 the radical, fundamental principles of freedom, rational self-interest, and individual rights. This is The Iran Book Show. All right, everybody. Welcome to Iran Book Show on this Thursday morning. Good morning, everybody. Getting out of bed, some of you. Well, it's 11 o'clock here in Puerto Rico. It is, you know, 10 a.m. on the East Coast and 7 a.m. on the Pacific Coast. So, yes, some of you are getting out of bed. Some of you might still be in bed. Hopefully, we're picking up some European listeners. This is perfect timing for you guys. So, hopefully, we have a few of those on board today, but from the rest of the world. So, playing around with times, we'll see how this all works out in the future. All right, we've got a bunch of stories today to cover. Don't forget that you can use the super chat to support the show, these particular shows, these news roundup shows, and to support the show, and to ask questions. So, you can both support the show and ask questions, or you just can support the show without asking a question. That's fine, too. So, jump in and hopefully do that. FD says, I'm European who just got out of bed. All right, some Europeans, you know, have a siesta. That's well known in Europe. I hope you had a good siesta, FD. All right, he probably lives in Spain or Italy or Greece. Now, I'm going to be accused of being anti-Southern Europe. All right, big story, breaking story that just happened. The WNBA star, Brittany Greiner, I think I'm pronouncing it right, was released from Russia, from Russian jail. Today, she was accused and sentenced, I think, for seven years in jail for carrying, of having drugs, marijuana, something like that, on her way out of Russia. She claimed she had none of that, that she was being framed. And what we have is a swap, a swap, one for one, with Viktor Baut, who is described as the merchant of death, a arms dealer who was captured by the United States and prosecuted and sent to jail for a long, long time, for illegally selling weapons internationally. So she's been exchanged for him. I'm not a fan of these kind of exchanges. I think this is a really bad idea with one caveat. I mean, it's horrible what happened to her. It's horrific the United States should have done everything in its power to get her out. As long as we have diplomatic relations with Russia, we should utilize that. But the idea of a prison exchange, I think, is horrific. The challenge here is that every time the United States arrests somebody that the Russians want, they will then frame somebody in Russia, some American in Russia, and sentence them to some horrible sentence in jail with the now expectation that the United States will trade for them because the United States cares so much about its citizens. So given this prisoner exchange has happened, and I'm happy for Brittany, I'm happy for her family and for the WNBA, and I'm happy for her being back and all of that. But the United States should make a simple straightforward declaration. And that is that the United States citizens who travel to the Russia on their own, that the United States is not responsible for their safety in Russia, that they cannot vouch for that safety. I think at the same time, the U.S. should bring back its ambassador and cut off whatever diplomatic ties we have with Russia. I think the United States should basically say Russia is a rogue nation. It is a suspect of framing U.S. citizens and putting them in jail for the purpose of having negotiating chip. And therefore, the United States will not be in a position to protect its citizens as they travel to Russia. And then, fine, then you do the exchange, and it's over, and from now on, nothing. And from now on, Russia is a pariah state that it deserves to be. And from now on, the U.S. has nothing to do with it. And until further notice, that is the situation in which we're in. I think that's the appropriate thing to do, encourage American citizens who live in Russia to leave, and encourage U.S. citizens not to go there again. That is the only scenario under which I think such a prisoner exchange makes sense, because otherwise, again, every time Russia wants something for the U.S., it just has to arrest a U.S. citizen. It happens to be passing through and Trump up charges, sent up to jail, and then negotiate a so-called prisoner exchange. All right, this is a story that's kind of breaking. I don't like this kind of story, because it really hasn't had that much time to percolate and to try to see if what is being said is accurate or not. I encountered these stories periodically, where it's really outrageous, but then it turns out that maybe what is being said is not accurate. But in this case, it looks like the story is true. The story is accurate. It looks like, so this is a story coming out of Project Veritas that has taped, that has video of a dean in a Chicago Illinois school. The school is W. Parker, Francis W. Parker in Chicago, which is a private school. And this is a dean, I think a student's dean at the school who is shown by video talking about the fact that in, I guess, sex education class, students and students were, there was a discussion of, I guess, a educational program around queer sex, queer sex is part of sexual education. And as part of that, dildos were handed out, butt plugs were handed out, lube. I don't want to get all the details partially, because it's hard to tell how much of this is real, although this is him in his own words, talking about this kind of proudly, that this was a, you know, he also brought, this teacher, this dean also said he brought in a drag queen to perform for students. I don't really care that he brought in a drag queen to perform to students. I don't see that as a big issue. But the idea that students as young as 14, 14 to 18 would be exposed to dildos and butt plugs and discuss the virtues of lube versus the virtues of spit on using them is pretty bad. And this is from somebody who is probably the least prudish person you know when it comes to sex. I don't believe, and this is the issue, that once you start sexual education where the limits, once you give to school educators the responsibility of teaching our kids about sex, where is the limit, what sex is out of bounds, what sex is okay, what constitutes normal, what constitutes abnormal, what constitutes stuff that a 14-year-old needs to be exposed to versus stuff that an 18-year-old needs to be exposed to, and to what extent should the schools be involved in something like this? And my view is that the schools should not be exposed to any of this. Indeed, that schools should not be teaching sex education. Sex education should be something parents teach their kids, parents are responsible for in terms of their kids. Indeed, I think that the only reason schools have been taking over the whole field of sex education is because parents are embarrassed to talk about it, don't want to deal with it, and have basically outsourced the whole topic of sex, and I think as a consequence the whole topic of value is more broadly. Two third parties, and this is given schools way more influence and may weigh more power over kids' education, particularly in these teen years than they should have. I don't think this is part of a school education. I don't think schools need to be talking about sex other than the biology of it, in biology class, but I'm not convinced there is any reason to have a sex education class. I don't think schools about this is a class in a school curriculum. Schools should be primarily about teaching content, teaching methodology, of reason, of rationality, teaching knowledge, teaching content, knowledge, and then teaching method, how to use that knowledge to achieve one's goals and one's values, but it shouldn't be about how to perform gay sex. I mean, that to me is just not what a school is there for, but I think that parents want this. So I think the outrage of the parents, there's a lot of outrage in this, supposedly in Chicago, parents didn't know the Board of Trustees did know, indeed, when he was asked about whether the Board of Trustees knew about what he was doing. He said, I wouldn't even run it by them. Why would I run it by them? He thought this was completely normal and completely acceptable. Parents didn't know about it, the trustees didn't know about it, and I think there's a big... The school, as Basie said, this is all the right wing conspiracy, but it hasn't denied any of it. And that's why I don't like these kind of issues that much, because until the hot news right now, but what's going to turn out to be the truth about this, we will see as it pans out. But I think to the extent this is true, and again, the school doesn't seem to be denying it, I think parents were going to be outraged, but I blame the parents at the end of the day, because parents are disengaged with their kids' education. Parents have granted the school's permission to teach sex education, when I don't think they should, as a way to avoid it themselves, because the parents don't want to deal with it. And this is the consequence. You hand people this, and you're going to get the parent... What you're going to get is the teacher's values being projected into the sex education, rather than the parent's values being projected into the sex education. And that, I think, is horrific and bad. So pretty disgusting, pretty awful. And again, not because I have anything about any of those practices, but because I don't think it is part of what a school should be doing, and I don't think 14-year-olds should be exposed to it any more than I think 14-year-olds should be exposed to porn. So 14- to 18-year-olds should not be exposed to this kind of sex. I'll say one other thing, and there's a lot more to say about this topic, because it deals with sex. Part of the issue is that we live in a society that has two views of sex, both wrong. We have a view of sex primarily dominated on the secular left, which is that sex is, well, it's just about pleasure, and it's just a material thing, and it doesn't mean that much, and what the hell, have it with whoever. And it's lost any spiritual, any bonding, any emotional meaning. It is just a physical activity. And then people are surprised by by two facts, I think. One, that people sleep around a lot, and B, that people are having less sex. I think both are consequence of this view that sex doesn't really matter. It isn't that important. It's just, it's just a physical drive. It's just, you know, it's just material, it's just animalistic. And then, of course, the flip side of that is the religious conservative view of sex. Oh, God, sex is this super kind of, well, it's the same thing, right? Sex is animalistic, is barbaric at the end, but it's tinged with this religious and morality, morality, indeed, deals to a large extent in religion with sexual behavior. Sexual behavior is a big part of what morality is about. And God forbid, you shouldn't have sex. It's because it's this both connection to God and this animalistic thing. It has to be preserved from marriage. It has to be bound by this real boundaries. And it's this, you know, kind of almost scary thing. And oh, gay sex, oh, that is really horrific and anti the Bible. And we can't even talk about it. And we can't discuss it. And we can't even. And so you've got two attitudes, both wrong about sex, one, and both agree in a sense that it's kind of animalistic and primarily about pleasure. And yet one tries to push people to have it only when they're married, which I think causes a lot of infidelity because people have it when they're married and it's not satisfying because they don't know anything about sex before then and then they land up sleeping around. Or it's nothing, it's no big deal who cares, have it with whoever. And that also deals with a lot of just meaningless sex happening in our world. And what both parties really reject is the idea that sex is this amazing reward for self-esteem. Sex is this amazing spiritual, emotional, physical, pleasurable reward for succeeding in life. Sex is super pleasurable emotionally and physically because of how important sex is in life. Because it is an affirmation, affirmation of you, affirmation of life, affirmation of your own worth and your own value and the beauty and the greatness of human life. And that makes sex something super special and something that shouldn't be avoided, shouldn't be denied, but shouldn't just be frivolously given away, done as if it's meaningless. So both sides have a distorted, perverted view of sex and the consequence is meaningless sex and less sex. Generally, most surveys show that young Americans around the world, young people having less sex today than they were having 30, 40 years ago, which is weird, but understandable completely. As you diminish the importance and value of sex, as you make it more material, more meaningless, more fervorless, the less people are going to have it. And when they have it, the less meaning is going to have for them because it's not that intense, super amazing experience that that unity of emotion, of spirit and physicality, of that celebration and reward that a proper view of sex would have it. So it's not surprising that people are having less sex, not surprising. I mean, sex should be a mutual expression of valuing, but it should be a mutual celebration of life. And if we have to have something to celebrate, you have to have earned the celebration. And if we have to have self-esteem, and that's what's missing from the whole sex debate, without self-esteem, sex becomes meaningless without knowing what you're celebrating, sex becomes meaningless. All right, that deserves a whole show. We'll have to do that one of these days in a longer format. All right, let's see. A coup attempt in Peru. This is kind of an interesting story. Let me just pull up. I had a, I got an email from Peruvian, which I think summarized this really nicely. So this is great. So yet, so Peru last year elected a communist, basically a Marxist communist as president, a leftist, a really corrupt, mafioso type, you know, just a horrible, horrible human being as president, who was to a large extent, again, both Marxist and communist, but also super corrupt in just a mafia style personality. Anyway, he has been, there have been several attempts to impeach him. They have gone after him for his corruption on several attempts. The corruption has become public. Everybody knows it. It's kind of in the public domain. Part of the reason he won is he was running against the daughter of a very unpopular Peruvian politician. Fujimora was his name. It was Japanese Peruvian, and I think he won to a large extent because she was so unpopular. Part of the problem with the oppositional party that is nominally on the right, nominating somebody who's horrible. We're familiar with that here in the United States. Anyway, over the last few days, there have been attempts to impeach this president. And yesterday at 3 p.m., the Peruvian Congress, and this is from Craig Spencer, so thank you, Craig, for sending this, but it's all over the news as well. At 3 p.m., the Peruvian Congress was scheduled to vote on the third attempt to impeach Castillo, who was the president. At that point, they didn't have enough votes to impeach him, partially because you need a supermajority for the impeachment to pass, and you need a two-thirds majority of 130 member parliament, and all they had so far was 80-something, so you needed 87 out of 130, and they couldn't get to 87, partially because Castillo owned hardcore communist supporters were part of the parliament, and because there were a number of fellow travelers, and there were, of course, people who he'd just bought. You know, corruption in Peru is nothing new. So it looked like this attempt to impeach him would fail again. Castillo, though, miscalculated, and at noon yesterday, he tried to conduct a coup. He dissolved Congress, declared martial law, and announced he was going to rule by decree for nine months and then impose a new constitution. An hour and a half later, so this is around 1.30 p.m., the high command of the armed forces of Peru and the commander of the national police in an unusual joint statement declared, quote, and I'm reading for this email, but I've verified this across many news sources, quote, any act contrary to the established constitutional order constitutes an infringement of the constitution and generates non-compliance by the armed forces and national police of Peru. Citizens should remain calm and trust the legally established state institutions. An hour later, Congress met and indeed impeached Castillo with 101 votes, even people, many of the people who were Castillo supporters at this point, viewed his coup attempt as something they could not stomach and voted against him. Castillo tried to flee to the Mexican embassy for asylum, but he was arrested by his own security guard on the way. He's now in jail. His vice president, who unfortunately is also a Marxist communist, but I think less of a thug, less of a mafioso, was sworn in as the new president. The funny thing is if Castillo had not tried to coup, he probably would still be in power. And unfortunately, many of the horrible people that Castillo has put into government positions, including his vice president, are going to stick around for a while until the next election, which is 2026, unless something else, of course, happens. Peruvian governments are notoriously unstable. You know, this is going to cause a lot of anguish and a lot of problems for the, I think, the Peruvian people for many years, and it's sad. But I take solace in this, in the fact that even in Peru, and this might reflect something on the United States, and something on those of us who might be more pessimistic about the U.S., even in Peru, dissolving the Constitution and just announcing yourself as dictator basically is unacceptable. And I think at the end of the day, if somebody tried to do that anytime soon in the United States, yeah, it wouldn't be acceptable. I don't think it would pass, Muster. I don't think the military would go along with it. I don't think, unless there were some extraordinary circumstances, I don't think the military would go along with it. I'm not sure the Secret Service would go along with it. I'm not sure Congress will ultimately go along with it, even if it was in order to stop the left. And I don't think the courts would go along with it. So in Peru, the constitutional order, as weak as I think generally it is, was stood an explicit coup attempt. I think, like Peru, and I think like the rest of the world, the real danger is not a coup attempt like this. I think the real danger is slow, the slow decline of liberty and freedom, the slow eradication of it, and ultimately the establishment of a strong man because everything else has failed, everything else is crumbling. No other alternative is even feasible to people. So I thought that was particularly interesting. And then finally, let's, well, maybe I've got two more stories, but let's look at Chinese Zero COVID. Chinese officials yesterday softened the COVID-19 safety measures significantly. They're dropping mass testing requirements. They're narrowing the lockdowns from entire neighborhoods or districts to individual buildings and floors. They're allowing people with asymptomatic or mild COVID cases to quarantine at home. And they are, in other words, giving up on the COVID Zero strategy. To try to understand why partially is it's a demonstration. So demonstrations were unprecedented. I think there was real pressure put on Xi. I again think that violent suppression of demonstrations. You're seeing this a little bit in Iran. And I think you're seeing this in China is problematic, I think, for regimes right now because of the internet, because of the availability of cell phones, because videos of any kind of violence is going to make it online so quickly. And there was fear of repercussions. So I think the demonstrations had a part of it. But also it's the fact that these lockdowns, the Zero COVID policy has had a grave impact, a dramatic impact on the Chinese economy. And look, the Chinese Communist Party's legitimacy, I mean, legitimacy in quotes here, in party depends from the perspective of the Chinese people on economic growth and economic prosperity. I think that's been the deal that many people I talked to in China have had with the basically Communist Party. They say, basically, look, as long as the economy grows and as long as I get richer, as long as growth is substantial, and as long as my cousins who are poor right now, they have a path to becoming rich or becoming middle class or becoming less poor, I don't care if I don't get a vote. But if the economy falters significantly, that deal is broken. And I think that that all emboldened the Chinese people to become more and more aggressive and more and more inclined to fight against the regime and to try to overthrow the regime. And I think she and the Chinese Communist Party know this, know this. So just to give you a few numbers, Chinese imports last year, and I know post Donald Trump, everybody thinks imports are bad, but imports are a reflection of how richer society is that you can afford the kind of stuff that you can buy from overseas. The fact that America can import lots of stuff is a reflection of our strength. Chinese imports fell 11% year over year in November. That's a lot. 11%. You could argue that that reflection of 11% decline in the standard of living quality of life in China. Exports fell by 8.7%. Now, there's a relationship there because the less you export, the fewer dollars you have in order to import, in order to import you need foreign currency. Now, this is the largest dip since the initial zero COVID lockdowns happened in February 2020. And you know, this is a big deal. China's economy is probably in a recession, even though they won't admit it, even though that's not the official line. But I think that's good news for China. I think it's good news for the global economy, but it's good news for liberty and freedom, although I'm hoping that the Chinese will now start demanding even more that this will be a first step. And seeing the Chinese government compromise, maybe this will lead to even more. All right. Finally, a quick news story, and then I'll go to your super chat questions. I appreciate all the super chat support here. Thank you guys. But we've still got about $100 to go. So quickly Iran, you know, I keep updating you on Iran, but Iranian demonstrations continue. There is no slowdown in there. Iran is hung, executed a protester for the first time. This is the first known execution. A lot of people are being condemned to death, but this is the first actual execution. It is interesting that he was convicted of waging war against God. That was his offense. Waging war against God. I'd be dead many, many decades ago if that was a real offense. Luckily, I don't live in a place like that. He was sentenced to death on October 23rd, executed by hanging on Thursday, according to many in Iran without any due process. Not that I think Iran has particularly good due process, but even they have an appeals process for the death sentence. He didn't go through that. They just executed him. I think this is an attempt, a desperate attempt by them to show, see, this is what's going to happen to you people. I don't think it's going to work. I think the Iranians are committed to fighting for their own liberty, committed to fighting against this regime. We will see, we're seeing for the first time significant Iranian figures coming out and saying, hey, maybe we should moderate things a little bit. Maybe we shouldn't be so extreme. Khatami, the former president, Khatami, on Tuesday urged the current government to be more lenient with protesters. A Sunni cleric, Molavi Abdul Hamid, Ismail Zahi, on Tuesday called for the country's judiciary to investigate and prosecute individuals abusing women in prison. So there is a little bit, we're starting to see a little bit of the regime, the people at the top, the people in power kind of waver a little bit, but on the other hand they're executing people. So I think the struggle within the Iranian regime about what to do and what to do next, the continuation of the protests, a real challenge within Iran, which has not yet been resolved, and I'm not sure when, if it's going to be resolved, but it is, yeah, I mean, it's sad and also, you know, emboldening to see that and encouraging to see the kind of courage that Iranians are showing in the face of the horrible violence of the regime, of all the authoritarian. All right, let's see. Wes says, downward coming schools, free market and education, it's disturbing how many schools try to circumvent parents, but many parents seem willingly ignorant and don't want to know. Yeah, absolutely. Most parents, not just many. I think most parents don't want to know. They drop the kids off at school. That's a school responsibility. They pick them up after afternoon, they ask the kid, I was school, the kid says, okay, and that's the last thing, the last question they'll get, parents just don't want to know. And I think that's true of a vast majority of the parents. Okay, let's see. Friend Harper says, showing support for the new shows, very dense with content and value, valued greatly for that. Thank you, friend Harper. Really appreciate that. Alexi, Alexi, also $50. So we're now $55 short of our goal. So hopefully somebody will step in here soon. Wanted to give a shout out to Jeffrey Miller, Oozella and its staff. Yeah, I'll second that shout out. I had an amazing dinner with my fiance on Saturday, on Saturday, some of the best sushi I've ever tried. Yuan, thank you for the recommendation. Yes, Oozella is amazing. It's just fantastic food. Jeffrey is becoming a friend. And it's, you know, I get treated like a VIP. I have to say I enjoy that. But every time I go there, I mean, it's twice. Second time was better than the first time was amazing. Second time was even better. And I expect that trend to continue. No, I expect to keep going because it's a fantastic place. And I enjoy getting to know Jeffrey and his staff and the experience. It's just that, you know, eating is not just about the food. It's about the whole experience. And, you know, you definitely get that if you go there and you say you're an objectivist or you say you're affiliated with Yuan Bookshow, you're going to have, you can have an experience. All right. I think you have an experience anyway, because the food is great. But I think if you, if you bond around the, the show, the experience is even better. Fred Harper also says, have you seen the movie Jo Jo Rabbit? I thought it was really good movie due to its message. God, that sounds so familiar, but I don't remember seeing it. It sounds familiar. Anyway, let's see. J.J. Jigby's. My mom once found some, my mom once found some troubling sex at homework from my sister's middle school, middle school. God, she cried because she was so confused. She didn't know what to do. Think about it. I think a lot of parents feel that way. In my initial super chat, I wrote the test at homework, said, but YouTube wouldn't even allow it in the, oh, I wrote what the sex at homework said, but YouTube wouldn't even allow it in the super chat. No wonder people are so lost. Yeah. I mean, that's the thing. You can teach anything, but in the super, but in YouTube won't allow you to actually say it. You know, they, they, they, they ban you using the terminology or that description. I think parents are confused, but I think that's, that's the culture in which we live. We live in a fundamentally Christian culture where Christianity has framed up perspective on sex, and therefore we don't know how to talk about it. We're shamed by it, and yet we think it's frivolous. We think it's nothing, but yeah, we know it's not, and yet Christianity has, has, has couched it that this is this thing that needs to be preserved. It's somehow bad, but it's sometimes pleasurable. It's somehow important. You have to save it until after marriage, but it's somehow animalistic. And people are full of contradiction when it comes to sex. It's why everybody's attitude out there to sex and to pornography and all these things are so screwed up. Why pornography is so popular and it's consumed so much because we're fundamentally as a culture because of Christianity. So completely and utterly confused about it. I think generally Europeans have a better attitude towards sex, but it's not that good as much as even though it's better. Americans are completely confused by it. You know, because of how dominant Christianity is, even in secular society, even in secular culture, it, it, it dominates and it's been secularized, that attitude towards the sex. It's a movie. So Jojo Rabbit. Oh, I saw that movie. It's a movie about the Nazis has Scarlett Johansson in it, which I love Scarlett Johansson. God, somebody recommended it to me, I remember, and there's something about it that I wasn't, didn't really like that. There's some good elements, but there's something about it I didn't really like, but I can't remember what it was. It's, it's a, it's a kind of movie that would be good to review because it's a kind of movie that is very tempting to like. And yet I see, I see things I don't like about them. But anyway, I think that's right. So I don't, if I see it again, I'll say something about it. But was that Flint Hopper? Yes. But I can't remember, which is always dangerous to comment on stuff you can't remember. Yeah, I'm getting to the point where I watch I used to be able to remember movies amazingly, and I'm getting to the point where not, all right, we are $55 short of making our goal for today, there we go. We're not anymore. Jackson Ford we just came in with the $50 question. Thank you, Jackson, really, really appreciate it. And so we made our $250 as we almost always do. Jackson says, hi, Iran, started listening November, 2021. Wow. Don't often have time to join live, but just because it became a monthly contributor. Thank you, Jackson, really appreciate that. Value for value, thank you for the value you have brought in my life this last year. Read the found head and working my way Wow, yeah. You exactly the kind of story I love to hear. I'm curious how you found me. Just generally, that would be great if you put it in the chat. I'd really appreciate that. It tells me something about what I do is particularly effective, but thank you, Jackson. Colt says, I agree with you. The slow decline is as much a real threat. I've done a lot of research on Roman Republic. It was slow decline for a century. People got tired of it. Then authoritarianism came. Yes, but look, I mean, yes. I think that's absolutely right. And the Roman Empire was a slow decline. And I think it was a slow decline for a reason that is the same reason it was declining. That is an undermining of the fundamental philosophical principles that made Rome great to begin with. And those were Greek principles primarily, Greek philosophy. And they were being undermined partially by Greek philosophers, by a variety of Greek philosophers that were pessimistic about the world. They were pessimistic about human reason, pessimistic about human success and ability. But also because of the rise of Christianity and Christianity undermined the Roman Empire, slowly chipping away at it, eating at it, eating at the self-esteem, eating at it, self-confidence. And at the one hand, just like today, it destroying certain elements within Roman society and destroying other elements by who became Christian. And destroying other elements, not through that, but destroying other elements by people who were belling against Christianity and that you could see in the hedonism. So Romans became either Christian or hedonists. And that was the end, right? That's the end. And to some extent you're seeing that today and to some extent you're seeing that with the sex education. All of this is kind of a hedonism slash nihilism. I mean, I think this kind of sex education is nihilistic. It's about destroying sex for these kids. It's making it animalistic. And that I think happened to a lot of this then in Rome as well. It became meaningless, it became hedonistic and thus ultimately nihilistic. And it's that combination of Christianity, driving people on the one hand to become Christians and those who were belling against Christianity become nihilistic and hedonistic. That is what destroyed it. And there was no kind of positive alternative that rose out of Rome, just like, unfortunately, there's very little positive alternative rising out of America. I mean, I think it's objectivism. I think it's Inran, but we're still so small and so small of a voice. But there it is, right? It's Jackson who saw my conversation with Mark Moss last year. Yes, I remember doing that interview. I actually drove out to his place, which is in Rincon, which is about a two and a half hour drive from here to do that interview. So I'm glad something good came of it. I mean, that's amazing, right? I do these interviews. I don't know. I'm doing one at noon today. I don't know what's gonna come of it. And then something good comes of it. And then Charles says, I've been listening since I saw you in Ben Shapiro. Yes, I mean, that was another example of you go, you do the interview, you think you do a good job, but it's hard to tell what impact you have on people. And then Charles shows up and Jackson shows up. So that's how we change the world. One mind at a time. I wish I had the formula of changing the world to 1,000 people at a time. I wish I knew how to break through with a new algorithm on YouTube because clearly something has changed. I mean, subscriptions have flattened completely. They're not growing at all, which is weird the first time ever on the Yoram Brook show. In spite of me doing more shows, I think viewership is not going up much. I mean, you guys are amazing because the people I have are incredibly passionate. So revenue is doing great. But by all the metrics, the show is flattening out. And I suspect something changed in November in the algorithm. It's brand new. I don't think I said anything new that would piss people off. I don't think anything else. So something changed. So I'm hoping that, I'm hoping you guys, I hoping we figure out how to get around this. One of the things I encourage you to do is, again, like the show, comment if you can, share, do all that. And let's see if we can make a difference. But it is sometime around the end of November, early November, something in the algorithm changed. And, but we are getting to people. You can see that, you can see that, which accent, you can see that with Charles, we are getting to people. We see that with a lot of people here. We are getting to people. We still have a lot of work to do and we still have people who come on here who don't get it and we're not getting it. But that's the price you pay for being public. Thank you everybody. Thank you for the super chat, for getting us to where we need to be. Thank you, Jackson. But we had a bunch of $50 questions today. Thank you, Alexi. Thank you, Fred Harper. And yeah, I'll see you all tonight. There will be a show tonight, 7 p.m. East Coast time. So tonight, 7 p.m. East Coast time will be a Iran book show. It'll be kind of a history show. We'll do a kind of modern history of the United States show. I wanna do a show on the key events over the last 40 years. I think the defining events, in a sense, the rise and decline of modern America. So, the very short rise and the very long decline. I think it could be fun and interesting. I've gained some new insight about things that I didn't know over the last few weeks that I find interesting. Historically. So, join me tonight, 7 p.m. Eastern time, right here on the Iran book show. I'll see you all then. Bye.