All right, I gotta you, guys, gotta because I gotta record this
thing and I gotta run. I'm late. Ask not what your country can
do for you, what you can do for your country, mister, tear
down this wall, read my lists. It's the Ricochet Podcast with me Rob
Long, I'm Lead Robinson and Charles Cook, who's filling in for James LILENX.
And today we talked to another James, James Polus about the coming digital
apocalypse and who and what might prevent it stick around. I agree, you'll
never get bored when when we never get bored? Hello, and welcome to
the Ricochet Podcast. This is number six hundred thirty two, which every time
I say a number like dad, I can't believe that we've lasted this long
or where did we got just healthwise? I am Rob Long, joined as
always by my UH co founder Ricochet, Peter Robinson, and Palo Alto.
Hello Peter, Hello Rob. And we also have with us Charles Cook,
Charles, what is it settled down? Settled us now? Charlie, Charles,
what is it either one? No no no no no no? Then
Charles in England and Charlie in Florida. No work from people call me both
and I just have run with it. I just tell people it's not Chuck,
it's not Chuck. And speaking of not being Chuck, it's also not
Jim. It's James Lilacs. And James is not here. James's I think
is on the high seat somewhere. Maybe he's in Mexico. Whenever, whenever
James actually goes on vacation, it goes someplace warm. I always feel like
that should have been covered by his health insurance, just because he lives.
Um. Uh, we are, of course, um, coming to you
from the ricochet, the Master's servers that ricochet. Uh. Please um.
And I've been in the computer sense, not in the in the on PC
sense. If you like where you're hearing, please come and join us at
rikshe dot com and be part of the conversation as it continues. Um.
So there's a lot to go on here, a lot to talk about.
And I'm used, as you know, Tom, I'm more of a disruptive
force, that's my normal job here than actually as a leader conversational leader.
But I'm gonna try because in the in the Lenten season, one of the
thing, one of the things I chose not to give up was my evil,
mean spirited glee when bad things happen to people who richly deserve it.
So and as an exercise of that of my non goodness, I'm going to
say, didn't Laurie Lightfoot's defeat in the Chicago mayoral and the first in mayoral
runoff election before the runoff, didn't that just like kind of make day?
Oh, I'm still in a good mood. It made my week, It
turns up, just made my week. Why Why? Because, of course,
because justice was done in some basic way. But Chicago is a town.
Chicago is a town where democracy has always been optional, where it hasn't.
Really, they have no deep they have his little experience of real democracy,
as Argentina say, so in the old days when the dailies, I
mean the real old days, when mayor Daily, when the senior mayor daily
ran the place very interesting. He lived in a modest house. He seemed
never to engage in any personal aggrandizement. On his way to city hall each
morning he stopped at church for morning mass. And he ran that thing with
the tightest fist imaginable. A buddy of mine here in California grew up.
He was in the Lithuanian neighborhood. He was the grandson of immigrants, and
he once went to the ward boss and said, you know what, can
I get a job just sweeping or stacking chairs in this big convention, this
happening the nineteen sixty eight convention. He was a kid and he just wanted
to see the convention, and they did give him a job stacking chairs.
But do you know who had to sign on that job, mayor Daily himself.
Right, all that said, there's a difference between a man and a
regime, the democratic machine that was based on neighborhoods, that was based on
some sense of what was a decent life and what wasn't a decent life,
what was lawful and what wasn't lawful. There's a difference between that machine and
a machine that permits a murder rate. If you live in a black neighborhood,
good luck to you, good luck to you, especially on a weekend.
Well, so you don't want to get shot, you don't want your
kids shots, stay indoors that under a black mayor an African American, she
needed to go start again. So, Charles, isn't this just one more
confirmation that this were you gonna say this is an aftershock many a series of
aftershocks that came after the riots of twenty twenty. It seems to me that
this is part of that movement, the progressive city governance movement. I went
too far and bad things happen, and now the people are pulling it back.
But isn't this also the sign that, like, I mean, it
made me happy because maybe thinking of oh, yeah, that's what mayor stick
to your knitting, like stick to your knitting should be um the new Uh,
it's the economy stupid, don't you think? No, I have a
different view on this. Thing's all right, I'm not thrilled and gleeful in
the way you are, Rob And are we being ve Charlie Well, I
don't think this has restored democracy in any way. My read on this is
that the city of Chicago is about to replace one interchangeable left leaning COG with
another. Of course, Laurie Lightfoot had to say, but I'm black,
but I'm a lesbian. That's the only thing that distinguishes her from the other
twenty people lining up to take her job, whether it's in this election or
the one after or the one after and it's not hyperbole to suggest, and
the one after that, because the last time that Chicago had a Republican mayor
was nineteen thirty four. I don't see this as a victory because I don't
think anything will change. I don't think anything will change because the unions in
Chicago are untouchable, because the piety is that every single person who is apparently
eligible to make it through as Chicago mayor has to promise failty to have not
yet been collapsed. There's no Giuliani moment here. No, that's true,
there's no doubt. No, I'm not I'm not suggesting that. But if
you if if if a mayor is tossed out because the crime rates are too
high and the person who seems to be the front runner is the person saying,
hey, we got to get the crime rate down, isn't that a
small incremental benefit? I mean, I agree that, I'm sure that he's
a progressive weirdo in all sorts of ways, But you know, he's the
ashes that the smoke is still in the air from the auto de fae of
the previous mayor. Don't you think that's gonna matter? I suppose what I'm
saying is. To me, this looks a little bit like a politic saying
taxes are too low. We have to get rid of Art Laugher. Who
do you want will take Paul Ryan. It's just not a material change.
And yeah, she's not going to be there. But Chicago, though,
does not seem to me to be serious about fixing what are extremely serious and
extremely sad problems. And the fact that they've got rid of her is good.
But I don't know. So you're just better than me, Charles.
You just saw this. You didn't laugh and cackle gleefully. I like nothing
more than to cackle gleefully, misfortin they deserve it. But I just don't
think that this is quite the cathartic moment. Okay, so here we go.
Here's Illinois, and in particular Chicago. The schools are no good,
taxes are punitive, and the regulatory regime is driving businesses out of the city,
and crime is out of control. We have a mayoral candidate who says,
well, let's see, I'll take on one of the three that is
not good enough. It isn't a fundamental change in outlook. I agree,
this guy ran the Chicago schools. That means he is clearly in bed with
the teachers unions. The schools are not going to get He hasn't said a
peep about cutting taxes, and in fact, it seems likely that he's going
to ask for more time. The business community has to fund the police that
we can all. We can see it coming. But at least he has.
You know what I can tell you have argued Rob and me into this
miniature kind of deminimus position. Miniature bad Charlie cheer up. It's not as
bad as it was the day before she lost. That's about all we can
say. But look, every time, every time, um a lor lightfoot
goes down, an angel, you know, an angel gets his wings.
I mean it's a it's a incremental steps here. We're not going to win
World War three? But is it also and I and we want to get
to obviously to our guest here as an old friend of Rickechet before we do,
isn't it part? Am I now seeing connections where there aren't any?
So disabuse me of this, um. The DC City Council watching DC,
which is about is a perfect progress of Eden as you can come up with.
They came up with a result. They came up with a set of
laws that would essentially turn DC into a law of state, much like Chicago.
All those things have to go through Congress because of the way DC is
governed. The Republican U Republicans passed in the House passed resolution saying that Congress
would nullify those laws. The bill is now in the Senate. Biden has
come out essentially to support the I'm trying to get this right, so I'm
not confusing. He won't veto the bill. He will not veto the actions
of Congress to stop the DC City Council from essentially tossing out what we would
consider to be just standard law and order procedures. Isn't that a small,
incremental, little stream of life our universe, Charlie is like when you're like
when you look on the horizon and see nothing but storms and storm clouds and
orcs. Isn't this look I don't want to be I was going to say,
I don't want to be that guy. But our crime ate is at
a fifty year low, and I think that yeah, and I think that
that is important. But I do think that you're right that, yes,
there is a diminimus, as you put it, pushback and there is a
pattern of diminimus pushbacks. I suppose what bothers me, and I know we
need to move on. But what bothers me is that we know how to
avoid getting into these positions. We know better, we really know, and
we therefore have at our disposal. And I'm saying our on behalf of people
who live in different places than me. We have at our disposal a set
of tools that have been proven to work again and again and again, and
we're not doing it. And that is a choice. And I just look
at this Laurie Lightfoot situation and I think, well, it's great that she's
gone because she's a terrible, terrible leader and a weirdo. But I don't
see people pulling the lever to change this across the board. But you do
see Chicagoans. You do see Chicagoans moving to Florida. Well, right,
welcome to America. At least we do have red states here. You can
vote for your feet, and you can sleep soundly in Florida, or you
can sleep soundly wherever you are. That is a good segue. So just
you both stuff it. If on, if you got the right sheets.
It's freezing here in New York, city. Um and weirdly rainy too.
And I know it's it's cold in Los Angeles. There's a cold where you
are, Peter, it's cold, Grace, guys, rainy, I'm gonna
breeze right by where where Charlie's whatever, whether he's experiencing which seems rather you
know. Anyway, Look, but there's one thing that we all enjoy,
which is a good night's sleep. And you can stay cozy all winter long,
or you can say relax and cool all which long to live in Florida
where they set of buttery soft sheets from ball and Branch. They are made
with one hundred percent organic cotton threads and they get softer with every wash.
I am here to attest to that. I have some, and they get
better with every wash, just like good sheets should soft. And you know,
they remind me I was once in a very very fancy, grand old
European hotel and the sheets were the They were amazing because they were ancient and
they were washed, you know, every day, and they were ironed and
they were just fantastic. And that is the experience of Balling brand sheets.
They use the highest quality threads on Earth. Their sheets are made from slow
grown organic cotton for a superior softness and a better night's sleep. They feel
buttery to the touch and are super breathable, so they're perfect for both cooler
and warmer months, or the cooler months that we experienced in the warmer months
that Charlie experience at the same time. This is why their signature hemmed sheets
are a best seller and loved by millions, and you can hear from more
more than ten thousands of those happy sleepers you've written rate reviews. Always check
the reviews. That's how you know Ball and Branch is a great product.
Make the most of bedtime with Balling Branch sheets. Get fifteen percent off your
first set when you use promo code Ricochet at Ball and Branch dot com.
That's Ball and Branch all one word bolll A and D branch dot com.
The promo code is ric o'schet and we thank Ball and Branch for sponsoring the
Riche pod test and they've been sponsored for a long time. It's a it's
kind of nice to see this, Like, you know, I kind of
want to buy sheets again, even though I have Balling Branch sheets in there.
Excellent. Um So moving on, there's one more thing I want to
talk about. We're gonna put it to the end. I want to.
I need to talk about this, the new blogger law in Florida, because
it seems to be lighting up everyone and it seems like those stupid distinct who's
going to be on the defensive now exactly? But before we get there,
so I give you time now to come up a conturing view about way way
Actually it's a good thing. Um uh. Before we talk about that,
let's introduce or reintroduce our old friend, James Paulos. James is the editor
at large of The American Mind at the claremline. It's He's the author of
Human Forever. He's founder of the online publication Return. He was an editor
in chief and one of the early founders of rickiche dot com. And we
welcome him back to the Ricochet Podcast. James, how are you well?
First of all, where are you well? How are you good? So?
Where are you now? Are you in in the southern California? I
am in Glendale, California where it is sunny and clear. It's a beautiful
day. Man. Yeah, okay, human Charlie King so all right,
so okay, I'll show myself out, Yeah, exactly. The book is
called Human Forever. The subtitle is the Digital Politics of Spiritual War. What
does that mean, Well, it means it means a couple of things.
Technology has developed to a point where as I think, more and more people
are noticing, Um, fundamental questions are being raised about why we humans should
bother to do much of anything? Why should we get a job? Why
should we um participate in public life as citizens? Why should we get married,
why should we have children? Why should we have sex? Why should
we leave the house, why should we leave our beds? Um? Why
should we ever? Put has been asking just these questions, but reading my
dream journal, etcetera. Sa, Uh, so you know, these are
these are the ultimate questions about who and why we are who we are as
as human beings, um. And they have ultimate answers, They have theological
answers. These are sort of theological questions. And that's what the great religions
of the world have been wrestling with from the beginning, and what the philosophers
ponder and um. And so in the face of these great questions, Uh,
there are competing answers. UM. If you you know, if you
look at what our regime has become just since the UH, since the the
debut of the iPhone and the development of the smartphone into a commodity, our
regime is moving in a direction where it has very clear, and to many
Americans, very alien and bizarre answers such as, well, we're going to
create a social credit, social justice system, and we're going to onboard everyone
into it, and everyone is in some sense going to be a cyborg,
whether it's digital ID or CMDC or a combination of all the above. The
great heroes of our society are those who are at the frontier of transhumanism,
whether they call themselves transgender or trans whatever. And the not just the tolerance
or the acceptance, but really the adulation, the celebration, the worship of
these figures and of the kind of borg that that unifies them all together is
going to be the new state. Religion, established religion, constitution doesn't extend
into cyberspace. Um. And that's their answer. That's what's supposed to get
our lives our is. But is anybody, but is anybody arguing in favor
of this? It seems like every time we turn around, it's like mostly
people arguing, I mean overwhelmingly people arguing against all of this. I mean,
what is it they did now know that you know them suicidal ideation?
I guess what they call it. And the depression and anxiety and young people
has zoomed up, not since you know, Greta Durnberg's telling us we're all
going to diaglobe. Not it's not global warming, it's none of these big
things. It's just the fact that Instagram makes people miserable, and or Facebook
before it, or Twitter or TikTok or snapchat. And yet what do we
see to be on a runaway train to do all that and to use all
of that. I mean, we're talking on zoom right now, James.
We didn't have a podcast in two thousand and eight, two thousand and seven,
actually we did. We've done six hundred and thirty two of these.
Are we are we contributing to the general dehumanizing um can scade? Well,
it's difficult because the point of the spear here is the weaponization of our communications
technologies. And we live in a society where people are very accustomed to speaking
their mind, to having opinions, to thinking that if they kind of get
it right in speech, then it's only a matter of time before they get
it right in action. And what's I think demoralizing a lot of Americans is
discovering that, you know, the regime is moved in a direction where you
know, you can sort of flap your lips all you want, and it's
really not going to change anything. People in charge are folks that you can't
vote in, you can't vote out. They control the technological infrastructure in a
way that is impenetrable and inaccessible to the practice of citizenship. It's bad stuff,
but you're right, there are a lot of people who are who are
reacting against it. Could I double back on Rob's question a little bit,
No, not a little bit, sort of reframe the whole the repeat the
question actually so I can see we can all see it. We can all
feel it that this move in the direction AI of a surveillance state of social
credit. We can all feel it happening. I got censored for ten days
during COVID. We all know people Ja Bardacharia's story is horrifying. We can
see it happening, we can feel it happening. Is it happening out of
sheer inadvertence or are there actually people who do indeed make have convinced themselves that
the argument you just put is the correct argument and that we ought to be
doing this, and do those people inhabit the deep state? I exchanged example
of question or sort of illustration. I was exchanging emails the other day with
David Galertner, who knows a thing or two about this, the Yale computer
scientist who he's not an old man, but he was a sort of a
genius very young. He helped to invent the discipline of computer science. And
he said that within a couple of decades, we won't even have the option
of driving our own cars. But that's because there will be planners, city
planners, people in the Suddenly it will become the argument. And if you're
in Manhattan and they can actually take control of traffic, accidents go down,
the city becomes much more livable. Do you see what I mean? It'll
be kind of inadvertent adoption of these things. Is that the path or are
there really are there journals and people online? I'm sure actually exchanging ideas and
saying, you know what, the CCP has it right. We should have
a social credit in this system. Oh yeah, I think you can see
it openly, whether it's World Economic Forum or other faora you've got. You
know, the five eyes is working as a single unit, and that,
you know, that might be comforting at a time when there's a serious great
power conflict, but when you look at the way that that power has been
wielded over the course of the pandemic and beyond, whether it's in Australia or
Canada, or New Zealand or the UK, the boot comes down at home
before it comes on anyone abroad, and that's a serious problem. The indications
are everywhere, and because these are the theological stakes here, any powerful answer
that's going to come forward for how we should you know, do a great
reset or refound society, it's going to be rooted in some kind of theological
propositions. You look around the world. The Chinese are doing this with Taoism,
the Russians are doing with Russian Orthodoxy. The Vatican wants to be a
big player and how that he regulates technology. The Israelis have their own thing
going on. Every civilization state that is trying to assert and secure its digital
sovereignty is doing so by trying to reorient public life and governance on the basis
of their oldest religious roots. If those are my choices, I wish to
be ruled by the Vatican, because the ineptitude will create all kinds of freedoms
for us. Well, I think it's interesting, you know, you'll see
sort of which, which of these which of these models is capable of of
doing what it promises? And then I think you're right. I think as
some of these gray is of sovereignty open up, you're going to get all
kinds of weird and unusual alternatives cropping up where they're able to do so.
So, first off, I just want to congratulate you for the amount of
wine that you have over your right hand shoulder. That is suppressive collection to
rive on my own, I have an extreme question. I'm going to put
it in extreme terms. What you're describing is dystopian. What you're describing is
something that any free person should want to avoid. Should we want to destroy
the technology that's enabled this? And because usually you hear people say here are
all the good things about the internet, and here are the bad things.
But if you're right, the good things will not offset or outweigh the bad
things. Should we want to destroy this digital environment we've created? Well,
I think that I would answer that in a couple ways, there are some
things which are likely to destroy themselves. I think if you look at the
course of human history, you will see that there is something of a pattern
where terrible ideas that are pursued fanatically tend to implode on themselves, and I
think some of that is going to take place. However, at the same
time, it seems clear that unless there's a real sort of planetary cataclysm,
much of this technology is not going to go away, and it's not going
to be destroyed, simply because it's very difficult to destroy it, whether in
its own right or because it's so powerful that some sort of sovereign organization is
going to be there with guns and whatever and prohibit it from being destroyed.
And it's true that, you know, even on the level of like well,
maybe if we just got rid of the bad guys, everything would be
okay, it's very difficult to destroy that class of people, even if they
were all sort of terrible and needed to be got rid of. There are
going to be evil people at every level of society, so you know,
your mileage may very I think the important thing is that we need to understand
and live out ways of interacting and using our technology that actually strengthen our way
of life, strength in our form of government, strengthen our humanity, and
that can be done. Americans used to be very confident with regard to their
technology, getting their hands dirty, rolling up their sleeves, putting their hands
on their tools and their machines. And at some point that has that has
changed. It's been it's been to a degree surrendered into a degree taken away.
And now many Americans feel alienated from their technology, intimidated by their technology,
um subservient to their technology, enslaved by their technology. And the reality
is that there are some tools out there that are very powerful that you don't
need to be, you know, an electrical engineer or a Silicon Valley nerd
or a blue check or anything else. You can put your hands on them
right now and start using them to do those things that strengthen us. I
published Human Forever on bitcoin. It's it's encrypton chain, it's for sale,
and bitcoin worked out financially, which you know, was a proof of concept
for me. But really I wanted the medium to be the message of the
book. You do not need to be some kind of super expert nerd in
order to do this. The technology is advanced to a point where, yeah,
you know, you can do an end run around the New York publishing
industry or around the you know, around Wall Street and just do the stuff
yourself. Yes, the regulators are circling, but that's all the more reason
why, you know, Americans really need to become adult about this and be
willing to take one step in what might be an unfamiliar direction in order to
reclaim some of the least. So there's nothing lud eyed about you. You're
using technology to combat the technology. Well, I mean, if only it
were, you know, if only it were as easy as just driving a
truck up to the data center and there's a kaboom and everything goes back to
normal. Well, I'm getting back to brother Charles here down in Florida,
who seems to be coming very close to suggesting that if there were a button
he could push to a eliminate the smartphone, he'd do it. Well,
I'm asking given the conclusion, he's just asking, He's just asking. Look,
I'm obviously very much pro technology. I co own a technology company.
Just I'm just asking that if I believe what James is saying I would wonder
whether the whole thing ought to be neute. Well, if if that were
an option, maybe more people would be trying it out. But I think
the fact that no one is trying reflects that it's not really an option.
The root of the issue is us, and if we become obsessed with trying
to create an alternate universe of our own device, if we become obsessed with
becoming as God's, if we become obsessed with destroying or obsolescing our own humanity,
things will continue to go in a dark and horrible direction. And the
problems you gotta get us to give up some of the good stuff. Like
I'm on the subway. You're on the subway. Um, everyone's on their
phones. It's nice people on their phones. They just they're not making noise,
they're not even looking at each other. They're just on the subways and
everybody's nice in their own cocoon. I like that. I understand it's probably
a benefit to having everyone is a part of a civilized group. We're all
on the subway car together, and we're all going to be humans together and
make eye contact. I don't want to do that in New York City,
I like it that. I like when people are very busying themselves with their
you know, games or whatever. It used to be paperbacks. Yeah,
it was always kind of like spooky eye contact with a weirdo. Now the
weirdo's got an iPhone. I have to worry about him. It's very hard
to stop. Sorry, I'm assuming that I'm not the weirdo. So let
me let me pick this to the to the group. Here is something a
friend of mine, very smart, very accomplished, technological tech entrepreneur, very
successful tech entrepreneur, told me recently is what he tells his children, and
they're I think, you know, teenagers or maybe older teenagers. So there
are three things you need to know about the future. Three crucial things for
the future. One blockchain, two machine learning. Three Jesus, because if
you have the first two and you don't have the third. I mean he
he sort of, I mean he said Jesus, but he sort of.
He means it in the lasts, not an episcopalion. I gather this is
in fact, it is an episcopalian really, And he said that the US.
Yeah, yeah's right. The last one is what makes the first two
tolerable, not dystopian. And if you have the first two and you don't
have the last one, you don't have the spiritual piece, the human piece.
I'd say, right then, the first two are inevitably going to turn
bad. Is that what do you think? Yeah, that's where this is
going. I mean, look, we need to catechize our bots. If
we're not catechising our bots, someone else is catechizing theirs to tell us what
to do and how to live and who we are as human beings. Um,
you know, it's it's the form of a all of this technology.
You know, that's this innumerable, invisible, instantaneously communicating um entities until you
know, twenty years ago, fifteen years ago, the only the only entities
that people human beings thought could do these kinds of things where angels and demons.
So the spiritual stakes are baked right in. And the form of all
that technology which most people interact with, is as as something that's invisible is
like is like a big swarm, a swarm that that is engulfing the planet.
And so when you're thinking theologically, when you're thinking about Jesus, you're
thinking about religion. Um, yes, you're thinking about you know, the
message of the ancient church, which is, if you put your faith and
your hope in your senses and your passions, you will be led astray and
destroyed. Um. And these are devices that encourage us to do that,
or give us a greater temptation than ever before. Does this explain Asbury Kentucky
through the Revival an amazing story? Did you let him talking about Charlie?
I do, and to a degree I think think it does. But I
also think you know that that religion quote unquote is not enough in order to
assert some kind of real mastery and authority over something like the digital swarm.
You need a kind of human body, a kind of spiritual body that is
that is bigger, that has that spiritual authority. And I think that's going
to be the church. You know, if if everyone's just kind of randomly
gathering together and standing in rooms and praying a lot, you know, obviously
that seems like a step in the right direction. But I think it's going
to be organized or powerful enough. Now we need to go to the the
house Atheist Charles Well, I wonder why you think now is different. I'm
not suggesting that it's not, but if you look at for example, the
Pessimist archive accounts on Twitter. I don't know if you've seen this, but
it has all sorts of warnings that were issued in newspapers and from religious authorities
and from speakers and critics and politicians throughout history, from the invention of the
printing press to the radio to video games in the nineteen seventies. What is
it about now that makes this so complete? Is it that the Internet is
all encompassing in a way that the radio was not. Is it the acquiescence
of politics? What's the difference? Well, I think that the difference is
one of scale. And this is something that scales up to the level of
incasing the Earth in a sheath of satellites, all the way down to the
molecular level, all the way down to you know, okay, we're going
to immortalize some brain cells and hook them up to some wires and turn them
into organoid robots. Like it is saturating every level of life at a scale
that is super that is that is unhuman and I think often anti human um
But look, we can we can do this with any kind of technology.
And it's true that during the Industrial Revolution there was it was the latest and
greatest way of of of dehumanizing people. And if you go back to you
know, the new Soviet Man with the Russian Communists, they were trying to
do just this. They were trying to get to post humanity. They were
trying to use technology to leverage us out of our human condition, out of
our given human being, and create a kind of cyborg superorganism. That's what
they wanted to do. Then, Um, that's what's going on now that
that same kind of effort, and so none of it should, really,
you're right, be that shocking. Um, if you do sort of go
back and read you know, the ancient Church and the Desert Fathers and all
those guys and the saints, none of them would be surprised by what's going
on right now because it all fits the pattern. And the pattern is the
arrogance of man and the desire to become as God's um, and the hope
of of using our tools, dead matter, the material world to create a
sort of you know, to become the demiurges of a new universe that we
can disappear into forever. So so to Charlie, if I may, to
Charlie's point, what's different now? Two questions for the House. Well,
one question for the House and one for Charlie. Here's the question for the
House. If David Gallertner is correct, and I can see no way to
gainsay him, that the interior political dynamic of self driving vehicles is that we
will no longer be permitted to drive our cars. If that's correct. Does
that feel like a loss of freedom? Does it feel to me? It
does? Oh? Yeah, okay, So that's item one and then item
two. Charlie, you'll correct me on this, you'll actually know this.
I have a vague impression from reading over the years this piece, that piece
on Britain. As far as I can recall, in the Western world,
Britain has the policing. The police in Britain have more cameras in public places
than any other country in Europe, and far more than we have in the
United States. Are you has that changed the feel of everyday life in Britain?
Does it mean anything to box the streets of London and now to know
that the police are watching you and there's facial recognition technology scanning the crowd for
the original idea was terrorists, but who knows what all kinds of categories people
are being put into. Does it feel different? Yeah, there's a poem
I forget who it's by, has this line and it all watched over by
machines of loving grace, which is creepy as how, That's what I feel
like walking through London. I've written about this a lot. The British comfort
with mass surveillance of all sorts is bizarre to me, especially given it nominally
was supposed to be the precursor to American liberties, including the Fourth Amendment on
the the your first question cars, I've actually called Peter for a twenty eighth
amendment to the Constitution that prevents the government from passing laws that force people into
vehicles over which they have no control. Because keep your hands off my golf
code, I'll certainly golf. It will be the first line of the amendment.
But the difference now with cars that drive themselves is that you cannot have
a car that drives itself without that cars being tracked. Car has, by
definition, if it is to drive itself, to know where it is,
and to know where it is, it has to be connected to the GPS
network and probably to the Internet. And as a result, there is no
way of doing that without surveillance. And so, although I don't objective people
want to turn on their GPS, I do it myself. The idea that
they would be forced to I find extraordinarily creepy. And so I mean,
I think there's a massive loss of liberty, and one one that I would
oppose. Yeah, well, I mean I was gonna say, when they
when they come to take your liberty, I mean normally and not in totalitarian
regimes, but in these kinds of regimes they first it comes as a form
of a present, right. I mean, the technology behind GPS isn't the
map technology it has. The missing piece of data for traffic has always been
the central brain doesn't know where you're going. And once the central brain knows
where you're going, right, I mean, it used to be you get
in the car, you get in the in the car, you drive somewhere,
only you behind the wheel and any of your pastors know where you're going.
Now, of course the central brain does if you use GPS, because
you've told it where you're going, and so it can you know, it's
only a matter of a few steps from that was the one un missing piece
of data that they needed, because that's the one piece of data that's inside
your head. Everything else is public, but it makes life easier. Right,
So what I'm saying is that when I come to take your take your
liberties like this, I first give you a gift that you really prize well
gift, But then there's also a lot of moral bullying that's involved. I've
tried to game this out, and I think you're right. It will be
sold as an advantage to you. But all of the rhetoric we hear around
say gun control is instantly transferable to driving. I mean, driving is far
far more deadly in the United States right than say mass shootings are, and
so we will hear how many more have to die. We'll hear sub stories
about people who died in car accidents, which is of course horrible, it
is part of a free society. We will be told that human beings are
irresponsible and that they can't be trusted. Of course, if America gets to
the point of which it's trying to do this, at least federally, some
other country will have done it first. So they'll say, well, they
already did it in Sweden and Germany. And look at these civilized nations who
when they had car crashes. Congress acted. Um, I just think every
single trick that we already have will be applied to this. But I guess
what I'm saying is that there's there's something about gun control that's clear to me
that it's the state imposing a regulation on an unwilling population, especially donors.
Right. But I think what James talking about, James chump jump in is
that is that there's a complicit like it's scary. I don't know, like
maybe I kind of don't mind it. Like you know, rich people during
COVID were like, yeah, you know, it wasn't in Lockdown's not so
bad. I get my food delivered from somebody he's outside. I get to
work on my laptop. That's a regulation, but it's not the worst thing
in the world. I get to hang out at home and I don't have
to go to work. And the when they come and they start ebbing away
at your human freedoms, isn't isn't the biggest piece of that our acquiescence to
it, because it comes like candy, like, oh, this is to
be easy. The worst freedom is nothing if you don't care about your humanity,
If our humanity itself is totally disenchanted. If our connection with the divine
has been totally severed, and if people think that that human beings suck,
that the existence of humanity is in an injustice, that we're obsolete, that
we deserve to be replaced, then we will be replaced. It's like,
you know, John, John, and Yoko. It is saying like war
is over if you want it, well, like humanity is over if you
want it. And and unless we do, unless we muster the spiritual authority
to insist once again that actually, yes, the body is sacred, that
it is inviolable, Yes, the soul exists. Yes we are not just
organisms that have appeared on this on this rock that's twirling through space. Then
we're gonna get rolled. It's that simple, James is really in my this
is subjective. This is just points of evidence. But I sit and I
work in the middle of Stanford University, which is the go go spot for
tech right and has been for three four decades now, and particularly with this
chat what it was, the thing called the chat bot, It's called what
is it called GBT? Thank you very much chat GBT. The kids,
there's a kind of Scooby Doo moment there's a kind of role tech. Maybe
maybe the humanities have something to say to us after all. Maybe, of
course I'll do my major in CS, but maybe i'd better minor in history
or philosophy. Maybe maybe we need to discover not only how to parallel process,
but what it means to be human. There's just just this sudden The
suddenness of the things just stuns me. And I'm sure that James is onto
it. There's a there's a kind of pulling up short and saying, maybe
before we go too much farther with tech, we ought to stop and think
what the traditions have to say to us about what it means to be human.
Kind of thrilling for an old English major like me, and you too,
Rob, Yes, well maybe I mean, I guess I said,
any sen I sense it among to quote a great philosopher, Bob Dylan.
You know, everybody's got to serve somebody. The human beings are worshipful creatures,
no matter what the atheists like to tell us. And if we are
not worshiping God, we're worshiping something else, whether it's a device in our
hands, or an abstract idea, or or a cyborg entity that swallows up
the earth. Um, and so you know, I yeah, it's great
to to you know, be literate and to remember that there are thousands of
years of written record of intelligence and excellence in human flourishing and sensitivity and love
and all that. But if if we're not kneeling in the right direction,
then we're going to be kneeling in the wrong direction. Okay, um,
I can't top that, But I can't ask you this question. How hard
is it to get your damn book now done? Now that I know I
can't go to the bookstore and get it, is it like a thing where
I gotta go and have a digital wallet? I do a coin base.
It's very easy. You don't even need to you don't even need to leave
your house. Just go to canonic dot x y z that c A n
O n iic dot x y z u. The book is Human Forever and
canonicu founded by a friend of mine. They just opened up their beta to
the public, which means that anyone yourself included, can hop on and uh
and upload your manuscript and have it encoded onto the bitcoin blockchain, and you
yourself can sell it and in bitcoin for for any of the major bitcoin chains.
Uh, start making money now, he speaks the truth. I just
did it. I just did it, canonic dot x y Z and boom
human. I got to tell you it may be too easy. I think
you should put in a few more thresholds there. Hey James, it was
great to talk to you. Such a pleasure. Thank you, guys.
See you secure, We'll see you that its top Yeah, yes, all
right, see you in the president. Thanks James. Uh. You know
you keep thinking that you're old, Peter, but the truth is that you
might live to see this because it is possible to expand, extend your lifespan
and feel younger at the same time. According to a Harvard it's a good
segue. It is a good segue. It was a good segue or scientist
and Nobel Prize winning m breakthrough artists. There is a way to do all
of these things, and it is by lengthening you're telomeres. Now, telomeres
what protects your DNA and they play a critical role in the aging process.
But many of us struggle with shortening telomeres thanks to stress on healthy food,
obesity, that kind of thing. That's why we recommend youth switch. Youth
switches all natural, doctor approved and manufactured right here in America. Contains a
potent brand blend of adaptagens that promote healthier telomeres and longer lifespans. It boosts
energy, can support regeneration of healthy organ systems. And you can try youth
Switch for yourself risk free today and you get a free bottle of Ageless Brain
as a bonus, which is a great product to help you improve focus,
memory and mood. And you also receive four bonus ebooks to boost every aspect
of your health and longevity. Go to youth Switch MD dot com slash ricochet
to claim your supply of youth Switch at all five bonus gifts. That's youth
Switch md O, one word youth Switch wi tchmd dot com, slash Ricochet.
Order youth Switch today. You know, I just got my bottle UM
two weeks ago, and so I'll report back. It sounds I already already
think I'm smarter. UM don't know about living longer, but we'll find out.
We thank you switch there. We will well, I will find out
you won't you that's true? Will the last thing I'll find out, Um,
But we thank you switched there. A new sponsor and we thank them
for joining us and sponsoring the Rick Shape podcast. So wait, um,
I was gonna ask you, Charlie about this stupid blogger laws. So the
law is in Florida that's been proposed. It sounds dumb, it sounds kind
of pointless, but it sounds like a kind of thing that everybody's getting in
there upset about. Essentially, what does the law say? Okay, well,
Peter said, I had some time to think up my my pushback.
I actually wrote about this this morning, so I'm already committed to that position.
And that position is, this is an unbelievably dumb idea. It is
unconstitutional federally, and it's unconstitutional under the Florida state constitution. The idea is
that if you are a blogger whatever that means, who wants to criticize the
executive branch in Florida and everyone in it, then you have to register with
the state within five days of doing so. Presumptively unconstitutional. It's it's bad
on the merits. But here's my defense of it. We're not of it,
but here's my caveat this one guy. It's not a bill, it's
not de Santis. No, this is reported because it's Florida. I said,
this is Flora the legislative session. The truth is, it's one guy
from Seminole County who's a state senator who just won for the first time,
who wrote this bill, sponsored his bill, said hey, is there anyone
who wants to come along with me on this? And met with silence and
tumbleweeds at this happens. Florida is only in the legislature, is only in
session for two months every year, and as a result, the majority of
the work that is done there is going to make it into legislation and then
into signed legislation after that is done before those two months start pre filling.
It's called the bills that are going to make it somewhere that the bills that
people ought to be thrilled by are worried about are already a matter of public
record. Is one guy in Seminar County with an iqbe about seventeen who has
decided that there would be a good idea we registered Bloggs. Now to give
you an indication of why I'm not the slightest bit worried about this. There
is another bill at the moment in Florida that is also going nowhere that was
written by one person and that has only one sponsor the author This one by
a Democrat that would ban Floridians from allowing their dogs to stick their heads out
of the windows in cars. Legislative stuff. There's a bill in Texas from
some Republican who's i think, said the more kids you have, the more
money the state will send you. That. I'm sure there are crazy bills
in Iowa. There are always crazy bills in California in the other direction.
They have one or two sponsors. I am happy to condemn this. I
think the statement put out by Fire was absolutely right. It is presumptively unconstitutional,
and this guy in Seminole County should be ashamed of himself. But it's
not a thing, as the kids say. Right, but is it a
good politics? I mean, I'm assuming he doesn't. I'm giving the benefit
of it, but I'm giving him the benefit of a doubt. Like he
doesn't have an IQ of seventy. But he's looking around, he's seeing like,
oh, it's all this Like in my district. I can make a
lot of hay and make him be a crusader against the you know, the
constitutions. Yeah, but I mean, there's something's behind this. I guess
I should take him in face value. He really wants to people to start.
He wants to register First Amendment register for First Amendment rights. But it
seems to me that, um, there's a political calculation here. Was sort
of interesting. Maybe it's dumb, but it seems to me that if anything,
it's gross syco fancy towards the governor. Yes, yeah, probably unprompted
and unwanted sycophancy, but sycophancy. Nevertheless, nonetheless, Rob would be familiar
with that. He gets it all the time. It's on the subway,
which is why he's in favor of smartphones exactly, bearing yourself his smart phone.
All right, Uh, and I didn't we want to wrap it before
we do? Um you wrote, Charlie, you wrote, UM pretty blistering
piece about Biden's uh magic wand his his gift gift to the to the to
his to his subjects. Um, it's almost like one of those like on
the feast of the Goddess of you know fire, I eliminate your debt.
Um, how much trouble are we in if this thing isn't struck down by
the Supreme Court? And then how much trouble are we in politically? If
it is, I don't think we're in any trouble. If it is,
I'm afraid. I'm not sunny on this question. I think that this is
a constitutional crisis, and I use the term consciously and advisedly. I think
this is a constitutional crisis of Joe Biden's making. And I think that if
this is upheld on standing grounds, which is the only way it can be
upheld, the on the merits argument is preposterous, right and has no chance
in any court. The standing ground is essentially that the people who who have
challenged US law in court have no standing to do so. They didn't,
they are not party to it, they have no harm right, And yes,
that is the that is the way of looking at it, although I
would point out that that it's a threshold issue. I mean, clearly the
people in question have been harmed, but the court often narrows its standing window
because otherwise it would be overrun by cases. What if you say it's you
know, you know anything, Anything under four hundred billion dollars is dot harmed?
Anything over half a trillion. We're talking about half a trillion dollars,
right, Look, the reason I think this is a is a potential disaster
is that if this ends up being upheld on standing grounds, the Supreme Court
will have ratified a massive whole in the Constitution, and we'll have signaled that,
under its standing jurisprudence, if the executive branch can find a law somewhere
that has some vague reference to any topic, and if the executive branch can
find a way of using that law to do something that is ostensibly benevolent,
then there is no judicial role to play in superintending separation of powers. And
I don't see a limiting principle there. I assume that this will become the
norm, because every time in the last thirty forty, maybe even eighty years,
the executive branch has discovered a new way of aggrandizing itself within our constitution
lorder, it has taken it, and it has pocketed it. And the
example I always give is of a rogue republican administration that decides for a year
not to collect taxes. If the argument here is it seems to be that
the harms that are caused by a given action have to be direct and discrete
and identifiable. If the argument is that no one is really harmed by the
federal government giving away four hundred billion dollars from the treasury, and that taxpayers
don't count because their claim is to attenuate it. Then it's actually hard to
see who would be harmed if the federal government, for example, so were
were just not collecting any income taxes, even if Congress is told to right.
And you know, I know that after a certain point, Congress would
probably wake up and start changing the law or issuing a writ of mandamus,
or impeaching the president if it got too far. But the risk here is
that these these actions are limited only to behaviors from the government that are generally
perceived to be friendly. And the reason I go down that rabbit hole is
that if you go back to the founding, what the founders are mostly worried
about is tyranny that would be recognizable by anyone. They're worried that the government
will smash up the printing presses. They're worried that the government will take away
the guns or imprison people without due process. They're worried about the rise of
a Julius Caesar. What they had not countenanced, or at least not provided
for. If this standing doctrine holds is the president who behaves like Oprah and
says, everyone under your seats, there is here is a car for you,
and then turns around and says, well, who's harmed by that?
Oh no, it doesn't count. By the way, that the people who
are on the hook, that doesn't count. I'm very worried about it.
Rob. As usual, it falls to you to find a cheery note on
which to close up the show. Yeah I can't accept that. Yeah,
I can't. I can't. Charlie. By the way, in my own
humble reading of this, Charlie is completely right. Court has backed itself into
a position in which the standing, the jurisprudence of standing, has now become
an absurdity. You get to do anything unconstitutional you want, mister President,
as long as nobody has standing to sue you. And incidentally, taxpayers,
ordinary Americans, ordinary American citizens don't. Right, It's an absurdity which it
seems has to occur to at least Clarence Thomas. But he's only one of
nine Clarence Thomas, and I can get it up to two. But they
could seem, um, just from my reading of the transcript, they did
seem skeptical, did they not? Yeah, But what they should have said
was get the hell out of here, are you kidding? They should have
said good. I'm not saying, by the way, that this isn't going
to come down in the right way. I'm just saying that the way that
this is covered, as so often is limited to whether or not canceling student
loans, by which they mean transferring student loans to the people who didn't borrow
and spend the money. Correct. It is a good idea, and I'm
saying that I think that this is an inflection point in American constitutional law.
That's why I'm so worried about it, right, I mean, if you're
the counter art enough to counter argue. But one of the things people say
is, well, listen, we bailed out all the banks in two thousand
and eight. Well, Congress did, right, so Congress can do this.
Rob. I would be livid because I opposed the policy, but it
would be absolutely legal. If Congress decided to pass a bill then instructed the
executive branch to remove ten thousand dollars from every student loan holders balance, that's
legal. Congress has that power. It issued the loans in the first place.
I think taxpayers should be angry and vote them out. They do that,
but that's not the question here. The bailouts that the cavaliers don't like
were congressionally passed. The tax subsidies to business or rich people or the middle
class that the cavaliers don't like passed through Congress. And if this is going
to be done, it has to be as well. Trying desperately to find
something cheer cheerful. But I don't know. Can we go back at it?
Maybe you can change your mind, Charlie about Laurie Lightfoot's was good?
Right, we can end on a good you know it was maybe it was
good. We were all thrilled to see the end of that, at least
one at least one of the little tiny caesars. Fell Um, this is
the moment when Cliff pipes up and says something so completely some total non sequitory.
Yeah, but it's is real life. Um, So before we go,
um, do we do we have anything? I mean, I'm breaking
a rule here and talking about twenty twenty four. It's so early, but
we are seeing the only way out of this conversation, baby, right exactly,
But we are seeing, um, you know, the beginnings of of
you know, stirrings of a campaign. Mike Pompeo's out, Nicky Haley's out,
The governor Florida is not in Florida. It am I wrong to be
optimistic about this? It seems like it's going to be sort of an interesting
um but an interesting race on the Republican side, with some compelling candidates who
have messages and things to say, one of whom we've heard from many,
many, many, many, many, many many times, and I think
we might be board of the others are new and fresh, and it seem
interesting. M seemed like, yeah, Democrats seem like they've made their peace
with Joe Biden as as the as the presumptive nominee um one of my missing
Well, we do have to get through the books. We just have to
somehow or others transcend the books. Pompeo's book is out. It's entitled Never
Given Inch. Pompeo is tough, he's smart, he's a remarkable man.
But the only blurb on the back cover of the book is by Mike Pompeo.
And here's the blurb. Here's the blurb. My new book reads like
a thriller with stories from my heart. Huh, oh, no, that's
im. He's not even he blurbed his own book. It was a blurb
written by a chatbot or an editor. There's no difference between the two.
That's an impeachable offense. And the man has elected a thriller. But the
stories from my Heart that doesn't seem he seems like Nick's metaphors. That.
Yeah, it's a romance with stories from my heart. So a thriller with
stories from my past. Um, all right, poor guy. All right,
So for the first weird, weird mistake of the twenty twenty four,
these guys, there's work to be done here. These guys needn't tune up.
In my humble opinion, Charlie, I think it's going to be really
interesting primary as long as there aren't too many people. If you get to
twelve thirteen people, you have the same structural problems you had last time,
and it will be impossible to hear anyone speak from mold and ten seconds.
If it sticks at six or seven, I think it'll be great. Yeah,
it seems like it could be really interesting. M all right, So
that's that? Is that positive enough for you? Peter? Yeah, yeah,
that'll do. That'll do, although it's not very funny. Well,
stay tuned. I think I think he's blurbs pretty funny by the way.
Oh actually there, I give that to you for free. There's your next
column for n R exactly. Yeah, self riveting read a riveting read it.
You'll laugh, you'll cry, you won't put it down. Dick Charles
Dickens blurbing Nicholas Nickleby or something. Right, it was out of my seat
and applauding, you know, William Shakespeare on Julia's season. Um, all
right, that's enough of a laugh. Um we should Before we go,
we have to say that this podcast is brought you by Balling Branch Sheets.
You know, ball and Branch has been a long time supporter of ours,
and you switch a new support of ours. We hope you check out you
switch, so please support them for supporting us. And they really do support
us. So if you like it, if you like us, you should
be liking them. And you know, if you like us and you should
liking them, you should join us. At ricochet dot com. Lots happening
at Ricochet. Meetups are happening. They're fun. We have a bunch of
coming up. There's a chance to meet the actual King of Stuff, John
Gabriel. He'll be in Phoenix on March eleventh, which is, you know,
kind of right right around the corner. And a bunch of us are
going to be in New Orleans for French Quarterfest in April. Check it out.
I will be there for sure. And Flicker a member. Flicker has
set April twenty second as the date for the Stillwater, Minnesota meet up,
and James Lilacs on the record that he'd be going unless he's in Spain.
I don't think he's going to be in Spain. James in Spain, I
don't think so. And these are far too far away or whatever. The
dates don't work out. There's a solution to join Ricochet and make one happen
closer to you. Just post on the Ricochet member feed, Hey meet up
where I am. We will come to you, I promise you. People
in Ricochet members like to get together, So for details and all of this
go to ricochet dot com slash events. You can find the module in the
sidebar on the website. Also, I'm not, as you can say,
I'm rusty at this. James always reminds you to take a minute and leave
a five star review, and Apple Podcast is a magnificent algorithm, soon,
according to James Polos, to take over all of our lives. But in
the meantime, give us a five star review, and that moves us up
and allows new listeners to discover, and that helps keep the show going and
helps keep Ricochet front and center. So thanks for joining us, guys,
and we'll see everyone else in the comments and see you guys next week.
Next week, boys Ricochet join the Conversation