 Next speaker is a gentleman by the name of Richard Nicolai, and he's a returning speaker to the 21 convention. I heard him speak last year in Orlando. His speech is called Free the Animal, which sounds pretty cool. He is a best-selling author of Free the Animal, and you can find out more about him at freetheanimal.com and he's one of the top authors for the new web company called Hyper Inc. So let's welcome Richard to the stage. Have a good one. I like to give my presentations barefoot. I hope you don't mind. I did that last year. I think I'll make it a tradition if I come here again. Thank you all for coming. It's nice to be out here again. Last year, who am I? I'm Richard Nicolai. Website Free the Animal. I'm what they call a paleo blogger. And last year, my presentation was almost entirely about diet, health, things like intermittent fasting. Dave Asprey, my friend, is going to speak about the bulletproof diet tomorrow, which is very closely related. You've got the caveman, you've got the paleo, you've got the bulletproof. Ancestral, I was just at the Ancestral Health Symposium in Boston last week. This is basically a similar kind of presentation. And the presentation that I gave last year, what I spoke about, like I said, is diet, exercise. But then there was a little bit at the end about my attitude towards politics, political structures, even religion, things like that. And I decided that what I would do this year is take that part of it and expand it into a full presentation. So we're going to talk about basically what you're going to hear from me today is the same presentation that you've been hearing since Socrates started yesterday. How many know that you've essentially heard the same presentation over and over and over and over again? What is that common thread? Can anybody tell me what that common thread is? That's part of it. It's part of it. Reality. What you have been learning, hearing about is how to tap in, how to recognize reality. How to deal and make your decisions and conduct yourself with what's really real and not all of the illusions that everybody is trying to sell you. And even in terms of the game and the pickup stuff, I'm learning the terminology now. I like that the game. And I like how it kind of is misapplied because I knew nothing about the pickup community before last year. And unfortunately, because of my schedule last year, I did not get to sit in on many of the presentations as I did yesterday. And I thoroughly enjoyed it because I found that when people say to me, like, why are you associating yourself with that 21 convention deal, those pickup artists guys? But when you really learn about it, it's not at all about how to go and pick up, correct me if I'm wrong, but you're not learning to go and pick up a woman who doesn't want to sleep with you or be with you or talk to you. What you're learning to do is to get out of your own way, right? What you're learning to do is to recognize that as a human animal, by definition, you're sexually attractive to the opposite sex. Tell me one single animal species out in the wild who goes around saying, chicks just don't like me. But that's where the whole diet and stuff comes in, right? Because there are sexually unattractive people, males and females. But who did that to them, right? So you've got to each diet squared away, your health squared away, your appearance squared away, learn how to dress, and then you still have to learn how to get out of your own way by overcoming your introversion as Greg. So incidentally, I've known Greg since about 1995, 94, 95, something like that. Long time, yeah. I first took note of him when he was arguing with a guy in Usenet. Brad Asai, he was arguing with Greg, and Greg replied, he said, don't you think I know who you are? Greg is a very perceptive person, so I really enjoyed his presentation. But yes, we've got Anthony's putting this together, and it's all these great ideas about the diet, the health. He's even had finance stuff, so it's all about becoming the best you. And when you're the best you, you are going to be sexually attractive to someone, and all of this pickup stuff is merely a way to make you to recognize that and to be confident in it and go out and find out which ones of those who want to be with you and make it happen. Okay, so it's a little intro. Good, it works. Alright, so paleoepistemology and sociology. Now, epistemology is a big word, so let's start there. It works too, good. Alright, so the standard definition. The theory of knowledge, especially with regard to its methods, validity, and scope. Things like, what is knowledge? Epistemology is really just the study of knowledge. What is knowledge? Well, I kind of like to answer that somewhat totalogically. Knowledge is knowledge of reality. It's not about reality, it's not knowledge. If it is something that you can count on, if it's existential with regard to reality, that's knowledge, right? And we're going to talk about a lot of stuff that you think is knowledge, but it's not knowledge at all. It's illusion, it's deception, right? Okay, how is knowledge acquired? How does knowledge get acquired in the very, very, very first place? As fundamentally as you can go. Well, you have senses. You have sense, eyes, ears, nose, touch. But you also have a mind, right? So you take all of this data from your senses. You integrate it. Our minds are integrating. Our minds are not reality-creating organs. They're sensory data integrating organs. You don't create reality. We perceive it through our senses, concepts, and then we use our mind to further build a house of knowledge. It's called a hierarchy. This comes together with this, and this comes together with this, and this comes together with this, right? To what extent is it possible for a subject or entity to be known? Well, that's kind of a continuum because the cool thing about knowledge is that usually there's always something more to know, right? So we know this, but we know that in a year's time or ten years' time, in your own life and society, technology, all these things that we know more and more. But what I like is right here. This is the way I really like to think of epistemology or the study of knowledge. The quality of the knowledge. So keep that in mind. When you're thinking about knowledge, think it's all about quality. It's quality. You've got everything from outright delusion to 1 plus 1 equals 2, right? And everything in between. And we're talking about quality when we're talking about that. So sociology, everyone knows of this. Study of humans in their social thing. The thing to really take home there is that we are social... Oops, misspelling, social. Humans are social animals. We're social beings. We don't really fare well by ourselves. Robinson Crusoe or not. That is an aberration, right? Now we've put them together. Social epistemology and I thought, how do I explain this? And I was digging through a bunch of stuff and I went over to Stanford University. They have an encyclopedia of philosophy and I read that and then I come to the very, very end and I'm like, ah, that's what I want. Alright. Social epistemology acknowledges that quests for truth, think quality of knowledge, are commonly influenced, for better or worse, by institutional arrangements and we're going to talk about that big time. That massively affect what duxastic... duxastic is just a fancy word for belief agents. So people who believe one thing or another. Those are agents, duxastic agents. Hear or fail to hear from others or see or touch or smell or argue or whatever. To maximize prospects for successful pursuits of truth, this variable cannot sensibly be neglected. In other words, institutions lie and deceive and it affects what everyone believes in great ways and if you want to get quality knowledge, this has to be taken into account. Is that clear? Alright. Paleo-knowledge base. So now what we're going to deal with is we're going to take a look at how fucking stupid all those primitive people were. Are you ready? And how much far more enlightened we are. Okay, sunrise, sunset. These are... I'm going to show you some pictures to convey to you what paleo-man with the guy in the caves, what they had to deal with in order to survive. And they were very successful. You know, they were very successful. Otherwise we wouldn't be here. Sunrise. Animal tracks. Is it food? Where do they come from? Where are they going? If they're coming from somewhere, why are they coming there? Do they know something we don't know? Is there danger? Is it a signal of danger? Are they going to something? Are they going to water? We need water. All of these things in existential reality, they are dealing with reality here. Unequivocally. Sunsets. What does it look like? I was a Navy officer. Drove ships for eight years. And we had a saying, red sky in the morning, sailors take warning. Red sky at night, sailors delight. And you would not believe how well that holds true. That's dealing with reality. It's not 100%, but it does pretty well. I don't know if you can see that very well. That's footprint in the sand. So, you know, friend or foe? Where is he coming? Is it a new tribe in the area? Something, something we need to be concerned about? So on. Aliens. That's a joke slide. Storm clouds. Does it look better or worse or different than the last one? What happened the last time is the last time, right after they saw this, they saw forest fires. Is that going to happen? These kind of things that they had to deal with to survive. And that's my favorite there. What do you think you can learn from that? And in fact, I would submit to you, I would submit to you that this is a great representation of the beginning of epistemology. And by what I mean of quality of knowledge and integration and forming a hierarchy. A very experienced tracker probably sit and talk to you for 15 minutes about everything he knows about that animal based on that picture, right? And you've heard it before, you know, whether the snow is packed or the extent and there's debris in it and what the edges look like and on and on and on and on and on that they have built this entire hierarchy for their survival. They even know what kind of animal it is. They can tell whether it may be injured or something or maybe it's a predator or something like that. So really think about that. I'm going to skip down here, quick. Okay, now. So what I've just gone through in all of these is really, I think, a pretty solid case that payload man, our ancestors, our way back ancestors over a period of 200,000 years or so, how they dealt with reality and the knowledge. It wasn't a huge amount of knowledge. I mean, everybody has more knowledge than they did overall. But the knowledge that they did have pretty much all very high quality knowledge. Everyone with me? All right. So now we're going to juxtapose that. The Neolithic knowledge base, right? Church and state, purveyors of mass delusion, right? Because, because, so much. I mean, it's proven, just read the news. If you do, I don't. But pretty much everything that comes out of it is subjective, it's based on belief, it's based on judgments, it's based on politics, it's based on antagonism, which we'll get to in a moment. So let's, you remember just a few minutes ago, I showed you all of these things that payload man looks at to perceive and integrate reality. We concluded, or I concluded, I told you, that it's quality knowledge, right? So here's a similar slideshow about the Neolithic knowledge base. Faith, belief, the subjunctive belief of world's not in evidence, right? Yeah, they even, you know, and here is, here's an odd thing to think about right here, true. There are people, there are not just thousands, not just tens of thousands, not probably not even millions, there are probably several billion people on this planet who would look you right in the eye and say this represents the highest quality of knowledge attainable. Seriously, billions of people, and they make decisions, and they enslave, and they kill other people over it. Well, so, you know, we have, have they even had these, the convention jet? I don't know, see, I don't pay any. Yeah, yeah. And when is the erection? The erection. November. That's a pun intended, and it's metaphorical. It's metaphorical because in that context, women have erections too, I guess. So, but we'll get more on, I'll speak more to that subject later on. So, you know, this is all, this is all part of the same game, really, to make you think that, quality and all, that you have quality of knowledge. When what they're doing is pretty much feeding you a bunch of lies and deceptions and everything, and we'll get to why in just a little bit. They're involved too, right? All part of the same big scheme to keep every, do you think, you know, they say, you know, the liberal news media and they favor the Democrats and everything, bullshit. What they favor is antagonism, right? That's what they favor. They favor keeping you all stirred up, you know, and get out the vote, we'll talk about that too. Them, them, them, you know, this is the bad guy, right? And these are the good guys, right? Give me a break. Them too. I mean, representative, you know, I'm a fan of education, big time, you know. But you have to, at some point, you do have to realize that everybody that's here and here and here came from this, you know, what is it, a kind of a breeding pen or whatever, you know, and how many of these and these and these went to these and took science, got a PhD in chemistry, got a PhD in math, engineering, anything. No, no, politics, political science, right? Scoot down one here. So, but what is, you know, what is it all about, really? What is, what is, what is the purpose of it? Anyone, can anyone think of why all of this stuff exists? The whole church state, what are they there for? Control, good, yes. That's close enough. Authority, right? Now, when, when, if I say, if I say that my friend Dave Asprey is an authority on diet, right? I'm saying that basically whatever you think doesn't matter. He's an authority. If I say he's an expert, then that makes it, then it's different. But we, but what we're talking about here is authority. The church and the state, the church is the authority for all this, all this, you know, quality knowledge and the government is the authority and then they anoint the different people that are authority and it's all designed, it's all designed to make, to give you a feeling of inferiority. It's, it's to diminish you. It's, and ultimately dominate you, right? Because they're the authority and it's external to you. And that's what's important because there is valid authority. We'll get to that. But, but all of this, all of this authority we're talking about that's all propped up is external to yourself. But you are, if you were the ultimate authority for you, right? Then why would we even talk about other people as authorities? The reason you talk about anybody as an authority, if I tell you, you know, someone's authority, what I'm really saying is that, is that, is that what you say or think doesn't mean shit compared to this. Ultimately. Is it false? Well, it can be, it is. But how do you mean, so how is, how, but how does, how does it get maintained? How does it, how is, how is this idea that other people, other people or authorities that serve to, to, to serve in a superior fashion to our own judgments lies, deception, we talked about that. Blame, shame, guilt. You know, essentially, you're, it's all, it's all, it's all you, it's all about you, really, you know. It's your nature, you're selfish, you're too selfish. You're a sinner, selfish and you're a sinner. You don't measure up to the higher ideals set for you by the authorities. To the extent you accept your terms, you'll always fail, see. Ever heard of the doctrine of original sin? It's rigged. You know, it's a, it's a, as, as I ran in Atlas Shrugged in John Galt's speech, does a wonderful expose of, of original sin. It's, it's basically, it's basically, it's, it's, it's, it is the founding doctrine of Christianity. And it's a game of loaded dice. It is designed, it is designed to make you feel guilty from the get-go, from birth. Right? So since you'll always fail, you feel the appropriate guilt and shame. And that's the means of the influence and control of your, over you. You've accepted the terms. You've put yourself in bondage. A citizen of the human zoo. Like a domesticated animal. You know? And we've already talked about it last year. But part of that domestication means that, you know, part of the whole authority thing is about diet and exercise. We talked about that last year, but that's a big part of it too, you know? You've, you've ever heard of a CAFO, CAFO, confined animal feeding operation? You know, have you ever driven by one of those things and there's like a bazillion cattle in this one little thing and they, it's a few weeks or months before slaughter and they feed them with grains every day so they fatten them up, right? That's like Walmart. Yeah, Walmart too. So that's part of it. The human zoo, you could say the human can concentrate on animal feeding operation. That works. But, like I said, there is valid authority. Authority is a good word, actually. Actually. In fact, you should strive to be authoritative. You should be strived to be maximally authoritative. But over who? You and why? Reality. There's two, you know, there's other, there's, there is, there is, there is a, oops, oops, oops, oops, oops, oops, oops. Sorry. Okay, so valid authority, first and foremost is reality, you know. I mean, that's what we talked about at the beginning. The sunrise, the sunset, all these, all these existential truths and there's nothing wrong with taking advice and counsel. That's a social sort of, you know, expertise or authority as long as you don't have to, as long as you're not forced to, but ultimately authority is individual and it's you in authority over yourself. Now, let's contrast, we talked about the Neolithic knowledge base and all of these different things, you know, illusions, deceptions, you know, to keep up to the antagonism and everything. So, and it may, and I talked about the paleo, it may, on some level to you sound like I'm some, some kind of a Luddite or Primitivist or, or, you know, glorifier of the Primitive. No, that's just the way things are. And we should, we should, we should look back and realize that they were successful and we should, we should determine why they were successful. They were successful because they dealt with reality. Like these people, you know, the people who designed the airplanes and things like that, do you think they studied social studies? They get a, did they get an art appreciation degree? They may have went to an Ivy League school. Fact perhaps. They got a degree in chemistry. They got a degree in computer science. They became a coder. They were dealing with reality. Just like paleoman. Let me click down here. Excuse me a second. So, in a sense, in a sense, the people who do this are like the people who did that. It's just a different scale. But it's the same principle. It's dealing with things as they really are. It's dealing with reality. It's, it's that. One plus one equals two. It's not a matter of opinion. There was no law ever passed that said one plus one shall equal two. No authority was ever required. No president ever got up and said, I've just, I've made an executive order that one plus one shall equal two. It's not just a truth, but it's the fundamental foundation of all truth just as Greg's solipsism. One is greater than zero is greater than negative one. It's the same sort of thing. So, so what do you think, what do you think all these would look like if instead of being based on this and on this, they were instead based on that and that? I think, I think, and I think didn't, didn't the Soviet Union and produce some, some really crappy cars? You know, what? Trans, yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah. What was the Tramont ideology or something? That was the model, the model name. Yeah, so what's the church state domain? Politics, religion, social studies, multiculturalism, liberal arts, and to even great extent history. You know, there's good historians and bad historians. There's revisionist historians, you know, and a good historian uses many, many sources and we still, it's still, since nobody was really there, it's hard to tell what the real story is. So, even to some extent, history is highly manipulated now. And we could probably go on with the list of things there. So, and I've already mentioned this. We'll go through it quick. What's the purpose of all this? The purpose of the whole thing, of the way that they act, and why it's not like tech-knowledge-e. Did you catch that when we hit that slide? And remember, tech-knowledge-e. And what are we talking about when we're talking about knowledge? We're talking about the quality of the knowledge. The purpose is to support the general political antagonism because if they've got you all antagonized about one another based on lies and deceptions and one more that I'm just going to get to here in just a second, it's coming up next. I love this quote. In fact, every presentation I've ever done in my life starts with this slide and then I build a presentation around it. The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed and hence clamorous to be led to safety by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. They want to keep you antagonized against each other. You know, I was just on the side. You know, I'm a blogger. I'm kind of known as a shit stirrer. You know, I was introduced as Richard Nicolai. My mom has always hated the nickname, but I am known by the nickname in connection in the paleo movement as Angry Dick. I kind of like it actually. I called some... I used the C word against some particularly awful women. But strangely enough, there are a number of women who actually like the use of the word. So my alternate nickname is Cunt Master. I'll take either one, actually. All right, so... Are we here? All right, so, you know, the... Let me actually stick with that for just a second. The whole thing about antagonism, you know, and that whole C word thing and everything, I'm more and more... You know, anytime I say anything, mention anything, such as, you know, in fact, in a lot of circles, the speech Socrates opened up yesterday, misogynist, right? More and more and more, you hear that one. There's actually very few misogynists in society, otherwise we wouldn't be here. You know, what there is, what there is is antagonism between males and females, just the way everybody likes it. Who? The authorities. Another way to look at antagonism is it's creating problems where none exist. None otherwise exist, right? And so these politicians, these leaders, these various institutional leaders, a lot of the non-profits, the ivory tower, intellectuals and so on, they're always doing stuff to antagonize different groups. And this is why it's so important that we have more and more different kinds of groups because more and more different kinds of groups equals more and more different ways to pit groups against groups and have antagonists. So it's very different from the... from the chemist and the mathematician and the computer sciences who get together and build an airplane, you know, who are dealing with reality. What are they doing? They're solving problems. What are the antagonists doing? They're creating problems where none otherwise exist and then pretending to solve them. So, are there any real hobgoblins? Sure, sure. So, I mean, Menken isn't to be taken literally. It's only in the context of... it's only in the context of those institutions, right? There's real societal hobgoblin, financial crises, unemployment, inflation, real estate bubbles, business cycles, it goes on and on, right? But who's responsible for them? We all know, if you've been listening to me, you know who's responsible for these. But who do they actually blame? Those guys. Right? And you know why? It's the corporations, it's the bank, it's greed, it's greed and you're greedy too, incidentally, right? It's unbridled individualism. I told you, it's the same presentation over and over and over again. It's inadequate regulation. It's never state force and violence. Never. No, it's not them. Demosyde. The murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicized and mass murder. This does not include combatants. Check this out, Death by Government on the Internet, it's very interesting. Professor R. J. Rumel, University of Hawaii, total democide at 133 million deaths pre-20th century and 262 million deaths in the 20th century for a grand total of 395 million people. It doesn't include combatants. So this is where a government intentionally kills its citizens, not talking about when they go to war and combatants kill combatants. That's a different figure. Who kills the most? I'm questionably authoritarian regimes number two, but democracies kill plenty. It's the lesser of three evils. Isn't it interesting? I got a question actually in the Q&A last year about what's wrong with voting for the lesser of two evils. My answer was thanks for pointing it out that you're choosing evil. Running out of time, so we're going to move quick. Now we're going to kind of contrast the same sort of thing that we did with epistemology now in the social realm. There are primitives there, dirt-scratching primitives. They can't have any social power. Cooperation, standby the fire, lounging around. It's because people like this knew what the fuck they were doing that we're here and they had to know what the fuck they were doing because it wasn't very many of them. They could have easily died out and gone extinct. Many homo-species did. We were the first one that was successful as she has social power in the paleo and the neolithic. We evolved to account for the actions and values. Pay attention here of 30 to 60 other individuals with each individual having a real and true potential to influence the direction of tribe and the group. In essence, we evolved as little commies in little communes. The problem is, there's nothing wrong with that. A family unit is somewhat like a commune. The problem is it doesn't scale, but that's genuine social power right there. Everybody you know, you know what they like, you know what they hate. You know how to behave around them. If you integrate all of that, you can actually influence what they do and what the whole group does. We're social animals. There's the contrast right there. It's hilarious to me. People go in and they come out with this sticker on. You know, I voted. I got my 1 in 300 millionth say in my own affairs. I ought to say in who's going to rule my life next. And they think that's social power. So, you know, at least they have the decency to cover themselves, you know. That's the same sort of thing there. So, at this point, people say, well, you know, what do you advocate? You know, it's like you can't say, well, you know what, I'm not for force. I'm not for initiating force. I'm not for domination, you know. It just doesn't square. So, what do you advocate? How should we organize society? What should we do to fit everybody in? And finally, I've come up with an answer. You know, I'm not interested. People say, why don't you vote? First of all, I wouldn't do that to you. Second of all, I'm not interested even in a 100, 1 in 300 millionth say in your affairs or yours affairs or yours affairs. I'm not interested. I'm no interest in trying to dominate you or be an authority over you or tell you what to do. I'm not interested in finding out how I can be in the bigger mob, right? What happens in anarchy? What happens? What happens in anarchy? What? Everything. Everything happens. You find out which thing you like and you go get with those people and do it. Organize yourselves, whatever. Everything. Anarchy begins at home. So, you know, Greg and I have known each other for a long time and he is the only other person on the face of the planet who has the same conception of anarchy as I do. Because they're all, everybody but us is full of shit because it's not about... Yeah, we're the only two that can be trusted. Yeah. So, you know, the idea of anarchy, like, well, we're going to establish that, well, you're right off the bat, you said you're not an anarchist because you don't establish anything. Anarchy is self-authority, recognizing everybody else's self-authority, no desire to dominate anybody. And just like those groups way back when, doesn't mean there's never violence or anything, you know? People ask me, well, what about rape and murder and everything like that? I say, well, as soon as there's no laws, who are you going to rape and murder first? Right? And do you think the laws now prevent rape and murder? Of course not. Happens every day. So, everything happens. Everything happens now. Everything still happens then. So, just some suggestions for anarchy beginning at home. Nurture. Family. You know, why not focus, instead of focusing on, I voted, how about focus on your family, your friends, your small social circle? What, you know, what can they do for you? What can you do for them? The trade. Trade in the same currency. Or know what currencies you're using. Trade, social circle. You know, local merchants you know. Bargher, when you can, when it's appropriate. You know, hey, I'll mow your lawn if you'll wash my car. That sort of thing. You know, develop these bonds and relationships with people. You already know. 99% of what you do every day is anarchistic. You know, control information. This goes to the lies and the deception and everything. Dump the mainstream news. Important news will find its way to you, believe it or not. You know, there's a big tsunami or hurricane. You're going to hear about it. You know, you don't need to be glued to the news. I quit watching the cable news channels about five years ago. I've not watched one single mint in it in five years. One of the best things I ever did in my life. Just don't give a fuck. But be, you know, so go to, you know, the internet is great. And even, even, you know, bloggers, bloggers are great sources of news. You know, I, I'm, and they're authoritative too. But be critical and simple. Pay no more attention to it than required to ridicule and laugh at it like an hour-long presentation in Austin, Texas, for example. I never vote. We already went into that. Passion. Do something you love instead. Don't, don't quit letting them and getting, antagonize you against other people's ideas and, and, and whatnot. And turn it into an income stream if you can. Do something you love turned into an income stream. You know, be entrepreneurial. Read your life of all negative influences. Dump all that drags you down. Run from all forms of domination. Be an example. That's it. Two questions. So, any, any, any, any, anybody? Let's, let's go with him. My question, I suppose, is something I'm very, very curious about. Is these authoritative structures? Do you feel that that, that's a natural process that's just happened? Because people sort of, for a survival, they go, all right, I'll choose that authoritative masses. That just really confused me how they got there in the first place. Well, do you know how governments actually got started? Very first place, you know, 10 to 14,000 years ago. Because before that, before agriculture, there was no, there was nothing to steal, right? People were hunter-gatherers, you know. You, you, you had, you could carry, basically, right? There's nothing to steal. So, as soon as there was agriculture, you know, then you, then you began, assets began to be created. You had, you had cleared fields, you know, you had land, you had stored grains, you had livestock. You had assets, right? Well, of course, of course, you had, when you have assets, where there are assets, there would be thieves, right? So, you had, you had, you, you had, with the domestication of horses and everything you had, or not even on horse, you would have, you know, marauders who would come by and, and, and basically steal from these villages, right? Steal what they had built up. But it's, it's, it's disorganized because there was, there was no communication, right? So, the problem was, eventually, you know, abandoned marauders would ride, you know, seven days to go hit this village that they knew of, only to find out they would just hit a few days ago. There's nothing left to steal, right? So, they have a brilliant idea. Why don't we just stay here, and we'll protect it from other marauders, and we'll just steal from it regularly? That is government. That's how it started. Thieves. That, it started as thieves, right? So, so, but the, and, and of course, for thieves, because here's the thing. Here's the thing. You know, the, the government really by definition is simply, simply an agency that gets to do stuff that you as an individual can't, right? Because if, if, if they couldn't do any more than any individual could do, then they'd just be in another individual. Or a club. Or something, right? What's that? Well, I think pretty much. Well, no, no, I think, I think what, what, see, what thieves do is highly sophisticated thieves, right? It's, it's, it's like a protection racket, you know? Everybody knows that when Guido and Larry show up at the little mom and pop, that they're stealing, right? But you know, it's, it's like, well, you know, we need to protect you from, you know, your place being firebombed or something like that, you know? So that's, that's a, right? Yeah. Right. Yep. Yep. Well, that's all, that's, that's part of the whole, that's part of the whole, that's part of the whole general deception. I mean, I mean, a thief, a thief, he doesn't, you know, the US government, or any government for that matter doesn't come out and say, taxes are theft. It's legally def, it's defined as a legal taking. What's the fucking difference? All right. One more question. Okay. So I want to talk about your stance on voting, right? You say that people shouldn't vote because you don't want to. Well, I don't tell people what they shouldn't, shouldn't do, like, just like Greg, I say I don't. You don't vote. Okay. Why? I mean, I guess I don't understand how you can preach, or talk about anarchy, and yet also tell, or also not participate in voting, because you're almost preaching anarchy and not practicing in government. But voting, voting, voting in a democracy has nothing to do with anarchy. It's a complete night and day, oranges and apples sort of thing. Voting in America or any other democracy state is very simple. It's very simple. It's about one mob opposing upon a smaller mob. That's all it is. So it's an imposition. It's domination, you know? Or the old joke, you know, democracy is two wolves in one sheet deciding what's for dinner, right? How do you think? If so, or voting on what's for dinner, you know, that's democracy. So how do you think that vote's going to go down? You know? Any... Okay. That's it. Thank you. Thank you.