The following is a conversation with Eric Weinstein, the third time we've spoken on this podcast.
He is the wise turtle, Master Ugwe, to my Kung Fu Panda, one of my favorite people to talk to in this world.
A complicated and fascinating mind that I'm grateful to have the chance to accompany in exploring this world through conversation
on this podcast and on his, the latter called The Portal.
Quick mention of each sponsor, followed by some thoughts related to the episode.
First is Grammarly, a service I use in my writing to check spelling, grammar, sentence structure,
and readability. Second is Sun Basket, a meal delivery service I use to add healthy variety
into my culinary life. Third is SEM Rush, the most advanced SEO optimization tool I've ever come across.
I don't like looking at numbers, but somebody should, it helps you make good decisions.
And finally, ExpressVPN, the VPN I've used for many years to protect my privacy on the internet.
Please check out these sponsors in the description to get a discount and to support this podcast.
As a side note, let me say that wherever this life takes me, I'm drawn to the possibility of having many
more conversations with Eric through the years. I think we have just the right kind of contrasting
worldviews and a deep respect and appreciation of each other's life stories that creates for
this magical experience in the realm of conversation that feels like we're always looking for something
that we never quite find, but are always better for having tried. I'm not sure how or why the
universe has connected Eric and me, but it did. And I would be a fool not to trust its judgment
and enjoy the journey. If somehow you like this podcast, please subscribe on YouTube,
review it with 5 stars on Apple Podcast, follow on Spotify, support on Patreon,
I'll connect with me on Twitter at Lex Freedman. And now here's my conversation with Eric Weinstein.
Who's the greatest musician of all time? Would you say? We were just off camera talking about
Eddie Van Halen. He unfortunately passed away. Who's the greatest musician of all time? Yeah.
Jonathan Richmond. Who's that? It's a weird question. So I'm going to give you a weird answer.
It's not because- Thank you. Okay. Jonathan Richmond, the reason I'm picking on him is that he had a quote
he was the frontman of a group called The Modern Lovers. And his quote was something like,
we have to be prepared to play music when our instruments are broken, the electricity's out,
and it's raining, something like that. And I thought that that quote was very interesting,
because what it said was, you have to be able to strip this thing down farther and farther back
to get to something that is intrinsically musical. So we were having a conversation just now
about virtuosity. And we're talking about Eddie Van Halen and his recent passing.
And that affected me emotionally. I don't know whether it affected you. I was never a Van Halen
the group fan, but I revered Eddie Van Halen's capacity for innovation. I saw him like
Rodney Mull in the skateboard. I had dreamed of having the two of them on the same podcast,
just to talk about what it's like to totally discontinuously innovate.
And he posted a video of Spanish fly, I think, and saying like, I didn't know the guitar could
make those kinds of sounds. Like, what is this voodoo magic?
How is it? Well, this is the thing, right? The arpeggios that he did on a single string
are so fast, and the attacks from the hammer-ons, when they go at light speed as he did,
particularly, and the reason I chose that was that I wanted to strip out the electronics,
because part of the claim will be is that he's a rock musician, and a lot of the innovations had
to do with things peculiar to the electrified setup. His use of the whammy bar, for example,
or the Frankenstrat that he built from different pieces, right? All of those aspects,
in my opinion, are just dwarfed by his innovation and his musicianship. And that's why I chose
Spanish fly, because everyone, of course, will go to something like your eruption or running with
the devil, which is the first things that they heard that let them know that there was a new force
erupting out of Southern California that was Eddie Van Halen, right? I mean, I'm in love with the
story of it. You're often so poetic about music. Like, it clearly touches your soul on some kind
of, on many levels. What is that? Is it deeper than just rocking out with the, in your convertible
Corvette 69? I imagine Eric Weinstein is just driving down the California highways,
blasting some kind of music. Is it just like being able to be carefree for moments of time,
or is there something more fundamental that connects to the theory of everything in physics
and life and all of that? How often do you have the chance, for example, to hear mathematics
performed as you do in Bach, right? Like something with that kind of precision and elegance that
can't really be grasped, where to go back to Leonard Cohen's famous line, the baffled king
composing, right? Such a good song. Such a good song, but it's also like individual verses of that
song are insanely important. The baffled king is how we often make music. We don't really
understand what did we just do that broke that person's heart sitting on the couch, right? And so
it's a very strange thing that you should be able to have. Think of it like you're a computer. You've
got this weird open music port. Port 37.8. It's not even supposed to be there, and suddenly
somebody starts playing a guitar and they're making you feel things. In particular, particular
instruments like the violin, it's so difficult. It's so unforgiving. And when it gives up its
secrets, it wraps its fingers around your heart and won't let go. Sometimes I talk about head,
heart, and loins. When something can grab your head, heart, and your loins at the same moment
and integrate them, there are very few opportunities to live like that. And if you think about Eddie
Van Halen, as far as your head, the musical innovations and the fact that he was drawing
directly from the classical canon really speaks to the idea that maybe rock is what somebody
like Jimi Hendrix saw it as being an infinitely extensible medium. In terms of heart, I always
notice the smile on his face. It's painful to look at an Eddie Van Halen solo now. Sometimes you'll
see the cigarette dripping off the side of his mouth, and you're like, that's going to
fucking kill you, and I'm not even worried about it for you. I'm worried about it for me.
You're going to rob. I don't even need to hear you play another note. I just like knowing that
you're in the world, that there is somebody that everyone looks to that know, but I've never heard
a guitarist say, I don't know. I think it was okay. I've never heard it. You can hate him,
but you still think he was a genius. There are very few people like that in the world.
And then Loyons, those leaps, that guy was incredibly good-looking, and skin tight pants,
super athleticism. He completely owned the male sexuality of the stage, both being the completely
dominant sort of mythical alpha male. I hate that expression, but there you are. But also,
this little boy with this mischievous smirk, and the sense that it all came together,
how could you not eat that up? You could just imagine the millions of young teenage boys
who are just playing air guitar in their room, basically dreaming of being that kind of god.
The most perfect example of what a human being can be. It's fascinating to think.
It is. And then, as in many of the cases with these bands, you get these multiple talents in
the same outfit. And I think that the original configuration with David Lee Roth is such a
hot mess at all times. I would love you to talk to David Lee Roth. That dance would be just gorgeous.
I don't know. Can you handle it? Can you ride that?
Probably not. Probably not, because I get the feeling that he's very smart and very
dysregulated. And I don't know that I could bring him down to earth for a moment.
Well, I can also get pretty dysregulated. And so, I don't know whether it could be magic. It could
be a shit show. I don't know what you thought of his appearance on Rogan. That was an interesting one.
I loved it, but Joe and that, and Joe does this sometimes. Sometimes he just sits back
and listens. And he just lets the music play, which works really well. I think you have a chance to
kind of jump into the chaos. I care too. And then you'll just start. And the places you will go,
you may not even talk about music for like hours. It might just go to this, because he I think lives
in Japan. Like there's a weird, he's been an EMT after he was a rock star. He chose to become like
I don't know. There's depth to that man that hasn't been explored by him either.
So that'll be an exciting conversation. Can we go back to Leonard Cohen?
The things I feel when I listen to Hallelujah by Leonard Cohen or anything by him really, but that
one, you really want to get into it? Let's go. What does that song mean to you? Is it love?
Oh boy. Well, first of all, it's mystery. Like it starts off about mystery. So what are you doing?
You're doing this alternation between the two chords. So three notes at the same time. One is
called the tonic or you have the major and the relative minor and he's alternating between them.
There's only one note of difference between those two chords. One of them would be feeling sad. One
of them would be more joyous, typically described. And so by altering one note, it's the minimal
amount to take you back and forth between joy and happiness as that's encoded in us. So he starts
off with that. I heard there was a tune. David played the please the Lord, but you don't really
care for music, do you? That's really interesting because he's using this technique called bathos,
right? So the alternation between the sublime and kind of the guttural or ridiculous or the mundane,
right? So he's like... There's a bitterness to it too. Does it just play? Well, the way I hear it,
again, a great song allows for different interpretations. You happen to be asking me,
so I'm going to impart some stuff that probably isn't in the song, but why it speaks to me and
that's what makes it great. The way I hear it is he doesn't believe the audience. You don't really
care for music, do you? Then what are you doing listening to this? You stupid idiots. Of course,
you care for music. You're too cool to care. So I see through you and screw you. That's the energy
I get at. Then he does this weird thing. It goes like this is where he should put the description
of where he is in the chord progression, which is the tonic, right? It goes like this. And then he
hits the fourth and the fifth, which are the two other major elements, the subdominant and the
dominant in functional harmony. So he's describing the chord progression in real time in the lyrics.
There's two ways this can come about in other songs. We had this example of
every time we say goodbye. Do you know the song? Every time we say goodbye? No, I think it was a
Cole Porter, maybe, or Gershwin, maybe Porter. I don't know. I cry a little, there is no love song
finer, but how strange the change from major to minor, right? It's beautiful use. Then there's
times when it's duplicitous. So for example, you'll have, I guess my favorite examples of this are
Johnny Cash's Ring of Fire. I fell into a burning ring of fire. Then what does he do with the lyrics
in the tune? I went down, down, down. He goes up, right? And so the idea is like, oh, okay, that was
a head fake, right? And another one of these is Nina Simone's Feeling Good. Oh, okay. So what do you
get? A bird's flying high. You know how I feel. And sun up in the sky. You know how I feel.
That woman's voice. She doesn't give a damn. And I feel it. But then what's the
it's like heavy stripping music. It's, it's, you're not in a good place. You're probably in some
strip club with some blast of your money. You're drinking lousy beer, some bad situation. Yeah.
And she's feeling good. No, it's funerial. It's oppressive, right? I never thought of that song
that way. Wow. Well, you think of it as joyous? Yeah. No, no, no. If you think about it, contrasted
with Ray Charles, for example, you know, do you know Lonely Avenue? Well, my room has got two windows,
but the sunshine never comes through. It's really depressed. It's the same sort of vibe as Nina,
but she's claiming that she's in great shape. So she's like a good case of the unreliable narrator.
Leonard Cohen, to me, is talking about the unreliable audience that's too cool to be with
the performer on stage. There are things that go with the music, like the Cole Porter stuff that
go against like the Johnny Cash. I think these are the games that musicians play that the rest of us
only sort of notice subliminally. Okay. Fourth, the fifth. Then he should say something about the
relative minor or the, he's giving you the secret, the baffled king. In other words, he doesn't know
why it works. Did Pockelbel know why Pockelbel's canon would work? It was a discovery. That's
the whole thing. Like some music is discovered and some music is invented. And he's talking about
a musical discovery. He's talking about the Pythagorean power of the wave equation and then
superimposed. Like there's two genius intellectual concepts behind music, one of which is the wave
equation. Usually we solve it for a one-dimensional medium because we're talking about strings or
air columns. Occasionally, you're talking about things like handpans or steel drums or metallophones
or gamelons, whatever. And those have a wave equation too that's much more chaotic. The other
equation is this crazy thing that two to the 1912 is almost exactly equal to three, which is what
gave us even temperament. And so the tension between those two things is, in fact, one of these most
beautiful stories, inside of that system, that formula of the baffled king is a discovery. He's
not really composing it. The reason he's baffled, imagine that you took a little brush and you
started brushing off a pyramid under the sands. You might think that you created the pyramid by
your brushing, but in fact, somebody else did it. That's why you're baffled, right?
That's beautifully put. You're right. And as creating one of the greatest songs of all time,
and as he's doing it, he's baffled. And he's within the song.
And he Leonard is baffled, is my contention, but he knows enough to know that he's baffled.
Right? And so the idea is that he is composing. He has the audacity
to compose as David. He's echoing David at a minimum. And then in a later song,
which I really wish we would discuss that's totally dystopic and you will not like it at all,
is The Future, which contains this line that I think I used in my episode with Roger Penrose
on the portal. I'm the little Jew that wrote the Bible. So there is this way in which Leonard Cohen,
I think, is constantly coming to the idea of being a biblical like scribe. And I think this is one
of the great things that you see Dylan doing this with all along the watch tower. You saw Warren
Zevon, who we should talk much more about, doing this with a song called I Was In The House When
The House Burned Dad. Do you know this? No, this is embarrassing. This is a great day.
Warren Zevon is one of the most important songwriters of our time. And he's been largely forgotten
by this generation. But Bob Dylan would sing one of his songs in tribute. I've heard Bob Dylan
very small number of songwriters really move him. Woody Guthrie, Gordon Lightfoot,
and Warren Zevon. By the way, Bob Dylan, if you're out there, appear on either one of our
podcasts. We need to get your voice into a new medium for a new group. This is a time for Bob
Dylan, my friend. Honestly, you've been doing an amazing job in this space. One of the reasons
I'm super excited to do this podcast again is that I've learned some things about what I don't do
well. And I also have sort of struggled with the question, should I do those things better? Because
what if it's... I always use the same example of the fitted sheet when you're trying to put a queen
size fitted sheet on a king size mattress. He's like, okay, I got that corner squared away,
and then you get another corner that pops off, and they have to go back around.
I wonder whether I can improve my style in the ways in which... I think it's just a
recognition of a difference. You do a better job of getting to the soul of a really top
intellectual guest and making them accessible and presenting them as themselves for a huge
number of people. And I'd give my eye tooth to be able to do that.
Do you ever think about this? Because I think about what is the greatest conversation I'll ever
have? In the sense of the portal, not to reduce it to anything, but there will be the greatest
conversation. You may have already had it, but it's very possible. If enough people like me can
keep twisting your arm to keep doing the portal, please, there'll be an amazing conversation.
And one of the questions that I ask myself is, who is the person that I'm especially equipped?
For some reason, I'm convinced on Putin. There's something in my head that says,
I can do this man better than anyone else in this world. I got this thought in my head about it.
I don't know why, and I'm convinced, but I think the universe works in that way. If it tells you,
it's going to happen. The way I would say it is that almost everybody who becomes a Supreme
Court Justice believes at a very early age that they're going to become a Supreme Court Justice.
Many people believe at an early age that they can do it, don't get there. But of those who get
there, almost all of them had this sort of, well, I call it pathological self-confidence.
And I do think you have pathological self-confidence, and you also have humility. And most people would
hear those as a contradiction. I think that you would not be able to get away with what you do
if you didn't have the humility. And so I think the great danger is that your equation becomes
unbalanced, that you either lose the humility or you lose the humility overwhelms the ego and the
drive. Because right now, you've got a Mexican standoff in your mind, and the rest of us are just
benefiting. That's beautifully put. My Mexican standoffs aren't as stable as yours. It's all
reservoir dogs all the time. But actually, the person who that describes is Peter Thiel.
Peter Thiel thinks more, people always say, what does Peter think about X, Y, and Z,
P, and Q? It's like, well, do you want communist Peter? Do you want hypercapitalist Peter in there?
Oh my God, right? On everything. That's why he's successful is that he's got all these minds
fighting each other. And so when people say, Peter is this or Peter is that, I just laugh.
Because nobody who knows him would describe him as having thoughts at the level that people are
claiming. And I do think that, in my case, there's also pathological epistemic humility.
I know how little I can do in one life. I know how many things I've screwed up.
I know how many things I've got wrong. And on the other hand, it's like Hillel's questions.
If I'm not for myself, who will be for me? If I'm only for myself, what am I? If not now, when?
At some level, there's a question about if I don't decide that someone is capable and that
that somebody is me, and if I apply that to everyone else on the planet, then nobody's
going to do anything. And so I do think that one of the things that people like you and I get is,
who are you to say that? F that, man. Just sign me up for some Dunning Kruger.
Yeah, but it's multiple minds. Like you said, this morning, I was feeling so good and confident
about I couldn't think no wrong. And I remember last night clearly thinking that I'm the dumbest
human who has ever lived. And nothing I've ever said is worth anything. What the fuck am I doing
with my life? Why am I scared? I'm almost terrified of this conversation. Who the hell am I?
This conversation?
Because I'm an idiot. And because, you know, Lex, but no, no, no, but this morning,
I was the baddest motherfucker who's ever walked this earth. So I was very conscious.
I think it was the coffin. I'm not sure. Maybe some sleep.
This sounds very Russian and it involves multiple beverages, some of them being alcoholic,
others containing caffeine. There's, in fact, I can't share the story behind it,
but there is a bottle of vodka in the fridge. Okay. So I mean, I should have hit you for coffee
because this is a morning show here. So I put out a call that we get a chance to
have this conversation and people ask these wonderful questions. A few people asked about
depression and suicide. This is a Russian program, so we have to go there. And I think about Leonard
Cohen and one of the things that always kind of broke my heart and kind of suffocated the hope I
have for just, I don't know, for love in a person's life is to hear how much depression was a part of
Leonard Cohen's life and how much he suffered. I guess one way, I'm not sure where we can go
with this question, but do you think about the places that the mind can go, like these dark places?
Yeah. Is there something like where the only escape out is suicide, for example,
that's the darkest version of it? That, I really think suicide is a big place
in suicidal ideation and self-harm. And we don't talk a lot about it. It's a similar problem to
trying to talk about trans. These are umbrella categories. And if the commonality is that somebody
harms themselves, but we don't know whether that's coming because of a problem in brain chemistry,
because of an event in their life, whether evolutionary programming for suicide is weirdly
normal, whether or not it might have a religious motivation. There's too many different forms
of self-harm. It's something like the 10th largest killer thereabouts. And I think that you can look
at it from different angles. I'm old enough to have had Pete Seeger come to my college
when I was at university and to watch his good humor in the face of all adversity.
I think of Odetta. I used to go to Odetta concerts. I don't know if you know who she is.
Okay, this is going to be one of the better days of your life. Check out Odetta when we're done
with the interview. She was a civil rights figure, but also just had a profound voice
and great musicianship. These people were in the struggle, right? And they saw lots of bad
things happen, and they kept their humor about them. And the thing is that you can take on the
Veldschmerz, the pain of the planet, or you can try to do something else, which is to be a happy
warrior, even if the odds are terrible and the cost of failure is catastrophic.
So even once surrounded by darkness, but the thing is with Leonard Cohen,
is he created such beautiful music. And yet it's like Anthony Bourdain, the same.
And yet they go to this dark place. And it could be, it's easier to say it's just biochemistry.
There's a linkage between this highly generative, creative side. And in some cases,
dark depression, in other cases, not. So you can't say that it's tied. The genius and madness are
always co-traveling, or the beauty and pain are one and the same. What you can say is that
what you can say is that there's a cluster of people that tell you that for that cluster,
there is a relationship between the darkness and the beauty. And I do think that in part,
it's squaring circles that can't be squared. We were just talking before about the inability
to serve two perfect systems, the perfect system of the wave equation and the perfect system of
even temperament. They're both perfect. They're not compatible. And once you realize that there is
perfection and an inability to make contact with perfection, I think you recognize that
there is no solution to this world.
Yeah. That's weird with the poets and musicians. Do you want to say this is a particular thing
that you do, but then there's Spanish fly by Van Halen? And then you realize, oh.
Well, what do you get out of Spanish fly by David Van Halen? I think it's very singular because of
the fact that it's purely acoustic. For some reason, I couldn't imagine
Eddie Van Halen separate from the band in front of thousands of people just screaming and rocking
out with lights everywhere. And Spanish fly made me think like, you made me imagine him
sitting alone in a college in a room. I think that's who he was. I really do. Believe me,
I get it. He was a rock star. He was a rock god. Got it, got it, got it, got it. I'm almost positive
that you can't get to where he got to without being a complete introvert.
Yeah. It made me imagine that there's some half naked supermodel walking around hoping that they
can do their thing together. And Eddie's completely disinterested. He'd be with the guitar. He'd be
with the guitar, right? Yeah. Because honestly, at some level, in one case, maybe you're
conquesting, maybe you're pursuing love and romance. In the other case, you're talking about a
relationship to the order, the creator, the Almighty, whatever it is you want to call that
substrate that is reality. And do I believe that Eddie Van Halen and Jimi Hendrix and Paganini
and Heifetz jacked into the true essence of the world? Yeah, they did. I don't think it's as good
as differential geometry. I'm sorry. I do think it's amazing for other reasons. And thank God,
because it's very difficult to communicate differential geometry at scale. But the thing
about eruption, for example, what level do you want to come into eruption? Do you want just
the sheer majesty and pageantry? Do you want the theatrics? You could put them on wires and set
his pants on fire or whatever, and it'd be totally in keeping with it. On the other hand,
you want to have something completely precise that shows off the virtuosity of what's possible
with the Stratocaster. Everything works, multi-axis. But there's a precision to it, which is very
different than Hendrix. There's a messiness to Hendrix that to me, somebody who has OCD has always
been struggling. How does Hendrix affect you? I mean, let's have the Jimi Hendrix conversation.
I don't know that we can do anything to it that hasn't already been done to it.
Maybe that's not true. Maybe the idea is that every generation has to have its Hendrix
conversation, and this is a long conversation. It's Jimi Hendrix experience. So funny. I hear
you sold it from Joe Rogan. There's so many details. One, it hurt my soul on so many levels
that you can put a thumb over the guitar to play a note, to hold a note. Because I wanted to be
the Russian virtuoso that sits with his classical guitar in a perfect form, plays really fast with
the fingers, and then you want the thumb to be perfectly relaxed and supporting the neck.
So that's the Russian conservatory student. Conservatory student, yeah.
Then there's the Russian wild man. Which one is that? Well, they're different Russian archetypes,
right? So the completely idiosyncratic Russian is very different in a weird way from the,
you know, I can do this backwards in any key in my sleep and in any time signature that you,
you know, just snap your fingers. We've discussed my piano tuner in previous episodes.
No, no, no. That was offline conversation. You told me the story.
I should tell you the story. You should retell the story.
There I was in darkest Manhattan with the world's shittiest, it wasn't even an upright,
it was a spin at piano. A friend had given it to me. The piano fell out of tune and I would have to
tune it. And the only tuner I knew was this Russian guy and I hated dealing with him.
There was something about his attitude that just really rubbed me the wrong way.
So anyway, my wife says tune that thing. So we get the piano tuner to come and he's tuning this.
He's like, are you sure, are you sure you want to tune this, this piece of shit? You know, okay,
fine. So he's like, okay, it's your money. The phone rings and I have the phone ringer set
on a landline to Paganini Caprice 24. And immediately as the phone rings,
he figures out what key the phone ringer is and which is not the key that like list composed
the variations on Caprice 24. And he starts going into theme and variations on Caprice 24
at some level I've never heard before, just jaw dropping. And like the phone stops ringing,
we have this awkward silence. I said, I didn't know you were such a great piano player. And
then he says one of these things that in, you know, in Russian accent in English
hurts in a way you can't imagine. He said, no, you are the piano player. I am merely the piano
tuner. And it's just like, oh man, through the heart, you know, it's kind of reminiscent. I'd
love to hear actually your opinion. This is reminiscent of the Goodwill hunting story.
What do you think about that? That movie? That movie. It's MIT. It's, I guess when I think of that
film, I think about Matt Damon as a young guy risking everything, giving up Harvard. I think,
you know, probably the most accomplished group of people in the world are people who choose to
give up Harvard voluntarily. Right? Bigger than Harvard. You know, Ives was one of these people.
Bill Gates, of course. And then oddly, you know. Zuckerberg. What? Zuckerberg. But then
Steve Jobs gave up a read. And read is like the weirdest, craziest college in the world. People
should pay much more attention to read. And I'm sorry it's going through a hard time at the moment.
But what it was before the current craziness is really an interesting story.
Irregardless, as we say in the 617 area code, I think that a lot of my reaction is to the
real story of Matt Damon having this vision and being the young guy to pull it off. And,
you know, I also think about Robin Williams trying to explore heart through this lens of acting.
And, you know, as you and I, you've hung out with comedians, they know that they are a screwed up
bunch of people. They do. They're proud about it. They really are. The idea that Robin Williams,
who I saw many years ago when I was in LA in the comedy clubs around here,
you know, he was a straight up crazy, dysregulated genius in tremendous pain.
And his desire to do it earnestly through acting rather than constantly by just
sniping, you know, or being a clown or showing us how fast his mind worked relative to ours.
I was really moved by that. I thought that he brought some authenticity
and took a huge risk for a comedian to be that real.
And again, like you said, it doesn't always have to be, but in that case, the madness and
the genius were neighbors. That one couldn't have been any other way.
Yeah. No, because his mind, the thing about seeing him in a comedy club
was that he would react to random stimulus in the environment. You know, it could be a heckler.
Sometimes you almost got the feeling that he wanted a heckler because it gave him something
to play against, right? He was infinitely, instantly inventive.
But I actually, to me, the best Robin Williams is as he got closer and closer to the end of
his life because there was a sadness and he's almost fighting the sadness with this improvisational,
like the weapons he has is this wit and humor and his dancing that he does with language.
That's right. And then sometimes when you just fall silent,
you can see the sadness. And I don't know, there's something so beautiful about that.
It's like this bird with a broken wing that's like trying to fly, you know,
and it's getting older and older. He would have made a one hell of a podcast guess,
I'll tell you that. That's a sad... Yeah, I have some sadness that I really do think that part of
what we call podcasting is actually just getting to know a soul over and over again.
Maybe the idea is that this is talking about depression and sadness and heavy feelings
is not an American specialty. Seeing that in context with the beauty of life is a Russian
specialty. It is very much... Sounds like a diner menu. What? Yeah. What the Russian specialty?
A big scoop of ice cream with tons of depression. I do think that we're in a really terrifying
and depressing time. And I think that part of it is that we don't know if something huge is about
to get started. And we don't even know what this is. I mean, we just sit here in this weird world
that is falling into some new state and we're not even super curious. It's like, what the hell just
happened? Everybody's got an answer and I'm positive that all of those answers are wrong.
Let's try to at least sneak up on the good answer. So the central core of the answer is
that the US seemed to be the greatest thing in the world in large measure because we hadn't noticed
that we were getting a benefit from having no plan, not having to make a plan for low growth.
As long as we had growth, we were in great shape. Let's imagine that you could run an experiment.
You have a billion copies of Earth and you start the initial conditions slightly different.
On some giant number of planets, a lot of the things that were discovered from the 1800s
through the end of the 20th century are discovered in a period of time because a lot of that just
has to do with once you crack the puzzle of getting better instruments, you can see more.
And the more you can see, the more you can make use of what you can see. And it turns out there
was lots of stuff to do with like germs or electron orbitals or spectrum, electromagnetic
spectrum. So we got to do all of those things. And the US roughly corresponded for a good chunk
of its history with this bonanza. And so of course, we look like an amazing, genius country.
We have no plan. Imagine that you could sell a car. You don't have to put in seatbelts.
You don't have to put in airbags. You don't have to put in seatbelts. You don't have to put in airbags.
You don't have to put in airbags. You don't have to put in rear view mirrors or sensors or
rear view mirror. You could save a lot of money on a car by not putting in all of the stuff to
keep things from going wrong. And I think that's what we had. We had a machine that as long as
growth was insanely good, we plowed it back, the riches and spoils and treasure back into the system
and made more genius stuff. And we carried along a good chunk of humanity, hundreds of millions
of people. We did not have a plan for what happens when the growth goes below the stall
speed of our society. How confident should it be that the growth is slowed in a way that
is permanent rather than a kind of slap in the face where it's not the right concept?
Right concept is, I try to use the same words over and over again in case people see mold because
then the perseveration actually gets somewhere. So I use this analogy of the orchard because
everyone talks about low-hanging fruit. They know the concept of low-hanging fruit,
but they don't think in terms of orchards. So they say things like, you think we've picked all
the low-hanging fruit, but I believe in the infinitiveness of the human mind. It's like,
okay, that doesn't even work as an analogy. What if the idea is we only picked all the
low-hanging fruit here and then we're having this stupid argument about low-hanging fruit and we're
not going and looking for new orchards. We're not planting new orchards. We're not looking for
forests. We're just sitting here arguing about low-hanging fruit. So my claim is there's probably
a lot more low-hanging fruit and it's not here. It's in other orchards. It's in other orchards.
One of those turned out to be the digital orchard. The digital orchard has not been as stagnant
as lots of these other like the chemical orchard. I have faith that there's a small percentage
of the population, but not zero that's looking for those other orchards. I'm excited about one
of those orchards, which is I believe there will be robots in everybody's homes and that will
unlock some totally new thing, totally new set of technologies, ideas, the way we live life,
the productivity, everything. It'll change everything. So I'm excited about that orchard.
I'm roaming that orchard and wondering how the hell you bring back the ant that finds a new
source of food. I'm trying to find an apple I can bring back to the rest of the store.
Great. So you're in an explorer idiom. And do you have faith that there's enough of those?
I don't think there are very many of us. I mean, I'm one of them too.
How many does it take? It takes one ant. It takes one ant.
What are you talking about? How many Elon's does it take to screw in a light bulb?
Let's imagine that we went, imagine some ant goes and finds a new source of food.
Right. And then it comes back to the colony and it says, hey, I think I found a new source of food.
And the initial reaction is, you're not authorized to find new food.
What? Why would you try to go find new food?
We're going to remove you from Twitter.
Yeah. And by the way, I think the fact that you think you're allowed to go find new,
shows how privileged you are as an ant. Get out of the colony.
Kill him. Kill him. Well, that's probably not a great model for finding new orchards.
And I think that what we find is that where there's a system that allows somebody to ascend
without a lot of gatekeeping, you can have that. But I saw this happen in hedge funds.
Hedge funds for a while, hoovered up a lot of talent because they were places that had funding
and had freedom. And in general, really smart people want to be free and they don't want to
want to think a lot about how they're going to feed themselves. They want to get lost in their
minds. So you can either give them productive places to play, dangerous places to play.
They're either going to break into computers or find vaccines for you or build bombs or build
companies. And we're not providing for the people who have to disrupt and have to innovate
and trying to channel that effort. We're so focused on this other thing, which is like
fairness and safety. And fairness and safety, by the way, are really important. I don't want to
denigrate them. But the singular focus on fairness and safety in the same breath being focused on
growth and discovery and creation is going to doom us because what we're talking about is we're
always talking about divvying up the pie that is as opposed to the pie that will be. Imagine
that you spent all your time trying to divvy up the 13th century pie and you destroyed your ability
to get to the 20th century. You'd be an idiot. But one place I think I disagree with you is
I don't think you need that many people to empower the geniuses, the innovators, the people who refuse
to spend most of their days in meetings about fairness. This is good. Let's have a disagreement.
I think podcasting, whatever you call that medium, is just one little example of a tool that you can
give power to make you and your podcast can have the next Elon Musk and make them a star.
Now I see where you're going. Okay. There has been a series of places for people to play
and be free. And we've lost them successfully. What's a good place you remember? Because I
disagree with you there too. I think they're still there. You can still play. You interviewed
Noam Chomsky. Yes. Okay. Noam Chomsky comes from an era where you can play. Where you could play.
At MIT. At MIT. And you can't play. This is where I disagree with you. We've already had this,
but go check the clips channel for the Lex Friedman podcast. I think I wasn't brave enough at that
time. And I'm not really brave enough now. Come on. Because it's a feeling and the people are
going to tear me apart. Oh, what are you? And you speak from emotion and facts.
The feeling. The podcast is yours. Yes. Okay. Tell the people who are currently editing your brain
because I saw that move right now. They should go find another podcast. Let's get rid of some
of your audience right now. Please go find another podcast if you're editing my brain.
Nevertheless, all the self-doubt, they're sitting in that brain. So I can't stand to watch this.
But all right. What is the self-doubt loop that you're in? The thing is, when I walk
the halls of MIT, there's bureaucracy. There's administrators that never have done anything
interesting in their entire lives. There's meetings. There's all the usual crap. But there's, in the
eyes of individuals, there's this glow of excitement that has nothing to do with career.
I understand this. And it's still a playground. There's little, little pockets of playgrounds
from which genius can emerge still. And they're unaffected by diversity meetings or fairness
meetings or blah, blah, blah. I love to hear that. Yeah? You don't think so? I don't believe it.
Because I've watched the change, Lex. I've watched people. We're all editing ourselves all the time.
I remember my old mind. I liked it better. All of this relentless focus on critical race theory
and critical theory, postmodernism, fairness, social justice, it's making many of us into
worse people. Do you think the Matt Damon's of the character is paying attention to any of that?
You think that has an effect? Have you seen what happened to Matt Damon himself?
Matt Damon has tried to say various things at various times that seem to be relatively innocuous.
He can't speak. Okay. Well, let's not mix up. Matt Damon's just an actor. Well, no, no. He was
just a Harvard student who came up with his own genius screenplay, acted, and made it happen.
No. But we're somewhere else. You don't think you can build the rocket company out of MIT still?
I think that there are things that you can still do. But we're losing them. We lose them. We keep
losing them. I would say the biggest problem here, let me just say what I think the solution would be
is to fire anybody who's not faculty, especially young faculty, should have way more power
and administration should have much less power. Because right now, the administration,
which used some of the whom used to be faculty, but they've lost the fire, the spark that gave
them, they've lost the memories of the playground. And so the people that admire and love the playground,
like you could see it in their behavior, should have way more power. And so we should create
systems that give them power. Lex, you're very idealistic and you've got a huge heart. It's
a weird time because I don't want to dissuade you from believing beautiful things because I see how
potent you are. You do all these things, jujitsu, guitar, podcasting, programming, computers,
et cetera, et cetera. I don't think you're right. I think we're in a really deeply screwed up place
where even the tiny number of... Let me give you an alternate version of the dystopia. I do think
that there are people who are capable and there's still places to play and cause things to happen
that progress the story forward. But if you look at the fire that some of the people are in who fit
that profile, how much crap has Elon Musk taken? Quite considerable, right? And not much admiration
from the... Craig Venter, Jim Watson. These are very difficult people. Steve Jobs is a very difficult
guy, you know? Yeah, it is a bit heartbreaking to me. I mean, everybody is different generations.
I just, my mind is a little focused on Elon Musk because he's the modern person. Well, you know
him. I mean, he's a person to you. It hurts my heart to see how few faculty and people with
Nobel Prizes and so on admire Elon. He gets a lot of fans from people that buy his products and
young minds just excited. But why doesn't MIT say that we want to... Somebody amongst us
will be the next Elon Musk and we want to encourage them. Say that. Say that in meetings,
say that. That's success. No kidding. For us as MIT. And instead, there's this jealousy. It's like...
Did you hear what Elon Musk tweeted? How responsible is what he's doing? He's just
saying all these things that are just dripping with jealousy and basically... I want what he's
got. That's the thing, right? Here's the weird thing. Rivalry has a different signature.
You see, when you know that you're never going to make it, that's the position you take.
What is it in Kung Fu Panda, which you've watched now? What does Tai Lung say when
he's looking for the Dragon Warrior and the Furious Five come to defeat him on the bridge?
One of them gives up Poe's name accidentally and Tai Lung hears it. Poe! So that is his name.
Finally, a worthy opponent. Our battle will be legendary, right? He's excited. Why is that?
Well, you learn about this in boxing. Sometimes you'll see a division or an MMA,
which is lousy with talent. You can't swing a cat without hitting an amazing athlete.
Sometimes you'll have a division, which at that particular moment has one star and no real competition
in that weight class or something. That person is in bad shape because you can't build a legend
without the other. When you think of Muhammad Ali, what are the names that you immediately think of?
You have to think of the other heavyweights. So those opponents are in part what made Muhammad
Ali and Muhammad Ali. That's why the Mayweather-McGregor revelation that this guy has got his
opponent's picture in his house. How weird is that? Well, because without the opponent,
you may not be able to get there. Now, I am not a huge fan of the wrong kinds of rivalries.
Do you have examples in mind? Well, there are rivalries where people take
each other's credit and screw each other over. And then there are other rivalries like the
RNA Tai Club, where these guys were so in love with what they were doing that they couldn't
wait to share everything. And Nobel Prizes were so abundant that most people got Nobel Prizes just
for being a member of the RNA Tai Club and doing cool stuff. That's the golden sweet spot.
Most of these people can't do what Elon's doing because they can't break rules. They
can't take the pressure. I'll tell you what really concerns me about your perspective.
I think that there are a lot of genius ideas inside of people who don't have the stomach for
conflict and derision. And I think a lot of those people are female. And I think that until we come
up with a world in which we can swat down the trolls, where we can actually cause the trolls
not to ruin everything. And I don't necessarily mean by shutting them up. I don't necessarily mean by
being brutal to them, but somehow separating off people who are working and people who are trolling.
I think that we're losing a huge amount of human genius in part because women in particular
are not necessarily going to push an idea if it results in 10 years of being derided.
Very few men are willing to do that either. But there are some of us who are so dumb
that we will pigheadedly stick to an idea for 10 years even if the world collapses.
I don't think that there are as many women who are going to make that calculation even if they
know the idea is correct. And one of the things that I believe technology can help us fight the
trolls of all definitions of troll. I believe that a better Twitter can be built. Interesting.
I do not. I don't believe that a Twitter successor can be built that solves most of the
problems. I think you can always improve what we have. But I don't think that converges in
something that really works because I think ultimately the problem isn't Twitter. The problem
is us. For example, I've recently made a very disturbing realization which is academics and
trolls have very many similar behaviors. Absolutely. It's largely a trolling community.
I tend to believe that the trolls are not... It's like the Peter Teal mini-mind idea which
in all of the trolls, there's the possibility of goodness. And all you have to do, not all you
have to do, what you have to do is create technology that incentivizes them to embrace,
to discover, to embrace, to practice the better angels of their nature. People actually want
to do that. The trolls is a short-term dopamine rush of childish toxicity that all of us want
to overcome. I believe that deep within, we want to overcome that.
I try to keep myself from believing what you believe. Because you'd be disappointed if it's
not true. Because it's dangerous because a lot of these people are implacable foes and there
aren't many of them. But when you meet somebody, it's like, yeah, I just like screwing people up.
I'm here for the pain. I just believe even in them, there's a good...
There's a wonderful book that I'm going to recommend to you where I hope this comes from.
Maybe I've got the source wrong. But in any event, it's a great book called Maximum City
about Bombay. And I believe the conceit is that the author leaves Bombay as a kid and comes back
as an adult. And he realizes he has to rediscover the city because he can't live in the city he
left. So he gets in contact with all of the weird areas of the city. And one of them is the underworld.
He hangs out with the police. But in the underworld, he's talking to contract killers.
And he says, it's really weird. Everybody pleads for their life right before I kill them.
And they always say this thing about, I've got two kids at home. He says,
never say that to a contract killer because we have terrible relationships with our parents.
Doesn't it dearest you? And I was just thinking, oh, wow. So there's a minus sign in front of
that statement. You're sitting there saying, I've got a three-year-old and it's like,
okay, well, I'm going to take this POS out of that kid's life. Maybe I'll have a chance.
You don't know how people are wired. And as much as I hate to say it, there are people
whose wiring is so disturbing and so different from yours that you will never guess why you can't
reach them or how much pleasure they may have gotten because they may have gone over a point
of no return. Nevertheless, you're just a smart guy who is using his intuition to make a hypothesis.
You do not know this for sure. Nope. And I'm a whatever the hell I am that has a different
hypothesis that even in the darkest human beings that seem to be only full of evil,
there's a good person there that could be discovered. One of the reasons I love doing
your show is that you have these beliefs even as a Russian. The Russian special.
As you know, there is a weirdness which is a total cynicism and total idealism
locked together. That's very much part of the Russian character.
The reason I was kept bothering you, kept bothering you to have this conversation
is I'm really worried about the next couple of months. No kidding. And if there's anybody in this
world that could help alleviate my worry by at least walking along with me through this
worry of mine, it's you. Do you think we're headed towards some kind of civil war,
or some kind of division that explodes beyond just stuff on Twitter, but something that's
really destructive to the fabric of our society?
Well, I believe we're in a revolution, as you know. I've called it the no-name revolution
or n-squared revolution. I've been talking about it for years. I think waiting for this
to be called a civil war is not smart. Only history will call it such. Fine.
I think that the problem is that you're encountering things that you've never seen trying to fit them
into things that you already know. But history repeats itself. You don't see lessons from history.
I do. We see today. But I don't see it repeating itself.
What about violence? The famous quote is that it rhymes.
It rhymes. I mean, the thing I'm, I guess, I'm speaking to is violence, and we're in there.
The abstraction of violence. Imagine you were coding up violence as an abstract class.
Okay. Thank you for speaking to the audience.
Trying to lose these people. Come with me.
Go on. No, no, no. I've dealt with your audience,
and your audience contains the smartest people around. I guarantee you, if I say some stuff,
first of all, any wrong thing that I'll say, they're going to detail, so that'll be a little bit
of catnip to bring in the smart people. But they'll also digest it for each other. It's one of the
great lessons of long-form podcasting. If you don't waste all your time explaining things,
that's the job of the audience to do amongst themselves. They're happy doing the work, and
those who aren't, they leave. Isn't that great? They'll leave. The people who don't want to struggle
will leave. You can get rid of them. I think that the point is you would want to say violence is
defined relative to a context. Let's call it meta-violence so that we don't get into the
problem. We already have a term for physical violence. We have meta-violence and physical
violence. I would say that physical violence is subclassed for meta-violence. Meta-violence is
the disruption of a system. For example, if a cell dies, you can die through apoptosis or
necrosis. Apoptosis is controlled, programmed cell death. Necrosis is just like, okay, this didn't
work. That was a violent disruption of the system. This meta-class is presumed in the
documentation. Is it all negative? No. What are you talking about? This is part of the problem
in the madness of our age, which is if you open up a drawer in your cabinet, in your kitchen,
and you see knives, spoons, and forks, do you have a sense that the spoons are good utensils and the
knives or forks are bad utensils because they're mean? If you start thinking in these terms, that
knife is there to do violence. That's violence you want done. When I cut a mango, I'm doing violence
to the mango. The mango expects that I will do violence to it because otherwise, I won't be able
to get the meat and it won't get its seed spread somewhere else. In part, violence is absolutely
part of our story. Okay. There's this meta-violence class. The meta-violence class is already,
it's a multiple inheritance pattern. Whatever's going on right now inherits from meta-violence.
No, but there are certain subclasses that allow evil to emerge. What I'm specifically worried
about is that- What's on your mind, Lex? What's really going on?
Okay. I worry that amidst the chaos of these protests or the chaos that could be created by
the feeling that the election does not represent the voice of the people saying that whoever gets
wins the election according to some kind of reporting of the numbers that come out that's
not going to represent what people actually want to be the leader. Something in that narrative
will create so much division that people will resort to literal violence, like protests that
really, that the United States loses its united aspect. Because of that chaos and tension,
evil people, evil forces, that my definition of evil is just cruel human beings use that moment
to attain power, the kind of power that ultimately goes against the ideal of the United States.
That could be Donald Trump. That could be another human being. It doesn't really matter.
My worry is that love doesn't win out in this. The unity doesn't win out in this.
And I feel like you and I have a responsibility. No kidding. Yeah, I know. And so how do we let
love win in this moment of potential chaos? We're going to have to fight for it.
You're going to have to become a fighter. You're going to have to throw some serious punches if
that's what you want. You have to be Muhammad Ali here because the moment you start criticizing
anything, you have to be a masterful communicator because that's why you're here.
Look, Lex, in part, your decency is allowing you to do things that you couldn't otherwise do.
I saw that you had Michael Malis on your podcast. Now, Michael Malis is, I think of somebody who,
at his best, is extremely shrewd and insightful, yes? He's also got this trolling game,
which he's quite open about and you talk to him about it, which I can't stand.
And this is the idea, oh, grandpa doesn't get the internet. Well, I'm grandpa. I don't get the
internet. I don't love the trolling. There are trolls of the past who were incredibly good.
I don't see any of the modern trolls as being that kind of genius level trolling the people who
deserve it in the way that they deserve it. Right now, what I see is that anything that
stands up gets cut down. It's like anything earnest. You have to turn into cynicism and a meme.
It's this idea that the people who believe that the world is chaos and has no point
are constantly trying to let you know, don't try to use the internet for meaning, for decency,
for goodness, because we are going to find out that that's all sanctimony is hypocrisy.
And we will make you suffer. So I do think that there's a lot of sanctimony is hypocrisy in the
world. Some of it mine, some of it yours, but we all have it. And the trolls somewhat remove that,
but it's not a judicious, kind, constructive, compassionate, caring version most of the time.
And a lot of those trolls, and I have this feeling about Michael Malis. I don't know
whether it's right, that there's somebody who deeply cares and loves beneath it,
and that that's motivating some of the trolling behavior. And you and I don't seem to be doing
that. I don't see you as almost ever trolling. You and I, I'm very much against trolling.
I'm very much against trolling. It doesn't mean that it's selective.
You know, I'm not even, it's not even true. Like everything we say, we say like, I'm forward,
I'm against it. This isn't my native language. I speak nuance. I don't speak this internet shit.
And the more I have to communicate through internet shit, right? I almost never take
a tweet seriously if it contains the letters LMAO, L-O-L, R-T-F-L, you know, F-O-L.
There's an interesting fact where people say stuff and then finish it with L-O-L.
You put it beautifully that it indicates to me that this is a person, we've talked about
like why I wear this stupid suit. Yeah. It's like, this is anti, this is to fight the L-O-L
at the end of sentences is take, it's like stand up for the words you're saying. Yeah.
Don't finish stuff with L-O-L, removing completely the responsibility of the content
of the sentence that preceded it. Yeah. Also, choosing the outfit that worked
both for Men in Black and the Blues Brothers, not a terrible choice. Okay, but getting back,
look, Lex, we're not in a position to do this. You need to be seated in a different chair.
Your chair is the wrong chair. You're in the wrong chair. It's been so long.
All right. I want to talk about you and Joe Biden. Joe Biden was a 29-year-old guy with
nothing particular going on so far as I can tell. Okay. I know people as impressive at age 29 as Joe
Biden, 12 rows back, three deep, doesn't matter. Huge number of people. None of them, my age,
can get to where he got to. We're all morons. Anytime somebody takes out, if you found Eddie
Van Halen in a guitar shop, you'd be angry. What is this guy doing repairing guitars?
Then somebody will say, maybe he loves to repair guitars.
Yeah. I mean, what is your Russian piano tuner doing?
What is my Russian piano tuner? That was the whole point of that story,
which is, what is it that happened in that life that converted somebody? I find this,
for example, with Russian doctors who are technicians in offices now,
there's a huge amount of talent in the world that's not sitting in its proper seat.
And quite honestly, I've gotten to the point where my feeling is we've got to take the seats.
Maybe we don't sit in them. Maybe the idea is that we take the seats and we put some smart
Gen Z person in the seat and say, look, no chanting. I don't want to hear you say,
no justice, no peace. If there aren't verbs, if it rhymes, it's wrong. I used to have this thing,
things that rhyme are more true. But in general, if something starts at one, two, three, four,
I don't want to hear what the rest of your sentence is. Yeah.
Yeah. But I feel like the responsibility that you carry that I carry,
this is where Joe Rogan generally removes himself from being, I'm just a comedian,
this idea of I'm just a comedian. You all do that.
But at this moment in history, history literally can pivot on the words of a tattooed
ripped 50-year-old comedian. And I think the same is true with you.
Okay. Well, I'm interested and I care. Speaking of lyrics, there are many here among us who feel
that life is but a joke. That's not us. The hour is getting late. That's not us.
In the song, the joker and the thief are on opposite sides of Jesus having this conversation
over Jesus. You and I, we've been through that. That's not our fate. That's somebody else's fate
to throw spitballs at the internet. That's not your fate. You're an earnest guy. You're filled
with love. You're getting the most amazing podcast. Yes. But you're going over the internet.
This is the point I'm trying to make that you're saying I'm just a grandpa. I don't
know. I'm telling you, you're going to get bigger and then you're going to get cut down.
You're going to keep ascending for a while, Lex. And then you're saying naturally there's
a problem. I'm telling you, I watch the same process. People get up to a certain level.
And one of the things that's going on in my opinion with Joe Rogan is that when Joe Rogan
starts to talk about his misgivings about Joe Biden in a way that you find at any bar in America
about cognitive decline in a 77-year-old who's about to be 78, I believe in November.
We have never had anything remotely as insane as a 78-year-old person slated to win the White
House. And you're saying when that idea is being communicated, is there something about the disc
concept that you talk about, the system naturally starts to... Some bad thing happens to Joe or
one of Joe's close associates. The ability to destroy people who become inconvenient
has been documented. This is what we have done in the past. Whether we are doing it now, we
don't know because we are not doing this church committee too. In order to know whether or not
you are currently destroying American citizens as we did in the past and as we have documented,
as we found out in 1976, the federal government destroyed Americans who had political beliefs
that the government didn't want to continue. And I don't know whether you are grasping that.
One interpretation of why John Stuart and why Joe Rogan and why Bill Maher, all these people,
to some extent, hide behind, it's a joke. It's because they're trying to find a protected class.
Is there some place I can stand and speak the truth which does not result in my being garbage
collected? Interesting. I guess you're right. My intuition is you can stand. As you gain more
power, you can stand behind Joe Rogan right now. I mean, I've talked about it for a few years now.
People did not understand how big that program was. People didn't understand long-form podcasting.
I was derided by people who I think of as being very shrewd for believing in these podcasts as
a major force. And most of the people who derided me have said, wow, did I not get things? It's like
if you started to propose, you wanted to do the Sopranos in the era of 30-minute sitcoms.
You don't get it, man. The American people, they're not interested in these long plot storylines.
That's your weird thing. Nobody cares, dude. Everybody just wants short, fast, memorable.
If you do that, you totally miss the opportunity. The savvy people used to say,
kid, let me tell you, nobody ever lost a dime underestimating the intelligence of the American
people. Well, that was totally wrong because they didn't calculate opportunity costs.
I have been talking about the problem of Joe for a long time. The problem is that when the system
wakes up, they're going to want to control it. They come up with new different mechanisms of
doing that. I guess one interesting one is cancel culture. Well, look at the number of people
around Joe who they've come after since they've realized that Joe is really big. Joey Diaz,
Brian Callan, Crystalia. Now, I'm not saying that those are all related, but I do notice
that there are at least correlations between when Joe says something, when something bad
happens in Joe's universe. It's easier for me to believe that that's happening when it's happening
around Joe himself, but I'm worried about my friend. I don't necessarily want to push him
towards being more if he doesn't want it because I don't want to conscript people.
He's got a great life. He's got a great situation. He's done a huge service.
How much do I owe Joe just for what he's done for you to say nothing of what he's done for me
or for Brett or for Sam or any of these people? I'd like to think that we all try to give back,
but I'm worried about Joe. He's not worried. One of the inspiring things about Joe is,
I mean, he's in this war alone, and the way he fights the war is by just enjoying life.
Well, that's his thing. As long as he stays close to things that he loves and being,
one of the things is he's honest about his drug use. He loves to hunt. He does a certain amount
of semi-vice signaling up front, and then you just also know him. This is why every time they
try to take him down, you use the n-word. Unfortunately, everybody knows who Joe is,
and yes, he doesn't act as if he went to a fancy finishing school. That's not his energy.
The fact that you've got some super smart guy who always pretends to be a meathead,
just like, hey, I'm a comedian. It's like all these defenses and disguises. You've got this
super smart guy who he's admitted to most of the things that you can take him down for,
and because everybody's been effectively in his den or his basement, think about that studio as his
basement. People have hung out with Joe so many hours that you can't tell them something about
Joe or they're going to say, wow, I'm going to believe the New York Times and not the hundreds
of hours I've spent on the Joe Rogan experience. But the cool thing is that this is what inspires
me is that the way he's waging war against the system is just by being a good person
and talking enough hours in a week where that message like bleeds throughout the words and
the gaps between. That's so inspiring to me that the good people can win by just being good.
He's kind and he's tough and he's no pushover. I always worry a little bit when I sit down
in my chair. You still get scared that he'll call you on some kind of bullshit that you weren't
even aware of? The first time I was on the show, the energy wasn't great between us.
It was in a sober October situation, so I think I hadn't understood that and maybe our egos got a
little bit off. I don't know. I was having fun, but maybe it was just two complicated life forms
getting to know each other. The first one was probably made me a little nervous for the future,
but then Joe and I become friends, although sometimes we have miscommunications like on
Yom Kippur. I texted him and I said, Joe, I want to apologize for ways I've let you down as a friend
that haven't been there for you and appreciate everything you've done for me. I get this text
back and I'm like, what the fuck is your problem? You're great, dude. I don't know what bad place
you're in, but cheer up. I was like, Joe, are there any Jews in your life? Apologize for what
they've done. He was just like, dude, have you lost your mind? What the hell's gotten into you?
Yeah. What do you think about the Spotify thing? What about it? Ask me a question.
He's now, as opposed to being just a comedian with a podcast, he now is just a comedian with
a podcast who stepped in the middle of the center of cancel culture, which is like, I know Spotify
is in Sweden, but they represent Silicon Valley. They represent the very kind of structures they
contain and represent the kind of structures that threaten to destroy the elons of the world.
Hmm. And he just stepped with his Alex Jones and his Joey Diaz just strolled right into the
middle of it. Yeah. I think it's awesome. I love it. But do you think he's strong enough to...
Well... I don't know. I mean, I don't even know the right way to ask this, but is he strong enough
to persevere? It's a bit interesting. It's like when Alliance decides, wow, that honey badger
looks tasty. I'm going to swallow it whole. See what happens. Because I talked to him offline.
He really seems to be willing to give away the 100 million, which gives him so much power.
Oh, I don't... It's a powerful thing to be able to say. I don't... Yeah, to the honey badger.
He just strolls in, but he's willing to walk away from anything in the...
Well, he's going to walk out the other side of the line. I don't think he's going to go out the way
he came in. Yeah. Well, you know what it is? It's Tommy Lee Jones entering the bug.
This is like a giant alien. He just walks into it. He just... He gets swallowed by the bug and
he blasts out from the inside. Yeah. I have it as Tommy Lee Jones. Yeah. That's Joe Rogan to you.
Yeah. Is that my feeling is that Spotify doesn't understand what they're messing with. I could
be wrong, but I'm not. No, you're right. I'm right. Because Joe doesn't need anything, man.
I mean, this is the weird thing about it. It's like, I'm sure that he loves all his toys,
whatever, blah, blah, blah. He's a rich guy. Yes, he's got FU money. He had FU money a long time
ago. And you're not... The other thing about... It's a bit weird being friends with a dude like
that. It just is because you call him up or he'll call you up and he's like, what's going on in
your life? I don't know. Kind of depressed, trying to get some math done. What are you up?
Oh, dude, I can cheer you up. I just came off of a 29,000 person stadium. It's like, oh, cool.
How'd you do that? Oh, I don't know. I just announced it on Instagram a few days ago and it's
filled up. Just like, oh, damn. Yeah. I mean, that thing is powerful. That thing is so powerful.
Yeah. So there you go. I mean, you could be that too. The instant Joe takes an interest in politics
and saving the world. You might destroy all that. It's going bye-bye. I promise. I just
disagree with you. Okay. I mean, because you have to do it. You've said this many times before.
I'll bet you. Yeah. I'll bet you a bottle of Stoli that you can get... If you get Joe Rogan to get
highly politically active and call out the system for all the bullshit that it is in a very
pointed and determined fashion. And he doesn't get destroyed. I'll give you the vodka.
The vodka? Yeah. That sounds like a pretty damn good deal. But you've said this. I mean...
No living heroes, my friend. No living heroes. I just... No living heroes.
It's just difficult. You just have to be good at it. I mean, if you just say generic political
things, you're going to be taken down. The more heroic you are, the more beautiful you are,
the more you will be made to suffer. If they cannot get you on reputation, if Jesus himself came
down, I don't know if I ever read... I probably have never read to you the hit piece I did on Jesus.
You don't know about this? No, I did not know. I did hit pieces on all of the best people in the
world. Wow. So whoever it was who cured cancer, discovered new particles, whatever it is, I did
a hit piece against them to prove that I can do it to anybody around anything at any time.
Except Eddie Van Halen is what we're talking about. Well, Eddie Van Halen is now dead.
But if this was a situation hot for teacher, canceled. Disrespectful. Absolutely.
Also, packaging female objectification for young men, clearly Eddie Van Halen is one
of the worst people alive. But the skill, the incredible inspiration that is just
radiating from his music inspires so many millions that they will fight those canceled pieces.
They will fight those. This is your thing. You have this idea that there's a war between good
and evil and the good has already been designated the winner. It's not true. But your belief in
that it's true. Take it till you make it. It's motivating both of us. I also believe
that we're going to win because if I don't, then I can't get out of bed. It's pretty heavy at the
moment. Do you think 2021 can make us feel good about the trajectory of society? Where we emerge
from this year feeling good. There's a smile on their face and the next time we talk,
we'll be doing some kind of duet and guitar and not having this worried look on our faces.
No. Okay. But you've also promised that you're going to somehow end this in a positive.
So how do you turn the no around? What's the you turn from the no?
Until we get some actually decent people in the right chairs who are not constantly thinking
about their next paycheck, I don't see a solution. Let me just say what the prerequisites for a
solution are and to let you know why I don't think it's coming. First of all, both of these
political parties, the leadership of them is disgusting and has to go. They're tearing us
apart. They lack the will to be Americans. They don't understand the subtlety of the project.
They're simply the people who figured out how to inhabit the seats, and that is their great
achievement. I believe that in order to solve this, you need people who can integrate, who are
not partisan at the level of the partisan warriors that we're seeing, people who believe in dividing
the pies of the future rather than the present pie as our main task as Americans, because we are
built around growth. I'm sorry to say it. You need an ability to have subtle conversations,
and you need the ability to exclude. At the moment, everyone knows inclusion is good,
which it isn't. It's like saying, well, water is good. If I say water is good, everybody will
agree with me. It's not. People drown. People need to get dehydrated. It can be life saving or life
ending. It isn't good or bad. Inclusion is not good or bad. Inclusion is just inclusion. Exclusion
is part of inclusion. We've taught people that they can reason through the world as sub-cocker
spaniels. They just bark things at each other. You know, I'm for safety. I'm for inclusion.
I'm for growth. Oh, really? Do you guys use verbs? Dependent clauses? Are there compound,
complex sentences? Where are we in this sea of nonsense? You have to be able to build a place
where you have smart, talented people who represent a diverse group of correct opinions.
You need to get rid of almost all of the people who have opinions that are antithetical to what
we're trying to accomplish. You need to give them insulation, which we're terrified because we
don't trust anybody, so everything has to be transparent. If you're going to the bathroom,
I want those walls to be plexiglass so I can see what you're doing. It's like,
that's too much transparency. We have too much and not enough at the same time.
Then, in essence, you need to ensure that people aren't worried about feeding their
family every four seconds for being real. None of that is happening. Our billionaires are pathetic.
What is the point of billionaires if you're not going to do billionaire-type cool stuff like
saying FU? I'm going to throw $3 billion at the project of restoring the national conversation.
I don't grasp this. What is the point of creating obscene wealth if we don't have anyone smart enough
and caring enough to use it? I agree with that last part for sure. Let me slightly push back
on the idea that the leaders themselves are broken. I feel like this goes to Joe Rogan,
Joe Biden, and Trump having a debate on that program. I feel like Joe Biden has a lot of
really interesting ideas that he's almost forgot how to communicate. He's been fake for so long
within the system. Hillary was fake for too long. I'm sure she had real ideas at the beginning
that she still was campaigning on decades later. If the system, if the platforms
empowered you to search, to be honest, to be real, to search for those ideas within yourself,
like long-form conversations do, then even the Donald Trump and Joe Biden leaders we have now
would take this country to a better place that would unite people. We can keep the
current Congress. We just need to create better platforms. This is going to the intuition that
there's good in Donald Trump. There is depth and complexity in intelligence and the same
with Joe Biden. There's good in Joe Biden. We're not incentivizing. There's several things I think
are broken. One of them is Twitter. The other is journalism. It's just the platforms of us
communicating with each other. One of the reasons that I try to come up with unifying explanations
is that if you look at the number of wildfires in California, let's say that we've just seen,
if you treat them all as spontaneous uncorrelated instances, it feels like, oh my god, it's just
whack them all. Every time I send a fire truck here, there's a fire over there. You want to come
up with something like a central theory, which is why do I suddenly have a problem when I hadn't
had a problem before? I look for these unifying explanations. I found one the other day that
really speaks to me. People are very frustrated because they've been trained to think about
this incorrectly, in my opinion. Here's the graph that you need to look at. On the x-axis is time
by year. On the y-axis is something like average age of a human. The title of the graph is Any
Desirable Situation Involving Institutions. That could be CEO. It could be tenured professor.
It could be who's getting grants. It could be the age at which people win Nobel Prizes.
University presidents, all these things go up. In other words, for a long period of time,
the average age of the person in a desirable situation has been increasing something like
nine months for every 12. Those graphs have to go down at some point. The specter of
having five people all born in the 1940s as the final
entrance in the presidential context. That makes no sense. Think about how bizarre a thing that
nobody is even really talking about. The last five people were all ancient by presidential
standards, not one, not two, but five. We are talking about a contest between somebody who is
the oldest of the baby boomers, the very beginning of the baby boom, summer of 46 birthday, fighting
somebody who is in the silent generation. The silent generation guy in a town hall in Florida
gets this question from a Gen Z guy saying, what's going on with my future? Joe Biden has
the audacity to say, I'm a transitional president. You guys are the highly educated one.
When has any generation in history needed a transitional 78-year-old person to take office?
It's bizarre. It's preposterous. That graph is the graph we can't talk about. That graph
is the graph of our destruction. Because it has the, you can make a one-line argument,
which sounds like ageism, which isn't a very good argument. What it does is it muddles the
conversation. You always have to ask yourself the question, if this conversation becomes muddled,
who wins as a result of the muddling? It's a battle, but let's just win it. Let's win the
battle. Are you running? Sure. I'll run. I was born in Russia. I can't run. We Russians can hack
elections, so we'll figure it out. This is me officially announcing. I was born in St. Petersburg,
Florida. Lex, what is it that you really want to ask? I want to put the some responsibility
on the portal, the portal, the portal, that the portal gives power to the people in that graph.
Because you put it quite brilliantly, that the people that move the world, their age has been
going up and not move the world, but put in the position where they get the chance to affect the
world. These new platforms, I think Twitter falls in them, give power to the younger people. It
doesn't have to be about age necessarily, but the younger thinking people. That's a promising thing.
You're like Gandalf. You get to pick your photos. I'm not very good with the analogy,
but the whole point is for you as Gandalf. I don't know that I make that much sense.
Gandalf makes sense. I don't know if people know how to fit me into this ecosystem.
I think there's something in my presentation that people find very confusing.
No, figure it out. I disagree with you, but you need to look at the mirror and think like,
what is it? Maybe you need a mustache. I don't know. But there's something about
figuring out how to be a charismatic communicator. That's the responsibility.
You said like finishing sentences with the LOL is painful for your soul.
That's just how somebody lets me know. I don't have to take their opinion seriously.
Yeah. It's still the language, the way that people are communicating. You're swimming that
wave. You have a big platform. I have a growing platform. It feels like this is the place to
give power. I agree. I agree. But we're going to get swatted down. I just don't think so.
You're wrong. Why are you afraid of the big... Like this is... I've studied it.
Because I've studied... Let me ask you a question, Lex.
I believe that every society is supposed to have a collection of what I call
a break glass in case of emergency people. Yeah. These are people who are universally loved and
trusted by your society. For example, David Attenborough, the great British naturalist and
presenter recently came on Instagram. He's worried about the planet. I said, you know,
look, there are very few of these people left. Let's pay attention, find out what he has to say.
Maybe he's going to be an ass. Maybe he's going to be in it. Maybe he's going to say wrong things.
Don't know. Tell me about your top 10 universal American heroes.
This is not a rhetorical question. No. Give me five. Everybody looks to that person and says,
yep, the best of us. Not divisive. Well, everybody's an interesting concept. I mean,
Elon Musk is very divisive, right? I'm talking about overwhelmingly, people would follow that
person if that person gave a rousing, intelligent speech that said, we must act now because we're
in dire straits. I think a lot of people fall in that category. For me, it would be in the tech
world, in the engineering world. No, no, no, no. Elon Musk. Elon Musk. Elon Musk.
The rock. I'm thinking like, who is the most eloquent actor? You think celebrities,
so people with platforms. I didn't say so everything. You have to be well-known.
I believe like platform. Yeah. So this goes to Joe Rogan.
First two did not really impress me as being what I said, but okay.
Elon several years ago would have. Joe Rogan. Why do they fail? Why is it?
Lots of people treat Joe Rogan as if he's some sort of right-wing racist because
they've never watched his program. They don't know who his friends. I don't know.
Oh, but when I thought you said everybody, I thought you meant a large enough people
where a huge change can happen, not actually literally everybody. Because I think-
I mean people who've pulled off, like people who've pulled off something where everybody's
convinced that that person just deeply- I mean, I think I've told you the story before, but
the one time I've seen the power of a figure like this. I mean, very few times I've been
in a large crowd and I've seen people just moved where they would do almost anything good,
bad, and different because they were primed. One was a Rolling Stones concert. The other one
was Nelson Mandela coming to Boston. Man, you've never seen anything like this. You check out the
photos from the banks of the Charles River when Nelson Mandela came. There are people that you
need in your dark hours, and we can't agree on who they are. As soon as they emerge, we tar them
with shit. We get out the shit breach. I just disagree with you. So I think-
What do we disagree about here? I think it doesn't matter who it is. I think really good
speeches are needed. I saw Killer Mike try to give a good speech. Yeah, he did. In Atlanta, right?
Yeah, he did. That was something. Very impressed. Even Killer Mike immediately gets into this
sell out. Yeah, but he didn't take up the responsibility. I would say-
He didn't. Of going bigger. He was speaking to the community on this particular moment.
He's exceptional at it, and he was speaking to this particular moment. He didn't take it a step
farther, which is giving the same speech, but bigger than race, bigger than this particular
moment, but more about the American project. You know the guy who landed the plane in the Hudson?
Yes. Yeah, there you go. That's a good example. That guy, until we screw him up,
is the kind of thing that I'm talking about. Yeah, exactly. I mean, Jocko, maybe. That's
another- Jocko's pretty good. Jocko is pretty good. I can't really tell. Is he a Democrat?
Is he a Republican? I don't know. He's an American. That's for damn sure.
Yeah. I think there's a lot of folks there. No, I think Jocko, there aren't. That's one of the
reasons why Jocko's so important. Your podcast, The Portal, is something in my little universe,
is something a lot of people really love, and it moves them. They draw a lot of meaning from it,
and also especially in difficult times. It gives them a comfort of through this kind of-
It's not just nuance. There's like, even when you're talking about chaos,
there's love underneath all of it, and I think people draw a lot of meaning from it,
which is why they are wondering why you haven't been doing that many podcasts,
or you haven't done it in maybe a month and a half or two months in this most difficult of
times. Is there a good reason? Yeah. There are lots of good reasons.
The first one is kind of weird, which is everybody assumes that everyone wants to be famous.
If you say, I don't want to be famous, it's like, oh, you're just saying that because you want to
be famous, you're not that famous. I don't love being as well-known as I've become.
There's lots of things that are fun about it. It's wonderful that I can go to any city in the
world, and there are portal listeners there. All I need to do is put out a tweet and 20 people
show up for a drink. They're amazing people. They're almost- I mean, you can see my live
Q&As on my Instagram page. If you go to Eric R. Weinstein, I'd just pick somebody randomly.
I was really worried about it at first. Maybe I should be worried about it, but in general,
people all over the world are just so positive. And thoughtful and deep and never story.
Because they're self-selected, right? Yeah.
But I don't like the fame. The thing we just described comes with the fame. It's a beautiful
thing. You're worried that it's getting- It's ephemeral. It'll turn on you in a heartbeat.
It'll turn on you in a heartbeat. And the other problem is I don't like my audience being my
audience. I want to get closer to them. I want to talk to them. I want to find out what is this
doing in your life. My house fills up with art that people send me. The lightest thing is an
effects pedal called something like, I don't know, it's a bow tie overdrive from a guy in Mexico.
Right? Yeah. You play electric, by the way, in a tiny little tangent. Did you play electric?
I have a Stratocaster, but it doesn't have a strap. And I don't know what to do with it. And
I have a bad amp. So you should hook me up with the- We'll find it a home, maybe.
You're starting to sense that this is too much? No. I want to be here. I want to do the
work. Very simply, I don't have an ability to fully explain myself. I don't want to claim
that I don't love the fact that- How much love do we get from these programs? Generically,
people are incredibly generous. People have begged me, set up a Patreon account,
and I haven't been able to do it. I should do it. I've said to everybody, it's a business,
it's a business, it's a business. But they're so used to being defrauded when somebody starts
thinking about monetary incentives. My goal was to say, I'm going to keep talking to you about-
You want to know why I started doing ads on my show was because I wanted people to think
from the get-go, this is a business. This is what I sound like when I'm selling.
But you see, I've lost weight. A lot of that is due to athletic greens. Athletic greens.
Code, what's the- I don't know what my promo code is for athletic greens.
Well, it's probably athleticgreens.com slash portal.
But doesn't matter. But Fitbit, who doesn't advertise, has also been instrumental,
as well as a guy named Stephen Cates, who was a fan from the show, found me on the street and
just said, I'm a trainer. I want to help train you. It's got me on a good path.
So that's one paid advertiser and two people that I'm calling out just because
two outfits, Stephen Cates and Fitbit, that have changed my life. I wanted people to say,
you don't have to be afraid of advertising. If I do it in this way, this is powering your show.
But the whole issue of money is weird because people have these crazy feelings like,
oh, wow, I knew he was a shill. He's a grifter. Okay. I didn't love that.
I didn't love the issues. So I didn't set up a Patreon. The security issues for talking and
being me are significant. And I don't have the kind of money to hire around the clock.
I mean, I desperately want to get to a level of wealth where I don't have to think about money.
I don't think it's- some people want money because they need it for status.
I think I can handle status if I want it doing this. I don't want the status necessarily. And I
don't want- I'd want the status, but I don't want the fame that goes with it. I want the money.
I don't want to be seen as this is about money because it's about a substance.
Yeah. And try, you know, all of those things. That's part of- I haven't solved these issues.
I've been feeling bad because people say, where's the Port Award? We're desperate. These are
difficult times. We have an election coming up. And it's just like, do you think for a moment that
I want to explain that I actually got really uncomfortable being as well known as I was?
And then what is it that I want? Because I want to be better known and less well known at the same
time. It doesn't- there's nothing the audience can do. I don't want the audience to be the audience.
That doesn't make sense to people. I want it to be a business, but I don't think people need to
fear a business if the business is open about being a business. That- and then that's all to the
side. What you're seeing now in front of the election is an incredibly meta-violent period in
our online existence. And I believe that anybody who attempts to say these two parties are completely
screwed at the moment the leadership of these parties is unsalvageable, unworkable, everyone
hears that from inside the two-party system. Oh, I get it. He's trying to subtract votes off of
Biden. Oh, I get it. He's trying to scuttle Trump. Oh, I get it. This is a play for his show because
he's trying to plug into disgust. There's a Bill Hicks routine on marketing. Have you ever seen
this? Brilliant. I recommend it to everyone, where he comes out on stage and he says,
are there any people in marketing and sales in the eyes? Whoo, yeah. Okay, great. Can you do
us all a favor and die? And like everybody laughs. He's like, no, I'm not laughing. I'm
seeing him being serious. So he talks about how marketing is horrible. So you're like,
where's this act going? Then he gets to the point where he's like, oh, I know how you
marketing people think. Bill's going after that resentment dollar. That's good dollar.
Let's get that resentment anti-marketing dollar. It's like, no, that's not what I'm saying. I
really hate marketers. Oh, that's good. It's the authenticity dollar. You can't escape this kind
of negative marketing thought. And I guess that gets to the issue that I don't want to be destroyed
in advance of this election. I don't think it's a good use of my relationship to my audience
to be broadcasting how completely ridiculous Donald Trump and Joe Biden are as candidates for
the president of the United States, full stop. None of this makes any sense. These moderators of
these pseudo debates, we're in the wrong format with the wrong people. No part of this makes a
wit of sense. Can I try to push back several claims? One is I don't believe the systems as they stand
now can destroy their request on voice, the voice. You're a child. I'm sorry to say that, but well,
let me, well, it's also possible. Let's fight. It's entirely possible that you're the child.
Because a child would say you would call other people a child. Yeah, get in the first blow.
That's a big reveal. It's a tell. Because the only power they have is to attack you psychologically.
No. Well, I believe that the army of people that love you is much more powerful than mainstream
media, than people that you might hear it say ridiculous things that you just said,
which is try to reduce you like the marketing thinking, I just believe there's an army,
maybe there's a better term, of people that see you for who you are and are hungry.
I'm not disputing those things. I don't know what I'm saying.
I would venture to say as your therapist that the battle is all in your mind that you have
found these demons in the system and they're just a tiny minority and it's all in your mind.
They cannot actually remove, they're not strong enough to remove the voice of Eric Weinstein,
to silence the voice. I love this. This is some of the best fiction writing I've ever heard.
Let me tell you, I have relatives who've known me my entire life where one article in
the New York Times, they will believe that over me. My contention is that there has no power
except to affect your psychology. What you have to do is the Rogan thing, just laugh.
You're not hearing me. Just laugh. I am laughing. I know, but more.
I'm telling you something. The way this works is through ruin. Ruin can come to anyone. There's
no one who cannot be ruined. Every single person is signed up right now to be ruined by the system.
Don't you understand that you have more power than the system? You can ruin the system.
Your Twitter account, the podcast, that's what I'm telling you about the army.
I agree that my Twitter account, my pocket, but what we've seen, for example,
you saw what happened to Brett's Articles of Unity project?
Yes.
Okay, what happened?
On the Twitter side.
On the Twitter side, what happened?
What happened?
Well, actually, it's not an answer.
Say the word.
It was blocked or removed from Twitter.
Suspend.
It sounds suspended. I have a direct line to Jack.
So I'm talking to the CEO who I am crazy enough to still believe in.
Good. I do too.
I believe it. Somehow, there's a very strange thing going on with Jack Dorsey.
I cannot possibly reconcile the actions with the person. That is a next level mind in there.
I don't know it well enough to say that it's all next level.
I'm not claiming he doesn't have any blind spots.
Every smart person I know has blind spots.
I don't know what he's up against, blah, blah, blah.
There's no way that the Jack Dorsey that I've talked to and the Jack Dorsey that
interacted over Articles of Unity can be the same person.
He is constrained by that company in some way that doesn't make sense to me.
Either that or he's the most deplicitest person on earth and I'm not believing it.
I just don't buy it. Something horrible is happening.
My claim is I can remove you functionally from the chessboard in a tiny number of moves.
No matter who you are, no matter how virtuous or how much of a bastard you've been your entire life,
it doesn't take more than three or four moves to basically neuter you as a force.
Yeah, and I disagree that if that's possible, that means I'm not very good at chess.
Unity 2020 was removed from Twitter because it's not good enough, not within the system.
The army of people that feel the brilliance of the idea was too small.
But fear, uncertainty, and doubt is the name of the game, the coin of the realm.
Psychology, though. It's not real power. It just affects the mind.
Okay, I have a reading assignment for you. Because you're Russian, you'll really enjoy this.
As part of the Great American Tobacco Settlement, the Tobacco Institute had to
discourage its archives of all of its strategies, all of its skull-duggery,
and put it on the web for all time so that we could all understand how the tobacco
companies got together and destroyed people. You see, tobacco destroys people. You can see,
you know, Scientology destroys people. There are various vindictive organizations
that will not tolerate reality in opposition to them.
Let's take them down.
Okay.
That's what I'm trying to tell you.
So why aren't you doing the podcast or return? Because that's one of the weapons of war.
Well, first of all, if you're at war, I don't want to discuss strategy on a podcast, right?
But that's your misunderstanding.
What did Montgomery say about Rommel? Wasn't his line, I read your book,
You Beautiful Bastard? It's like, why are you using the tactics that you already explained?
Okay, so one of the things I'm doing is I'm not having a strategic conversation
with you and several hundred thousand of our closest friends.
I pulled back because this is not the battle that I know what I'm doing.
I do not feel passionately enough about defeating Donald Trump to elect Joe Biden,
even if that's the way I'm going to ultimately vote, right?
I don't believe in the Biden Democratic Party. I don't believe in the Trump Republican Party.
So, yes, it's an incredibly consequential election. But to me, it's like the crypts
and the bloods and the Latin Kings fighting over the right to extort a business and the
business trying to figure out who it wants to do the extorting.
But don't you think, listen, there's very few people that are as good with the English language
as you? Don't you think it's possible to draw a line that in between, that finds
how we find our common humanity, that ensures a better 2021 without having to say like
Donald Trump is evil or Joe Biden is incompetent or any of that, just somehow draw a beautiful line?
I am seeing you both in so much pain. This election is chewing up the integrity of everyone
who comments on it, Lex. Maybe they're not good enough.
They're not good enough. No, but okay. The hope is you believe in me?
Yes. You do? Yes.
Listen to me very carefully. My spider sense, my intuition that has allowed me to survive in
the space, I've been mouthing off since the 80s, tells me this is a super dangerous time
for smart people to be spending the dry powder because the election doesn't make sense.
Doesn't mean that I don't have a sense that one outcome would be better than the other,
probably, but the variance on that. I'm not even positive that I'm right.
These two options are so completely inappropriate to the world of 2020.
What we need is so diametrically opposed to more boomers and more silent generation people
trying to sort out a highly technical world being mediated through social media.
We need more exclusion. We need more actual elites. The people we've called the elites
are not the elite. They need to go. Yeah, we need excellence, competence.
We need people who can be trusted behind closed doors and we need to close the doors so we
can't see what those people are doing. Here's the thing. Imagine that you had a bunch of people who'd
all seen action in combat, had all volunteered to be part of the armed services, had all come
from backgrounds where they didn't need to. So you were convinced that these people had put their
lives on their line for their country, not for a payday. Imagine you had 10 of these people
with technical backgrounds. Men, women, black, white, Muslim, Jew, doesn't matter. I would
trust those people and I'd close the door. I don't want to know what they talked about.
I don't want transparency into all of their negotiations. I want to know that they're
patriotic, that they see something in the world bigger than themselves and their family fortunes.
I want to know that they're courageous. I want to know that they've got
all of our well-being and I'm willing to roll the dice and if they screw us over,
I'd rather go down like that. Okay, so I disagree with you there because
there's a difference between those and Jaco because you're not speaking to people with
credentials. No, I'm talking about self-credential people. I view Jaco as self-credential.
But the powerful thing about Jaco is he's not only self-credential, but he's been real with
people. The magical thing about Jaco isn't his book, isn't his life story. He's been
talking on a podcast for a long time. There's something real that happens.
Okay, so if you took Dan Crenshaw and Tulsi Gabbard and you took Jaco Willing and maybe Jesse
Ventura, right? I see where you're going with this. What? You can take Bernie Sanders who's a
lone voice. You take all of these people who've really just risked. Why is Catherine Hepburn
the best that Hollywood ever produced? Because she told Hollywood to go fuck itself.
Hard. They gave her four Academy Awards and she said,
love you, sweeties. I'm going to use them as the door stops for the bathrooms in my house.
See, that's skill. That's what you were talking about. Be Catherine Hepburn.
Audrey Hepburn is pretty amazing, but Catherine Hepburn is next level. That's what you're trying
to say to me. I'm trying to figure it out, Lex. I don't have the answer yet. What I do know is that
this election is chewing people up. I mean two separate things. One, that parties don't have
enough integrity. That if you comment, either for or against, there's a short sequence where you
make a comment that's nuanced. You get referenced to something. Take this thing about fine people on
both sides. That is non-resolved after n years, whether the context should be reported or not.
We are in some situation in which Democrats and Republicans are primed to fight each other
the way introducing two ants from two different ant colonies always produces a battle.
I don't want to be in that fray because those people are going to kill each other mindlessly,
like robots. Until the election is concluded, do I think this is dire? Yes. Could it be make
or break? Absolutely. I'm not saying that. Do I know which way this goes? I can make an excellent
argument that we need to elect Joe Biden right now, that we've got a situation which can only be
cured by voting for Joe Biden. I can make another argument that we could have a situation that can
only be cured by defeating Joe Biden right now and all of the things that the modern Democratic
Party represents. It's not the lady and the tiger. We're choosing between the tiger and the tiger.
It's the Sumatran tiger versus the Siberian tiger. I'm trying to think, well, which tiger
can I have a better chance against? The key problem for us politically is that we have to
divorce the concept of the center and moderation from kleptocracy. Every time we try to say something,
like we need more moderate solutions, we need more pluralistic solutions, people will say,
wow, you just want to hand us right back into the swamp, don't you? Those swamp people,
because the moderates and the swamp people are the same people.
So then we have these two crazy wings. We can't have crazy right wing people. I don't want any
tiki torch BS. We can't have crazy left wing. Don't attack my courthouse. Really don't attack
my courthouse. And we can't have moderates. It's like, okay, how do we install our children and
rape pillage and get these speaking fees when we're out of office and become cozy with the things
when we're supposed to be regulating them and then become their lobbyists immediately when we
leave office? All of this stuff. We need an entirely different system. And I can't talk about that at
the moment. When I talk, people say, oh, wow. So you're going to sit this one out because you're
a pussy because you're a coward. Great to know, Eric. We thought better of you by click. I don't
know what to do. So are you thinking of what to do? Yeah. Oh, you better believe it. Look, Brett
Brett had this idea of Unity 2020 and I told him it was a wrong idea. I didn't tell him that Unity
2024 was a wrong idea. I didn't tell him that Unity 2028 is a wrong idea. And if I were to make the
case that he was right and I was wrong because he's now shuttered the thing, right? I would say
that the case to be made that he was correct was is that by doing this in 2020, we found out what
we were up against. It's good to know that Twitter can turn this off at the drop of a hat.
Great to know. It's good to know as we learned that you cannot have meetings of presidential
candidates in a primary that are not approved of by the party, right? Like they've got this
thing figured out so we don't have any way in. And now Unity 2024 makes sense because Unity 2020
was tried. Okay. I don't know that we get to 2024 under all circumstances. In some we do,
in some we don't. There's a game theoretic thing that I'm not sure you're counting for,
but you probably are. But let me just make an argument is Jack Dorsey very likely listens to
your podcast. And wait, this is the power of these words. Something deep went wrong. But we can change
it with the power of words. Something went wrong at Twitter. They have so much division on their
platform. That's what I'm trying to say. They've gotten it's not wrong. They just don't know they're
understaffed. They have no, they have an insoluble problem. Difficult to solve. They have an insoluble
problem. This is what you and I disagree. Because I'd like to create a competitor.
No, so then give it to me. Create the competitor. Show me that you actually
understood this because my guess is, is that most of the things that you'll think about,
I mean, I can tell you things I've talked to Jack about, which I know would make Twitter much better.
However, I think that this problem of instantaneous communication across the planet
and you subtract off all sorts of context and mutual self-knowledge.
The problem is us. It's not the platforms. You're thinking about a technological solution. And I'm
saying the problem is, is that we are ultimately the product. And I just disagree with that. And
there's a lot of, that's probably could save that for tomorrow. I look forward to spending summers
in your villa when you, when you debut this product. And I would love to angel invest in it.
By the way, in terms of money, I'll never have a villa.
Yeah.
No, I will always give away everything I own.
Don't do that.
No, sorry, invest into like things you mentioned, awesome things.
Yeah, yeah. Invest fine, but a little bit of avuncular advice.
Don't pledge to be the person who disgorges themselves of security. Money is freedom.
That's what it is. It's a big hunking pile of freedom. You can choose to use it as the
freedom to imprison you. If you don't, you know, so you can use it as freedom to make
yourself a prisoner of your money. But generally speaking, Lex, money is freedom.
And your voice is important. At least retain the amount of money, security you need
to follow Joe's advice. What is the point of FU money if you don't say FU? The number of people
who have FU money who don't say FU indicates the number of people who chose the freedom of their
wealth to create a prison. They built a prison with the freedom they had and they walked into it,
locked the door. I think it's too difficult not to create it. The reason I want to give away the
money is because I just know my own psychology and you create prisons. Our human mind just creates
those prisons. The FU money is enough for basic shelter and basic food. That's the optimal FU.
You don't have kids yet. Okay, this is the problem. This is why I'm sitting. So this is me,
single Lex speaking. Future Lex, I'm talking to future Lex. Single present Lex, please don't
listen. Don't be an ass. You're going to need some money and don't make these pledges to say
on a podcast. I want to save you from yourself. You need money to do many of the beautiful
things that we're counting on you to do. Don't eff it up. Can I talk to you about Roger Penrose?
Sure. You've talked to Roger on the portal, but also in between the lines and offline,
just everything you've said about Roger Penrose. For people who don't know, he just recently,
a few days ago, won the 2020 share, the 2020 Nobel Prize for physics. But it's clear to me that he
had a deep personal impact on you, a connection with you in terms of both your love of mathematics,
just the way you see the world. This is the Eddie Van Halen conversation. This is clearly
somebody who's profound in your worldview. Can you talk about Roger? Can you talk about what it means
that he won this highest of prizes? Just in general, let's celebrate the man.
Yeah. Okay. First of all, there are two other people who won this prize. I'm sorry. I just
didn't happen to know who they were before they won. It is not Roger in particular,
but the class from which Roger comes that is so important. I would put Roger in the class
of Feynman, Einstein, Dirac, Yang. Put Witten in there? I know.
I mean, Witten's a special case, but Witten is weirdly the reverse of the Roger Penrose story,
right? Because Witten is the first physicist to win a mathematical fields medal, the highest honor
in mathematics. Penrose is, in some sense, a mathematician who's now won the Nobel Prize.
So it's a perfect sort of a couplet. Roger's class means everything to me. That's the highest
achievement of the human mind. I'd probably throw Bach in with Feynman and Dirac in company, right?
I think that he was so inventive. It was very frustrating to watch this career. It's a little
bit frustrating to watch Feynman's career. Feynman was so good. Had he been born at a slightly
different time, I believe his claim on physics would be far greater. I feel like Penrose,
in some sense, came up a very difficult path because, you see, Einstein effectively solved
most of the most important problems in general relativity right at the beginning. As a result,
the children of Einstein are impoverished because there wasn't as much to pick off of the trees
and sell at the market, whereas Bohr and Planck didn't do nearly as good of a job with quantum
theory. So there's lots to do in quantum theory. I think that Roger affected me personally
by a diagram that I saw in a paper of Herman Gluck at the University of Pennsylvania. It was
the first picture I'd ever seen of the Hopf vibration sketched. Weirdly, I brought that
to the Rogan program in order to convey the wonder. It was recapitulating my own journey.
I think I probably saw that at age 16 or something. It just flipped my mind.
Roger is incredibly visual. He's incredibly geometric. He's incredibly
sui generis. He just does his own thing. He's got lots of bets. None of them had really come
through the way you would hope. And I think they stretched the rules to be blunt about it.
To give him the prize. Yeah, I do. You said this thing on Twitter, which is beautiful,
that every once in a while comes a human being that gives value to the prize versus the prize
giving value to the human. Two different kinds of prizes. The reason that we care about the
Nobel Prize isn't because of Alfred Nobel. It's because it came along at the right time to reward
Einstein, Dirac, Schrodinger, Feynman. Most of the people who should have won won.
Most of the awards are not good in the sense that they don't really follow.
The prize is used to rewrite history. That's the problem. You should have a love-hate relationship
with it. On the one hand, it does focus the world on what really matters. On the other hand,
it distorts what really matters. Both of those functions take place simultaneously.
In this case, I think that they violated their own rules slightly. It wasn't really
clearly a case of a prediction and a discovery in the typical fashion, but we better give this
award to somebody of that highest caliber to make sure that the prize is fully funded with
prestige going forward. That's my weird speculative guess as to what happened.
Roger's getting on in years, and the person should be alive. I think they've bent the rules.
I think they couldn't have bent it for a better person. I hope they will not bend the rules
out of weakness, but out of strength in the future. It would be great to get Madame Wu
and Emmy Nerder, a posthumous prize along with Doug Prasher, George Sudarshan,
and George Zweig, as well as Ernst Stuckelberg, Nobel Prizes. There have been some terrible
omissions, the first two being females who revolutionized our view of the world.
I take a very dim view of people pushing for prizes for people from ethnic groups or
genders or whatever in order to make it plural and inclusive if it's not following the work.
I feel very clear that in a few cases, we know there was a real problem with the Nobel Committee
because we have stunning accomplishments. I'm going to try to get through a day as a physicist
without Nerder's theorem and try to imagine the universe without Madame Wu's discovery that left
and right don't appear to be symmetric. I mean, these are terrible omissions, and they're a huge
blot on science for not being more inclusive when it matters.
Just like you said, the Nobel Prize is plagued by omissions as much as…
And distortions and dilutions. For example, Dirac and Schrodinger, where I believe,
given the prize in the same year, there's no reason that those two people needed to dilute
each other. The same thing with Dyson was an omission. Toma Naga probably got included in part
because we had an opportunity to show that something had happened on both sides of the
Pacific after the war. But I don't think we needed to dilute Weinberg or Feynman or Schwinger.
It just makes me somewhat sick. All of these people are such important giants, and it has to
do with the field, I think, not wanting to create luminaries and superstars who could have defended
the field from budget cuts and worldly pressures. So, I think it's really important that we have
absolute superstars because we produce superstars. We acknowledge them, we don't dilute them,
and that we bend the rules to make sure that the prize stays funded with the prestige that comes
from giving it to the Roger Penrose's Albert Einstein's and Paul Dirac's of the world.
Can we talk a little bit about evil? Sure. I haven't actually talked to you about this topic,
and it's been sitting on my mind mostly because everybody at MIT is quiet about it,
which is Jeffrey Epstein. I didn't get a chance to experience what MIT was like
at the time when Jeffrey Epstein was part of this, but I'd love to try to understand
how evil was allowed to flourish in a place that I love. Whether you think,
maybe let me ask the question this way, was it the man evil or was the system evil,
or is evil too strong a word? Because what I see is the presence of this particular human being
in the eyes of many destroyed the reputations of many really strong scientists, and also
weaken the ability, weaken the institution of MIT by making everybody quiet, almost making
them unable to say anything interesting or difficult. Yeah. And what is that? And what
am I supposed to... We don't know. Why is everyone quiet about Jeffrey? We don't know.
We don't know. Obviously, I want to scream about it too, and I probably have said too much about
Jeffrey Epstein. Look, something horrible happened. I don't know what it is, but something horrible
happened. The first thing I need to do is I need to get rid of this woke crap about
power differentials. In general, you can talk about hypergamy and power differentials are
Russell conjugates of the same concept. Just the way particular proportions and symmetries
are mathematically provable to be attractive in females to males. Male attractiveness is largely
determined by male competence and ability to amass power and success and all these sorts of things.
The relationship between consenting adults is, quite frankly, not something I want to sort out.
The relationship between the sexuality of adults and minors, and particularly,
you know, there's the 17, 18 issue, that's very different than 12, 13.
We're talking about really sick depravity with respect to what appears that Jeffrey Epstein
was involved in at some level. I believe this story is super complicated in part because I
think one thing Jeffrey Epstein was doing was providing money, encouragement, and support
to scientists. Another thing he was doing, I believe, was giving tax advice to very rich people.
I believe another thing he was doing was hooking very wealthy people up with young adult females.
Another thing he was doing, I think, was doing stuff with children that will curl your toes.
So there's an entire spectrum of different stuff. And at the moment, nobody can pull apart or
deconflate anything because the woke thing comes over it and says, you know, I think it's disgusting
that a 43-year-old billionaire would be partying with a 23-year-old.
Okay. I don't want to adjudicate that. I'm worried about 12 and 14-year-olds that we're not talking
about. But I mostly, I don't think MIT was deep into pedophilia. My guess is that that did not
happen. I don't think that the scientists were the targets of the really sick depraved stuff.
It's my guess. My guess is that what you're looking at was a government construct.
It may have been our government. It may have been a joint government project. It may have
been somebody else's government. I don't know. I believe that, in part, we don't really understand
Robert Maxwell. Sorry, who's Robert Maxwell? Gilane Maxwell's father was very active in
scientific publishing. I don't know where peer review came from. I would love to run down the
relationship between peer review and Robert Maxwell. I would love to run down the missing
fortune of Robert Maxwell and the mysterious fortune of Jeffrey Epstein, because I don't
think Jeffrey Epstein ever ran a hedge fund. I don't think he was a money advisor the way people
claimed. There's two things I want to talk about. One is the shallow conversations of
of woke identity politics that you're referring to seems to be removing everyone's ability. No,
everyone's willingness to talk about what the hell is this person and how is he allowed,
most importantly, to how do we prevent it in the future? From the individual perspective,
the question for me is the same question I asked about 1930s Nazi Germany. I've been reading way
too much probably, or not enough about that period currently, is if I was in Germany at that time,
what is the heroic action to take? When I think about MIT with Jeffrey Epstein, what is the heroic
action to take? We're not talking about virtue signaling action. You wouldn't know what you're
up against, Lex. You're not hearing me. The problem here is, what was Jeffrey Epstein?
Well, that question might be the heroic action to take.
That's all I'm trying to say. I'm just trying to get my first question. You have to map the
silence with Jeffrey Epstein. What you're describing is a map of the silence at MIT.
Well, is there a map of the silence in Washington state around Jeffrey Epstein,
the Bay Area, New York City? The amount of silence around Jeffrey Epstein should be telling you
everything. The number of dogs that don't bark is like nothing we've ever seen.
You're exactly correct, but I want to know what is it telling us, because what it's telling me
is not some kind of conspiracy, but more a disappointing weakness.
Not some kind of conspiracy?
It's not some kind of conspiracy.
You've got to be kidding. You're so afraid of saying the word conspiracy that you don't
think it's a conspiracy. I personally, I just think it's people who I thought were my heroes
just being weak. No. Be of good cheer, sir.
A cheer? Be of good cheer.
Of good cheer. You think that there is a conspiracy?
I think there is a conspiracy.
I'd be a very impressive one. That's the scale of it. I tend to believe that large scale
can only be an emergent phenomena. Really? I find this so fascinating,
because I always see you as a logic and love drive your soul. You're very logical. You're
relentless. You've got a lot of love in your heart. I believe that if you would review the video,
where is it from? Dubai or Abu Dhabi of the mysterious hit on the hotel guest?
You ever seen this thing? No, it happened.
It's the assassination in 2010, 10 years ago, of Mahmoud al-Mabou, something like that,
in Dubai, where I believe 26 separate individuals on multiple teams are shown
converging, coming in from all over the world on false passports, pretending to be tennis players,
or business people, or vacationers. All of these teams have different functions,
and they murder this guy in his hotel room. Dubai, I guess, chief of police or security officer,
was so angered that he put together this amazing video that says,
we can completely detail what you did. We caught you on closed circuit TV.
We don't know exactly who you are because your disguise is in your false passports,
but yeah, 26 people converged to kill one. No, I don't believe you. I don't believe
after Cointel Pro, an operation paperclip, and Operation Mockingbird. I don't know whether I
should even bring up Rex 84. To not believe in conspiracies is an idiocy. You have a sense
that evil can be as competent or more competent. First of all, when evil wants to operate at
scale, it needs to make sure that people don't try to figure out evil. When evil operates at scale,
from first principles, you have to realize that evil must not want it investigated.
That's correct. The most efficient way to keep yourself from being investigated, if you are an
evil institutional player who needs to do this repeatedly, is to invest in a world in which
no one can afford to say the word conspiracy. You'll notice that there is a special radio
activity around the word conspiracy. We have provable conspiracies. We have admitted to
conspiracies. You have been invited to conspiracy. There is no shortage. Conspiracies are everywhere.
Some of them are mundane. Some of them are like price-fixing cartels,
or trade groups are generally speaking conspiracies. The first thing you have to realize is that all
of us are in a mimetic complex where you can be taken off the chess board by saying conspiracy
theorists. Good done. It's like a one-line proof. We don't have to listen to Rex. He said he was a
conspiracy theorist on this show. That is partially distorting our conversation. If you want to ask
me about Jeffrey Epstein, you have to agree with me that that is a logical description of what you
would have to have if you wanted to commit conspiracies, is that you have to make sure that
people are dissuaded from investigating this. It's a very fascinatingly difficult
idea then because the world with conspiracy theories and the world without conspiracy theories
to the shallow glance looks the same. My point, there is responsible conspiracy
theorizing where you look at the history of unearthed conspiracies. Just like you would with
any other topic, just think about how different the rules in your mind are for conspiracy theorizing
versus X theorizing where X can be anything. If I say to you, I can say the statement that
average weight is not the same between widely separated populations. You'd say, yeah. I'd say
average height is not the same between widely separated populations. You'd say, yeah. Then I
say, in fact, no continuous variable that shows variation should be expected to be identical
between widely separate. Of course, Eric, like IQ. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, hold on.
We have a violent reaction to specific topics. The first thing I want to do is just to notice
that conspiracy has that built into everyone's mind.
That's really important to state. It's very interesting. As a prerequisite, as you're saying,
that would be the first step if you wanted to pull off a conspiracy in a competent way.
You would have to first convince the world of that.
I just watched the film 1971 about my favorite conspiracy of all time. I highly recommend it.
1971? Well, the film is titled 1971. It's about the Citizens' Committee to Investigate the FBI,
which was run by a student of Murray Gelman, a physicist, and broke into FBI offices in Pennsylvania
to steal files which allowed freedom of information requests that discovered a huge
conspiracy. It was a conspiracy that unearthed a conspiracy inside the federal government.
A double conspiracy story, which launched multiple conspiracies. I think that the problem
with modern Americans is that they are so timid that they don't even learn about the history
of conspiracies that we have absolutely proven. With that done, Jeff Epstein, in my opinion,
represented somebody's construction.
It's kind of scary to think about. Yeah. Well, what part of the story isn't scary?
I, in part, did something, which I imagine may get me destroyed, because I was more worried
about being destroyed by somebody else I had a conversation with around Jeff Epstein.
I'm just trying to let it be known that I don't know anything more than I've already said.
Now, your friends at MIT, their problem is that Jeff Epstein showed up as the only person capable
of continuing US scientific tradition. You see, the US scientific tradition is a little bit like
the Russian. It's combative. We're a free society, and we act like a free society. We're a rich
society, and we researched like we're a rich society. That is historically, and then came
in the 1970s. William Proxmire and the Golden Fleece Awards and the idea that we have to,
we're paying too much, and these are welfare queens and lab coats and blah, blah, blah,
blah, blah. We need more transparency, more oversight. Everything went to hell,
and the national culture of US science was lost. The thing that produced all this prosperity and
security and power was lost, and then Jeff Epstein shows up in a tiny number of funders,
maybe Fred Cavley, maybe Yuri Milner, maybe who else would be in this category. Peter Thiel,
to an extent. Howard Hughes would be the largest of these things, which has different grant
structures than the NIH, gave people a modicum of risk-taking ability. When Jeff Epstein showed
up, everybody wanted to take risk in science, and suddenly a charismatic billionaire says,
hey, I can make that work for you. Here's $100,000. Go research something crazy.
Well, that money was supposed to be provided by the federal government under the terms of the
endless frontier compact between the federal government and the universities, and the federal
government, the taxpayers welched. So that's one place to lay the blame for Jeff Epstein,
as it the failure of the federal government to honor its commitment. So the universities
became psychopathic. It's not like everybody doesn't remember what we're supposed to be doing,
to be moral, but the point was there wasn't enough money to be moral, so it was time to
to eye each other as a source of protein, as I like to say. And in that process,
Jeff Epstein said, hey, come to my world. We can do it like we used to do.
So in part, my point is that almost none of your colleagues at MIT have that kind of religious
commitment to science that they're willing to go down with ship science. The Galileo-Galilei thing
became very important to science because occasionally you just have to say,
look, this isn't about me and you. There isn't enough money in the world
to buy the kind of legacy I want to leave to this planet.
This is one of the great things about science. You know, potentially it's worth dying for.
Yeah, I'm glad you said it. Science is one of the things that is best that's worth dying for.
I mean, I'm not eager to murder myself, but I've certainly risked my health, my fortune.
You know, I've destroyed myself economically over science. And my need to oppose these sons of
bitches in chaired professorships who are destroying our system along with everyone else.
Let me bring in Grandmaster Oogway into this.
Oogway.
Oogway.
Master Oogway.
I think he's a grandmaster.
Oh, that would make him a chess-playing turtle.
So I've read some Wikipedia.
Uh-oh.
A Shifu's a master. There's apparently only one grandmaster. That's Oogway.
Anyway.
Is the phrase grandmaster ever uttered in the script?
I don't think so.
I don't think so.
But there's a story.
Oh, there's off script canon.
I'm going to call Glenberger right now and find out if any of this is true.
All right. You're not supposed to call out my journalistic integrity. But Master Oogway.
Master Oogway.
He says a couple of things I'd like to bring up with you.
So one, as part of a longer quote, recommends that you should find a battle worth fighting.
We've talked about several battles just now.
What is the battle worth fighting for, for Erich Weinstein, in the next few months,
in the next year?
There's only one.
It's the Moses. It's the Moses thing.
It's time to go. It's time to leave.
This place is over.
To get off the planet.
Yeah, I freak people out when I say that.
But look at your world. You just got introduced to the problem of a virus.
Wait until it's fusion devices and you understand what it means to have one interconnected planet
with no uncorrelated experiments happening anywhere else.
So do you see the foray, your work in physics, and maybe the echoes of it in ship Elon?
Elon, everybody who has a possible plan to avoid what is coming, if we don't have one,
should work on the plan that he, she thinks best.
Right? So Elon wants to do rockets.
People misinterpret me.
Meta Erich says, I don't think that's a smart plan.
Regular Erich says, all people who have hope should do that thing.
At least it's Mars, man.
At least it's the moon and Mars and maybe Titan and whatever.
And I don't think it'll work and it doesn't make sense and it looks silly.
But that's exactly the kind of fight worth fighting.
But it's the kind of, it's for the same reason that I went on Brett's Unity 2020 thing,
when I didn't think it had a hope in hell and people are making fun of us.
We got to do things that make, that make us feel dumb and silly and childish,
that it possibly have a hope of working.
Okay. So everybody should do something.
My version of this, I am the most hopeful about because I wouldn't have chosen to do.
If I thought that Daniel Schmockenberger's Wisdom Project was a better hope, I'd do that.
It's more down to earth in a certain way.
I just think that it's more probable.
Look, we got from a powered flight with the Wright brothers and wind tunnels to sending
back images from the surface of Titan via Huygens Cassini in less than a century.
What we can do if we can change the laws of physics is something we can't even conceive of.
It may be that it buys us nothing.
And at least we will know why we died on this planet.
But as a small aside, I think this is not the right time to take the full journey.
But I feel like you'll guide me like Master Wei did.
And I'm the Kung Fu Panda at some point.
They only have one conversation.
We're on our likewise.
We didn't.
Well, we're Jews and they weren't.
So we talk too much.
But the guide doesn't have to be with words.
You don't think Poe is Jewish?
It's debatable.
We'll have to go back to the Wikipedia.
Really liked Poe.
Yeah, OK.
Is there that you would guide me through some more intuition about the source code of our universe?
Can you comment on where, since the last book, where your thinking has been, has roamed around
geometric unity, around that work in physics, in this fight?
Yeah, I'm trying to figure out when to release it and how.
I mean, I've released the video.
And the video, quite honestly, I think it has a very bizarre reaction.
I think one of the things that I've learned from the video, because the video is coming up on half
a million views on YouTube alone to say nothing of the audio.
But yeah, it produced a very strange reaction.
One of the things I don't think that I properly understood is that most physicists
don't talk in this geometric language.
I thought that more of the physics world probably had converted over into manifolds, bundles,
differential forms, connections, curvature tensors, etc.
And I saw a lot of the comments would say things like, I have a PhD in theoretical physics,
and I'm not even familiar with all of these concepts.
And I think that was probably a distortion coming from living in Cambridge,
Massachusetts for almost 20 years.
So what's the solution to that?
I can make this make as much sense as anybody needs to.
My problem is that my calculation is that as long as the boomers are still in charge,
the same people have these perverse incentives on them, where they've invested in these programs
that didn't work.
So they're extremely hostile and difficult to deal with.
The fact that I'm not a physicist has its own set of issues, which is that effectively it's
like the Hermit Kingdom, they don't get any visitors, and they don't necessarily want somebody
rolling up and saying, I know how to do physics.
So I'm always very clear, I'm not a physicist.
That said, if I wait too long, I don't know that theoretical physics is really going to exist
after the boomers, because everyone in you, I think you had Wolfram on your program.
I don't remember whether he said this to you or Brian Keating,
but he said something like everybody got discouraged.
It was too hard.
We can't do that, guys.
We cannot do that.
There's something about the renormalization revolution that innervated the physics community,
because it taught them just because you can see in this energy regime doesn't mean you can
extrapolate somewhere else unless you understand how coupling constants run and
what kind of UV fix points exist, blah, blah, blah.
Somehow that discouraged people from guessing, from believing, everything became an effective
theory.
The beauty of the effective theory wasn't taken to be really the beauty of the universe,
just the beauty of an energy level.
So I think that renormalization was one of the most important revolutions that ever happened
in science, and also its interpretation by the physics community was catastrophic.
Well, the story I'm telling myself is that in part I'm waiting for them to get weaker.
But on the other hand, I don't know that we have any time left.
Are you also thinking about ways of, you know, the podcast medium is revolutionary for
public, for discourse, for what, I mean, I don't even know the right words for it.
Are you thinking of revolutionary ideas for re-energizing the physics community?
So basically for communicating geometry.
Look, I have a fantasy, okay?
My fantasy is that all of these things are the same problem.
And it goes back to this thing that I read about in Feynman's books about Tartaglia.
They asked him this question, like, what's the greatest thing that ever happened in math?
And he says, Tartaglia's solution to the cubic is just like the weirdest answer.
So you're like, okay, I'll bite.
Why is it Tartaglia's solution to the cubic?
And he said, because it was the first time a modern person had done something profound
that the ancients had failed to do.
I was like, oh, I got it.
It's the thing that opens up new psychology that says maybe things are possible again.
It's a new orchard.
New orchard.
New farmers, new people who can find fruit that they can pick.
And once you have one person do that, very often you get many.
Like one of the things that we were talking about with Eddie Van Halen,
the reason that he created a revolution and somebody like Roy Buchanan did not
is that you could follow Eddie Van Halen.
You couldn't pioneer it.
And maybe you couldn't play as well and as cleanly and as fast and as inventively.
But you could follow.
Once you understand that there is a tapping principle, right?
It was just the beginning of something called percussive guitar.
My belief is that once we start innovating in the present, everything will come
because everything that around us is screwed up.
On that, let me, with one last question, bring back Master Oogway,
the probably the most famous quote of his, right?
With yesterday's history, tomorrow's a mystery, but today is a gift.
That is why it is called the present.
It's very beautiful, although I would have gone with quit, don't quit, noodles, don't noodles.
I feel like people need to know way too much context.
I feel like people need to know way too much context to put that to make sense.
To hell with your audience, just to hell with context.
Yep, they'll figure it out.
Well, let me ask, what are you grateful for today?
What is your present?
We've talked about a lot of dark things, but what brings you joy to your heart that
I can't believe I'm lucky enough to have this?
You know, Nyla and Zev, my wife Pia, the fact that we've got our health,
all the little things, saying grace after meals.
You're coming over for Friday night Shabbat dinner, so we'll bench together and say grace.
It's important to just, like this bottle of water in front of me, I made a point
of just thinking about how wonderful it is that there's a quenching bottle that happens
to be placed in front of me because somebody cared.
That small thing made a difference to me.
I still have strength for the fight so far.
I think that's something I'm grateful for.
I can't believe that I'm not more beaten down after all of this nonsense.
I have the most interesting set of friends.
I really do.
I'm not that rich by monetary standards, but if there were friend billionaires,
Forbes would be all over my ass.
I just can't believe who I can talk to at the drop of a hat, and I'm really grateful.
I think this is the end of something profound, and it's the beginning of whatever is next.
And whatever is next could be terminal, whatever is next could be amazing,
whatever is next could be a return to the horrors of the early 20th century that doesn't
manage to go totally catastrophic, but takes hundreds of millions of lives in the process.
I'm grateful to having half of my life in the rearview mirror.
Maybe it took place in a bubble, and maybe it was unsustainable, but it was nice to be able
to move around the world without a mask. It was nice to be able to see a little bit of the world,
even if it was from a cot in a hostel in some country.
To fall in love.
Absolutely.
It was a good life.
Find the last Indian Jewish girl left.
Who knew?
You're a lucky guy.
Actually, there's something I wanted to just say before you get to that.
Yes.
I forgot to say something. Falling in love with an intellectual collaborator
is a special thing that not everybody gets a chance to do. I think when I met Pia,
I fell deeply in love with her, all her normal characteristics.
She and I had an antagonistic relationship around geometry and economics.
And then weirdly, just like in a buddy picture where in the first half of the film,
they hate each other, the two fields were fighting with each other, cats and dogs.
And then finally, the sexual tension clearly was so thick you could cut it with a knife.
And we came up with geometric marginalism, which is this other theory, not geometric unity,
which allowed me to inhabit space with somebody who I already knew intimately and had fallen
in love with and to see the quality and beauty of their mind and to play into dance.
It's the intellectual version of the tango. One of the most romantic periods of my life
that doesn't fall into most people's experience. That was a chance to see something totally
unexpected, haven't really had it since because she doesn't want to revisit the material,
but something I'm super grateful for that's very particular and unique.
But to flip the tables on you for hundreds of thousands, I think millions of people,
I can speak, me and them are really grateful, one that you exist and two, sorry, for your podcast.
And I do hope your voice in some form continues to reverberate, I think,
at least in the 2021s and beyond, even if it takes a brief pause.
We're pausing at the moment. We've recorded some for future episodes and I'm recording for you.
I really appreciate that. I mean, earnestness trades at a discount at the moment because it's
easy to make fun of it. And one of the things I like best about you is that you and I are both
fairly earnest. We may joke and jab, but honestly, there's a project here in a world to win, as they
say. The thing that I want my and your listeners to know is that I'm not stepping away from the
podcast because I don't appreciate that people really want more. This is hugely financially
costly to me. I want to make sure you guys are getting the best that I can do and destroying
myself right in front of an election. I think Lex is incorrect. I think that the forces that are
trying to make sure that there aren't any planes in the sky that aren't either colored red or colored
blue is a big danger given how angry I am at the system. And I don't want to be removed from the
chessboard because if nobody's going to talk about Jeff Epstein, there need to be people.
If nobody's going to talk about various things that we've talked about on these programs,
I want to make sure that I'm there. Do I think that this is potentially an existential election?
Yes. Am I positive that I know that my way to bed is the right way out? No, I'm not.
I don't know people. I just don't know. And where we are right now seems so dumb and so
catastrophic in terms of how it is chewing up smart people. It's really not about cowardice
because it's hard for me to restrain myself. I have so many reactions every day. This is really
about trying to plan for all of our futures to make sure that I'm around. I had a huge concern
that what happened to Brett's articles of unity was going to happen to Brett. It was going to
happen to the YouTube channels. I want to make sure that we don't have all of our eggs in one
basket. If something goes wrong over there, that's the whole idea of the intellectual dark web,
which is at some level a loose confederation. It can become a strong confederation if somebody
wants to back it and make it work. It can dissolve so that there really isn't anything.
The thing is to be hard to kill because ultimately, when the hit pieces come,
they don't come for what it is that they're angry at you about. They come for where they
can get you. It's very important that right in front of an election,
yeah, I think that the desire of the old system to defend itself through reputational destruction
is one of the most pernicious aspects of the new America. We have to fight the ability to
destroy reputations as a means of institutions keeping individuals with podcasts and the ability
to reach millions like through Substack out of their domain. I don't surrender this domain to
them. They have plenty of weaponry with which to fight us. I believe that they could remove you or
me in an instant. By the end of today, if they wanted us off the chessboard, we would be off
the chessboard. I know that's not your perspective. My goal is to stay here as long as possible to
make sure that you have enough of a counterbalancing set of ideas and to let and help other podcasters
start. My hope is that that works. Long heroism, short martyrdom is a good motto for anyone.
I try to remember the short martyrdom part of that. First of all, beautifully put. Second of all,
wait to end the conversation and the disagreement, which is how you hook them for the next conversation
to be continued when Lex says... Eric, it's a huge honor. Thank you once again. Lex really
appreciate every time we get together. Thanks, buddy. Thanks for listening to this conversation
with Eric Weinstein and thank you to our sponsors. Grammarly, a service I use in my writing to check
spelling, grammar, sentence structure, and readability. Sunbasket, a meal delivery service I
use to add healthy variety into my culinary life. SEM Rush, the most advanced SEO optimization tool
I've ever come across. I don't like looking at numbers, but someone should. It helps you make
good decisions. And finally, ExpressVPN, the VPN I've used for many years to protect my privacy
on the internet. Please check out these sponsors in the description to get a discount and to support
this podcast. If you enjoy this thing, subscribe on YouTube, review it with 5 stars on Apple Podcast,
follow on Spotify, support on Patreon, or connect with me on Twitter at Lex Freedman.
And now, let me leave you with some words from Leonard Cohen in the song titled Hallelujah.
Well, maybe there's a God above, but all I've ever learned from love was how to shoot somebody who
I'll drew you. And it's not a cry that you hear at night. It's not somebody who's seen the light,
it's a cold and it's a broken hallelujah. Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.