 Let's get started. Okay, so Richard Hanania, who, just the context, I praised for a long time, I thought is some of the cities were excellent and fresh and good perspective. I think he's super smart. And then the Huffington Post had the story where they revealed that he had been a, you know, real racist white supremacist that had written under pseudo name and written some horrible things about blacks, about minorities generally, and about women, and just the typical, and he did that from 2008, I think until 2012, and then went on, got a PhD, and so on. And of course now is a very successful Twitter and substack, and I have a feeling this crisis, this whole thing is going to actually increase his following and his supports and his visibility. So I think this is actually going to play well for him. Anyway, they revealed that two days later, he wrote this article, Why I Used to Suck, and Hopefully No Longer Do. And he writes, My wrote to small l liberalism and liberalism here is more of a classical liberalism than a left-wing liberalism, I think. So, you know, good for him for admitting that he sucked. That's a great step forward and an important one. And I think it takes, well, he has no choice at this point. So I think it's good that he wrote it. It's good that he acknowledged, he acknowledges here that the views he held back then were wrong and bad and offensive and that they sucked and that he's now over them. And he gives an example, which I gave when I talked about him on Sunday. He's pro-immigration, he's pro-diversity of just peoples. He used to be, when he was young and a racist, he was a jerk and didn't get along with women. He's not married. He's got a life. And he's written a lot from the perspective that he used to think that women are disastrous for politics. And now he thinks, no, that sounds quite true. And he recites all the good stuff, like the fact that he's so positive about immigration, but also about, generally, I'd say about what you'd call the liberal world, the democratic, free world, the western world. He says he's learned a huge amount from Stephen Picker's books, both on violence and on kind of the value of what you'd call relatively free markets, relatively free markets that we have today, kind of the mixed economy, the value of the mixed economy. And then he considers himself today a classical liberal. So all good for what it is. I still have two qualms with him and two problems. And I don't know how this is going to play out. I don't know how serious this is. I still respect the good stuff that he's written. And I respect the fact that he's backed off the bad stuff. But I think there are two concerns that I have that are directly related. And the first is that his condemnation of himself, this idea that he sucked, is a little too soft, a little too nice. What does it mean that he sucked? Is there full acknowledgement of the horror and the evil that racism and the kind of views that he held about human beings, men and women, really mean the kind of history that is manifest from racism and this kind of view of women, the actual existential consequences of these views. These are evil views about as evil as it gets. And yeah, he was a confused kid with psychological problems. There are a lot of confused kids with psychological problems that don't go that route. And it really needs to be a lot more morally condemnatory in my view of himself. You can't just say, whoops, sorry, screwed up over something like this. And you're an intellectual. So your realm is the realm of ideas. The realm of politics, the realm of deeper ideas, particularly politics though, that's what he does. And you held ideas that are reprehensible, the evil, the disgusting, the horrific. And there has to be something that has a little bit more passion and oomph to it than I used to suck. I don't suck anymore, believe me. So there's a little bit of him being removed from his past that I don't, you know, I'm not saying he's lying. I don't think he is. I think, I think this is true. And for now, I'll take him at his word. He's doing very well for himself. So he has a strong incentive not to veer off the path that he's on. But I am, I'm going to watch him. I'm going to be careful. I'm not just going to say, okay, back to retweeting everything he says, back to, you know, just treating him like I thought he a real star. Not going to happen. Not going to happen. And the real, the real, you know, the real red flag for me. And I mentioned this on Sunday, but there's no, he has no, he has no sense of this. He has no, right. So he links to this article again. And this is, he links this article. This is an article where I don't know if it's real or not, whether it's a story, real story, a potential story, doesn't matter. But where he goes with this guy, UNTS UNC, UTZ, and they go and they confront a bunch of racists and UNTS basically shows them how stupid their position is and how ridiculous their position is. And he lists this as, see, I'm not a racist anymore. I'm in a sense on outside. But this guy, one UNTS, is a explicit uncompromising UNTS, a UNTZ, anti-Semite, kind of Holocaust denier, kind of, yeah, we should, you know, Hitler's being treated, maybe a little unjustly, we should really consider it. He didn't know about the extermination of Jews. That wasn't his intention. And we should really rethink Hitler and what he represents. And this isn't really Germany's fault. If you're really repenting, if you're really saying, I'm not a racist anymore, I really think racism is opponent. I really think it's horrible. I was dumb. I sucked when I was young. And why would you then say, okay, I'm not a racist, but I'm still an anti-Semite, or I'm saying I tolerate anti-Semites. I tolerate racist, but I'm not a racist. You don't hang out with a full, and say nice things about a full-fledged anti-Semite as you're trying to prove to the world that you are now repudiating completely, thoroughly, unequivocally, racism and your, these old views that you had. So this UNTZ stuff really bugs me. And, you know, it's a question of sanction. And that's what's missing here. It's like we should morally judge people, and we should morally judge ourselves. And when you discover that you were immoral in the past, which can happen to all of us, any of us, then that requires a certain judgment, a certain severity, depending on how immoral you are. This is pretty big. And he's not morally judging himself. He's not morally judging UNTZ. So what is he exactly? What are we talking about? What is he retracting? What is he repenting? What is this new? He's a classical liberal, but he still kind of tolerates anti-Semites when they're interesting. Like he keeps saying UNTZ is interesting. By the way, in the end of the essay, UNTZ suggests that COVID was an intentional lab leak in the United States by the US government. And, you know, Richard's response to that was like, yeah, okay, whatever. That's ridiculous. But there's no judgment. Anyway, so again, I like the material he writes. I'll keep on reading it. I'm going to be retweeting him a lot less. I am going to watch what he does and watch what he says with a little suspicion. And I am going to watch the nuance. I mentioned last time IQ. I got into huge trouble. Everybody commented on how ignorant I am about IQ. But as usual, but you know, it's things like that. How he talks about these things. What he actually says about these things. I'm going to pay attention to those. I'm not just giving him a blank check. He doesn't get a blank check anyway for me. Not that he cares. But for me, and we're going to watch him. We're going to watch him.