 All right. This guy, I forget who asked this. I think Paula Ban is a bigger issue in the capital riot. Remember, Zuck is lobbying DC to mandate Facebook's content moderation policies on all platforms. So I don't think Paula Ban is a bigger issue. I think Paula Ban is an issue, but it's an interesting issue. It's Paula Ban is primarily a contractual issue. It's not an issue of, and it's a cultural issue, but it's not an issue of free speech. Free speech has nothing to do with it. It really is an issue of culture and contracts. The culture is such, and you know, whatever Paula did or didn't do, big tech doesn't approve of what they did. And one of the mechanisms by which you can deal with somebody doing something that you don't like without using force on them. Let me repeat that. The way to deal with somebody who does something you don't like without using force on them is to boycott them, to ostracize them, to separate yourself from them. Paula did stuff that Amazon, Facebook, Twitter didn't like. So they boycott and ostracize them. Now whether the boycott and ostracism were within the realm of the contract, that is to the extent that they were violations and are violations of the contract that Paula had with these entities, I don't know. That's a legal question. And Paula is suing Amazon, claiming that it's not, that Amazon has violated the contract with Paula, and we'll see in court who's right. But if my neighbor does stuff I don't like, and he's not violating rights, but he just behaves in a way that I think is nasty, I'm not going to talk to him. I'm not going to sell him stuff in my store. This is why I think we should be allowed to discriminate in our businesses. I won't have business dealings with him, because I don't like him. Now maybe me not liking him is rational. Maybe me not liking him is irrational, but it's my right not to deal with him. His right not to deal with me. And yes, boycotting some entities makes life very, very difficult. And a complete boycott of some entities in all almost impossible. AWS, if you wanted a boycott Amazon web services, you could certainly avoid hosting your platform on their platform. But half the internet is on their platform. And you don't know which sites are hosted there and which sites are not. So it's almost impossible to boycott them. Okay, tough. So it's almost impossible to boycott them. Good for AWS. They've gotten so big, that it's almost impossible to boycott them. So I think Paula, that is the issue. It's an issue of boycott and ostracism. It's an issue of the culture, the culture that doesn't tolerate certain points of view. That's the issue. The issue is, should those points of view be tolerated or not? That's an interesting question. I think the problem is we tolerate too much. I think it's not, I think some of the people that have been banned from Twitter and Facebook, including the President of the United States, should have been banned. I think the problem is the inconsistency that Facebook and Twitter don't ban people like Diatula and people like the BLM who are arguing for violence in the streets or argued the looting was redistribution of wealth. If we had banned them as well, then I think Twitter and Facebook would be doing a service to all of us, taking out the people who advocate for violence. I think the problem I have culturally with all these institutions is that they only see, and this again goes back to tribalism that I talked about earlier, they only see the evil on the other side. They only see the devil on the other side. Their side is fine or any other side other than the other side. Jeremy asked, what do you think of the argument that the government is de facto leaning on tech companies via force, laid out in the Wall Street Journal, did or will save the constitution of big tech? I haven't read the editorial site, I don't know, but I don't buy it in this sense. I don't think the government needs to because I think big tech is already on the left. It already shares these concerns. And it's true to some extent, the big tech is afraid of pissing the government off too much. But remember that up until November, government was the Republicans and Ted Cruz wanted to regulate. So big tech has to, this balancing app between who's in power and who do they want to push off and who they, so it's not that they're following directions from the top. It's that they are impacted by who's in power because who's in power will determine the regulations and controls on them. And they should be concerned on who's in power. And it goes back to my point. The mixed economy necessitates Paula. It necessitates these choices. It makes it impossible for big tech not to do this. I mean, what it should big tech say? We don't care. We don't care what the Democrats and Republicans think. When the Democrats are in power, we don't care. When the Republicans are in power, we don't care. We can act the same all the time and let them come and destroy us. Let them come and break us up. Let this come and crush us. Well, of course they're sensitive to who's in power. Of course they're going to change their policies depending on who's in power. Because who's in power has an impact on them. But who do you blame here? I know who I blame. I blame the government. Republicans and Democrats because they both play the game. They both play the game. Look at what happened to AWS when they pissed off Donald Trump, which they did because Jeff Bezos owns the Washington Post. So by definition, they're pissed off Donald Trump. They didn't get a massive huge government contract, which they assumed was because of Jeff Bezos pissing off Donald Trump. They don't want to have that to happen again with the Biden administration. So they're going to play nice with Biden because they don't want them not to give them a government contract. Now, what is the solution to all this? The solution cannot be let's regulate big tech more or let's break it up or let's intervene more in some way or another. The only solution to this is let's separate the economy from politics and we're not going to do that in one day. So we can do that slowly. We can do that by advocating for the government getting out of this business, the government leaving these companies alone, the government not dictating to these companies that have to be neutral or not neutral or this or that, but let it work. The market would work as flawed as it is. As flawed as it is. If Amazon violated its contract with Paula, it will lose and it will lose not just a lawsuit, but it will lose reputational capital. And there are plenty of other companies, Oracle, which Oracle, by the way, is run by somebody who's a big supporter of Donald Trump's. So you think, oh, politics is, yeah, I mean, maybe they would take, pick up some of the slack that AWS loses, or maybe it's Microsoft, or maybe it's some of these other entities that are offering competing products to AWS. There are lots of ways to do this, but the only one that is illegitimate is to use the government because then you've given up. Then you've just accepted authoritarianism and it's all over. All right, let's see. What we need today, what I call the new intellectual would be any man or woman who is willing to think, meaning any man or woman who knows that man's life must be guided by reason, by the intellect, not by feelings, wishes, wins or mystic revelations. Any man or woman who values his life and who does not want to give in to today's cult of despair, cynicism and impotence and does not intend to give up the world to the dark ages and to the role of the collectivist roads. All right, before we go on, reminder, please like the show. We've got 163 live listeners right now, 30 likes. That should be at least 100. I figure at least 100 of you actually like the show. Maybe they're like 60 of the Matthews out there who hate it, but at least the people who like it, you know, I want to see a thumbs up. There you go. Start liking it. I want to see that go to 100. All it takes is a click of a thing, whether you're looking at this and you know, the likes matter. It's not an issue of my ego. It's an issue of the algorithm. The more you like something, the more the algorithm likes it. So, you know, and if you don't like the show, give it a thumbs down. Let's see your actual views being reflected in the likes, but if you like it, don't just sit there, help get the show promoted. Of course, you should also share and you can support the show at yourunbrookshow.com slash support on Patreon or subscribe star or locals and show you support for all, for the work, for the value, hopefully you're receiving from this. And of course, don't forget, if you're not a subscriber, even if you just come here to troll, or even if you're here like Matthew to defend Marx, then you should subscribe because that way you'll know when to show up. You'll know what shows are on, when they're on. You'll get notified. So, yes, like, share, subscribe, support, like, share, subscribe, support. There you go. Easy. Do one, all of those, please.