 All right, everybody. Welcome to Iran Book Show on this, uh, what is it? Sunday afternoon here in Guatemala City. Yep. Today I'm broadcasting from Guatemala City in Guatemala, the home of Universita Francisco Maraquin the most free market university in the world. I think it's fair to say I'm not on the campus right now. Uh, I am broadcasting from my hotel room. As you can see, I'm here to attend a conference, uh, the Mont Pelerin society conference. I'll tell you a little bit about, about the Mont Pelerin society in a few minutes, but, uh, conference we'll be starting tonight. Uh, you might notice from my, uh, from my, uh, voice that I have a cold. So, uh, all these travels, uh, all the traveling, um, the cost of all this travel has been, um, me getting a cold. I of course checked to see if I had COVID just to make sure didn't want to get COVID because of me. I do not have, I test the negative. So, um, I assume that it's just, uh, just a cold first time I've been sick with anything, uh, since COVID started. So, um, there we go. Uh, theme master says, looks like a Guatemalan hotel, even though I've never been a Guatemalan. No, it looks like a pretty standard hotel. There's nothing Guatemalan about this particular room. I don't think. So, uh, yeah. So I am a little congested. Uh, I apologize for that. Uh, and, uh, it kind of sucks. It just, it does. All right. Uh, so I've been in Guatemala a couple of days. I got here yesterday. Well, I got here really, uh, after midnight yesterday, uh, Friday night, Friday I spent in Colorado, uh, doing a session of capitalism for the leadership program, the Rockies. And then I flew to, um, to Guatemala. Of course, um, as you, uh, as you probably know, uh, you know, maybe if you read the newspapers, you know, how many, uh, all the troubles that American airlines are having with cancel flight, delete flights. Well, I was victim of all that. It took forever to get to Denver, uh, and then, and then, uh, to get down to Guatemala. So I think all those flights, all that late nights, I think that's what have resulted in this, uh, in this stupid cold. So, um, there you go. It looks like you can get colds in airplanes, you can get COVID on airplanes. We can certainly get cold if I got it on the airplane. So, uh, there we go. Uh, Scott says his wife got a cold, but it only lasted a day. I wish mine lasted a day. My colds never lasted a day. It takes a week to 10 days. It just, it just takes forever. So, uh, I hope that this one is faster because we still got a whole week of traveling. Um, but, um, it's unlikely, just realistically. All right. Uh, you know, Guatemala, it's an interesting place. It's my, I don't know, fourth time I think here. I think it's my fourth time. And, uh, you know, the primary reason, uh, for being here, uh, four times is the university, university of Francisco, Marquina for short, UFM, uh, which is a university built on, on, uh, on the idea of free markets of classical liberalism of, um, uh, of capitalism. Uh, it's a university where, uh, they have pictures of Iron Man in a variety of different places. They have a high accordatorium on multi-freedmen library, I think on Mises library, but they have, they have, uh, you know, room after room and, and, uh, library after library named after some of the heroes of, of free market economics and primarily and pictures of, of, of them all over the place, recognition of that. The business school at, uh, at, uh, UFM has a large two-story relief sculpture of Atlas shrugged. And just in case you don't know it's Atlas shrugged, there's a plaque at the bottom with a quote from Atlas shrugged, uh, with a quote from Gold Speech on it. So that's the kind of university this is where the business school has, uh, is, uh, is built around the idea of Atlas shrugged and a quote from it. Um, the, the university is just a beautiful place. It is, it is in a valley in the middle of the city. Um, and, uh, you know, uh, kind of a tropical tropical forest all around the buildings built beautifully into the sides of the hills into the tropical forest. It's one of the most beautiful campuses I've ever seen in the world. And again, this is the place where, where, um, you know, where they teach free markets and they have a law school. They have, they might have a medical school, but they certainly have a law school. It's the most prestigious university in Guatemala. 3,000 students. And, uh, and they all get a heavy dose of classical liberal philosophy, classical liberal ideas. The university has a masters program and objectivism taught by a, a, a, uh, an architecture professor who's also a, um, an admirer of mine, right? And one of the things that have happened in Guatemala is because of the university and because of the visibility that the university has provided. I mean, uh, there is a thriving objectivist community here. There was a number of people who are objectivists. A couple of them actually, uh, do four hours, I think every day on the radio, um, you know, talking about objectivism, talking about free markets, talking about capitalism. Um, but there was a thriving objectivist community here. One of the objectivists here, uh, I spent, uh, yesterday and today with, um, with him and his wife, he is a sculptor and, and a very good sculptor with fantastic ideas. Uh, he builds monuments, uh, all over Guatemala city, uh, monuments, celebrating freedom, celebrating liberty, celebrating reason, uh, celebrating entrepreneurs, celebrating the, the capitalists, the businessmen. Uh, he gets commissions from local businessmen to do this. Um, sculptures are realistic. They're, they're, they're in the style of, uh, realistic style, figurative, um, striking. Uh, he's got a, a, a beautiful new 11 foot high atlas, uh, in, in the four year of a, uh, beautiful business building in, um, in Guatemala city. So, uh, you know, we spent, uh, we spent the last couple of days going around town, seeing the different monuments that he's built, um, and hanging out the light for really, really good time, uh, beautiful stuff. And, um, yeah. And just, uh, just, just amazing. And here we are in Guatemala city of all places in the world. You can see figurative sculpture as public sculpture, sculpture that, that corporations here have sponsored, not that, not that modern, meaningless, uh, uh, BS junk, but actually beautiful things, actually things that actually represent something. And then actually, uh, mean something. And, and, and, and that, uh, you know, that have, that have, uh, uh, have real meaning and real value. Uh, so, uh, his name is Walter Peter P. E. T. R. He has a website. He's on Instagram. You can go look at his, uh, you can go look at his work. I think you'll enjoy it. Um, and, uh, it's, uh, many of the pieces are quite stunning and, and, and really, really enjoyed going to see them and, uh, and, uh, experiencing them and not just in photographs, not just in two-dimensionals, but, but the way sculpt just supposed to be seen in three-dimensionals. For example, the Atlas is 11 feet high. You can't appreciate that. You can't appreciate the power, um, of that from photographs. So, uh, a real treat. Um, I encourage you to look up the sculptor and, uh, and, and follow his work, um, on Instagram. So, uh, so that's been, uh, uh, that's been a, a lot of, uh, that's been how I've spent the last couple of days. The conference starts tonight. Um, I'm looking forward to that. So, um, um, you know, we got a reception and a dinner and a little while, but I figure I try to sneak in a show since I haven't done a show in a while. I tried to sneak in a show, uh, before, um, before we went to dinner. So, uh, that's what we're, that's what we're doing right now. Right. I'll be with you one second. Okay. So, um, yeah, Walter Peter Brennan, Walter Peter Brennan. So one of the things that struck me today as we were touring around Guatemala city and talking about UFM, I haven't been to the university yet. I mean, I've been there before in my previous trip to trips to Guatemala, but I haven't been there yet. This trip I'll be there tonight. But one of the things that struck me, um, while we were looking at the sculpture and moving around is the fact that here we are in Guatemala with, with this amazing university, we have, um, libertarians, classical liberals, and even objectivists in the media. Um, we have businessman who are claimed to have been inspired and, and, uh, uh, hugely supportive of, of Atlas shrugged love Atlas shrugged. And I was thinking about other places that have kind of a similar environment. You know, I think I've told you before about Georgia, Georgia, the country of Georgia in, uh, in the Caucasus, Georgia about 20 years ago was, uh, was governed by a group, um, who dominated the government of free marketers. Um, um, Baka Baka was, was one of them. And, um, and, uh, the prime minister was another one of them. And, and they basically, you know, dominated, uh, the politics of Georgia for a few years. And during that period, they completely deregulated the country. They lower taxes. They flattened them. They, uh, they completely liberated business from, uh, most regulations. Uh, I think they did some of the most dramatic deregulations we've seen anywhere in the world. And this is in a country that had lived through, you know, Soviet occupation and through communism and it was liberated, but, but hadn't really adopted capitalism about 20, 30 years ago. They really did. They, they, they had this moment in history where, uh, the government just completely freed up the economy in ways that even today are unimaginable. Um, even there, kaha, who, kaha, who is the person mainly responsible for this kind of a libertarian businessman, um, also started a university called free university, free, not because it was free, free as showed for freedom, freedom university in, in Tbilisi, in Georgia university dedicated to the ideas of freedom. Um, indeed to this day, uh, they have Austin economists teaching there. They have, uh, I think the vice dean of the university has pictures of Ayn Randall over her office. Uh, so these are, you know, this is the university again dedicated to kind of free market ideas, to political liberty and to freedom. Um, and yet Georgia has, um, over the last 20 years since that government is no longer a, has moved away from freedom, away from liberty. Uh, they have put in place, put, put, put back a lot of the regulations that were taken away. They have slipped, slidered their way back into more and more statism. Um, they are in terms of political influence. The libertarians or the, the, the free marketers have a lot less influence that they had back, back then. Uh, and it's, it's, um, it's kind of sad that here they had this experiment. It succeeded. Uh, by the way, the Georgian economy did well. Jobs were created. GDP per capita went up. GDP generally went up. Uh, you know, it completely modernized this deregulatory regime and the lowering of taxes completely modernized the Georgian economy. So it, it was an absolute success. This was not like it failed. And yet all their achievements are being reversed and, and have been reversed. And then when I look at Guatemala, UFM has been around for a long time now for several decades. Um, and while at the margin, it's had an impact on individuals. It's had an impact someone on the culture. It's had an impact here and there on some deregulatory bills and some, some people who are graduates of the university who've done good things in politics. But overall Guatemala is still a massively status place. It's still a very poor country. It's still a country with, with, with cronyism, massive cronyism, big families who control much of industry and farming here and also have all kinds of subsidies and all kinds of benefits that they get from the government. Uh, you know, very, uh, feudal almost, uh, in, in, in some aspects of, of its existence, but definitely crony and, and the university arguably has has had some impact certainly on individuals, right? There are many more objectivists here than they would otherwise be, but, but it's still just a dozen or two. It's a handful. Um, and in Guatemala, socialism is on the rise just like it's on the rise pretty much everywhere else. Uh, young people tend to be status and socialist. And then of course, if you think about, um, if you think about a country like, like Chile, um, another country in the world that has gone through this amazing experiment over the last, what is it now? 40 years, right? About 40 years ago, uh, uh, General Pinochet at the time authoritarian dictator of, of Chile handed over the reins of the economy to what were called the Chicago boys, uh, uh, economists trained in the Chicago School of Economics and they basically deregulated, freed up the economy, privatized social security and, and, and generated what became a massive, unbelievable economic boom. Uh, Chile went from the poorest country in Latin America on a per capita GDP basis to the richest country in Latin America on a capital GDP basis. Um, in a, in a relatively short period of time and they had, they had until recently a dynamic economy and economy, which poor people rose up from poverty and you know, an economy that generated massive benefits for, for people across the board in particular, uh, poor people who benefited disproportionately from, uh, the liberation of the economy as, as they do everywhere where the economy is liberated. And yet, what we've seen over the last, uh, and, and you had think tanks and you had university dedicated to teaching free market economics and, and a human boom in increasing, in, in teaching these ideas. And yet over the last, I'd say five years, but in particular over the last couple of years, Chile has taken a sharp turn to the left and there's now, they've assembled a constitutional convention to rewrite the Chilean constitution. And it's clear that it's going to be written in a way that supports socialism. It's going to destroy all of the achievements of the Chicago boys. It's going to turn Chile again into socialist country, very similar to that of ultimately Venezuela. You saw in the recent election in Peru, a sharp shift to the left. Peru that had a relatively, relatively speaking, thriving economy, relatively speaking liberalization movement towards free markets. And yet they are now drifting back towards statism, socialism. And in this case, they elected a Marxist, explicit Marxist to be president of the country. And this of course brings up the question what's it going to take? And it particularly brings up the question in the context of the fact that we celebrated last week, the founding of this university in Texas, this University of Texas, University of Austin, Texas, I told you it was going to be confusing, not University of Texas in Austin, University of Austin in Texas. Of what impact, what impact do free market, libertarian types, do universities that teach free market principles, how? In terms of the long run sustainability of freedom, of liberty, can they bring about liberty? And if they can, can they sustain it? Can they keep it going? And when you look at these historical examples and granted, from historical perspective, not a lot of time has passed. But you've got to conclude that this seems to be something missing. Something is missing to the combination of political power and free market economics. Something is missing was significantly missing in Chile, which has abandoned capitalism, whatever semblance of capitalism they had to move further to the left towards socialism. Something is missing in Guatemala that prevents a university like UFM from having the kind of influence on the culture and on politics that we would like to see that is revolutionary, that is world changing. Something was missing in Georgia when free marketers captured the commanding heights, captured government, did the right things, actually deregulated, shrunk government, reduced regulations on a massive scale, and cut taxes, did all the right things, and succeeded just like in Chile they succeeded in terms of the impact on the economy. And yet, it didn't survive. Something is missing from this recipe of having some good universities and some good politicians and great economists. And of course, I've been talking about this for 20 years. What's missing is a philosophy. What's missing more than all, anything is an ethics, is a moral code. What's missing is egoism. What's missing is an epistemology of reason. What's missing is objectivism, a philosophy. I mean, I have a lot of respect for many of the kind of free market economists who come to a conference like the Montpalaman Society, I have a great respect for many of the teachers at University of Francisco, Marqueen, or in Georgia, or in all of these other places. But the unwillingness or inability to challenge religion, Catholicism in the case of Guatemala, you know, Christian, what is it, Eastern Orthodox, religion in the case of Georgia, Chile, Catholicism, and in the United States to challenge Christianity more broadly, the unwillingness to challenge religion makes it impossible for capitalism to ultimately sustainable, to be sustainable. And in that sense, it's fantastic that we have the University of Austin in Texas, but it can't win. It can't change the world. It can slow the decline, hopefully. It can bias time, hopefully. But it can't win because it doesn't have anything to offer. It has to offer the status quo of 20 years ago. It wants to turn back the clock to an error that they think is idealistic of 20, 30 years ago, when, while the universities were as dominant as they are, dominated as they are today by leftists, at least the leftists were more rational in the sense that they were more open to people who had differing ideas. They weren't quite as eager and as fast to cancel. They weren't quite as woke, if you will. They were still leftists. That's been no mistake in the universities to be dominated by the left, dominated by the left for 50 years. Nothing really has changed except the left has become more wacky, more egalitarian, more woke. But people like Stephen Pinker, people like Barry Weiss, people like who else is on the, you know, Arthur Brooks, the people who are on the Board of Advisors of the University of Austin in Texas cannot, will not, change the world. They will not reverse the course because they don't have what it takes. They don't have the philosophical foundations, the philosophical context to actually reverse the course of history as it is playing out right now. They'll allow more voices on campus. They'll provide an alternative for parents who want to send their kids to university that is not completely thoroughly corrupt. But the best one can say about the university, like a university in Austin and granted, I celebrated it last week because I do think it's worth celebrating. Somebody says, now I'm focusing. Same with now I'm focusing. Now I'm focusing as not a revolutionary thinker. He's not a radical. The best these people can do is give us a university that of 30 years ago, 40 years ago, but that wasn't that great. There was already anti-capitalist. There was already a rejection of true freedom and true liberty. Yeah, it's a good start, but it's a good start towards what? Towards what? They will teach the same altruism that every other university teaches. They'll soften it a little bit. They won't be quite woke about it. They'll teach a mixed economy economics, just like every other university. They'll be a little bit more tilted towards free markets. They'll teach the same Kantian philosophy or philosophy influenced by Kant as everybody else teaches. There'll be a little bit more oriented towards liberty and freedom. But look, they won't be as good as you are families. They won't be as good as freedom university is in Tbilisi. And those universities haven't had a huge impact on societies that are much smaller than the American society of 350 million people. So what kind of impact are they actually going to have? Sadly, a minimal impact, big impact on individuals, big impact on parents who want their kids to go to relatively sane university. Not a huge impact on the culture as a culture. The culture as a culture is dominated by statist, mystical irrational forces. And one university is not going to change that, particularly one university that is not willing to challenge the fundamental prevailing ideas in the culture, which are mysticism, religion, and altruism, also the morality of religion. And therefore ultimately cannot, will not, will not challenge the prevailing acceptance of a mixed economy, which almost nobody stands up against to actually change the world. And this is what so many people are not willing to recognize and not willing to actually change the world. You need a radical philosophy. You need to be willing to challenge everything. And granted, you're going to be canceled by both left and right. I got into some of my most passionate disagreements with students here at UFM about stuff, even though on economics, they're pretty good, but God, you mentioned abortion here, run for the exit and the faculty here has responded negatively to many of my presentations because of the issue of religion. You cannot raise it. You cannot have a rational discussion about it in Montpelerin society. The society that was founded by, I don't know how much you guys know about Montpelerin. Montpelerin society was founded by Hayek in 1947. In its first meeting, I think there were 12 of the leading free market intellectuals. Notice who was never invited. Ironman was never invited to join the Montpelerin society. Hayek was. Mises was there. Milton Friedman was there. And many of the other leading lights of classical liberalism of the 20th century and the 21st century. To this day, it's a society of the leading thinkers in the classical liberal tradition. But Ayn Rand was never welcome because these thinkers, as great as they were, as revolutionary as they were, in the case of Mises as radical as they were, were not willing to challenge not the morality, not the conventional morality and not the conventional epistemology or metaphysics. They were not willing to challenge religion. And indeed, once in a while, a couple of times now they've had me speak at the Montpelerin society. I remember and I don't run for the exits. Stephen Porter never have, never run to the exits twice now. And the Montpelerin society meetings, they've invited me to speak about the compatibility of liberty and religion. And twice I've explained why religion and liberty are incompatible, not in the long run, not if you want to be consistent. And, you know, while many of the European members of the Montpelerin society agree with me, they will never say it. And the Americans, of course, despise me for having these views. To them, liberty and religion go together. It's, you know, it's, it's, it's stunning how they're not willing to question their premises, as Ayn Rand would have encouraged them to do. In particular given, you know, arguably the failure in country after country after country to really have an impact. Now, granted, if you challenge religion, and you challenge altruism, you're going to be sidelined. You're going to be marginalized. You're not going to have influence in the short run. And I know that upsets many of you, many of you want to see political change now. But if you really care about the future, if you don't just want to see a glimpse of freedom, a glimpse of free market, a glimpse of liberalization, but you want to see a sustained, a sustained political freedom, something that lasts forever, maybe, or at least for a long time, then what we need is a philosophical revolution. What we need is a moral revolution. And what we need is seen the minority to be marginalized for a while. And this is what I've said. We, we don't have allies, not on the left and not on the right. We don't belong anyway, because we are true radicals. At least I am to know about you. I believe reason is man's means of survival. Reason is the way we know stuff. We reject the idea of revelation of any kind. We reject the ideas of mysticism of any type, left or right. And we reject determinism. We reject the idea that you're shaped by your genes exclusively, or by your environment exclusively, or by a mixture of your genes and your environment. Nobody holds that. Psychologists just assume determinism. Nobody holds free will, except the religionists. And the religionist idea of free will is, is, is very mixed up and very confused. God is all-knowing. He knows everything in, including in advance, but you have free will somehow. And at the same time, we reject this epistemology, we reject these ideas. We advocate for a philosophy of reason, for a morality of egoism, for particular virtues, for particular ideas. We are very, very very, very adamant supporters of a particular type of morality with particular virtues and particular values. We're not subjectivists, as many of the libertarians friends that I have in Montpelerin who might not be religious, but then they're subjectivists. And our defense of capitalism is not built around just the economic consequences, but it's built upon a deep understanding of human nature that explains those economic consequences. It's deep, it's based on a deep respect for reason, the need for freedom in order to be able to think and choose your values, be able to pursue your values free of coercion, a deep respect for man as a rational animal. It's why we have the concept of individual rights, to protect the individual's ability to live by his mind in pursuit of his values with the end being his own happiness. We are egoists. Your life is yours for the purpose of living for your own happiness. Our argument is not that capitalism is good because it's good for society. And if you once in a while need to sacrifice somebody for the good of society, so be it. We're consistent radical individualists who believe in capitalism as the only political system appropriate for individuals, for rational animals, rational animals with free will, rational animals with free will that require reason to live their life. And until there are institutions that are willing to teach that until there are dozens and dozens and dozens of intellectuals willing to advocate for that, we can't win. And this is why I'm excited about, you know, the Iron Man University which the Iron Man Institute is launching with the idea of training dozens and dozens and dozens of intellectuals over the next few decades. In advocating for liberty and advocating for freedom based on the philosophy of objectivism. With all respect to University of Austin, with all respect to UFM, with all respect to every relatively pro free market university on planet earth, without objectivism they cannot succeed. The culture will not change in fundamental ways. We need intellectuals in every sphere to discuss, to debate, to articulate the case for romantic art, for capitalism, for egoism, for reason, for reality, and for the connectedness, is that a word, of all of those into one philosophical whole. And only when we have such intellectuals, and we'll have to have artists and we'll have to have practitioners, we'll have to have a lot of people. Can we ultimately, can we ultimately win this battle? So what is it going to take to win the world? Dozens and dozens of intellectuals and artists. How are we going to get them? We're going to have to create them. We're going to have to create them ourselves. There's nobody else that can do it. There's nobody else that could save the western civilization from the decline it's experiencing right now. We'll get periods of respite, we'll get periods where the pendulum will swing back to a little bit more sanity, but it's not sustainable long term. It's not something that could sustain us over decades and centuries. It'll be more like we'll get a little bit of freedom for a while and then people start resending and turning it around, just like they are in Chile. So it really does boil down to philosophy. Not as an abstraction, but it's applied to the real world. I mean both as an abstraction and applied to the real world, but the abstraction serves to the application of the real world. It's going to take a lot of people. It's going to take time. Things like University of Austin, things like these other good universities are slowing the decline down, but they cannot stop it. They cannot reverse it. They can't bring about a true free society because you need a philosophical foundation. Even the founding fathers could not as good of a system as they create, as great of an intellectual foundation that they provided because they weren't willing to question the philosophical foundations of statism, altruism, collectivism, or collectivism they did, but altruism and mysticism, because they weren't willing to completely undermine those, the American experiment will not last, has not lasted. It lasted for maybe a hundred years, even then and makes some circumstances, but it wasn't last as soon as it found opposition, opposition in this case from the progressives. It folded slowly and we're in the midst of American decline and American rejection of the ideas of the founding fathers in the name of the progressive movement. And progressive movements come from the right as well from the left. Again, Teddy Roosevelt is a good example of that, but progressive Republican who's had a huge impact on the Republican Party and still considered one of the great Republican presidents. All right. Let me, let me see. We've got a number of super chat. Wait, what's that? I need to get some water. For those of you who came late, I'm at a hotel in Guatemala. I'm attending a conference at the Montpellum Society. I have a cold, which sucks. We're not COVID. I had that tested. So it's certainly not COVID, but it is a cold. It's a little difficult to talk nonstop, but it is what it is. We do have super chat on. We do still have our goal, our usual goals. We are just over $100, I think. So it's still about $500 to get to a $600 goal. Then if we have time to make it, but you have, you have time to change my mind about that. Let me just say in summary that I'm excited because, because of the number of good intellectuals we have today in Objectivism, because the number of young people that I see coming through up the ranks in, in Objectivism, young intellectuals who, who, you know, who will be able to have a huge impact on the world out there, the more of those we have, the more chance we have of really dominating the culture. I think it's doable. I can see kind of the talent. I can see the educational programs we have. I'm excited about this idea of, in a sense, an Objectivist University, Iron Man University, where we teach philosophy, where we teach primarily philosophy, but maybe more, maybe history and economics and other things long term, and where we really train a new generation, the new intellectuals, as Iron Man called them, to really, really, really change the world. And I view it not just as a place to train intellectuals, but also to train businessman, not to be, not to sanction, not to sanction, you know, their destroyers, not to sanction their destroyers. And I think that's how you ultimately change the world. There are no shortcuts. There's no easy way. There's no people to cooperate. There's nobody to vote for. All that are just tactics to slow things down. Real change has to happen by real principled, radical, intellectual advocacy, philosophical advocacy. And that's what we're working on. That's why I'm here in Guatemala for the Montpellant Society in my own way, in a small way, trying to influence them, to move them a little bit more in the direction of philosophy, more willing to engage with Iron Man, more willing to give Iron Man a seat at the table, more willing to give Iron Man a place in the philosophical place, in the philosophical defense of capitalism. They need it. They just don't know how much they need it. Imagine, I think I've said this on shows in the past, but imagine if Mises and other great free market intellectuals in the 50s and 60s and 70s had taken Iron Man seriously. Imagine if they had said, wow, we're great economists. But if you want philosophy, if you want the philosophy, if you want to understand the morality of what liberty requires, read Iron Man, or she's the one. You might even say, we don't completely understand it. We might not even agree with everything. But this is the philosophy to look into if you're interested in liberty and freedom. Imagine how the world today, we'd be 50 years ahead in terms of where we are. We'd be on the verge of taking over. But they rejected philosophy and they rejected Iron Man. They thought everything was economics. And I think we're suffering the consequences of that right now, today. Jennifer says Iron Man needs to sit at the head of the table. Yes, of course. But just at the table. Imagine if they recognized that. Okay, let's see. So we're taking Super Chat. I see we have quite a few $20 questions. So I appreciate that we need a lot more if we're going to get anywhere close to our goal of $600. Let's see. Shali asks, will you comment on Kyle Rittenhouse's case for a bit? Oh, God, why? I know you said you disagreed with his decision on being in the area at all. But in the view of new details, do you think a self defense case exists for the defense? Yeah, I absolutely do. I mean, look, he shouldn't have been there. I think it's a travesty that it was allowed to be there that, you know, I think that there should be some some way to discourage this kind of behavior. I don't think that prosecuting for murder is the way to do it. But I certainly think there has to be some way to discourage 17 year olds from picking up guns and going out of their town somewhere else. I mean, it's one thing if they have a family business and they're trying to defend their family business, but to go out of their way to go and do something the police should have been doing is absurd and ridiculous. You know, it's one thing if you're 30 or 40 with a little bit of experience, it's it's even better if you're a vet and you've you've been trained on the use of weapons and being trained and what in action on the stress. But I don't think a 17 year old should have an IR 15 in a stressful situation. Now I know we give 17 year olds guns in war, 18 year olds, but they're heavily heavily heavily trained. And Kyle was not. So I don't think Kyle should have been there. On the other hand, it seems like, you know, he was provoked. People try to reach for his gun. Again, it's hard. I said this before, but and I can't prove this. But I think there's good reason to believe that if Kyle was 30 years old with more experience, excuse me, he might have been able to get out of that situation without killing anybody. But he isn't he's 17 years old. Somebody reaches for your gun. Now they couldn't have taken the gun because of the way it was wrapped around his body. But it's still it's scary situation. You're under threat. In the case of at least one in the third guy he shot, he didn't kill him, but he shot him. Somebody point that guy appointed a gun at him. Yeah, I think there's definitely a case to be made for self defense here. What scares me is that if he wins and I think he will, I think the evidence is compelling that there is that the prosecution doesn't have can't convict him on murder without reasonable doubt. There's reasonable doubt that he acted in self defense. And therefore I think he'll be acquitted. I think he should be acquitted. But the fear is that he becomes a hero. And I don't think he's a hero. I think he's a he's a I think what he did was wrong. I don't think he should be been there. I think he acted impulsively. I you know, I think all those writers should have been rounded up and prosecuted and put in jail for five years. That's never going to happen. But the fact that that didn't happen doesn't justify turning him into a hero. And I think he will become a hero become a hero of the right. I think again, there'll be a lot more kids of 17 feeling emboldened to go out into the streets with guns. I don't think that's good for this country's future. I don't think that's good for anything. So I think it's a lose lose. And I think I think why he will probably be acquitted. It's not an issue of being a hero to a lot of people. It's a question of is he a hero objectively? I don't believe in subjectivism. I don't I don't care. Mother Teresa is a hero to a lot of people screw them. I mean, it doesn't it doesn't make it doesn't change my evaluation. He should not be a symbol of self defense. He should not be a symbol of a hero. He should not be viewed as heroic. He should be reviewed as an irresponsible young person who got himself into a bind unnecessarily. And yes, acted in self defense, but only because he was immature and put in a position he should have never been put into. That's my evaluation. That's I think an objective evaluation. The people of humor is a hero. I think that's a very, very, very dangerous thing. And but you know, I'm not going to be able to convince many of you of that. But I don't think he was a hero on the stand. You know, sorry, I just I just don't see what was heroic about him being on the stand. He cried he presented his case that he acted in self defense. Okay, you know, there's nothing heroic about that is they're defending property rights. He shouldn't have been there. He shouldn't have been there. He's an irresponsible 17 year old as a kid shouldn't be placed in that situation is immature. And I think that immaturity came across on the stand. And then immaturity came across in his actions. So yeah, I mean, why would you go into a high tension situation brandishing a rifle untrained at 17? It's just irresponsible. It's irrational. People like that should not be celebrated should not be viewed as heroes. I'll say that again, I've said it many times. Let's see. Justin asks, is it catholicism and doing South America? American Nations social and economic wild mood swings? Yes. There's no question that it's ultimately religion. It's religion and the altruism associated with that, the guilt that is built into that. In South America, the business leaders all feel guilty for their success. They think the inequality that exists there is a problem and is their fault. They view themselves as exploiters. That is all a consequence of the guilt filled Catholic religion. Even the secular ones within it can escape with the guilt associated with Catholicism that inspires the way they think. Yes, as long as South America is dominated by Catholicism, it is hard to imagine a true lasting free market revolution in South America. And that's hard because many of the free market advocates in South America are Catholics. They're not going to go against the Catholicism. And that's why they're doomed to fail. Alex mentions the hero of Georgia was a guy named Kacha. Ben do kids. Well, I never met unfortunately, but I have met his daughter. His daughter runs the free university today. But he's a real hero from everything I've learned about him. He was a real hero and did some major dramatic radical things in Georgia. And unfortunately, he died. If he stayed alive, maybe that momentum around free markets would have sustained himself because from everything I've heard, he was an unbelievably charismatic guy. So he really got got people motivated. The prime minister at the time was Mikhail Shakashvili. He was again as a mixed character and today lives in Ukraine and is in trouble both in Ukraine and in Georgia and is kind of homeless. But Kacha is the real hero of Georgia, from what I understand. I don't really have firsthand information. Okay, let's see. Ryan asks, I listened to your debate with Mo Levant. Mo seems to understand the need for individual freedom, but then support of state intervention where corporations get too big. Do you consider her view as typically centrist? Yes, I mean, I think Mo is probably center left overall. I think that generally the center left in the UK, certain members of the center left in the UK, even ones who have certain affinity to marks tend to be pro things like free speech and tend to advocate for individual liberty and individual freedoms, at least when it comes to the non economic realm. But yes, they're very, they're very anti big business. They're very anti corporations and businesses more broadly. They're part of the they have a certain problem with employee-employee relationship, but Mo is probably better than some of the others who have that problem. But yes, I think there are people on the left who are relatively reasonable. You know, they have they have this obsession with democracy. They think democracy is the be all end all rather than individual rights. They don't quite accept the concept of individual rights. They don't quite understand it and they don't quite accept it. But yes, there is a there is a better left out there. I'd say again, probably in the UK, I've encountered it more than I have in the US. Friend Hopper asks, any advice for the boots on the ground, non intellectual people who try and advocate objectivism social media on social media, I find objectivism outright is resistant. I've been spitting virtues of intellectual honesty to decent effect. Yeah, I mean, I think that's fine. But I think you have to I think we will only win when you guys, the non intellectuals are willing to advocate for objectivism outright yet a lot of people resist it. But you're not going after a lot of people. You're going for one mind at a time. One of the things I've said this many times before, I think one of the things that objectivists are very bad at when it comes to non intellectuals out there and social media is very bad at utilizing social media to push people towards content that is produced by objectivist intellectuals. Leftists don't have any problem advocating for their wacky ideas and then sending people to essays by their leftist friends that are videos of Richard Wolff or videos of Norm Chomsky or videos wherever they they admire. The right has no alt-right in particular has no problem using social media in order to advocate for their crazy views, which are resisted by a lot of people by the way, and send people to the writings of their leading intellectuals. Objectivists want to be so reasonable, reasonable in quotes here, want to be so mild. They don't want people to resist their ideas. They don't want to be perceived as radical, but you are. And one of the things they don't want to do is they don't want to link to the Iron Man Institute website. They don't want to link to Iron Man videos or to videos produced by the Iron Man Institute or to my videos. And I see very, very, very little activity on social media that is actually explicitly, passionately, unapologetically advocating for objectivism. And I think that's a massive mistake. Yeah, it's going to be resisted. So what? The truth is always resisted. Radical truth, certainly. But how is anybody going to actually discover what we stand for? How is anybody going to discover for themselves what objectivism is and be exposed to it if you're not willing to lay it out there? And if you're not willing to do it, who's going to do it? So I think that the attempt to be, to show people, you know, they're not consistent, hypocrisy, it's fine. It's not going to change the world. You want to change the world, become objective as crusader, not obnoxious, not, you know, unfriendly, not, you know, in their face, but unapologetic. I stand for reason, I stand for egoism, I stand for capitalism. And by the way, if you want to understand what I believe, here's an essay, here's a video, here's an article. You think X, Y, Z, here's this amazing intellectual, from the Anduin Institute, refuting you. If, if, if, I don't know, the 2000, 20,000, 100,000 objectivists that existed out there, on social media every day, linking to Anduin lectures, Anduin interviews, essays, you know, Anduin Institute content, my content, other content, at the same time advocating and pushing. In a polite, friendly way, respectful way, the ideas, the philosophy of objectivism, we'd have a much better chance. But most people are too timid. They don't want the confrontation. They want to be liked, and they want to see instant success. I mean, if I wanted to see instant success, I'd never, I'd never challenge religion, I'd never challenge altruism, I'd go out then give campus talks, like most of my colleagues in the free market world, oh, about the how wonderful capitalism is, and how good capitalism, I get a lot more invitations. I'd make a lot more money. That's not the point. You've got to go out there and shake it up. You've got to go out there and stand for principles. You've got to go out there and actually push. So I mean, you have to do what you know how to do and what's, you know, what's your ability and what's your tolerance. But you know, again, I'll tell you that it's up to you guys how big the show grows. It's up to you guys how big the Anduin Institute goes. It's up to you guys whether the world changes, because intellectuals, we produce the content which you should be sharing, which you should be, you know, actively engaged in putting out there into the world. Right. There's now objective as content that addresses almost every issue that is out there. Right. I just put up a playlist of everything I've said about critical race theory. I don't know, six, seven, eight, nine, 10 videos. All the major videos I've said about critical race theory. Well, use it. Anytime you get into debate on critical race theory, use that content. Expose people to it. And you could do that over and over and over again on a million different topics. And that's the only way. I don't know of any shortcuts. And you got to be brave. Advocating for radical ideas is brave. But think about what the founding fathers were willing to do. All right. We are, I don't know, $160, $170 in something like that, $165. That's pretty pathetic. So, you know, we're not even 400, which is kind of the minimum of minimums. We're certainly not at 600. So if anybody out there wants to support the Iran book show and can support it and is in a position to support it and values what I do, please do so. This is your opportunity. There are not going to be a lot of shows this week because of the conference, because I'm traveling. So I'm not going to be here asking you for money day after day after day, but today is your day for this week. Please support the show. We haven't, I don't think, I don't think we've missed a $600 goal in a long time. Don't make today the day, but it looks like you will. All right. Captain's not here. And I don't know where Catherine is. And Allie's not here. And yeah, you know, I'm dependent on you guys. All right. If yes, minister, the TV show was remade for America, what would it be called? What people would people watch it? I don't know what it would be called. Yes. Yes, Senator. Yes, President. Yes, Mr. President. Maybe that's what it would be called. I don't know how you would do it in America. I mean, the humor is so British, the focus is so British. It's so much about the British political system and the machinations of the civil servant, civil servants versus the politicians and how the civil servants manipulate the politicians. If you've never seen Yes, Minister, it's one of the greatest show ever and maybe the greatest show ever to ridicule and describe the way politics works. It's a fantastic show. I highly, highly encourage you to watch it. Jennifer, thank you for the support. It's very generous. Arthur, same with you. Thanks for the support. Really, really appreciate it. We're up to over $200 now. So a third of the way to our $600 goal. And I'm sorry, I can't get really excited. I can't yell at you. I can't encourage you with great passion to contribute because I am dying here. So I can barely talk. I hope you appreciate the sacrifice for the cause. I'm kidding. I'm kidding. It's not a sacrifice. But yes, definitely pick up Yes, Minister. Find it. It's one of the greatest TV shows ever. One of the funniest things you'll ever watch. And probably one of the cleverest instead of small dialogue, in terms of small dialogue shows that have ever been written. So try to catch Yes, Minister. And then it was Yes, Prime Minister as a follow up to that. Both were good. All right, lots of $5 questions. It's going to be tough on $5 questions. It's going to have me talking without getting a lot of return on the investment. What's the blast for me? What blast for me? What's you talking about blast for me? All right, let's see some more $20 questions. Why does the AI YouTube channel? Why does the AI YouTube channel produce more short 10 to 30 minute video essays on some philosophical political subjects? Those kinds of videos get a lot of traction on YouTube. They clearly have the talent and the means. I think the leadership at the end of energy has come to the conclusion that trying to attract people on YouTube is not their strength. It's not what is going to make the big difference long term. They are doing more video video discussions, short video discussions about different philosophical views about different philosophers. So you're seeing more of that. And I think you'll see more of that. But the focus of the I'm an institute in the years to come is going to be on training new intellectuals. It's going to be getting people to read the books, essay contest, books to teach us programs like that, and then on training new intellectuals and through the Ironman University. And that is going to be the focus. You can't do everything. There are million good ideas out there of what should be done, could be done. Many of those ideas we've tried at various degrees of success. But you have to stay focused. And a lot of the focus right now, and I can't go over every attempt we've made and every attempt we've made, I'm sure you will say, well, but if you've done this different, if you've done that different, I think it's better to get, you know, we've got a Siona that has a vision that has an idea of where the institute should go, what the focus should be, which is on education and primarily training the new generation of intellectuals. And that should be where the focus is, and that should be where the energy and momentum is. All right, Ragnar the Desert, 100 bucks, thank you. That'll go a long way to getting us to our goal. Really appreciate that. That is really terrific. So that puts us at around 350, 350. So we're still, well, 370, so maybe 380. So we're still 220 shorts, but we're getting the Ragnar the Desert, thank you. Travis, awesome work you're on. I'm an auditor at Aynurian University. I was hoping to meet you one day. I'm sure we will meet you one day, you know, the amount of travel. And I try to let you know here when I'm going to be in different places, I'm sure I'll be in a city near you sometime. If not, you can trouble to come and see me maybe at Ocon one of these days. So I'm sure we'll meet. All right. Sam C, thank you for the support. All right, let's see, we still got some more $20 questions. You know, if you've got questions like why doesn't AI do X, send them to the CEO of AI to Tel Aviv. I don't make those decisions. I have some influence, but I don't make those decisions. I believe the CEO should run the ship. Captain should run the ship. I'm chairman of the board, but I don't make those kind of decisions. Fendt Harper says, cheers to all your hard work, appreciate that, thank you. Your ability to speak is like in music. You have worked to exhaustion and built back better than before, thank you. Never have I seen a speaker so active. Thanks. I might be a little sheltered in this regard. I think you'll find very few people who do as many talks in as many places as I do. There are a few. I meet them on the road when I travel, but very few. There are very few of us and nobody with an objectivism. So I've done as many. I do, in a pre COVID year, I would do over a hundred talks, debates, panels over a hundred in one year. That's going to be three point six days. Let's see more $20 questions. Yes, Alan, it's tough to compete against other ideas such as libertarians when they produce great clips on YouTube such as libertarian PBS. Maybe we need more humor to get the objectives message out today. I don't think so. I mean, I know, and we have tried to put out short videos and some of them are successful, but I don't think that's the issue. I really don't. I think the reason it's hard to compete against libertarians is libertarians don't ask you for too much. They don't demand too much. In particular, they don't demand that you reject altruism. They don't demand that you reject religion. They don't demand that you reject subjectivism. They don't demand that you adopt any particular philosophy. They're agnostic when it comes to philosophy. And that's a much easier position. That's a much easier position to convince people of and to get their buy in. I don't think it's the marketing that's the issue. Indeed, think of all the people who read out the shrug and then and then become the vitamins instead of objectivists. I mean, it all begins with Iron Man. Iron Man is the biggest marketer of free market ideas in history. And yet very, very few people who read Iron Man take the idea seriously. Why? Because very, very few people who read Iron Man are willing to have the fundamental deep rooted view of life challenged. And that's our marketing challenge. Our marketing challenge is that we reject religion. We reject altruism. We reject mysticism in all its forms. And you can't get over that. That is objectivism. So I know, I know, I've been doing this for 30 years, you could argue. And I know that everybody thinks there's a silver bullet, there's a magic formula, there's just one thing. If we only did that, we would get it. And I just, I just don't see it. I just don't see it. And all of these things have been tried. The short videos have been tried, animated videos have been tried. Let me get some traction, but they're not, they're not going to change the world. They're not going to grow the movement to such an extent. And they're expensive and difficult to make. Justin, thank you. That's very, very generous 50 Australian dollars. Biodiversity is becoming the golden standard of altruism. How do we argue against such a moral principle? Well, I mean, it's the main thing is to ask, why? Why should you sacrifice for the sake of a snail? Why should you sacrifice for the sake of some species, any species? Why use an individual's life doesn't matter, but, but, but biodiversity does. What is the value of biodiversity? To whom is it a value? Remember that values can only be for what and to whom. It has to be a purpose. It has to be a value. So why should I care about biodiversity? The goodness on them. And that's to evolve altruism. Why should I sacrifice the X fill in the blank, what X is? What we need to argue is that no, there's absolutely no reason she should sacrifice, that sacrifice in and of itself is evil. That you only have one life. That your purpose in life should not be the wellbeing of other people. Your purpose in life should be your own wellbeing. Why is your, their life more important than yours? Why is the life of a snail more important than your life as an individual, not human life, even your life as an individual? How did that happen? My life is more important than any animal's life. Sorry, certainly to me, because it's my life. And what we have to convince people is exactly that is the importance of people's lives to themselves and why that should be them all standard. And why that should be what they strive to defend their life. That's what morality is about. So they can couch the altruism through biodiversity, Mother Earth, climate change, Christianity, Kantian duties, or any other way, the million forms of altruism. But the ultimate question to ask them is why? And the ultimate positive point to make is you have one life. Live it. Live it to achieve happiness and to achieve happiness. You have to be thoughtful about it. Applejack 815. Thank you. Really appreciate the support. So you have to reject altruism. And then you have to ask the right questions with regard to egoism. And if they need a philosophical statement of why you should be an egoist, you can provide one. Only you can think. There's no group think. You are the standard of value. Only you can value. Nobody else can value for you. Morality is about values. Morality is about you. It's about your life. It's about living a good life. Brie asks, thanks Brie for the $20. Is there any source debunking the utopia? The communists always fall back on the idea that they have a better way, but their way is much worse. We have plenty of evidence after 2020, 50 years of welfare and the worst utopia. I mean, look, there's a million and they're all kinds of utopias. Not all utopias are socialist utopias. All utopias ultimately are authoritarian. But you know, there's a million, million things that I've written that others have written attacking the idea of altruism, attacking the idea of collectivism, which are at the heart of every utopian system. And why they must fail because altruism and collectivism must fail. And of course the history is filled with the bloodshed of utopian visions, particularly Marxist utopian visions. Action Jackson reminds me to remind you that we're having one of these private sessions. We'll call it the Fund Roar event where there will only be 14 people. It costs $100 to participate. It'll be March, sorry, December 18th, December 18th. And the topic will be how to defend against socialism. So it'll be, it'll be just 14 people with me. We'll be talking about socialism, how to defend against it, why it's so popular. And I think it'll be a lot of fun. And you can sign up for it. So if you're not unregistered for one of the newsletters, get registered. Go to youronbookshow.com. Of course, if you support the show, it's youronbookshow.com. So I support, you get automatically onto the newsletter, and then you can get more information about the event. But that's on December 18th. That's a Saturday. And it'll be 14 people with me just talking about how to defend against socialism. A moral pancake says thanks for recommending Walter Peter. Oh, my pleasure. I hope you enjoy his work. Thank you. Thanks for looking him up. That's great. Okay, Alex asks for $20. Did you ever wish there were actually were health so that truly even people would suffer for their sins? In a sense, yes. But I also actually also know that truly evil people do suffer for their sins. They suffer in this life. I am convinced of it. I have no doubt about it. But you can't really wish for an afterlife, even if it has good consequences like bad people suffering for their sins in hell, because of everything that implies. So not really, never really done it. But yeah, I'd love to see evil people suffer for their sins right now right here. The master asks, are you saying that by linking objectives videos in our arguments online, we would dramatically improve some people's lives, rather than slightly improving many people's lives, which would only slow things down. Yes, exactly. By linking objectives videos of all kind, and you can go over the entire objectives library and find the objectives videos that are most appropriate for you to link to, you will be changing some people's lives. And changing some people's lives will go and have a much bigger impact long term on changing the world, then changing a lot of people's lives just a little bit. It's one mind at a time, but you've got to really change that one mind. All right, no more under $20 questions, just because I'm running out of voice. And for those of you who don't know, I have a cold. I don't have COVID, but I do have a cold. And I'm losing my voice and it's just not pleasant. So I'm trying to keep today's show short. We are $70 short of 600. So it would be great if we got to 600 and kept the street going. But to do that, please ask $20 questions like Thessie just did. So Thessie asked life advice, when you feel yourself getting emotional from a momentary unjust incident, and that irrational side of the brain take over, well, there's no irrational side. It's not a side of the brain. It's just a default. Take over the rational objective side. What do you do to get yourself back on track? Well, the best thing to do is to walk away from whatever situation is causing you to feel this way is causing you to act this way to feel this way. And take a time out like we tell kids to go at the corner and take a time out. That is a good technique for adults as well. Just slow everything down, step aside, go into another room, go into another space or just disengage from the argument, disengage from the person who's triggering you or whatever situation it is that's triggering you. And just settle down, think rationally, regroup, we get yourself, get yourself back to that rational place. Yes, take a time out. So that's what I think you need to do. And it's sometimes hard to do it because you're in the emotion of the moment, but I think that's the rational thing to do, disengage, because you're going to say things, you're going to do things, you're going to regret later because they're going to be driven by emotion instead of a reason. All right, friend Harper, if you raffled off something like a signed copy of a book or 30 minutes of face to face entry being $20 super chats, I bet super chat would be insane. That's a good idea. You know what I was thinking I'm doing? Maybe maybe one of you can help me figure this out. What if I did an NFT? What if I like auctioned off an NFT of, I don't know, a signed article or one of my videos? I'm sure one of you who is into crypto, who is into kind of the crypto world, Linda, thank you, really appreciate the support. I think you got us very close to 600. So we're only basically six bucks short. Thank you, Linda. I'm sure one of you can think of a creative way for me to create an NFT that I could auction and maybe somebody would want to own. I don't know. Somebody told me that one of these substack guys, I think sold one of his NFTs for like six or seven figures, like an article of his signed as a digital unit, original with, I don't know, security, whatever the NFTs are. So that's my challenge to my Bitcoin crypto friends. Figure out a way for me to use NFTs to raise money. I'll auction one signed book a week. That is easy. Okay, we'll try that. I don't know how much a signed book by me is worth, but we're going to try that when I get back home and have a little bit more energy to do that. I'll do a book auction and we can see signed art prints. I don't produce art prints and I wouldn't sign an art print that whose art is not mine. That would be kind of funny. Anyway, NFTs, non-fungible tokens. Think about how to use that to raise some money, but let me try this idea of auctioning a signed book that's easy enough to do. Thanks, Fred Hopper for the idea. We'll try it out. Okay, let's do the non-$20 one. Somebody step in with like 10 bucks just so we can get to the 600. That would be great. According to the Heritage Freedom Index, America has declined by two points in 10 years while Guatemala increased by four points. Yeah, doesn't surprise me. The United States has been getting worse for at least 20 years, 21 years since George Bush was elected president. The United States has gone from third in the world to like 17. I think AORI is considering doing NFTs for ran stuff for the Iron Man Archives. I think that's possible. Enric, thank you for putting us over the 600 bucks. Really appreciate it. Anyway, I don't know what NFTs are really. I don't know how to do it. It's going to take one of you with initiative to make this happen. Let me know if you can help and you can make it happen. Hi, Ron. Can I train? This is Ryan. Can I train to be an intellectual? Yes. I thought I knew in the university remotely. Yes. I'd be willing to do this before launching a channel quite serious. Yes. Go sign up. It's easy to do. You have to apply to become a real student, but they're looking for people. They're always looking for talents. Contact the Iron Man Institute and let them know you're interested. Let them know you heard about it from me. Yeah, given that you want to do a channel and all of that, I am convinced that they would be eager to help train you. Couldn't waiting for enough intellectuals turn into a reason to take no action in the meantime? Isn't training new intellectuals action? Isn't getting people to read Iron Man books action? I don't know what action means if that's not action. Isn't setting up a university to train new intellectuals action? Maybe the most important action we could take. Action is not politics. I think that kind of action is what's going to save the world. I don't think the political action is going to save the world right now, but it also doesn't preclude you guys from acting. You guys can act. I said how you should act by advocating for objectivism, by linking to objectivist content, by not compromising on your objectivism, not compromising your views and really pushing them forward. Enric says, thank you for your work being about objectivism worldwide. I appreciate it. Let's see. Alex says, thank you. Just a thank you, Alex. Thank you. Let me just see something here. All right. Let's see. Friend Hopper says, I totally got you and Alex Epstein, a follower who just got elected as a mayor somehow, some way. I don't know where that's pretty funny, but cheers. Cool. That's excellent. We need as many mares as we can get. Frank Greil. I'm astounded the FDA approved a vaping product for sale. Seems like lobbying on steroids not to spit conspiracy theories, but someone got paid off. I'm not surprised. It's the FDA after all, but yes, somebody had some political power in a way that is surprising given that it's a vaping product, which is considered evil these days. Not sure exactly why, but it is. Bonnie, okay, $5. Best I can do, but thank you for your work and get better soon. Thank you, Bonnie. And thank you for the $5. It means a lot, knowing that not everybody can do $20. Not everybody could do certainly $100 or more. Friend Hopper says, tell whoever runs the Atlas Shrugged versus series to watch anime. You tell them. You should recommend that to them. Flona Nick, have you ever heard of the cargo cults of World War II? If not, basically, a story is the primitive inhabitants of the island treated the Americans in the airplanes as guards. Yes. I think Ayn Rand even wrote about the cargo cults, about the kind of mysticism of the cargo cults. So she's pretty sure she mentions it in one of her essays. I can't remember which one. Andrew, do you think morality is a floating abstraction of most people? Yes, absolutely. They have a vague notion they should be good. Sacrifice is good. Selflessness is good. They're supposed to be honest. They're supposed to be a few things, but it's not real. And it can be real because altruism, in some sense, is a floating abstraction that cannot be made a reality. All right, last question. What do you think of a lawn musk behavior and selling stock to pay taxes, supposedly in a tax maximizing way? I mean, it's stupid. It's stupid through and through. Why would you do it in a way that maximized your taxes? Again, he's trying to create a buzz. He's trying to be the good guy. He's trying to stick it to his critics by saying, no, I can pay taxes. Look, here, I'll pay taxes. I don't know what a lawn musk is after other than attention. And he's a genius. He's brilliant. He's incredibly able, but he's also cookie. He's also a bit crazy. And to put yourself in a position to have to pay, I don't know, billions of dollars in taxes for no reason, not because he needed any money, but because a Twitter poll said that most people would like him to do that is nuts. Sad that one of the great geniuses of our time from a business perspective, this is what he was about to do. All right, everybody. I am going to take a break. I've got a reception and dinner coming up after let my let my voice rest for a little bit. Thank you for joining me today. Thanks for getting us to $600. I really appreciate it. That is great. And I will see you all soon. I don't know exactly when, as soon as I have a break in the conference, I'll try to do a show in a couple of days, if I feel okay. And if not, suddenly Saturday, we'll do a show Saturday and Sunday, we'll do a couple of shows. And great. I will see you all soon.