Speaker 1: I want to welcome everyone back to the Peking Yana Show.
Speaker 1: Stormy's back, and yeah, we're gonna We're gonna go in
Speaker 1: a completely different direction. And let me put this out
Speaker 1: there right up front, right up front, because whenever I
Speaker 1: do an episode like this, I'm going to get comments saying,
Speaker 1: you should have this person on to talk about this.
Speaker 1: You should have that person on to talk about about
Speaker 1: Marcus Aurelius and the meditations and stoicism. Now the Stormy
Speaker 1: and I are going to talk about this. So how
Speaker 1: you doing, Stormy doing well?
Speaker 2: Doing well?
Speaker 1: How about yourself doing well? Man? So you mentioned you
Speaker 1: mentioned Marcus Aurelius. You it was a few months ago
Speaker 1: you said, you know, we should read and discuss you know,
Speaker 1: some of the meditations, go through, go through some of
Speaker 1: the meditations, and I just put it in the back
Speaker 1: of my head and I was like, Okay, when the
Speaker 1: time comes, you know, when I think about it, when
Speaker 1: I remember again, when it comes back to the forefront
Speaker 1: from the back, it comes back to the front from
Speaker 1: the from the back, We'll do it. But why do
Speaker 1: you why did you talk about this? Why did you
Speaker 1: think we should talk about this on the air?
Speaker 2: Well? Because it I don't know how Marcus Aurelius came
Speaker 2: to a lot of his ideas, but it's basically the
Speaker 2: I don't want to call it like Eastern mysticism, right.
Speaker 2: He could have arrived at these entirely organically, but well
Speaker 2: there was, I mean, that's much more to us.
Speaker 1: Let me interrupt you real quick so that you I'm sorry,
Speaker 1: yep Zeno of Citium round three in the three hundred BC,
Speaker 1: he's basically considered the founder of Stoicism. He forms a school.
Speaker 1: Uh Cleanthes is his his student, Chrysippus is his student.
Speaker 1: So you know in the in the BC times, in
Speaker 1: the before times, you did have a school, a Stoic school,
Speaker 1: and these these are the three, you know, early figures
Speaker 1: in establishing Stoicism in in ancient Greece, but later Romans
Speaker 1: picked up on it like Seneca episode epic Teta, I
Speaker 1: can never pronounce his name epic Tetus or epic epitet
Speaker 1: epicoet epic Tetus. I'll go with that. And Marcus Aurelia
Speaker 1: is built on the foundations, but they're not considered the founders.
Speaker 1: So basically, what what uh Marcus Aurelius is doing is
Speaker 1: a Roman form of Stoics that he got from Greek
Speaker 1: fathers I would say three hundred years before he lived.
Speaker 2: Well, so when I say like Eastern mysticism, there is
Speaker 2: a lot of Eastern mysticism that is taken again like
Speaker 2: people guys like doctor Stephen Skinner and a couple others
Speaker 2: that basically do like the history of the basically like
Speaker 2: deep histories of mysticism, and not from like the from
Speaker 2: the content of it, but basically who said what and
Speaker 2: when and how these ideas propagated. So something magical happened
Speaker 2: when Alexander got to Egypt, because you had two groups
Speaker 2: of people that were working on the same problem but
Speaker 2: from opposite ends, and the Egyptians had a lot of
Speaker 2: what the Greeks missed, but without the Greek's rigor. You know,
Speaker 2: Pythagoras had a large amount of followers at the time.
Speaker 2: Even though he didn't survive the Siege of Tire, all
Speaker 2: of his followers did and from there on out, Greek
Speaker 2: thought on well in this case to what we're talking
Speaker 2: about today, emotions changes quite a bit. And then Marcus Aurelius,
Speaker 2: I think you're yeah, you're definitely correct. This would be
Speaker 2: like a rediscovery of it right, because there wasn't a
Speaker 2: lot of Romans actually, I mean, for as much as
Speaker 2: they were, you know, Greek fans at this time, I
Speaker 2: don't think there were anybody else but those three that
Speaker 2: we know of.
Speaker 1: Well yeah, I mean there are going to be others,
Speaker 1: but that's that's the school. That's where those are the
Speaker 1: three big names. You know, like if you were going
Speaker 1: to talk about Greek philosophy, we're going to talk about Aristotle, Plato,
Speaker 1: and Socrates.
Speaker 2: I mean that's based Roman Stoicism. It's just those three
Speaker 2: names roman Stoicism.
Speaker 1: Well, I mean there is more, but you know, as
Speaker 1: as I said, were naming a whole line of people
Speaker 1: and everything, you have to concentrate on who the main,
Speaker 1: most influential were and it's those story.
Speaker 2: So the reason I like Marcus Aurelius's meditations is because
Speaker 2: you can pull these lessons out with and leave the mysticism,
Speaker 2: and because it is in Latin, it's very easy to
Speaker 2: read and digest. And when he is described when instead
Speaker 2: of like a very esoteric teaching that will take you,
Speaker 2: you know, months, months to pull apart to find out
Speaker 2: what the guy actually meant, Marcus Aurelius gives it to
Speaker 2: you in context of real situations he's dealing with. So
Speaker 2: it is both the knowledge and applied knowledge simultaneously, so
Speaker 2: you're able to grasp the concepts much much easier. And
Speaker 2: he leaves out a lot of the other stuff that
Speaker 2: I think would take people of a Christian background, It
Speaker 2: would probably cause a lot of people to turn their
Speaker 2: nose up at it. So just the teachings of how
Speaker 2: the man views his emotions as separate from him, right,
Speaker 2: they are not, you know, things that he has control
Speaker 2: over that are internal processes. Marx's relis views them as
Speaker 2: external processes, right His you know, the question is for
Speaker 2: him is how one reacts to these external processes. So
Speaker 2: it's not like, you know, you're going to get rid
Speaker 2: of emotion. You're not going to get your emotions under control.
Speaker 2: Like all these things are impossible. You have no control
Speaker 2: over the emotions, the emotional information, the content that comes
Speaker 2: to you. The only thing you do have control over
Speaker 2: is how you respond or react to these emotions, you know.
Speaker 2: And Marcus's take is the same as no, God, I
Speaker 2: can't believe I'm blinking aloutsuit the eternal doubt. These things,
Speaker 2: these are things to be observed studied, let them wash
Speaker 2: over you wait till they're gone, right, and then internalize
Speaker 2: time more and more information, and in these emotions that
Speaker 2: you are socking away, you know, in your knowledge bank,
Speaker 2: become something you can pull from later and use almost
Speaker 2: like a power source of infinite immovability, steadfastness, or strength.
Speaker 2: And I think that would be something that would be
Speaker 2: very valuable for people in our day and age, specifically
Speaker 2: our guys when we have to interact on the Internet
Speaker 2: and are interfacing with algorithms that are deliberately designed to
Speaker 2: elicit emotional responses and get them into very non productive moods. Right,
Speaker 2: it teaches it'll teach you how to not be a
Speaker 2: reactive you know, loser jump from current thing to current thing.
Speaker 2: These things don't mean anything. The emotions they give you
Speaker 2: are not yours, right, They're not innate to your conscious mind.
Speaker 2: And the strength to not react to them and to
Speaker 2: study them, like why am I having this? Why is
Speaker 2: this particular thing making me feel this particular type of
Speaker 2: way would benefit our guys a lot, because I think
Speaker 2: our information environment is extremely more hostile than one in
Speaker 2: any other age. I think it's actually the biggest hurdle
Speaker 2: to us making change.
Speaker 1: Well, I also think it's important to know if something
Speaker 1: is if you're having trouble, if something is causing you
Speaker 1: to get emotional, get upset, whatever, whatever it might be,
Speaker 1: then to avoid that. And I think that the problem
Speaker 1: is is like one of those things that I know
Speaker 1: causes a lot of people because sometimes I have to
Speaker 1: just get off of it for long periods of time,
Speaker 1: is social media. Social media can be daunting because it
Speaker 1: is designed to bombard you with information, and if it's
Speaker 1: information that is going to upset you, if it's information
Speaker 1: where you've you feel like you have a stake in it,
Speaker 1: like you're invested in it, and it's not going your way, which,
Speaker 1: let's face it, most of the time things aren't going
Speaker 1: to go your way, especially if you have no power
Speaker 1: over them, then you should know to avoid it. I
Speaker 1: mean that's just really the beginning of knowledge. And I
Speaker 1: fail often at that because I feel like, oh, if
Speaker 1: I'm not on social media, I'm not on the biggest
Speaker 1: battlefield in the world. And no, actually, the biggest battlefield
Speaker 1: in the world is in your skull.
Speaker 2: I couldn't have said it better.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's what you have to you know, you have
Speaker 1: to try to learn to master. You'll never master it,
Speaker 1: but at least you know you're on the path.
Speaker 2: It also creates what's necessary for leadership. Like, I think
Speaker 2: people misunderstand, like what leadership is. It's like, it's not
Speaker 2: like a learned thing. You can't like learn to be
Speaker 2: a leader. Like it's a thing that you study. Right,
Speaker 2: you could jump up in a like I know everything
Speaker 2: about leadership. That does not mean people will look to
Speaker 2: you as a leader. You don't get to decide whether
Speaker 2: you're the leader or not. Right. That is a decision
Speaker 2: that everybody around you makes independently inside themselves. And what
Speaker 2: are they basing that decision on. They're basing it on
Speaker 2: your presence.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 2: People want a leader because that person is unmoved, unchanged
Speaker 2: by you know, very negative externalities by crisis. The person
Speaker 2: that is always of a cool head, right, a leader,
Speaker 2: we call it. Like leaders These are just men that
Speaker 2: are internally ordered inside. Right, they are integrated their conscious mind,
Speaker 2: their unconscious mind, their physical self. Right. These are they
Speaker 2: are mind, body, and soul of one thing. Right, they
Speaker 2: are firm and immovable. And when they are these things,
Speaker 2: how they order themselves internally projects externally?
Speaker 1: Right?
Speaker 2: I guess for lack of a better term, It's a
Speaker 2: vibe and everyone around you will pick it up. So
Speaker 2: ordering yourself internally is how we make leaders, I think.
Speaker 2: I mean, there's many people that can disagree with me,
Speaker 2: but I think you'd have a hard time because who
Speaker 2: people look to as a leader is a choice that
Speaker 2: they make and oftentimes without even knowing you. In a crisis,
Speaker 2: people decide in an instant who the leader is. And
Speaker 2: if our guys are ordered internally when crisis hits, which
Speaker 2: it will, they will be the ones who will be
Speaker 2: looked to as leaders because they will be the ones calm, firm,
Speaker 2: and immovable, and they will project the type of safety
Speaker 2: that everyone is going to be attracted to. So I
Speaker 2: think Marcus Aurelius has the best tools to make leaders
Speaker 2: because I think it's an internal thing and on an
Speaker 2: external thing, not something that you can, like, I'm going
Speaker 2: to learn and you know, take a crash course in leadership.
Speaker 2: I think that it's a waste of time. Well, we've
Speaker 2: even read the book yet, this is already a pretty
Speaker 2: good discussion.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah, let's just let people know. Marcus Aurelius was
Speaker 1: the Emperor Rome from one sixty one to one eight.
Speaker 1: He came from his he was a son of a
Speaker 1: prey tour, so yeah, he's he comes after Hadrian's adoptive son,
Speaker 1: Alias Caesar died in one thirty eight. Hadrian adopted Marcus's
Speaker 1: uncle Antonius Pius as his new heir. Later later in
Speaker 1: turn and Sonius adopted Marcus and Lucius the son of Alias.
Speaker 1: So yeah, he this is somebody who was emperor of Rome.
Speaker 1: And yeah, let's I think a lot of people have
Speaker 1: in their mind what the emperor of how the Emperor
Speaker 1: of Rome would act, and how he would think. But
Speaker 1: Marcus Aurelius's meditations are seemed to seems to fly in
Speaker 1: the face of what most people would think. So let
Speaker 1: me read. Yeah, this is well, yeah, this has broken
Speaker 1: up into parts into verse almost verses, like like biblical
Speaker 1: how biblical chapters are broken up. So let me just
Speaker 1: read the first one. So this is the first book
Speaker 1: of Marcus Aurelius. This is the first uh, first part
Speaker 1: of my grandfather Verus. I have learned to be gentle
Speaker 1: and meek, and to refrain from all anger and passion.
Speaker 1: From the fame and memory of him that begot me.
Speaker 1: I have learned both shamefastness and manlike behavior. Shamefastness is
Speaker 1: in a term that we're very, very familiar with anymore,
Speaker 1: but it's basically the quality. I'm going to read the
Speaker 1: definition the quality or state of being modest, shy, or
Speaker 1: bashful rooted in a sense of propriety and restraint, rather
Speaker 1: than the awkwardness of being shamefaced of my mother. I
Speaker 1: have learned to be religious and bountiful, and to forbear
Speaker 1: not only to do, but to intend, but to intend
Speaker 1: any evil, to content myself with a spare diet, and
Speaker 1: to fly all such excess as is incidental to great
Speaker 1: wealth of my great grandfather, both to frequent public schools
Speaker 1: and auditories, and to get me good and able teachers
Speaker 1: at home, And that I ought not to think much if,
Speaker 1: upon such occasions I were at excessive charges. So this
Speaker 1: already flies in the face of what most people think
Speaker 1: a leader is a modern way. It's what most people.
Speaker 1: Most people think a modern leader is a sociopath. And
Speaker 1: this is an Emperor of Rome, and obviously he's not
Speaker 1: a sociopath. He's telling you to do the exact opposite.
Speaker 1: So Part two I'll just do here real quick of
Speaker 1: him that brought me up. Not to be fondly addicted
Speaker 1: to either of the two great factions of the coursers
Speaker 1: in the circus, called Parsini and Venetzi, nor in the
Speaker 1: amphitheater partially to favor any of the gladiators or fencers,
Speaker 1: as either the par Parmulari or the secut Secutorus, and
Speaker 1: those are two classes of gladiator. Moreover, to endure labor,
Speaker 1: nor to need many things. When I have anything to do,
Speaker 1: to do it myself rather than by others. Not to
Speaker 1: meddle with many businesses, and not easily to admit of
Speaker 1: the slander. I'm starting to feel seen here.
Speaker 2: Yeah, this is how you get men like Cincinnatus. Yeah,
Speaker 2: it's thinking like this.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Moreover twins or labor, nor to need many things,
Speaker 1: and when I have anything to do, to do it
Speaker 1: myself rather than by others. It's too easy in the
Speaker 1: modern world to have other people do something for you.
Speaker 1: Of diagenetis not to busy myself about vain things, and
Speaker 1: not easily to believe those things which are commonly spoken
Speaker 1: by such as take upon them to work wonders, and
Speaker 1: by sorcerers or prestig prestidigitators and impostors concerning the power
Speaker 1: of charms, and they're driving out of demons or evil
Speaker 1: spirits and the like. That's keep quails for the game.
Speaker 1: Nor to be mad after such things, Not to be
Speaker 1: offended with other men's liberty of speech, and to apply
Speaker 1: myself onto philosophy. Him Also, I must think that ever
Speaker 1: I heard first Bacchius, then Tendasus and Marcianus, and that
Speaker 1: I did write dialogues in my youth, and that I
Speaker 1: took liking to the philosopher's little couch and skins and
Speaker 1: such other things, which, by the Grecian discipline are proper
Speaker 1: to those who profess philosophy. Not to be offended with
Speaker 1: other men's liberty of speech, and to apply myself onto philosophy.
Speaker 1: What do you have to say to that.
Speaker 2: I don't see a single modern leader. It really this particular. Yeah,
Speaker 2: there's a lot to say. This is a person that
Speaker 2: is very, very particular about how he keeps his mental space,
Speaker 2: right if you like, So that the verse three talks
Speaker 2: about all of the things that he does and does
Speaker 2: not do. But the common theme with the other three
Speaker 2: the other two verses is what he thinks and what
Speaker 2: he does not allow himself to think and most importantly,
Speaker 2: what he allows others to see. This is a person
Speaker 2: that is completely sovereign in his own mind. He's not
Speaker 2: if he doesn't want to think about something or think
Speaker 2: a certain way about something. He doesn't if he wants
Speaker 2: to think about something. His mind is doing what his
Speaker 2: mind is tasked to do, and not what it wants
Speaker 2: to do.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 2: Not to be offended by another man's liberty of speech, Well,
Speaker 2: he can't decide whether he's offended or not initially, so
Speaker 2: what does he mean? He means, I'm going to have
Speaker 2: control over how I express myself because you can't decide
Speaker 2: to be offended or not, so you can decide how
Speaker 2: you can react, how you react or not.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's not that's not something in the modernity as
Speaker 1: it tells us to just react to everything in a
Speaker 1: very feminine, in a very feminine way.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we're supposed to be the passive recipients, and this
Speaker 2: man is not a passive anything. I mean so A
Speaker 2: he's constantly talking about like all of the things he
Speaker 2: doesn't do. I don't want to show favor to anyone.
Speaker 2: I want to do things myself. I don't want to
Speaker 2: bother anyone. I want to give thanks to each and
Speaker 2: every person that has helped me along the way, and
Speaker 2: think about and remember them.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 2: I don't think a lot of us, especially nowadays, give thanks.
Speaker 2: I mean, we do when we pray, but there's a
Speaker 2: lot of people in our lives that do a lot
Speaker 2: of things for us. How often do we take time
Speaker 2: to remember all of those people and what they have
Speaker 2: done to help us? I mean, before I came across
Speaker 2: the text, I don't think I ever had. There's an
Speaker 2: ordering to him thinking taking the time to give thanks
Speaker 2: internally for every single person that has helped shape him
Speaker 2: to the person that he is, is hand and tied
Speaker 2: to him, not busying himself with vain things, him not
Speaker 2: favoring any excess. How do you be humble? Well, he's
Speaker 2: telling you. He's doing it in front of you. He
Speaker 2: is recognizing each every person's contribution to them himself. Well,
Speaker 2: if you do that, it's really hard to be an
Speaker 2: ego maniac, isn't it. This is him checking He is
Speaker 2: checking his ego. He's humbling himself by recognizing each individual
Speaker 2: person's contribution to what makes him up. The man that's
Speaker 2: writing it today or on the day that he wrote it,
Speaker 2: and he's actually what's actually I forgot was like how
Speaker 2: detailed he is in like this person taught me to
Speaker 2: do this or behave in this way, and now this
Speaker 2: is how I behave in all of these instances. And
Speaker 2: I was brought up to not be addicted to either
Speaker 2: of the great factions. And this is how I don't
Speaker 2: favor these groups in the amphitheater, and this is how
Speaker 2: I don't favor these groups in the gladiatorial arena. Has
Speaker 2: an exercise in humility?
Speaker 1: Go ahead, Yeah, as a leader, I'm yeah, I'm going
Speaker 1: to jump to this. I probably would have held this
Speaker 1: comment a little longer. But this is the kind of person.
Speaker 1: And you've known people like this in your life, the
Speaker 1: quiet person, the person who's a man of few words.
Speaker 1: You got the idea that writing this was him was
Speaker 1: an outlet for him, because he's somebody who's not going
Speaker 1: to speak many words. He's also the kind of person
Speaker 1: who if he's not choosing sides in the most in
Speaker 1: things of it don't matter, like the you know, like
Speaker 1: the the arena and what happens you're what happens if
Speaker 1: you're invaded, say the barbarians are at the gates. How
Speaker 1: do you act towards that? Do you start to panic?
Speaker 1: Do you lose your mind? Are you such a stoic
Speaker 1: that you don't care? No, that's not it at all.
Speaker 1: The thing is this is somebody who is in the
Speaker 1: face of problems is not going to think about how
Speaker 1: solving them makes him look in the eyes of others.
Speaker 1: He's just going to solve the problem and it's not
Speaker 1: going to be for any other reason. Then there's a
Speaker 1: problem that needs to be solved, and I'm not going
Speaker 1: to get worked up over it. I'm not going to
Speaker 1: be emotional over it. I'm just going to solve the problem.
Speaker 1: And once the problem is solved, we move on, and
Speaker 1: that's it. That's one of the reasons why you know,
Speaker 1: when we say hating your enemies, oh I hate them?
Speaker 1: Why why are you expending that energy? Why do you
Speaker 1: think Why do you think that that emotion is profitable?
Speaker 1: Do you think that one day you're going to have
Speaker 1: to kill and that that by hating it'll be easier
Speaker 1: to do that. Someone like Marcus Aurelius doesn't. He doesn't
Speaker 1: need that. He just knows that if he has to kill,
Speaker 1: he has to kill, and that's it. It's just a
Speaker 1: decision that he has to make. It doesn't have to
Speaker 1: be emotional. It is just something that needs to be done.
Speaker 1: And I think hate and emotions is such just weaken you,
Speaker 1: and it weakens your vision for sure. And I think
Speaker 1: we're taught to hate. And I think, really, if you
Speaker 1: really think about it, our enemies have taught us to
Speaker 1: hate because they know what makes us weak.
Speaker 2: Yep, and it makes them strong. They need it. But
Speaker 2: it's also really interesting, as I kept on, well you
Speaker 2: were saying that, I kept thinking about justice must be
Speaker 2: delivered dispassionately. If not, then it is not justice, it's vengeance.
Speaker 2: This is a man that could meet her out justice.
Speaker 2: There there's lots of men that will, you know, commit
Speaker 2: acts of revenge, But then you're not actually doing anything.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 2: Other if you're committing acts of revenge, maybe people will
Speaker 2: be afraid of you, but they won't come to you.
Speaker 2: If you're dispassionate. Then when you do kill someone, whether
Speaker 2: yourself or by order, it's justice. It actually means something
Speaker 2: to everyone, where vengeance means something only to you. It
Speaker 2: means nothing to anyone else except for this guy just
Speaker 2: murdered somebody. And you could apply that to pretty much
Speaker 2: every aspect of leading. Right again back to him thinking
Speaker 2: each and every person he will go on to do
Speaker 2: more of it. Is this an emperor that heeds his
Speaker 2: advisor's counsel? Is this a person that thinks that he
Speaker 2: knows more than everyone in the room. So what Peter
Speaker 2: has talked about as far as hatred, right, or whether
Speaker 2: this is a person that is going to take counsel
Speaker 2: from his advisors when offered, isn't going to dismiss them
Speaker 2: as like, oh no, I know more than you, I'm
Speaker 2: the smartest guy in the room. Right, These are very
Speaker 2: similar things even though they have they sound like they
Speaker 2: have nothing in common unless you're a leader than what
Speaker 2: Pete has described and I just described are blind spots,
Speaker 2: places where you will make the wrong decision for selfish reasons,
Speaker 2: whether it be to fulfill your own hate or to
Speaker 2: fulfill your own ego. Right, this is how you're supposed
Speaker 2: to rule and not for your own benefit. You can
Speaker 2: be a macia like Pete was just saying, does this
Speaker 2: guy sound like a sociopath or not? He doesn't, Oh, well,
Speaker 2: then how is he going to get into power and
Speaker 2: be all machiavellian? This is about exercising power, having the
Speaker 2: right to rule. I think the Bronze Age barbarianism shit
Speaker 2: has kind of poisoned a lot of people's minds to
Speaker 2: what having agency is, to what being a leader is,
Speaker 2: to what governing is. Having power is. All those things
Speaker 2: are duties. Having power over your family, over your wife
Speaker 2: and children. Yeah, they have to listen to you, that's
Speaker 2: one thing they have to do. But that means you've
Speaker 2: got about like three or four different duties to them, right,
Speaker 2: It is you having power over them. There's a lot
Speaker 2: more duties in your column to have that power than
Speaker 2: there is duties in their column. Their column is listened
Speaker 2: to you do as you say. Yours is protect, provide, lead, plan, Right,
Speaker 2: you have a lot more duties than they do. And
Speaker 2: that's what ruling. That's what leading is. It is duties,
Speaker 2: it is obligations. It's leading correctly. Being a leader is
Speaker 2: should be an act of selflessness. Like the eagles nest
Speaker 2: that was built for Hitler's birthday, You never and he
Speaker 2: spent he was there once, right. The only person outside
Speaker 2: of that, the only house that was his or that
Speaker 2: was you know that he had built for him, was
Speaker 2: I believe for his mother or his sister. He slept
Speaker 2: on a cop, the same one that was issued to
Speaker 2: the Wehrmacht. Hitler slept on the entire length of the war. Right,
Speaker 2: so for five years, four years, the most powerful man
Speaker 2: in Europe slept on a cop. This is a person
Speaker 2: who thought it was his personal obligation to fix the country. Right.
Speaker 2: What Hitler was doing was a selfless act. And until
Speaker 2: you understand that, understand why it is people won't love
Speaker 2: you like they love him. Right, people, The most common,
Speaker 2: the the most potent thing in this is from my mother.
Speaker 2: I have learned to be religious and bountiful and to
Speaker 2: forbear not only to do, but to intend any evil.
Speaker 2: It's about intent. You can say a lot of things.
Speaker 2: Politicians say a lot of things to us, but we
Speaker 2: don't believe them, right. Their words are the same words
Speaker 2: as someone else. But in certain people, when they say
Speaker 2: the identical words, we believe them. Why is that if
Speaker 2: person A and person B can say the same exact words,
Speaker 2: the same exact cadence, even the same exact accent, how
Speaker 2: do we know who's telling the truth or not? We
Speaker 2: just know we can feel it in our gut, can
Speaker 2: sense their intent, And that's something that you see again
Speaker 2: and again and again throughout the stext. It's it's intent. Anyways,
Speaker 2: That's all I've said about that. That was a lot
Speaker 2: longer of a rant than I planned.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I could add on to it, but I'll keep reading.
Speaker 1: I'm sure what I have to say well will be uh,
Speaker 1: will make sense as we move four to Rusticus. I
Speaker 1: am beholding that I first entered into the conceit that
Speaker 1: my life wanted some redressing cure, and then that I
Speaker 1: did not fall into the ambition of ordinary sophists, either
Speaker 1: to write tracts concerning the common theorems, or to exhort
Speaker 1: men into virtue and the study of philosophy by public orations.
Speaker 1: As also that I never, by way of ostentation, did
Speaker 1: effect to show myself as active, an active, able man
Speaker 1: for any kind of bodily exercises, And that I gave
Speaker 1: over the study of rhetoric and poetry and of elegant,
Speaker 1: neat language, that it had not used to walk about
Speaker 1: the house in my long robe, nor to do any
Speaker 1: such things. Moreover, I learned of him to write letters
Speaker 1: without any affectation or curiosity, such as that was which
Speaker 1: by him was written to my mother from sinuessa, and
Speaker 1: to be easy and ready to be reconciled and well
Speaker 1: pleased again with them that had offended me, as soon
Speaker 1: as any of them would be content to seek unto
Speaker 1: me again to read with diligence, not to rest satisfied
Speaker 1: with a light and superficial knowledge, nor quickly to assent
Speaker 1: to things commonly spoken of whom also I must think
Speaker 1: that I ever lighted upon Epictetus his hypo nemata, or
Speaker 1: moral commentaries and common factions, which also he gave me
Speaker 1: of his own from Apollonius, true liberty and unvariable steadfastness,
Speaker 1: and not to regard anything at all, though never so little,
Speaker 1: but right and reason, and always, whether in the sharpest pains,
Speaker 1: or after the loss of a child, or in long diseases,
Speaker 1: to be still the same man, who also was a present,
Speaker 1: invisible example unto me that it was possible for the
Speaker 1: same man to be both vehement and remiss, a man
Speaker 1: not subject to be vexed and offended with the incapacity
Speaker 1: of his scholars and auditor and auditors in his lectures
Speaker 1: and expositions, and a true pattern of a man who,
Speaker 1: of all his good gifts and faculties least esteemed himself
Speaker 1: in himself, that his excellent skill and ability to teach
Speaker 1: and persuade others the common theorems and maxims of the
Speaker 1: Stoic philosophy of him. Also I learned how to receive
Speaker 1: favors and kindnesses, as commonly they are accounted from friends,
Speaker 1: so that I might not become obnoxious unto them for them,
Speaker 1: nor more yielding upon occasion than in right I ought,
Speaker 1: and yet so that I should not pass them neither
Speaker 1: as an unsensible and unthankful man.
Speaker 2: That's a good.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that is let's stop there. Yeah, true, yeah, from Apollonius.
Speaker 1: Let me see here, Yeah, this part true liberty and
Speaker 1: unvariable steadfastness, and not to regard anything at all, though
Speaker 1: never so little, but right and reason, and always, whether
Speaker 1: in the sharpest pains, or after the loss of a child,
Speaker 1: or in long diseases, to be still the same men,
Speaker 1: who also was a present invisible example. Unto me that
Speaker 1: it was possible for the same man to be both
Speaker 1: the vehement and remiss, a man not subject, be vexed
Speaker 1: and offended with the incapacity of his scholars and auditors
Speaker 1: in his life. How many people can can even find
Speaker 1: that strength anymore.
Speaker 2: Yeah, or be as humble as to what Rustic has
Speaker 2: taught him in the passage above. And it's all about
Speaker 2: him purposely. There's like that famous scene you know where
Speaker 2: Caesar comes in triumphant into Rome and they paint his
Speaker 2: face red and they have a servant ride in the
Speaker 2: chariot with him as he takes his triumph and whispers
Speaker 2: in his ear the entire time, you are not a god,
Speaker 2: You are not a god. He's basically doing that in
Speaker 2: every aspect of his life. Life. He is functionally policing
Speaker 2: his humility and the where is itself terms about how
Speaker 2: to take basically how where does he say it here
Speaker 2: where he talks about reconciling.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Moreover, I learned of him to write letters without any
Speaker 2: affection or curiosity. I think you're talking about like intrigue
Speaker 2: or gossip such as that was which by him was
Speaker 2: written to my mother from Sinuessa. And to be easily
Speaker 2: and readily as are easily easy and ready to be
Speaker 2: reconciled well pleased again with them that had offended me,
Speaker 2: as soon as any of them would be contingent to
Speaker 2: seek it unto me again.
Speaker 1: That's it. That's a most people don't have the temperament
Speaker 1: and to that anymore.
Speaker 2: No, when somebody comes on the timeline, it's like, hey,
Speaker 2: I think this, this, and this, rather than congratulate and say,
Speaker 2: oh awesome, this person has changed their mind. They think
Speaker 2: like us now, Without fail, I will always see a
Speaker 2: comment and then many of them. But it's always one
Speaker 2: of the first couple ones of somebody going back on
Speaker 2: their timeline to like three or four years ago or
Speaker 2: whatever and taking a screenshot of something that they said
Speaker 2: for when they thought something different and said, oh this
Speaker 2: you this, you bro? How the fuck is anyone supposed
Speaker 2: to change their mind? Were you born here on the
Speaker 2: far right? Like? Yes? Like did you always exist here?
Speaker 2: If no one can change their mind, how can anyone
Speaker 2: come to agree with us that doesn't always already agree
Speaker 2: with us? Right? If someone expresses your opinion, who once
Speaker 2: expressed the opposite of it, Right, why are you not
Speaker 2: reconciled and well pleased again with them? Right? This is
Speaker 2: not how men act. It's more important for people to
Speaker 2: hold a grudge and or get a dunk in on someone. Right,
Speaker 2: then congratulate them for changing their mind and encouraging them
Speaker 2: to go further. And you know, er elatic behavior.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and I'll add real quick that we can all
Speaker 1: do this. We all fall victim to it every once
Speaker 1: in a while. You know, where have you been? You know,
Speaker 1: I was here. You know I learned about this five
Speaker 1: years ago. What took you so long? The thing is,
Speaker 1: you don't want you want to recognize when you're doing
Speaker 1: that and stop and apologize for it. And you also
Speaker 1: you also want to you don't want that to be
Speaker 1: who you are. You guys, there are a lot of
Speaker 1: people that you can see on social media, and you know,
Speaker 1: this is something that people don't do in real life.
Speaker 1: They don't do it to people's faces. And which is
Speaker 1: why social media is such a to many because a
Speaker 1: lot of people don't even know how to talk to
Speaker 1: people in real life anymore, but they sure do think
Speaker 1: they know how to talk to people on social media.
Speaker 1: And we all fall into it. But if this is
Speaker 1: if this is like your personality, if this is your
Speaker 1: if when people think of your account, this is the
Speaker 1: first thing they think of, Oh, this person is just
Speaker 1: going to try to own people the whole time. And
Speaker 1: you know, I mean like I had somebody reach out
Speaker 1: to me the other day and say and then I
Speaker 1: haven't contacted you in like five or six years. It
Speaker 1: took me a long time to get here. But you know,
Speaker 1: now I'm reading you know, I'm reading Henry Ford, and
Speaker 1: I'm like, awesome, man, okay, you know, welcome, and he's like, well,
Speaker 1: he actually said, he said, let me pull this up
Speaker 1: because I really let me see where this is. This
Speaker 1: this was awesome to me, he said. He said, it
Speaker 1: took me too long, but must admit you were right
Speaker 1: about the JQ currently reading Martin Luther and Henry Ford. Apologies,
Speaker 1: my friend from my quiet skepticism. I'm retarded. And I said,
Speaker 1: we all reach touch points at different times. It's a
Speaker 1: never ending race. There is no finish line. And he said,
Speaker 1: appreciate your grace. I appreciate your grace. That's it. That's it.
Speaker 1: The guy came and said, Maya Kulpa should have been
Speaker 1: here all along. But I mean, the only.
Speaker 2: What am I expecting you to be an assphole?
Speaker 1: Well? And and what how did it affect him by
Speaker 1: taking this long? I'm sure he was still he's still
Speaker 1: living his life, he's still loving his family, he's still
Speaker 1: taking care of his family. Now he gets to see
Speaker 1: the way the world works. Yeah, a little clearer. It
Speaker 1: just took him a little bit longer. So what.
Speaker 2: And the type of people we're trying to attract to
Speaker 2: our coalitions are going to be busy. Right. The more
Speaker 2: tools that they have at their disposal is a one
Speaker 2: to one of how much busier they are in their
Speaker 2: day to day life. Right. So, like the type of
Speaker 2: guys that you want on your side, you're going to
Speaker 2: want them to be too busy to learn all this shit.
Speaker 2: Just drop what they're doing and learn all the shit
Speaker 2: that you don't, right, because they'll have means and tools
Speaker 2: and relationships at their disposal that they built by doing
Speaker 2: other shit than not learning about this every day. So
Speaker 2: the type of people you're going to want are going
Speaker 2: to be the type of people that take longer to
Speaker 2: get here. I like the CEOs, the entrepreneurs, Like these
Speaker 2: people have already very stressful days and if something looks
Speaker 2: to them like a rabbit holism, that's going to be
Speaker 2: like upsetting are going to require a huge amount of
Speaker 2: mental investment, which this does. Then they're going to put
Speaker 2: that off because they have to because people depend on
Speaker 2: them to do things. So it's the people that come
Speaker 2: to this late that are going to be people that
Speaker 2: you want to congratulate. And think about how hard that
Speaker 2: was for that person to write, because he was full
Speaker 2: well expecting you to dunk on him and talk shit.
Speaker 2: So he wrote that to you knowing, or at least
Speaker 2: he thought he knew that he was going to get
Speaker 2: nothing but scorn in return, and it was still important
Speaker 2: enough for him to tell you. I want that guy
Speaker 2: on my team. I don't want somebody that would excoriate
Speaker 2: him or frankly, you know, be an asshole. Because that
Speaker 2: person that sent Pete that message as a bigger person
Speaker 2: then I would say most people I see. So, yeah,
Speaker 2: it took him longer to get here, he probably had
Speaker 2: shit to do.
Speaker 1: And I would much rather have him as an ally
Speaker 1: at this point in his learning stage than somebody who's
Speaker 1: known this stuff, who's been reading this stuff for ten
Speaker 1: years and is in their black pilling, you know, just
Speaker 1: negativity spewing negativity stage.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I find I find it funny that all of
Speaker 2: those people, right, the guys that are always growing about
Speaker 2: how long they've been here for and how much more
Speaker 2: they know than everybody. What's really interesting is that those
Speaker 2: are the people that can't see the ground shifting underneath them.
Speaker 2: The people that crow about how long they've been here
Speaker 2: and oh, oh you fell for it again. Ah, those
Speaker 2: are also the same people that can't see the shifting
Speaker 2: sands underneath their feet, which I find just deliciously ironic.
Speaker 2: To steal a quote from Thomas so Pete's right, that
Speaker 2: dumb shit will blind you because all of those guys,
Speaker 2: we all know who we're talking about, there's a whole
Speaker 2: bunch of them. They can't see the change that's happening
Speaker 2: right now, and they're going to be the most surprised
Speaker 2: and the last to realize it. So what use are
Speaker 2: they then?
Speaker 1: I don't even know if they're going to be the
Speaker 1: last to realize that. I think they'll might never I think, well,
Speaker 1: I think many of them, many of them could see
Speaker 1: the destruction of their enemies and not realize it's happened,
Speaker 1: or the beginning of the destruction of their enemies, and
Speaker 1: their hatred has just blinded them.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and then Jarette, who has had to do seven
Speaker 2: little videos, little table talk videos to try and convince
Speaker 2: you that he didn't kill Charlie Kirk. Does that sound
Speaker 2: like a person that's in charge to you? Does that
Speaker 2: sound like a person who has everything going according to plan?
Speaker 2: Did he plan to do all of these emergency little
Speaker 2: fireside chats?
Speaker 1: They're spending billions of dollars to buy CBS News. I
Speaker 1: mean that who watches CBS News? Yeah? Talk? What like
Speaker 1: people aren't just going to figure out ways to get
Speaker 1: around the sensors? I mean that's what isn't that?
Speaker 2: What?
Speaker 1: Like the meme wars we're all about.
Speaker 2: Yeah, he's got damn Galatians. They can spend a lot
Speaker 2: of money, but they sure can't stop people from talking
Speaker 2: about them. What's really interesting is that, like you'll watch
Speaker 2: Tucker Carlson come out and say something and then the
Speaker 2: fucking Prime Minister of Israel has to rush in front
Speaker 2: of a camera in his office, sit down to sit
Speaker 2: down in front of his desk and try and bullshit
Speaker 2: his way around something that Tucker said a media person
Speaker 2: in America and he sends it out and then some
Speaker 2: random black lady that lives in England does another video
Speaker 2: and there it is, that fact. It's running back to
Speaker 2: his office, setting up the camera again, trying to come
Speaker 2: up with some more bullshit. That is rear guard action.
Speaker 2: That is a person who is no longer able to
Speaker 2: set the tempo of battle and is no longer able
Speaker 2: to determine the place and time of battle. That person,
Speaker 2: if we were looking at any type of conflict, that
Speaker 2: person has lost dominance over a key part of the battlefield.
Speaker 2: Ukraine right now cannot set the tempo of battle. Ukraine
Speaker 2: right now cannot determine the time and place in which
Speaker 2: their forces fight, and that is because Russia has total
Speaker 2: air dominance over Ukraine. There is a field of battle
Speaker 2: which Ukraine can exert no control over, and that is
Speaker 2: forcing them to respond a different way that is very
Speaker 2: noticeable on the field that they can still engage in.
Speaker 2: Right Benjamin and Yahoo's behavior is a man that is
Speaker 2: suffering from total information dominance by his enemies. He does
Speaker 2: not get to determine the time and place of battle.
Speaker 2: He's running around doing little TikTok videos trying to put
Speaker 2: out fires his enemy set whenever they decide to set them.
Speaker 2: Not him, and none of the fucking guys that'll, you know,
Speaker 2: swagger around about how much longer they've been here and
Speaker 2: how much you need to shut the fuck up because
Speaker 2: I was hearing this, that, and the third thing, All
Speaker 2: those fagots can't even see it, but they'll tell you
Speaker 2: how much smarter than they are, they are than you,
Speaker 2: and how wrong you are because of how long they've
Speaker 2: been here. Well, have you ever seen the prime minister
Speaker 2: of a country like arguably the most evil, most powerful
Speaker 2: guy in the world. Were you bracketing for them doing
Speaker 2: six you know, fireside chat videos about how I pinky
Speaker 2: pinky promise I didn't kill somebody in a period of
Speaker 2: less than two and a half weeks. No, they didn't
Speaker 2: because they can't physically even see when they're winning. They
Speaker 2: don't have the humility, which is I think the overarching
Speaker 2: theme of this text is thus far and self reflection.
Speaker 2: That's another thing that we see again and again and
Speaker 2: again and again and again. It's almost like he lives
Speaker 2: in a constant state of self reflection.
Speaker 1: You know, there's there have been many times in my
Speaker 1: quote unquote it's quote unquote public life, you know, since
Speaker 1: I started podcast, since I put myself out there, that
Speaker 1: I've been wrong and had to you know, maya culpa
Speaker 1: change my mind and say, yeah, I just don't see
Speaker 1: it that way anymore. And you always get attacked for
Speaker 1: that because you know a lot of people are they
Speaker 1: seem to have to. And what's funny is it's outside
Speaker 1: of religion, it's politics. Put themselves into this political bubble
Speaker 1: that they can never allow themselves to extricate themselves from,
Speaker 1: mostly because they've made their version of politics their morality
Speaker 1: because they don't have a morality that's based in anything
Speaker 1: other than materialism. So they have to find materialistic morality.
Speaker 1: And yeah, I'm not saying that that makes me any
Speaker 1: better than anyone else, but you know it, once you
Speaker 1: do it the first time, you realize I'm never going
Speaker 1: to get this right. I'm never going to get it
Speaker 1: one ed to present perfect. I'm constantly going to be
Speaker 1: adjusting here and tweaking there, and you know, there may
Speaker 1: even be some seismic shifts. You know what's funny, this
Speaker 1: is just Scott Horton and Darryl Cooper have this new
Speaker 1: podcast Provoked and they had Orn McIntyre on the last
Speaker 1: episode talking about the hit piece that reason ran on
Speaker 1: or In and mentioned Darryl in and one of the
Speaker 1: things Daryl said, And what's funny is Daryl came off
Speaker 1: even more radical in that episode than Oron because Oran's like, oh,
Speaker 1: we got to do everything within the law and Daryl's
Speaker 1: gone to defeat our enemies. And Daryl's like, He's like,
Speaker 1: I don't know about that. But something Darryl said was
Speaker 1: he said, look, I would love to still be a libertarian.
Speaker 2: And I think.
Speaker 1: Corton asked him, you know, what do you believe now?
Speaker 1: And he's like, well, it's hard to say what you
Speaker 1: believe because things are constantly changing. When things are constantly changing,
Speaker 1: you have to change with them. You can't deal with
Speaker 1: you if you have people being killed openly for their beliefs,
Speaker 1: You're none. You're you're non aggression thing where you're like, oh,
Speaker 1: I'm not going to aggress against anybody unless they you know,
Speaker 1: unless they aggress against me. First, well, basically there's a
Speaker 1: whole class of people out there now who are threatening
Speaker 1: to kill you if you don't agree with them. So
Speaker 1: how do you deal with that? How do you how
Speaker 1: do you put yourself into a box when things change?
Speaker 1: If you you know, let me put it this way, do.
Speaker 2: You sit by and watch everybody else get killed because
Speaker 2: they haven't aggressed on you yet?
Speaker 1: Right? Well, also, you know how about this, say you
Speaker 1: are forced to move to England and you're forced to
Speaker 1: live in London, what are you taking your political sensibilities
Speaker 1: with you? Are are you taking your ideology with you?
Speaker 1: You're talking about a completely different system of government. Now,
Speaker 1: how's that going to help you? You think you've you
Speaker 1: think you've created this political ideology that helps you get
Speaker 1: through the American landscape in twenty twenty five. It's not
Speaker 1: the same thing as the British landscape in twenty twenty five,
Speaker 1: or the Japanese landscape in twenty twenty five, or the
Speaker 1: Indian landscape in twenty twenty five. It's here, and it's
Speaker 1: for a certain time. It's for certain you know. It's
Speaker 1: like talking about one of the things that Daryl said
Speaker 1: that you know it was, you know, just you would
Speaker 1: hope people would, especially libertarians, would hear it and a
Speaker 1: light bulb would go off. Is this whole article was
Speaker 1: basically saying, they talk about Karl Schmidt, Carl Schmidt was
Speaker 1: a Nazi, These people are Nazis.
Speaker 2: Well to James Lindsay, write this, Yeah.
Speaker 1: Well they talk about Carl Schmidt like Carl Schmidt was
Speaker 1: writing in Vermont.
Speaker 2: That's how they Yes, I remember that. That was a
Speaker 2: really good point.
Speaker 1: Yeah, they're judging Karl Schmidt like he was living in
Speaker 1: Vermont in nineteen twenty, in nineteen thirty three. No, he
Speaker 1: was living in fucking Germany in nineteen thirty three, where
Speaker 1: there were gun battles in the streets between communists and
Speaker 1: the National Socialists, where they were literally having battles in
Speaker 1: the street. And you want to judge him, like he
Speaker 1: lived in all white Vermont in nineteen thirty three.
Speaker 2: Yeah, there were hundreds of people dying in Berlin, hundreds
Speaker 2: more dying in Munich. Like we had one guy get
Speaker 2: shot and it was a total paradigm shattering event for
Speaker 2: most of the country. Now, imagine what it's like having
Speaker 2: hundreds of people shot running gun battles in the street.
Speaker 2: Like Daryl is really, really, really really good at taking
Speaker 2: like something that would probably take me five minutes to say,
Speaker 2: and just whipping it out in a punchy sentence that
Speaker 2: is also contextualized. He's very good at that, and I
Speaker 2: think I hope he leans into it more because I
Speaker 2: think it's one of his one of his greatest weapons
Speaker 2: in his in his toolbox that he has. For me.
Speaker 2: Oh yes, I'm a nationalist for me, I'm a globalist
Speaker 2: for you, I am pro life for me, and I
Speaker 2: am pro choice for you and so on down the
Speaker 2: line where it's like, yes, these things are index to
Speaker 2: a people, right my political I don't have any political beliefs.
Speaker 2: I don't. It is this is a core group of
Speaker 2: people that I care about and love deeply. Yeah, is
Speaker 2: this good for them? Or is this bad for them?
Speaker 2: And that's it.
Speaker 1: That's politics. And I think something else Daryl's really good
Speaker 1: at is what we've been talking about, what we've been
Speaker 1: reading about. Because at the end of that, Horton asked
Speaker 1: Oran about the people mentioned in the in the article,
Speaker 1: like Jarvin and you're a MAZONI and Darryl and and
Speaker 1: Oran said, look, there are a lot of things I
Speaker 1: disagree with with Darryl On because I think Darryl's a
Speaker 1: bleeding heart on some things. If you look at Daryl's face,
Speaker 1: he just smiled. He just smiled a little bit, you know,
Speaker 1: let it bother him. He's not going to take It's
Speaker 1: not like he's not going to take Oran's call. If
Speaker 1: Oron calls. It's one man's opinion, and he also knows
Speaker 1: that that man doesn't want it, doesn't want ill it,
Speaker 1: doesn't want anything bad to happen to him. He just
Speaker 1: has different opinions on him on different things, you know,
Speaker 1: on different things, but as a whole, I think Oran
Speaker 1: would rather have Darryl as a neighbor than some Antifa
Speaker 1: fuck from Portland, you.
Speaker 2: Know, yeah, a friend enemy there at that table.
Speaker 1: Yeah, a lot of our guys talk about Darryl like
Speaker 1: he's no different than than someone Antifa. They're so black
Speaker 1: and white, like he Well, he's just he's just a
Speaker 1: leftist like all the other leftists. Oh really, you're that ignorant?
Speaker 1: How'd you get this way?
Speaker 2: And now he'll take one take. Oh, he doesn't agree
Speaker 2: with me on how we structure our mass deportations. He's
Speaker 2: a leftist, Okay, but what about the other ninety nine
Speaker 2: of his beliefs? Well, yeah, it doesn't matter because he
Speaker 2: doesn't agree with me on this particular thing. Well, is
Speaker 2: that thing being discussed right now? Is that thing a
Speaker 2: possibility that's on the table right now? No, it's not
Speaker 2: so right now, he's your ally, you fucking retard.
Speaker 1: Well, I mean think about this. Would you rather live
Speaker 1: next to some libertarian that you probably agree seventy percent on?
Speaker 1: But they're a degenerate scum bag and you're going to
Speaker 1: have to deal with degenerate scumbag behavior from them as
Speaker 1: a neighbor or a Jewish banker, Jewish banker, like every day,
Speaker 1: all day, every day, every day, all day. Yeah, because
Speaker 1: this is real life. This isn't the Internet. Well, it's
Speaker 1: kind of the internet. We're recording over the internet.
Speaker 2: So yeah, you know, who's going to make my neighborhood
Speaker 2: a better place and throw a bunch of money at lawyers?
Speaker 2: Seems like that if anybody tries to make my neighborhood
Speaker 2: a bad place, that guy. But the libertarian is going
Speaker 2: to be like, oh no, well these people doing shooting
Speaker 2: things in our neighborhood, they're doing it on their property. No,
Speaker 2: the Jewish guy and me are going to team up
Speaker 2: to make sure that libertarian gets evicted. What's going to happen?
Speaker 1: You sound you sound like a traitor?
Speaker 2: Yeah, oh really, Like they have no power over any
Speaker 2: individual person. The only power.
Speaker 1: Power over the power over themselves.
Speaker 2: This is true. But because people, oh that you's gonna
Speaker 2: try and subvert you. Yeah, but I can say no,
Speaker 2: he's going to try and tell you these things and
Speaker 2: I'm going to not listen.
Speaker 1: That was another thing Orin said on the on that
Speaker 1: that was another thing that Orin said on that episode.
Speaker 1: He said that a lot of people on the right
Speaker 1: were really pissed off at me for having Urim hozony
Speaker 1: on because he was going to try to sell me on,
Speaker 1: you know, on his Zionism. You can try and sell me.
Speaker 1: I can talk to a Zionist on my show if
Speaker 1: I want to, and he can try and sell it
Speaker 1: to me. I ain't buying. It doesn't mean that I'm
Speaker 1: going to be buying. I mean, maybe you're too weak to,
Speaker 1: you know, refuse. It's like people who don't want to
Speaker 1: hear other opinion, opinions other than their own. They don't
Speaker 1: want to read outside of whatever. It's like, you know,
Speaker 1: Christians who don't want to read the Koran because they're
Speaker 1: scared they'll be convinced by it or something like that. Well,
Speaker 1: well you don't want to really, you don't want to
Speaker 1: read one of the most read religious technics, like they
Speaker 1: probably the second most religious, red religious text of all
Speaker 1: time and know what's in it and there's like a
Speaker 1: billion of them in the world. You don't want to
Speaker 1: know what's.
Speaker 2: That's so left, it's it's that's what the left does.
Speaker 2: I talk to our British friend about this all the time,
Speaker 2: all right. The left cannot do strategic empathy because they
Speaker 2: know that our worldview is kojin, at least subconsciously. They
Speaker 2: explain it away because as you know, our world views
Speaker 2: are old fashioned and we've disproven those ideas and moved
Speaker 2: past them. But they will resonate with you culturally or
Speaker 2: you know, basically with your soul that they also think
Speaker 2: doesn't exist. But whatever doesn't matter. They as doctrine, refuse
Speaker 2: to engage with any of our material or ideas, even
Speaker 2: in a strategic sense. This is why they're always wrong
Speaker 2: about us, and this is why they are constantly surprised
Speaker 2: and fall flat. Is because they are not allowed, They
Speaker 2: don't allow themselves or others to read our stuff, to
Speaker 2: dialogue with us at all. And that's why they that's
Speaker 2: why they lose, and that's why they're always wrong. So
Speaker 2: the same thing that we cry that we mock in
Speaker 2: the left, I see just as much of it, Like
Speaker 2: like in the example you just gave on the right,
Speaker 2: Oh no I can't read this text, Well, then you're
Speaker 2: never going to understand these people, and then you're going
Speaker 2: to lose. Yes, we have no discernment at times, it
Speaker 2: really frustrates me.
Speaker 1: Well, I mean it's yeah, I don't know what it is.
Speaker 1: And I'm and look, I've I'm trying to talk about
Speaker 1: things that I know, places where I've changed my mind, things,
Speaker 1: but I know I'm still wrong. I still have a
Speaker 1: bunch of things wrong that I have to work on.
Speaker 1: I'm not perfect. I'm trying and I'm not. I hope
Speaker 1: no one thinks that by I'm talking about things that
Speaker 1: I know now, things that I've worked through, things that
Speaker 1: I've struggled with, things, things that like literally caused me loss,
Speaker 1: like not only like emotional loss, but like monetary loss
Speaker 1: in the past, by changing my mind and and and saying,
Speaker 1: you know, I was wrong here, and I really think
Speaker 1: this is this is the wrong path. I think I'm
Speaker 1: leading people down the wrong path by talking about this.
Speaker 1: And people will be like, no, this is my religion.
Speaker 1: So you know, you're you're a heretic now, and you're
Speaker 1: you're immoral now, and you have no principles now, and
Speaker 1: you're like I literally had somebody in the comments and
Speaker 1: I didn't say anything about it because I'm I've resigned
Speaker 1: myself to ignore comments and not even really even unless
Speaker 1: somebody starts spamming. It's not even blocked during my live streams.
Speaker 1: But someone said, oh, you used to be a libertarian,
Speaker 1: now you're a neocon. How do I argue? How what
Speaker 1: am I to argue?
Speaker 2: Am I supposed to?
Speaker 1: Am I supposed to argue? There? You know, it's like,
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm sorry that I offended your religion. But
Speaker 1: you have to understand what Stormy said. There is political ideology,
Speaker 1: is it's fleeting. I mean it never you know, Sam
Speaker 1: Francis said, it just never manifests itself. You know, it's
Speaker 1: channeling James Burnham from from Uh was it Suicide of
Speaker 1: the West? I think that's what it was. Yet, Yeah,
Speaker 1: suicide of the West where he says, yeah, political ideology
Speaker 1: is great until it gets introduced to the air. As
Speaker 1: soon as it gets introduced to reality, it you know,
Speaker 1: it's like like Mike Tyson said, everyone's got a plan
Speaker 1: when they come in the ring with me until they
Speaker 1: get punched in the mouth. Then they're playing. Yeah, that's
Speaker 1: political ideology. The only political ideology is what is good
Speaker 1: for me and my people? Is this good for me
Speaker 1: and my people? If it's not, we need to change
Speaker 1: it or we need to fight again instead if you
Speaker 1: get to the point where you can take power and
Speaker 1: you can get your people in power, and maybe you
Speaker 1: can start from a legitimate standpoint trying to shape shape policy,
Speaker 1: or shape things in your area that lend itself to
Speaker 1: your people. You know, one of the most important things
Speaker 1: I heard, you know a long time ago, was the
Speaker 1: way America was set up in the beginning, was it
Speaker 1: was set up so that white Europeans, you know, mostly
Speaker 1: Northern Europeans and Wasps and Scotch Irish and people can
Speaker 1: thrive in As soon as you introduce a group of
Speaker 1: people into that that can't thrive in that environment, one
Speaker 1: of two things is going to happen. Either they're going
Speaker 1: to fail miserably and it's best for them to leave,
Speaker 1: or somebody's going to come up with the idea that
Speaker 1: what you built for the people who found it, it
Speaker 1: needs to be changed so that it's easier for these people.
Speaker 1: And as soon as you change it for those people
Speaker 1: now the founding stock, it's harder for them to operate
Speaker 1: in it. Now it doesn't benefit them anymore. And what
Speaker 1: should happen is wherever these people are coming from, even
Speaker 1: if you need to help them, if you feel like
Speaker 1: you need to help them if you're some kind of
Speaker 1: you know, Captain Sava Hooe with frigging an African nation
Speaker 1: or something like that, figure out a way to design
Speaker 1: a system that they can benefit from. Help them do
Speaker 1: that if you feel like you're an Albert Schweitzer or
Speaker 1: something like that, because they're not going to be able
Speaker 1: to thrive in this system. They need to find their
Speaker 1: own system. And there needs to be multiple systems for
Speaker 1: multiple people and multiple cultures and multiple not every That's
Speaker 1: why when people say, oh, capitalism is the greatest for who?
Speaker 1: Who is capitalism for what? Somalia? For average sixty three
Speaker 1: you know, sixty five IQ country, And that doesn't work.
Speaker 1: Capitalism doesn't It doesn't even really work for what we
Speaker 1: have now. Capitalism really didn't work for I mean once
Speaker 1: you got very much past the founding because capitalism more
Speaker 1: whatever you were calling capitalism and be getting morphed into
Speaker 1: something else, and whatever it morphed into was not conducive
Speaker 1: to the actions and the beliefs of the founding stock.
Speaker 1: So if you're not willing, if you're not willing to
Speaker 1: look at politics in way of how does this benefit
Speaker 1: my people and be willing to say, and those people
Speaker 1: over there, I don't hate them, but they need to
Speaker 1: figure out whatever system works best to benefit them. In Singapore,
Speaker 1: the best way it benefits them is to have a
Speaker 1: system of authoritarianism, because that's what they need. But they
Speaker 1: also have a very open economy. Somebody told me that
Speaker 1: you can like pass through the airport and go to
Speaker 1: a bank in the airport and not even be from
Speaker 1: there and open a bank account and deposit.
Speaker 2: Money, not even leave the international terminal. Your passport never
Speaker 2: even gets stamped.
Speaker 1: Yeah, So they have this open economy and it works
Speaker 1: for them because the people get along. Well why do
Speaker 1: they get along? Because if they don't get along, there's consequences.
Speaker 1: That's the way it needs to be in some places.
Speaker 1: I don't know all I know. The only question I'm
Speaker 1: asking is what's best for my people and people who
Speaker 1: think like I do.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And to sirt back on the difference in beliefs,
Speaker 2: basically creating strife that there's no coalition building happening or
Speaker 2: just a circular firing squad. I want to remind everybody
Speaker 2: that there is no set of beliefs on the right
Speaker 2: right now, and this is actually a huge problem for
Speaker 2: us strategically, all right, I can pull one hundred right
Speaker 2: wingers and say, okay, can you describe to me what
Speaker 2: it looks like when we win? And I'll get a
Speaker 2: hundred different answers, monarchists, Christian nationalists, wig nats. And it's
Speaker 2: going to stay that way for forever until we learn
Speaker 2: to do what Pete is describing. And this is everyone's like,
Speaker 2: oh well, we need, you know, right wing billionaires to
Speaker 2: fund all these things. Okay, why the fuss did they
Speaker 2: do that? You can't even convince them what it looks
Speaker 2: like when they win.
Speaker 1: I say that often.
Speaker 2: Sorry, but unless we can agree upon what it looks
Speaker 2: like when we win, they can't make that investment because
Speaker 2: you can't tell them how it will benefit them or
Speaker 2: how it will protect them. Everybody, And like, Pete, you
Speaker 2: know this because I think, as I probably chimped out
Speaker 2: to you privately, Darryl and I disagree on something. I
Speaker 2: don't even know if he still even has that opinion
Speaker 2: or whatever, but there's an opinion that he had that
Speaker 2: kind of cut me. But below the quick I don't
Speaker 2: know if that's a term people still use anymore, but
Speaker 2: it got under my seat. It happened to hit like
Speaker 2: all of my sensitivity buttons, and I will still champion
Speaker 2: his stuff. He is brilliant and he's doing fantastic work.
Speaker 2: And I will never say I won't even air our disagreement.
Speaker 2: I won't tell anybody what we disagree about. That's for
Speaker 2: me and him to talk and we sit down privately
Speaker 2: and we can actually discuss that. But he's on my
Speaker 2: side and I'm on his side, just like Oran is
Speaker 2: on Darryl's side, and Darryl's on Orn's side even though
Speaker 2: they disagree, because they can prioritize things. Daryl knows that
Speaker 2: having a neighborhood full of Orans is great, and Oron
Speaker 2: knows having a neighborhood full of Daryl's is great. Daryl
Speaker 2: knows having a government full of Orans is great, and
Speaker 2: Oran knows that having a government full of Daryl's is great,
Speaker 2: and that whatever the thing that they don't agree on
Speaker 2: doesn't fucking matter. And I think we need to luck.
Speaker 2: I think we need to do that at scale. I
Speaker 2: think that basically what we saw on that episode of
Speaker 2: What's it Called? I always forget the name. It's like, oh,
Speaker 2: it's a one word name. Provoked, provoked. There we go
Speaker 2: what happened on that show in real time is something
Speaker 2: that we need to be doing all the time, because
Speaker 2: it's only when we can do that that we can
Speaker 2: eventually settle on a cohesive picture of this is what
Speaker 2: is attainable in the short term, this is what is
Speaker 2: attainable in the long term, This is how we structure
Speaker 2: things after that. Now you can paint a worldview that
Speaker 2: you can sell people with money on. The One thing
Speaker 2: about the left is if you ask them roughly what
Speaker 2: it looks like when they win, they have enough slogans
Speaker 2: memorized where they can most of the time convince you
Speaker 2: that they're in agreement on this. And that's what gives
Speaker 2: people the ability to donate tons of money to them,
Speaker 2: because they can paint a picture about what that money
Speaker 2: is going to be used for and how great it's
Speaker 2: going to be for the person that's giving that money
Speaker 2: and for the people receiving that money when they win.
Speaker 2: And that's why they get money to win, and that's
Speaker 2: why we don't A billionaire will never not be an
Speaker 2: investor no matter what. Like they have a million people
Speaker 2: pitching them a million ideas all the time, and you
Speaker 2: need to be able to paint a picture of what
Speaker 2: it looks like in the future to pitch, like, what
Speaker 2: are you pitching? And I think the more serious people
Speaker 2: in our in our thing, Pete, I think we're doing that.
Speaker 2: And I think the people that don't want to do
Speaker 2: that are gonna whether they know it or not, or
Speaker 2: whether they do it with intent or not, are going
Speaker 2: to find themselves not in the mechanisms of what's going
Speaker 2: to happen next.
Speaker 1: Well, they'll benefit from what happens next to be bitter
Speaker 1: about it. Yeah, yeah, they'll never say thank you. And
Speaker 1: so those who came up with the ideas and everything,
Speaker 1: and you know, and really, I I think everybody knows.
Speaker 1: I'm not the not a big fan of Ronald Reagan,
Speaker 1: especially the amnesty and the making machine making machine guns
Speaker 1: go from seven hundred dollars to thirty thousand dollars for
Speaker 1: a cheat. Yeah. Yeah, but he did say, you know,
Speaker 1: it's amazing what you can what you can achieve and
Speaker 1: get done if no one wants to credit for it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: And that's something I think that's really important, because that's
Speaker 1: not I mean that there are things that I've done
Speaker 1: and people I know have done and no one knows
Speaker 1: that they did it, yet a lot of people celebrated it,
Speaker 1: and to I think part of the reason it got
Speaker 1: done is because no one everybody was like, we don't
Speaker 1: need credit for it, just get it done. And you know,
Speaker 1: if you get credit for something, puts a bull's eye
Speaker 1: on the next thing. If you're like, yeah, I did this,
Speaker 1: puts bulls eye on you the next time you try
Speaker 1: to do something. So you know, humility is Humility is important.
Speaker 1: And I think that you know what we see and
Speaker 1: you and I have talked about this before that a
Speaker 1: lot of the people out there who are quote unquote
Speaker 1: content creators, really they just want credit for being right.
Speaker 1: I was right about this. I was right about that.
Speaker 1: See how I predicted this? Now, what did their prediction?
Speaker 1: How did their predictions change your life? Well? I knew
Speaker 1: this was going to happen, okay, so how did you
Speaker 1: benefit from that? Did you short of stock? Did you
Speaker 1: buy a stock? Did? What'd you do? Well? I knew.
Speaker 1: I get to brag about the fact that I watched
Speaker 1: the guy who told me this, and I told my
Speaker 1: friends and I was right.
Speaker 2: Can you pay your mortgage with it?
Speaker 1: Quite the accomplishment? Quite the accomplishment. But no, you know
Speaker 1: what though that content creator they could pay their mortgage
Speaker 1: with it, What did you get from it?
Speaker 2: Astro makes a really good point about this, like basically
Speaker 2: like if you're on the right and you're in a
Speaker 2: non you may think you deserve credit or whatever, but
Speaker 2: you actually don't. You're in a non so people can
Speaker 2: take your ideas and run with them and dumb them
Speaker 2: down and not say them as good as you or whatever. Right,
Speaker 2: by being in a no on, you're making that tacit
Speaker 2: agreement that I don't care if I get credit or not.
Speaker 2: I just want to win. And I think we forget
Speaker 2: that a lot. And the more you win, the less
Speaker 2: people will have to be ann. I think as things progress,
Speaker 2: none of us will be. But that only happens if
Speaker 2: we win. Right, Why do we want to win? Is
Speaker 2: it because of how it will benefit us? And this
Speaker 2: is another thing about being ordered internally. One thing you
Speaker 2: could tell almost immediately about Marcus Aurelius, and this is
Speaker 2: another thing, is correct me if I'm wrong, Pete. But
Speaker 2: the meditations were never published. They were just his internal notes,
Speaker 2: and I'm sure like if you found out that they
Speaker 2: did publish, he'd be probably mortified.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, these this was like a diary of his
Speaker 1: and yeah, probably closest to a diary and stuff he
Speaker 1: wrote down for himself, and it was never meant to
Speaker 1: be in the public.
Speaker 2: So he is self reflecting daily to himself. No one's
Speaker 2: ever going to read this, right, he is centering himself
Speaker 2: every day. And this is a man. How did Yaki
Speaker 2: say it? No one will die for an idea, but
Speaker 2: a few men will die for an ideal, or a
Speaker 2: few great men will die for an ideal. There is
Speaker 2: a thing inside of Marcus Aurelius that is driving him
Speaker 2: from his soul, not from his spirit or his body. Right,
Speaker 2: the ego is a separate thing from the human soul. Right,
Speaker 2: The thoughts in your head, you know, the feelings like
Speaker 2: these are all separate. And you know they're separate because
Speaker 2: when a baby is born, it doesn't have any of
Speaker 2: that shit yet. It has no opinions, It has no beliefs,
Speaker 2: it has no opinions of others, no thoughts, it's just awareness.
Speaker 2: It's just soul and body. And that's where an ideal
Speaker 2: comes from. It is a layer deeper than the conscious mind.
Speaker 2: The conscious mind wants recognition, the constant mind wants status
Speaker 2: because the constant mind can think about the not just mine,
Speaker 2: can think about how that status will benefit them, or
Speaker 2: how that credit will benefit them. And what you see
Speaker 2: him doing by reflecting again and again and again throughout
Speaker 2: his life, you can see him pushing that aside, that
Speaker 2: conscious mind aside. And what matters to my soul well,
Speaker 2: that these people flourish, that no evil is done to them,
Speaker 2: that they have the means as God intended to self actualize,
Speaker 2: to be the best versions of themselves. None of those
Speaker 2: things benefit him. He's not going to wear fancier robes.
Speaker 2: He's not going to get fancier robes. As you say here,
Speaker 2: To not busy myself with vain things, and to not
Speaker 2: easily believe those things which are commonly spoken by such
Speaker 2: as take upon them to mark wonders by sorcerers or
Speaker 2: prestidigitators or impostors concerning the power of charms and the
Speaker 2: driving out of demons or evil spirits, and the like.
Speaker 2: To not keep quails for the game, to not be
Speaker 2: mad at such things, or be offended by another man's
Speaker 2: liberty of speech. I'm sorry I grabbed the wrong paragraph,
Speaker 2: and then I did not fall into the ambition of
Speaker 2: ordinary sophists, either to write tracts concerning the common theorems,
Speaker 2: or to exhort men unto virtue in the study of
Speaker 2: philosophy by basically grandstanding by public ortions. As also that
Speaker 2: I never, by way of ostentation, did affect to show
Speaker 2: myself an active, able man for any kind of bodily exercises.
Speaker 2: Marcus Aurelius mogged no one. He showed off. Never, This
Speaker 2: is what he's saying. I have never, by way of ostentation,
Speaker 2: what is ostentatiousness, did affect the show of myself to
Speaker 2: be an active and able man in any kind of
Speaker 2: bodily exercises. And that I gave over the study of
Speaker 2: rhetoric and poetry and of elegant, neat language by basically
Speaker 2: speaking frankly, that I did not use the walk about
Speaker 2: the house in my long robes, nor to do any
Speaker 2: such thing. Moreover, I learned of him to write letters
Speaker 2: without any affectation or intrigue in gossip. Right, he's basically
Speaker 2: telling you that the things he does that Rusticus taught
Speaker 2: him right is to not flatter himself, to not show off,
Speaker 2: to not seek, more importantly, to not seek the status
Speaker 2: giving of others to not seek the recognition of others.
Speaker 2: And this circles all the way back to what his
Speaker 2: mother taught him, and of my mother, I have learned
Speaker 2: to be religious and bountiful and to forbear not only
Speaker 2: to do, but to intend any evil intent. So why
Speaker 2: is he not fall into ambition of ordinary sophists or
Speaker 2: to grandstand with large public orations to show how virtuous
Speaker 2: he is and how philosophically intelligent he is, or by
Speaker 2: way of ostentation, did affect the show of myself as
Speaker 2: an active, able bodied man for any other kind of exercise,
Speaker 2: or basically stroke himself being a word sell doing poetry
Speaker 2: and talking in neat, flowery language, or prance around his
Speaker 2: house in his nicest gear. Because that means when he
Speaker 2: does do exercise right, when he does do oration right,
Speaker 2: or write tracts of theorems, or when he exerts exhorts
Speaker 2: men to virtue and study, the intent behind those actions
Speaker 2: is not for his own benefit. The intention matters. And
Speaker 2: that's why I say like it's it's a it's some
Speaker 2: things that you would read like mystical texts about why
Speaker 2: you do something right, and in that like reality isn't
Speaker 2: what you think it is series we did Pete. We
Speaker 2: talked about like consciousness being able to affect random number generators,
Speaker 2: and they also did that test on money, right, So
Speaker 2: why you do things matters? Right? So God has built
Speaker 2: right and wrong into the universe. It's built into the
Speaker 2: fundamental framework right that undergirds are reality. So one of
Speaker 2: the tests that Rupert Scheldric and Dean Rayden did was
Speaker 2: basically they had people concentrate on a certain dollar amount, right,
Speaker 2: and then they kept track of them and to see
Speaker 2: if they would buy any instance this money would fall
Speaker 2: into their lap through unexpected means that they did not initiate.
Speaker 2: And you can measure whether something is statistically significant or
Speaker 2: not right by basically how many how many degrees from random?
Speaker 2: Is it like total randomness like winning a lottery ticket
Speaker 2: for instance. And what they found is okay to give
Speaker 2: a really dumb down example, when a person, let's say,
Speaker 2: wishes for not wishes, but just focus their consciousness on
Speaker 2: one hundred thousand dollars just dropping in their mailbox, the
Speaker 2: chances of that actually happening to that person were less
Speaker 2: than random, as in, one hundred thousand dollars will land
Speaker 2: in the mailbox of somebody not even thinking about it
Speaker 2: sooner than it would the guy that is. That's funny.
Speaker 2: But what's even more interesting is, let's say the guy
Speaker 2: who's thinking about one hundred thousand dollars landing in the
Speaker 2: mailbox of his next door neighbor, right because his next
Speaker 2: door neighbor has cancer and the chemotherapy costs are eating
Speaker 2: through all of his neighbor's savings. And now his neighbor's
Speaker 2: about to lose his house because he was one hundred
Speaker 2: thousand dollars on his house and it's going to get
Speaker 2: foreclosed on. Those people that wanted that thought about having
Speaker 2: one hundred thousand dollars land in their neighbors mailbox. Again,
Speaker 2: I'm dumbing down, and you know, taking liberties with the
Speaker 2: experiment and had nothing to do with mailboxes or one
Speaker 2: hundred thousand dollars checks. The chances of one hundred thousand
Speaker 2: dollars landing in that person's neighbor's mailbox was not only
Speaker 2: more statistically significant, actually statistically significant so enough multiples above
Speaker 2: absolute randomness to where it is signaling that something else
Speaker 2: is happening. Right. So let's say if the landing in
Speaker 2: your your mailbox was negative, I don't know five percent, right,
Speaker 2: random person mailbox zero percent, So total randomness landing in
Speaker 2: the cancer neighbors mailbox ten percent. So you've increased the
Speaker 2: chances of some random event happening from zero to ten
Speaker 2: percent because the action, the intent behind it was selfless.
Speaker 2: And they've proved this a bunch of different ways. So
Speaker 2: that means the intention in which you do in action
Speaker 2: affects the success of that action. So a leader that
Speaker 2: is acting out of selflessness, right, the thing that motivates
Speaker 2: him is not himself or his own self benefit, that
Speaker 2: person is going to be more successful. Random chance is
Speaker 2: going to break his direction far more than the leader
Speaker 2: that is doing any such action for his own personal benefit.
Speaker 2: So God has written morality and virtue into the very
Speaker 2: fabric of the universe. Right, there is no randomness. Randomness
Speaker 2: is something that is affected by our virtue and why
Speaker 2: we do things matters, And this is you'd only you
Speaker 2: would only are the only places you pick this up
Speaker 2: or in like you know, like a cult, mystic traditions
Speaker 2: or whatever that the intent in which something is done,
Speaker 2: or as a Christian in whose name something is done
Speaker 2: will affect the outcome. So are you acting selfishly or selflessly.
Speaker 2: Are you doing it in Christ's name or are in
Speaker 2: your own? Who has the power? Here? Is it you
Speaker 2: that is making that check hit that mailbox? Or is
Speaker 2: it God? It's God, all right? So humility and selflessness
Speaker 2: are very important. So I find that really interesting that
Speaker 2: the overall theme in his governance and the way he
Speaker 2: acts in the world is entirely selfless. And he is
Speaker 2: constantly policing his own mind and reinforcing this again and
Speaker 2: again and again, so much so that he meditates on
Speaker 2: it daily. He takes credit for none of his positive attributes.
Speaker 2: He is going through and enumerting all of the good
Speaker 2: things about him. Even his own virtue he does not
Speaker 2: take credit for because they're not his. They were given
Speaker 2: to him by something out with someone else. So even
Speaker 2: the best things about himself he will not attribute to
Speaker 2: his inate ability or his innate virtue. Marcus, why are
Speaker 2: you so kind? Oh? I'm not kind. I was shown
Speaker 2: this kind as how to be kind by this other person.
Speaker 2: So even in attributing his own virtues, there is selflessness.
Speaker 2: Like the order of this person's internal state is I
Speaker 2: think what people should be focusing on.
Speaker 1: Sorry, right there, that's where we're gonna end it. I
Speaker 1: don't think we need to even come back to this.
Speaker 1: I think even just the first five, five or six
Speaker 1: that we we talked about should be enough to keep people.
Speaker 1: You help people to think in a different way, you know.
Speaker 2: I mean, it's not very fun to read.
Speaker 1: It's not fun to read. And well, yeah, because self
Speaker 1: examination is hard. Just just ask a certain group of people.
Speaker 1: It's who it's impossible for.
Speaker 2: The vampire can't see his reflection. We were told.
Speaker 1: Yes, but the yeah, I mean, I I hope nobody
Speaker 1: comes away from this thinking we think we're perfect. I
Speaker 1: mean we I think we both know that we're works
Speaker 1: and were works in process, and that the you know,
Speaker 1: we'll change our mind on things when we get more information.
Speaker 1: But knowing that you've made mistakes in the past, being
Speaker 1: able to admit them and even be able to explain
Speaker 1: why they were mistakes and why you change your mind,
Speaker 1: I think is h is very important. And to to
Speaker 1: talk about it publicly. You know, it doesn't always seem
Speaker 1: to be the you know, something that people want to do.
Speaker 1: But you know, I have no problem with it because
Speaker 1: if my even from a personal standpoint, a if you
Speaker 1: don't want to get involved in politics. You don't want
Speaker 1: to be public about anything that you believe if anything
Speaker 1: can help you just to thrive in your personal life. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I'll uh, I'll put a little bit of myself out
Speaker 1: there to see if it to see if it helps.
Speaker 2: Yeah, this, this text is going to get really thick
Speaker 2: and not as cleanly broken up as I think the
Speaker 2: other ones are going to be. So yeah, maybe like
Speaker 2: if we we don't have to touch on this again,
Speaker 2: or if we have to do one more about like
Speaker 2: other stuff, then yeah, because I think this is also
Speaker 2: something that somebody should read to themselves and work on.
Speaker 2: Like I think you're going to read meditations. Yeah, you
Speaker 2: should read it many times.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's not long at all. I mean you got
Speaker 1: when you go to the twelfth book, you're only on
Speaker 1: one hundred and thirty ninth page in this pdf, so
Speaker 1: I mean you're talking about one hundred and twenty pages basically.
Speaker 1: So yeah, alright, Stormy, have a good.
Speaker 2: Name, my friend. I will talk to you later.
Speaker 1: Take careme right, right,