Speaker 1: A lot of funds and an individual lots m This
Speaker 1: is the show. Oh right, everybody, welcome to your one
Speaker 1: book show on this Uh my voice is funny Sunday
Speaker 1: on the Sunday, June eighth. Though. Everybody is having a
Speaker 1: fantastic weekend. I hope you're getting a chance to relax
Speaker 1: do fun stuff. I see, Uh Robert is a Viking.
Speaker 1: Maybe I don't know. That's the emoji put on his chat.
Speaker 1: So uh yeah, cool that that is all good? All
Speaker 1: right today in spite of the fact that there's a
Speaker 1: lot of news out there like National Guards being deployed
Speaker 1: to Los Angeles. We'll talk about that tomorrow. That's a
Speaker 1: good that's a good Monday Monday thing for for Your
Speaker 1: on Book Show. I thought today would take a topic
Speaker 1: go a little bit in depth in it. A topic
Speaker 1: that is a recurring theme on the Your On Book Show,
Speaker 1: but I think I think crucially important and that is
Speaker 1: the the the rise in religion. So we'll talk today
Speaker 1: specifically about Catholicism and the rise in Catholicism, so we'll
Speaker 1: dig into that. I will not be reacting Jordan Peterson's
Speaker 1: did You Beileeve? Video? Today just didn't have a chance
Speaker 1: to prepare for that. I'll try to do that. Maybe
Speaker 1: next week, Yeah, maybe next weekend. I'll try to do that.
Speaker 1: It depends though, because I'll be heavily in prep mode
Speaker 1: for the for the Peterson Academy of course that I'll
Speaker 1: be teaching that follow the following week in a week
Speaker 1: and a half, which is which is which I need
Speaker 1: to prepare for, which is not? Of course I've taught
Speaker 1: in many, many years and a lot of new material.
Speaker 1: And then I've got two more coses with Peterson Academy
Speaker 1: that I'm preparing, So three courses that are we doing
Speaker 1: the next six weeks for Jordan for the Peterson Academy,
Speaker 1: and then we've got one talk for OCON. So I'm
Speaker 1: gonna be very much tunnel vision into that. Maybe I'll
Speaker 1: do something. Maybe I'll try to do some content from
Speaker 1: those talks as kind of weekend shows rather than doing
Speaker 1: new content so I don't have to prepare new stuff.
Speaker 1: So at some point we'll do we'll do the debate
Speaker 1: between between Peterson and the twenty atheists twenty eighteists, so
Speaker 1: I did anyway, we will. We will get the news tomorrow.
Speaker 1: You can't ask me questions, so you can ask me
Speaker 1: questions about the news, about what's going on, about what's happening,
Speaker 1: whether in California, or about the big beautiful bill, whatever
Speaker 1: you want, just put it in the super chat. Super
Speaker 1: Chat great way to support the show. Twenty dollars. Questions
Speaker 1: particular are valued, and appreciate it and get priority. But
Speaker 1: I will try to answer all questions that I'll ask
Speaker 1: whatever amount of money you put behind them. You can
Speaker 1: support the show with a sticker, as Jonathan Honing just did.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Jonathan. And all right, well let's just jump in.
Speaker 1: Let's just jump in and talk about Catholicism. You know, Catholicism,
Speaker 1: I think, surprisingly surprisingly, not religion surprising, but Catholicism surprisingly
Speaker 1: Maybe shouldn't be surprising, but it is. And I'll tell
Speaker 1: you why in a minute why it's surprising. Catholicism really
Speaker 1: does seem like it's on the rise. They seemed to
Speaker 1: be record numbers of baptisms, not record numbers, but increasing
Speaker 1: numbers of baptism adult baptism in the United States and
Speaker 1: France and Sweden, in many Western Spain, Western European countries.
Speaker 1: And so you've you've got increased interest in Catholicism among
Speaker 1: young people. I mean, I saw this that among young people,
Speaker 1: Catholicism now is bigger religion than Anglican in the UK.
Speaker 1: The UK is seeing a big spike in Catholicism. Catholics
Speaker 1: set to exceed Anglicans for first time since the Reformation,
Speaker 1: since King Henry the Eighth, all because of young people,
Speaker 1: young people. And one thing that is a theme across
Speaker 1: all of this is when they say young people, what
Speaker 1: they really mean is young men. So predominantly young men
Speaker 1: turning towards Catholicism and embracing Catholicism. She's seen that in England.
Speaker 1: France is a headline a record of adult baptisms in France,
Speaker 1: so surge among youth. And again this is the highest
Speaker 1: number I ever recorded since they started doing a survey
Speaker 1: I guess of baptisms over thirty twenty years ago. And
Speaker 1: it's all young people, which is new. It used to
Speaker 1: be that people adult baptism were typically a little later
Speaker 1: in life, may be mid life crisis. But this is
Speaker 1: all like eighteen to twenty four year olds that are
Speaker 1: being being baptized. And it's quite striking that. Yeah, they
Speaker 1: say in the age group eighteen to twenty five, age
Speaker 1: group composed of students and young professionals, are represent forty
Speaker 1: two percent of adult whatever it is baptisms, surpassing in
Speaker 1: twenty six to forty year demographic that used to be
Speaker 1: the dominant one. This is in France, even adolescent baptisms
Speaker 1: eleven to seventeen year old teenagers has increased dramatically, increased
Speaker 1: dramatically over the last year or so. So this is
Speaker 1: a new phenomena. So this is we're talking about, you know,
Speaker 1: these overports coming out April twenty twenty five, so we're
Speaker 1: putting on twenty twenty four and so on. Now, generally
Speaker 1: there seems to be a you know, there's been this
Speaker 1: long term trend of in the United States, according to
Speaker 1: the Pew Survey of people who are kind of declaring
Speaker 1: themselves not affiliated with any major religion or even increased
Speaker 1: in the number of atheists and increased in the number
Speaker 1: of certainly non denominational unaffiliated that an affiliated seems to peaked,
Speaker 1: but down affiliated, it seems to peaked in you know,
Speaker 1: I'm looking at the at the numbers here, it looks
Speaker 1: like a few years ago, twenty twenty two, and since
Speaker 1: they've gone down, so I think it peaked at like
Speaker 1: twenty nine thirty percent is down to twenty eight percent.
Speaker 1: It's not big changes, but down Christianity people self identifying
Speaker 1: as Christians bottomed out at the same time, is not affiliated.
Speaker 1: Peaked in twenty twenty two and then and then it's
Speaker 1: been going up since then. So the numbers of the
Speaker 1: number of those identifying as Christian is actually rising slowly.
Speaker 1: It's not a big rise, it's still small rise. Other
Speaker 1: religions pretty stables a little bit, increase them five percent,
Speaker 1: you know, twenty five years ago to seven percent last
Speaker 1: two years ago, to six percent this year, so somewhere
Speaker 1: between five to seven percent, pretty much consistently without changing much.
Speaker 1: It's really Christians who used to be self identified Christians
Speaker 1: used to be seventy eight percent of the population and
Speaker 1: today only sixty three percent of the population. So Christianity
Speaker 1: overwall is in decline, but in the last few years
Speaker 1: it's seeing a small increase, just small in aggregate. The
Speaker 1: numbers are all small. What happened to you among Christians?
Speaker 1: The decline is mostly among Protestants, who you know, over
Speaker 1: fifty percent of American Christians used to consider themselves what
Speaker 1: do you call anet Protestants I don't even know what
Speaker 1: any Protestant means. And now it's it's close to forty
Speaker 1: percent against seeing a slight uptick from when it bottomed
Speaker 1: out a few years ago. And then if you look
Speaker 1: at evangelical Protestants, that's down from to twenty three percent now,
Speaker 1: mainline Protestants they're way down from eighteen to eleven, Black Protestants,
Speaker 1: seven to five, Mormons moments from pretty stable at two
Speaker 1: percent of the population. Orthodox Christians pretty stable at one
Speaker 1: percent of the population. Catholics we're twenty four went down
Speaker 1: quite a bit and to I think nineteen, and we're
Speaker 1: seeing a little increase. So back up to over the
Speaker 1: last three years, you're seeing an increase in Catholics. Now,
Speaker 1: this is big aggregate numbers based on pure surveys, but
Speaker 1: when you look at actual you know, and if you
Speaker 1: look at Cathosism around the world, Cathosism around the world
Speaker 1: still is massive. It's one point four billion people. It
Speaker 1: increases year after year, primarily because of Africa, where the
Speaker 1: population is increasing and where there's a lot of Catholics,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of evangelizing for Catholicism, and where there's
Speaker 1: a growing increase, growing increase in number of Catholics. Catholicism
Speaker 1: represents about seventeen point seven percent of total population of
Speaker 1: the world are Catholic seventeen point seven and most of
Speaker 1: the growth in aggregate for the big numbers is in Africa.
Speaker 1: We're going to ignore that. I want to focus in
Speaker 1: our discussion on the growth in the West, particularly in
Speaker 1: Europe and the United States, and kind of what potentially
Speaker 1: is driving it. Over the last again, April May, the
Speaker 1: last couple of months, a bunch of stories about this,
Speaker 1: you know, in here's some headlines young people are converting
Speaker 1: to Catholicism in mass I think that's a little exaggerated,
Speaker 1: driven by pandemic, internet lacks alternatives. Not sure what that is,
Speaker 1: all right, you know, there's a lot of discussion about
Speaker 1: religious revival. And then there was this headline why are
Speaker 1: so many young adults becoming Catholic? And then the thing
Speaker 1: that really got me thinking about this and thinking we
Speaker 1: should do something about it or talk about it is
Speaker 1: what is it? Four days ago? Earlier this week in
Speaker 1: the Free Press, this is the headline is how Catholicism
Speaker 1: got cool? Young Americans and people around the world are
Speaker 1: flocking to the Catholic Church. Again probably an exaggeration. The
Speaker 1: Free Press spoke to them to find out why, and
Speaker 1: it's an interesting article. Again they're saying, there's a surgeon
Speaker 1: the number of Espyman Catholics registering to join the church
Speaker 1: at Easter. This was in April. This is across the
Speaker 1: country anyway, from Michigan, Nebraska. No. The Dame, so the
Speaker 1: large attending church attendance this Easter that they've maybe ever
Speaker 1: seen or seen it in a very long time. This,
Speaker 1: as I said, this is true in France, increase in
Speaker 1: the number of adult baptism this year, in England surgeon
Speaker 1: in mass participation, but also place like Sweden and other
Speaker 1: places in Europe where you wouldn't expect it. And add
Speaker 1: to that, all of these articles, at least some of
Speaker 1: them are emphasizing the fact that this is primarily a
Speaker 1: phenomenon that is related to young men. That is, young
Speaker 1: men are the ones converting to Catholicism. So what's going on?
Speaker 1: What is it about Catholicism that people are finding appealing?
Speaker 1: Why have all the white First of all, are they
Speaker 1: attracted to religion at all? And then why if they're
Speaker 1: attracted to religion or they go into Catholicism. Again, the
Speaker 1: decline in religious affiliation has been seems to be halted.
Speaker 1: There seems to be a slight increase in affiliation at
Speaker 1: least with regard to Christianity since twenty twenty two, maybe
Speaker 1: since COVID, so since the early part of this decade,
Speaker 1: and it definitely seems to Christianity seems to be in
Speaker 1: the UPTIC although again in the aggregate the numbers are
Speaker 1: still small. But I think it's more important that what's
Speaker 1: important here is not the aggregate numbers because those could
Speaker 1: be small, but the trend and the trend, particularly among
Speaker 1: young people, because they are cliche. They are the future, right,
Speaker 1: they are what's coming. And you know, so if you
Speaker 1: look at gen Z, if you look at millennials, most
Speaker 1: of this movement now towards Christianity but mostly Catholicism is
Speaker 1: among gen Z and to some extent millennials. So what
Speaker 1: is going on now? It's important to note that this
Speaker 1: is something that doctor Peacock in a sense predicted would
Speaker 1: happen and saw it happening in the you know, in
Speaker 1: the what is it twenty teens, early very early twenty teens,
Speaker 1: coming out of the financial crisis, I don't know that
Speaker 1: the numbers were really their statistics, but again, adecdotally, it
Speaker 1: seemed like Christian Christianity was on the rise, and then
Speaker 1: it wasn't. And then you saw all these numbers of
Speaker 1: Christian affiliation declining, declining, declining, and now it's coming back.
Speaker 1: And the question is is this it is this Lenapeacock's
Speaker 1: prediction coming true? I mean, it's hard to tell, but
Speaker 1: I think if we're going to look at the causes
Speaker 1: for this, he gives us the causes and I think
Speaker 1: they are I think they are legit, and I think
Speaker 1: that they're coming real. That is, I think whether this
Speaker 1: is the big conversion of Christianity, whether this is going
Speaker 1: to be sustainable, whether the numbers are going to be there,
Speaker 1: I don't know. It's hard to predict the future. But
Speaker 1: in terms of why this is happening, why this is happening,
Speaker 1: I think Leonard Peakcoff had it completely right when you
Speaker 1: wrote the dim hypothesis, what is it now over? I
Speaker 1: think it was published in twenty thirteen, so you wrote
Speaker 1: in twenty ten to twenty twelve something about there. I
Speaker 1: think it is absolutely right. So let's walk through what
Speaker 1: that is. I mean, what we've seen over the last
Speaker 1: ten years is the rise particularly among young people, and
Speaker 1: this is probably true more millennials than gen Z's of
Speaker 1: kind of a postmodernist, disintegrated philosophy goal thinking a philosophical system.
Speaker 1: We've seen the rise of all kinds of you know,
Speaker 1: woke ideologies. Intersectionality, the intolerance for anything other than a
Speaker 1: particular leftist ideology. But a leftist ideology that you know,
Speaker 1: starts in the premise of you know, reason is not
Speaker 1: capable of delivering us truths reason. You know, we cannot
Speaker 1: know the world through reason. Everything, everything we do know
Speaker 1: is conditional on the particular perspective we happen to have.
Speaker 1: There is no absolute truth. Everything is your own perspective.
Speaker 1: And you know, human relationships and the relationship between human
Speaker 1: beings all determined by this kind of exploited, exploited hierarchy,
Speaker 1: and all human being relationships are exploited exploited relationships, and
Speaker 1: those exploited exploiter somewhat related to your particular group. But
Speaker 1: since nobody belongs only to one group, since we belong
Speaker 1: to multiple groups, each individual has in a sense a
Speaker 1: somewhat different intersectionality score into place. Intersectionality in this exploited, exploited.
Speaker 1: What is a matrix? There are no universals, there's no
Speaker 1: universal truth, concepts like a universal rally, or concepts like
Speaker 1: individual rights, or any particular system as being good, or
Speaker 1: any particularly interpretation of history as being right. Just none
Speaker 1: of that exists, because, in a sense, a kind of
Speaker 1: a universal truth cannot exist. Everything is from the perspective
Speaker 1: of the observer, from the perspective of the individual. And
Speaker 1: yet the way to reach any kind of truth through
Speaker 1: this is not through reason, It's through some other means.
Speaker 1: And of course this is a completely fragmented ideology. It
Speaker 1: leads people nowhere frustration, It leads people towards, I think,
Speaker 1: being alienated from the people around them. Because if all
Speaker 1: relationships fundamentally are exploited, exploited, exploits to exploited. In other words,
Speaker 1: if all relationships are fundamentally zero sum, then you know
Speaker 1: what's other people are other people dangerous? Other people might
Speaker 1: exploit me. If I win, they lose. If I lose,
Speaker 1: they if they win I lose. I mean, there's always
Speaker 1: a loser in an equation. That's no fun. So I
Speaker 1: think I think if people look for the loneliness of pandemic.
Speaker 1: A big chunk of it is is this, it's this
Speaker 1: attitude towards life and towards human relationships and and uh.
Speaker 1: And then of course all this drives people to be tribal,
Speaker 1: to look for people who are like them in some
Speaker 1: dimension that they can find. And then, given that they
Speaker 1: have abandoned the ability to use reason, uh, they you know,
Speaker 1: aggregate in in in tribes and and try to figure
Speaker 1: out or emote together what the what what their truth
Speaker 1: is going to be. And it's it's just a gobbled
Speaker 1: and it's nonsense, and it's uh. It induces fear and
Speaker 1: and loneliness and yeah, and and and and just disintegration
Speaker 1: disintegrates the mind. Disintegrated means there's no universal there's no truth,
Speaker 1: there's no there's nothing to to there's nothing that integrates
Speaker 1: all the information, all the data, all the knowledge that
Speaker 1: is out there. There's no principle that integrates that. There's
Speaker 1: no meaning to anything. This is the crisis of meaning
Speaker 1: that we see, the crisis of purpose. What's the point,
Speaker 1: what's the point? Yeah, existential dread, fear, everything's unreal, fake,
Speaker 1: it's just not And I think this is what young
Speaker 1: people feel because this is what they've been kind of taught,
Speaker 1: explicitly or implicitly. I mean, this is the I mean,
Speaker 1: what is the message at the end of I don't know,
Speaker 1: all the all the popular TV shows that young people
Speaker 1: have been exposed to and have been watching religiously for
Speaker 1: the last twenty years, What is the what is the
Speaker 1: ultimate message of I don't know? What are what are
Speaker 1: some of those animated shows, the Simpsons and The Fall Guy,
Speaker 1: and and what's the what's the real cynical one? The
Speaker 1: one that uh, the Book of Mormon or the guys
Speaker 1: who wrote the Book of Mormon did and and but
Speaker 1: but even Breaking Bad and and all the other really
Speaker 1: popular TV shows? What what? What? What do they get?
Speaker 1: South Park? Thank you? Southwalk? What do you get out
Speaker 1: of South Palk? What ultimately is the sense of life?
Speaker 1: That the meaning that you get out of these shows
Speaker 1: is everything's to be laughed at, everything's to be not marked,
Speaker 1: cynicism and skepticism, and what can you hold on to, well,
Speaker 1: nothing except cynicism, skepticism, except knocking everything down and smashing everything.
Speaker 1: And you know, this is the kind of mentality the
Speaker 1: leads to to ultimately denihilism. Family Guy was it was
Speaker 1: that series, original series twenty thirty years ago that started
Speaker 1: this super cynical uh you know, put putting the really
Speaker 1: really really dumb people at the center of the universe.
Speaker 1: Also a family in it. I think in the title
Speaker 1: that that really you know, Beevis and Bradhead was the
Speaker 1: first movie that put stupidity at the center. But but
Speaker 1: it's just this impossibility of values, the impossibility of values
Speaker 1: that an importance of value. Married with Children that's the one,
Speaker 1: Thank you, Andrew. Married with Children was the first one
Speaker 1: which was unwatchable. I mean literally unwatchable. It was. To
Speaker 1: call it stupid would be a compliment. It was beneath stupidity.
Speaker 1: It was cynical and stupid and just disgusting and complete
Speaker 1: contrast to the kind of sitcoms of the past, which
Speaker 1: you know, elevated family and showed it as a positive
Speaker 1: and smart people, you know, trying to manage the challenges
Speaker 1: and the often humorous things that are happening within a family.
Speaker 1: Married with children just just like the negation of all
Speaker 1: of that, just everything is dumb, stupid, and at the bottom,
Speaker 1: everything is meaningless. Everything is meaningless, There is no meaning,
Speaker 1: And I think that's really you know, this we got
Speaker 1: a generation that grew up. Oops, I don't know what
Speaker 1: just happened there. See that'll fix it. You guys still there.
Speaker 1: I don't know if I lost the internet or something less.
Speaker 1: Now again, I'm not saying every show is nihilistic. Not
Speaker 1: every show was, but a lot of them. I mean,
Speaker 1: think about making bad fascinating show, interesting show, well done,
Speaker 1: well produced, beautiful visually I mean well done visually and
Speaker 1: well acted interesting often, but just about a good guy
Speaker 1: descending into homicidal madness and destroying everybody in his path,
Speaker 1: and nobody good standing up to him, nobody good capable
Speaker 1: of standing up to him, just dissent into the nihilism,
Speaker 1: all in the name of supposedly survival but not really.
Speaker 1: And yet it was hailed, and it was one of
Speaker 1: the best produced shows ever, amazingly scripted. Everybody watch it.
Speaker 1: I mean there are almost no heroes. There's no beauty.
Speaker 1: I mean the I guess what they consider beauty today
Speaker 1: is in an action movie. The way that blood splatters
Speaker 1: all over the place is about as beautiful as it gets.
Speaker 1: So we live in a world, have lived in a world?
Speaker 1: Do you live in a world in which the philosophy
Speaker 1: is a philosophy of disintegration. The philosophy is a philosophy
Speaker 1: of meaning, of lack of meaning, of the denial of
Speaker 1: meaning in many way, you know, a denial of self
Speaker 1: and a denial of the individual. A philosophy that is
Speaker 1: bound to create existential angst. And when people turn to art,
Speaker 1: I mean the most popular forms of art, television, and movies,
Speaker 1: and they get cynicism, skepticism, and nihilism. And if they
Speaker 1: turn to music, and I know, I'm going to fence
Speaker 1: some of you, but tough, what do they get. They
Speaker 1: get rap with ugly, ugly you know, lyrics again, hates
Speaker 1: and emotionalism and just ugliness, ugliness. You know, maybe there's
Speaker 1: some pop music that sounds a little okay, because it
Speaker 1: wouldn't be pop if it didn't. But there's no meaning there,
Speaker 1: there's no values there, there's no there's nothing to challenge.
Speaker 1: There's dull. I mean, the thing about mostly of our
Speaker 1: popular music is it's dull. And it's the same repeats
Speaker 1: over and over again. I mean, when was the last
Speaker 1: time you had a spiritual experience when listening to pop music?
Speaker 1: I don't know last time you listened to uh, I
Speaker 1: don't even know who a pop singer is these days
Speaker 1: a spiritual experience really moved you? It just doesn't happen.
Speaker 1: And then if they go to a museum, if they
Speaker 1: go to a museum, yeah, maybe you watch Taylor Swift.
Speaker 1: Who's the last spiritual experience you got from Taylor Swift?
Speaker 1: And if you go to a museum, what do you get?
Speaker 1: You get crap? You get meaningless, empty nothingness. You get.
Speaker 1: I mean, the culmination of our modern culture and modern
Speaker 1: idea is in modern art museums just splashes of paint,
Speaker 1: geometric shapes, white and white. I mean, some of it's
Speaker 1: kind of pretty because it has some aesthetic design, but
Speaker 1: most of it is just ugly and stupid and meaningless,
Speaker 1: meaningless in other words, you look at it, and again,
Speaker 1: where is the experience, where's the spiritual experience of it?
Speaker 1: There isn't. So we grow up or gen z and
Speaker 1: Millenniums have grown up in an environment that is incredibly wealthy.
Speaker 1: They have all the material stuff that they need and
Speaker 1: if they have a job they can afford. You know,
Speaker 1: they are, in spite of everything they're told the other
Speaker 1: richest generation ever. Given where they are in life, they're
Speaker 1: making more money, they have more stuff. They have a
Speaker 1: higher standard of living than any generation before them. And
Speaker 1: at any time they turn to things of consciousness, to
Speaker 1: the mind, to the spirit, what do they get nothing, emptiness, garbage,
Speaker 1: a slap in the face. And this has got a
Speaker 1: cause a crisis, a real crisis, not a potent crisis,
Speaker 1: a real crisis of what does it mean to be
Speaker 1: a human being? In the case of a lot of
Speaker 1: young men, what does it mean to be a man?
Speaker 1: Young men experience what they think is negative change, or
Speaker 1: at least change as compared to what they perceive past generations,
Speaker 1: primarily because women in some respects of dominating them, and
Speaker 1: they don't know how to hand so. For them, modern
Speaker 1: society is much more challenging than I think it is
Speaker 1: in many respects of women. Women went through the biggest
Speaker 1: change in past generations. This generation is mostly a generation
Speaker 1: of change from men. And again emptiness, emptiness, emptiness and ugliness.
Speaker 1: That's the other thing. Ugliness. They turn around and all
Speaker 1: they see is ugly. A lot of the architecture is
Speaker 1: ugly or boring. The music is ugly or boring, the movies,
Speaker 1: the TV is cynical and cynicism and ugly and boring
Speaker 1: and you can go on and on and on and
Speaker 1: on it just in every respect of their lives there's nothing,
Speaker 1: there's no meaning, and importantly there's no beauty, there's no
Speaker 1: appeal to the spirit, there's not appeal to to something
Speaker 1: beyond the material. And of course somebody like Jordan Peterson
Speaker 1: tells them that their angst is real, which it is.
Speaker 1: Jordan is right. Young people are struggling, particularly young men,
Speaker 1: are struggling, and he tells them to go take responsibility,
Speaker 1: find values. But you know, he's not specific, particularly specific,
Speaker 1: other than the stand up straight and make your bad
Speaker 1: not very specific. It's kind of vague on the details.
Speaker 1: And of course, if you watch a bunch of Jordan
Speaker 1: Peterson videos on YouTube, what do you think YouTubers recommending
Speaker 1: to you as the next video you should watch? Well,
Speaker 1: I mean they are they are leading you towards Christianity.
Speaker 1: I mean, Jordan is doing that in his round about
Speaker 1: sometimes way. But given that YouTube is feeding you the content, now,
Speaker 1: what does Christianity have to offer you? And here, in particular,
Speaker 1: I think Catholicism stands out because the difference between Catholicism
Speaker 1: and Protestantism primarily is I think and I'm not a theologian.
Speaker 1: So this is me is that Catholicism is intellectual. It
Speaker 1: is a much more grounded in tradition. It has a
Speaker 1: real grand appreciation of beauty, ceremony, if you will, the
Speaker 1: spiritual it has. It has a theology, a real thought
Speaker 1: out I mean completely bsationalistic, but it completely thought out
Speaker 1: theology ideas. They have books and books and books. I
Speaker 1: mean there's no end. They have opinions about everything. It's
Speaker 1: not just I don't know, standing up in church in
Speaker 1: some evangelical church and telling you how you should go
Speaker 1: out and make money and by the way, you should
Speaker 1: give the preacher, you know, x percent of that money
Speaker 1: so you can get a jet so you can fly
Speaker 1: around the world or whatever. It's it's got depth to it,
Speaker 1: whereas so much of the Protestant evangelicals don't have the depth.
Speaker 1: And what do they used in terms of their music
Speaker 1: in the in the I don't know, masters or ceremonies,
Speaker 1: whatever you want to call them. There's pop music, there's convention.
Speaker 1: I mean, everything's very modern. It's very modern, and in
Speaker 1: its modernity, it's very similar to popular culture. They might
Speaker 1: politically be different, but it's very similar to popular culture.
Speaker 1: There's no, it's not. In a sense Partestanism is not
Speaker 1: some radical it's i mean American style evangelical megachurch Protestantism.
Speaker 1: But generally it's just it's just vague. It doesn't have
Speaker 1: a couesive ideology. Nobody, nobody in a Protestant church in
Speaker 1: America today. I think it really takes Lutho Calvin that seriously.
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm sure the exceptions, but again, in the megachurches,
Speaker 1: it's not giving you anything. So when young people are
Speaker 1: looking for meaning and they're told by Jordan Peterson the
Speaker 1: meaning is transcendentdal meaning is outside of them. Meaning is
Speaker 1: not gonnot be fine in their own lives. Certainly the
Speaker 1: life is not their meaning. It has to be outside
Speaker 1: of them where they're going to go or Cathosism has
Speaker 1: two thousand plus years of practice at this and given
Speaker 1: the ugliness and the incoherence and the fragmentation and the
Speaker 1: disintegration of the world around us, Catholicism provides them with.
Speaker 1: Now you have to do a lot of evading to
Speaker 1: to accept us, but it does to provide them with
Speaker 1: a structure, a clear theology. I mean, the disagreements between Catholics,
Speaker 1: but there's there's a theology, clear ideas. It boasts. You
Speaker 1: know right now, there are a number of these very
Speaker 1: charismatic priests who are online who you get fed from,
Speaker 1: from Jordan Peterson to them directly. There's a guy named
Speaker 1: Mike Schmitz, father Mike Schmiz, who's a charismatic priest on
Speaker 1: the Bible. In a year frame, you got Bishop Baron
Speaker 1: of wood on Fire and others, and they talk about
Speaker 1: the struggle, particularly of young men. They give them a path,
Speaker 1: they talk about two thousand years of tradition of fulfilling
Speaker 1: this path, and they promise them a better life now
Speaker 1: and a much better life in another world. But there's
Speaker 1: a path guard rails. They demand standards from them, They
Speaker 1: expect behavior to change. They demand, if you will, them
Speaker 1: to change themselves, but to live up to something where
Speaker 1: modern culture doesn't expect anything. So I think a lot
Speaker 1: of guys and I wouldn't be surprised if this is
Speaker 1: the case. A lot of guys who attracted maybe by
Speaker 1: an Andrew Tate or some of the other people in
Speaker 1: the manosphere who tell them just to be men and
Speaker 1: so on, but at the end of the day are like, yeah,
Speaker 1: but that those guys, that's not that's not really good.
Speaker 1: So they might be attracted to certain talking points of
Speaker 1: the manisphere, particularly those that address their angst. They want more,
Speaker 1: and the Catholic Church is there to provide it, and
Speaker 1: it's there to provide it in a beautiful package. It's
Speaker 1: pretty amazing the number of times as I'm reading these
Speaker 1: news stories and the interviewing people, the number of times
Speaker 1: people say that they are attracted to Catholicism because of
Speaker 1: how beautiful it is, because not that it is beautiful,
Speaker 1: that it presents beautifully. I mean the amazing cathedrals, the
Speaker 1: stunning music, and you know they're not adapting rap to
Speaker 1: the latest evangelical cool thing, the sticking to you know,
Speaker 1: old masses and requiems and submit martyrs written by great,
Speaker 1: truly objectively great composers of the past. The Catholic Church
Speaker 1: figured out certainly during the Renaissance, but even before that,
Speaker 1: they figured out that they that art was an important
Speaker 1: means by which convey their message, that they needed to
Speaker 1: embrace art and they need to embrace beauty in order
Speaker 1: to make it interesting for people to come to church,
Speaker 1: and in order to create and an objective spiritual experience
Speaker 1: that people could relate to and people could associate with
Speaker 1: the church. So if you listen to Bogole sees sad
Speaker 1: Macha or a mass by Bach, or a mass by Handel,
Speaker 1: or a requiem by Mozart or requiem by by by Verdie,
Speaker 1: it's a real spiritual experience, even for somebody who does
Speaker 1: not believe it, never has really believed in God. It's amazing,
Speaker 1: it's beautiful, it's stunning. It moves you in a way
Speaker 1: that literally no pop or wrap or rave or drug
Speaker 1: can do. It actually moves you. It hooks into your
Speaker 1: emotions directly. It is sacred, and sacred should not be
Speaker 1: a word monopolized by religion. Beauty art, statics have real power,
Speaker 1: real power. So you're go into a beautiful church, you know,
Speaker 1: I don't know, the Basilica at at the University of
Speaker 1: Notre Dame or Simpeter's Cathedral at the Vatican, you know,
Speaker 1: and if it's in Europe, you're surrounded by beautiful art.
Speaker 1: There's a choir singing amazing music. They light the place
Speaker 1: in a beautiful lighting and they you know, with with
Speaker 1: effects where they lower the lights in appropriate in appropriate times, right,
Speaker 1: and you know everybody everybody's together, and there's a certain
Speaker 1: uniformity of values, uniformity of spirit that goes on. And
Speaker 1: it's it's I can see it. It's a it's a
Speaker 1: it's a beautiful experience. And there are values and virtues
Speaker 1: that you expected to live up to, you expected to
Speaker 1: live by. Now. Yeah, I mean you can't ask too
Speaker 1: many questions about why Mary Lee says I was raised Catholic.
Speaker 1: The only good part was the music. I mean, there's
Speaker 1: some good paintings and sculptures too. It's some of those churches,
Speaker 1: and you're pretty amazing paintings and sculptures actually, But yes,
Speaker 1: this ceremony, there's a process, and particularly if you as
Speaker 1: a youth, condition to tribalism, which I think I'm out in.
Speaker 1: Culture is so eager to condition us towards and to
Speaker 1: emotionalism and tribalism. There is a loving, beautiful tribe here,
Speaker 1: all in sync, all pursuing elevated values, not about you know,
Speaker 1: exploiting and exploited. It's now about love and about beauty
Speaker 1: and about pursuing the good. And you know, many of
Speaker 1: us want a question, what good? You know, I don't
Speaker 1: want to join a tribe. What's going on here. But
Speaker 1: if you grew up in a world where you want
Speaker 1: taught to question, in a world where reason is not
Speaker 1: your means of knowledge. If you grew up in a
Speaker 1: world where belonging to a group was super important and
Speaker 1: where emotions were super important, but all of that was
Speaker 1: an associated with ugliness and disintegration and lack of values
Speaker 1: and anything like that. Someday you're exposed to all of
Speaker 1: that tribalism and groupthink and emotionalism, but now there also
Speaker 1: values and beauty and aunt and just just a just
Speaker 1: a calm and uh, you know, yeah, I can see it.
Speaker 1: I mean, here's one guy, one professor. You know, this
Speaker 1: is how he writes about this. It's kind of interesting
Speaker 1: how he how he describes this. He says, in a
Speaker 1: disembodied time, and I think it is a disembodied time.
Speaker 1: It disembodied, fragmented, disintegrated. Uh, it's a it's a it's
Speaker 1: a time where people don't understand their place, don't know,
Speaker 1: don't know what their life is about and what meaning
Speaker 1: to bring to it and what purpose they have. So
Speaker 1: he says, in a disembodied time, the church is resolutely concrete.
Speaker 1: It's real, right, The splash of holy water, the smear
Speaker 1: of oil, the pinch of exercising soul, the smell of incense,
Speaker 1: the quiet voice of absolution in your ear, the gentle
Speaker 1: slap of confirmation pleas, the candles on your throat, the
Speaker 1: laying on a grasp of hands, the gentle ache of
Speaker 1: the knees, a consternation, the weird, withering relic of a saint,
Speaker 1: and of course the taste of bread and wine that
Speaker 1: are mysteriously his flesh and blood, suffering embrace and giving
Speaker 1: loving meaning. The revolution will not be digitalized. I mean,
Speaker 1: that's beautifully written, and you can see again the kind
Speaker 1: of mentality, the kind of person who is going to
Speaker 1: be drawn to all of that is the kind of
Speaker 1: person we've been educating, we've been raising for the last
Speaker 1: thirty to forty years, somebody who's looking for that sensual, physical,
Speaker 1: and yet spiritual experience and integrated experience, supposedly full of
Speaker 1: emotion and you know, not to not to not not
Speaker 1: not don't think too much, right, don't think too much?
Speaker 1: So you know, the the Free Pass interviewed this one guy.
Speaker 1: He says twenty one years old. He likes the fact
Speaker 1: that Catholicism doesn't shame you for being a man. He
Speaker 1: believes young men inspired to become Catholic in a similar
Speaker 1: way that they might join the military. Right. Being Catholic
Speaker 1: is like joining in the military in some way. It's
Speaker 1: a brotherhood among other brothers of Christ. Along with that
Speaker 1: discipline that I believe is bringing so many young men
Speaker 1: to Catholicism. I mean it sounds so much like Jodan Peterson, right. Discipline,
Speaker 1: so bonding, manhood, a tradition of manhood, a tradition of
Speaker 1: mayor responsibility, a tradition you know, they're no, they're no
Speaker 1: yet womens right, a tradition of men being men, women
Speaker 1: being women. And then he said, you know, he went
Speaker 1: to other churches, and he didn't like any of the
Speaker 1: other churches. But when you know, it was like they
Speaker 1: were like concerts, more like you know, connecting to God,
Speaker 1: having a spiritual experience. But then Catholicism because of you know,
Speaker 1: because of its you know, tradition and its intellectual rigor
Speaker 1: kind of rigor appeal to somebody else says they were
Speaker 1: going to Catholic tradition, by the music, by the emphasis
Speaker 1: on contemplation, by the quiet. Uh, and you can go
Speaker 1: on and on. It's it's it's fascinating, but clearly these
Speaker 1: are people looking for something and again conditioned by the
Speaker 1: culture in which we live to be emotionalist, and Catholicism
Speaker 1: is very good at this. Again, it's a twenty two
Speaker 1: hundred years of two thousand plus years of training, right,
Speaker 1: and the combination is indeed super appealing. It's also now
Speaker 1: the the the chosen religion of the elites. So most
Speaker 1: of people converting to Catholicism right now, particularly in America,
Speaker 1: are highly educated, and you know they are coming to
Speaker 1: it also from a perspective of the intellectual traditions of Catholicism.
Speaker 1: And I think I've told you a big chunk of
Speaker 1: kind of the New Right. The intellectuals of the New
Speaker 1: Right are not just Catholics that converts to Catholicism. And
Speaker 1: if you look at the integration integralists, integralists of people
Speaker 1: who believe that we need to integrate Catholic teaching with government,
Speaker 1: they reject the idea of separation of state and religion.
Speaker 1: The government's job is to create a good society, and
Speaker 1: the only way to create a good society is by
Speaker 1: imposing the moral code of Catholicism on society's members. But
Speaker 1: you've heard me talk about Patrick Deneen at Notre Dame
Speaker 1: or Edrian Vermule at Harvard. This was a Gladden Pappin
Speaker 1: at University of Dallas, and Edward Walstein and many many
Speaker 1: others that have embraced this perspective. Maybe some of you know.
Speaker 1: Another notable person is Shabamari. All of them, all of them,
Speaker 1: I think all of them are converts once originally Catholics
Speaker 1: became Catholics. And of course maybe the most well known
Speaker 1: of all of them, who's the most well known convert
Speaker 1: to Catholicism right now on the new right, and who
Speaker 1: I think is an advocate of integralism, even if you'd
Speaker 1: doesn't know, even if he doesn't want to say it,
Speaker 1: that's JD. Events. JdE Events was not a Catholic, raised
Speaker 1: Evangelical Protestant, became an atheist at some point, and then
Speaker 1: recently five six, seven years ago, became a convert to Catholicism.
Speaker 1: So there's a revived Catholic intellectualism, you know, intellectual class now,
Speaker 1: you know, appealing to young men with ideas, ideas that
Speaker 1: are not just theological, but now ideas that relate to
Speaker 1: politics and how we can implement this in a political context,
Speaker 1: how you can live your values not just for yourself
Speaker 1: in your own life, but how you can actually use
Speaker 1: these values to shape and change and mold society. And
Speaker 1: this is a political and cultural movement that is growing
Speaker 1: and I think will continue to grow in terms of
Speaker 1: its impact and its power. So why is it surprising
Speaker 1: because Atlanta Peacoff in the hypothesis when he said he
Speaker 1: thought Christianity would come back and there would be a
Speaker 1: revival of Christianity, and it would intensifying power and it
Speaker 1: would gain political power, but he said it won't be Catholicism.
Speaker 1: And why did he say it won't be Catholicism. He said,
Speaker 1: because he believed that cathosm could not recover from the
Speaker 1: child abuse, the sexual assaults against children, the pedophilia that
Speaker 1: the Catholic Church has engaged in, the people in the
Speaker 1: Catholic Church have engaged in at the Catholic Church, which
Speaker 1: officially cover it up. So it's truly amazing how people
Speaker 1: might talk about pedophilia and the evil of it, and
Speaker 1: how horrific it is and how ugly it is, and
Speaker 1: how it shouldn't happen. But it's the fundamental ideas that
Speaker 1: either attract them or don't attract them. And the reality
Speaker 1: is right now, the fundamental ideas of Catholicism attracting people.
Speaker 1: People who are avoiding their lives, people who are looking
Speaker 1: for purpose and meaning, and people who want beauty, who
Speaker 1: find the modern world ugly and in many respects it is,
Speaker 1: and want something that they don't know values, virtues, morality. Look,
Speaker 1: we all need philosophy. We don't need an explanation for
Speaker 1: the world. We don't need to be able to answer questions.
Speaker 1: We don't need morality, good and evil. Everybody needs it.
Speaker 1: And I think what has happened, particularly over the last
Speaker 1: ten years, is the secular world has basically defaulted completely.
Speaker 1: It has for a long time, but over the last
Speaker 1: ten years it's become absurd the kind of answers they
Speaker 1: give as explanations for the world. There is no truth,
Speaker 1: there is no reality. Just go by whatever emotions. It's
Speaker 1: all about sacrificing others to sell for being sacrificed. It's
Speaker 1: all about exploiting exploited. It's all some game that doesn't sell.
Speaker 1: It's sold for a while, but it doesn't sell. There's
Speaker 1: a backlash against that, and what fills its place, something
Speaker 1: that has answers to pretty much every question, not very
Speaker 1: good answers, actually pretty bad answers, hubbable answers, bad answers,
Speaker 1: and something that provides guidance, not good guidance, but guidance
Speaker 1: nonetheless better than nothing, and people willing to put aside
Speaker 1: all the sins of the Church, the history of it,
Speaker 1: all the evil popes, all the just disasters that the
Speaker 1: Catholic Church has led to in all of human history,
Speaker 1: including the pedophilia, in the name of just getting some
Speaker 1: kind of integrated, coherent or semi coherent. It's not coherent,
Speaker 1: it's semi coherent answer to the questions why am I here,
Speaker 1: what's my purpose in life? How do I live? What's good?
Speaker 1: What's evil? And a sense of that aesthetic beauty that
Speaker 1: we talked about, that's spiritual something, And at the end
Speaker 1: of the day, that's what's lacking in the secular world,
Speaker 1: and that's what objectivism brings the secular world. But it's
Speaker 1: just too small, and it's it's it's just too small
Speaker 1: to have a real impact. But objectivism provides us with guidance,
Speaker 1: meaning explanation, values and virtues oriented or originally from reason,
Speaker 1: discovered by reason and orient it towards happiness, one's own happiness.
Speaker 1: By the way, the Catholics one of the one of
Speaker 1: the things the Cathics say, oh, we're for happiness. This
Speaker 1: is following Thomas Aquinas's reading of Aristotle. We don't define
Speaker 1: happiness the way you guys do, but we're for happiness. Well,
Speaker 1: we're really for happiness and for values and for living
Speaker 1: a full, complete life. And by the way, as I've
Speaker 1: said many many times over the years, we are full
Speaker 1: beauty in full love. There's ever been a philosophy of love.
Speaker 1: Objectivism is it, and i Ran conveys these ideas through
Speaker 1: beauty in her novels. What we need today is a
Speaker 1: is A A is a you know, vast quantity of
Speaker 1: romantic art that elevates this world, that presents this world
Speaker 1: is as Noble presents, an ideal to strive towards, without mysticism,
Speaker 1: without emotionalism, without rejection of reason, indeed, indeed depending on reason.
Speaker 1: We need a a you know, a esthetic artistic renaissance.
Speaker 1: And we need to use art and aesthetics better in
Speaker 1: conveying ideas. Again, people are drawn to beauty. Beauty is important,
Speaker 1: so we need an aesthetic revolution, and we need to
Speaker 1: be communicating with people about values, about ideals, but virtues
Speaker 1: about how to live a life, about the purpose of life.
Speaker 1: We need to pick up on Jordan Peterson's challenge to
Speaker 1: people to find meaning, but tell them he's sending you
Speaker 1: to the wrong place to look. He's sending you to
Speaker 1: the wrong place to seek out that meaning. That purpose
Speaker 1: is your life. The meaning is your life. Embrace it,
Speaker 1: Embrace life, life, big l life. And you know your
Speaker 1: purpose is going to be living that life to the
Speaker 1: best of your ability for the achievement of your happiness.
Speaker 1: And yeah, part of that purpose is having a central
Speaker 1: purpose of career. But it's also about love, and it
Speaker 1: is about family, and it is about friendship, and it
Speaker 1: is about having a successful life in every dimension of
Speaker 1: that life. It is about beauty. It is about surrounding
Speaker 1: yourself with beauty. And we, as objectivist, if we're going
Speaker 1: to win this, one of the things we need to
Speaker 1: do is project that we should care about beauty. We
Speaker 1: should promote beauty, and we should promote reason, but not
Speaker 1: just but reason, not in a dry, detacted sense. But
Speaker 1: reason is the means by which we live and thrive
Speaker 1: and succeed and have great lives. We need to project
Speaker 1: happiness and success. To project it, you have to attain
Speaker 1: it first. You have to we have to attain and
Speaker 1: project happiness, success and a life well lived. And then
Speaker 1: we just have to grow. We have to grow. We
Speaker 1: need more people and uh because the alternative to the
Speaker 1: craziness of the disintegrated left is not the lie and
Speaker 1: the falsehood of Catholicism. The alternative is reason, reality and
Speaker 1: life life. All right, That's part of what I have
Speaker 1: to say. There's a lot more, but that's part of
Speaker 1: what I have to say. If you're interested more in
Speaker 1: kind of my view of how to live life. There's
Speaker 1: a playlist of Juan's Rules for Life. Juan's Rules for Life.
Speaker 1: There's a playlist on this channel. Please seek it out.
Speaker 1: Go watch those videos. I think you'll enjoy them, But
Speaker 1: you know, I wish more people would view them. You
Speaker 1: guys are too many people are too focused on the
Speaker 1: news instead of what I think is much more important,
Speaker 1: and that is the questions of living life. So seek
Speaker 1: out the those videos, of course, more importantly, seek out
Speaker 1: Iran Iran's novels and Iinran's philosophical writing that give you
Speaker 1: the tools, cognitive tools to live this much better life
Speaker 1: and to avoid both the falsehoods of subjectivism relativism and
Speaker 1: the falsehoods of you know, religion and mysticism and Christianity.
Speaker 1: You know, we've got some Catholics here sending me crosses.
Speaker 1: Pretty funny. All right, let's go to your questions. Let's see,
Speaker 1: we'll sell the twenty dollars questions. I think, do you
Speaker 1: have any fifties? Now we just have twenties. I remind
Speaker 1: you we have got goals for the shows. We've covered.
Speaker 1: The first hour we've done well, thank you. We've got
Speaker 1: another hour to cover. So if anybody wants to add questions,
Speaker 1: please consider doing twenty dollars so we can we can
Speaker 1: make it up. You know, ten twelve twenty dollars questions
Speaker 1: and we're there, so of course you can LUs do
Speaker 1: fifteen hundred dollars questions. Also, do stickers. Stickers are great stickers.
Speaker 1: You don't have to ask questions. You can do any amount.
Speaker 1: Just support the show value for value. If you enjoy
Speaker 1: listening to this show. Some you don't. I know, our
Speaker 1: Catholic friend here on the chat doesn't enjoy the show,
Speaker 1: but many of you do value for value is great?
Speaker 1: All right, let's jump in with on the leroy. I
Speaker 1: believe Roman Catholicism is one of America's strongest and most
Speaker 1: ancient enemies looking forward today's show. Yes, I absolutely think
Speaker 1: that Roman Catholicism is antagonistic to the very, very nature
Speaker 1: of this country. It is an authoritarian dogma that rejects
Speaker 1: the basic principles as articulated in the Declaration of Independence.
Speaker 1: Even if some of the ideas of our natural rights
Speaker 1: came out of a Catholic tradition tradition, it's a very different,
Speaker 1: uh interpretation of rights that comes out of that Catholic tradition.
Speaker 1: Then what is embraced by the founders and what we
Speaker 1: understand rights to be today. So so what is this?
Speaker 1: Uh So? Yeah, Catholicism is stagonistic, and you can see
Speaker 1: that in the writings of in the writings of the Integralists.
Speaker 1: It's very clear from the writings of the Integralists they
Speaker 1: hate the Declaration and they want to undo the Declaration.
Speaker 1: They reject the idea of individual rights. I mean, for
Speaker 1: Mule's whole conception of constitutional interpretation is from the perspective
Speaker 1: of the common good. It's all about the common good.
Speaker 1: There is no such thing as individual rights. Individual rights
Speaker 1: don't matter. Everything needs to be from the perspective of
Speaker 1: a Catholic interpretation of the common good. So it's a
Speaker 1: complete rejection of the American political system. That's integralism. That's
Speaker 1: what we have as a vice president. It's not an
Speaker 1: accident that JD. Vance said America is not about an idea.
Speaker 1: It is, but it's not an idea he supports. It's
Speaker 1: not an idea he believes in. So he needs to
Speaker 1: undo that. And for him, America is a place and
Speaker 1: a people, place and a people that can be imbued
Speaker 1: with whatever common good set of ideas that they want.
Speaker 1: But JD. Van's a good friend and support of practically
Speaker 1: Denan the Dame, and I think a real support of
Speaker 1: Emule's common good. Constitutionalism really bad stuff. Leam de decme.
Speaker 1: Pumpkin in the White House just called in the National
Speaker 1: Guard to call riots in California about hard working immigrants
Speaker 1: being seized and deported. We're in the early phase of
Speaker 1: dystopian authoritarianism. I mean, it's bad what he's doing, but
Speaker 1: you know, let's not exaggerate. I don't think I don't
Speaker 1: think we're quite there yet. I will talk about the
Speaker 1: calling of the National Guard tomorrow on the news show,
Speaker 1: and willis have mournful what they're actually doing tomorrow for
Speaker 1: the show, so we'll have another twenty four hours of
Speaker 1: knowledge about what's going on, so we'll talk about it tomorrow.
Speaker 1: U Charzbah says, blessed are the cheesemakers. That, of course,
Speaker 1: is from the classic classic brilliantly anti Catholic piece called
Speaker 1: movie called The Life of Brian. If only we had
Speaker 1: more humor of that quality, the world would be a
Speaker 1: much bitter place. Mondy Python all r John Bail's a
Speaker 1: sign of our time. In today's superhero movies, all conflicts
Speaker 1: between individuals between nations are set up by hand to
Speaker 1: hand conflict. Yes, and sometimes, depending on the superhero movie,
Speaker 1: hand to hand conflict where the good guy is not
Speaker 1: allowed to kill the bad guy, right, where the good
Speaker 1: guy is not allowed to kill the bad guy. I
Speaker 1: just got a text from uh Bat Thompson, who's always
Speaker 1: quick to correct me when he thinks I'm saying something wrong.
Speaker 1: He says, quote my SOO says, tell me that Catholicism
Speaker 1: is no longer hip for young men and women on
Speaker 1: the reactionary right. The cutting edge thing is that is
Speaker 1: rising in popularity for the young on the so called
Speaker 1: new new right is Eastern Orthodoxy. And he's he's linked
Speaker 1: to a video describing that. He says, pretty slick and
Speaker 1: pretty sick. And yes, I mean I didn't talk about that,
Speaker 1: partially because I don't really know that much about Eastern Orthodoxy,
Speaker 1: but also because it is on the fringe. It's still
Speaker 1: on the fringe. The movement of Catholicism is culture wide.
Speaker 1: It's again in fans in the UK and in the US,
Speaker 1: and it's not just the fringe right, but it's more broad.
Speaker 1: But it is true that on the kind of fringe cool,
Speaker 1: particularly particularly cool new new, new, new new right, Eastern
Speaker 1: Eastern Eastern Orthodoxy is it is considered cool. I mean,
Speaker 1: remember Eastern Orthodoxy kind of survived or flourished under the
Speaker 1: Roman Empire, the Eastern Roman Empire, the Business Empire for
Speaker 1: a thousand years after the fall of Rome. So it
Speaker 1: was it was linked to political power in a way
Speaker 1: that the Western Church was not right the Western Church
Speaker 1: because it rose at the same time as wrong declined.
Speaker 1: There was this ongoing notion of separation of churches state,
Speaker 1: which doesn't really exist in Eastern Orthodoxy, not in the
Speaker 1: same way because in the Byzantini Empire, church and state
Speaker 1: were united in a in a much stronger form. Eastern Orthodoxy,
Speaker 1: from what I can tell, is this a more mystical
Speaker 1: and I think it's being made popular right now by
Speaker 1: a hero of the new new, new, new new right
Speaker 1: of the of the far right, and that is Vladimir Putin,
Speaker 1: and Vladimir Putin's Russia. Uh you know, Eastern Orthodoxy is
Speaker 1: much more explicitly, particularly again and its Russian interpretation. And
Speaker 1: there is a difference between Oxodoxy, I think in Greece
Speaker 1: and and now in Ukraine and in in Russia, but
Speaker 1: particularly in its Russian form. It's it's anti uh gay
Speaker 1: in a way that the Catholic Church has not been,
Speaker 1: and in a way that the Catholic Churches try to
Speaker 1: moderate and try to be more hip and cool and
Speaker 1: more appealing to the left, because it's ultimately based in Europe.
Speaker 1: The Eastern Orthodox Church has not succumbed to that. So
Speaker 1: I can see why the Eastern Orthodox Church is is
Speaker 1: more appealing. But we'll have to do a separate a
Speaker 1: separate show on the Eastern Orthodox and we I'll watch
Speaker 1: this video that Brad said me, uh to try to
Speaker 1: to try to, you know, get a get a stronger
Speaker 1: sense of it. But it's it's not good either way.
Speaker 1: Either way, it's not good. But yes, John, I I
Speaker 1: agree with you about the superhero I mean, I mean,
Speaker 1: the superhero movies are stupid, but the hand to hand
Speaker 1: combat thing is is pretty ridiculous. Let's the adam the
Speaker 1: world's most rapidly growing economies of Poland and Macau in
Speaker 1: the long term and Argentina in the short term, all Catholic.
Speaker 1: Does this have an impact on the better informed, young
Speaker 1: and middle aged people around the world. I don't think so.
Speaker 1: I don't think anybody's really noticing that. You know again
Speaker 1: that the I mean a lot of the fastest growing
Speaker 1: economies in the world in Africa right now, and those
Speaker 1: all Catholic or mostly Catholic. I don't think any of
Speaker 1: this is driven by economics. I don't think anybody really
Speaker 1: cares that much about economics. I don't think it's driven
Speaker 1: by economics. So I don't think that paying that much
Speaker 1: attention to it it is. We haven't haven't commented on
Speaker 1: the latest Polish elections, which I don't think went well.
Speaker 1: But you know where a religionist, kind of right wing
Speaker 1: religionists came into power at least as president doesn't have
Speaker 1: a huge amount of power, but has enough to kind
Speaker 1: of put a lot of constraints on the government in Poland. Okay, Brad.
Speaker 1: Brad wants me to correct what I said early. He
Speaker 1: says he doesn't always criticize me when he thinks I'm wrong,
Speaker 1: So that many many times he thinks I'm wrong and
Speaker 1: he doesn't criticize me. So what those times are We're
Speaker 1: gonna leave in suspense. Maybe he can send me, text
Speaker 1: me a list of all the times that he hasn't
Speaker 1: criticized me when he thinks I'm wrong. Yeah, I mean,
Speaker 1: I think it's important. So you don't think that he
Speaker 1: agrees with me too much because he doesn't criticize me
Speaker 1: too often. Thank you, Adam Andrew. Our digital tech age
Speaker 1: has a beauty that's not being romanticized in too much
Speaker 1: immature goofiness still surrounds the area of Silicon Valley. It's
Speaker 1: ready for more romantic treatment. Why do you think that's missing? Well,
Speaker 1: because I think tech grew up in this in the
Speaker 1: age of cynicism. It grew up in the age of cynics.
Speaker 1: And if you think about one of the big drivers
Speaker 1: of tech, what's the one big driver of tech over
Speaker 1: the last forty years since the invention of the of
Speaker 1: the videotape, it's pawn, you know, so pawn cynicism, ugliness
Speaker 1: now and the one real romantic in tech, the one
Speaker 1: real romantic in tech was Steve Jobs, and Jobs unfortunately
Speaker 1: died way too young and way too early, but he
Speaker 1: was a real romantic. He understood beauty, understood the power
Speaker 1: of esthetics, the power of art, the power of beauty,
Speaker 1: and he and he spoke that way, and he inspired
Speaker 1: and he he was a romantic figure. And there's just
Speaker 1: there's just nothing like that in the in the tech
Speaker 1: world right now. Much of technology is now used, i
Speaker 1: mean on a day to day basis for people, it's
Speaker 1: used to insult and offend and attack on on Twitter, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, or or to con people. And there's just
Speaker 1: there's they don't they don't know how to pivot towards beauty.
Speaker 1: How do we use this technology to make beautiful things?
Speaker 1: How do we use this technology to create beautiful relationships,
Speaker 1: to build beautiful things to how do we emphasize the
Speaker 1: aesthetics of the tech. How do we think about it
Speaker 1: in terms of long term versus short term? I think
Speaker 1: all of that is is lacking, and it's lacking visionaries.
Speaker 1: It's lacking people in Silicon Valley who know how to
Speaker 1: do that. Again, Steve Jobs is the only one who
Speaker 1: comes to mind, and he's no longer with us and U.
Speaker 1: I don't see anybody else. And to the extent that
Speaker 1: even Silicon Valley is missing something feels like it's too
Speaker 1: maturialistic and they're missing something. They're turning to nationalism. You
Speaker 1: say that with this with a book by the CEO
Speaker 1: of Plantea who's it's complete nationalism, that that'll give us
Speaker 1: meaning a project, a big project for the state, rather
Speaker 1: than pursuit of individual happiness, the individual beauty. They can't see,
Speaker 1: they can't see how to do that. They view it
Speaker 1: as all tech has just led to a more of
Speaker 1: a consume economy, materialism, more ugliness. But it is that's
Speaker 1: a real challenge. I think Andrew's onto something. It's a
Speaker 1: real challenge. How do we where are the tech leaders
Speaker 1: who will integrate this new technology into something beautiful. I mean, alone,
Speaker 1: Musk could have done it right. I mean SpaceX has
Speaker 1: a romance toward a beauty to it, a like grand
Speaker 1: purpose to it that it could truly be inspiring the
Speaker 1: capacity of the human mind, the capacity of human being
Speaker 1: to reach out and to go to space and to
Speaker 1: and to to colonize Mars and all of this, and
Speaker 1: and it's it's cheapened by his politics. And I think
Speaker 1: it's even when he talks about it, he doesn't talk
Speaker 1: it in as inspiring a sense. He talks about it
Speaker 1: as the species or whatever, not as an inspiring sense,
Speaker 1: as an individualistic adventure, which I think it really is.
Speaker 1: I mean, Zuckerberg has nothing. I mean, what what does
Speaker 1: Zuckerberg have to offer in terms of great spiritual beauty.
Speaker 1: There's just nothing there, just nothing there. So I don't
Speaker 1: know who who is going to lead in that direction.
Speaker 1: I don't see anybody. I mean, Boom has that romantic notion,
Speaker 1: and I think I think they do a good job
Speaker 1: projecting this what's possible to man in an romantic version.
Speaker 1: But it has to be a technology that's bigger than that.
Speaker 1: It has to be a technology that touches everybody to
Speaker 1: really make a big difference. I mean, Bezos, but he's
Speaker 1: not doing it. He's not vocal. He's not a leader.
Speaker 1: He's not I mean, he's a leader of business, but
Speaker 1: he's not a cultural leader. He's not a cultural voice.
Speaker 1: Steve Jobs was a cultural voice, Jennifer. I remember when
Speaker 1: I was a kid seeing the crucifix up on the
Speaker 1: wall in the church when I went with a friend,
Speaker 1: I thought, why do they have this ugly, unhappy looking
Speaker 1: thing up there? Yeah, well, you're healthy, you know you
Speaker 1: are healthy, and most people are not. And he died
Speaker 1: for your sins. You should feel gratitude and appreciation and
Speaker 1: reverence towards him and is suffering on the leroy. Why
Speaker 1: do you what do you think about freemasonry. It shares
Speaker 1: some of the qualities you've attributed to Catholicism resurgent. It
Speaker 1: has values and moti music for its ceremonies, but it
Speaker 1: places more of an emphasis on an individual. Yeah, but
Speaker 1: it's it's it's still mystical, or at least has mystical elements.
Speaker 1: It's not a Cooreeran philosophy. It doesn't have virtues and values,
Speaker 1: not not coherent ones, not separate ones from from Christianity.
Speaker 1: It's it's too conventional. So it's it's a it's kind
Speaker 1: of a social club. It is ultimately what it boils
Speaker 1: down to, and it's, as far as I can tell,
Speaker 1: it's died as a real movement, certainly as a real
Speaker 1: movement of the successful people within society. Then my superchat
Speaker 1: lab month advertised my pro I ran YouTube channel Dan
Speaker 1: Morton one helped me get many new subscribers. Thanks Value
Speaker 1: for Value, Thank you, Dan Moulten Splendor. I think you
Speaker 1: are being kind when you suggest that tribalism describes those
Speaker 1: that practice describes those that practice Catholicism. In my opinion,
Speaker 1: sheep is a better description. I mean, you have to
Speaker 1: be careful with that because there's a sense in which
Speaker 1: it's cheap. There's a question. But it's also like it's
Speaker 1: it's it's smart people, it's it's well educated people. It's
Speaker 1: people that are searching and looking for something and finding
Speaker 1: it falsely there And I and I think, look what
Speaker 1: motivates people to be sheep. It's tribalism. They're not the
Speaker 1: leaders of the flock. They're not the shepherds of the flock. Yeah,
Speaker 1: they are the sheep of the tribe. I mean, tribalism
Speaker 1: is cheapness. In a sense. But yeah, I mean we agree.
Speaker 1: It's it's irrational, it's emotional, and it's detached from reality,
Speaker 1: and it's it's it's barbaric in a sense that Catholicism God,
Speaker 1: if you ever read the history of Catholicism, the evil
Speaker 1: that they have committed, that just the horrors of it,
Speaker 1: and and really digested the ideas of it and the
Speaker 1: fact that it's I mean, one of the things that Catholics.
Speaker 1: I was just reading up on stuff from Catholics, and
Speaker 1: one of the problems they have is if the doctrine
Speaker 1: was always right, how come it changes right? So you know,
Speaker 1: if the doctrine around gaze, if that's the word of God,
Speaker 1: then how can I pope change it now? Or the
Speaker 1: article I was reading was like, there's a doctrine about usury.
Speaker 1: Usury is evil, Usury is a mortal sin, and this
Speaker 1: guy's making argument, yeah, it is, and all the banking
Speaker 1: and all the finance we have today is all modal sin.
Speaker 1: And Christian doctrines cannot change. It is fixed in time,
Speaker 1: and therefore we have to launch an anti usury campaign
Speaker 1: from the Catholics. I mean, I didn't know there was
Speaker 1: still Catholics who believed that. I really didn't. I readoutical today.
Speaker 1: It's there's a book out about how usury. How there's
Speaker 1: Scholastics and Aristotle and and everybody else was right about usury.
Speaker 1: It is a mortal sin. Dante was right to put
Speaker 1: them in the what seventh roung of Hell or whatever?
Speaker 1: Those bankers, those evil financiers, I mean the pop poo said, Okay,
Speaker 1: I mean it's it's it's so babaric, it's so primitive,
Speaker 1: it's so anti life and anti reason and anti well,
Speaker 1: that's that's I'm repeating myself. Anti reason is an anti life.
Speaker 1: Je I mean, thank you for the sticker. We had
Speaker 1: some of the stickers. Let's see Jonathan early on, but
Speaker 1: I thought I saw some more. Yeah, Mike, thank you,
Speaker 1: Maria Lean, thank you, and uh Olie w thank you. Lucinda.
Speaker 1: There's Lucinda. And I think that's it. I think we
Speaker 1: caught everybody. If I didn't, I apologize. Thanks all the stickers.
Speaker 1: You too, can help support the show. Show that is
Speaker 1: funded one hundred percent by listeners like you, By watchers
Speaker 1: and listeners like you. Please consider making a contribution through
Speaker 1: a sticker or becoming a monthly supporter on Patreon dot com.
Speaker 1: All right, oh, SUPERGASKI ask you're reacting to the Jordan
Speaker 1: Peterson' you believe video, right, the one with twenty frogs. No,
Speaker 1: not today, h Liam. I heard the big beautiful bill
Speaker 1: gets rid of inherit tax. I don't think so. I
Speaker 1: don't think so. It I think it. It maintains the
Speaker 1: now higher threshold for where it applies, which was passed
Speaker 1: in twenty seventeen and was going to be phased out
Speaker 1: and is now is now they're going to keep it high.
Speaker 1: So yeah, but I don't think you get rid of
Speaker 1: it completely, Hoppa Campbell. No one stares harder at their
Speaker 1: own mediocracy than a narcissist. Yeah, I mean narcis often
Speaker 1: not even mediocracy. Is there worse than that? Michael ein
Speaker 1: Ran said, quote the truth is not for everyone, only
Speaker 1: those who seek it. Did she mean don't be too
Speaker 1: needy to convince people of objectivism those morally worthy you
Speaker 1: will discover that it's true. No, I don't think. I
Speaker 1: don't think so, because you know, people, people who seek
Speaker 1: the truth might be seeking truth and not discovered objectivism,
Speaker 1: and you can be providing that to them, and you
Speaker 1: know so how much you invest in them will be
Speaker 1: a function of whether you think they're seekers or not.
Speaker 1: So that's true. I think it's a more broad statement.
Speaker 1: It's well, you can't you can't impose the truth on people.
Speaker 1: People have to want it, have to seek it, have
Speaker 1: to use their mind. It's an active process. It's not passive.
Speaker 1: You can't just implant it on somebody. They have to
Speaker 1: be actively engaged in it. I think that's what she's
Speaker 1: talking about. Natavi, I'll go with him. Is PTSD real
Speaker 1: giving abuse of people are to each other in today's world,
Speaker 1: you would think we would see more of it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think PTSD Israel. But it's a consequence of you know,
Speaker 1: dramatic abuse. It's trauma that is caused by things like war,
Speaker 1: or abuse, beating, sexual abuse as a child. It's not
Speaker 1: caused by somebody yelling at you or somebody impolite or
Speaker 1: not opening the door for you. It's caused by by
Speaker 1: you know, real trauma. And that real trauma needs a
Speaker 1: big sauce. And and and wars is the classic and
Speaker 1: or extreme violence, and that is still unusual in our world.
Speaker 1: We are less violent today as a species, as a
Speaker 1: people in the world we're less violent today, and then
Speaker 1: probably at any point in time in human history, we
Speaker 1: better range better angels of our nature by what's his name, uh,
Speaker 1: Stephen Pinker. And he's got all the debt to show it.
Speaker 1: And I talked about murder rates a few shows ago.
Speaker 1: Murder is dramatically in decline, so we're probably being abuse.
Speaker 1: It was less today than ever before. Now there are
Speaker 1: places around the world where people are suffering PTSD, but
Speaker 1: it's unlikely that you're going to be suffering PTSD in
Speaker 1: the United States. John looking forward to listening to this
Speaker 1: later in the car. A fallen Catholic, A risen Catholic.
Speaker 1: You're not a fallen Catholic. You've risen above Catholicism. You've
Speaker 1: done better, Michael. Wasn't Catholicism begin in nineteen thirties Germany ominous? Yeah?
Speaker 1: I mean, but so I don't know if it was
Speaker 1: growing in nineteen thirties Germany. I mean, Germany is a
Speaker 1: country split between Catholics and Protestants. Indeed, the most brutal,
Speaker 1: savage warn European history, probably on a per capita basis,
Speaker 1: was the Thirty Year War, and it was primarily German
Speaker 1: Catholics and Protestants slaughtering each other for thirty years killing
Speaker 1: I think. I think it's between the three and half
Speaker 1: the German population. Michael, are status relying on an ever
Speaker 1: expanding tech sect to preserve the parasitic extortion racket. You know,
Speaker 1: I don't know how aware the status are of this,
Speaker 1: but yeah, I mean there's a sense in which tech
Speaker 1: is sustaining ole economy, keeping our economy going so the
Speaker 1: status can survive, and it's also providing the status with
Speaker 1: tools for preservation, including the surveillance tools that allow them
Speaker 1: to thrive as statists pop up. Are you able to
Speaker 1: have more influence on Milay and his administration or is
Speaker 1: he doing a good enough job on his own? I
Speaker 1: have not me never to have influence on Milaana's administration.
Speaker 1: Milaine never contacted me, even though he promised to read
Speaker 1: my book, so he either didn't read it, or read
Speaker 1: it and wasn't that impressed, or I don't know, but
Speaker 1: he hasn't contacted me. I haven't been back to Argentina
Speaker 1: for a variety of reasons, and I haven't had invitations,
Speaker 1: you know, urgent invitations to come. So I'd like to
Speaker 1: have more influence, but I need a way in, and
Speaker 1: it's not obvious what that way in is. And in
Speaker 1: the meantime, he's doing a good job by himself, and
Speaker 1: you know, you have to know a lot about Argentinian
Speaker 1: politics to be able to improve on what he's doing
Speaker 1: in terms of just the economic stuff that he's doing.
Speaker 1: James are the most evil figures in history Catholic intellectuals, Well,
Speaker 1: I mean it was con to Catholic I don't think so,
Speaker 1: I don't know, I don't know. They were pretty bad. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean I think Augustine ranks definitely ranks up there
Speaker 1: as one of the most evil. And a lot of
Speaker 1: the fathers of the Church were really really evil. So
Speaker 1: uh yeah, a lot of them, most I don't know,
Speaker 1: but a lot. Yeah, Thomas aquinas of course with Cathy intellection,
Speaker 1: and he was pretty good. Ali, how you on just
Speaker 1: our gender reminded about review of Right the TI guy. Yes,
Speaker 1: as I said, Ali, it's going to take me a while.
Speaker 1: I apologize, but it just is, you know, realistically we're
Speaker 1: looking at because I mean the rest you were looking
Speaker 1: at sometime August, September, October, uh, sometime in that period
Speaker 1: of time. It won't be before August won't be before August,
Speaker 1: but it's it's definitely on my list and I've downloaded it.
Speaker 1: It's ready to read. Richard a reminder of the Catholics
Speaker 1: promote the abolition of original the abomination of original sin. Yes,
Speaker 1: they do the abomination original sin. That to logic, Stan
Speaker 1: is Augustine's work, right. Augustine was the big original sin guy.
Speaker 1: But by the way, so the Protestants, at least Protestants
Speaker 1: who take Lutha. Obviously, Luther was a huge original sin
Speaker 1: guy and predestination. So Lutherans and Calvinists are even bigger
Speaker 1: original sin guys uh and even bigger uh uh determinism
Speaker 1: people because they are Augustinians. There the critique of the
Speaker 1: Catholic Church was that the Catholicism had moved too far
Speaker 1: away from Augustine. But yeah, Protestantism never developed though, because
Speaker 1: they didn't have a unifying dog man, a unifiing church,
Speaker 1: and never never developed esthetics of Cathosism. It never understood
Speaker 1: the role of aesthetics in the way Catholics understood it. James,
Speaker 1: isn't it crazy You can make more money having your
Speaker 1: own podcast than you ever could as an elite college professor,
Speaker 1: the Internet is breaking the university stronghold on the intellect.
Speaker 1: It isn't breaking it yet. I'm hoping that it will,
Speaker 1: but it isn't breaking it yet. Right now, universities are
Speaker 1: still strong and going. I think it'll slowly be diminished.
Speaker 1: So breaking is a little hard, certainly diminishing. Michael, would
Speaker 1: you argue Christianity, particularly Catholicism, is more dangerous than Islam
Speaker 1: in the West. Yes, yes, I think in the West
Speaker 1: it's much more likely that people become more and more
Speaker 1: Catholic than they become more and more Muslim. Certainly in America,
Speaker 1: Islam is not a threat to America and in Europe.
Speaker 1: At the end of the day, I don't think Islam
Speaker 1: will be a threat to Europe. I think the Europeans
Speaker 1: will take care of that threat. But by doing so,
Speaker 1: we'll become authoritarian, that is, will be in a self
Speaker 1: destructive way. They'll take care of Islam. So yes, I
Speaker 1: think Christianity is much more dangerous to the West than Islam. Nick,
Speaker 1: is there a difference between individual rights and human rights?
Speaker 1: Not really, No, I don't think so. Now when you
Speaker 1: understand it, there is not. And if Kant wanted to
Speaker 1: preserve Christianity. He has succeeded. It appears he has. By
Speaker 1: the way that I mean human rights is like I'm
Speaker 1: a PC way, a non individualistic, not emphasizing the individual
Speaker 1: way of talking about rights. In that sense, it's usually
Speaker 1: what I bet people who want who have a leftist
Speaker 1: interpretation of rights, where you have a right to all
Speaker 1: kinds of goodies. Individual rights is usually you can only
Speaker 1: hear individual rights from classical liberals who have a locky
Speaker 1: and a Lockian interpretation of it. So but there's no
Speaker 1: different There's no thing called human rights that separate form individualis,
Speaker 1: even if people argue for it. Jacob, my parents are
Speaker 1: doing a three week trip to Portugal in Spain and September.
Speaker 1: Can I send you that tinery for food and general accommendations? Sure,
Speaker 1: I don't know how much time I'll have it. I'll
Speaker 1: try to get you a few recommendations based on where
Speaker 1: they are. Cook. Did you read Rob Dreha's recent piece
Speaker 1: for The Free Press title the retical right is coming
Speaker 1: for your sons? Might be we're talking about on a show. God,
Speaker 1: I read something else by dre and the Free Press.
Speaker 1: I don't think I did that, and I'll have to
Speaker 1: check it out because that sounds like one of those
Speaker 1: topics that is good for me. Yeah, he is a
Speaker 1: piece of work, the guy. Although he's become a little
Speaker 1: skeptical about Trump, which is good, but he is he
Speaker 1: is a big fan of Albon's and a big fan
Speaker 1: of Christianity. And when he says the radical right, he's
Speaker 1: to loge extent talking about himself. Cook, Also, have you
Speaker 1: ever looked into Catholic social thought? When I looked into
Speaker 1: it years ago, it sounded like Bernie plus Grata plus
Speaker 1: Richard Wolf with the Bible. Yes, I mean the previous
Speaker 1: pope was part of that social thought school. Liberation theology,
Speaker 1: I think it's called. It primarily comes out of Latin America.
Speaker 1: It's not the dominant view within the church. The Oppean's
Speaker 1: a little different. And then the Africans are quite conservative.
Speaker 1: African Catholics are the fastest growing group of Catholics are
Speaker 1: quite conservative. But you know, liberation theology is kind of
Speaker 1: a mixture of car Marks and Jesus, which is not
Speaker 1: that crazy of a mixture, but it's much more explicit
Speaker 1: than it would be otherwise. Donna, thank you appreciate the support.
Speaker 1: All Right, let's see uh Subkaski. Catholics do believe in
Speaker 1: zero some oppressed oppressed at the ecotomy though, it's why
Speaker 1: the church is being against capitalism and pro Palestine. Uh Catholics, Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean Cathics invented altruism, so I mean altruism and
Speaker 1: is in it's in its modern forms. So Catholics definitely
Speaker 1: believe in altruism. And they invented the idea of oppressed
Speaker 1: oppressed or they they you know, the woke modern intellectuals
Speaker 1: just just reinterpreted, stole it from Catholicism. But Catholicism deals
Speaker 1: with it very definitely right because they don't necessarily resent
Speaker 1: white men or or you know, to them, it has
Speaker 1: much more to do with religion and Jesus and your
Speaker 1: belief system and stuff like that, and then kind of
Speaker 1: the identity politics that the left is interpreted as. But yes,
Speaker 1: there's very much Altruism is the theme within Catholicism. Within Christianity,
Speaker 1: frank artists move between their spiritual creators and depressed voids.
Speaker 1: Even in rand doesn't religion perform the business of filling
Speaker 1: the voids of culture to avoid a culture falling into
Speaker 1: vice and other excite excite excitements. No, I don't think.
Speaker 1: So there's nothing about religion. Religion, indeed, is what creates
Speaker 1: many of the voids. It doesn't have answers, It doesn't
Speaker 1: fill the gaps. What you needed to fill the gap
Speaker 1: is philosophy, is ideas, is a system of thought that
Speaker 1: explains the world, and the only way to explain the
Speaker 1: world is to reason. So no, I don't think religion
Speaker 1: fills the voids. I think creates voids, and it gives
Speaker 1: you the ill illusion that your void has been filled.
Speaker 1: But all it's doing is creating a much bigger void
Speaker 1: that you get sucked into. Because that's what religion is.
Speaker 1: It's a void that sucks you into it, a void
Speaker 1: filled with faith and lacking in reason and facts in reality.
Speaker 1: Shots about In Superman two, the hero defeated the three
Speaker 1: equally powerful villains simultaneously with a clever ruse rather than combat.
Speaker 1: So they are exceptions and he killed them. Oh right,
Speaker 1: maybe I should watch Superman two. I like when the
Speaker 1: villains die at the end rather than one of them
Speaker 1: doesn't kill anybody. I thought Superman didn't kill I thought
Speaker 1: that was one of the principles. Joshua says, I actually
Speaker 1: do enjoy the show in spite of putting up crosses everywhere.
Speaker 1: Never understand that Frank did idea of kill fifteen paramedics.
Speaker 1: What really, I don't know what really happened. It's very
Speaker 1: hard to tell. It's a battlezone. There's a lot of misinformation.
Speaker 1: But I can almost guarantee that his Israelis didn't knowingly kill,
Speaker 1: purposefully kill a bunch of paramedics for the sake of killing.
Speaker 1: There was reason or an accident or mistake. Mary Aline
Speaker 1: the Nuns used to tell us that the fact that
Speaker 1: the Gothic Church has survived all the corruption in its
Speaker 1: past was proof there was the one true church. That's
Speaker 1: a flaw. There's a flaw in that reasoning, Yeah, there is.
Speaker 1: I thought the reason Judaism survived all the Holocausts and
Speaker 1: discrimination and oppression and slaughter and you know, disasters and
Speaker 1: anti Semitism and everything else is because it was the
Speaker 1: one true religion. I mean, Judaism and Christianity gonna have
Speaker 1: to have it out. Problem is, they're only like eighteen
Speaker 1: million Jews and there's one point four billion Catholics. So
Speaker 1: I'm not sure. If I'm not sure, if there's a
Speaker 1: fair fight, there be too brawler. Right, I'm attending your
Speaker 1: lectures for Peterson Academy this month. It's going to be
Speaker 1: weird listening to you live without the one point five
Speaker 1: speed on. I know everybody tells me that when like
Speaker 1: I sat down with lunch with somebody in London who
Speaker 1: listens to the show, it says, it's so weird talking
Speaker 1: to you. It's you're so slow. So yeah, I'll try
Speaker 1: to speed it up. Not really, yeah, sorry, You'll just
Speaker 1: have to bear with it. On the other hand, you'll
Speaker 1: have the amazing You'll you'll be in the presence of
Speaker 1: the amazing magnetic charisma that I exude when I'm when
Speaker 1: it's in person and not over video. That mitigates my
Speaker 1: my magnetism. How much do you interact with I'll take
Speaker 1: questions from the audience after lectures. So the way it
Speaker 1: happens is I give the lecture with very little interaction
Speaker 1: with the audience just because of the way they've got
Speaker 1: the structured. So you basically deliver content. Then they cut
Speaker 1: and there's a Q and A and they'll pass around
Speaker 1: a mic and you'll ask a questions and a mic
Speaker 1: and I'll do that for as long as they are questions,
Speaker 1: and I don't know how many people are going to
Speaker 1: be there. Usually it's pretty small, maybe ten people, maybe less.
Speaker 1: I don't know how many people show up. Hopefully they'll
Speaker 1: be a good size attendance. But I'll answer questions, and
Speaker 1: then once the questions, you take a break. And the
Speaker 1: three of these sessions on two of the days, and
Speaker 1: two of these sessions on the third day. In between,
Speaker 1: I interact a little bit, but I rest a little
Speaker 1: bit too, and then but you know, at the end
Speaker 1: of the day, more time to interact. So I'm happy
Speaker 1: to interact with the audience after the lecture beyond the
Speaker 1: Q and A, just as long as I do need
Speaker 1: a rest between, because each one of these is pretty intense.
Speaker 1: And you go an hour, you do Q and A,
Speaker 1: you rest for half an hour, you go another hour,
Speaker 1: you do Q and A, you rest for a little
Speaker 1: bit lunch stuff, and then you do another You know,
Speaker 1: it's I used to be able to go like eight
Speaker 1: hours of lecturing without blinking. Yeah, I'm not that young
Speaker 1: guy anymore. Now I need my rest. So I'll try
Speaker 1: to interact as much as possible with you guys, And
Speaker 1: I appreciate you being there, really, I do it'll make
Speaker 1: the class much better having a live audience. But the
Speaker 1: interaction will be there will be some maybe less than
Speaker 1: what you want. I don't know. I mean there might
Speaker 1: be a lot. We'll see. Roberts says, right, you are
Speaker 1: out on the bike fifteen point seven mile so fart,
Speaker 1: still a few miles from home. Tell Amy, I'm still
Speaker 1: alive and we will go live at six pm. Great show, Amy,
Speaker 1: Robert's still alive and you're going live with him at
Speaker 1: six pm. So get ready. It's like an hour from now,
Speaker 1: all right, fank says, I am impressed by The Godless
Speaker 1: Girl CB The Mills, nineteen twenty eight film about a
Speaker 1: girl who runs a school atheist club. It's in Wikipedia.
Speaker 1: Iron Rand not in it. I don't know what that
Speaker 1: means that it's in Wikipedia. I've never heard of that movie.
Speaker 1: That would be interesting to see. If I can find
Speaker 1: it and watch it, that would be interesting. Fankoso says,
Speaker 1: I like a Catholic sect based on Pallagius's ideas. It
Speaker 1: believes in free will. Also, more Protestants in sixteen In
Speaker 1: sixteen hundreds killed accused witches than Catholics did. Yeah, Protestantism
Speaker 1: isn't the more emotionalist religion uh, less dogma, less pretense
Speaker 1: of reason, no scholastics, much more based on feelings reason,
Speaker 1: and less theological, less spending time in theology. So yeah,
Speaker 1: they're more likely to burn witches than the Catholics because
Speaker 1: the Catholics had an inquisition. So the inquisition was pretty brutal.
Speaker 1: Even if they didn't burn riches, they burned Jews, they
Speaker 1: burn heretics, they burned lots of other people. Catholicism has
Speaker 1: a very very very very very dark past, very dark past.
Speaker 1: I yeah, all right, guys, and that very very very
Speaker 1: dark future and a pretty dark present. But the past
Speaker 1: particularly dark because they had power, and when they have power,
Speaker 1: they do horrible things. Matthew just came in with the
Speaker 1: question have you seen equalize A three? Seems like car
Speaker 1: realized he had become broken and is slipping into vigilanteism.
Speaker 1: I have not seen equalizer three. Oh wait, wait a
Speaker 1: stone Equalizer three? Was that the one in Italy where
Speaker 1: he he he he goes after the mafia guys in Italy? Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think that's it. Yeah, I mean I thought it
Speaker 1: was the weaker. I mean, I like even all the
Speaker 1: equalizes because I like, I like uh the actor god. Uh.
Speaker 1: But and I like, I like the basic vigilante, you know,
Speaker 1: den I like Denzel. I think Denzel's amazing and uh,
Speaker 1: I like uh, I like action movies. But Equalizer three
Speaker 1: was way too violent, particularly the opening sequence. There was
Speaker 1: no reason for that violence. The previous ones were not
Speaker 1: as violent, and I thought were badter Uh it also,
Speaker 1: did you know digress into this? You know, vigilante is
Speaker 1: for the sake of vigilanteism, and yeah, versus I think
Speaker 1: the first two were much more values driven, positive values driven.
Speaker 1: But look, I still like Equalizer because I like revenge,
Speaker 1: and because I like bad Guy's dying, and because I
Speaker 1: like Denzel Washington. Oh, he's so much better than Bonnson.
Speaker 1: Charles Bonson was not a good actor. Drenzel Washington is
Speaker 1: a great actor doing the kind of roles Charles Bonnson did,
Speaker 1: but as a great actor. So there's so much better.
Speaker 1: All right, guys, I hope you enjoyed the show. If
Speaker 1: somebody wants to do a stickle for footy, bucks will
Speaker 1: make our goal. But otherwise, and in any case, we
Speaker 1: will call it a date and I will see you
Speaker 1: all tomorrow for a news show. We'll definitely cover the
Speaker 1: National Guard in California. There's a lot of other stuff
Speaker 1: going on in the world that we will cover. And yeah,
Speaker 1: this week will be a week full of shows. And
Speaker 1: you know, until I go to to Arizona in a
Speaker 1: week and a half, we're going to be doing shows,
Speaker 1: all right, Everybody see tomorrow. I have a great, great,
Speaker 1: great rest of your weekend.