 Now, I believe that the speech by Marco Rubio basically announces the death of Anybody on the right now, maybe there are few voices here and there who represents America. I think China has won. I Texted a friend of mine today. I said we are all Chinese now All right now, maybe you don't believe me. Let's listen and see How Marco Rubio thinks We should stand up to China. What is his recipe for the United States in this big struggle in This ideological struggle in the struggle for vision for the future for us and for the rest of mankind How does he think America? Should position itself what should America do? Facing the challenge in my view the ideological challenge facing the challenge in my view a challenge of the philosophy of governance The China represents remember China's collectivism the common good state control of industry Where it wants to but leaving some parts free What is Rubio's view of this? All right now? Let's see. I've got a transcript of it as well So I'm starting in the middle the first 10 10 minutes 35 seconds And I'm not gonna go through the whole thing although well hopefully here a chunk of this We'll see we'll see how far it goes So here we start where I mean this is where I think Rubio really sets out the fundamental challenge Right the fundamental challenge and this is his words here I'm just gonna read it to you and then I'll have him speak it He says the fundamental challenge is that China seeks to prove that you can have a prosperous society a Contents civil citizenry and be the world's major power without respect for human dignity freedom or God Well put aside God a second without respect for human dignity freedom Now he doesn't say individualism of course because he can't because he's not but China wants to show That it can do all these things it can be prosperous and all this other stuff by being collectivist By being centrally planned and he understand that that is that is The real fundamental challenge What's our solution to that? So while it may be true that China is quote breaking the rules Or that Chinese companies are engaging in unfair competition against the American order the fundamental challenge will not be simply solved By some future trade agreement He's right fundamental challenge is that China seeks to prove that you can have a prosperous society a contented citizenry citizenry and be the world's major power and You can have all these things Without respecting human dignity and freedom or even a belief in God now he innocence I agree with Rubio the issue is not this or that trade practice the issue is not this or that subsidy Or this or that tariff that issue is fundamental is the Chinese model the right model or is the American model the right model That is the fundamental conflict right now that we face Which one is the right model and he says they want to show That you can be successful now if he had a proper understanding of history of the mind of human beings He'd know that China China's mother has to fail has to fail and will fail But he doesn't have that understanding. So this is the challenge and he's right about the challenge How do we solve it though? The second reason we have to respond to the challenges before us is because the industries that China intends to dominate are the very ones That will create the dignified and productive work The kind of dignified and productive work that Americans need for us to remain a strong Nation so this is really big right so the other threat is a practical pragmatic threat China once dominated industries that we and by doing so it's gonna take jobs away from Americans dignified and productive Work and that work is essential for the American character And we can't let that happen In the name of what American individualism Now responding to the challenge will require us to reject the fundamentalism that argues that the greatest virtue in American policy Is to maximize economic efficiency now notice what he's saying him Spawning to this challenge will require us to reject the fundamentalism that argues that the greatest virtue in American policy I assume economic policies made here is to maximize efficiency now that's code word for what we need to reject is The fundamental idea that capitalism of capitalism. That's what efficiency Stands in for it stands for markets. It stands for capitalism. It stands for freedom In other words Rubio says that if we're gonna Combat China the one thing we have to give up is capitalism the one thing we have to give up is Economic efficiency the one thing we have to give up Is free markets That He says is unacceptable in other words in order to defeat the Chinese as we'll see We must become like them. There's my there it is The market will always reach the most efficient economic outcome The problem is that sometimes the most efficient economic outcome is at odds With the common good and the national interest So we're adopting the Chinese view There's all the government is not to protect individual rights Do all of the government is not to protect our individual freedoms do all of the government is not to Protect our property rights and to leave us alone The goal of the government is to seek out the common good and the national interest The common good and the national interest That sounds like China to me Outsourcing jobs might to China might be more efficient. It lowers the labor costs and increases the profits But the good jobs we lose end up destroying families and communities. Do we lose jobs? I've said this over and over and over and over again unemployment today in the United States is lower than it's ever been Supposedly right that's what Trump constantly tells us and it's low and Americans at work Wages actually rising We've got amazing jobs in the United States because we've restructured our economy to get rid of low productivity jobs Jobs in the Midwest jobs and manufacturing jobs all kinds of jobs and invested in high productivity jobs Silicon Valley Technology around Austin biotech in Boston and San Diego Really good jobs. We are losing Because of outsourcing I'd say the opposite We're gaining fantastic jobs because of outsourcing because what the outsourcing does is it feeds up capital in the United States to invest in things That are much more value increasing So let's adopt the lefts the lefts Ideology let's adopt the ideology that says that outsourcing and capitalism Actually hood jobs that outsourcing capitalism actually Hoots wealth that wealth creation is not a consequence of capitalism No Because capitalism is about self-interest capitalism is about the individual capitalism is what America was about But we're not about America. We're gonna fight China not by being America Just last year a study found that areas of the United States that faced Chinese import saturation from 1990 through the year 2014 experienced drops in male employment as well as declining marriage and fertility rates now I want to know again if All these men are losing their jobs. How come unemployment is so low and This is the same as what the left does I've critiqued the number of leftist videos Recently by by different leftist commentators on YouTube and they all use the same thing They use one study one bogus statistic that they pull out from nowhere and they cite it over and over and over again And they generalize from it Statistics are dangerous Study is a dangerous unless you understand how they've done what's really going on you can find any results you want and Yes, it might it's quite possible that jobs Are gone, but does he know that those jobs are gone because of Chinese China? This is this is areas that face Chinese import saturation. What does Chinese import? Saturation mean aren't we all facing Chinese import saturation is the whole of America Facing Chinese import saturation then shouldn't there be massive amounts of job losses in America? Why is unemployment so low? Why is the economy growing? Why are the most innovative? productive creative Companies in the world in the United States of America still I I can't believe I'm the optimist here Why the doom and gloom? Well, as I've said many times you have to convince people that everything is horrible and falling apart that the world is in terrible shape so that You can inflict something radical on them so that They will accept things that they wouldn't otherwise accept Communities that bore the brunt of what some call normalizing trade relations with China We even see jumps in suicide rates This is the same guy used to be profuy trade From substance abuse now. It's interesting what I mean today is not the show I'm gonna talk about suicide and substance abuse abuse. I will talk about that later. I think it's Rubio's fault I think it's Trump's fault. I think it's Obama's fault I think it's the political class and the elites in this country's fault that we have so many suicides And we have so much drug abuse and it has to do with the false promises They made it has to do with the collectivism and the nationalism and the common good It has to do with the betrayal of the American dream that they have engaged in It has to do with the lack of demand of people to take responsibility for their own life It has to do with the lack of moral moral leadership in this country That's the reason we have suicides and a drug problem not because of China Not because of China. How weak would we be? How weak would you say the American character is how weak would you say our country is if China could cause people to Commit suicide in mass and and go on drugs in the United States. It's just not true Something profound has changed in this country. What's changed in this country is A lack of individual responsibility a lack of belief in the American dream a lack of insistence on the individualism on the sanctity of individual life and a coddling of people I Told generation that expects to have a job that expects to have healthcare that expects to be taking care of by government and Then when it doesn't turn out to be rosy when that happens, it doesn't turn out to be really really good when that happens Then yeah, it's depressing But we were promised and as I say and I'll continue to say get in the frigging car and Drive to where the jobs are because there are plenty of jobs in this country even today There are plenty of jobs in this country get in your car drive the year on of a car get a bus a bus ticket Your ancestors got on boats traveled three months in Stormy weather to reach a shore where nothing was promised to them But today we have promised so much in this country That people are depressed That people are depressed because our politicians and our intellectuals cannot live up to those promises They should have never promised them to begin with So for policymakers The common good can't just be about corporate profits It can't common good common good just can't be about corporate profitees, right? It's not about corporate about finding economic efficient efficiency When dignified in other words, it can't be about capitalism the common good cannot be about capitalism I mean, this is great because let's lay it out exactly the way it is particularly for men goes away So too goes away the backbone of our culture The evidence shows our communities become blighted and wither away families collapse and fewer people get married and Ultimately it ruptures the soul of our nation now Let's say it was true that we've got a job shortage in this country That's what really killing Americans in them in this country is the fact that we don't have enough jobs What would a pro-capitalist president propose as a solution for this? How about dramatic rolling back regulations not the trickle Bailey deregulation of the Trump administration, but radical deregulation Doing away with a big regulatory bill that Congress passed one every month Big deregulation. How about big Getting coming out of our lives How about a rollback in entitlements? How about rollbacks? How about this is the principle if we want more jobs in America if we want better jobs in America if we want more productive jobs in America for more high-paying jobs in America how about We make America more capitalist Even the Chinese know that You give people freedom and proof wealth is created productive jobs are created. Why don't we do that? Why don't we do that? How about some economic free zones in America? But no No, the solution of Macaubia the solution to the Republican Party The solution is the cave to the left and to cave to the to China The solution is in the name of the common good give up on capitalism in the name of the common good give up on Efficiency in the name of the common good Give up on America Give up on what America made America still makes America great This experience has become essentialized today and images of decaying rust belt towns and the epidemic of working-class deaths of despair But this story is playing out just as destructively in our nation's inner cities from Flint to Phoenix from Baltimore to Birmingham The erosion of dignified work is colorblind and is geographically limitless. I'm agree with that Let's eliminate minimum wages. Let's make it a federal law that you cannot raise at the local level minimum wages the localities cannot cannot Let's establish economic freedom in this country and Then you will get wages going up jobs being created high productivity wealth creation But God forbid God forbid that anybody should advocate for freedom God forbid that we did should actually Advocate for an American solution. No the solution must be a Chinese solution Now you'll see he gives lip service to free enterprise now to be clear free enterprise is the greatest mechanism Man has ever employed for achieving prosperity, but he doesn't believe that He doesn't believe that or if he does he doesn't care prosperity is not his goal You think it was because jobs prosperity seem to go together Maybe we don't have free markets today. Maybe all our problems are not China. Maybe all our problems are not the Chinese Taking our jobs. Maybe our problems today is regulation taxes welfare state entitlements and American modern mentality of entitlements Sitting on your hands and waiting of a welfare mentality. Maybe that's the problem senator Rubio The solution should be capitalism but no At the same time, we must always remember that the market is agnostic as to whether America is a high or a low wage economy The market really I mean, I mean all evidence suggests is market really agnostic a Markets is capitalism a place places that implement capitalism. Do they tend to be low wage economies? No When capitalism is implemented wages are rising and it's a to be high wage economies America was a high wage economy because of capitalism if it isn't today. It's because it has moved away from capitalism China became relatively high wage only when it adopted capitalism and even then the wages are low until it fully Embraces capitalism Hong Kong has become a high wage place the financial center of Asia because it adopted capitalism. I Mean, come on Rubio. You know better than this or you used to or you pretended to know once agnostic on whether a certain outcome is in our national interest or the common good Now that is true markets cannot tell what the common good is Markets cannot tell what the common good is because there is no such thing as the common good the public interest What is the common good? What is the public interest? It's whose interest who is the common who is the public and by the way who gets to the side it cannot be markets Monkets don't know it's in the common good of the public interest. So who does this like who is Mark? Oh, we'll go to give the power to make the decisions About what is in the public good and the common interest or the other way round whatever Well, of course The only people who can make that decision Are the philosopher kings the rulers the politicians the government the state? Now place them above us as individuals place them above the market And then let them make decisions about what is in now common good and what is in the public interest? agnostic The policy makers like me cannot be he's a policy makers a politician. He is a ruler. He is a philosopher king He knows what's in the common good He has that power I don't have that power But he has the power The power to see into the minds of men the power to aggregate all this information The power to know what is good for me and what is good for you and what is good for all of us And you know what if we have to sacrifice a few individuals here and then if we have to sacrifice some businessmen If we have to sacrifice some billionaires if we have to sacrifice these employees for those employees We have to sacrifice You know auto workers for steel workers and steel workers for farm workers and farm workers for somebody else only Big brother only policy makers like Marco Rubio can do that He's got a big brain. He knows what's in the common interest. He is a philosopher king Suspect that many and not all of you Men and women who are here because you are committed to our national security Are not agnostic either For example, the market may say short-term profits justify adhering to the requirements that China places on our companies But policy makers Take into account that long-term surrendering of our productive capacity to China is reckless really we're surrendering our Productive capacity to China by outsourcing doesn't work that way Economics business take a business course market may say that Americans often unwittingly should invest in Chinese firms But policy makers must take into account whether American investors should be capitalizing the very firms That steal from our companies that commit human rights abuses and develop the weapons that could one day kill the men Now imagine a speech that actually focused on China's committing human rights violations, that would be interesting, but nobody does that Nobody focuses on that Trade deficits they focus on lots of other things and yeah If they have already proposed how to deal with them stealing from our companies, what do we do with thieves? Well, we we outlaw them we ban them if Chinese companies steal IP from American companies Don't Don't let their products enter the United States put pressure on all governments around the world to stop Trade and stolen goods. We can do it with Gucci bags Louis Vuitton products. Why can't we do it with high-tech software? Because that's not really the issue it's not really what we care about it really the issue is power Really the issue is people like Marco Rubio people like Donald Trump people like Bernie Sanders and Biden and all the politicians out there What they really really a jealous of is the power That the Chinese government has They're not concerned about IP. They're not concerned if they would their things they could do about it They're not concerned about human rights violations if there was there was thing they could do about it They're not concerned about any of this This is not a call to socialism or a rejection of capitalism. Yes, it is it actually is a Call for socialism and a rejection of capitalism and indeed it's a call for fascism Which is a form of socialism one could argue called a policy makers to remember that the national interest Not economic growth alone is our central obligation. So the national interest What is that? Who decides that? How is it defined? Give us a principle Marco tell us what national interest means. I mean it has should have a definition It should have a way you should be able to represent it. What does it mean? You want to change the way America is in the name of the national interest But you never define what it is because it's a colleague in your mind and in most people's minds It's a collectivistic floating abstraction. It means nothing but grants you immense power This is in a call to recreate the economy of America's past. Yes, it is It's a call to invest and compete in the emergent industries of the future Instead of forfeiting them to China. How are we gonna compete? How are we gonna compete? Well, you'll see in a minute and this isn't a knee-jerk Call to protection is it is it's a call to maintain the technological and industrial superiority necessary That's called competition Defend our interests and ensure that working Americans have access to dignified and productive work and the best way to do that Is to bring more freedom to the American economy? Now the critics of the approach that I've just laid out argue that I'm making us choose industries to favor But I'm arguing that we need to pick winners and losers. Yes, that's exactly what you're doing what you're arguing for is An industrial policy in the dissection of the speeches title Revitalizing American industrial policy the truth is we are already doing that. Yeah, that's true We already have a mixed economy and we already got the government involved in much of our economy and you'd think an American conservative would argue against that not use that to justify doing even more of it Conferences the path we are on now is allowing Beijing to do the picking and the choosing How secure or prosperous can America be if it cannot carry out heavy industry or pharmaceutical manufacturing or advanced technology American policymakers have an obligation to pursue policies that make our economy more productive by Identifying the critical value of specific industrial sectors and sparing investment in these sectors. Did you pay attention to that? This is important American policymakers must pursue policies that make our economy more productive by identifying the critical value of specific industries industrial sectors and sparing investment in them Now this is industrial policy This is the state picking winners and losers This is the state decided which industries win and which industries lose. This is the state centrally planning This is Japan's model before it completely failed in the late 1980s This is the this is the Japanese model that Americans envied at the time and this is the Chinese model of state-run enterprises a model that even in China Is failing because the successful portions of the Chinese economy are those portions of the economy That are left free from such manipulation, but Macaubia is calling for Identifying government. Let's be clear government identifying the critical value of specific industrial sectors and sparing investment in them I call that subsidies in other words. Let's be very very clear He's arguing for the Chinese model He doesn't want to give up in capitalism completely. There'll be certain sectors in the economy that will be left free Just like they are in China But others the important ones the ones that he the commander-in-chief the chief Regulator the chief central planner will identify as crucial to American interest in the common good There the government will intervene there. We will have state-run enterprises. We won't call them that We'll pretend they're private But we'll provide them with capital with spur investment and we'll make sure they can also stay jobs It's truly unbelievable It's right in front of us and is there a single voice out there a single voice That is talking against us. Is there a single voice calling Macaubia on this? Is there a single voice in the intellectual landscape of the way? calling them on this No Well me the depletion of American manufacturing has left us with a tremendous National security vulnerability prove that prove that no evidence to that I Am not advocating for a government takeover of our means of production. No the fascists never say that the fascists always say No, I'm not a socialist I don't want to come into own the means of production. I just want them to control the means of production All right a little bit more. Let's go What I am calling for is us to remember that from the Second World War to the space race and beyond a Capitalist America has always relied on public-private collaboration to further our national security Now these are the talking points of the left This is what the left has always said This is what Obama said What's the difference? Everybody wants me to always vote Republican, but what's the difference between them? They were all status central planners They are long for the days of World War two in the government controlled the economy doubtfully Doubtful that was a good thing Even though we did win the war Listen to the next paragraph This is a gem and from the internet to GPS many of the innovations that have made America a technological superpower Originated from national defense oriented public-private partnerships again the left stocking point Oh, no, you can't give capitalism the credit for the iphone all that stuff in the iphone all came from government projects I mean I've talked about that a lot why that is a bogus argument, but again you're hearing this left and right There's no difference This kind of collaboration is not a rejection of capital. Yes, it is It's exactly what you encourage and harness the dynamism of our economy's most productive private industries To further our national security and ultimately to further our national economic development And here it is It is a call for a 21st century pro-american industrial policy and Why do we need this notice this next paragraph when it comes to Chinese firms our companies aren't competing with private enterprises They're competing with a large and powerful nation-state. So let's copy them Let's copy them Because they subsidize the industries We should subsidize their industries because they have controls of trade We should have controls and trade because they have the common good We should practice the common good because they have an authoritarian government. Maybe we should Won't go there because democracy is still God in this country. We won't go quite there won't go that far But everything else we just copy them. This is why I titled the show the Chinese of one It's over and Mokorubio is right here. He's surrendering and Mokorubio basically representing Trump is Philosophy Mokorubio has become a Trump is since Trump won and It's just surrendered the United States to China It's over guys their model one our Politicians are convinced of it and I fear I Fear the American people are convinced of it In the long run it is a competition that market fundamentalists cannot and will not win Because China has learned how to leverage access to short-term profits as a way to get many American companies to commit Long-term corporate suicide. Yeah, there it is again another left to think American companies think short term It's all about short-termism. It's a Chinese central planners Central planners generally they're the ones who think long term They're the ones who have long term considerations and you know why the Chinese can think long term and why American politicians can't Because they don't have to get elected. I mean that's the next step in order to really really be able to practice the common good In order to really really really know what the national interest is and impose the common good in the national interest on us We need to get rid of elections because you know what he is not going to say this, but you know what? Elections cause us to think long short term Senators have to be elected every six years house members every two years But in China they don't have to be elected so they can think really really long term where capitalism or capitalism is all about quarterly profits It's all about short-term That's why America has invented basically a biotech industry because it's so short-term They make profits instantly That's why it's truly amazing after my picture up here Whoops, sorry. Oh, it doesn't matter He's rejecting everything about capitalism And he says Because China provides their domestic companies the ability to make investments that make no market sense in the short term But are critical to their national and economic security in the long term So short term versus long term I mean the same old anti-couple list arguments and again because China does it we should do it They have won All right, I'm gonna skip this You get the point Basically what will be always arguing for is the adoption in America of Chinese like industrial policy of Chinese like supportive industries of Chinese like management of the economy all In the name of beating China or because the Chinese model is better because the Chinese model allows Investment in the long run run the Chinese model allows for central planning, which we know is better than markets Markets are too short term markets are too selfish markets are too focused on the on Individual good and not focused on the common good Not focused on the national interest. So we must abandon markets in order to beat China at its own game Now I don't know about you guys because I don't know anymore But that's just horrific It's the end of America. It's the end of this country it's the complete complete surrender of any kind of principle any Kind of idea that comes from the founding of this country the surrender of freedom and individualism for the sake of what? For the sake of Chinese central planning imposed on Americans Because that's the only way we can beat China now. Let me give you an alternative vision Now turn a vision is the capitalism works That freedom works It works to make individuals better Both in the short run and in the long run it works to raise wages and raise productivity It works to innovate to produce to create to build it allocates resources where they're most needed For example away from stupid jobs and to smart jobs It increases our ability to produce to create to build to make and Indeed central planning is a failure always has been always will be and The China to the extent that it embraces central planning to the extent that it ignores what has been successful in China Which are the free economic zones will fail will become poor Indeed the slowdown in the Chinese economy which started about two years ago Isn't a two three years ago went down from about 12 15 percent to around 6 percent and now is going below 6 percent It's not a consequence of Trump. It's not a consequence of tariffs, but it is a consequence Almost entirely a consequence of their economic central planning The more they do of it the more they clamp down on private industry. They more They clamp down on individual thought the more they restrict freedom of speech political freedoms freedom of movement the more They try to manage ideas manage entrepreneurs manage industries the poorer they will get There is nothing to fear from an authoritarian China Because authoritarianism leads to poverty and will lead to poverty The only reason China is relatively rich is because it loosened up. It's authoritarian reigns because it allowed for freedom If it goes back on that as it seems to be doing and there's nothing to fear it We win hands down We have not lost millions of jobs for the Chinese we have lost millions of jobs technology Which has enhanced our productivity made us richer created? Unbelievably good jobs all over America. What is destroying this country? What is causing suicide rates and drug addiction and general depression and the election of Donald Trump? What is destroying this country is? That we have abandoned the ideology of individualism we have abandoned The vision we have abandoned the confidence We have abandoned the idea of the individual standing by himself relying on himself Pursuing his own happiness For a murky Vision of the common good the national interest and trade as a zero-sum game The real depressing thing about America is how great we were How amazing a vision we had and and how we have walked away from their vision left and right holding hands and singing kumbaya? Yay for industrial policy and central planning. Yay for subsidizing businesses and deciding what's long-term good for America versus the short term is of capitalism What's destroyed America is exactly what I ran said. It's an orgy of altruism Manifest politically and collectivism Complete and utter betrayal stabbing in the back of the vision of the founders And I don't know what it's gonna take to resurrect this country. I don't know It's a It's indeed a pleasure to have you with us tonight. I'm delighted to be here I know that you probably don't appear on many shows of this nature. It's kind of a crazy entertainment show generally although we do like to sit down occasionally and And get some views of people that are important in the world today Well, I don't think there's a problem entertainment in fact. I've been watching you many times. I'm very very happy I know it's very difficult to state any Philosophical principles like objectivism in a short period of time or to condense it but quite can you give us some? basic idea of Objectivism and the principles of philosophy that you believe in all right now I'll make it very brief with the Understandings that anyone who really is interested would look it up in my books particularly not the shugged Because otherwise I can't give a long discourse and proof here So just as mentioning the highlights The basic principle of objectivism is that man must be guided exclusively by a reason reasons the faculty that Identifies and integrates the material provided by his senses. That's a form of definition That reason is men's only tool of knowledge his only guide to action and his only guide to the choice of values As a consequence of that man's proper ethics or morality Morality of rational self-interest Which means that every man has a right to exist for his own sake and he must not? Sacrifice himself to others or sacrifice others to himself That the achievement of his own Rational happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life as a consequence of that the only system On a political system which expresses This morality is the system of laissez-faire capitalism by which I mean for unregulated uncontrolled capitalism a system based on the recognition of individual rights Including property rights in which all properties owned by private individuals the Principle which ties Morality to politics is The principle that no man has the right to initiate physical force violence Compulsion against other men men have certainly the right of self-defense But no man no group of men that includes the government has the right to Initiate force and to force a man to act against his own judgment as this is the essence of the philosophy Your objectivism is in a way of course while there's much controversy is it it is almost contrary to I guess the cultural beliefs as people have been brought up true as to sacrifice the good of your fellow men and Not to have the Ethicalism and self-sacrifice as you call it not almost contrary the exact opposite and you're saying that man Should first serve his own self-interests and be interested in himself first I Wouldn't say first I would say only But you would have to explain this other man Can be of interest to an individual if they represent Values moral values you serve your own interest best By finding associating with working with the right kind of people Therefore other people can be a value a great value to a man But only when and if they correspond to his Moral ideas not otherwise in other words man does not have to serve anyone Accept himself, but he does in effect serve others When they're interested in their values agree using the super chat and I noticed yesterday when I appealed for support for the show many of you step forward and actually Supported the show for the first time. So I'll do it again. Maybe we'll get some more today If you like what you're hearing if you appreciate what I'm doing then I appreciate your support Those of you who don't yet support the show, please take this opportunity go to your own book show calm slash support or go to subscribe star calm your own book show and And and make a kind of a monthly contribution to keep this to keep this going. I'm not showing the next