1
00:00:00,100 --> 00:00:02,900
Um, what is the most important 
thing you learn from the work of

2
00:00:02,900 --> 00:00:05,400
Jason Brennan? 
Most important work? 

3
00:00:05,400 --> 00:00:07,800
I learned for them from the work
of Jason Brennan. 

4
00:00:08,400 --> 00:00:09,900
The actually Priya probably the 
thing. 

5
00:00:09,900 --> 00:00:12,500
The other thing is work that 
I've learned the most from, is 

6
00:00:12,700 --> 00:00:17,300
his why not capitalism, which is
reply to Jerry Cohen's classic 

7
00:00:17,400 --> 00:00:18,700
work. 
Why not socialism? 

8
00:00:19,200 --> 00:00:22,200
And what's really neat? 
That Jason does in the book. 

9
00:00:22,200 --> 00:00:27,000
Is he just says, all right, 
look, we can imagine a society 

10
00:00:27,000 --> 00:00:29,800
of totally cartoonishly. 
Nice, sweet pea. 

11
00:00:30,000 --> 00:00:34,400
People who still want to have 
capitalism and we can imagine 

12
00:00:34,400 --> 00:00:37,900
what that would be like and he 
relies very heavily upon the 

13
00:00:37,900 --> 00:00:41,500
Mickey Mouse clubhouse TV show 
for kids Reese's like there's 

14
00:00:41,500 --> 00:00:43,600
clearly Capital Society. 
All the characters own stores 

15
00:00:43,600 --> 00:00:46,400
and run businesses, but they're 
all really nice. 

16
00:00:46,900 --> 00:00:48,900
They're all really nice. 
And he says, in this is what's 

17
00:00:48,900 --> 00:00:51,500
wrong with Jerry Cohen spoke, as
he talks about a society where 

18
00:00:51,500 --> 00:00:53,100
everyone is super nice in their 
socialist. 

19
00:00:53,500 --> 00:00:57,400
And Jason says, look, really all
the mileage is coming from the 

20
00:00:57,408 --> 00:01:01,300
niceness and not from the 
difference of And it's not true 

21
00:01:01,300 --> 00:01:03,200
that nice people would 
necessarily want. 

22
00:01:03,200 --> 00:01:06,300
Socialism, just in the same way 
that a really nice person might 

23
00:01:06,300 --> 00:01:09,300
not want to co-author a paper 
with another person. 

24
00:01:09,300 --> 00:01:12,100
They might want to write singly 
so they can express themselves 

25
00:01:12,500 --> 00:01:16,100
in a undiluted fashion. 
So, to, in a capitalist Society 

26
00:01:16,100 --> 00:01:17,800
really nice person might want to
run their own business. 

27
00:01:17,800 --> 00:01:21,200
They can do it their way, 
Express their individuality, and

28
00:01:21,200 --> 00:01:22,700
selling. 
That's, that's a really nice way

29
00:01:22,700 --> 00:01:27,100
of explaining it, right. 
So, anyway, so, you know, that 

30
00:01:27,100 --> 00:01:31,100
those so he takes what he was. 
Sofia presents the Jerry Cohen 

31
00:01:31,100 --> 00:01:33,000
argument. 
And he really pervasive in this 

32
00:01:33,000 --> 00:01:36,300
very persuasive way of saying, 
what do you want to be part of a

33
00:01:36,308 --> 00:01:38,600
campaign group where everyone 
was buying and selling things 

34
00:01:38,600 --> 00:01:40,500
for everyone else? 
And people were acting all 

35
00:01:40,500 --> 00:01:44,100
greedy and Jason says, well, you
probably wouldn't would want to 

36
00:01:44,100 --> 00:01:47,100
be in a nicer can't but it's the
niceness that matters, but we 

37
00:01:47,100 --> 00:01:49,600
could also have an Eye Society 
based upon free market 

38
00:01:49,600 --> 00:01:51,700
principles. 
And in fact, he says that one 

39
00:01:51,700 --> 00:01:55,100
will work better Ina course, 
it's not very nice to make 

40
00:01:55,100 --> 00:01:58,000
someone follow the rules of your
group when they want to do their

41
00:01:58,000 --> 00:02:01,100
own thing. 
What is the most important thing

42
00:02:01,100 --> 00:02:03,800
you learned from the work of 
Michael humor now? 

43
00:02:03,800 --> 00:02:07,100
So for Michael humor, I will 
actually go out really far and 

44
00:02:07,100 --> 00:02:10,699
say, there's a whole literature 
on whether you can teach a human

45
00:02:10,699 --> 00:02:14,500
being, how to think, right? 
Which is overall quite -. 

46
00:02:14,800 --> 00:02:17,100
But I would say if there were 
any hope that there were 

47
00:02:17,100 --> 00:02:20,000
thinker, that could teach people
how to think that thinker would 

48
00:02:20,000 --> 00:02:23,900
be my humor because he doesn't 
just have positions on specific 

49
00:02:23,900 --> 00:02:27,500
issues because a general 
algorithm for how to think about

50
00:02:27,500 --> 00:02:30,600
anything and the algorithm. 
Is an algorithm is this. 

51
00:02:31,500 --> 00:02:34,300
First of all, start with some 
premises that will be plausible 

52
00:02:34,800 --> 00:02:39,600
to almost anyone. 
All right, and that means almost

53
00:02:39,600 --> 00:02:42,600
anyone, right? 
It's not just sure I me my five 

54
00:02:42,600 --> 00:02:43,600
friends. 
All agree on this. 

55
00:02:43,600 --> 00:02:46,600
Now, start with some premises 
would be very broadly 

56
00:02:46,600 --> 00:02:48,600
acceptable. 
When you don't need to First, 

57
00:02:48,600 --> 00:02:52,700
have a whole worldview before 
you can see the appeal of the 

58
00:02:52,708 --> 00:02:57,000
premise, right? 
So that's Step One is, and then 

59
00:02:57,200 --> 00:03:00,100
step two is try to construct an 
argument. 

60
00:03:00,100 --> 00:03:03,900
That were you reason very 
carefully from broadly accepted 

61
00:03:03,900 --> 00:03:06,300
premises to an obvious 
conclusion. 

62
00:03:07,400 --> 00:03:11,500
So, that is the general method 
that he uses and then I was also

63
00:03:11,500 --> 00:03:15,600
seeing a secondary method that 
the ability of the applies is to

64
00:03:15,600 --> 00:03:17,200
say for a. 
Yeah. 

65
00:03:17,200 --> 00:03:19,800
Any time you think you've got a 
very broadly acceptable? 

66
00:03:19,800 --> 00:03:24,100
Premise think really hard about 
counter-examples that one and 

67
00:03:24,100 --> 00:03:26,400
see whether there's any lessons 
you can learn and one lesson 

68
00:03:26,400 --> 00:03:30,500
that you love that he or that he
gets out of this is Any 

69
00:03:30,500 --> 00:03:34,100
principle where you are, 
especially on any any ethical 

70
00:03:34,100 --> 00:03:36,500
political principle or you just 
say this, something is always 

71
00:03:36,500 --> 00:03:40,000
true regardless of anything 
else, principles almost always 

72
00:03:40,000 --> 00:03:42,400
wrong. 
I think of this as all one 

73
00:03:42,400 --> 00:03:44,600
sentence moral and political 
theories are wrong. 

74
00:03:47,000 --> 00:03:49,200
Right. 
And again, it comes down to 

75
00:03:49,200 --> 00:03:51,500
someone, you know, so there's a 
Libertarian one. 

76
00:03:51,500 --> 00:03:53,800
Well, you should never initiate 
Force against anyone else. 

77
00:03:54,100 --> 00:03:57,100
Well, how about, if you could 
steal a dime, to save the Earth?

78
00:03:57,100 --> 00:03:59,500
How about that? 
You still shouldn't steal the 

79
00:03:59,500 --> 00:04:01,400
dime. 
Right? 

80
00:04:01,800 --> 00:04:04,200
Right, but it could also be 
everything should be equal. 

81
00:04:04,300 --> 00:04:05,100
All right, well, should be 
equal. 

82
00:04:05,100 --> 00:04:07,300
What if half of humankind will 
die of starvation? 

83
00:04:07,300 --> 00:04:09,400
If we equalize everything? 
Should we still do that, then, 

84
00:04:10,000 --> 00:04:12,200
right? 
So that kind of thing, right? 

85
00:04:12,200 --> 00:04:15,800
So anyway, if you go and read 
Mike's work all of Does follow 

86
00:04:15,800 --> 00:04:18,100
these general principles of 
thinking which I have found to 

87
00:04:18,100 --> 00:04:21,500
be tremendously helpful and it's
something that also you can 

88
00:04:21,500 --> 00:04:24,400
apply out-of-sample. 
So it's one thing to say some 

89
00:04:24,400 --> 00:04:26,300
general principles. 
Then he gives you some examples 

90
00:04:26,300 --> 00:04:29,300
and then you just repeat these 
examples, but I will say that 

91
00:04:29,300 --> 00:04:32,300
you can apply this your Marion 
method to new questions and they

92
00:04:32,300 --> 00:04:36,300
often have right and I have used
this to get rid of many of my 

93
00:04:36,700 --> 00:04:40,900
ridiculous and dogmatic use 
because often there was some 

94
00:04:41,100 --> 00:04:43,500
philosophical principle, but I 
held and then I just thought, 

95
00:04:43,500 --> 00:04:47,200
well would this make Make sense 
to someone with the same. 

96
00:04:47,200 --> 00:04:48,800
We like doing. 
Who does this make sense to you?

97
00:04:48,900 --> 00:04:51,500
Well, this premise makes sense 
to five people. 

98
00:04:53,200 --> 00:04:54,900
Why do I even believe it? 
Is? 

99
00:04:54,900 --> 00:04:57,600
It actually all that obvious and
only they know. 

100
00:04:57,600 --> 00:05:00,000
I mean, I believe it because I 
got really excited when I was 

101
00:05:00,000 --> 00:05:03,400
young about this and I've been 
barking it out at other people 

102
00:05:03,400 --> 00:05:04,800
ever since. 
Okay. 

103
00:05:04,800 --> 00:05:07,700
Well, so let's stop doing that. 
And let's see. 

104
00:05:07,700 --> 00:05:10,000
Is there any principally? 
What principles would seem 

105
00:05:10,000 --> 00:05:13,700
obvious to almost anyone who was
not in the grip of some other 

106
00:05:13,700 --> 00:05:17,600
ideology? 
And suddenly, I've applied this 

107
00:05:17,600 --> 00:05:19,600
to many other issues. 
And I think I've just gotten a 

108
00:05:19,608 --> 00:05:23,500
lot of mileage out of it. 
So soon for personal growth and 

109
00:05:23,500 --> 00:05:27,300
for understanding the world. 
So, for example, I don't think I

110
00:05:27,308 --> 00:05:29,400
like until we actually reviewed 
my book, the case against 

111
00:05:29,400 --> 00:05:31,100
education. 
I don't think my humor really 

112
00:05:31,100 --> 00:05:32,800
wrote anything notable on 
education. 

113
00:05:33,200 --> 00:05:35,600
But if you read the book, you'll
see that it's very humor 

114
00:05:35,600 --> 00:05:40,000
influenced because so much of 
the book is about trying to find

115
00:05:40,000 --> 00:05:42,900
premises about the education 
system that will make sense to 

116
00:05:42,900 --> 00:05:48,800
almost anyone things like And if
you could either get the Clio, 

117
00:05:48,800 --> 00:05:51,400
learn the material in a class, 
but not but not getting an F in 

118
00:05:51,407 --> 00:05:54,500
the class, or you get an A, but 
not learn the material, which 

119
00:05:54,500 --> 00:05:56,400
would actually more helpful for 
your career. 

120
00:05:57,700 --> 00:06:00,000
This is something else. 
I might didn't teach me to ask 

121
00:06:00,000 --> 00:06:02,700
that, but this is the kind of 
question that you start asking. 

122
00:06:03,000 --> 00:06:06,600
Once you take my humors thought 
seriously, and it does lead very

123
00:06:06,600 --> 00:06:07,400
naturally do. 
Yeah. 

124
00:06:07,400 --> 00:06:09,800
Well most people would rather 
have the grade without the 

125
00:06:09,800 --> 00:06:13,200
learning, the learning about the
grade and that along with many 

126
00:06:13,200 --> 00:06:16,000
other, similar questions are 
really the inspiration for the 

127
00:06:16,008 --> 00:06:17,500
book. 
And yeah, there's a lot of other

128
00:06:17,500 --> 00:06:22,000
books also as a lot of research 
in it, but a great part of it is

129
00:06:22,000 --> 00:06:24,900
just be you trying to start with
premises that will be plausible 

130
00:06:25,100 --> 00:06:27,300
to someone who wasn't 
dogmatically convinced. 

131
00:06:27,600 --> 00:06:30,100
Every class you're taking is 
pouring skill into you. 

132
00:06:31,700 --> 00:06:34,100
What is the most important thing
you learned from The Works of 

133
00:06:34,100 --> 00:06:38,500
Michael humor? 
Oh God, there's so many things. 

134
00:06:41,000 --> 00:06:43,100
You know, I'm not answering 
quickly just because I like 

135
00:06:43,100 --> 00:06:45,300
humor stuff so much that it's 
hard to pick. 

136
00:06:46,700 --> 00:06:49,700
I think I think what I like the 
most about humor rather than the

137
00:06:49,700 --> 00:06:53,000
substantive content is the 
methodological style. 

138
00:06:53,200 --> 00:06:56,800
So humor is very much. 
Some philosophers do something 

139
00:06:56,800 --> 00:06:59,600
like this first. 
Let me give you a crappy 

140
00:06:59,600 --> 00:07:03,100
argument for some big theory 
that you probably won't believe 

141
00:07:03,100 --> 00:07:05,500
and then let me just explore the
implications of that theory. 

142
00:07:05,600 --> 00:07:08,700
So an example, that would be 
John Rawls, John, Rawls has a 

143
00:07:08,700 --> 00:07:11,500
great political philosopher. 
But fundamentally, what he does 

144
00:07:11,500 --> 00:07:13,800
in a theory of justice is give 
you an incomplete. 

145
00:07:13,800 --> 00:07:17,000
Somewhat ad, hoc, not 
particularly compelling, 

146
00:07:17,000 --> 00:07:19,500
argument for a couple principles
of Justice, which happened to 

147
00:07:19,508 --> 00:07:24,000
correspond with what the average
Democrat in 1968 to 1972 would 

148
00:07:24,000 --> 00:07:26,500
have believed anyways, and then 
he kind of explores what that 

149
00:07:26,500 --> 00:07:29,100
theory would mean. 
Humor is very much more of the 

150
00:07:29,300 --> 00:07:32,000
he's like, he's really Peter 
Singer where he's like, you the 

151
00:07:32,000 --> 00:07:34,500
reader believe this, you believe
this. 

152
00:07:34,600 --> 00:07:36,300
And you believe this here are 
three common. 

153
00:07:36,400 --> 00:07:39,300
Since moral views and empirical 
use that, you probably already 

154
00:07:39,300 --> 00:07:40,200
have. 
Now. 

155
00:07:40,200 --> 00:07:42,000
I'm going to show you that these
lead to some surprising 

156
00:07:42,000 --> 00:07:44,700
conclusion that you didn't 
realize, which means that you 

157
00:07:44,700 --> 00:07:46,800
either have to accept this 
conclusion or you have to give 

158
00:07:46,800 --> 00:07:48,600
up one of these things you 
already believe. 

159
00:07:49,400 --> 00:07:51,400
Right? 
And that's I think a powerful 

160
00:07:51,400 --> 00:07:55,200
way to do philosophy rather than
my crazy Theory, implies some 

161
00:07:55,200 --> 00:07:57,100
crazy results. 
You're like the thing you the 

162
00:07:57,100 --> 00:07:59,400
reader already think imply, 
something, you weren't you 

163
00:07:59,400 --> 00:08:02,200
weren't, you weren't aware of. 
So I very much try to emulate 

164
00:08:02,200 --> 00:08:06,300
humor in my work where I try to 
lie upon common sense. 

165
00:08:06,500 --> 00:08:09,700
All ideas and like I argue for 
not common sense conclusions, 

166
00:08:09,700 --> 00:08:12,400
but I try to show that they 
follow from Common Sense, moral 

167
00:08:12,400 --> 00:08:13,700
ideas. 
And the reason that we don't 

168
00:08:13,700 --> 00:08:16,800
endorse them is because of our 
own, ethical confusion. 

169
00:08:17,300 --> 00:08:20,000
And if I have an empirical 
claims and I back them up with 

170
00:08:20,300 --> 00:08:23,800
the evidence to support them. 
Yeah, you did a terrific job and

171
00:08:23,900 --> 00:08:26,700
against democracy with your 
jury. 

172
00:08:26,800 --> 00:08:29,100
Analogy. 
Can't recommend this book 

173
00:08:29,100 --> 00:08:31,500
enough. 
What is the most important thing

174
00:08:31,500 --> 00:08:36,299
you learned from Bryan Caplan? 
The rational irrationality? 

175
00:08:36,400 --> 00:08:38,600
Thesis, that's the most 
important thing. 

176
00:08:39,600 --> 00:08:44,800
So, the rationale irrationality 
thesis is the claim that the 

177
00:08:44,800 --> 00:08:47,000
reason that people like, 
remember Ashley ignorance from 

178
00:08:47,000 --> 00:08:50,100
previously in the discussion. 
People don't know things because

179
00:08:50,100 --> 00:08:52,400
the cost of knowing it is higher
than the value of knowing it 

180
00:08:52,500 --> 00:08:54,200
rationally. 
Rationality is an addition to 

181
00:08:54,200 --> 00:08:56,600
that. 
It says processing information 

182
00:08:56,600 --> 00:09:00,700
in a careful way, takes time and
effort and is difficult, 

183
00:09:00,900 --> 00:09:05,000
indulging, bias, indulging, 
false beliefs can sometimes have

184
00:09:05,000 --> 00:09:07,400
a positive benefit and it's To 
do sometimes. 

185
00:09:07,700 --> 00:09:11,600
So, rashly, the thesis here is 
that people will be rational in 

186
00:09:11,600 --> 00:09:13,500
there. 
Like an epistemic sense. 

187
00:09:13,800 --> 00:09:16,700
They will think scientifically 
in carefully about an issue. 

188
00:09:16,900 --> 00:09:19,700
If the benefits exceed the costs
in otherwise, otherwise, they 

189
00:09:19,700 --> 00:09:23,900
won't. 
And so what if you take, 

190
00:09:23,900 --> 00:09:26,200
seriously, neoclassical 
economics these ideas, it says 

191
00:09:26,200 --> 00:09:29,800
that the typical voter is not is
going to allow themselves to 

192
00:09:29,800 --> 00:09:32,700
indulge bias allow themselves to
indulge their worst thought 

193
00:09:32,700 --> 00:09:35,000
processes. 
There's no not going to think 

194
00:09:35,000 --> 00:09:37,900
carefully about something. 
Because their vote doesn't 

195
00:09:37,900 --> 00:09:40,700
matter very much the cost to 
them of being rational exceed 

196
00:09:40,700 --> 00:09:44,300
the benefits of being rational. 
So it's instrumentally valuable 

197
00:09:44,400 --> 00:09:47,600
to be epistemic lie irrational. 
So, I learned that from him. 

198
00:09:48,400 --> 00:09:52,100
I read a draft of his 2007 book,
myth of the rational voter 

199
00:09:52,100 --> 00:09:54,900
before was published and he's 
nice enough to share that with 

200
00:09:54,900 --> 00:09:56,500
me. 
And that there really be. 

201
00:09:56,500 --> 00:09:59,000
I knew a lot of the facts about 
like the stuff about ignorance 

202
00:09:59,000 --> 00:10:02,100
and so on before, but I think I 
learned from him, just how bad 

203
00:10:02,100 --> 00:10:05,000
it is and it's not simply affect
an information problem, but that

204
00:10:05,000 --> 00:10:08,300
voters have such a Face, it 
incentive problem that explains 

205
00:10:08,300 --> 00:10:11,300
why they behave badly like why 
they reason badly and act like 

206
00:10:11,300 --> 00:10:18,800
jerks. 
So Bryan Caplan, what is the 

207
00:10:18,800 --> 00:10:20,600
most important thing? 
You learn from him or you 

208
00:10:20,600 --> 00:10:23,300
thought his most best 
contributions? 

209
00:10:24,000 --> 00:10:26,000
Yeah, man. 
So, you know, there are two 

210
00:10:26,000 --> 00:10:27,900
answers. 
So the answer to the first 

211
00:10:27,900 --> 00:10:31,000
question is Bryan Caplan, 
introduced me to her Narco 

212
00:10:31,000 --> 00:10:34,300
capitalism. 
And so I don't know if you know 

213
00:10:34,300 --> 00:10:36,900
this story, right? 
We were at UC Berkeley. 

214
00:10:37,200 --> 00:10:40,600
So Brian, and I went to college 
at UC Berkeley at the same time 

215
00:10:41,100 --> 00:10:42,400
on. 
So that's where I met him. 

216
00:10:42,400 --> 00:10:47,100
And then he introduced me to an 
cap and that's Became America's 

217
00:10:47,300 --> 00:10:50,200
I've already libertarian, right?
And then he told me about this 

218
00:10:50,200 --> 00:10:52,800
and I and my first reaction was 
anarchism is crazy. 

219
00:10:54,100 --> 00:10:56,200
But you know, and then he was 
able to explain it and liking 

220
00:10:56,200 --> 00:10:59,900
made me read Murray rothbard 
indeed Friedman his biggest 

221
00:10:59,900 --> 00:11:04,600
contribution to just like, you 
know, other than an cap, um, 

222
00:11:04,600 --> 00:11:07,400
which you know, he did invent is
of course a theory of rational 

223
00:11:07,400 --> 00:11:08,600
irrational T. 
Right. 

224
00:11:09,400 --> 00:11:11,300
So the book, The Myth of the 
rational voter, right? 

225
00:11:11,300 --> 00:11:14,600
That's like the the big 
statement of that also a bunch 

226
00:11:14,600 --> 00:11:18,300
of papers, but And, you know, I 
use that theory frequently, like

227
00:11:18,300 --> 00:11:24,000
I invoked it in this discussion.
And Jason Brennan. 

228
00:11:24,200 --> 00:11:25,900
Another one of my favorite 
philosophers. 

229
00:11:26,100 --> 00:11:29,300
What something you learn from 
him or thought was his best 

230
00:11:29,300 --> 00:11:32,500
intellectual contribution. 
Yeah, I mean Jason and I 

231
00:11:32,500 --> 00:11:37,200
basically have the same views 
like it's like, you know, on on 

232
00:11:37,200 --> 00:11:41,400
government and democracy and 
whatever and anarchism, although

233
00:11:41,500 --> 00:11:44,900
it's not obvious in, I don't 
think it's come out in his 

234
00:11:44,900 --> 00:11:48,400
published philosophical, 
writings that he's an anarchist.

235
00:11:48,800 --> 00:11:51,800
I think people when people read 
him, they think that he's an To 

236
00:11:51,800 --> 00:11:55,000
stick rat by that is, you know, 
a person who believes in the 

237
00:11:55,000 --> 00:11:57,400
rule of the well-informed or 
something. 

238
00:11:57,900 --> 00:12:00,600
And I understand why people 
would think that because, like, 

239
00:12:00,600 --> 00:12:03,000
so he has some good articles 
about this about how, you know, 

240
00:12:03,000 --> 00:12:05,300
you have a right to not be ruled
by people who are totally 

241
00:12:05,300 --> 00:12:08,900
incompetent and and ignorant and
stupid and whatever and are not 

242
00:12:08,900 --> 00:12:13,200
paying attention to so on and 
so, you know, the suggestion 

243
00:12:13,200 --> 00:12:15,900
seems to be, okay, so we should 
just, we should be ruled by the 

244
00:12:15,900 --> 00:12:20,000
smart wise benevolent people or 
whatever, but I happen to know 

245
00:12:20,000 --> 00:12:22,800
that is actual use anarchism. 
But anyway, so I mean, I think 

246
00:12:22,800 --> 00:12:25,400
that is criticisms of democracy 
or probably his biggest 

247
00:12:25,400 --> 00:12:28,300
contribution, right? 
And just, you know, pointing 

248
00:12:28,300 --> 00:12:31,100
out. 
I mean, like it's well known how

249
00:12:31,100 --> 00:12:35,100
democracy is screwed up and he's
well known among people who look

250
00:12:35,100 --> 00:12:37,700
into that sort of thing, not 
among the general public, who 

251
00:12:37,700 --> 00:12:40,900
have totally incorrect use about
democracy, but, you know, like, 

252
00:12:42,300 --> 00:12:45,400
besides explaining the problems 
with incentives, right? 

253
00:12:45,500 --> 00:12:48,600
I think, just like explaining 
how it's totally immoral, right?

254
00:12:48,900 --> 00:12:51,400
The system that we have is 
immoral because like, you know, 

255
00:12:51,500 --> 00:12:55,300
You're you're under the power 
just like, you know, without 

256
00:12:55,300 --> 00:12:57,500
even being a Libertarian, right?
You can see that there's 

257
00:12:57,500 --> 00:13:00,400
something wrong with you being 
under the, under the power of 

258
00:13:00,400 --> 00:13:02,500
these people who don't know what
the hell they're doing, and 

259
00:13:02,500 --> 00:13:04,000
don't care. 
Right? 

260
00:13:04,000 --> 00:13:05,800
Like all of these voters, don't 
care. 

261
00:13:06,600 --> 00:13:08,600
They're not, they're not doing 
research. 

262
00:13:08,600 --> 00:13:11,400
They don't know what the issues 
are right there. 

263
00:13:11,400 --> 00:13:15,500
Just like taking some tweets 
that they heard whenever and and

264
00:13:15,500 --> 00:13:18,100
voting on the basis of who's 
good-looking or stuff like that.

265
00:13:18,200 --> 00:13:18,400
Yeah.