The Spiritual Agnostic
God is dying and Science is killing him. He won't recover, and without him, America and Western Civilization will ultimately collapse in chaos. On this podcast, we discuss what can be done, relate it to current events without politics and party bias, and perhaps plant a seed that helps America grow.
The Spiritual Agnostic
Democracy by Lottery: The Anti-Politism Revolution
Have you ever wondered if there's a better way to run our democracy than through the endless cycle of campaigns, fundraising, and partisan bickering? In this eye-opening episode of The Spiritual Agnostic, I finally unveil the complete concept of "Anti-Politism" – a revolutionary governance system that could transform American politics by replacing elections with a lottery.
The concept is both radical and elegant: instead of voting for representatives, we select them through a blind lottery from the pool of Americans in the top third of income earners. This creates an "elite of the achieved" – people who have demonstrated competence in their lives and have skin in the game through their tax contributions. The selection is completely blind to race, gender, education, or connections, resulting in a naturally diverse representation based solely on demonstrated real-world competence.
What makes this system truly revolutionary is how it transforms governance. With no elections or fundraising, Congressional service becomes a civic duty rather than a career path. Representatives serve a single four-year term – one and done – then return to their regular lives. The President and Vice President are selected by Congress from among their ranks after working together for two years, ensuring leadership emerges from demonstrated ability rather than campaign skills. The entire system eliminates the need for political parties, campaign finance, and the professional political class that has become so disconnected from everyday Americans.
Could a random selection of successful Americans create better governance than our current system of career politicians? What would happen if every citizen knew they might one day serve in Congress or even as President? How would our civic culture transform if leadership positions were filled through duty rather than ambition? These are the questions that Anti-Politism forces us to consider as we imagine a government truly of, by, and for the people.
Listen now to explore this fascinating alternative to our current political system, and consider what might be possible if we returned to the republican principles upon which this nation was founded.
Good morning everybody. It's me, your pal, herbie, and this is another episode of the Spiritual Agnostic, and in this one, since I keep alluding to it, I thought it only fair that I lay out exactly what I'm talking about when I talk about antipolitism, and that's what I'm going to do today. Also, just as a note, I started out downloading an episode every day, seven days a week, to kind of jumpstart the algorithm, but now I'm going to settle into a regular routine of Monday, wednesday and Friday every week, three times a week. Um, seven times a week every day doesn't give me enough time to be thoughtful and um contemplative before I do a new episode, I find. So I'm going to restrict myself to three episodes per week Monday, wednesday and Friday. Same time, same place. You'll see new ones popping up. Okay, let's get into. And, by the way, thank you for all of you listening to me so far, and thank you to all of you who are listening to this, much further down the road than the launch of the podcast, who have come back to find out what in God's name is this guy talking about? I appreciate your curiosity and now I'm going to satisfy it. So here we go.
Speaker 1:Antipolitism is an idea that came to me, and I'm in a world where everything is embellished by everybody. I want to make this crystal clear I'm not embellishing the story I'm about to tell in any way, shape or form. I thought of ant-politism as I walked around the inside of the prison yard on the track that was exactly one third of a mile around that. I walked on and did 15 circulations every single morning while I was at the La Paz yard of Yuma prison in Yuma, arizona, which was a low-end, medium-security prison and when I say low-end, inmates end up in prison at different levels based upon their risk to the community, just as an FYI and my community risk score was literally zero I posed no threat to the community, which is why, just as a slight digression, I was never arrested or given bail or anything else, because they knew that I'd show up and do what I was asked to do without any fooling around. That's always what's missing in the bail conversation. Bail and all those things are set based on community risk and so on and so forth, and I don't have any, thank God, although I think they were wrong.
Speaker 1:I think what I did was maybe a thousand times worse than that. You know, one violent criminal beats up one person, as long as they don't kill them, that person will survive. What I did is inflict enormous financial damage, which has all kinds of repercussions on 35 innocent people, something that I feel enormous remorse about every single day and in some ways, in many ways, depending. It's all perspective, like everything in life, as the Buddha said I think it was the perspective. Like everything in life, as the Buddha said I think it was the Buddha there is no truth, only perspective. So, anyway, I was walking around the track. Let me take a sip of my coffee. Hold on Yummo. Anyway, I was walking around the track and I don't know, it just popped into my head. I used to do this just to be contemplative, every morning, and I did it very, very early, as soon as the prison yard opened, at 5.30 am, because it got hot, as you know what, in Yuma. So, anyway, this is where the idea came to me. It came to me, so that was 2000,. Probably I went to Yuma in 2015. The idea probably dawned on me in 2016,.
Speaker 1:If I remember correctly, I wrote the book A Radical Reset, now available on Amazon in 2019. Actually, what happened was, while I was in prison, I wrote over a dozen novels and books in longhand. And then I had a collaborator Her name is Chelsea and Chelsea helped me when I got out to edit and put these things into written form. And even while I was in prison we collaborated back and forth by snail mail believe it or not, because I had absolutely no Internet access and I published this book and copyrighted it in 2019. So that's the genesis of the idea and in the book, some of the things I've already changed in my mind and I haven't updated them in the book, but I'll discuss that as I go through.
Speaker 1:In particular, how people are selected to be chosen. So what anti-politism is, let's cut to the chase is democracy by lottery. Now, that means no voting, no parties, no money. So let's start there. People will be chosen. So instead of our current system of 435 congressional districts divided into goofy shapes to try to protect one political party or another you know what I'm talking about.
Speaker 1:The fancy word for that is gerrymandering there will be no need for gerrymandering in anti-politism. So we'll still have 435 congressional districts. No one's suggesting to increase or decrease them. That's up to the census and the legislatures in each individual state. So if there's suggesting to increase or decrease them. That's up to the census and the legislatures in each individual state. So if there's going to be any variance, that'll come from Congress not from my mind, but anyway, in antipolitism, conceptually we have the same number of congressional seats as we would if we did not have antipolitism.
Speaker 1:Let's put it that way and then those districts will be all redrawn to equal-sized geographic states pardon me, what's the word? I'm looking for districts in the states where they are. So, for example, here in Arizona we have nine congressmen I believe We'll redraw it from the goofy, fishhook-shaped, weird little dotty inner city. I mean, we have so many weird shapes in Arizona and we're not even a particularly big state population-wise, in fact we're on the small side. But anyway, all redrawn to equal geographic size, you know, like as close to squares or rectangles as we can possibly get, lining up next to each other in each state, based on geography, not population. Now, within each of those we'll have a census, and the census is very, very simple. Well, that's in the book. Let me tell you what I've come to.
Speaker 1:I've decided that the only screen necessary for the system to work as it's designed is that every single person eligible to be selected is in the top third, the top 33, and a third percent, the top third of wage earners, income-wise, regardless of education, regardless of race, gender, regardless of profession, regardless of anything else. Their only qualification is they're paying taxes. Now, this is to recreate the property requirement of the founders. So when the founders first set up the constitution, uh, they, they put in a property requirement. Now they also put in a male, and you know, white male and all that white male wasn't actually there, but a male. And you know that, the dred scott decision, and what's a black man? Yada, yada. We're not going to go down that that horrible road of racial, uh, whirlpool of, you know, sill and drib this, you know down that. So anyway, so back. So here we are and we're um.
Speaker 1:What I'm trying to do is reinstate the property requirement based on a very simple thing that Alexis de Tocqueville noticed in 1815 when he wrote his book on American democracy, and he said the American democracy is remarkable and wonderful and will continue right up until the day that Americans figure out that they can vote themselves benefits that they don't pay for. Now, he wasn't doing that because he was particularly omniscient. He didn't say that, even though that's exactly what we've managed to do with our zooming in on $40 trillion of national debt, not including the unfunded Social Security requirements that dwarf that. We've managed to do this just exactly as he said, because we removed the one protection that the founders put in, which was the property requirement. The idea was that if you have skin in the game and in those days, remember, we had an agrarian society and an agrarian society, land is everything. Where today we can't really recreate that because property is not necessarily an indication of ability or wealth, but in those days it was, and the idea was smart or stupid. If you had skin in the game, you wouldn't make stupid voting decisions and you would vote in your self-interest. The whole idea was to align self-interest, and since everybody's self-interest is to improve their lives, those who own property know that it is only through private property one of the great things about this country that lives can be improved, and so that was the idea. Woodrow Wilson ripped that away, woodrow Wilson being far and away the worst president in American history and, in fact, maybe the greatest villain of the 20th century in lots of ways, but we'll discuss that another day. I think Woodrow Wilson in some ways was directly responsible for Adolf Hitler, but that's another well, directly responsible is a strong word, largely significantly responsible for Adolf Hitler and the Holocaust. But that is a circular argument for another day that we will discuss, or it's a meandering argument, so I'm not going there.
Speaker 1:So, anyway, I propose that instead of a property requirement, given that this is the 21st century and we do not live in an agricultural society anymore, we live in a technological society, clearly I'm revising that, and in the book I had a whole bunch of you know, did you go to college? But then I had a lot of thought. I've given thought since that colleges. What I didn't appreciate when I was inside prison, and I appreciate more than now that I'm I've been a free man for a decade, is that? Or for going on a decade, I should say is that the universities are the cancer that has placed progressivism, the tumor of progressivism, which is basically collectivism renamed, that will ultimately bring about our downfall. If not checked, that all stems from the university system. So I did away with the requirement for university degree. There are plenty of people that go to college and come out like normal human beings, but there are plenty of people that don't, and so, rather than make that a requirement. I just made it unimportant one way or the other and instead I think that the requirement should be. I now changed my mind. This will be a little bit different from the book and I'll update. I'll do a appended or amended version in the not too distant future, but just clear and simple.
Speaker 1:Top third of income earners. The rationale being that if you have clawed your way into the top third A, you're paying almost all the taxes. So if you look statistically, virtually all the taxes are paid by the top third of income earners all of them. You listen, a dribble is by the top half. But once you get past the top half of income earners, the amount of tax paid is zero. You might file a tax return, but filing a tax return is very different from paying taxes. When you get refunded back all the money you put in, you didn't pay taxes. You filed a tax return. So instead I'm talking about people who are paying serious taxes where taxes really hurt, and so they understand the cost benefit relationship between what they want and what it costs. And so inherently, regardless of whether they went to university or not, a person who has started in business clawed their way up one way or the other. Maybe they went to university, maybe they started their own business, maybe they just hired on at a.
Speaker 1:I knew a woman in Tucson, arizona. I won't use her name because I've not asked her permission, but she ended up. She started working at a Jack in the Box. It was actually kind of a famous one locally. That's open 24 hours right by the university because you could get cheap stoner tacos, you know, in the middle. Back when I was in school. I want to say they were three for a dollar for those little crappy. I almost used the S word. I'm trying to keep this a clean podcast. Every now and then I do digress into a bad word, quote unquote, but as part of public decency I try not to.
Speaker 1:Anyway, she went to work for Jack in the Box. She literally was cleaning out fryers, yada, yada, yada. She became the largest Jack in the Box franchisee in the country. As I understand it, she owned many, many stores. I haven't spoken with her in over a decade. I don't know if she's dead or alive. I'm not going to use her name, like I said, but that's what I'm talking about People who. She had no college education. She went to work for Jack in the Box and she clawed her way to the top and ended up being a multimillionaire many times over. So she appreciates the value of hard work, discipline and putting her head down and not worrying about whether she had a degree.
Speaker 1:That's exactly the kind of people we want voting not voting we want in our public sphere. By the way, and as just a digression that has a point, she was or is a lesbian. Now I only bring that up because of the blindness of the system. I'm proposing we will get a much more representative Congress, both in the House of Representatives and the Senate, doing it this way. I mean, I'll explain how the lottery works in just a minute, because it's blind. So we will get gay people and straight people, we'll get black people and white people, we'll get Asians and everything else roughly in the percentages that they represent within that group of top third of income earners.
Speaker 1:And what's nice about? And it is creating an elite of sorts, an elite of the top third of income earners in the country. That doesn't mean, by the way, the top third of only a third of the people are participating. You can be in the top third. 90% of the people could be in the top third. It's just how statistics work and how they're weighted and how much they make versus people who don't make, versus the welfare state, yada, yada.
Speaker 1:But the point of the matter is figures lie in liar's figure, but the top third of income earners could easily be half the country. It could be two-thirds of the country. The only requirement is you're in the top third of income earners. How averages work, I'll leave to your math teacher. Okay, but average and mean are two completely different things. Go talk to your math teacher. This is not. But average and mean are two completely different things. Go talk to your math teacher. This is not a lecture on how math and statistics work. Although, as a slight digression, I think that statistics should be taught in high school so that people understand from the start that figures lie and liars figure and how figures can be manipulated to work you up into a frenzy that you don't need to be in, okay, or make you feel falsely good when you really shouldn't feel as good as you do because you're lying to yourself, manipulating statistics. But that is a digression. Back on course Now.
Speaker 1:Those top third of people are put into a pool for the congressional lottery. And how the congressional lottery works is that, instead of election day, we have lottery day. It's all done. It's publicly broadcast, both on the internet and on public television. It's done with a ping pong ball machine. Now every person understand. Every single person within that state, within that district, is going to be assigned a number one through however many people live in the district. So let's say there are a million people in the district. Just use a round number. Everyone will get a number, a seven digit number, from six zeros and a one to one and six zeros, okay, and everything in between. Everyone has a number. And then on the night, the ping-pong ball machine spools up. People are present in the room with it witnessing Everyone's watching on TV and on the Internet or wherever they're streaming their information, and seven ping-pong balls pop up and give a number and that number will be the congressperson for the next four years.
Speaker 1:Senate and House of Representatives. We change the terms down from six years to four for Senate, up from two years to four for House of Representatives, and it's a single term. Once you've served, it's one and done. There's no possible chance of being reselected. You're taken out of the pool permanently and you will never be in a position to be selected again. This changes the nature of going to Congress, from a career to a duty. It changes everything.
Speaker 1:This one thing alone might be the most important part of antipolitism, because everybody who does well in their life will know that there is a possibility they could end up being in the Congress or the Senate. And, by the way, if there's something going on in your life and you cannot serve and you do not want to serve it is not a mandatory thing you can turn it down and simply another drawing will be held. So you're drawn and you're in the top third of income earners. But let's say you're a woman who is in her eighth month of pregnancy and about to have a baby and would prefer not to do this because you would prefer to stay home with your child. That's perfectly okay. You don't even have to give a reason. If you don't want to serve, don't serve.
Speaker 1:But most people what I'm thinking will happen is this should create a new culture of civic responsibility, and a big part of being the spiritual agnostic as I talk about is as religion has lost its grip, there's nothing that's coming in to replace it. There's no cultural replacement, and by making everybody potentially able to grow up and be the president of the United States, literally, and I'll explain how that happens in just a minute. Everybody knows that they need to at least know what's going on because they might get selected, and that should, or will, I believe, force a change in, for example, high school curriculums, teaching more about culture and accurate history and what goes on and how things work, and a much more practical education in terms of what's good for America. Anyway, and people, you know, discussions change. It's not theoretical anymore. You could be selected and if you're not in the top third, well you know, there's nothing stopping you from doing it. All you got to do is put your head down, put your nose to the grindstone and end up in the top third of income earners. It's not that big a hurdle.
Speaker 1:And for those people, by the way, there are lots of people that will choose simply not to become involved in it, which is totally fine. No one's, no one's. There are no rights differences, there's no reduction in habeas corpus, nothing like that. It's just that we're going to take the people who have demonstrated a talent, the people who have something to offer by the actual results of their lives and who have skin in the game because they have created a lifestyle based upon their own label, that will be called upon in this lottery to serve in Congress. And for those of you saying to yourself, but they'll be inexperienced, my answer is a glib but easy, based on the track record of the Congress and all these experienced people running, I don't think that's much of an argument. We could scarcely do worse. So they go to Congress. They serve a single four-year term Now because there is no election and no fundraising and no need for political parties. There's no need for Democrats or Republicans because there's no elections, so there's no need for a party apparatus, there's no need for support, there's no need for anything. That all goes away Because of that.
Speaker 1:Currently and this is based upon a number of different sources that I've researched feel free to do your own, but between 80 to 90% of a congressperson's and this is by when I say congressperson I mean House or Senate 80 to 90% of their time is spent raising money in one way or another. Even their meetings that seem to have substance are really about raising money. Well, since there will be zero money in politics and zero money being spent on elections and, by the way, you can't do campaign finance reform as an alternative, because whoever's writing the rules will change the laws to advantage themselves, whatever party and this isn't something I'm just speculating on. This has always happened, and why campaign finance reform never works. They make what is corrupt legal in their favor if it helps their party, and so it's just a giant morass of publicly legal corruption disguised as a better system, when really truly.
Speaker 1:I'll give you a good example. You have to. There's a maximum size of campaign contributions. I think it's a couple of thousand dollars. It's not important what it is, it's a small number. So you might say to yourself, well, that's great, it stops, you know the big boys. No, that's completely stupid. So what that does is make a candidate dependent upon party organization to raise all those small donations in order for them to do it, and makes them a bigger slave of the party doctrine, as opposed to someone who would, for example, let's say, they had one donor who gave them all the money to run, and you would say, oh, but that's an oligarch, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Yeah, not if the rule is public disclosure of the contribution. I I mean the biggest.
Speaker 1:The biggest reform they could do right now as a as a transition to anti-politism, would make all campaign finance contributions, transparent, name and of the donor, who it came from, what the donor did, all published instantly. If you accept the money, you must publish it within 24 hours. That takes care of it. Then you can have a public debate over, you know, is it a good guy or a bad guy. But rather than all of that in anti-politism, we just eliminate it all. So back on track. There's no need to raise money, no need for elections, no need for campaign finance reform, no need for campaign finance.
Speaker 1:But most importantly, it reduces the job of Congress from a full-time to a part-time job. Congress now only has to meet to basically do the budget and go home, and then it will be called into service when there's a national emergency, a war, a national disaster. You know a hurricane that wipes out. You know half of southern Florida, whatever it might be. I'm from Southern Florida, that's where that came from. Originally I was born in Miami Beach, but anyway, regardless. But that's it.
Speaker 1:Other than that, you go home, congress becomes what it was at the founding a part-time job. You show up when you have to. Therefore it becomes we can pay the Congress people per diem what they're making at their career. So let's say that we have a teacher making $75,000 a year I'm just pulling this out of my rear end she's making about $300,000 a day. Is that $75,000? Anyway, close, you'll get the point. That's what she'll be paid, or he'll be paid when they go to Congress to serve for their time and they go right back to being a teacher. They'll just be a substitute there. Or a doctor if he's making $365,000 a year which clearly I chose because it's a round number will get a thousand dollars a day for every day he or she is at Congress and then go home and back to their practice.
Speaker 1:Congress becomes entirely a part-time job. No need for campaign fundraising events, no need for constant speeches, no need for public appearances. You can do all those things and, god knows, you might decide to because you feel that it fits within the framework of your position as the person selected to be the representative for that period of time. But it becomes based upon something other than the need to raise money and, most importantly, the need to create favor. Okay, enough about that. More in the book. You can read it as you go.
Speaker 1:Now the Congress people are selected, and they're selected six months before the end of the term of the previous Congress person and then they work side by side for six months so that there's a little on-the-job training about how Congress works between the old congressperson and the new one, so that they hit the ground running when they take over the reins. They serve their four years. They're one and done. Meanwhile, halfway through two years into the term, congress gets together to select who will be president and vice president. That's done much like the way the Pope is being selected right now. As I'm recording this, as I'm recording this, it is Cinco de Mayo, so the 5th of May, so on the 7th of May, the conclave of cardinals will meet in Rome to select the replacement for Pope Francis who just died just to give you some idea of when I'm recording this.
Speaker 1:And we would do exactly the same thing to pick the president, except not in secret. It's all done live on C-SPAN or whatever the equivalent is at the time. Everybody watches it happen. There's no hidden things, and I base this simply upon my service in the military and particularly in the Navy. When you can be on a ship or a submarine and you guys all know this is true in your own lives, in your own when you can be on a ship or a submarine, and you guys all know this is true in your own lives and your own ways.
Speaker 1:You can get to know over a two-year period If you're in a group of, let's say, 500 people to use a round number 535 in this case, but okay, let's use 500, you'll figure out who the smarts and the stupids are pretty quick and by the end of two years you have a really good idea because you've been working with them for two years in important meetings, listening to them speak and reading what they put out, and so on and so forth. Everyone will know who's potentially a good president and who's potentially a real idiot, and there'll be both. There's no guarantee. We're going to get some idiots selected by the lottery and we're going to get some geniuses, just like we do now. But what will be absent from all of them is that they're automatic sociopaths who lie like they breathe and make it acceptable to lie publicly, because it's all part of politics.
Speaker 1:With a little wink, wink, nudge, nudge from the mainstream media, that'll all be gone and they'll select from amongst themselves who will be president and vice president, who will then go on to serve four-year terms themselves, so they will have a total of six years. They'll come from the Congress, they'll have four years as president and vice president. They'll serve their four year term, which will overlap the congressional terms to provide some continuity of government between the executive and legislative branch, and at the end of their four years they're done, finished out of office. And, by the way, no pensions, no need for lifetime secret service protection, except on a case byby-case basis. If we have a president that's done some remarkable things and maybe pissed off some crazy people around the world somewhere, the government in those situations can make that decision on a case-by-case basis. But for the most part most presidents will be as most presidents have been unconsequential, because things pretty much run themselves when you don't mess with them. We'll get a much smarter government. We'll have a government that doesn't go to Washington to do something. We'll have a government that goes to Washington to do something that's smart. We don't have to worry about whether they're Democrats or Republicans. All of that.
Speaker 1:When you have skin in the game, practicality overtakes stupidity really, really fast. When you have skin in the game, ideology gives way to practicality and people start to think and they start playing chess more than checkers and they stop reacting to every story Speaking, of which a law will be passed by Congress protecting those that serve in Congress from spurious attacks in the news. If you publish an article, the libel and slander laws will be updated and made incredibly powerful to the level of even a criminal offense in the case of disrupting the lives of people who have been selected by lottery and did not ask for this. Trouble. That will extend for 10 years after they leave Congress. That's not to say that if we're inevitably going to draft and that's what it is, this is a draft as opposed to an election we're going to end up drafting people that are, in some cases, crooked and they'll get caught and when they do, they'll suffer the punishments and so on and so forth. If a congressperson is indicted, that is not going to be subject to the law.
Speaker 1:You know anything that's real and not spurious speculation. Of course, free press, free press. But if you know the personal attacks, you know anything that's real and not spurious speculation. Of course, free press, free press, but if you know the personal attacks, you know Joe Blow is, you know, sleeping with bovine or some horrible. I don't know where that came from, but you know what I mean.
Speaker 1:It's these ridiculous charges that come up constantly about public people who, since they're sociopaths, don't care. But in this scenario, when we have people who aren't sociopaths, folks 100% of the people serving in Congress, nearly 100%, are sociopaths, people that reinvent themselves every day. Otherwise, how could you possibly lie every single day and think it's okay and it's just part of doing business? But I digress. So anyway, that's antipolitism.
Speaker 1:We have a Congress and a presidency selected from a pool of people who have done something with their lives to begin with, have skin in the game, and then we don't have to worry too much about what decisions they make, because they'll make the decisions you would make if you were in the same position, because you could be in the same position in the next cycle. Every little boy and girl born in America will have. When their parents say one day, you can grow up to be president, this time they'll really mean it. It'll have nothing to do with whether they were born into a famous family like the Bushes or the Kennedys or the Clintons. It'll have nothing to do with their connections. It'll have nothing to do with what college they went to. It'll have nothing to do with what race they are or gender, what group they belong to or how well they can work up a crowd. It'll have everything to do with what have they actually done with their lives. Wouldn't that be novel?
Speaker 1:Meanwhile, we have a republic again, not a democracy. Antipolitism is not a democratic system. It is a republican system, not like in the past that we talk about in terms of the Republican Party. That has nothing to do with it. A republic, so that we spare ourselves the mob rule of democracy. Democracy is mob rule.
Speaker 1:The idea that what makes America special is that the majority rules is the idiocy taught in the stupid high schools and junior high schools and elementary schools. Every country has majority rule, even a dictatorship. Even Nazi Germany had majority rule. If the majority of people don't support the dictator, sooner or later the dictator will come down, and usually quickly, and it's always a big surprise, because dictatorships look like they're strong from the outside, but they're always brittle and thin from the inside. Right now, as I speak to you, I'll make a prediction just between all of us here. It is now Cinco de Mayo of 2025, the 5th of May, and I'll make a prediction that by Christmas of 2026, china has collapsed when I say collapsed, broken up, fallen into pieces, become other countries a mess.
Speaker 1:It looks like it's powerful today in the middle of all these tariff wars that Trump's carrying on, and I'm not going to comment about any of that. Okay, in this commentary. This is not a political podcast per se. We'll talk about issues. We won't talk about personalities. So I'm not going to get into whether you like or dislike Trump or what he's doing or he's not doing, but the point is he's pushing China over the edge.
Speaker 1:Their entire economy was a mirage to begin with, because, without a free press, every statistic they put out is I'm going to use my bad word for the podcast today bullshit. It's all bullshit. Their economy is bullshit. How it looks is bullshit. How much they say they put out is bullshit. Okay, it's completely dependent on exports, which they've taken advantage and cheated on for years, and now they're going to implode, and that's the nature.
Speaker 1:The point I make is there's always majority rule. I don't want to get into the Chinese issue. There's always majority rule, and when the majority didn't support the Soviet Union, that was the end of the Soviet Union, when everybody thought it would never fall at the time. I'm just telling you that democracies are mob rule. The mob rules Libya. When they pulled down. Gaddafi was a good example of what the mob does when it has enough and pulls down the leader, and whether they do it in the voting booth or they do it in the streets, it's still mob rule and horrible things come as a result.
Speaker 1:In a republic, you get people who have some skin in the game, an elite. It's not a bad word. We're creating an elite of the achieved, of the achieved Of people, of achievement Of people that have done something. And again, doesn't matter what your education is, doesn't matter what your business is. There are commonalities. In order to succeed in the United States, you have to put your head down, get to work and do the right thing, and there are all kinds of structures within society that if you don't do them, you will not end up in the top third.
Speaker 1:I don't know that there's been a study done about this I haven't looked but I would bet you that, for example, the top third of income earners have a much higher marriage rate. Married couples do much, much, much, much better than single people. I'm not talking about per capita income. I'm talking about in terms of support and having the backing and the infrastructure behind you, so to speak, of the family to create success in life. You can't do it alone. Male or female, your spouse is a big part of your success and I know without looking we could do the study. But you know it from common sense We'll have mostly married people. We'll have mostly people that go to church. It's another part that goes in with being successful. People who are nihilistic tend not to rise, because nihilism leads to cynicism and cynicism makes makes a person of the kind of person nobody wants to be around. We'll have a lot more honest people we'll have.
Speaker 1:I can go on and on. You see it. That's enough on anti-politicism today. I'm going to stop there. Pick up the book a radical reset, a radical reset by me, herbie k, at amazon. It's available under kindle. You can download it or that's how I read or paperback or hardcover. Read it, learn more about it, and also in the book I lay out what would be potential, just suggestions of how we fix everything. You'll see A Radical Reset by Herbie K on Amazon. That's it for today. Okay, thank you very much for joining. I hope you have a better idea of what anti-politism is and what we're talking about, and I'll talk to you guys on Wednesday. Until then, god bless you and be successful and have a happy day. And remember that control is an illusion, so don't work yourself up about things you can't control. Relax, remember my friends. 99.99999% of the time we're confronted with something, the best thing to do is nothing. Have a beautiful day, take care.