Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
The 14 day mask mandate has ended 700 days later . . . but has it exposed the true danger to society? Musk and free speech?
Tired of being gaslit by progressive media?
Wanna fight back against deceptive narratives being pushed across the globe?
At the Lucas Skrobot show we tear down cultural & geopolitical events giving you the context you need to expose the worldviews driving the cultural agendas of our day.
Ultimately connecting back to why it matters to your world, and how to order our lives and society to own the future.
Join Lucas Skrobot and follow the show on your favorite podcasts app today to understand the world, discern the truth, own the future.
After 700 days of slowing the
spread, the mass has finally come off
exposing the real danger to society.
People seeing the faces of the general
public has reminded each and every one of
us, of the real danger of people who don't
think like you or don't look like you,
or don't scowl like you, the offensive
smiles of strangers passing by ops to
offend you after all, they don't know.
You and they shouldn't
assume what mood you are in.
Smiling is a microaggression
that must be stopped.
Those masks really helped
stop that microaggression.
Imagine you're walking down
the street and there someone
you don't know, smiles at you.
I feel triggered just thinking about it.
And after 700 days, Of nature.
Being able to heal from the scorch
of humanity, what might happen now to
the environment and mass companies.
Now that the little people aren't
being muzzled, we should all be
deeply troubled the mass over people's
mouths and big tech, big pharma and
big government censorship effectively
reminded people that they shouldn't talk.
And if they did, there would be
consequences after all democracy
dies in darkness and democracy.
Well, that is a white supremacist
colonialist concept of an individualistic
notion that must be done away with,
at all costs as little people like
you and I, we don't know better, and
we should be kept safe from thinking.
Thinking is dangerous.
We need to be kept safe
from thinking for ourselves.
Elon Musk is threatening to uncover
that darkness that is keeping you and I
so safe by buying Twitter and exposing
the black box of Twitters algorithms,
shadow bands, de platforming, and really
publishing the propaganda and promoting
the propaganda that the powers that be
behind it, dark and shadowy curtain of.
Really align and agree
with for once, for once.
We all need to lay aside the fear
mongering of climate catastrophe and
attack Elon Musk, who is creating
a great electric car, which cuts
humanity's carbon footprint because.
He's really only trying to save
humanity, not save the environment.
And this goes against everything.
The ruling elite were pulling
the strings behind the curtain.
Believe it is not the environment that we
are trying to save, but as humanity that
we seek to destroy, Hey, it's Lucas Skrobot.
And you're listening to the Lucas Skrobot
bot show where we uncover purpose, pursue
truth and own the future episode 279.
It is April 21st, 2022.
And I'm coming to you from
the heart of the middle east.
And man, I am so excited, so excited
to see that after only 700 days of
slowing the spread by muzzling men,
women, and children on airlines,
which have, you know, EPA air filters,
great air circulation, which really
means that an airplane is not a likely
place that you're going to catch the.
That's all been done away with
it in a moment there's videos,
circling around the social medias of
people, celebrating the moment that
the airline pilot announces that.
No longer are the mass
mandates in America in place.
And in the rest of the world
is already following suit.
It's you mean British airways beforehand,
before this happened said we're no
longer mandating mass on our airplane.
The UK had already begun
to roll back measures.
Uh, this is a great sign of great day.
Uh, a shame that it took
so long, so long for this.
To reach this point, but, uh,
finally the masks have come off
and hopefully it is the beginning
of the end of this catastrophe of
policy that has wrecked in destroyed
economies, livelihoods people's jobs.
People's.
People's mental health, suicide rates.
Hopefully it is the end of these
horrible government policies that have
really endangered so many people and
harmed so many people through the world
into a tailspin because of policies
that were put in place policies that
weren't even able to be questioned.
There wasn't even the ability to
have in many countries, the ability
to have an open forum to discuss.
The conflicting data behind what
was happening when it came to COVID.
Now this ties into today's episode.
We are talking about Elon Musk.
This is a Musk heavy episode as
really one of the it's really amazing
what's happened over the last week
of Musk, not only buying a 9.7% of.
But then making an offer to buy the
buyout, the entire company at 54.20
cents per share, which is far above
what the value of the company is worth
in attempts to take Twitter private.
So he can undo all of these black
box policies of hidden algorithms
and not really knowing what's
promoted, demoted why that is
what's going on behind the scenes.
We're clear.
There is bias, explicit bias against
conservative voices or against voices that
do not align with the progressive liberal
movement that big tech has embraced that
big, big tech and big government has
embraced instead big tech instead of
being a place where there is, uh, an open.
Uh, broad and decentralized.
It has become a centralized place
of gatekeeping and gatekeepers and
algorithms of people who have taken
upon themselves to become publishers.
And we've talked about this, I don't
know, numerous, numerous times on
the show about article 79, I believe
in India in article a section two
30 in America, which states that.
Uh, internet company like Facebook,
Twitter, Instagram is operating as a, a
bulletin port as a utility, as a telephone
company, they are not held liable
for the information that users post.
They have the ability to take some
things down that are threatening to the
community that clearly break laws such as.
In the real inciting of violence,
calling for violence against individuals,
doxing people, calling for death threats
against people, which sometimes is done
most of the time is not done on these
platforms, depending on which side of
the aisle is calling for what that is.
One of those companies operating
as a utility as a bulletin
board, they're not a publisher.
Then the ability for users to generate
content without Facebook or Instagram
being held liable for that content just
as if I pick up my phone and I have a
telephone conversation and we talk about
some sort of a conspiracy to overthrow a
government or some other illegal actions.
The telephone company acting as
the utility is not held liable.
They are not going to be the ones
who are being brought to court.
Say so-and-so had a phone conversation
over your phone network and
therefore you were a guilty party.
You're responsible for this crime.
No, there are utility.
They're just providing a service,
but I'm held liable for the actions
that I take upon that service.
Well, over the years, internet.
Social media platforms have
been able to use this to qualify
themselves as an intermediate.
You're not as a publishing, not as a
journalist company, that's held liable,
which gives them the ability for users
like you and me to post content, to
places like YouTube, just like this.
This has given us an amazing freedom
of open doors, but then slowly,
slowly, slowly, the creep has come in.
Govern where these companies are
functioning more like publishers,
where they begin to say, well,
we need to curtail speech
to meet there's hate speech.
There's there's bullying.
That's taking place, things that are
going against our community guidelines.
For instance, just this just this
week, a farmer was kicked off of tick
tock because he was bullying vegans
by saying that, Hey, if you eat a.
That turnip actually is only able
to grow because of cow maneuver.
And there is a circle of
life that is going on where
animals are used to grow crops.
And so when you're eating turnips
or spinach or any sort of grain or
wheat, there is an animal by-product
that is being used in that.
And therefore it's not really.
Well, I mean, clearly use probably
bullying, use making fun of vegans.
And so I can see how that mocking
could be considered bullying and
offensive, but now he's been kicked off
tick-tock because he's being offensive.
He's offending a certain group of people.
So these big tech companies have,
have now been having to deal with
these or choosing to deal with
these sort of things by, by proxy.
By the pudding up of fact, checking on
the bottom of posts by the, by the, the
organization of an algorithm, especially
an algorithm that's not transparent.
We don't know why some things are
being shown to us and why other things
aren't, we don't know why some posts are
being promoted and pushed to the top of
algorithms and why some things aren't.
What is the secret sauce behind it?
All this creates these
big tech companies not.
Unbiased open squares, where people
can have freedom of speech, freedom
of freedom to offend people, freedom,
to engage in debate with one another,
without having fear of being silenced
for saving biological facts, that a
man is a man and cannot become a woman.
Eman cannot give birth to a baby.
And a woman is a woman that cannot become
a man stating biological facts is now.
I hate crime is now considered,
considered hate speech.
This has moved far beyond the open
neutral platform and has moved
into, has moved into publishing.
And this is what Elon Musk, who is turning
into the hero, the hero of the world,
not the hero of the world, but a hero
in the world really going to bat for.
For the freedom of speech, freedom
of dialogue in offering to say,
Hey, I see Twitter being a problem.
I'm going to put my
money where my mouth is.
I'm going to offer billions
of dollars to buy out Twitter,
still keeping some shareholders.
He he's saying that he wants to keep
the minimum amount of, or maximum
amount of shareholders that private
company can have, which is about
2000 shareholders in a company
while still being a private company.
Doing a way with the secrecy.
Elon Musk was just interviewed by,
by Ted and we have a series of clips
they're a little longer eclipse a day.
Each run.
Each one runs about a minute long
of Elon Musk in this interview,
really laying out his vision.
For what he wants to do with Twitter
and why and the problems that he
sees happening within Twitter and
how he thinks he can fix them.
Here is the first of a series
of clips with Elon Musk.
Well, I think it's very important
for, uh, that'd be an inclusive arena
for free speech, uh, where, so, yeah.
Um, Twitter has become kind
of the de facto town square.
So it's just really important that
people have the, both the reality and the
perception that they are able to speak
freely within the bounds of the law.
And so one of the things that I believe
Twitter should do is open source.
The.
And make any changes to people's tweets
or if they're emphasized or deemphasized,
that action should be made apparent.
So anyone can see that
action has been taken.
So there's no sort of behind
the scenes manipulation, either
algorithmically or manually
there's there's so much talk
about democracy dying in darkness.
It's this.
Cliche phrase that people use, which
I don't really know what it means as,
uh, what, how do you define darkness?
I guess supposedly it's being used
more so in journalistic spheres, if
we have to speak and expose what's
happening, otherwise democracy will die.
And yet when it comes to institutions
like Twitter, which has a black box
algorithm, which you do not know why
something is being promoted, what is being
demoted, what's manually being changed.
We don't know how these
decisions are being made.
There's not a clear,
uh, uh, a clear vestige.
There's not a clear display of what's
happening behind the scenes in a platform
that really is the town square of the
globe, where conversations are happening
about policy change, social issues.
More than not one side of the conversation
is being silenced is being shut
down is being shadow banned because
it goes against the, the ideals of
those who own the private company.
Now.
Yes, if you own a private company,
you can, you have the freedom to
say, actually, I don't want this
talked about, I don't want this
talk about, I don't like this idea.
I'm going to control.
The culture of my company, for sure
you have that freedom, but the moment
that you decide to exercise that
freedom, you are, you are operating as a
publisher in this space, in this realm.
And once you're operating as a
publisher, the laws change no longer
are you protected by section two
30 in the United States, no longer
are you protected by article 79.
You are now exposed as a publisher
and you're held liable for every
single thing that is published on your
platform, which is impossible to control.
But as Musk says, there is freedom of
speech within the confines of the law.
And there are laws in America and in
every other place in the world that
places curtails that places limits.
Certain kinds of speech, for instance,
defamation, I can't go out and say
something that is blatantly false
about you and smear your name and,
and create a whole bunch of false,
complete lies and allegations about you.
If I do that, you can take me to jail.
You can take me to court.
You can Sue me.
I'm held liable for false
witness and false testimony.
That's.
And you shouldn't be able to do that.
Likewise, if a person is inciting
direct violence against another
person or group that is also criminal,
that's a criminal offense in America
and many other parts of the world.
So Musk is not saying that, just
take off the limits, just have total
free and anyone can say whatever
they want and it's a free for all.
And there's no.
He say, no, we need to
respect the laws of the land.
That's reasonable.
I think that's reasonable.
And if anything is being changed, there
is a note on every post notating and
dictating what has happened, why it
has happened, and you can go and look
at it within the open source of the
algorithm that is open to critique.
Here is Musk and.
Might my view, Twitter should match
the laws of the, of the country of
Spain and really, you know, there's an
obligation to do that by going beyond
going beyond that and having it be
unclear, who's making what changes to
who talk to where having tweets sort
of mysteriously be promoted and demoted
with no insight into what's going.
Uh, having a black box algorithm promotes
some things and other, not other things.
I think this can be quite dangerous.
So, so, so the idea of opening the
algorithm is that is a huge deal.
And I think many people would, would
welcome that of understanding exactly how.
The decision and critique it and
critique like ordering is like,
like, I think like the, the coach
should be on GitHub, you know?
So then an app, so people can look through
it and say, like, I see a problem here.
I don't, I don't agree with this.
Um, they can highlight issues, suggest
changes in the same way that you sort
of update Linux or signal or something.
You would think that many
people would be open for it?
You think that everyone
would be open for it?
That everyone would say,
yeah, let's open this up.
Let's have a fear, fair Plainfield to
know the rules that we're playing within.
Instead we have Calvin ball where
there's some people, a small group
of select people who are controlling
the flow of information, controlling
what people do see or don't see in a
non-transparent way for the responses.
The responses to Elon Musk, who is so
green energy blowing past boundaries
and borders and creating electric cars,
which is it's the way of the future.
It's it's the green new deal.
It is everything about creating
a new utopia of being free from
fossil fuels and he's spearheading.
You would think that he would be
the hero of that side of the aisle,
of those who, who really believe
that climate change and that climate
catastrophe is the biggest issue.
Society, they would, you would
think that people would look
at him and say, you know what?
I agree, Musk Musk is onto something
he's really fighting for our
values when it comes to making a
cleaner and better environment.
And I'm for that, I'm all for that.
I think Tesla's awesome.
Amazing.
But instead, because he doesn't
fully align because Musk thinks for
himself and has ideas that contradict.
What the antinatalism what the, the
environmental realism movement believes
and says, which is humanity is a scourge.
We are no different than any
other animal on this planet.
We should be limited.
We are an invasive species.
We need to limit our population.
There's population collapsed.
Musk actually says the opposite.
There's a publishing collapse coming.
They say that there is this
population, boom, coming in.
We're going to have so many
people that it's not going to be
sustainable, whereas the numbers
and we're going to get into this.
The second part of the show must actually
points out that actually we're, we're
going into population collapse on a global
scale and it's going to be detrimental,
but because Musk thinks for himself.
Because he doesn't tow the party line.
He is now an enemy of the state
quote, unquote state and enemy of
the party of the ideals because he
doesn't fit in to the box precisely.
And that is always dangerous.
What does Musk think healthy and
free speech looks like and sounds
like, well, I, I, I think we would
want to err on the, if, if in doubt,
let, let, let the speech that let
it exist, but it would have, if it's
a gray area, I would say, let,
let the, let the tweet exist.
Um, but obviously in a case
where there's perhaps a lot of
controversy that you'd not want to
necessarily promote that to tweet.
If you know, I'm not saying I have all
the answers here, but I do think that
we want to be just very reluctant to
delete things and have just, just be
very cautious with, with permanent.
Uh, you know, timeouts I think
are better or, uh, than, than,
than sort of permanent bands.
And Y you can see here, he's not speaking
completely irrationally about this.
He's not going to an extreme,
he's measuring his words.
He's saying, yeah, I'm still
trying to figure it out.
These are some of the things that I
think here's some of the patterns that
I think would make Twitter a healthier.
It sounds very, level-headed not
at all controlling, but quite free.
He continues.
Uh, but just, just in general, like I
said, won't be perfect, but I think we
wanted to really have like the obsession
and reality that speeches as free as
reasonably possible and a good sign
as to whether there is free speech is.
Is someone you don't like allowed
to say something you don't like.
And if that is the case, then we have free
speech and it's, it's damn annoying when
someone you don't like says something you
don't like, that is a sign of a healthy
functioning, free speech situation.
When someone you don't like says something
you don't like, and that is allowed, that
is a sign of healthy and free speech.
I think it's a great articulation.
It's saying the ability for you to be
offended for you to be triggered is a
sign that you are living in a society
where there's free speech, where there's
an ability for the government to be
offended for a religion, to be offended
for someone's beliefs, to be offended for
people's feelings, to be hurt for people
to feel like they're being disagreed with.
By people saying things they don't like
that is a sign of freedom of speech.
That should be appalled.
But instead we have moved into this
snowflake mentality of absolutism
where if anyone is saying something
that you don't like that offense.
It becomes this personal violation
at persons should be shut down.
If someone believes something
that you don't like, you should
cut them out of your life.
We've all, we've probably all had it
happen where someone says something
we don't like offends us per assess.
And so we silence them in our life.
Now, in some ways it's totally
called for, if you have a person
who's bullying you, who's harassing.
Yeah, it's okay to set up
boundaries around your life.
If someone is constantly parading,
you cursing at you, attacking you
Syncrude and obscene things to you.
Yeah.
Put some boundaries around you.
But if you just give someone that
disagrees, that sees the world differently
than you might say, some things that kind
of offensive and should have that person
in your life should talk to them, should
go get coffee for them and you should pay.
Get a meal with them, discuss and,
and seek to understand why they see
the world that they see the world
through, why they have that lens on
the world that will make you a better
person, you a healthier person.
And if your view on the world
doesn't change, it will only
make your arguments stronger.
There's what, what's the downside.
If you become too to see the world a
little differently, you'll be a more.
Rounded person seeing the blind spots,
blind spots better than you did before.
I was in a conversation
recently taking my own advice.
I was in a conversation recently with
someone who self labels and selves as
a progressive, he said, yeah, I would
be what you'd consider a progressive.
And so we were talking.
Policy you were talking.
I was asking him, what
does that mean for you?
What does it mean for you to
be a progressive in what areas?
What, how does that actually
play out in policy, different
areas socially and economically.
And it came up, this Twitter
thing came up, it must came
up and I'm going to Paris.
I may not get exactly his quote correctly,
but you saying to the fact that he doesn't
think that the richest man in the world
controlling a platform like Twitter
should be a good idea or is a good idea.
He thinks it's too much control
centralized in one person that he
owns enough and controls enough.
And when you look at what Musk
owns and controls, yes, he is worth
hundreds of billions of dollars.
But that hundreds of billions of
dollars is that cash for gold bullion.
That's sitting in his bank account.
Those are tied up in shares.
That's unrealized capital gains.
In fact, an article just came out this
week, revealing that Musk says in an
interview that he doesn't own a home.
He's staying with friends crashing
in people's empty couches.
He doesn't own.
He has one plane company plane so that
he can get to places and save time
rather than spending a bunch of time on
commercial planes, which at that level
that's minimum expense, but he's not
some extra extravagant, uh, oligarch.
Who's spending hundreds of
billions of dollars on obscenities.
He's focused on building stuff.
He's focused on a mission he's focused.
His purpose.
Well,
and remember, just because he has
$251 billion of net worth, and
people have criticized him for not
paying his taxes, that net worth
at $250 billion is unrealized.
If, if you have stock that you
bought at $1 and it went to $250
billion, but you didn't sell that
stock yet, but it's worth that much.
You have not realized.
That $250 billion game.
There's no taxes that you can pay on it.
I digress.
I digress
in the conversation that it was.
I don't think that one person
should have that much control.
And yet there are my opinion, the
argument falls apart in both spot
because there's other people.
Do you have a lot of control who are
actually using the platform not to create
a space of freedom of speech, but they're
creating a space where they're willing to
take a poison pill and kill Twitter, to
make sure that Musk isn't able to have a
controlling share or buy out the company.
They're willing to say that board
members can't stay on the board.
They're willing to say.
That board members can buy more
stock in the company to make
sure that Musk isn't able to
all to stop mosquitoes pretty much
just saying, Hey, I think that this
has been poorly run and poorly managed,
and because it believe in freedom of
speech and believe in people having the
ability to have freedom of speech, I
want to open up the black box of Twitter
so we can see what's really happening.
Why, why is that?
So controversial.
Why is that so bad?
His here's what must says about him
being the richest man in the world,
owning a platform like Twitter?
Well, like I said, I think it's
very important that the algorithm
be open-sourced and that any
manual adjustments be identified.
So if this tweet, if somebody
did something to a tweet it's
there's information attached
to it, that that action was.
And I S I would personally be in
there editing tweets, but you'll know
if something was done to promote the
mode or otherwise affect a tweet as.
Media sort of ownership.
I mean, you've got, you know, um,
mark Zuckerberg, owning Facebook and
Instagram and WhatsApp and with a shared
ownership structure that will, uh, have
more exactly work the 14th still, uh,
you're controlling those, uh, entities.
Um, so.
Like literally, um, what's that need,
do you want to have that at Twitter?
So there's a great example of Zuckerberg.
He owns Facebook, Metta, Instagram,
WhatsApp, and he's going to continue
to own it to his 14th generation,
apparently according to Musk.
And so if Musk comes in, owns it and
decides to deep platform, every other
electric car company, Uh, people would
know that people would see that and that's
going to be marked on every single tweet.
So his, his vision of transparency when
it comes to how the algorithm works,
seems to be far, far better in this
conversation with my progressive friend,
he labeled himself a progressive, not me.
We were talking about Musk's well,
and whether he has a right to.
And the argument that was put forward,
which I thought was a fairly interesting
argument, was that because of the
system, because of the environment
in America, Musk was able to build
space S X Musk was able to build
Tesla because of the environment that
was in, because there's laws in the
lands that enabled entrepreneurs.
And then the argument followed because
he didn't really build it on his own,
but it was a collective thing, not just
a collective thing of his investors
or the people who work in the company,
but a collective of, uh, of the entire
United States that the United States
government should be able to take away
wealth from Musk through taxation, I
suppose, and redistribute that into.
And to other people's pockets, people
who are less fortunate or how about,
I would say this way, people who have
less economic means than Musk, which
on the face of it, I can understand
why people want to have wealth
distribution, redistribution of wealth,
the Robin hood syndrome of stealing
from the rich and giving to the.
Not on the Rich's own volition,
not on the bridges saying this
is something we want to do.
And as we said earlier, Musk's
$251 billion is unrealized gain.
Largely most of it is unrealized.
So how do you, how do you tax that?
Can you tax money that
you haven't made yet?
Well, that's the argument that's
being put forward in many.
But it drew me to two questions.
One was Musk, just lucky.
Was he just lucky?
And just all the cards fell
into the right place for him.
And because he got lucky, he
doesn't deserve it, earn it.
Or did he work hard for what he earned?
The second question that I had was if.
Either one of those is the
case and he was just lucky.
And it was just because of the environment
that he happened to be born into,
which Hey, being born as a woman, you
are lucky because you have a longer
expected life span, span than men.
If you are born near the water and live
near bodies of water or the ocean or
rivers, you have a longer life expectancy
than people who live in landlocked areas.
That is not a bias.
That is not privilege.
That is just natural laws.
It is just the laws of nature.
So what would happen if all of a
sudden we say, well, because of
the environment that you are in
must that enabled you to succeed.
We are going to take away your
wealth because you have enough of it.
You don't need $200 billion.
We'll just take away, you know, a hundred.
89 billion.
You can live off a couple of billion.
That's more than enough, and
we're going to do with it.
What we see fed, even though we didn't
actually create this wealth, but you did,
but w we're seeing it's the environment
that we were in to help you create it.
All of a sudden that strips the
environment away that gave him the
ability to create that in the first
place, which seems a little contradictory,
but Musk has talked quite openly
and talked, even in this episode.
About the excruciating pain and
suffering that he had went through
to be able to build this company.
He's not sitting back in an
ivory tower with all his little
minions, doing the work down there.
He's working.
He's he's the laboring working day
and night sleeping on floors to
see this dream become a reality.
Here's.
I slept on the floor so that the team who
was going through a hard time could see
me on the floor, that they knew that I was
not in some ivory tower when whatever pain
they experienced, I was, I had it more.
He is a leader that is,
is giving everything.
It's not just.
It's not just the environment.
Yes.
That plays into it.
Yes.
The laws help, which is
why he left California.
And he moved to Texas because
the laws here are ridiculous.
They're crazy.
They're killing our company.
So yes, the environment plays into it,
but then it makes no sense why you should
create an environment that is inhibits
the very thing that he created while
saying that it was the environment that.
Well, there is an, an automation,
boom that is coming in.
Whether it's a couple of years,
a couple of decades, it is, it
is already been among us, which
is the industrial revolution.
We have seen it from factories, uh,
replacing workers all across the globe,
but really what it leads to is excess.
It leads to abundance.
It leads to.
People being able to be lifted out of
poverty and the fear that it can often
drive us to when we probably talked about
it, if you're on the show as well, which
could be a possibility of a lot of people
losing their jobs, where automation is
coming in and is replacing the teller.
Automation is coming in is
replacing the factory worker.
Automation is coming in
and it's replacing the.
And this is a real, a real fear
that people have and often use to
make arguments for UBI for universal
basic income seem because of all this
automation, we need to begin to give
people a basic income to live on because
we're not going to be able to do anything.
We're just, automation will take
care of everything and we'll
just be able to sit back, relax.
There's going to be a whole bunch of
unskilled labor who can't find it.
But in reality right now in America
and all over the world, we are
facing massive labor shortages.
We are facing construction worker
shortages, even though we have so much
automation, when it comes to construction
already, it's hard to find craftsmen.
It's hard to find people who know
how to do things with their hands.
The, the tangible, real world outside
of the digital world, because we've been
pushed to, if you want to be someone
that's successful, you're going to
work in some sort of digital sphere.
You're going to work with gigabytes
and digit bites in ones and zeros,
rather than working with things
in your hands, in your real world.
But here's Musk before right before we
get to our, uh, yeah, that makes sense.
Segment here's one last clip.
Talking about the automation
that is coming, thinking
about the economics of this.
If you can replace a $30,000 $40,000
a year worker, which you have to pay
every year with a one-time payment
of $25,000 for a robot that can work
longer hours, doesn't go on vacation.
And that there could, it could
be a pretty rapid replacement
of certain types of jobs.
How worried should the
world be about that?
I wouldn't worry about the sort of
putting people out of a job thing.
Um, I think w w we're actually
going to have an already do have
a massive shortage of labor.
So I, I, I th I think we will, we
will have, um, uh, not, not people
out of work, but actually still a
shortage of labor, even in the future.
Uh, But this really will
be a world of abundance.
Any goods and services, uh, will be
available to anyone who wants them,
that it will be so cheap to have
goods and services will be ridiculous.
We can often on this show, I know myself
definitely included and putting myself in
this camp, I can begin to see the world
through a negative pessimistic worldview.
I can begin to look at the world
and say, things are getting worse.
And in many ways, many places.
There are many things on the rise,
especially if you look at America
at what has been happening when it
comes to this agenda to undermine, uh,
undermine family rights, to undermine
children's identity, making children's
identity, tied to sex, um, people
making arguments that well, what is,
what is really the consensual age?
Have sex, we should
just have it at any age.
You know, if the child's consenting,
um, or laws that have had been passed
in, in Colorado and California, even
this week, the bill HR 2, 2, 2, 3.
And we mentioned this a couple
of weeks ago here on the show,
which, because the way that the
bill reads it gives provision.
A baby to not be cared
for or to be even aborted.
Post-birth post birth after birth up to
six, 10, some people even say 28 days.
Now the, those on the progressive left
say, no, that's just a, uh, an hyperbole.
That's just the progressive right.
Make blowing something out of proportion.
That's not exactly what it says when
really you can read the law and you
can say, well, yeah, I can see how.
The law is saying that a mother
or a doctor cannot be faulted for
even post natal death of a child.
That's that's postnatal
abortion, that's infanticide.
And saying if a, a child is left to
cry and not being fed and dies, there's
no, no space for an investigator.
And no space to charge anyone with
the murder of a baby, which really
is, I mean, slow clap, congratulation.
That's consistent.
That's consistent with the
worldview, which says, well, we
don't really know when life begins.
We, I wonder when does it begin?
I mean, I mean, does it begin now?
Am I a human?
Do I have life?
I have lesser intelligent than Elon Musk.
Am.
Am I valuable enough to sustain?
If someone with down syndrome,
is that, is that really a human?
Are they really there?
Should they really, is it, would
it be more merciful to kill them?
Someone with Alzheimer's
Alzheimer's I don't know.
What about someone's cerebral palsy?
Their body's not really working.
Well, maybe the merciful thing would be
just to put them out of their misery.
That infant in the womb.
Is that really a human being?
When does that life really be?
Oh, gosh, surely not conception.
Well, if it doesn't begin at conception,
when biologists say that life begins
in every other sense of the word
with every other animal, as an egg,
even Eagles, eggs being protected,
uh, turtle, eggs being protected,
but a human life not being protected.
Well then when, when does life begin?
If it's not a concern.
It's not at the heartbeat then why
what's the say that it's not a birth?
What's the say it's not until they're 18.
What's the say it's not until the
government agrees that this individual
has reached full human maturity and
allows that individual to live for
a certain amount of time, as long
as they're productive and helpful
in society in the party line.
This, this is exactly, this is exactly.
And I hate using the term cause
it's so cliche and overused, but
this is the Marxist socialist
worldview of determinism, where
there is no such thing as morality.
There is no such thing as good and evil.
There's only power.
And you and I are sacks of chemicals
that have been predetermined.
And if we have been determined
incorrectly, then it is not
immoral to wipe out anyone.
If it serves.
Agenda and the greater cause.
Cause after all, there is no morality
that makes sense in a post-truth society
where we've exchanged truth, relies and
reason for postmodern irrationality.
The absurd finally make sense today
this week in Canada, a church,
very, when you think of church, you
think of religion, you think of, I
mean, I don't know what you think.
Uh, classically you think that a
religious body ought ought to care
for the sick and the dying and the
poor, the orphan and the widow.
True religion is caring for the
orphan and the widow visiting
and caring for the poor, the Jean
visiting those who are in prison.
This is true religion.
The definition of what a religious
group is ought to do well, this church.
Hosted an assisted suicide ceremony
for a member of their church, an
86 old member, Betty was her name
and they hosted a assisted suicide
crossing over ceremony where the
church leadership had a unanimously
unanimously approved per request for
assisted suicide in their sanctuary.
Where, uh, even though in the Christian
faith, this Catholic or Orthodox or
Eastern Orthodox Presbyterian Baptist,
you name it across the board in the
Christian faith in monotheistic faiths.
We believe that suicide is immoral.
It's a sin it's it should not be done.
It is not the merciful
or kind thing to do.
Euthanasia is not the.
Thing to do.
And yet laws are being passed right now
in the west that are opening the door
wider and wider to euthanasia, to, uh,
assisted suicide, even youth assisted
suicide, even teen assisted suicide.
This is the . This is the worldview of
quote-unquote mercy that people are.
But it's anything but mercy, this is
the exact worldview that Hitler had
adopted in saying, well, you know, we
can cleanse the society of those with
disabilities, with mental disabilities.
And that is, that is merciful.
That is us being merciful because
we are superior noble race and
class of people we know what's best.
And we know that helping these people.
Really means putting them out
of their misery that expanded to
the Jews they are, are subhuman.
Race is actually merciful
to liquidate the Jews.
So liquidate the Polish ghettos to
pack people into gas chambers and
liquidate them to end their lives.
Mass genocide.
It's not genocide.
It's mercy it's because.
Those who have been determined to
be actually human, because we have
self-determined ourselves to be human.
And then therefore went on to
determine who is not human.
If that baby, if that that person
with a mental disability or someone
with a sickness is not human.
The merciful thing to do would be
to put them out of their misery.
After all what's coming, what's coming
is a global climate catastrophe.
Are, we're not going to have
enough resources around the world
to support the world, to support
those who are truly fully human.
And so we have to make some tough
choices, but don't worry us on our
ivory hill black boxes of algorithms.
We can make the choices for you.
Democracy dies in darkness.
And we definitely do not want a democracy.
We do not want to individualism
of you thinking for yourself,
let us do the thinking for you.
We are smart.
We are educated.
You are just a lowly worker down there.
We're going to decide who gets to
live and who gets to die because
overpopulation is coming in.
It's going to crush the planet
with a merciless future.
So this we're actually
showing mercy to these.
We're showing mercy by, by forcing,
uh, infertility here's Musk.
I told you we have a lot
of Musk in this episode.
Here's a, honestly the final clip by
mosque, uh, for this, for this episode.
Um, yeah, so most people in the
world are operating under the false
impression that, uh, you know, too many.
Um, this is not true.
Both could maintain a
population many times.
It's the current level.
Um, uh, and the birth rate
has been dropping like crazy.
Um, So unfortunately, like we have
these like ridiculous, uh, uh,
population estimates from the UN
that need to be updated because
they're just don't make any sense.
Um, really you can just
look at say, what was it.
Both rate last year, how many kids
were born T multiply that by the,
um, life expectancy and say, okay,
that's how many people will be alive.
Uh, you know, um, in the future,
uh, and then say is the trend for
growth rate, positive or negative?
It's negative.
So that's the best case, unless
somebody changes with the both rate.
Um, I mean, you can look at,
take, take Japan, for example.
Uh, I'm just going off memory here, but I
think population is roughly 110 million.
Um, but last year, um, if you take
the, uh, number of, uh, children born
times, the life expectancy, which is
85 years, it's very impressive life
expectancy, then Japan would, uh, have,
I think, around, uh, 68 million people,
roughly half of the current population
that does not tell the full story,
because those that you would have.
Demographic permit.
You already have an upside down
demographic permit where, you know, a
lot of all people, very few young people.
And, um, um, you know, so
how has this upside down
demographic permit is unstable?
That's also here.
Why would to have an upside
down demographic period?
Pyramid is unstable.
What we are seeing in Japan
with a rapidly aging population.
And with very low birth rates, their
population is going to be cut in half.
And we were beginning to see the
same trends happen across Europe
has been negative for years now,
tapping negative trends in America.
Uh, we have, we, we talked about,
and we see negative trends in China.
The one, the one child policy Devis
is going to end up being devastating.
For China, they've increased it
to two and a three child policy,
but the birth rate has not risen.
They are in population decline.
And the Chinese government even says that
the Chinese government is even estimating
that their population is going to fall
to less than a billion people by 2100.
And that's what the Chinese government is.
So when we look at the actual problems
that we're going to face in the
future, it is not too many people.
It is not, not enough resources.
It is that we won't have enough trained,
skilled people to, to keep the environment
that the economy and nations running.
And that's a scary place to be because.
We're running into things
like massive inflation.
You end up in places of massive
depression, very states where it's
impossible to get your economy and
your nations and your societies
back up and running because you're
continuing to shrink and die.
Well, this show is brought
to you by listeners.
Like you, we don't have ads
on this podcast because it
is fueled by the value that.
Get out of it and give back into it.
So if you get value out of the show, we
ask that you would give value back to
the show in the value that you received.
You can do that by visiting Lucas,
scroll bot.com backslash support, and
you can give your heart cold Fiat there.
Or if you like Bitcoin, you can listen
on a podcast, 2.0 certified app, like
pod, friends, Spanx, or breeze, and
you can load up your Bitcoin wallet
and you can stream Satoshis to the.
As you listen, don't go away.
We'll be right back with our
closing Weaver and Liam segment.
Welcome back to Weaver Luma, part
of the show where we take ancient
wisdom and we weave it in with our
every day lives that we can own our
future and weave our destiny today's
quote again is by someone who.
It's not an ancient quote, but
it's someone who's ancient.
Uh, and here it is Warren buffet.
Again, Warren Buffett coming in
clutch, he writes, says chains of
habit are too light to be felt until
they're too heavy to be broken.
Chains of chains of habits
are too light to be felt.
They are too heavy to be broken.
And I I've been thinking about
this this week, and this is
both for positive and negative.
When we start negative cycles at
first, we don't feel the effects of it.
And so all of a sudden, suddenly we
feel the negative impacts of our bad
choices and habits that we've created.
And they're, they're impossible to break.
They feel impossible to get
above like the collapsing.
We are going to see a
collapsing birthrate.
Japan has seen a collapsing birth
rate where their population will be
cut in half in a number of decades.
And all of a sudden it is, it is
such a heavy lifestyle and habit
that is impossible to break that,
to begin to see growing birth rates.
Again, catastrophic.
Likewise on the reverse, when you begin
to build positive cycles in your life.
We see we first, we don't
see the improvement.
We don't see the return from our
investment that we make with the strength
that we're building as whether it's
physically an exercise or whether it's in
our finances based on, on good financial
choices or in our children through
good parenting, through pouring in and
investing in our kids in our community,
through investing in instruction.
Members in our community.
At first, we don't see the
impact of our habits until it
is too strong to be broken.
And so as we look to the future
and we say, you know what,
they're, they're really beat.
There really will be quite a
positive future of abundance.
There really isn't an abundant
future that we can have where
they're the lack that we're going
to have is lack of skilled workers.
We can build up those competencies.
Now we might not see the fruit of
our expertise and skills and labors,
but through brick, by brick day after
day, week after week, decade after
decade, we will build strong, will
build strong individuals ourselves
and within our family and thereby
we'll build strong families and a
strong community, but it starts to.
It starts with you making choices for
you to stand up and to be a leader
for you to stand up into engage with
the world around you, believing that
you can make the world a better place.
And that is how you can.
Your future.
So thanks for listening to the show.
If you want to get more value out
of today's episode, you do so by
sharing it with a friend, text it
to them, WhatsApp to them, say,
Hey, I listened to this episode.
I got a lot of value out of it.
Listen, let me know what you think.
That's how you can help this show
and really gives value back to show.
So go out this week, own your future.
Your destiny.