I am perplexed by the comment as the very foundation of the USA Constitution is that "the government is not in charge of us" ... but starting with the neuro linguistic programing of "The Bill of Rights" (i.e, that Rights come FROM the government rather than from the creator and the government is established solely to secure our inalienable Rights), this foundation and the "notion" of this comment, has been progressively subverted. Basically, this notion has been taking hold for a long time, and is really the essence of human's struggle for freedom.
Why don't you say "He's for saving babies lives and upping our falling birth rate" instead of "he's trying to take away women's reproductive rights." Why call it that when women AREN'T reproducing (much). There are two lives involved, not just the woman.
Governors having some input on what's being taught in schools isn't necessarily bad. Do we want teachers to be able to do whatever they want in public schools because of so called academic freedom? They are public employees. The oversight of teachers will never be perfect but letting teachers do whatever they want is a bad idea.
The trouble is that parents don't get involved as much. "Oh let the government do it." If parents cared and students could easily change to a good school the bad ones would dwindle away or copy the good schools. And tenure has got to go!
Yeah, idk why this is even a debate. They are a government service and they are dealing with children that have legal guardians. It's not up to the school to do whatever the school wants. The rhetoric around the religious stuff being brought back to schools is concerning to me, though it will be shutdown by the courts if it crosses a line most likely. As far as the intersectional feminism stuff being taught or ingrained in the curriculum, I don't see any argument for teaching that. That is a relatively new ideology to become mainstream. It has substantial pushback and most ppl do not adhere to that worldview. Ppl have this absurd view of government services and laws. They want it to be exactly what they want and nothing more. When what it should be is a bare minimum we largely agree on and the rest is up to individuals and families to decide. I had family members praising and defending COVID mandates, while they themselves broke the mandates on occasions. It's absurd.
Nick, please, you get some fantastic guests with fascinating ideas, please let them speak. You yourself are an amazingly smart guy but just hold off those thoughts and let someone finish their thoughts. Great work as always i just want it to be as good as it could be!
Labeling Trump and his buccaneers as agents of chaos requires further clarification. Chaos can be good or bad. Business has implemented what I call intentional, or managed, chaos with the goal of disrupting a system or process in order to improve it. What is most important is understanding why the Trump Administration wants to disrupt the system because their reason will either justify the approach or it won’t.
Eric Weinstein has reached the same conclusion as your guest: stand back , we dont know how big this thing is going to get -- but we do know Trump's going to turn the dials up to 11. Unlike your guest, Mr. Weinstein doesn't appear on camera in his long johns.
It sounds like this guy would like to live by himself somewhere. He assumes that only liberals and progressives work in those glittering towers? Is he kidding? He’s one-note Charlie: don’t involve me.
Liberals tend to be snobbier than conservatives when it comes to these types of things. He was referring to the current administration anyway. Not sure what point you're trying to make.
Hardcore and many mainstream supporters of Trump are not anti control or pro freedom. They are driven by authoritarian and collectivist values such as regarding restrictions and criminalisation of immigration, abortions and minorities
It has always been a crime to enter this, or any other, country without authorization. Laws regarding abortion have always been a matter of State jurisdiction; the Federal law, which was an overreach by the Supreme Court, no longer exists and State’s now have jurisdiction without any restrictions. As for minorities, just look at policies implemented and legislation supported by the Trump Administration and you will see that in many cases minorities benefited the most. As a classical liberal, the Democratic Party that I knew, and supported, 30-40 years ago no longer exists. While I still fear the religious right, comments from those on the left ranging from the elimination of States’ rights and restrictions on free speech are far more worrisome!
How have Republicans criminalized being a minority? Lol also illegal immigration has always been illegal. And roe v wade was super vague. Go look at Europe's abortion laws to get scope on what a normal system looks like.
@CharlieBam Roe V Wade wasn't just vague. It was blatantly unconstitutional, in that it created a right from thin air - using language that clearly didn't apply the way they applied it and - not necessary, just the cherry on top - was certainly never meant to apply that way by any of its writers. It wasn't subtle, either. The amendment they based their decision on was not at all relevant.
The "Democrats fly around on private jets so they don't believe in climate change" is such a lazy charge. Some people with influence will need to take advantage of private jets in the here and now to get the word out and organize around doing something about climate change. That's just unavoidable. Is there an implicit "X people are more important than Y people" in achieving this goal, i.e. the plebs shouldn't all take private jets? Of course! But a libertarian or conservative can't complain about that rebuke to leveling. (Nor can a grown-up socialist who believes in at least a party-based division of labor.) I say this as someone who doesn't even think it's important to do something about climate change, apart from getting into the HVAC business.
I dont agree. There are a HOST of times when they could fly coach or use Zoom. Look at the climate conferences - they stay in luxury hotels, eat fantastically, etc. They live in massive homes, often multiple ones. If they truly believed their own words they would demonstrate their commitment by living as they say we all should. They don't but the legacy media doesn't call them out on it because they are part of the same "elite."
Keep drinking the Kool-Aid. There is NO excuse for these "preachers" to tell us peons we can't use fossil fuels while they burn it by the tankful. There is NOTHING they can't do online. There is NO SUCH THING as a climate crisis - but they pretend there is for CONTROL.
Nonsense! There is no reason whatsoever that climate conferences couldn't be conducted remotely. These conferences should be world-class showcases for introducing environmentally responsible communication solutions. These are just spoiled elites gathering to congratulate themselves.
TDS blinds leftist to continue to vote blue no matter who and end up making the country as backwards as California and its mass exodus. This coming from a Democrat
![Global Capitalism: The U.S. Election and Trump 2.0 in Historical Perspective [November 2024]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0-WR6Zq7Qec/mqdefault.jpg)
![Global Capitalism: The U.S. Election and Trump 2.0 in Historical Perspective [November 2024]](/img/tr.png)
We really do need to disabuse the government of the notion that they are "in charge" of us...
I am perplexed by the comment as the very foundation of the USA Constitution is that "the government is not in charge of us" ... but starting with the neuro linguistic programing of "The Bill of Rights" (i.e, that Rights come FROM the government rather than from the creator and the government is established solely to secure our inalienable Rights), this foundation and the "notion" of this comment, has been progressively subverted. Basically, this notion has been taking hold for a long time, and is really the essence of human's struggle for freedom.
Nick, for a guest like Martin Gurri, this podcast needs to be 3x longer. Rogan was so far ahead of the crowd on this.
Great work, fellas.
Why don't you say "He's for saving babies lives and upping our falling birth rate" instead of "he's trying to take away women's reproductive rights." Why call it that when women AREN'T reproducing (much). There are two lives involved, not just the woman.
Another great conversation. Thank you.
Why did this guy show up to an interview in pajamas? This is legendary for some reason
What makes you think there pajamas.
Anyway an interview is for lessening.
@@TomPekarcik yea it's for listening. but you'll get more views in a video format with something to look at.
Wow, great interview!
Very sensible guest. Will explore his thought. Good interview.
Cool guest.
Governors having some input on what's being taught in schools isn't necessarily bad. Do we want teachers to be able to do whatever they want in public schools because of so called academic freedom? They are public employees. The oversight of teachers will never be perfect but letting teachers do whatever they want is a bad idea.
The trouble is that parents don't get involved as much. "Oh let the government do it." If parents cared and students could easily change to a good school the bad ones would dwindle away or copy the good schools. And tenure has got to go!
Yeah, idk why this is even a debate. They are a government service and they are dealing with children that have legal guardians. It's not up to the school to do whatever the school wants.
The rhetoric around the religious stuff being brought back to schools is concerning to me, though it will be shutdown by the courts if it crosses a line most likely.
As far as the intersectional feminism stuff being taught or ingrained in the curriculum, I don't see any argument for teaching that. That is a relatively new ideology to become mainstream. It has substantial pushback and most ppl do not adhere to that worldview.
Ppl have this absurd view of government services and laws. They want it to be exactly what they want and nothing more. When what it should be is a bare minimum we largely agree on and the rest is up to individuals and families to decide.
I had family members praising and defending COVID mandates, while they themselves broke the mandates on occasions. It's absurd.
Enjoyed this podcast
Nick, please, you get some fantastic guests with fascinating ideas, please let them speak. You yourself are an amazingly smart guy but just hold off those thoughts and let someone finish their thoughts. Great work as always i just want it to be as good as it could be!
Nick’s disdain for religion is so cringe
Labeling Trump and his buccaneers as agents of chaos requires further clarification. Chaos can be good or bad. Business has implemented what I call intentional, or managed, chaos with the goal of disrupting a system or process in order to improve it. What is most important is understanding why the Trump
Administration wants to disrupt the system because their reason will either justify the approach or it won’t.
Everyone will win.
Seattlite, here he's right about this city
Great conversation
Glad you enjoyed!
@@ReasonTV we sure did, very refreshing.
Interesting
Nick, I hope you have a box full of those t-shirts so you can wear one evey day between now and January 20th. (The one in the thumbnail)😊
Tulsi "Guh-bard". Really?
English is probably not his first language.
Eric Weinstein has reached the same conclusion as your guest: stand back , we dont know how big this thing is going to get -- but we do know Trump's going to turn the dials up to 11.
Unlike your guest, Mr. Weinstein doesn't appear on camera in his long johns.
Lmao I just realized that.
X-Men?? Pirate ship?? Who knows?? But it will be disruptive which I cannot argue against....
So frustrating. Stop interrupting your guest.
Less than 8 minutes into this interview explains the low traffic. Nonsense.
It sounds like this guy would like to live by himself somewhere. He assumes that only liberals and progressives work in those glittering towers? Is he kidding? He’s one-note Charlie: don’t involve me.
Liberals tend to be snobbier than conservatives when it comes to these types of things. He was referring to the current administration anyway. Not sure what point you're trying to make.
Hardcore and many mainstream supporters of Trump are not anti control or pro freedom. They are driven by authoritarian and collectivist values such as regarding restrictions and criminalisation of immigration, abortions and minorities
...thank you so much for your wisdom, o great mind reader.
It has always been a crime to enter this, or any other, country without authorization. Laws regarding abortion have always been a matter of State jurisdiction; the Federal law, which was an overreach by the Supreme Court, no longer exists and State’s now have jurisdiction without any restrictions. As for minorities, just look at policies implemented and legislation supported by the Trump Administration and you will see that in many cases minorities benefited the most. As a classical liberal, the Democratic Party that I knew, and supported, 30-40 years ago no longer exists. While I still fear the religious right, comments from those on the left ranging from the elimination of States’ rights and restrictions on free speech are far more worrisome!
The Democrats could’ve codified Roe in the 90s
How have Republicans criminalized being a minority? Lol also illegal immigration has always been illegal. And roe v wade was super vague. Go look at Europe's abortion laws to get scope on what a normal system looks like.
@CharlieBam
Roe V Wade wasn't just vague.
It was blatantly unconstitutional, in that it created a right from thin air - using language that clearly didn't apply the way they applied it and - not necessary, just the cherry on top - was certainly never meant to apply that way by any of its writers.
It wasn't subtle, either. The amendment they based their decision on was not at all relevant.
Balogna
Basically he voted against progressive control and voted in favour of regressive control .
???
Don’t think so. But time will tell.
Democrats progressive haha haha
@@amant7963 what do you mean?
@@ericholdsworth6611 ?
The "Democrats fly around on private jets so they don't believe in climate change" is such a lazy charge. Some people with influence will need to take advantage of private jets in the here and now to get the word out and organize around doing something about climate change. That's just unavoidable. Is there an implicit "X people are more important than Y people" in achieving this goal, i.e. the plebs shouldn't all take private jets? Of course! But a libertarian or conservative can't complain about that rebuke to leveling. (Nor can a grown-up socialist who believes in at least a party-based division of labor.)
I say this as someone who doesn't even think it's important to do something about climate change, apart from getting into the HVAC business.
I dont agree. There are a HOST of times when they could fly coach or use Zoom. Look at the climate conferences - they stay in luxury hotels, eat fantastically, etc. They live in massive homes, often multiple ones. If they truly believed their own words they would demonstrate their commitment by living as they say we all should. They don't but the legacy media doesn't call them out on it because they are part of the same "elite."
Keep drinking the Kool-Aid. There is NO excuse for these "preachers" to tell us peons we can't use fossil fuels while they burn it by the tankful. There is NOTHING they can't do online.
There is NO SUCH THING as a climate crisis - but they pretend there is for CONTROL.
Nonsense! There is no reason whatsoever that climate conferences couldn't be conducted remotely. These conferences should be world-class showcases for introducing environmentally responsible communication solutions. These are just spoiled elites gathering to congratulate themselves.
Let's be real here. Do you really think Kamala and her cohorts are discussing how to reduce carbon emissions on their private planes?
How about the vast multiple energy eating mansions of the Democrat elite? Al Gore, Obama, etc… even the founders of BLM. Riches for me & not for thee.
Voting for Trump because of worries about control is as voting for a pyroman because of worries about fires
Easy to say, harder to prove
Again, what are you talking about?
TDS blinds leftist to continue to vote blue no matter who and end up making the country as backwards as California and its mass exodus. This coming from a Democrat
@@CharlieBam what do you mean?