Welcome to the Last American Vagabond. I'm honored
to have on the show today Larkin Rose
to discuss his outstanding book,
the most dangerous superstition. And, really, this is
something we've talked about many, many, many different
times on the last American Vagabond, the daily
wrap up, the conversation of the illusion of
authority or, you know, voting in general within
that and the conversation of how important this
is. I mean, right now with the selection
process coming up, how
important this is. I mean, right now with
the selection process coming up, how much of
the conversation revolves around things we're gonna discuss
today. So I'm excited to have him on
to discuss why this is such an important
manipulation,
the illusion around all of this and and
what we may do to possibly change that
going forward. So, Larkin, thank you for joining
me today. How are you? Thanks for having
me on. I'm doing great even in Phoenix.
Outstanding.
Well, you know, it's interesting to start off
that I've been saying a lot that I
and maybe this is just me being hopeful,
but I still think it's important to lean
into. I I do see a lot of
mental change happening. And as usual, it comes
along with a lot of, you know, the
the powers that shouldn't be amping up our
uncomfortableness to make you fall back into line.
But I really do see a lot more
people than I've ever seen before asking questions
in a lot of different areas coming from
the COVID 19 illusion conversation, what's going on
in foreign policy, but specifically around the election.
And I've I've we've been talking a lot
about or just in my entire career doing
this. I've always been a 2 party illusion
mindset person. I've talked about the reality of,
you know, the the kinda just the big
facade around politics in general and then also
going further into the idea of the illusion
of authority. But it's been there, and we've
talked about it. But most of my audience
is still kind of like, well, I get
it, we're probably gonna vote. And, you know,
and I play that game every single year.
This year,
something has shifted as I feel at least
as I feel. And I I see a
lot of people asking questions and investing in
these ideas even if they still may vote
than I've ever seen before. And we got
a really incredible pushback
from the certain kind of people in the,
you know, the higher level left right paradigm
commentators when we simply said the same thing
we say every year, sort of like, you
know, vote no one, 2024. And it got
this crazy response. And so I immediately was
like, I've gotta have Larkin Rose on. We've
gotta talk about his ideas because people are
listening to these things more than I've ever
seen. So if unless you wanna comment on
just that in general, I'd like to start
with just, you know, explain for people that
have never heard this before, what is government
and what is and how what is it
that we incorrectly see it as?
Well, I'll start with the incorrectly see it
as because it actually ties in with what
you were saying.
And the reason it's falling apart and the
reason more people are starting to question it
is because the mythology that we were all
taught
is falling apart in front of our eyes.
Mhmm. What we're taught to think is that
society needs this thing called government
that that's above us mere mortals. Like, you're
not supposed to think about it like that.
But it's this thing that keeps us in
line, and it keeps us civilized, and it
settles disputes, and it protects us, and yada
yada yada.
And people don't even recognize that that's actually
a religious belief
because they talk about government as if it
isn't just people.
Because they well, the government will handle that.
Well well, what are you talking about? Like,
are is this some daddy you're talking about,
or is this just human beings?
And the fact that most people recognize if
you ask them, not only do they recognize
it's just human beings, they recognize it's the
worst human beings there are. Right. And as
that becomes more and more obvious, like, in
recent years where the the elections are just
one slimeball against another slimeball,
and the mask fell off.
Mhmm.
Tons of people who used to just take
it on faith that, of course, we need
government. Of course, there need to be sort
of societal
managers or something,
keeping the rest of us in line.
The more the facade,
that these people are somehow superior and they
have special knowledge or special rights or special
something
And the more and more people see, you're
not even, like, average. You're not you're worse
than my neighbor.
Right. Like, I'd rather have my neighbor rule
me than some random, you know,
republican or democrat.
And so the entire belief in government is
the notion that we have to have some
people who have special rights, who have authority,
who have the right to tell the rest
of us what to do, have the right
to tax the rest of us
to pay for big things because we can't
handle that, and we can't be trusted to,
like, just, you know, pool our resources voluntarily
and stuff. No. We, the the stupid little
children,
need our parent government bossing us around and
taking our money in for our own good
and funding these big things that we're told,
you know, us mere mortals could never possibly
handle.
And I think more and more that that
that
lie has been falling apart precisely because
nobody really has faith. The best they can
say is my slime ball isn't quite as
bad as your slime ball. Right. That's pretty
much the entire conversation right now.
And that's not enough to maintain people's actual
belief.
And I remember
when, like, the idea of the office of
presidency.
Even if you disagree with the pollies policies
of whoever's there right now, you respect the
office of the presidency, and I got to
shake hands with my congressman.
And it was in my lifetime not that
long ago where there was this reverence for
government,
and it has completely fallen apart over the
last, you know, 15 or 20 years
because the the propagandist for the state have
gotten so bad at their job.
Mhmm. Because instead of looking like we're above
you, we're sort of the high priests of
society. Like, you need us here doing these
complicated things that you can't possibly understand.
We have these legislative sessions, and we decide
public policy for the blah blah blah. So
the average peasant out there can go, well,
I don't know how any of that works,
so I'm glad somebody's doing it.
To now just these
screaming idiots. I mean, the they don't even
come across as smarter than the average person.
Right. With these screaming power happy idiots pointing
out how the other one's a liar and
corrupt crook.
And more and more people, they can't help
but notice,
we can't possibly society
can't meet these people Mhmm. To have special
power.
Well,
let me ask you something. And this is
interesting you bring so do you think there's
any level of this? And, wait. I mean,
I think everyone can sense that. And so
the question is, do you think there's any
level of this this is that is sort
of part of the design at some level?
Because, I mean, I I find it hard
to believe that it could have gotten
this I mean, it I guess I guess
I shouldn't even say that because if I
mean, it's obvious, almost like the logical decline.
But do you think that this being so
obviously con like, before, like you said, there
was reverence, there was at least, like, an
assemblance of difference of policy? Like, now there's
just, like, these screening wedge issues, then everything
else kinda seems to line up in the
same direction. Like, I think we the those
of us that see this always know that's
kind of how it works, but it's very
visible right now. So do you think any
of that's by design for some reason?
Actually, no. And the thing is I I
I often use the analogy of a chess
game. As if you're playing chess and it
looks like the other guy did a colossally
stupid move, you still have to pause and
go, was that a trap? Like, is there
some clever thing behind this? Because that looked
really dumb,
but maybe there's something I'm not seeing.
And so I I
am just by default in that mindset when
it comes to government doing stuff that looks
stupid.
So I even hesitated for a while to
all the way accept
they really are this dumb. I think they
have drifted so long on the momentum of
the propaganda
of the past geniuses like, Edward Bernays,
evil genius, but he was still a genius.
He was brilliant at manipulation and propaganda.
And the politicians were
way better at duping people into thinking
we needed them. And they're the source of
law and order and and all that.
And I think they've gotten their way so
long that the geniuses just sort
of faded away,
and the parasitic politicians like, they come out
and they do the dumbest thing. They they
have 1,000,000,000 of dollars at their disposal,
and they come out and they do the
most moronic things while, like, trying to pretend
they're one of us.
I'm just like you, and then they do,
you know, idiotic things that everyone's laughing at
them.
And I was hesitant, I mean, years ago,
but I was hesitant to believe, are they
really that bad? The first book I wrote,
which is actually out of print at the
moment, is how to be a successful tyrant.
And it describes the manipulations,
and it it describes all the nasty tricks
they do. They're getting an f minus
at this point in being successful tyrants.
Because when they just grab for brute force
power,
that's like, they may get it short term
for some people, but in the long run,
that is colossally stupid. You can't rule a
people if it's just by brute force. If
they don't feel obligated to bow to you
and obey you,
you as the tyrant, you're in deep doo
doo. Right.
I'm happy about. So I was thinking they
really are this incompetent now.
And I and I think what you said
there a moment ago is the ideas that
I think it's a lot of the people
that might have otherwise otherwise gravitated around this
power structure are just so aware of how
any number of things we see on the
decline that they're just not in it it's
almost like I said, the natural decline of
how this is going. You know? And I
think that's pretty visible. But so you said
about the the illusion about the idea that
you have to believe that they have this
authority. So let's talk about that. And that's
a a central part of your discussion in
the book is that you the that's not
that everyone's just inherently bad, that people believe
that these people have the right to rule
over them. So to touch on the point
your your point about the consent of the
governed and and why that is an illusion
and what it means and, you know, in
a context even of a democracy that's really
just the mob having rule over what you
say. So break that down for people. Right.
Well, picture there's a king. There's 1 king.
He bosses people around. He steals their stuff.
And people go, hey. We don't really like
this. And then he goes, oh, they're getting
kind of upset.
I'm gonna let them choose between me and
my brother
who's gonna rule them and boss them around
and take their stuff. We're still gonna boss
them around and take their stuff, but then
we're gonna tell them, well, because we let
you choose
which bully was gonna brutalize you on a
regular basis, that sort of means you're in
charge, and it sort of means you consented.
So democracy
I mean, people are like, well, at least
it's democracy. Democracy is the best trick tyrants
have ever come up with
because it gives the people the illusion that
they have some say in the matter, that
they're being represented
or that
it's by their consent when none of that's
true. And they have no say in the
matter at all.
But the reason for the tyrant to do
that is because if people have think they
have no influence within the system, they tend
to, like, have revolutions
or at least just disobey and, like, we're
gonna sneak over here and not tell the
master what we're doing.
But if
if they can keep the focus on,
we'll have this election and have these bicker
and and
get the the livestock into 2 groups who
are yelling at each other. We want our
guy in power. We want our guy in
power.
It's it's literally just managing human livestock.
Mhmm. And that that's what the the movie
Jones Plantation is about that we made.
And so
as long as people think the institution is
legitimate and they play these stupid games,
they lose because they've already accepted the premise
that somebody has the right to rule them.
They're just bickering over who.
And if you if you start with that
premise, you already lost. You've already agreed that
you're somebody else's property, basically.
Now you're just whining about which person it's
gonna be. Right.
And what a lot of here's the thing
that a lot of pro freedom people don't
even like to hear.
It's very easy
to point at Washington DC or wherever and
point at these crooks and go, they're evil
psychos. They're causing all these problems, blah blah
blah. And they are evil psychos, and they
are causing lots of problems.
The thing is all of their power
comes from the belief of their subjects. Right.
And people don't want to think, like, democrats
can point at the system and go, this
is unfair. Republicans
can point at the system and go, this
is unfair.
Everybody political can do that. None of them
want to admit that their belief system is
why this is happening. Right. And democracy is
a a fine example because people say, well,
if we vote really hard and I say,
okay. If 49%
of voters
voted to, like, end some tax, does it
end? No.
If 10%
of people being taxed just go, not giving
you my money anymore,
that's the end. It doesn't matter who's in
power. It doesn't matter what the legislation says.
It's the people's belief that they're obligated to
obey,
which makes their focus beyond begging the masters
for permission to be free. Right. And if
you have to beg somebody else for permission
to be free, you're already not free. Right.
Exactly.
Good. And that is the heart and soul
of politics, and that's why most of the
people who go rah rah rah on pro
freedom,
they don't get that as long as they
believe that government is a legitimate thing,
they are the problem.
And not on purpose, not because they're malicious,
but because they've been duped into believing this
superstition of political
authority
where they think, well, of course, we're gonna
have a ruling class. Now let's bicker about
what it's allowed to do and who should
be in control of it. It's like you
already lost. Like, as soon as the game
board was set, you had already lost
because you already accepted the premise
that you're gonna have a ruler
and that they'll hide that under, well, it's
representative and blah blah blah. It's a ruler.
They tell you what you can do, and
they decide how much of your paycheck they
will let you keep,
and then they say we represent you. Right.
Like, if I went to you personally and
said, from now on, I'm deciding how much
of your paycheck I'm gonna take
every time you get a paycheck. But don't
worry. I'm serving you and rep like,
in any other context, everybody would recognize that
as utterly insane.
But because this is a belief system they've
been surrounded by their entire life, they think,
well, it's this must be real. Like, government
must be legitimate. We can bicker about the
details, but
we can't, like, throw out the entire idea.
And then the only candidate throws out the
idea. Yeah. Well,
you called it what hand me down belief,
so I thought that was pretty a good
way to put that, any idea of people.
But, you know, what what I think the
foundational point that I really want people to
listen to here is that as you highlight
that, yes, these people are evil, they these
rulers.
But it's if without the belief that they
have that authority over our lives, this would
not be the dynamic. Now you can obviously
and maybe you can address the idea that
there would be some level of of force
or consequence.
Right? Well, you're not listening. I'm gonna put
you in jail. But the point is if
it actually became a mass action
to a certain degree, enough people saying we
just don't acknowledge your authority, you know, that
that's the obvious point there is that they
wouldn't have it if we didn't give that
to them. But so I guess that's since
I bring it up, address that point there
is, like, how would that look? Let's say
99% of the grouping of just, let's say,
the United States or the world said, you
know, we don't acknowledge your authority. Wouldn't there
then be an immediate response of force? And
then how do you deal with that in
that moment?
No. Because their enforcers are us too. Congressman
aren't out there beating people up and collecting
their taxes.
They're using the livestock to enforce it on
the other livestock. Right. And so it it's
totally a numbers game. If one person says,
well, I don't acknowledge your authority, they might
get a tank in their living room. Like,
that's not gonna go well.
But it's a numbers game when enough people
don't believe, and it doesn't have to be
everybody. It doesn't have to be a majority.
It is so easy for a pretty small
minority of a country to just disobey a
law out of existence. And there's Mhmm. Lots
of historical examples. Like in the US, we
have alcohol prohibition
that just it became unenforceable because people were
just like, we don't really feel obligated to
go along with this. So we're gonna do
this. In fact, we so much don't feel
obligated that we're gonna start to shoot your
revenuers when they, like, try to find our
stills and stuff. Yeah. And it's like,
the people in power are thinking,
yeah, not only are they shooting at us,
but most of the other people are going,
yeah, the revenuers kinda deserved it.
When the victims don't accept their victimization,
it becomes really hard to control them. And
so
not even 99, but if 50% of the
people in the country in the US said,
we're just not paying taxes, we're not gonna
hide. We're not gonna report anything. You're not
gonna do withholding. We're not gonna give you
any money. That's
over 50,000,000 people. What are you gonna do
about it? And the answer is absolutely nothing.
Yeah. Like, financially, logistically speaking, yeah, you're that
there I don't think that would be possible.
The consequence would be too bad damaging for
the entire system. Right? It's, like, it's an
excellent point. Well, to what you said a
moment ago, though, about alcohol, cannabis
is an interesting part in that conversation, though.
Right? Because we you're you that's a example
of what you're saying. Clearly,
they just explicit resistance, they it just now
it's just kind of by default legal in
most places, but the federal government has still
maintained the illegality. So it's like in this
middle quasi zone. Is that kind of like
the new dynamic? Like, how do you get
that? That's kinda where I see that going
is they just kinda let you do it,
but then you're still allowing them to have
the ability to enforce on you. You know?
It's interesting. Right. It it's funny because the
the people in power like, I've said a
1000000 times, the only thing they care about
is what they can get away with. They
don't care, like, when people protest, we don't
like this. Were you under the impression that
any of them care? Whether you they're literally
stealing your paycheck. You think they care whether
you want that to happen?
So it's just about what they can get
away with. So they're not thinking, well, they're
not even thinking like, well, who's gonna vote
for whatever, because the 2 parties are the
same thing anyway. They're basically thinking resistance versus
compliance.
Like, can we keep doing this? Mhmm. So
when it came to to marijuana, because the
mentality had shifted so much and almost everybody
was like, okay. Whether or not I like
the habit, caging peep kicking on their doors
and caging people for having a plant. That's
just bonkers.
And so when the mentality of the people
isn't on the side of you're all horrible
criminals because you smoke weed or something,
it becomes unenforceable.
And the thing is at some point, if
they try to make an example of somebody
when the mentality is shifted too far in
the other direction,
they trigger a way worse backlash than if
they just quietly let it happen. So right
now, you see the feds
quietly letting it happen in a lot of
states, including Arizona where I am, where the
state said, yeah. We're fine with weed, whatever.
The feds are like, well, technically, it's illegal,
but we're not really gonna do anything because
we know that's gonna go really badly for
us.
And Just real quick. Just right there, just
a vivid anybody can acknowledge the example of
what you're highlighting right there that simply the
act of of,
civil disobedience, if you will, just saying we're
not gonna comply, has caused that to be
now the reality. Now I guess what I
was saying before would even be ill illogical
based on your point that they can still
enforce what they want to. The point then
I would argue that you probably would say
is that the reality is they don't exist.
It's illegitimate. It's not it's an illusion that
they even have that power. And the the
fact that we don't acknowledge it, then it
no longer matters. I get that's I'm I'm
just coming together with that right now. That's
it's fascinating. And I I think most peep
this is what I was saying in the
beginning. Most people are going like, yes. Yes.
Like, this is connecting for me right now
than I've ever seen before. It's it's powerful.
There's another very important element that that a
lot of people don't think of. They they
view the cops as enemies for good reason.
It's like they're enemies of freedom, like, 99%
of the time.
But they don't actually think through the mentality
of these are people. Sometimes it's hard to
remember that. Mhmm. But these are people. They're
blindly obedient obedient people doing immoral stuff on
a regular basis.
They need to feel like what they're doing
is righteous too. Right.
If they start to enforce it and the
entire population says, you suck. We hate you.
What you're doing is not good. You can
call it law all you want.
We still all hate you. Mhmm. At some
point, whether it's just the pressure or the
stress or maybe even a trace of conscience,
if they have such a thing, they go,
I don't wanna do this. People Ayn Rand
coined the phrase, the sanction of the victim
many years
ago where she she was describing the fact
that the victims of authoritarianism
talk as if they're bad if they disobey.
So it's not just, oh, they're gonna hurt
us.
It's, oh, I he broke the law. All
the people around him go tsk, tsk, and
he goes, I'm so ashamed. Well, did he
hurt anybody? No. It's just some stupid arbitrary
victimless law.
The fact that all the people including him
feel bad for disobeying them, that's where their
power comes from.
But if you get to a point where
all the people feel perfectly justified in disobeying
and the tyrants are like, well, we're gonna
enforce it.
If the people decide, well, we're gonna stop
you from enforcing it
and everybody is on our side,
it's over. And that's why you see things
like, the Bundy ranch Mhmm. Where the feds
show up.
And And a bunch of people showed up
with guns, and the feds are like, okay.
Bye. Yeah.
It had nothing to do with that particular,
like, can we win this shootout? Well, they
have handlock out there and stuff. They could
have won it. What they couldn't have done
is 1, the thing that happened a week
later when 3,000,000 more people said, this isn't
okay. Here we come with guns.
Mhmm. That's what they're gauging is how much
is the livestock gonna actually put up with?
How much are they gonna comply? Now
the the forcible
resistance
isn't even necessary
when enough people just go, I'm just not
going along with this. Yeah. And there there's
so many very sad examples in history of
literally if the people hadn't volunteered to walk
to the train and get on the box
cars,
millions of lives would have been saved. If
they just said, okay. You can kill me.
Not even gonna fight back, but you have
to carry me there.
That all by itself would have saved 1,000,000
of now I'm all in favor of, like,
shoot the psychos who show up to put
you in a boxcar to haul you away.
But even if they just said, well, we're
not gonna help you to victimize us.
Just that is so powerful.
And I'm I'm definitely not a pacifist, but
Gandhi demonstrated
what happens
when, like, a 100 however many 100000000 people
just say, we're gonna keep doing our thing.
You can send thugs and beat us up,
and we're gonna keep doing our thing. And
we outnumber you about gazillion to 1. Eventually,
literally, your thugs are gonna get too tired
to keep beating us up. Right. And eve
again, I fully believe in self defense, but
even with none of that, them just saying
we're not obeying. We have no obligation to
do what you're saying. We're gonna like, in
that example, we're gonna go to the sea
and collect our own salt, and you can
beat us up, And you can look up
and see a line of us going as
far as the eye can see and realize
we're done. We can't enforce this. You can
beat them up all day long.
We're still not making a dent because we
don't believe in the obligation to obey. Right.
And that's why, historically, it's it's a common
tab. You know, this a lot of people
know this too, but don't connect these two
points that that in any historical kind of
shift of power, it usually is a shift
with the enforcement arm. Right? Where the police
or the military suddenly go, okay. Well, we're
shifting, and then, you know, that that they
no longer have the enforcement arm of that
illusion. And so that's the point right there
is that if we can get these people,
to to recognize that what they're doing is
illegitimate or immoral, then, you know, that there's
a point in shift right there. And I
think that to some degree may be happening,
but I think this is where the whole
political dynamic comes into play where they identify
with a certain side. We can get to
that in a second. You know? And I
think that's Right. Go ahead. But
because the belief of the people is so
huge, like, people think, well, who gets elected
matters and what they legislate. None of that
matters if the people don't feel an obligation
to obey. Mhmm. But because people are so
focused on the the political circus,
they miss
hugely
significant events. And to me, the the two
most
significant
stories I can think of in American history
are barely mentioned by any. One is a
few years back, there was a poll that
asked people if you could cheat on your
taxes and not pay the IRS and get
away with it,
do would you feel bad about that?
And more than half people said no,
which means they're only paying out of fear.
Right. And that was a huge change from,
like, 10 years earlier where they did the
poll and the vast majority said, I I'm
proud to pay my taxes and blah blah
blah. Just that mentality shift, even if all
the people are complying,
if you have a population that doesn't want
to comply and feels no obligation to comply,
you're this far from the collapse of the
empire.
And the second story, which people noticed more
during the ridiculous
ridiculous COVID circus
was where a whole bunch of sheriffs, including
a couple here in in,
Arizona, like Yavapai County just north of us,
where the governor's going, we're shutting down this,
and we're doing masks. And the and the
sheriff came out and said, no. We're not.
Right. Right. You're not right, dude. That would
when you're in the position of and that
is
monumental.
When you're in the position of the tyrant
and your own enforcers go,
yeah. No. We're not doing that.
Don't worry about it, guys. We're not doing
that.
That is enormous because if your own enforcers
are starting to question legitimacy,
even if it's not you know, they're not
questioning the legitimacy of the entire game or
they wouldn't still be law enforcement.
Mhmm. But if there's any point at which
the enforcers go, yeah, the higher ups told
us to do this and we're just not
going to, that is humanity
winning out over the belief and authority in
a huge way,
and that is becoming more and more routine.
And, you know, obviously, there are plenty of
of
badge wearing
thugs still out there beating people up on
behalf of the politicians,
but there's more and more who are at
least capable of thinking, should we really be
doing this? Right. And maybe if we get
together and we tell the politicians, no. We're
not doing this either. Like, why would we
aside from everything else, why would we risk
our necks enforcing this absolutely idiotic thing Yeah.
To put ourselves in danger
just because politicians made up some
ridiculous decree,
we're not doing that either because the people
don't feel obligated to obey, and we don't
wanna, like, have a shootout with the people
just because they won't do some dumb thing
that that guy told them to do. And
when even the enforcers are having that inner
dialogue
Yeah. Whose in power are in deep doo
doo. And we're see and we're seeing similar
things in foreign policy in multiple countries, actually,
but the United States in particular where less
people enjoy the military. And I think that's
a pretty I think that's more obvious than
the than the, you know, local police discussion
where pretty much I mean, I don't I
don't even know. Very few military people I
speak to that have, you know, been there
and come home have nice things to say
about the government. You know? It's it's very
interesting, and I think that's a growing problem
for them in this. But I was I
was actually gonna ask you about that, and
I'm glad you said that because,
I think, you know but I think the
historical point you make is that most people
comply out of the idea that they think,
as you highlighted, that that's just the right
thing to do. But I I agree, and
I'm glad you highlighted that that today, I
see it far more, my my personal perspective,
out of just fear for what the consequences
will be. And I think that leads to
what you're saying is about just highlighting that
we can simply just resist this or push
back and and not obey these illegitimate things.
And so when that goes back to the
illusion of authority, and as you said before,
that it really just another way to frame
it is that most think, like, because of
these dynamics that, like, obedience is a virtue.
And I think this is something that people
are recognizing as a problem. And I wanted
to ask you, like, how do you how
is it possible that we can even have
that perspective that obeying government
just as a general concept, even though we
talk about evil bad guy governments all the
time, is somehow the right thing to do
when history has shown. Like, just taking World
War 2, for example. Like, how is that
something we still pretend makes sense with how
much history we have around governments being the
focal point of the problem even by the
the the view by the view of, like,
the American government today? They'll point at Iran
and the rest of them. So how do
you think how does that make sense? It
it's funny because it's massively hypocritical. Like, there's
so much about the American culture today
that's about the underdogs resisting the authoritarian
control freaks. Right. And we go rah rah
rah on July 4th. You know, most Americans
ignore the fact that we're way
less free than we were as a British
colony, but whatever.
But they still go rah rah rah about
a revolution, about a bunch of people who
said, we're not gonna obey you anymore. And
if you try to enforce it, we're gonna
shoot at you. And they go rah rah
rah, and they go rah rah for v
for Vendetta, and they go rah rah rah
for the matrix and Braveheart and all these
movies where they go rah rah rah for
the underdog,
illegally resisting authority,
and then they go and brag about how
they're law abiding taxpayers.
And so
we're seeing the wearing away of the indoctrination,
but there's still this chunk left there that
has been so ingrained
in generation after generation
that even most people who go rah rah
rah for particular acts of disobedience, they go,
well, yeah. But you need government and you
have to have law and you need so
they haven't looked at the underlying problem. They
can look at certain symptoms and go, well,
in that case, we should disobey. Like, you'll
get conservatives who say, well, if they come
to,
you know, seize my firearms, I'm not handing
them over. Okay?
Good.
And yet
you still feel obligated to obey and you
go rah rah if somebody gets arrested for
smoking pot or something. Mhmm.
Because
people have this disconnect because they're they've been
indoctrinated
into this. I mean, I'm sure plenty of
your listeners know of the the Prussian indoctrination
system.
Mhmm. We've been trained
to think, like, deliberately,
openly. They described
the purpose
of the Prussian indoctrination
system, which is the foundation of all western
schooling,
the purpose was to deprive the individual of
his free will, to make him just be
a a malleable thing that will do whatever
the the the authority figure tells them to.
That that was their stated goal of the
system. They said so out loud
back in a, you know, in a time
and place where you could say that and
you wouldn't be, like,
thrown into a chipper or something.
They just openly said that. We still have
that system,
but we also have this culture that is
very,
like, vigorously
pushing anti authoritarian.
And it's just most people still haven't noticed
that a basic thing about their belief system,
like, anybody who says, well, yeah, but we
need some government,
you still have the problem inside your head.
Right. You can recognize
the symptoms of the problem and go, well,
that's bad and that's bad and this authoritarian
corruption and that warmongering, and I don't like
this and but we need
government.
And it takes a while for people to
be able to step back enough to go,
the whole thing is illegitimate. The concept is
it. The problem is not that the wrong
person is on the throne.
The problem is there's a throne. Why is
there a throne? Right. Why is anybody nobody
should be on that thing. Right. And the
thing is a lot of people have seen
so many symptoms now, especially in the the
the COVID circus
that a lot of them are starting to
to actually catch glimpses of the problem underneath
and go, do they have any right to
do anything? Maybe they don't. Right. And so,
yeah, it it to what you said,
early on, very much matches my experience and
the experience of a lot of people I
know because a lot of people relay to
me. They're like, you know, I've been trying
to tell my family this stuff for years,
and now all of a sudden, some of
them are listening to me. Yeah. It's fantastic.
Yeah. The tyrants got so ridiculous
in their control freakism and just so transparently
corrupt and
insane
that even a lot of people who were
there, like loyal faithful livestock are now going,
something's wrong. And it isn't just, I like
that guy more than this guy. There's something
way bigger has to change. And I and
I would point out too that one of
the op the the logical like, let's just
say we effectively break this down entirely in
the United States. That what what I can
already see is people looking to other representations.
Like, they they they still can't get past
the idea. The whole point you're making that
government itself, authority itself is the illusion. It
is illegitimate. Not this one versus that one,
but entirely. And the problem is you worry
that people might see it as, you know,
the US was the evil bad guy and
the pro oh, but the brics nations are
the ones that are gonna save us. You
know? And that's that's still part of the
problem as I as I know you're highlighting
right now, and that's that's concerning. And, you
know, it's like so let's actually bring this
into the the election kind of dynamic because
that's all kind of the same problem, seeing
that as the out of the say of
the we're in a problem created by the
government, then we're looking to the government to
solve that problem. So you as you as
you said in in your book, the the
pro I'm kinda paraphrasing. The problem is not
that evil people believe in authority, but that
basically good people do and end up advocating
for evil believing it's the right thing to
do. And in your book, you make it
in, in in actually, in the introduction, you
make an important point that I think is
that had really stood out to me. And,
again, paraphrasing it. It's most will read about
the horrors committed in our name around the
world and wish for it to stop as
I'm sure most people do. But you but
you suggest that their own beliefs are responsible
for even contributing to this horror
And that that that that if if you
suggest to them that their beliefs are responsible
or at least part of this problem, they'll
dismiss it or even attack you for bringing
it up. And as you point out, most
would literally rather die than objectively
reconsider their own belief system. So this brings
us into the voting election 2024 lesser of
evils dynamic. And it's because, I mean, for
me, this is, like, the problem of the
I mean, I'm bumping up against this everywhere
where people are simply resistant to even considering
something outside of that dynamic and, really, that
ultimately,
you know, even if you're providing facts and
backing it up. Like, so could you just
speak to that in the first point about
people that are
unwilling to address or even consider that their
beliefs might be part of this problem?
Yeah. Because that's that's uncomfortable.
Yep. I do I would,
Amanda and I did a course called candles
in the dark where we teach a method
of talking to to
normal people about these things in a way
that doesn't immediately trigger them and make them
defensive.
The problem is if somebody identifies themself with
their political beliefs
Mhmm. They don't want to be told you're
evil.
You're advocating evil. They're not trying to advocate
evil.
And if somebody
is painting their political beliefs as evil, they
don't wanna hear it because they think, no.
I'm a good guy. I want good things.
I want truth and justice and yada yada
yada.
So the ones I want in power, that
that would be good. The government I want,
the ideal thing that I want authority used
for, that would be for perfectly fine.
And the inability to let go of that
is just a matter of
lack of familiarity.
They've never seen a world where they've never
lived a life where they weren't somebody else's
livestock.
Mhmm. They don't see it anywhere in the
world. Now in their day to day lives,
they they're volunteerists.
They interact with all their neighbors. They're not,
like, robbing their neighbors and stuff. They do
voluntary trades and stuff.
But within the set of well, of course,
we need government, and this is our country,
and you have to obey the laws and
yada yada yada.
And it's way too uncomfortable
to think that I mean, this is just
psychology 101. In almost every dispute between any
two people,
nobody wants to think, am I the problem
here? Am I the one that made this
hat? Like, I didn't try to. Mhmm. But
even if somebody means well, because I think
most voters mean well even when they're screaming
at each other. Mhmm. They don't wanna accept
the possibility that those that massive corruption and
the warmongering and all that stuff, their belief
system is what makes that possible.
And if somebody still believes in government,
your belief system is what makes that possible.
Right. Not my own right, but any belief
in government. That's what people even hear that
right now. Right. And that's and I'll I
sometimes point it out this way that the
idea
of representative government versus corruption,
the only difference is somebody calls it representative
government
when authoritarian
violence is used to their benefit.
Right. And they call it corruption
when it's used for somebody else's benefit to
their debt. It's the same thing. Right. If
you you if violence was used to benefit
you, you're just the beneficiary of corruption, so
you want to call it something else. Mhmm.
So the Democrats and
corruption,
so you want to call it something else.
Mhmm. So the Democrats and Republicans and everybody
who vote, they want authoritarian violence used to
benefit themselves. Tax those people and pay for
this thing.
And then they wind that it's corruption
when they lose the game and somebody else
got it, so they were robbed.
And to be able to back up enough
to go,
I want nobody robbed
is, like, a huge process, and it it's
an uncomfortable
thing for a lot of people, myself included,
to go through, to realize,
to be a moral human being, I cannot
support government.
Mhmm. Because by definition, to support any candidate,
any government, including tiny little monarchist government,
I'm saying I want this thing there that's
going to forcibly rob tax
my neighbors for things that I want. I
don't have the right to do that. I
can't give anybody else the right to do
that. Right. But being able to back up
enough
to actually advocate freedom because everyone wants their
own freedom.
It just they don't want everybody else's freedom.
Mhmm. Like, I should be free to do
what I want, but you're being taxed and
controlled in the way I want government
controlling you.
And it's it's the ring of power. It's
it's the the Tolkien's
ring of power is the perfect example
of you have this way to control people,
and almost nobody would go,
I don't want it. Yeah. I don't want
to control other people. I want them to
be free as much as I want me
to be free.
And the control freaks know full well as
long as you can trick the people
into believing power is legitimate,
you can very easily pit them against each
other
bickering over how the power should be used.
This group wants that group robbed and dominated,
and this group Right.
But they'll both be in favor of robbery
and domination, and every voter is in favor
of robbery and domination. Right. And 0% of
them would admit it. And and Keith, what
you make
sorry. So Keith, what you make is that
is that the only reason and I I
agree that I think most people at least
want good or try to be in that
direction. And the only reason that they're okay
by thinking that is they think that they
accept the idea that allowing this entity to
rob your neighbor is simply what you're supposed
to do. It's virtuous. It's good. It's it's
the law. Right? And I think that's the
big issue right there is that people just
I think most people, like you're saying, they
they feel uncomfortable about it when they look
into it. They research, and they just fall
back on, well, that's what's supposed to happen.
You know? And this this is the crux
of the problem. We need to get past
this.
Yeah. And there's so much indoctrination
involved. And one of the things I've sort
of accidentally learned a whole bunch about along
the because I've been at Voluntary East now
for 28 years.
And I accidentally learned a whole bunch about
psychology
along the way of, like, how do people
believe these
these beliefs don't even match their own beliefs.
It's not just they have this belief in
mind as this. It
they they have contradictions inside their own heads.
How do they not notice that?
And I've I've developed ways to basically
gently make and I'm not always gentle, obviously,
but gently make people notice. Like, if somebody
says I'm for reasonable gun control, blah blah
blah. And I say, okay. If I if
I own an AR 15,
which I do as it happens,
and you got that law passed, you petitioned
or whatever, and they pass a law that
says, normal people aren't allowed to own these.
What do you wanna have done to me?
And immediately, you can see their brain going
to backtrack and, like, well, I wanna I
wanna say the fluffy stuff. Well, I just
think we need a well, you have to
obey the law. Okay? If I don't, for
whatever reason like, I haven't threatened or hurt
anybody,
but I say I'm not gonna obey that.
What do you personally want done to me?
Do you want them
kicking down my door and dragging me away
and putting me in a cage?
And you can see by the discomfort in
99%
of people who were 2 seconds ago, we
gotta ban these guns. Mhmm. Well, what does
that literally mean? And when you try to
make them literally describe what
what happened they don't disappear because somebody wrote
a law. What happens when somebody what do
you want to have happen if somebody disobeys?
Well, I think in their mind, they've got
the criminal. Right? They don't see you. They
see a criminal. And that's and then when
you confront you you put yourself in that
position, I think that's part of what triggers
it. Right. Right. Because then you make it
personal, and you make it beyond them. If
it were up to you, and I said,
I haven't threatened anybody. I haven't hurt anybody.
I'm keeping this. I think I have a
right to. Even if you think I'm wrong,
what do you wanna have happen to me?
And it's it's not just gun control. It's
literally every single
political
agenda of anybody, including just taxing people. Like,
well, I think we should have property taxes
to pay for schools. Okay. If I say
I don't have kids, I don't even like
what the school is teaching. I'm not paying.
What do you want to have done to
me?
And the reality is, like, eventually, sheriff will
show up and steal the house. Yeah. But
people don't like to say that, but that's
that's actually a a very good sign. Because
if people were just power happy sociopaths, they'd
go, well, I want this law, and if
you disobey, they should kill you. Like, that
would be the honest I mean, it'd be
insane and evil, but it would be honest
and consistent.
The fact that they go, well, I mean,
you have to obey the law. There would
be consequences.
Well, yeah, I know. I'm asking what consequences
you
would want there to be on me.
The fact that they back off almost every
single tie every once in a while, I
guess, I wanna go full fascist, But almost
everybody backs off
because they don't actually want the literal reality
of government.
Right. They want the fluffy rhetoric that makes
them feel good without having to look at
what they're really condoning.
Right. And the reason that's such a good
sign is that's when their conscience comes up
and goes,
I'm not gonna say I want you killed
if you don't. That's insane.
So I'll have to, like, try to sort
things out in my brain and do tap
dancing around.
That battle
inside,
you know, billions of individuals, the battle between
your own conscience and the crap you were
taught about authority,
that is the only battle that matters for,
like, the future of humanity,
not to be overly dramatic.
When enough people choose their own conscience and
go, yeah. This is wrong. I I don't
have to obey authority when they do that.
When enough people do that, that is the
end of of oppression.
Right. They can't oppress if we don't give
them power, and we don't give them power
if we stop feeling an obligation to obey.
Right. And I think what this one of
the main things this really should show people
and I think, I always credit I think
Caitlin Johnstone made a great analogy about this
a while back that I always think of.
But that, you know, it's
they know that we want good. That as
as as by and large, the majority of
the world, I think, are just or take
the country now, a point from the US,
want good. That's why they pretend to do
good and scream freedom and democracy while they
kill people. You know? And so I think
that's what's so interesting is that
it it that we can see that this
is an entity masquerading as good when we
really want good. And I think it just
shows you the core nature of what we're
fighting for here, that people genuinely want that.
And I think that's what you're highlighting there
is that most people will go, oh, woah.
Wait a minute. I am I am being
I am this is wrong. I feel wrong
about this. And I I just love this,
and I think that it's important to continue
to to kind of tease this out. Now
I I wanted to go to the election
part again
in regard to the next part of what
I was gonna get into around this. So
what we were saying before is that people
just can't seem to reconcile, like, that, you
know, your your beliefs may be in fact
part of why this is a problem. People
will push away from that. But in regard
to the, the in in I wanted to
read something here that that I thought was
really important
that you put you put you said people
are so accustomed to engaging in the cult
rituals collectively referred to as politics,
voting, lobbying, petitioning, campaigning, that any suggestion that
they not bother participating in such pointless and
import,
in in impotent endeavors amounts in their eyes
to suggesting that they do nothing. And my
god is this something that we're constantly dealing
with right now is that we're going, okay.
Okay. Well, we've got a whole lot of
other things you could do that might even
have more effect on the outcome. And it's
just the response. It's like, oh, you're black
pill. Oh, I I'm never gonna pass your
purity test. Those are the key things we
keep seeing. And it's mind blowing to me.
Both again the fact that we got this
response now even though we've been saying this
for a decade, but it's so important to
see how you know, it it really let's
put it this way. How what would you
say to people in that mindset? Let's just
say for sake of conversation somebody that genuinely
would want to hear what you have to
say and it is simply going that's you're
telling me to do nothing if I'm not
voting. What would you say to that person?
Well, there there's a lot of approaches. It
part of it depends on sort of what
level of philosophical thought they're at.
But the thing that works for almost everybody
is if they ran literally the 2 worst
per people in the world,
would you still vote?
And, like, you're so best case scenario is
you're trying to put the 2nd worst person
in the world in the power over yourself
and over me. Right. Would you still do
it in that case? Just to get them
to think, okay. At some point,
we have to not play this game. Yeah.
And then back it up and say,
if this person that you're voting for, if
they weren't running against somebody that you're even
more scared over you, hate them even more,
think they suck even more, and they're even
more corrupt or whatever,
if it was just the choices where this
person has power over you or that person
doesn't have power over you, that's it,
Would you give that person, Trump, Kamala, whoever,
would you give that person power over you
if your options were give them power or
don't give them power? Mhmm. And everybody would
be like, well, yeah. I don't don't really
want Trump to be able to tax me
either. Mhmm. Okay. So what you're telling me
is all they have to do to trick
you
into advocating your own victimization
is put another person up there that you
like even less,
and then you're going to cheer for your
own victimization
by somebody you don't trust and you don't
like and you don't wanna have power over
you. And you're gonna go in and press
a button to try to put them into
a position where they have power over you.
That's all they had to do to make
you personally vote against your own interests
by telling you these are your options,
punch in the face or kick in the
crotch. Like, you don't have to choose 1.
You're free. We're representing you. You consented to
it because we'll give you 2 choices.
But it's still hard because it's so easy
for people.
And the fact that now it's all
fear on both sides. Like, nobody's voting for
anybody. They're all voting because they're even more
scared of the other one.
It used to be that politicians were slick
enough that they get, oh, I have this
vision for America and then spew a bunch
of socialist nonsense.
But now they've gotten so bad that it's
just a badness competition.
Like, who's the one you trust even less
than
than the other guy? So almost their stated
campaign at this point. Like, literally pointing at
the other side. It's it's crazy to me.
Yeah. And the fact that people still fall
for it. Yeah. And but it is true
that fewer and fewer people are falling for
it, and I see it. I I actually
think
the reason
the Trump clown was brought into the circus
was precisely because nobody was paying attention to
politics. It's just bunch of lukewarm,
boring, blah blah blah. Nobody means anything on
the other side. And if people don't watch
it and pay attention and focus on the
the political circus,
they stop remembering that it matters because it
doesn't. Right. So they had to bring in
this clown and jump the shark and do,
listen to how outlandish she is, and he's
so anti establishment even though he raises taxes
and appoints all the same people to all
the same position for power.
But they had to basically, they had to
ramp it up to professional wrestling just to
get people's attention again. So they wanted that
ridiculous
drama
because most of the politicians had just become
lukewarm blah. Nobody really cares. Nobody's excited, and
nobody's scared.
They're just sort of, whole government sucks. Whatever.
So we have to
literally do what professional wrestling does, which is
fabricate this rivalry and get everybody riled up.
Oh, your guy sucks. My guy's awesome.
And it so it is pathetic that anybody's
still falling for that.
But I think it's gotten so ridiculous that
it's actually helping a lot of people see
through it. I agree. I would throw in
the the
sort of a positive note that as bogus
as it is for anybody to vote for
anything, the fact that most people now admit,
I don't believe in either one, but I'm
scared of that one more.
Like, they're basically admitting this whole game sucks.
But out of desperation,
I'm gonna try to pick the less sucky
one. Like, that person
is at
least closer to giving up the superstition of
authority entirely
than the person's like, oh, FDR,
all your plans of getting people free stuff.
You're just god.
It's like, I'd much rather have the person
that goes, well, yeah, they both suck and
they're both corrupt. I'm just more scared of
that one. Because at least they're in a
position where they might be able to think
about
maybe the whole game has to go, and
maybe you have to stop focusing on it
and empowering it and imagining you have any
obligation
to play their games.
What's interesting though and I I agree with
you actually, but I think what's interesting is
I tend to get the most pushback. Maybe
that's just because they internally recognize
how uncertain they are about that point, but
from those people where, you know, I get
that response that, you know, essentially, that, you
know, what are we the the lesser of
evils, like, you have to pick her or
him because the other one's just that bad,
like, in response to the same conversation.
And Mhmm. I I basically point out, well,
that's black pill. Like, I hate even using
the terms again, but I'm like, you're giving
up. You're just accepting the dynamic. I'm like,
well, here are all these other choices. And
again, same point, well, it's not voting. It
doesn't matter. But I mean, I I I
think that's what I would argue is that
they those people are so, like, they're just
vulnerable. They're comfortable. They recognize this thing's falling
apart in front of them, but they still
want to believe in it. You know? So
I I still I just I my hardest
my the thing I have the hardest time
with is trying to reach those people
with the idea that there are other actions
to be taken because they're so convinced that
this is the end of the world. And,
again, that's the other thing is that not
just that lesser of evils, but it's always
kind of built on the idea now that
this won't we won't even have an election
if we don't pick this person, and that's
an endless cycle in and of itself. Right?
This just continues.
Yeah. And that's been happening forever, and they
just Yeah. They have short memories of the
union. Of our lifetime.
Exactly. Every single election is the most important
of it. And it's always the ridiculous fear
mongering. That's the other one who wins. It's
gonna be
it's gonna be Soviet Union. It's like, no.
It isn't. It's gonna be mostly the same
stupid stuff and them seeing how much they
can get away with, which has absolutely nothing
to do with who you voted for. It
has to do with when you stop complying.
And, I do think
I'm I I totally agree that there's often
that very strong resistance of people to give
up that last little bit.
And I try to be patient with limited
success,
because I remember being that possession myself Mhmm.
Where I was still this was 8000 years
ago, it feels like, with a lifetime,
where I still believed in politics. And I
knew the government was totally corrupt and everything
else, but I'm like, we have in my
case, it was literally Ross Perot.
Like, he's different. He's an outsider. He's blah
blah blah. We have to vote for him,
which I have to laugh at the old
me falling for that crap.
But it's still like, they know something is
horribly wrong. The thing is
as long as the system can be dramatically
changed,
they don't have to question anything in here.
Mhmm. They want the problem to be external.
They want the problem to be something outside
of them that can change
because it's way
more trouble and discomfort
to have to change your own belief system.
So almost everybody think, but whatever the problem
is, it's not me. It's that guy. It's
those parties. It's these voters. No. It's you.
If you're voting, it's you. Right. But listen
to that, ladies and gentlemen. It's not and
that's not meant to be some kind of
an attack. Like, the reality is that Right.
If we really wanna see beyond this problem
and what we're dealing with, you have to
first acknowledge that you're part of that problem.
It's the same old idea that you can't
solve a problem if you haven't first acknowledged
that it exists. And I think that's obviously
where we are. So on that note, let's
talk about, you know, it I mean, again,
it's it's an abstract discussion, but the idea
of, like, a of solutions and what might
be done, like, in this moment. Oh, actually,
I wanted to ask you one thing before
we go past that and kinda finish on
that is with just voting in general. So,
obviously, it go it's obvious that the idea
you that you and I agree with you.
We see you see government authority all as
as an illusion. Right? It's it's illegitimate. It
doesn't exist. But within that, we still see
a process. We still people go out and
check a box and go through this whole
dynamic. So even if we're acknowledging that this
is an illegitimate
construct in and of itself, do you think
that voting is an illusion itself, or do
they still tally this and just how do
you see that in that discussion?
They
it's funny because in the novel version of
the Jones Plantation, mister Smith talks about it.
Like, ultimately, we can fudge the votes if
we have to, but we don't have to
because we fudge how people think. And we
fudge the choices they have, and we make
it so the choices don't matter. Like, I
think a bunch of people were surprised that
the puppet Trump won, and it made no
difference anyway. Mhmm. It's just like there's there's
different puppets inside the game who actually can
hate each other, but they're all loyal to
the game and they all play the game.
So it's
the, like, I'm sure they cheat at the
the voting level too, but mostly, they don't
need to. If they have you voting for
a master, that's all they need.
And it's there's a scene in the movie,
Jones Plantation, where where
Smith is talking behind the scenes to the
2 people running for a slave manager, and
he's they're like, what if it doesn't go
our way? And he has to explain, it's
just us. Like, we win either way.
Our way is the only way as it
is. Either way, we're still in power. Right.
And
it it has to get to a point
where people understand that if you vote, you
lose.
If you vote and your guy wins, you
lost.
If you vote and your guy lost, you
lost. Either way, you lost.
If you vote for a master, you already
lost. Right. You already advocated your own subjugation
whether you got the oppressor you wanted or
whether you got the other oppressor. You already
lost,
and you you didn't just do nothing. You
did something worse than nothing
because you gave it the appearance of legitimacy.
Now they can say, you can send it.
If Trump wins and he's taxing you and
making all these stupid laws like you did
the first time around,
and you say, hey. I don't like that.
Well, gee,
who voted? Oh, yeah. It was you. You
put him into power, and now you're complaining
about what the person in power did. And,
of course, president's mostly a puppet and does
isn't really deciding much anyway
on his own, but that's that's another layer
of the
the circus.
But when people
when people don't want to accept the responsibility
of what they voted for, like the people
who voted for Trump first time. Okay? When
he made several 100000
Americans into felons overnight
by declaring bump stocks illegal
Right. Like, you you press the button to
try to put him in the position where
he did that from. Right? Well yeah. But
I'm against that.
So did he ask you did he ask
for your permission before he did it, or
did you empower the person who did that
to a bunch of other Americans? And are
you gonna do it again in November?
Or or support a a a injection that
killed untold amounts of people. You know? There's
just so many different examples. But so what's
interesting there is it's it you know? Because
I I'm always talking about the vote in
the context of, first, what we're saying today,
but then the idea being that, you know,
the the voting process I what I say
simply to put it this way is I
don't think your vote translates to the outcome.
There's a reason I say it like that.
For exactly what we're highlighting here is that
that's just the outcome no matter what the
dynamic is. And so what you're highlighting is
is that really whether or not they're being
talented ultimately doesn't matter, which is what we're
always talking about is because it's there's just
your government. There's not this or that. It's
just your government controlling you, and I think
that's a very clear picture you're making there.
So in regard to the solution side of
this, you know, you you the what you
say in the book in general and outlined
very well is that we're talking about not
necessarily
an action needs to be taken or person,
but what things we're not doing or certain
things that we should not allow to happen.
So can you outline that and really get
into what people should be doing right now?
Like, let's say they've been listening to this,
and they're just going, okay. This guy gets
it. I this guy makes sense. What do
I need to do to start changing in
this direction? And, you know, I I I
don't know what you mean about, like, not
allowing things to happen.
Right. The the answer is painfully simple, but
it's still uncomfortable for most people to to
think about because they haven't thought
inside this template yet. The answer is literally
stop imagining that anybody has special rights,
period. The end. That's all the world has
to do. Because the rest of the solution
is what naturally happens when people don't believe
in the divine right of politicians.
Right. Because then they voluntarily
find ways to to organize and and cooperate.
I actually a number of times, it's been
ages since I did it, but I did,
a little
event thingy called the island where there'll be,
like, 50 or so people in the room,
and I'll say, let's say it's just us.
We're on a desert island. We don't even
know each other because we didn't. It's like
a bunch of people who came to a
dock.
It's just us, some island. There's lots of
resources, but nobody knows we're there. There's no
government. Nobody owns it. It's just us. What
are we gonna do about it? And we
go through the process, and we have a
little discussion back and forth of, like, you
know, some people will go, well, I know
how to hunt. I know how to grow
stuff, and, you know, I know how to
build stuff and whatever. And we go through
a discussion.
That is the answer to the question, but
what do we do without government?
Mhmm. We have 8,000,000,000
people decide what to do without government because
you know what? Nobody has ever suggested in
any of the times I've ever done that.
I get to rule you all and hurt
you if you disobey me.
In fact, at some point, I will say
that,
and every single time people laugh at it
because it's that bonkers. Mhmm. The notion of
government and authority as necessary or legitimate
in any other context is bonkers. If we're
on an island, I go, well, I think,
first of all, put me in charge and
give me some enforcers, and I get to
hurt anybody who disobeys anything I say. And
people, first of all, chuckle because they realize
that's insane, and this person can't possibly mean
it. He's not that bonkers.
It doesn't occur to people
to impose authoritarianism
if they haven't been indoctrinated into it. Now
there are some nasty people who will try
to rob you and boss you around, and
decent people have to, like, defend against that.
But those are few and far between
compared to the power of the guy who
all the good people think they're obligated to
pay taxes to.
Like but will they be warmongering? I don't
know. Will there be 300,000,000
people giving 1,000,000,000,000 of dollars to psychopaths?
Yeah. Right. Why would they if they didn't
feel up? Oh, they wouldn't. So you can
have a warmonger with $0.
What's he gonna do? Absolutely nothing.
As well, as as I always point out
is, you know, you're
you will always have danger in your life.
Government does not remove danger from your life.
I simply point out it just adds other
layers and aspects of danger to your life.
Yeah. I mean, I always point out with,
like, the police. When's the last time you
called the police and they were there to
save you from something that you called them
for? Like, the reality is it's an after
the fact concept, and it rarely does address
immediacy of danger. It's your responsibility
to do that. It's just it's incredible that
we can't piece these things through, though. And
I think, again, it comes back to the
the superstition. Right? This and that's the the
word that we should be making sure, like,
you use it. That's really what it comes
down to because superstitions in most cases are
irrational, and that's what we're dealing with.
Yeah. And nobody like, the like, the island
thing demonstrates
nobody would rationally come up with government as
the solution to anything. Right. Like, what nobody
does in those groups. And when I when
I suggest it, they But who's gonna build
the roads, Larkin? Who's gonna build the roads?
That's always the And even that, I'd say,
well, if we're on an island and we
wanna path up to the lake or something
where there's fresh water,
how do we do it? I know. Put
me in charge. Let me forcibly control it,
and they're like, no. Duh. Why would we
do that? Right. The whole the whole thing
of what about the roads or what about
this, what about that,
and this is something it took me forever
to learn is the psychology
behind that has absolutely nothing to do with
roads or them wanting to understand.
Right. It's literally
a way that the human brain shifts the
discussion to something comfortable to think about. Mhmm.
Because if you if it it's and the
the the
sort of flippant but nasty
parallel is, if we don't have slavery, who
will pick the cotton? Right. You know, that
doesn't matter as much as ending slavery, even
if nobody picks the cotton.
But the reason people go, but my roads
is because it's comfortable talking about the practical
things of, well, how will this happen? It's
uncomfortable looking at the fact that they personally
advocate violent extortion of all their neighbors for
the government version
of this solution. What I'm what I was
simply just kinda be facetiously pointing out is
the obvious answer is, well, we still would.
As you were saying earlier, it's the same
dynamic. So it's just the illusion of some
we don't need some government overarching hand pointing
to tell us to do things that we
already know that we need. You know? That's
just I think it's so hilarious that that's
where that goes.
But I actually did wanna ask you one
other point about this that I thought was
really interesting, and we can we can end
on this.
That really the idea of well, first thing
is that if you let's just say hypothetically,
in a in a an imaginary world, in
because this goes to the point that you
make that there is no good authority, which,
frankly, I agree with. But let's just say
we had a world where there was a
dictator, an all powerful, encompassing dictator that controlled
literally everything. And just for sake of conversation,
because this is a unicorn, it doesn't exist,
but that he cares
more about the people than anything. Every single
thing in every waking moment is done in
the interest of the people. Right? Couldn't you
explain for would that ultimately be a good
authority? And let's just say he lived forever
and it would never change. Right? Let's make
it something like that. How how does that
wouldn't that fit into being good and even
though it doesn't exist, not possible? How do
you see that? It I actually made a
a video called if you were king many
years ago. It's still on YouTube. It's a
little silly animated thing, and it basically walks
through like, it lets it lets the viewer
be the dictator. Like, you're a good person.
You want good things for people. Let's give
you unlimited power. What would that look like?
What would the outcome be? And you walk
through it and you realize either
I have no power or I'm immorally violently
dominating people. Because that's the only way you
can use authoritarian power is tell people you
have to do this. You're not allowed to
do that. My guys with guns will beat
you up if you disobey.
Like, you have no other power. And it
so it walks through some scenario. Well, I
would feed the poor
with what money?
Well, I would ask people for money. What
if they say no?
Well, then I'll tax them. Okay? Now you're
a tyrant. Way to go. Mhmm. Like, now
you're a violent thief in the name of
compassion
and generosity
just to demonstrate that authority
cannot be used for legitimate ends. Mhmm. It's
it's impossible
because by its very nature,
it's
immoral aggression. And there's there's a very simple
way that I like to break this down,
which is
if a cop has the the right to
do certain things that I don't have the
right to do.
Like, he has authority to enforce certain laws.
I'm just me. I have the right to
defend myself. I have the right to defend
other people. I have the right to use
inherently moral force in rare situations where it's,
like, defensive.
Mhmm.
All authority
can ever add to society
is immoral violence.
Because if the cop is allowed to use
force in situations where I'm not Mhmm. But
I'm allowed to use force in every situation
where it's inherently justified,
the only difference is you think that guy
has the right to use immoral violence.
That's all the belief in authority can ever
add to society.
Right. Immoral violence
viewed as legitimate
by the
peasantry.
Right. Well, so I did that little thought
experiment because that was just for fun. I
was trying to think about, like, how was
there could there be an exception to that?
And my my thought process was ultimately interestingly
came down to the idea that, you know,
even if that person that would never exist
had that intention,
there will be difference of opinion within the
population. And then you come down to the
idea. And my thought is like, oh, that's
interesting. So now it brought you to where
the like, just the idea of the you
divide yourselves essentially by like, it's it kind
of shows you what's happening in the world
today where we end up pitting our against
ourselves, acting like we have to decide what
the authority will tell us to do. It's
just a fascinating thing, and it all comes
back to the point you're making. Right? And
this is really what I like, a lot
of the work I try to do is
try to not just go, here's what you
should think, but get people to think it
themselves and connect the dots and make the
understanding so it's something they see. And I
just think that's it's just it's fascinating. And
so I guess the last part was
about the idea of how this is shifting,
where, you know, historically,
the government
sees itself as the the right to rule.
Right? But we historically saw the idea of,
like, the divine right to rule. So do
you see that one as something that's kinda
the same today, which is the different veneer?
And do you see that as something that
might be resurfacing to a degree? Because I've
I've seen a lot of discussion about that
with, like, the world governance idea.
A writer for TLAB, and and his own
platform, Matt Ehret, made this interesting argument a
a while back about how that that's what
he sees as the World Economic Forum and
that these are the the technocrats, whatever you
wanna call them, really just, for whatever reason
a long time ago, decided to let us
pretend to think we were, you know, in
putting them in power. And now they're like,
screw it. We're gonna step back out of
the shadows. And that's an interesting thought to
end on. Do you think that might be
part of what's happening and and, you know,
anything else you wanna discuss?
Yeah. The the the the divine right of
kings was the old excuse they used when
people were sort of way less educated and
way more superstitious. Oh, god said I get
to rule you. Oh,
well, lucky you. Oh, well, guess what we
have to obey.
And people you know, humanity progressed enough that
people are like,
did he, though? I mean, did he, like,
give me something signed maybe? Are we just
taking your word for it?
All that happened between then and now is
their excuse for authoritarian power had to get
way more complicated. It is just as dumb
as it ever was. Mhmm. The idea that,
well, these people have the right to rule
you because constitutions and elections and appointments, and
there's a house, and there's a
little 3 hours of lecture about
civics BS.
Now they have the right to rule. It's
just a more complicated
excuse for something just as dumb and something
just as insane
and just as destructive. In fact, more destructive.
Because back when it was just a king
going, I'm gonna boss you around, the people
would occasionally go, alright. We put up with
enough of this. But if people think, oh,
they're doing the will of the people. They're
representing us. They put up with way more
crap than they ever would from a dictator,
which is why
the US today under a constitutional republic is
a 1000000000 times less free than it was
as the colony of a king.
Like, that's pretty bad.
I would end with this, and it's something
it's one of the illustrations
why it's an insane superstition. And if people
dare to look at it,
it it gets pretty obvious pretty fast, but
it takes a lot to dare to look
at it. Mhmm. To solve 99%
of the world's problems, people have to abide
by one thing
and understand what it means. The one thing
is this. And when I say it, everybody
goes, oh, yeah. I totally agree. And nobody
believes in government.
Don't ever try to get somebody else to
do something
that you have no right to do yourself.
Right.
That's the end of government. That's the end
because everybody who votes is trying to get
government power used for something that they know
damn well they don't have the right to
do themselves.
Yeah. Just that rule. Like, if you shouldn't
do it, don't try to get someone else
to do it. Absolutely.
That solves 99% of humanity's problems if people
would just go, oh, yeah. First of all,
duh. Obviously.
Like, I shouldn't kill you, but if I
hire him, it's okay. No. It's still not
okay.
Just grasping the ramifications
of that one concept
ends the superstition and ends literally all human
impression.
Man, I I agree. You know? And I
think that it's to end on a positive
note what we started with is I really
genuinely believe that there's a shift taking place.
And as I'm sure, you know, in the,
in the past that there there there's been
moments like this before. And then, and often
we find. We fall, we fall into some
new trap and it gets, you know, we,
we cycle back in. But, again, we're in
a moment where I genuinely believe people are
hearing this. They're entertaining these ideas. They're understanding
why it makes sense and seeking change and
maybe going through government to do so. That's
what we're trying to woah. Woah. Woah. Woah.
Hold on. There are other ways to go
here and there's other chance paths to take.
But I I think that this is a
time where, you know, your your message can
really reach people. So I'm I'm honored to
have you on today, and I'm really hoping
people can take the time to read your
books, your work, and and at least just
consider the validity of what you're saying. Because
I I I think it's powerful. And, you
know, I mean, anything else you wanna leave
us with upcoming events or stuff you're gonna
be doing? So I'm just really hoping people
will take the time to just go through
what you've done because I see a positive
thing on the horizon here if we can
actually
understand this.
Absolutely. And that's I I would point out
in response to that that that
throughout history, lots and lots of people have
objected to certain authoritarian
regimes, and their solution was always a different
authoritarian regime. Now more than has ever happened
in the history of the world, more and
more people are starting to realize we don't
just need a different flavored ruler. We need
to not have rulers. And that is a
fundamentally different thing that's happening right now than
has ever happened before
because it isn't like, even the American Revolution
was, you suck. Let's put new rulers in
power. It's like Right. How did that go?
The solution is not comp the problem is
not the current people in power, and the
solution is not putting new people in power.
It's realizing
the power
is the problem. The flight political power is
the problem. Right.
I think like, almost everything I do is
sort of outreach and trying to get people
to think about these things. I would
strongly suggest people check out the movie Jones
Plantation, which is now on Amazon and Apple
TV and stuff.
And, of course, the book you've been talking
about the whole time, most dangerous superstition.
A lot of people assume that if you're
disagreeing with what they say, you think they're
bad people. Mhmm. And you're you're condemning and
attacking them.
So what I would ask people to do
or challenge people to do is simply this.
Are you sure
that your conscience
matches
your political beliefs?
Just look at that. Doesn't matter if they
match mine. Like, I'm just some guy. Doesn't
matter if you have my approval.
Can your belief system actually have
the approval of your own
conscience? And do you dare to look closely
enough to actually find out?
Well said. Thank you for
bringing this to the table, Larkin. I really
hope people will check it out. And as
you as I, you know, was reading from
and discussing, make sure you guys check out
this book. I mean, it's just it's important
to see more than just this I mean,
I think there's a lot of important illusions
that are following over you know, kind of
breaking down in front of us right now.
So it's an exciting time of things like
that and change, but as we said in
the beginning, it always comes along with the
dying power structure, you know, desperately, they're dying
you know, the cornered animal, whatever analogy you
wanna use, clearly trying to make you feel
like things are worse because they don't want
this to be changing. That's how I see
it anyway. And so we just need to
continue to follow your conscience, follow what you
believe is right. So thank you for being
here today, Larkin. And as always, everybody out
there, question everything. Come to your own conclusions.
Stay vigilant.