But I expect a lot fewer people at my talk because it's at this place and not the university. I won't get the students. Anyway, it's not good. It's very disappointing. But I will be giving the talk and hopefully they will be recording the talk. If not, maybe I will call the talk. We'll see. And I mean, this Freedom Bar is kind of cool. There is behind some of the bottles of alcohol up in the bar. There is a copy of Atlas Shrugged. So this is a bar that's inspired by some free market and even objective ideas. So in the heart of Warsaw. So it's pretty cool. So we'll be speaking there. If you were, if you're in Poland and you intended to come, please note the change of address. Check out the Instagram, Facebook messaging and please come to the right place. I will be speaking. I will deliver the talk. It will be anti-Russia and it will be pro-Ukraine and it will lay out the causes of war as I see them. It will lay out what I think of Putin and what I think of Russia. And yeah, I won't be silenced on the one hand, but I don't get the location and the audience and the venue and the atmosphere that I would want, which is unfortunate. Natural Observers asked, have you had a chance to check out the painting or sculpture in Tbilisi? I have not. Unfortunately, whenever I come to Tbilisi, the focus is on wine and on food. But I need to come to Tbilisi and have a few hours off or have a day even, God forbid, a whole day off where I can actually go to museums and actually check out the sculpture and the paintings. So my guess is there were some good sculptors and I know just from some of the public sculpture that there were some good sculptors and there were some good painters in the 19th century in Georgia. Georgia is a very interesting place. Do you know that not even with Stalin and Georgian, so was Berra, the head of the KGB on the Stalin. He was also Georgian. Georgians were often the intellectuals, the political leaders within Russia. Russia occupied Georgia in the early 19th century and basically there was a short period of Georgian independence from 1918 to 1921 and then the Russians occupied them again from the part of the Soviet Union. Georgia's always been important to Russia because it got some important people came from Georgia from the perspective of Russia, not from the perspective of liberty or freedom. But Georgia also had some real classical liberals, real advocates for freedom and liberty in the 19th century, some really interesting characters. So it's a very interesting place, very small with much larger influence than you would think given its size, particularly, I'd say, on Russia. Adam says, a national divorce could be taken literally, too, unless all married couples didn't have deferring political views by a house on a blue-red-state border where the house is half in each jurisdiction. Yeah, that's right. We could do that. But I wonder if she means that you would actually have an ideological test and you would kick out people who don't fit the test. Oh, I'm being accused of being a brazenly anti-Russian, Russia-phobe. I'm not Russia-phobe because I'm not afraid of Russia, but I'm brazenly anti-Russian as was I meant. I'm brazenly anti-Russian. I'm brazenly anti-Russian because of my experiences in Russia and I'm brazenly anti-Russia from studying Putin and watching what he's doing and I'm brazenly anti-Russia because of the underlying philosophy that drives people like Dugan and drives a nationalist in Russia and drives Putin. There's great rational, really good reasons to be anti-Russian and I am. And Rand was because she believed that the culture was collectivist and mystic, mystical in ways that would be very, very difficult to change. It can be changed, you believe in free will, but it can be changed. Heurim says, oh, Iran, how do you define authoritarianism and how does Bruni Sanders fit that criteria? Well, I think authoritarianism is, and I'm not sure what ah, Iran means. I don't know what the ah is for. But authoritarian means, you know, no opposition. It means that basically an authority dictates life for people. Usually authoritarianism involves as an ism, as a political system involves single-party rule. It's not quite totalitarianism where every aspect of every, so I think China's authoritarian, moving towards totalitarianism, North Korea, Iran are totalitarian regimes. I think authoritarianism is soft totalitarianism, but it definitely involves the government and the government rules the government trying to dictate as much as possible the values, the lives, the behavior of its citizens. Is Bruni Sanders an authoritarian? He certainly is on the road to authoritarianism. I think if Bruni Sanders was president, I don't think much would happen. Basically, he couldn't get anything past Congress because Congress would be opposed to pretty much everything he wanted to do. He probably wouldn't be very sophisticated. His executive orders would be terrible. The regulatory agencies would be emboldened. We'd be more authoritarian than we are now. But is he an out-and-out authoritarian in terms of getting rid of elections and taking control of the government? No, I don't think so. I think Trump was naturally authoritarian. He wanted that kind of power. He wanted that kind of authority and believes in that kind of power and authority. It's why he liked Putin. It's why he liked Xi. It's why he liked Erdogan because he envied their authoritarian regimes. But again, he couldn't do it. The American political system is strong enough to withstand soft authoritarians. I don't think Bruni Sanders could be a dictator in the United States. I don't think Donald Trump could be a dictator in the United States even though I think both would like that. Both have that inclination. Scott says you aren't just tuning in. We'll have to re-watch. I finish a stint of work in Brazil next week and I'm taking a week's vacation in Rio. Any recommendations? Yeah, Rio. Just, Rio. Wow. Just did the touristy things. First of all, get a driver. If you're staying at a nice hotel, ask the hotel to get you a driver and tell a guide, guide, quote, driver, somebody to drive for you. Don't drive yourself. Not in Rio. And basically tell them to take you to all the scenic highlights. And just go to the scenic highlights. Go up to the Christ on the hill. But there are other scenic highlights that are even nicer. Go up to sugar, sugar thing, sugar hill, sugar whatever. Go up, go and go to all the scenic places where you get views, because I believe the Rio is the most, in terms of geography, in terms of scenery, the most beautiful city in the world. Not in terms of cityscape, but in terms of the place. So I would definitely do that. If you have time, I would go to a cross from Rio on the other side of the bay. What is the place called? Notire, something like that. Anyway, you get to see Rio from afar. There's a big park there with some observation places, just beautiful. So I would do all the sugar loaves. Sugar loaves, that's what it's called. So I would do all the touristy things in terms of scenery. I would, you know, the certain buildings in downtown Rio that are truly beautiful from the 19th century, I think there's a library there. There's a place with books and a library that's really beautiful and really amazing and worth seeing. I would go to the beach. Definitely go to the beach. Rio is all about the beach. And just put on a bathing suit and just walk along the beach. And people watch. It is one of the best places in the world for people watching. And it's just interesting to watch how Brazilians go to the beach and how every section of the beach is for a different, I mean, they're the cool kids and the moods and the gays and the, I don't know, whatever. The ones who like soccer and football. It's just interesting. And of course, the women are beautiful and they don't wear much on the beach. So that's always fun. What else? Can I say that on YouTube? I don't know if I'm allowed to say that. But what else? Yes, the ocean is beautiful. Swimming it. You know, people watching on the beach. Now, just as a caveat for everything I say about Rio, be very, very, very careful. Crime off the charts. If your wallet is sticking out, if your wallet is in a back pocket, if you have an iPhone in your pocket, you will be pickpocketed. They will take your stuff and little kids will do it and they will run faster than you can. And so, I don't know, whatever you carry, anything you don't need. If you carry a backpack, carry it in the front, not in the back. If you have a wallet, put it in your front pocket, not your back pocket. Make sure your phone is secure. Don't walk around talking with your phone. Somebody will just grab the phone, jump into the car and drive away. So, Rio is a place where you have to be very alert and to your environment and what's going on. You don't just stand there and do what I do. You don't do that because people will steal them. And I'm not being, this is what Brazilians tell me and not just in Rio. This is true in Porta Lega and it's true in São Paulo. I mean, this kind of crime is everywhere in Brazil and it's really, really bad. What else? There's some good restaurants. There's a restaurant called ORO, O-R-O, gets some of the local food. There's a seafood dish with all kinds of stuff mushed in with seafood and I forget what it's called right now but it's really good in Rio. Anyway, just have a, just enjoy that. And then finally, yeah, go to the beach, scenery, oh, and if you like music, I like Brazilian music, I love Bossa Nova. If you like Bossa Nova, there's some nice kind of night clubs or bars where they play Bossa Nova music. I like to do that when I'm in Rio. I find the music beautiful and very relaxing and it's fun to get it. The authenticity of being in Brazil and listening to it live is a lot of fun. I'm sure I'm missing out some stuff but those are the main things. I will be in Rio for a week in March and all those things will be going to good restaurants. I'm also giving two talks, how can I not while I'm in Rio. All right, so yes, by the way, if you live in Rio, I will be in Rio and I will be giving two talks more information to come. I think this is in early April. Oh, John, $100, thank you, John. This is great. John says, just landed a very nice tech job in finance that doubled my already good salary. Congratulations. That is amazing particularly right now with the economy and tech layoffs and all of that but amazing. All the tech people, I think the good tech people are not are going to get good jobs. They're going to do okay. Good salary and feel right now like celebrating and sharing a little of my success. Too bad I'm moving from Austin. That is unfortunate. It was nice seeing you there, by the way. Thank you, John. It was nice meeting you to New York City but you got to go where the opportunity lies. Absolutely. I don't know how old you are, John. I'm guessing. You're fairly young. If you're making money and you're young, what better place on planet Earth is there to live than New York City? It should be a blast and exciting and fantastic and the opportunities, the food just the things to do in New York. There's so much to do in New York. I would be excited about leaving Austin. You can always go back to Austin later. At this point in your life, if you've got money and you're young, just take over New York City. Just have a blast in New York City. It's truly fantastic. John really helped there with the superchats 458 or $192 shorts. We've made quite a bit of progress. Alejandro, what should be the legal difference between Jews and non-Jews in Israel? Should it be easier for Jews to get citizenship or should it be like the U.S.? This is a complicated question and one that I've talked about at length. I'm going to give you a brief answer I'm going to get in a whole shitload of trouble from all kinds of people who are just looking to claim I'm a hypocrite and all that bullshit. What should be the legal difference between Jews and non-Jews in Israel? There shouldn't be any difference. Zero legal difference between Jews and non-Jews in Israel. Right now, there are differences. They should be eliminated. They should be eradicated. Either way, I don't believe Israel should have a conscripted army. I don't think military service should be forced. Right now, Jews have to do it. Arabs don't have to do it. They should all not have to do it and volunteer and let them volunteer. Some Arabs do indeed volunteer particularly Bedouin and Druze and non-Muslims. But Jews shouldn't be conscripted either. So I think they should have complete equal rights. They should be completely equal before the law. I do think though that it should be easier for a Jew to get citizenship. That's the only difference I think there should be. And I've said this before. I view Israel as a escape valve against anti-Semitism. I do think and maybe I'm wrong in this but I do think anti-Semitism is unique in the world. I do think anti-Semitism seems to be one of those things that is everywhere and always. It seems to be something that just will not go away. So as long as anti-Semitism is a major force out there in the world, Jews need a place to escape too. And a place where they can where they know that they're the majority and the anti-Semitism in Israel won't destroy them. It's not ideal. And indeed as the world changes or even if America changed, even if America became a place where there was just no anti-Semitism, became a bastion of freedom in that sense, then I would say Israel should just have open borders just like any other country, just like the United States. But until then I think Israel is the one country in the world and maybe there are others, maybe we can find other examples of this where the people in that country are so hated by the rest of the world and so discriminated against and so always live at the edge of the risk of being annihilated. And remember, American borders are closed and American borders were closed before World War II and American borders were closed during World War II. So Jews couldn't escape to America. They need a place to take an escape to that they can get citizenship and that they're not threatened. I also add one other element that Israel is right now in a perpetual state of war. With its neighbors and you could argue that as part of a state of war as part of a condition of war you have limitations on immigration. I think if the United States was at a state of war with Islamism, which I think it should be, has been should have won by now then I think it would be okay to ban Muslims from coming to the United States during the period of the war. And I certainly think Israel, given that it is in a state of war, should make that explicit and make whatever immigration restrictions, particularly with regard to Arabs and Muslims, contingent on what happens with that war. So that is my nuanced, somewhat complex answer to that question and I know I'm going to get some hate mail on that one. Tasey says let's get the party started. What are you talking about? It's 10.20 p.m. No coffee now. Roland said I'll be glad to trade my Hungarian citizenship against Marjorie's American one. Marjorie might go for it. I mean, she loves Orban. Like many on the American right, she loves Orban. She might be happy to accept your Hungarian citizenship. Tasey says here's some more money for a great show today. Thank you, Tasey. I appreciate the support and the fact that you like the show. Have you seen the movie Cocaine Bear yet? No, I haven't yet. Jack asks why send dollar to Ukraine if Russia is not a direct violator of individual rights of America? In 2014 you said that the U.S. should exit NATO. No, I still think the U.S. should exit NATO, but U.S. is not going to exit NATO. They should send arms. I also don't think the U.S. should exit NATO in the middle of a war. So I think overall there should be a plan for the U.S. to leave NATO. I said this over the last year. I've said it over and over again. The U.S. should not be a part of NATO. I think the Europeans should be responsible of the defense of Europe. And in that sense, I think when this war is over we should start the proceedings of exiting NATO. It can't exit in one day. It would be wrong to do so. This is a long-standing treaty to get out of a treaty my take. Two, three, four, five years, I don't know. You'd have to think about the logistics of it and everything that it entails. It should give the Europeans enough time to build up their militaries to replace American capabilities. And yeah, we should definitely not be in Europe defending Europeans. But selling weapons to the good guys whether we are a member of NATO or not a member of NATO. I'm for selling weapons to good guys. Now it's true that the weapons we're sending to the Ukrainians it'll take them 40 years for them to pay us back. But okay, we did that. We've done that many, many times over history. I support us doing that. I support us giving, in a sense, the weapons to our friends who are battling authoritarians and battling bad people who might potentially be threats to ourselves. I generally believe that we should support and arm, support morally and politically and arm free countries. I think we should do that with Israel. I don't think we should send troops to Israel. Israel's not a member of NATO. But I think we should support Israel, send them arms. We should do that with Georgia, here, Georgia. I think we should do that with Ukraine. I think we should do that with western Europe. Once we leave NATO, I think we should do that with Japan and South Korea. But I also think that in particular in Europe, I think Asia's a little different. We can talk about that another time. I think in particular with regard to Europe I think that the United States should start the process of exiting NATO and leaving the place. I do not think American troops should be on the ground to defend Ukraine, but I also don't think long term that they should be on the ground to defend Estonia. But send weapons? Absolutely. Again, in the form of some kind of lease agreement, which is what we have with Ukraine. Itai says, do you have any hope for the future of Israel? Is there any reason to stay? Also, what's your opinion about Timothy Snyder? Did you listen to the podcast he did with Sam Harris? Timothy Snyder, I take it as the historian who talks a lot about Ukraine and Ukrainian history. Is that Timothy Snyder? Do I have it mistaken? Anyway, I think his history is interesting. He's obviously a leftist, so I agree with him on some things. I've not listened to the podcast he did with Sam Harris. I don't listen to many podcasts at all, but if you think it's really worth listening to, I'll try to listen to it. What do I think of the future of Israel? That really deserves its own show, maybe when I'm traveling to Israel, that we do it. But I am as optimistic about Israel as I am in the United States. There's so much good in Israel, there's so much positivity in Israel that I can't quite give up on it. I can't tell you Israel's doomed and finished. But Israel is a very problematic country. I think it's very problematic because of the growing and I think it's going to grow even further in the future role of religion and kind of crazy in Israel. I think it's problematic because Israel won't defend itself fully and properly. I think it's problematic because it still has enemies, particularly inside of it, that is the shift among Israeli Arabs, the radicalization of the Palestinians, the continued radicalization of the Palestinians, Hezbollah and Hamas. And Israel not really engaged in what's necessary to defeat them. But that requires a much longer show in terms of really discussing all that. I think there's lots of reasons to leave. But the main reason to leave would be what opportunities do you have in Israel? Can you make your life the best that it could be in Israel versus in America or in Europe? Are there more opportunities just to live a good life? Whether it's job, whether it's just quality of life, standard of living, all of that, raising children, is Israel the best option you have. And I can't answer that for you. It depends on who you are, depends on what your values are, it depends on whether you have a family or whether you want a family, it depends on what kind of career you have, what kind of profession you have. Lots of different issues related to that decision and that choice. By the way, I will be doing a show soon, I'm not sure exactly when, on the whole situation in Israel right now, the demonstrations, the whole issue about the judiciary in Israel. I think it's an interesting topic and it has some philosophical implications. I will be doing a show on that, just not today. Alright, two last questions and I really have to stop. I did not intend to go for an hour and a half. I have to sleep. I have to get up four o'clock in the morning to catch my flight to Warsaw. Mark says, stay safe traveling Iran. Thank you. Don't let agitators antics get you down. Want to know what kind of topics you are planning coming up while you visit Europe and when can we next suggest topics. So generally you can suggest the topic anytime. I mean to buy a show in a sense that get a topic of your choosing for me to do that that costs that's a thousand dollars and you can do that anytime. I would definitely do that once I get back home in a week, in a week and a day. In Europe I'll probably talk about Israel. We'll see. I mean I don't have a plan of what I'm going to be talking about on the shows during my trip rest of my trip in Europe which will last another week. That depends on what's going on. It depends on what strikes me. It depends on what happens to me. I like to be somewhat spontaneous about these things while I'm traveling because but I do want to talk about Israel and this judicial issue, judicial independent issue. Alright guys I really appreciate the support and appreciate the questions but I really do need to go to sleep. So no more questions Michael I know you're itching to ask lots of questions there are three on the board. Let's leave it at that. We've raised five hundred dollars out of six fifty. I appreciate that. I love you guys but I really do need to get to sleep so I'm going to draw a line. Michael says are western and northern Europeans less stressed and anxious than Americans because they are taking care of like kept pets by their governments. Maybe I think Europeans I think primarily I'd say Scandinavians are kind of generally less stressed than Americans. I don't think they're more happy than Americans but I think they're less stressed than Americans. I think they have less expectations in life. I think they're less ambitious about life generally and so they're satisfied. They're not happy but they're satisfied and part of that is the welfare state part of that is just the fact that they're not very ambitious. These are not very ambitious cultures. Again there are exceptions and those exceptions are usually very much like Americans in almost every respect. David asked are you a fan of David Boz he seems like a more reality oriented pro-values libertarian. Yeah I think so I mean David Boz I'm not a fan you know I don't like what does it mean to be a fan of somebody David and I get along okay I mean clearly we have disagreements significant deep substantive disagreements but generally I think he's one of the more reasonable libertarians out there and he is definitely more values oriented and he is not caught up in this craziness of the libertarians but he is way too tolerant of the crazies that's one of the disagreements we have but yeah I mean David is also you know generally a nice guy so while we have deep disagreements we get along but a fan is a little bit of an exaggeration Michael says isn't it plausible our senses evolve to the level of understanding enough of reality to feed ourselves and live another day but enough to understand everything about the universe I don't even know what that means because the reality is that our senses evolved we don't understand everything about the universe through our senses we understand everything about the universe we can understand everything potentially about the universe using our reason and our reason is not limited by our senses and our reason is not limited by evolution in a sense and if we lack computational power that's what we have an iPhone that's what we have computers for so the fact that we can create abstractions makes it possible to understand principles and laws and the existence of subatomic particles that our senses can't tell us about that are non perceptual so we don't have to perceive everything in the universe in order to understand it in order to know it and in order to figure it out we can do mathematics we can do abstract thinking we can abstract understanding and understanding cause and effect so we obviously don't see everything that's in reality objects emit not just the spectrum of light that we see there's also other spectrum of light sound is bouncing all over the place and the bats can hear and we can't but we have instruments that can capture all of that so we can understand all of that so I don't think our senses limit us in terms of our potential understanding of the universe alright guys thank you thank you for all the superchatters you know really really appreciate it now an half show it would be nice to hit our goal but we have few of you because of the time of day and the fact that it's unscheduled so I understand that I will see you all I'm not sure exactly I'll try to do a show from Poland tomorrow but I'm not sure I can it will depend on a lot of factors but I'll try to do one and I'm not sure what time and then I will also try to do a show from Zurich well almost definitely do a show from Zurich either on Tuesday or Wednesday or maybe both again we'll see how it evolves I will try to update you I will try to keep you updated as soon as I know but for now have a great rest of your day I will have a great night sleep night I will see you