Kind: captions
Language: en
I'm looking at America and I'm saying
that we're really going through
something. We are in decline. I would
use even more dramatic words than that,
but I don't want to get trapped in a
linguistic game. Okay.
>> So, I'll just ask, do you think America
is declining on any measure any
meaningful measurements?
>> I would push back very heavily against
that word.
>> Okay. I avoided collapse cuz I know you
hate that word.
>> It's not collapse.
>> So, how do you think of it?
>> First of all, it's not collapse because
if you can get bread, it's not collapse.
Like right away, that's like the first
metric. And when people start freaking
out, America's destroyed. Can you
readily get bread? Yes. Then it's not
destroyed. Like because we've seen
countries where you can't get bread then
we're not even close to that like
in fact it might be a good thing if some
people had a little less bread in this
country than than more. Uh well go
ahead. I interrupt you.
>> So is there a metric by which you would
say we are declining? You don't like the
word decline.
>> There there are several metrics by think
ascension. I am a big fan of broadly
speaking of this sort of pox Americana.
this idea that the world is largely
um aware at all times, all countries of
America's power and American values and
at least pay some sort of lip service to
it.
>> Um and I I think that is in the
ascension right now.
>> Really? The you think the world is
paying closer attention to American
values now than say 15 years ago?
>> No, then say four years ago. I I I'm
just talking about, you know,
>> is this a regional ascension, meaning it
was high, it dipped, and now to some
extent we're going back up, or you think
on an all-time high basis?
>> Hold on. Hold on. I I got you. I got
there's a lot to say here. Hold on. I I
don't I didn't say all-time high, but I
think it's very clear that people are
responding to better for worse to
Trump's uh shows of strength than they
were to Biden. I think we see this with
NATO and various European countries
where on the one hand it's pretty
obvious that most of these prime
ministers think Trump is a loon or a
bully or so on and so forth, but they
are still meeting with him and engaging
with him and treating him with a lot
more respect at least publicly than they
did in the first term. I think there's
less space to be like taking a dump on
whoever happens to be the American
president. Um I think this the fact that
um he tentatively has this was regarded
as a joke in 2015. In 2015 in the debate
stage when Trump said oh you know what
are you going to the Middle East? He
goes oh it' be like the mother of all
deals like no one would ever say
anything like it. It'd be tough and
everyone's like yeah okay. So the fact
that we even have uh a potential deal on
the table where Iran has tentatively
signed on board and Qatar and Saudi
Arabia and Hamas and Israel that it's
even in that direction is something I
think is unprecedented and something I'm
I'm sure everyone else listening this is
very hopeful about. Um the fact that um
I think Americanism as a way of life is
in the ascension. people are more
patriotic. Uh I was just in the UK and
it was controversial to put up the Union
Jack, the British flag, which is crazy.
Uh so I think in that sense, America is
in the ascension. Um so and economically
I I I don't know what's going to happen
as a result of these tariffs. I've heard
two wildly different um points of view
and I am of the wait and see uh
persuasion. Um so in all those senses I
think America is in the ascension where
we are in a decline.
Uh, and I don't know that the reason I
hate the word decline, I it's this is me
being irrational in uh 1978
when Margaret Thatcher was head of the
Conservatives and they were the minority
party, the the opposition party in the
UK. And the idea was Britain is in a
managed decline. And during the 70s, as
I wrote about my book, The White Pill,
people don't realize this. They didn't
even have electricity. So, at one point
it could be fairly sad that the sun
never set in the British Empire because
they had colonies literally all around
the world. And the 70s they had uh
electricity rationing. They had uh uh
you couldn't get power because things
were so bad with the strikes and
inflation and so on and so forth. And
the idea was we've had our day. Uh that
time has passed and now we're like the
old men of Europe. And that said, I
can't bear the idea of Britain decline.
I just can't. we who once stood alone
against Hitler. Well, he had all of
Europe and look at us now. And she was
the last I think PM who loved Great
Britain to an embarrassing degree. I I
heard these stories of uh you know there
were these international meetings and
she's shoving like crappy British candy
and people say it's oh it's so great and
they're like yeah but I want that in a
leader. I want a a president or a PM who
is so irrationally patriotic that
they're forcing you to take this crappy
candy and you're just like thanks
Margaret. Um but where I think we are in
decline is as this siloization that you
know many people have discussed in terms
of politics has uh increased and
exponentially I think the space for
discourse has um is decreasing at a very
fast rate. I think people are not
interested in talking to each other. I
don't know that's a bad thing but it's
certainly not something that uh is all
upside. So that is the one space I think
we are very much in decline. We're have
I mean right as we record there is a
brinksmanship between Governor Pritsker
of Illinois, Gavin Newsome of uh
California and the governor of Oregon
whose name escapes me. Um I forget her
name. And right now in the articles
there just this morning as I was on the
in the card here they were talking about
this concept of soft secession which is
Illinois won't cooperate with the
federal government to the point of
withholding handing over tax revenues.
So yeah and you know Trump sending in
the troops to these different states.
These are all escalations. Is somebody
going to blink? I think yes. But I don't
think the person who blinks is going to
be like, "Well, all right, they got us,
boys. It's a wrap. We're going to go
home and change, give up." So, I don't
know where this ends. And I I had Tim P
on my show this week, and he and I kind
of disagreed a bit. And I think you're a
business person. Something that people
don't understand is trade-offs, right?
And if you have a benefit, you have a
cost often, right? You get married, you
don't get to cheat. You have kids, that
takes up a lot of your time, right?
That's a pay. It's it's a cost. Doesn't
mean the benefit's not worth it. And I
think Trump, and I don't know this is
unnecessary, I think it's funny how much
Trump has made his opponents lose their
minds. I mean, we had highly educated
women walking around with [ __ ] hats and
putting on their social media without
any sense of shame. And it's just like,
do you even see yourself? They were
proud of this. But I think when you make
people crazy, uh, crazy things happen.
Yeah, I'll agree with that. So, it
doesn't matter what you look at, it
matters what you see. You and I are
looking at the same thing, but we draw
very different conclusions. So, uh the
analogy that I always use is when you
look up in the night sky, all you
actually see are stars, but then we draw
constellations on them. Those
constellations are fake, but they
actually do help you steer at sea in the
middle of the night.
>> Uh so, they have utility even if they're
off. When I build the constellations in
the sky of all the different things that
are happening, I see something when put
into historical context are all the cues
that we are on a road that has a branch
ahead of us. One of those branches is
civil war revolution.
>> Yes. And because we're on that road, I
am screaming from the rooftops
trying to get people to understand,
okay, up ahead of us there's a fork and
if we don't take the correct fork, we
are going to end in revolution or civil
war. For me, I'll oversimplify it often
to the economy. It is an
oversimplification but it really is um
you can talk about diabetes as um we
need to manage the neuropathy in your
eyes and your feet or we can say it's
this is what you're eating. What you're
eating is the problem here and exercise.
So I'm saying let's talk about the
eating and exercise versus managing the
symptoms. And because we're not doing
that and because I I literally see
exactly zero indications that we will do
that. I can see the fork in the road
coming up. We're admittedly not too far
gone. We could still change course, but
I don't see any indication that we will.
And if we don't fix the economy, we will
end in revolution. So for me, I'm like
when somebody says America is
collapsing, I'm like yes, very clearly.
I don't know how a civil war or
revolution in a literal sense would
happen because when you had the American
Civil War, you had half of the country
all or heavily militarily trained and
armed ready to take up arms, right? When
you had the Revolutionary War against
Great Britain, all the soldiers were
here. We had all the land. They had to
send in, I don't know how long it took,
a month you send in their troops. So,
it's it's it's there's a capacity to
take up a stand. And we b, you know,
Washington kept retreating. He kept
getting her ass hand to us cuz the
American patriots didn't even have
shoes. They were wrapping their feet in
newspaper. Let's walk this through.
Let's suppose right now I don't know
that Pritsker and Newsome or these blue
states have the capacity. You could have
massive civil unrest, but if that's the
case, I don't think they have much of a
chance against the federal government.
Conversely, if you had uh President Y
Pritsker and you had these red states
revoling, I don't know that he would
necessarily have the military behind him
to do anything about it. Um what so it's
to me it's much more likely that you
would have this sort of you know, God
help us like Napoleon coming in and just
putting a stop and like the buck stops
here, here's going to it's going to
land. But in terms of a protracted
revolution or civil war, I don't think
there's a parody between two sides that
would allow this to be sustained in any
kind of duration.
>> Yeah. So, we agree with that. And the
last thing I want to get bogged down in
is like word choice. But I the way that
I see this is either French Revolution.
So, you have pockets of violence. It's
not some sustained thing. It's just hey,
we take a few thousand people, we round
them up, we either goolog them or
execute them in the streets. uh a new
government takes power based on a strong
man who understands once people get a
taste for blood, you have to aim it at
something. You you're not going to stop
it.
>> Uh so to your point, this is how
Napoleon comes to power, he realizes,
oh, I'll just aim these at every other
country. We'll go conquer Europe. 3
million people die across Europe. Um but
hey, you you end up getting a total
transformation, not for the better, but
a total transformation of French
society. Right?
>> Or, and I think this is the most likely
version, we become Argentina. And so
Argentina in the 1920s, 19
attracts more immigrants than America
literally at the same time. They were
the real land of opportunity. And then
they end up getting to the point where
they do all the classic things of
inflating their currency, um, trying to
keep the prosperity train running. But
if you're not doing innovative things
and you're just trying to flood the
government with money, it just never
ends up working. And so then it starts
declining. But people are getting used
to all the government money and so you
can't talk people out of it. You end up
marching towards socialism or at least
socialist policies where the
government's taking care of way too many
people and the economy collapses. You
lose all of the government defaults
always and so then you can't get
investments in the country and you end
up with this hundred-year period. It's
like played out so many times over and
over and over in history. So that to me
with the rise of someone like mom Donnie
is exactly the direction that we're
heading. We have made it impossible for
young people to get ahead economically.
The second you do that, you guarantee
the rise of populism because people are
afraid. Fear sucks. So it translates
into anger. Anger feels a lot better.
Populism rises cuz you get figures that
go, "Don't worry, I'm going to go slap
around the other team. I'm going to get
you all the cool stuff that you want."
But because there is no such thing as
giving people things for free without a
huge cost, you end up collapsing the
economy. The government is forced to
default on its debt and then all of the
investments go away. So is it going to
be 1860s and that classic style civil
war? No. But it we already have pockets
of violence. We already have political
assassinations. I think that will
ratchet up. someone will come into the
government and say we have to clamp down
on this just to like bring back
stability and then the executive powers
begin to expand and you're in a very
weakened state.
>> Um
as as someone who's a lot more
comfortable with political violence than
the layman. Um
well
>> because it's useful.
>> Well, I I don't really know how much of
this conversation I'm allowed to have.
>> I mean with me as much as you want.
Well, with the internet because I
>> Yeah, that becomes how much pain do you
want to go through?
>> Right. So, um
I I I see what you're saying, but I
don't think we are Argentina because
Americans have a very different view of
America than the Argentine state of
Argentina. And if you had I I couple of
points. First of all, um Pelosi and
Biden and Hillary did a lot more to stop
like AOC and Bernie Sanders than the
Republicans did. So I still think that p
that wing that corporate hack wing of
the Democratic party is still quite
powerful even though on social media the
energy is in the kind of uh DSA kind of
wing of the Democratic party. And for
decades, Republicans have complained,
not unfairly, that rhinos, you know,
they they run as the base and then when
they're elected, they get to Washington,
the rhinos, Republicans name only, and
the rep the base doesn't get anything
they want. This is the first time, I
think, in quite some time that the
Republican base is actually getting
results from the presidency. Even during
Trump's first term, he delivered in
terms of doing things that are funny.
Like when Pelosi and the congressional
delegation were trying to go overseas
and they're on the bus going the airport
and he canceled their flights and they
had to circle the bus as they wanted
what to do if because they didn't have
the permissions from the president. That
was funny, but like what did that really
accomplish? Now he's he's he's hitting
them where it hurts and it putting
points on the on the board. Um so I
think that is something that is a little
bit unprecedented. So the question is,
is the Mumani wing going to take over
the Democratic party? If they do, it's
kind of like, well, what what happen?
It's like kind of that dog chasing the
car. When it catch the car, what's it
going to do with it? Because a lot of
the Democratic Party is funded by
corporate America, right? And when you
have a socialist kind of party, they're
not going to be necessarily
uh um yes, sir. And just continue
supporting that money. they're going to
start funding some kind of you New
England Rockefeller Republican types.
They're going to go somewhere. So that's
one thing. Two is I think that only
works though if you actually start
fixing the economy. Young people really
are in a dire situation. If they can't
get on the property ladder, literally
all hope is lost.
>> It's not all hope is not lost.
>> No, it really is. So I I'll give a super
speedrun of this. So um the way because
the government deficit spends you're you
have to print money and as you're
printing money you're causing inflation
>> right?
>> If you don't own assets then you take
the full brunt of that. So in the last 5
years inflation's been roughly 25%.
>> And it hurts the poorest the most. Yes.
>> Right. And real wages haven't gone up in
like three decades or more. And so
people's wages have stagnated, prices
are going up. They can't get on the
property ladder. Now why does property
matter so much? It is the only asset
that people understand intuitively and
it's the only asset you can live inside
of. So, and to really icing on the cake,
it's the only asset that for certainly
for a heterosexual couple that you're
going to get massive pressure from your
wife to get you a house. Absolutely. So,
there's a reason that the house has
become the focal point of like the
American dream and all of that and it's
just completely out of reach. So, if you
continue deficit spending and don't
allow young people to get into a house,
you will make them increasingly
desperate over time and they'll vote for
anything that's changed. And right now,
the promise that sounds the most awesome
is I'm going to get you a bunch of free
stuff, which is socialism. We'll get
back to the show in a moment, but first,
let's talk about why you keep starting
and stopping. Most people consume
endless content but never master and
deploy the fundamentals. That's exactly
why Short Form exists. Take Atomic
Habits by James Clear. It's packed with
proven systems for building habits that
stick. But the book is 300 pages of
theory mixed with stories and most
people read it then struggle to apply
what they learned. Short Form cuts
through that problem. Their guides
aren't just summaries. They're written
by real human writers who extract
Clear's core systems and give you
step-by-step implementation guides.
Plus, they create master guides that
combine insights from different experts
on the same topic. And their AI browser
extension breaks down articles, videos,
and even political analysis, so you get
the key frameworks from everything you
consume. Click the link below and get a
free trial and 3 months off the annual
plan to access the decision-making
systems behind every major breakthrough.
And now, let's get back to the show.
>> Uh, I think first of all, one of the
reasons housing was such a big thing in
America was this postw World War II uh,
fetishization of suburbia and this idea
of like, oh, if you just move out of the
city, which was kind of a new thing, the
invention of the suburb, you get to have
be a homeowner and that's kind of the
American dream. So, number one. Number
two is I don't know that housing is
necessarily going to be as first of all,
by all accounts, everyone's saying the
housing market's on a bubble that that's
that's about to burst and housing is
going to come a lot more cheaper. I know
here in Austin specifically, uh the
house I was looking at went from um in I
moved here in 2021, it's 2025. When I
looked at it, it was 1.1 million and now
it's like 875. So that's in a couple
years. So, housing prices are going down
in certain areas. I think people are uh
maybe New York and LA, I think they're
still going up. I don't understand the
economics there at all. Maybe it's
foreign investment and they're just
sitting on those uh apartments and not
actually living them is one of the
things I heard, but I'm not an authority
on that whatsoever. Point being, I don't
know this idea that the demand of
housing being static or close to static
is true because what you might see very
easily is, you know, booms in in Dayton
or like cities that you and I aren't on
our periphery, but they can become new
hubs, especially with the rise of social
media and the internet. You don't need
to live in New York City anymore. So,
there's no reason why you can't have a
hundred cities that are prospering as
like Austin being one example. It kind
of came out of not nowhere but a
mid-tier city and then it became a
cultural hot spot. So that's something I
would push back again against as well.
But I agree with you completely broadly
speaking even without the housing. If
the currency loses its ability to store
value, if I don't have any savings, it's
kind of a wrap because then you're
Zimbabwe. And it's like I need to be
spending I all the incentives is for me
to spend my money today and get these
goods because if I leave in the bank I'm
losing a quarter of the value every
year. I shouldn't be saving. And when
you have a society that's incentivized
against saving. That's society that's
inized against investment. That's a
society that's kind of eating the the
seed that you're going to plant next
year. That's that's a deadly spiral. But
I don't um and there's no
>> this is what's amazing. There's like no
appetite in Washington to cut spending
like one iota. I remember a few months
ago Trump had the big beautiful bill and
many conservatives online correctly and
a few in Congress were like, "This is
insane. What are we doing?" And then
it's like, "Oh, look over here." They're
like, "Oh, wait, what?" And they they
all completely forgot about it. um this
continuing resolution right now that
they're debating the government
shutdown. It's it's I mean if President
Trump right now said I want to go back
to my first budget, you know, 2017 when
he became president for the first time,
it would be like you're a crazy person,
you're radical, blah blah blah. So that
is something that concerns me
enormously. But as you and I both know,
there is a great deal of ruin in a
nation. Uh the US dollar still is
disproportionately powerful worldwide
and many of these other countries have
GDPs, excuse me, um national debts that
are far higher proportionally than ours
and they're not doing great, but they're
not at collapse. Now, I'm not saying
it's good. I'm not saying it's not a
problem, but I'm saying they're not in
civil war either. Uh Japan being like
one prime example of this.
>> Yeah. So, Japan is always uh you hear
about Japan, you hear about the Nordic
countries when I bring these arguments
out. Uh so,
>> um I'll give a quick sort of uh
renunciation of Japan and why that does
not help us.
>> Denunciation, I'll take it down as an
argument. Uh whatever the right word is.
Uh so, Japan is like hyper um hegemonic.
It's just Japanese as far as the eye can
see.
>> They have a very specific culture. I
mean, you come here, it's that's not
true.
>> I thought that was like a racist eye
joke.
>> Is very funny. Nice. No, but I like it.
I'll take it. Uh, so having that kind of
cultural um uniformity is
>> when the culture is collectivist and
very polite and well, I want to make
sure that you have something as well.
Uh, you can get away with that more. So,
the reason Japan comes up a lot is any
country that's ever crossed the 130%
debt to GDP ratio for more than like 18
months has gone into um open violence.
And so,
>> what are we at now?
>> Uh we're at 122. So, the reason
>> when are we, sorry, I have to interrupt
because this is really key. When do we
hit 130?
>> Uh it's like 10 years.
>> Okay. So, so if we are on this track
according to all these kind of charts,
open violence.
>> Yes.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah. Yeah. So,
>> I agree. Yeah. Okay.
>> Japan is the only country that bucks
that trend
>> and I think they do that like if you
paid attention to the World Cup, they
cleaned the stadium after people left.
It's just a different
>> I'm going to interrupt you because we're
on the same page. I didn't realize you
meant in 10 years. I thought you're
meaning like in the next two or three
years.
>> No, no, no. In 10 years, yes, I can
easily see us going to open violence
easily.
>> So, and I don't see it as a binary. I
see it as like it will just continue to
escalate. So, I think we're already in a
very sort of controlled
pockets of violence right now. Um, I
think it will get worse. I don't think
it's topple the government. It's going
to take 10 or more years to get to that
stage. But my thing is if you don't
start putting in the fix now, then it
becomes unavoidable because you're
adding a hundred uh trillion dollars to
the national debt every 100 days. So
it's like this becomes a bigger and
bigger problem every day and you don't
want to be in like year nine going okay
now we really need to do something about
it. Um so anyway I don't think it's a
nothing burger. I also don't think
panicking is the right answer. So panic
is not going to get us anywhere.
>> Uh but taking evasive action is going to
be important. Um, I don't know that I'm
so
um
opposed to seeing my enemies crushed and
kind of um just destroyed. But the
question,
>> who are your enemies in this?
>> Uh,
I think
>> the American government,
>> not the American government. I think
there are schools of thought that are so
malevolent and nefarious that unless
they are completely kind of annihilated,
they're going to kind of exist in
perpetuity. That said, everyone thinks
they're going to be the guy driving the
tank and not the guy under the treads,
right? So, this is why I'm very careful
to be like, "Oh, this is going to be
fine." You know, whenever people light a
match, they're like, "What? My house on
fire. I just wanted to have a little,
you know, that's not how it works." uh
to uh and I am very um I I'm very um
doubtful that the people in those tanks
would be people I would consider friends
or people who I would approve of.
Certainly, I've said repeatedly that the
enemy class is not going down without a
fight. Uh my buddy Jesse had this great
point. He's like, "It's not like they're
going to say, "Well, good job. You won
that argument. I guess I'm going to go
home." That's not a thing. And I think
people have this there was this ' 80s
conception that you are sure familiar
with which was very much a part of this
American ethos how Reagan and Tip O'Neal
uh who speaker of the house Democratic
speaker of the house you know would
argue viferously during the day and then
go home and play golf together and isn't
that great and I think now there's this
idea that like um why am I playing golf
with people who want to kill my kids
right um and I think both the hardcore
Republicans hardcore Democrats would
say, "Yeah, my the other people want to
kill my kids." And I don't even know
that they're necessarily is either or
both or neither are wrong. So I don't
see any kind of kind of repress between
two
violently, literally violently opposed
worldviews. I don't What do you see as
the incentive
for anyone to blink? The incentive to
blink is always going to be if I blink
then my life tomorrow is better and my
kids lives are better. That's why I'm
saying this has to come back to the
economy. Like people all of a sudden
will change your tune instantly when
money's involved. If people believe like
oh wait this isn't profitable anymore.
I'm going to stop doing this. I'm going
to start doing this new thing. This was
part of the um JK Rowling when she went
after Emma Watson. She was like I think
a big part of this is Emma realizes it's
not as I think she even used the word
profitable. It's not as profitable to
dunk on me as it once was. And so,
>> meaning Rowling.
>> Yeah. So, Emma Watson was basically
anti-JK and now all of a sudden is
changing her tune and saying, "No, I
still love her." And JK was like, "What
is happening right now?" So, she was
like, "This is the same woman that once
mouthed to a crowd. I love all those
people except the one, meaning JK
Rowling." And she's like,
>> when you say profit, you don't mean just
financially. You mean like status and
other stuff. Uh Emma's talking about
status. JJ, sorry, is talking about
status.
>> But if people really believe that they
can get ahead, whatever that means,
either status, power, money, uh then
they'll change their tune. Fixing the
economy to me is that like you have to
get people to believe and understand
there is a way out of this. There is a
way for you to participate in the
economy. There is a way for your kids'
lives to be even better than yours.
There's a way for your life to be better
in 10 years than it is today. and it's
not the path you're on. Now, are you
going to get the average person there?
No. The average person is caught up in
emotions. They ration emotionally or
reason emotionally. And so, it that's a
lost cause. You just have to get the
tide to shift from grievance to
opportunity. Now, that's going to be
extremely hard. But to answer the
question directly, that's what will get
someone
>> I don't think it's gonna be extremely
hard at all because um I and I'm glad
you clarified what what you what you
were thinking because I I agree with
almost everything you just said. I don't
think it's going to be hard at all. And
I know I know I can hear right now the
mouse traps going off in people's heads
in the audience. There's this people
have this shreddinger's cat view of uh
first of all I hate the term the left
because even if Hillary Clinton and
Bernie Sanders would vote the same on
every single bill in front of Congress
if either of them were president God
help us they would not have the same
priorities.
>> They would not have the same things on
the agenda first, second and third. They
would not cut deals with the same people
maybe in the Republicans or other
countries in the same way. Right? So
when you say people understand that Mitt
Romney and Jeb Bush are not the same as
you know Donald Trump or Marjorie Taylor
Green but when they look at their
opponents oh they're all basically the
same and the Schroinger Scott they have
this view of that Democrats are the or
the left u let's just speak for
Democratic politicians are ideological
zealots who are you know some version of
Marxism and are obsessed with kind of
this Marxist uh hegemony at the same
time they're like these are soulless
immoral, power- hungry creatures who
will do anything to maintain their hold
in power. It's not both, right? So, do
they have this? Now, maybe this is their
vision that they have in the back, but
the point is there's time and time again
when a great example of this is the UK,
the Labor Party. The party's called
Labor, right? It's not that. It's not
the Democrats, it's Labor. And as soon
as people in unions started voting for
the Tories, like with Boris Johnson's
campaign, uh they're all white
supremacists. So labor turned on the
labor unions, right? So in America,
people are like, "Oh, they're never
going to turn on this group, that group,
that group." It was Bill Clinton who
pushed forth DACA, the defense uh um
the Defense of Marriage Act, and and
fought against gay marriage. In fact, in
2004, when John Ky was running against
George W. Bush, he called Bill Clinton
and asked for advice, and Bill Clinton
said, "Campa against gay marriage." And
John Ky said, "I'm not going to do
that." And he lost in a very close
election. And if he listened to Bill
Clinton, he probably would have won cuz
it was just very few votes in a few
states that carried their election. So
if people think that Democrats won't
start pivoting, it's already happened.
Uh if Pete Buddhajed just talking about
not having trans athletes, Gavin
Newsome's openly talked about not having
trans athletes. This was a thing five
minutes, like five minutes ago, we all
had this consensus. The Democrats, you
know, bought into what the base was
saying, but they don't. In the same way
that BLM was a huge thing in the spring
and summer of uh uh what it 2020 and
then as soon as Biden and Officer Harris
got into the White House, BLM was
complaining publicly. They're not
returning our calls.
>> They didn't even send some kind of like
random low-level staffer to have a big
kind of photo op at the White House be
like, "Oh, BLM's here. Let's discuss."
They didn't care. They didn't pretend to
care. So, I think it would be very easy,
and I know people are digging their
heels hearing this, for the Democrats to
pivot and be like, in 1992, it's the
economy, stupid. There are enough old
school Democrats, and more importantly,
Democrats who only care about seizing
power who could be like, it's the
economy, it's the economy, economy. They
can campaign very easily on this kind of
fiscal conservatism just like
Republicans do because Republicans don't
ever have to deliver it. And if you have
a binary system and it's like Trump's
crazy and he's focusing on illegal
immigrants while you can't put food on
the table, you know, I'm I kind of
worked my way up and my dad was a postal
worker, blah blah blah blah blah. That
will resonate with Karen and Karen is
the swing voter.
>> Yes. Uh I definitely think politicians
say whatever they need to say in order
to get elected. So I from that
perspective, I don't think any of the
parties are carved in stone. Um, having
said that, when I look at what the
energy is in the party, the energy very
much seems to be moving in the Mdani
way, which and I'm very empathetic to it
because if we have broken the economic
system for young people like it is just
absolutely smashed to pieces
>> and
given that they are going to need a
clear message.
>> What's unemployment with young people?
You keep saying smashed to pieces. Like
I have no idea how bad it actually is.
>> Okay, so unemployment is bad. It's uh I
think in ages like what do they call
prime working age? So 21 to 42 or
something like that. Uh it's I want to
say 12%.
>> That's bad.
>> Horrific.
>> That's bad.
>> Uh and and I saw rents in New York are
like three grand for a studio.
>> It's wild. It's wild. But the I I don't
even need people to get that far cuz now
we're starting to get into like the the
nitty-gritty of it all. uh two facts
just to get people to understand 10% of
Americans own 93% of the assets and the
only way to avoid the deficit spending
the punishment that we will all receive
of that is to own assets. So 10% are
protected and the take the 10% it's like
going to be most of them own a minuscule
amount and then the top 2% or whatever
own the 93% of the 93%. So, uh, most
people will never do the very thing they
need to do to protect themselves from
the government, which is to master or as
close as you can owning assets. And it's
a complicated game and it's a game that
carries a lot of risk. And so, I know
people are never going to do it. So,
you've got to get
>> it has to be. Who's not incentivized?
>> People to to save and and and kind of
get assets.
>> Well, no, you're not you're not
incentivized to save. You're punished
for saving, but you are a thousand%
incentivized to own assets. If you
don't, you're going to get punished into
a
>> I meant the media. I meant the the
culture. There's not this idea of like
be responsible.
>> Well, so agreed a thousand%. And this is
a big part of like the rallying cry that
I'm trying to do is get people to make
that. But like the one that always
baffles my mind is I'm like, hold on a
second. So, uh, people will be up in
arms about redlinining and saying this
is a great evil that we did to
African-Americans and it echoes through
the generations that they're not able to
pass on the wealth that you can put into
a house. And I'm like, uh, but I don't
see that same energy around the fact
that we are deficit spending and make it
impossible for people to buy a house.
So, it's like, you're literally
obliterating multiple generations of
people. I'm like th this ends so
horrifically and it compounds. That's
the part like it just compounds and
compounds and compounds because they
can't get into that asset. They are more
devastated by inflation and it just gets
worse and worse worse. Anyway, so that's
where I'm like we have battered the life
out of young people economically. Um
they're they're not able to start
generating that money. So when somebody
comes along and promises not like, "Hey,
we're going to be fiscally
conservative." Instead, they say, "All
of these guys are corrupt. You know it.
You feel it. Uh, they are the reason."
They probably don't even have to define
there. They are the reason that you're
not able to afford rent. We're going to
cap rents. We're going to get you free
bus rides. We're going to have state-run
grocery stores. And people are like,
"Yeah, that sounds a lot better than
what I have." But they're so
economically illiterate. They don't
realize that that experiment has been
run over and over and over. And there is
like a reason that is super easy to
explain as to why that doesn't work,
can't work, won't work, hasn't worked.
Uh but it sounds awesome and so they go
for it.
>> Sure. But I don't think that Mani's
appeal in that primary was largely kind
of economic. I think it was more this
kind of he's saying things that no one
else is. He's not a corporate party hack
like Cuomo was. It's very hard to get
enthusiasm among the base for a Cuomo
figure. It's like if Jeb Bush like ran,
you know, for for mayor of some of
Florida cities, even though he was
regarded, people are shocked to hear
this, widely regarded as a very
successful governor. He won his
re-election by this huge margin against
his opponent, I forget what year it was,
after crushing the guy in the debate.
Um, it was close before that. So I think
there's yeah I think something else that
you know you and I haven't touched on is
social media encourages and just our
culture in general encourages novelty.
>> So if something has been around for like
20 30 years it's inherently bad, right?
I want that shiny new thing. I want that
new app. I want that new whatever. So
this this was something weighed very
heavily in favor of Trump in 2016. Um it
and it worked against Hillary Clinton.
Um so I think that is part of his
appeal. Um also the you know him Curtis
Lee was his Republican opponent ran in
four years ago is regarded as kind of
like a clown figure in New York. Cuomo
you know was is a is a mass murderer. So
it's kind of are you going to vote for
the guy who did the mass murders in the
past or the one who's going to do them
in the future? Uh it's kind of a
Hopson's choice if I'm using that term
correctly. Um, but yeah, that AOC wing
is in the ascension. But I I think
you're also there's just this kind of uh
uh vacasillation and the Republicans did
this too where it's like there's this
myth in politics that moderates are
better at winning elections than the
people on the uh uh on the on the edge.
And one great example of this, you hear
this all the time, is Christy Whitman.
She ran for governor in New Jersey. She
won Republican, ran in 93, won again 97,
and she's like, "Look, I'm the
moderate." If you look at her elections,
she won by like one point over the
Democrat. Whereas Chris Christie, who at
the time was widely regarded as clearly
a hardcore conservative, won by far
bigger margins than her. The reason is
voted
by the populace. It's won by who gets
the who turns out. And you might have
someone who is really really hated by
the opponents, but he riles up people on
your side. And if you get people
excited, that might tip the scale. So
it's an enthusiasm gap, not just a
numbers gap. So the moderates like,
yeah, I might prefer Mitt Romney over
Obama. I'm not getting off my ass to
vote for him. Whereas if it's Trump,
it's people like, hell yeah, I want to
do this cuz this means something to me
as a signifier. So they'll do one and
then when that doesn't work, they run,
oh, should have been the moderate. Then
they run the moderate and it just goes
back and forth. You see this with both
parties all the time. So I don't at the
same time you know on the third hand as
an octopus um although they have arms
and hands if you look at Europe and
where the left is going it is going in
this kind of I would say mauist um
hardcore authoritarian direction you see
this in Canada you see this in the UK um
I mean talk about political violence if
the cops are arresting you for I don't
know if you saw this or maybe people
watching this maybe you have people
watching this
There was a woman or a guy, I forget who
it was, knock on the door in the middle
of the night from the cops in the UK.
I'm not here to arrest you. I'm here to
warn you about a Facebook post you had.
Now, I agree that people shouldn't be
wasting their time on Facebook cuz
that's for boomers. But it doesn't
shouldn't involve the cops.
>> Dude, they arrest 30 people a day in the
UK for things that people
>> and this is after 14 years of
conservative rule and what four four
different PMs.
>> Yeah, it's wild. I I am I am a gasast.
It is the most Orwellian thing I've ever
seen from the land of Orwell. Like
>> it's not the most Orwellian.
>> Oh, give me give me more.
>> I mean, come on. It gets more Orwellian
than that
>> in the in the West.
>> Yes.
>> Okay. Examples.
>> Um
Woodro Wilson. I know this preceded
Orwell obviously, but what he did during
World War I and you had kind of mass
censorship of the males and and the and
>> Yeah, but that's wartime. Horrible.
Horrible.
>> Sure. But at least you've got
>> But the war wasn't here.
>> Die yet. Fair.
>> The world, it didn't need to happen
here. It was just there because they'd
had their excuse. Never let a good
crisis go to waste. And it wasn't even a
crisis. This was their opportunity like
to flex their muscle. Like now we have a
pretext to kind of have mass censorship
and totalitarianism. And they got away
with it. This is what I'm concerned
about. Um, as a student of history,
everything that happened during World
War I, we have a in American shores.
Look, we're doing it. The Great War,
blah blah blah. when FDR comes in in
1933 and he could say with a straight
face all these measures that we took
during wartime just tw 13 years ago um
we have a great depression which is
really a bigger threat to America like
the Kaiser or what is happening where
you have 25% unemployment and of course
the answer is the great depression is
far greater threat to the average
American America as a whole than the
Germans during World War I ever were so
then they could just have that same
totalitarianism again point being co co
was the biggest scop in American
history. Uh a lot of very very nefarious
people by accident or design got some
very useful information about what the
limits are of American submission. Uh
what it would take for Americans to kind
of reach that violent point and whether
that violence would be regarded as
legitimate and I think now they are
going to be cashing that in. It's one of
those things you said that so calmly
that uh I think it a lot of people are
going to miss how terrifying that
statement is. But yeah,
>> sure. Yeah.
>> All right. You've said that the time for
talk is over. What do you mean by that?
>> When people are totalitarians, they use
language not to communicate to but to
manipulate. It is not done in good
faith. It's just what do I need to say
to get you to do what I want. A great
example of this was when it was
discovered that Mumani uh when he
applied to Colombia marked his race off
as black, not as African-American, it
said black. And several Democrats,
including former New York City Mayor
Bill Delasio, says he was born Uganda.
Of course, he's African-American. It's
like, you know, you're lying. I know
you're lying. It didn't even say
African-American. That's not what that
means. We all know this, but the time
for talk is over. There's not a
conversation to be had there. And I
think things like uh uh the trans debate
uh we talked about trade-offs earlier.
We can make the argument very let's make
very we can steal a man this argument
very easily. I have gend dysphoria. I
need to take crossgender hormones to
look and feel like I'm supposed to be.
You're telling me there's no cost to
take even the same gender hormones.
You're telling me if a woman takes
estrogen or a man takes testosterone,
it's all upside. So you laugh, but it's
people understand that that's
ridiculous. Women know perfectly well
during their cycle or when they're
pregnant when their estrogen's spiking.
It has consequences. It's part of being
human. But in this debate, nope, you
take the testosterone or the estrogen
respectively, it's all upside. It's
insane. And any question like, okay,
maybe
I can make this argument. The benefits
outweigh the costs, but the pretense is
there's no cost. So that's another
example of how it's it's just not done
in good faith and there's no really
space for talking.
>> Yeah. Okay. So if we're not able to have
good faith conversations, what what is
the alternative? Because you're very
optimistic. I It is I consider myself
optimistic.
>> I hate that word.
>> That's always optimistic.
>> Interesting. It's always like a passive
aggressive judgment word.
>> It's my filler word. I know, but it's
such a waspy thing.
>> I don't know why that would be waspy
>> because wasps don't say, "Oh, you you
suck." They go, "Oh, that's
interesting."
>> Oh, no. No. I don't think you suck. When
I say When I say that's interesting, I
basically mean that has made me feel
something that I don't yet know how to
categorize. So, I'm going to say
interesting to give myself time to find
its box, which may be tomorrow. Uh,
>> but I'm just saying in in I understand,
but this word has a it especially like
publishing has a certain connotation.
>> I don't mean it that way. I know you
don't. So, without using it in a way
that uh bothers you,
>> it doesn't bother me. I'm just
clarifying what you're what you're I
think you're putting out something
you're not trying to. I'm just being a
stickler.
>> Fair. So, now give me hope versus
optimism. Why draw a distinction?
>> Um I'm hopeful this conversation will go
well, but I'm not optimistic it will.
So,
>> that's clear. There you go. That's
clear. Okay. So,
uh
>> I've had that line. I've had that line
queued up for weeks and thank you for
giving me the chance to
>> very glad that you got a chance.
Interesting. Uh, okay. So, America, you
are hopeful but not necessarily
optimistic. That makes sense. So, if we
are, we're no longer talking. What do
you see as the alternative? Most people
will use the quip that once you can't
persuade or once you're not allowed to
speak, then violence is the only other
option. But I don't imagine that's your
punchline. Um you well you have that
free speech or free violence those are
the two choices right um there are I
don't think violence is necessarily the
alternative but if you disempower you
know uh uh populations or groups or
whatever then you have victory in that
regard I am gladdened and one of the
reasons I am hopeful is that Trump is
going head-on with the universities who
are really the the great villains of our
Um, and I think the fact that to your
point, and this something I know you are
extremely passionate about, there is so
much more space for young people to make
something of themselves without going to
university or having that credentialist
approach. Um, that I think is what would
save America because once you take care
of them, whether it's figuratively or,
you know, lamposty, um, I I think a lot
of the other issues would be resolved.
We'll be right back with the show in
just a second, but first, let's talk
about the hidden cost of choosing the
wrong platform. Most entrepreneurs pick
a platform that works great at launch,
but breaks when they grow. You start
small, gain traction, then you hit a
wall. Now, you're migrating platforms
midgrowth, losing momentum, losing
sales, and rebuilding everything from
scratch. Smart founders, though, start
with the end in mind from the beginning.
And that's where Shopify comes in.
Whether you're making your first $100 or
your first million, whether you're
testing your first product or processing
thousands of orders daily, the platform
of Shopify is going to grow with you.
Stop betting on platforms you know
you're going to outgrow. Build for scale
from day one. Sign up for your $1 per
month trial and start selling today on
shopify.com/impact.
Go to shopify.com/impact.
And now, let's get back to the show. I'm
going to say that in my own words. I'm
not attempting to put these words in
your mouth, but I do want to see if this
feels right to you. So, conversation
isn't going to be the way forward.
Changing the indoctrination machine will
be cuz I think we need to indoctrinate
young people. I just think the things
we're choosing to indoctrinate them with
are horrible.
>> Okay. Does that
>> I don't know about we but they are
indoctrinating them with things that are
horrible. I'm not indoctrinating them
with horrible things.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah. I think that's fair what you just
said. Yeah.
>> Okay.
>> What?
>> But it's not just that indoctrination is
a problem. It's that it's both. It's not
the message is bad. It's that they are
important and powerful. So if someone
who's important and powerful puts out a
bad message, you have to pay attention
to it to some extent. Walk me through
why they're the villain of our time and
how because I think it will be
counterintuitive for most people to
think of universities as powerful.
>> Really?
>> Yeah.
>> Wait, it's counterintuitive.
>> Uh, yes. Until I heard you talk about
it, I was like, "Oh, yeah, that really
is true." But it didn't hit me
immediately as like, "Oh, yeah, that is
true."
>> Wait, wait, wait.
So, the point of our universities is and
has been to create the next generation
of elites, right? And if you read um
James Ber