Welcome to the FeeCast, your weekly dose of economic thinking from your friends at the Foundation for Economic Education. My name is Richard Lawrence, and I'm here today with our excellent panel, Brittany Hunter, Dan Sanchez, and Mary Ann March. And today we're going to be talking about some big ideas, similar to how we've done in some previous FeeCasts, as usual. But first, I wanted to mention kind of leading into this big idea discussion that we had a seminar this past weekend at Clemson University with our partners at the Clemson Institute for the Study of Capitalism, and this was on the morality of capitalism. And we figured that given that we just discussed this over the weekend with about 100 students, given that we talked about socialism and progressivism and various other terms in the last FeeCasts and the previous one before that, that we might actually dig in a little bit to that one word that looms over all of these things, which is capitalism. Because that's a word that we use a lot, and we don't necessarily always have the same definition when we're talking with our friends or professors, or whomever else about that word, capitalism. And so I do want to mention real quick before we begin that this is our last FeeCast in this space for about a week, because next week we're actually going to be at FeeCon, where capitalism will be discussed in abundance, and we're going to be in a special set. So please be sure, if you're at FeeCon, say hello, come see our podcast recorded, come see each of us. We'd love to say hello, love to sign anything, programs, brochures, books, even if we didn't write them ourselves, we'll sign them. So we'll be at the biggest event that Fee has this year. It's next week on June 7th through June 9th here in downtown Atlanta. And so we'll be talking about capitalism and all sorts of things, entrepreneurship, technology, environmentalism. But one of the things that I wanted to lead our conversation off with today, particularly as we did with the previous episode on the isms, is what is the dictionary definition of capitalism? And as usual, I've looked in my trusty online dictionary, Miriam Webster, of course, it's not Wikipedia, so it's not been, you know, consumer reviewed. Sorry, Jimmy Wills. Well, Jimmy spoke at our last FeeCon, so we'll have to send her written apology for all the times that we've been digging on his website here. But it's not just him writing it, right? That's the idea. But Miriam Webster says that capitalism is an economic system, okay? Good so far. An economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in the free market. All right, so there are a lot of interesting things in here. And just because it actually characterized capitalism as an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership, I wanted to go through and I wanted to find out what exactly Miriam Webster had for corporate. So the definition of corporate is an association endowed by law with the rights and liabilities of an individual. So we think about all sorts of interesting recent court decisions relating to perhaps campaign finance. But here's the idea. Capitalism is an economic system characterized by private ownership with characteristics of competition, typically in a free market. So is that right? Is that wrong? I think it's right. It pretty much agrees with Ludwig von Mises' definition. Mises said that capitalism or market economy is that system of social cooperation and division of labor that is based on private ownership of the means of production. So he basically boils corporate individual down to private. And he went into kind of society in that too, which this one kind of constrains itself to the economic system. Which I like, because I think that should be a part of it. So it seems like the important takeaway is who is controlling industry if it's individuals or groups of individuals as opposed to collectively being controlled by the state. Which we discussed last week and the week before with the main primary definition of socialism is that the state or some controlling power owns the means of production. Thank you for inserting that previous definition because I think it is very helpful here. Well, in that definition, they're talking about ownership of capital goods in particular, right? They don't mention like land or labor in that. No, no mention of labor, no mention of land, which would typically be in your classical definition of capitalism. It says corporate ownership of capital goods and by investments that are determined by private decisions. So exactly against or in opposition rather to what you said about socialism being the government or state control of the means of production. Can we back up and define capital goods? I think that's a great idea. All right, let's do it. Tell us what they are. So first it would be good to talk about land and labor. Because those are what are called the original means of production. So land is just resources, just raw materials that just exist in nature. And so that can include actual ground land or it can include wild animals or the ocean or the air. So that could be food then. If you're talking about animals, it could be like not hunted just animals in the wild. Well, right, right. So not processed food. Not processed. Yeah, it has to be in its natural state to be considered. And then labor is also original because it is the human factor of production. So people, you know, our effort is considered original. Like we don't consider ourselves to be like produced. And then so capital goods are then a combination of land and labor. So you combine your labor with the land and then you create something new that didn't already exist in nature. So it's a produced factor of production is a capital good. It's a produced factor of production. So a pencil? Yeah. We always go back to the pencil because it's the easy one. So a pencil would be a capital good. Well, it depends on who is using it. So if an architect was using it, then it would be capital good because it is ultimately for the sake of producing a sky. It's producing something else. It's being used to produce something else. But if my daughter was using it just to draw for fun, then it would be called a consumers good. There you go. Because then it wouldn't be a factor of production. It would just be a good that is just enjoyed for its own sake and not for the sake of producing something else. So just like a business owner would need capital to get started. They would also need capital goods to get started to create whatever empire or whatever, you know, consumer good they're creating. That's right. And so there's a little bit of a confusion because capital is also used in terms of money, that startup capital instead of like things like factories, like actual goods that do things, that sometimes they use it for money as startup capital and that can be a little confusing. And it all derives obviously from the Latin, which means head, right? Yeah. So per capita. Oh, yeah. So GDP per capita. We know that, yeah. Right. So capita or in cattle raising, right? They would say, or they would characterize that generally as capital. Yeah. That's a type of thing. Like a head of cattle. Right. A head of cattle, exactly. Yeah. And so that's interesting that you differentiate between sort of the consumer good versus the means of production or the capital good, right? Mm-hmm. Because one obviously sort of allows us to produce something further where the other one is merely for our own consumption or enjoyment. Yeah. Sort of the production ends there. Mm-hmm. And so there's a difference in the economic way in which we think of these two things, whether it's a pencil or something else. Yeah.  Yes. Versus a pencil for an artistic purpose. Unless you sell that. Unless you sell it. Unless you sell it. Exactly. There's a fine line even there, it seems like. And I thought that you guys might also be interested in knowing that capitalism is in the top 1% of lookups on Merriam-Webster. Mm-hmm. And I believe, if I recall correctly, that socialism was also in the top 1% of lookups. So this is. Well, who is looking these up? Because they need to spread the word. Because if a lot of people are looking them up, a lot of people certainly still don't know what they mean. I think that's totally right. And so like what would you say is the typical conversational definition of capitalism? I think people think of capitalism along with things like lobbying. People think about the mustache twirling tycoon who is swindling and taking advantage of people and then shaking hands with a government official to get subsidies. And of course that is not real capitalism. That's what we call crony capitalism. But even that Merriam-Webster definition kind of lends itself towards that interpretation. Because the Marxist critique of capitalism is that it is run by and for the capitalists. Because again, it focuses on ownership of capital. But under capitalism, workers also own themselves. So there's no slavery. There's no serfdom like in the feudalism that we had. And that land is also owned privately. And really what Mises taught is that, again, coming back to the consumption good and how all production is for the sake of consumption, that it's the consumers who really direct capitalism. That capitalists are really following the lead of consumers and competing with each other to best serve the consumers. And I think that's one way actually in which this definition gets it right. Because it says capitalism is a system under which investments are determined by private decision. And so if you read into that along the lines of what you were saying, Dan, that the consumer actually directs what the capitalist with the capital goods produces, then you can imagine that private decision is not only the mustache twirling capitalists sitting in the top of the ivory tower, ivory tower maybe being more academic, but the top of the skyscraper. But he's responding to a need that's expressed in the marketplace. And that's the private decision that really matters. I think that's one of the most empowering and beautiful aspects of capitalism, is that we think prices have nothing to do with us. I can't control how much a pair of Jordan sell for, but how much I'm willing to pay for sneakers has an impact on the price of it. Prices emerge from the laws of supply and demand and the interaction of people. And so I think that's exactly right. So after a break, get right back to that very question because there's a deeper critique that is baked into what you were just saying, Mary. And so we're going to take a quick break and we'll be right back for the next segment of the FeeCast. One year ago, over 700 students, scholars, philanthropists, and business leaders from five continents gathered in Atlanta for a brand new, one-of-a-kind event, FeeCon. But get ready. This year is going to be even bigger. At FeeCon, we celebrate inspiring entrepreneurs, innovators, and wealth creators while helping you set your own path to personal and professional success. And it was awesome. All around it's been like a vacation. It will become a must-attent event next year as well. I'm not going to wait for my invitation. I'm going to invite myself, I guess. With FeeCon 2018, Fee is taking the conference experience to a whole new level. With eight incredible tracks, more than 50 jam-packed sessions featuring over 100 electrifying speakers and vast networking opportunities. FeeCon 2018 is sure to offer an unforgettable experience for everyone. It's the must-attent event this summer and it's all happening at the Hyatt Regency Hotel in beautiful downtown Atlanta from June 7th through 9th. Available tickets are going fast, so register now at FeeCon.org and find out how you can set your path and change the world. Welcome back to the FeeCast. Thank you for being in the break as you were watching that ad about Homer's Iliad and how in Homer's Iliad, cattle were used as currency. So this whole notion of capital and heads of cows and cattle kind of all goes together, obviously not from just us saying it, but it goes way back. When they would try to convey how nice a set of armor was, they would say, oh, this was worth so many heads of cattle. We need to bring that back. Let's figure out how many heads of cattle maybe... I won't pay over seven heads of cattle for this. How many heads of cattle would you accept for your salary? That's actually a pretty good question. One million. Is that a new alt coin? Crypto currency in the real world. A new blockchain. One of the things that you said, right before we went into the break was something that reminded me of this often-leveled criticism that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. And this is, in many people's minds, a hallmark feature of capitalism. And so I'm wondering, and this really is open to anybody, we hear this a lot. Is capitalism guilty of this oft-repeated saying the rich get richer and the poor get poorer? Well, there's a video by Daniel Hannon for PragerU that makes the case that under capitalism, historically at least, and theoretically too, but this video focuses on history, that under capitalism, the rich have gotten richer, but the poor have gotten richer faster. At a faster rate. And please correct me if I'm wrong. I've read, yes, you're going to have therefore the poor seem very poor when you're not comparing them to a new middle class that never existed before, but the middle class never existed before. You're having people lifted out of poverty who would have otherwise not been. True. And when you look at capitalist countries versus non-capitalist countries, if you're going to be poor in either of those places, you would prefer to be in the capitalist. The poor are much better off in the capitalist countries. And let's not sort of gloss over the importance of getting out of poverty anywhere. Poverty in any country is uncomfortable. It reduces our individual dignity. But overall, when you look at conditions of poverty throughout the world in economically free countries, meaning those typically who have a more capitalist type of economic system versus those with a less economically free or less free market, privately directed, market directed system, you would much rather, by just the mere material that you have accessible by yourself to yourself, be preference or prefer living in the capitalist system. I think it's also important to remember that poverty is the default of humanity. We are very lucky that we can think of having wealth as being the norm that has not been the norm throughout history and it's not the norm now. We have to create wealth. It's so funny too because wealth is one of those topics that's just so misunderstood. I don't think many people actually have a great definition of that. So I might ask for one of those in a second, but it reminds me also, you know, I go in the car all the time talking to the radio and I always hear, you know, Wells Fargo, wealth advisors, Bank of America, Chase Private Client, all these things that are designed to help you manage your family's wealth and at what point in history before this time was wealth something, or at least discussing what to do with your wealth, something that would be broadcast on radio, the most mass media consumption that's out there. And so it's available. It's not available to everyone. Everyone doesn't have it, but it's possible for many, many, many more people than in the past to actually acquire. I would say it almost is available to everyone. Again, I don't like to downplay poverty as serious, but it's kind of creativity. The people who say the rich get richer, therefore I get poorer, there's such a lack of creativity there. Why don't you do something? It's very static. There is no room to bend. There is no what if I create value in this new sector no one's even thought of before and therefore raise myself up. One of the biggest criticisms of capitalism is that it's not necessarily a level playing field for the reason that there are people who have disabilities or the elderly. We can't think of them as having necessarily the easiest way to add value. But it doesn't mean that we throw out the baby with the bathwater. We were talking beforehand about capitalism being the least imperfect of all the economic systems. And I like that. Not the most perfect, the least imperfect. The least imperfect because you're always going to have imperfection. And so how can you continue to move toward maybe a better type of perfection, maybe a little less imperfection. And the key there, sorry, the key there to me is consent. Because capitalism is the one form or one ideal economic theory where you have to agree to it. I'm not going to be enslaved as a worker because Dan wants to make money and therefore he's going to enslave me. I have to choose to voluntarily accept his terms, come on board as his worker, and then we're kind of working together in that system. Exactly. And embedded in that mutual consent is the fact that there's mutual benefit. Otherwise the two parties wouldn't consent. And so this whole view of it as a zero-sum game and as an antagonistic situation that of the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, it basically is based on the view that the only way that the poor can get richer is by taking from the rich. And the only way that the rich have been getting richer is by taking from the poor. But when that's not the case, that the reason why both get richer is because they're allowed to cooperate. And that is what... Allowed to cooperate, I like the way you said that because they're not always allowed to cooperate with the government. Or at least not precluded from not cooperating or working with each other. I do want to take a step back though because there was a conversation we had a minute ago about wealth. And let's just give a quick definition of wealth. I'm going to cue you, Danny. What's wealth? Well, I would classify wealth... Well, that's a good question. Wealth is the value, the monetary value of resources that you have. So there are a lot of things that make us well off that we don't really categorize as wealth because it's not for sale. Friendships, for example, are great. But it's not wealth. That's right. Or the breathable air that we have, for example. But the monetary value of the resources that we have that can be traded, that's usually what's considered wealth. And that leads to the question of what can enable people to get wealth. Because historically as we were saying before really it was not accessible to the vast public. Like you were saying that having a wealth management message being broadcast to millions of people, that is a very unique time in history that we are enjoying. Before, it was only an elite few, just like the upper crust of like less than 1% of the population that had any kind of wealth. And it was the vast majority of the people were barely getting by making a living. And really quickly how would you characterize those systems previously deployed under which very few were actually getting wealthy? Like what would you call those? Were those capitalist? No. We could call them feudalism. That's what I was thinking. Which gets into surf territory, right? We're talking about feudalism. Lords and serfs, feudalism. Serfs being tied to the land. Right. And not having, because again it's freedom of labor too. It's not just freedom of capital. It's that people are free to break out of their caste system. And have free entry into whatever market that they want to get into. That there aren't guilds that are saying, no, you can only be a peasant. And you can only be a labor in this industrial field. Although some laws that we have might actually try to sort of pine for those old days where competition would be stifled from example, entering into a field. And you've got competition and you've got guilds right now. Licensing. And like professional licensing for things such as interior designers and casket makers. Yeah, selling coffins. You have to have a license. So, you know, there's this sort of instinct in us that we need to protect the things that we've gotten and this far and no further, right? And so it's very interesting when you're talking about serfs being tied to the land. This was what Thomas Hobbes was talking about when he said that life was nasty, brutish, and short. This was what life was before we had a system that private initiative and private decision making could actually direct how the means of production were deployed. What they made and for whom and at what price. Which also allowed us to do other things like hobbies. Yeah, we never had hobbies before. Leisure time. That's exactly right. It's gigantic. But I don't think people appreciate that as well. And so I think, you know, the myth of capitalism right is this cast of people, this upper crust of people who are basically directing us to purchase whether we like it or not, their goods. And they'll, you know, build monopolies, the people like to say. And they're benefiting off of us, exploiting their own workers and getting richer and richer while the rest of us are suffering for it. But we had this article recently talking about the Fortune 500 and how much that churns. That's right. How no companies last very long in the Fortune 500 because consumer preferences change, technologies change and again, these capitalists and these corporations they are trying to serve the needs of the consumers and as those needs change then the arrangement of the best way of producing for that changes also. Well so we also want to serve the needs of our consumers here at the FECAS. So we're going to take a quick break and we're going to be right back after this message. Are you going to FECON this year? If you are, then make sure to download the FECON app today. When you download the FECON 2018 app you'll receive real-time updates and announcements. You can connect with other attendees, exhibitors and speakers. You can choose your sessions and manage your schedule. Locate breakout rooms, local attractions. You can schedule meetings and reminders. You can play games, share photos and so much more. Download the FECON 2018 app from the App Store or Google Play. I'll see you at FECON. Welcome back to the FECAST. Dan, I've got a bone to pick. And that bone is about something that you said in your definition of wealth. You said wealth was the monetary value or at least the ability to acquire things measured in monetary terms. Is that generally capturing that? I would almost and this is getting into the weeds a little bit but I would almost leave out the monetary terms bit because I think wealth is more than the amount of dollars in your bank account or wallet. It's much more than just sort of measuring by units of a currency. It's your ability through your own value creation through your own work to acquire the product of the work of others. Right? So basically I love your definition except I would leave out the measured in monetary terms. I think that makes sense because we look at an economy like America where there are our producer raised in the break that there are lots of people who don't have savings accounts. Right. And yet they are still living the lifestyle of a person in a wealthy economy who is very wealthy compared to people historically. They have iPhones even if they don't have savings accounts and they have cars and they have access to this living lifestyle living standards. I agree with that. Even with a negative net worth you're still wealthy. Maybe not the wisest thing to do. Right. So Richard what I think you might be are hitting on here is that it's not about money, it's not about numbers on a piece of paper it's about what you can do with that. It's about what you can trade and what you can gain. Which is funny because that's what we were talking about with capital goods.  What are you going to use your brain your mind power to turn that into and then monetize? And it's not only the consumer goods that are available but why we have those consumer goods so available, so abundantly and so cheaply is because we have an abundance of capital goods. And that's one of the reasons why Mises actually embraced Marx's term capitalism even though it was meant as an insult Mises actually embraced it because he said that capitalism is characterized by an accumulation of capital goods of produced means of productions of tools and factories and that is what makes the work of a laborer much more productive that a worker can only do so much with his bare hands. But a caveman with a handaxe can do a little bit more and a worker with tools can do a lot more and so again it's not this antagonism it's not an antagonism of capital versus labor it's a cooperation it's a harmony because the more capital we have the more productive labor is and the higher wages labor is able to earn and the more abundance we have as society. Alright so that gets us I think back to sort of our conversation earlier about what are the criticisms that people have or capitalism rather and that hits on that very point. Yeah I think to what you were just saying Dan I think one of people's main gripes is that they think about that worker with the high power tool as doing all the work that the people on the bottom the dishwashers the retail workers they're doing all the work and then some big wig up top is just cash and checks and that they feel that that's not fair that the people at the bottom should be receiving something more fair. And we have a common sense soap box that will be available by the time this goes live that takes that on because that really is a Marxist critique is that they adhere to the Marxists adhere to the labor theory of value and so they believe that the reason why something is valuable is because of the amount of labor that went into producing it and so if that's the case then the worker did everything and so the worker should be any profit that the capitalist takes is stealing from the wages of the worker that it should all just go back to the worker. It's so interesting because labor theory of value obviously you said goes it's the amount of work that goes into it but this goes to speak to our language too because we talk about putting blood, sweat and tears into our work and it's not necessarily the blood, sweat and tears that we use or we spend in order to produce something but it's the actual value that that end result delivers to the person who ends up buying it. Well it just comes down to supply and demand. It's that intersection of what producers are willing and able to produce and what consumers are willing and able to purchase. And workers are not the only ones who sacrificed. Capitalists are also workers often but capitalists also sacrifice too because they are the ones who take the risk. They are the ones who they delay the remuneration they get is delayed. Workers get paid regardless of whether any profit is made and they get paid as they're working. Whereas the capitalist only gets paid after the production process is finished and after it's sold at a profit if that ever happens. And so the capitalist has to be compensated for that or else they would never start the business in the first place. Not to mention I think people always forget this. Entrepreneurs and we all have entrepreneur friends they don't take weekends. There's no such thing as like oh I'm an entrepreneur I'm going to take the weekend that doesn't happen because you're always working you're constantly innovating and you don't really have a personal life. And so I think that's even like not even taken as far as cost benefit goes that a lot of these people who were seeing as you know up in their high ivory towers have sacrificed a lot more than we're seeing and yes the workers are sacrificed so much to give them a job where they can now have weekends and pay for their families and buy iPhones. This discussion of sacrifice reminds me of a term that I think is also used a lot and it's even in the definition of capitalism I read at the very top of the program today which is investment. And investment versus consumption right? So you mentioned that the capitalist is delaying gratification. He or she is investing in something he or she believes is going to be more productive later on. A seed that they'll plant that actually will grow into something greater. Consumption, maybe, maybe not exactly. But consumption is immediate and it's permanent and it's gone, right? So housing is consumption because you can only sleep in one bed in one apartment or one house per night. Food. Food is consumption. So I think there's a sort of comparison there at least definitional sort of challenge that we have when we talk about investment. That's the delay of gratification for the purpose of someone else's future consumption. Not the capitalist, but the future customer. He's doing this so that future customer can actually enjoy something later on. And like you said, he's working weekends, he's working nights. But what other criticisms of capitalism, yeah, are generally those that you hear? Unfair. I mean that's funny. This is unfair. Why is this company allowed to prosper? Well, this one's still struggling. Right, so there's a fairness question. Justice question. Egalitarianism obviously. Inequality of income, right? That it breeds this. The rich get rich or the poor get poor. What else? What else are we... Externalities. Pollution. We don't want for one person's actions to adversely affect somebody who had no interaction in the original decisions. Alright, so pollution. Various other things that we don't have control over sort of stopping once a producer actually puts the soot in the air. Right, well I mean that's theoretically we could though, because if transaction costs were low enough, we could just pay each other for the externalities. If I'm producing pollution with my car in theory, I could just pay everyone around me who has to deal with my pollution. Wouldn't get rid of the pollution. Right. It would just be more of a but maybe it would if I had to pay so much money that maybe you would become too costly for me to create pollution. Well and the way that Murray Rothbard deals with this is that property rights handle externalities for the... generally. So then the challenge is like how do you allocate property rights for things that are commonly thought of as common good. And so if you are the first to move into an area and you have been enjoying the clean air in this area, then you have established a homestead right to breathing clean air in that area. And so if you were there first before a polluting factory was there and the polluting factory was pumping smoke into your airspace, then you have a right to sue based on property rights. It doesn't need to be some kind of government policy of like okay well you know we need to have some sort of redistribution to make this fair it would just be I bet we could have an entire episode on externalities. So let's just tackle this one by one I heard justice and fairness, egalitarianism externalities. How does capitalism address these? In your opinion at least. Why are those not valid criticisms? In my opinion capitalism is competition, it's market competition or that at least is a huge factor of it. Unfortunately competition is not equal. It does not matter what you do, where you're born, who you are we are all very different people. Someone born the exact same day as me is the same gender is going to have different struggles than I have. It's just a matter of fact. So in that competition is where we kind of come alive and assert our uniqueness, right? So that to me conquers inequality. The competition in itself is actually kind of saying yeah we are all unequal, let me put my product against yours and see if our uniqueness can compare. And it kind of addresses fairness in some ways too. It kind of does, yeah. And I think the concern for inequality basically stems from an antagonistic view of the way economies work. Because really what they're concerned about is their own material welfare. And if the only way that you can benefit is by at the expense of someone else if the only way that the poor can get richer is by taking from the rich, then yeah, inequality is a problem. But if you get richer in spite of the existing inequality because of cooperation with the rich and if the rich getting richer doesn't hurt your chances of getting richer either then really that's there's no problem. In other words it's not a zero sum game. You cannot necessarily, you don't have to make a profit by taking away something from somebody by actually creating value which is what we talk about with entrepreneurship and the market process all the time you're actually growing the pie. And so it definitely is that the Marxist critique which of course we introduced a couple of weeks ago when we discussed his 200th birth anniversary, the Marxist critique really pits consumers against producers, pits capital against labor. We need all of us. We need all of us. It's what Mises calls a warfare sociology. And that's not a productive way to look at it because we're all in it together. Literally not productive. Which is amazing. So we're going to talk more about the amazing side of the market process and capitalism and sort of all the other elements that go into producing the good life that we enjoy living but for now we're going to take a hiatus. We're going to end the FeeCast and we'll see you all next week at FeeCon here in Atlanta. Have a great weekend.


Welcome to Toffy TV, it is the Everton News Daily. Everton are still unsure whether or not to take up their option to sign Jibril Siddabi on a permanent basis according to Paul Joyce, who wrote in the Times, said that Farad Masheery Marcel Brands and Carlo Ancelotti met in Germany this week to discuss the summer recruitment and Siddabi was on the agenda, the blue is still unsure. He's done well in games Siddabi, he's had five assists so far this season, other games like Sunday he was a little bit defensively caught out shall we say. So obviously with John Joe Kenny being out on loan at Shalka, Everton haven't made the decision on his future yet and also having Seamus Coleman still there with two years to run of his contract. It's obviously a big decision whether they feel John Joe Kenny's good enough or whether they feel Siddabi be good enough over the season, who knows we'll have to see but still haven't made the mind up on that one. It is a tough decision because they may choose to go in another direction, some of like Max Arans or whatever players like that who may be available in the summer haven't may choose to go down that route. He's a lot younger than Siddabi or he might decide to give John Joe Kenny his opportunity next season, we'll have to wait and see. Today the blue is also linked with a move for Olympique Marseille midfiel player Morgan Sanson, the 25-year-old Frenchman is available for around £21 million in the summer. He's apparently got an agreement with Marseille that he can leave this summer that's according to the Express today. He's certainly looking for another midfiel player linked heavily with Ibrahim Sangari yesterday, those links have continued today as well. If I was given a choice it would be Sangari out of those two who I would go for. Today the links again with Heavon Lazano of Napoli. Gennaro Gattuso has said, at the moment I have no space for him in my team, he needs to work a lot harder. That isn't just Heavon but he does certainly need to work harder to get in my team. AS, the Italian news outlet have jumped on this and said that that's kind of sealed his fate at Napoli and they expect him to join Everton for around £35 million in the summer. Obviously the links are there due to the fact that Marcel Brands took him from South America to PSV where he done really well and then he moved last summer to Napoli so played under Antio Lotti for four months before the Italian moved to Everton. Everton do look as though they're going to be moving for a wide player, Lazano can play right or left, he's predominantly right footed. He's got three goals for Napoli so far in his career but I don't know. He looks a really good player, he does but he's been more effective playing off the left hand side. I know he plays on the right for Mexico but I don't wonder whether Everton will be looking at it more on the right side of the player but he certainly knows where the net is and for £35 million may be a good deal. Still only 24 years of age as well and has been capped quite a few times by Mexico so with those links obviously it makes sense. Rovio who own Angry Birds have said that they're interested in extending their sleeve sponsorship of Everton that they've had in place since 2017. It had been thought that the Angry Birds logo on Everton's shape would end this summer, it may still do so. There's other businesses interested in taking up that option but Rovio today have come out and said they are keen to talk to Everton about extending that deal. So put Everton in a decent position actually to be able to play one brand off against the other I guess and get the best deal possible for the football club. Every bit important to financial fair play into the Premier League regulations as well, every penny is important. Finally the women's derby has been rearranged, it should have been played earlier this month but was called off due to a storm. It's now been rearranged for Wednesday 25th March, kick-off will be 7 o'clock, it is to be played at Gooderson Park. Everton hoping to get more than 23,500 at Liverpool got earlier in the season when the lady side won 1-0 at Amfield and hopefully we can get a bigger attendance at Gooderson Park and see the Everton women win the Maisie side derby and do the double over the Maisie rivals. Currently Everton's 7th in the women's Super League Liverpool are bottom so Everton could help relegate Liverpool. Would you like to be there to see that? Get yourself down there 7 o'clock on the 25th March. That is it, make sure you subscribe, give the video a thumbs up and if you want more videos join us over on Patreon. See you later.


Let us move on further clockwise and see this structure here. This structure is the pineal gland. This pineal gland is highly vascularized, it has got fenestriated capillaries and it is filled with cells which are known as pinealocytes, which are also known as epifysial cells. These pineal gland cells, they release melatonin, which is under the stimulus by the suprachiasmatic nucleus here and it releases melatonin. This is also a very important circumventricular organ. It is based by CSF inside by means of this process by this recess of the third ventricle called the pineal recess and this area it releases this melatonin into the third ventricle and from there it travels and it is mediated by trans sites and the trans sites then send the impulses to the hypofysus adenohypofysus. So therefore, this is another important circumventricular organ which is responsible for endocrine control. It acts on the pituitary and also acts on other endocrine glands.


103.9 FM, WZO Radio, Knoxville. Ladies and gentlemen, Digital Freethought Radio Hour. Hello and welcome to the Digital Freethought Radio Hour on WZO Radio. 103.9 LP FM right here in Knoxville, Tennessee. We're recording this on Sunday morning, October 10th, 2021. I'm Larry Rhodes, or Doubter 5. And as usual, we have our co-host, Wombat on the line with us. Hello, Wombat. Welcome to our 20th episode of All Time. Oh, no, more like 420. More like 450. We're keeping on keeping on. Our guests today are George Brown, two and a half. He'll be with us here in a little bit. Dred Piratig. Hello, Dred. How are you there? And John Richards, all the way from England. How are you? Hello. I'm fine. Thank you. I'm recovered. I'm happy you're fine. I'm very happy you're fine. Digital Freethought Radio Hour is a talk radio show about atheism, free thought, rational thought, humanism, and the sciences. And conversely, we'll also be talking about religion, religious faiths, gods, holy books, and superstition. Wombat, why are we going to be talking about today? Well, why do you have to make it mean versus you? Why can't you guys tell me? I can talk about it right now. What you, the topic is, are you making these walls? It's always us versus them. We're going to be talking about that on this show today. Tactics of narcissism starting with us versus them, and then whatever else we want to talk about after that. But before we get into the meat and potatoes, I want to fill it up for our own Dred Pirat Higgs for our weekly invocation. Arr. Well, be me captain. I shall not want. He maketh me to float in salt waters. He stireth me through glassy seas. He filleth me bowl. He stireth me through the states of noodliness for goodness' sake. I, though I sail through the heaving of tempestuous waters, I will fear not sinking. For thou art with me. Thy mast and thy rudder, they comfort me. Thou preparest a feast before me in the presence of me, mates. Thou quenches me thirst where grog. My goblet runneth over. Truly, pasta and grog shall abide with me all the days of me life, and I shall dwell in the galley of our quub forever. Rah. Oh, man. George, it looks like you're finally set up now. Let's do a quick check. Are you there? Oh, I think I'm here. Am I there? Fantastic. Yes, you're absolutely right. Wonderful. It's good to see you. Guys, we're going to be talking— Uh-oh. I'm getting some weird internet wards. We're going to be talking about narcissism again today, but specifically about tactics of narcissism. But I do would like to check up with everybody and see how you guys have been doing. John Richards, you just survived. Like what was it? Something, it was basically the flu, right? Well, let's tell me about like, well, let's tell me about, right? Coronavirus 2019. Yes. No. I'm a survivor. It's unfortunately, of course, I was vaccinated way back. So for me, it was, you know, people who are my age and don't get vaccinated have a 50-50 chance of living. Yeah. But in my case, I was vaccinated, so I suffered a mild sort of cold flu type of thing.   Fantastic. I'm so happy to hear that. I really am. I really am. That plus another win for science, right? Absolutely. It's just a wonderful, wonderful thing. It's like, hey, I get to keep my friends around. And yesterday, I had my flu jab. Okay. Cool. I got my, you call it a flu jab? Yeah. It's a slang term for vaccination. Okay. Dredd's nodding has had, you call him jabs over there in Canada too? Sure. Okay. Sure. Jabs and stabs. Can I please get stabbed and jab today? Hey, Dredd, how have you been? How was your week so far? Well, today we're going to be celebrating our Canadian Thanksgiving. Congratulations. Yes. Thank you. And what's probably not known to most Americans is that Canadians started celebrating Thanksgiving well before the American holiday came into existence. I believe it was 1592 and some guy came over from Europe and landed in Nunavut. And so they gave thanks for having arrived safely on the shores of Eastern Canada. Wow. We, so that's the story of Thanksgiving. Yeah. I am sometimes appalled with how much American-centric my education is. Right? Yeah. I really am. I was discussing, I haven't really long discussion about that yesterday. I'm not going to bring it up again today. So don't worry about it. The guy who listens to the show. I would have something to say. I know. It's crazy. It's crazy just the things I'm like, of course it wasn't an American thing. Of course it was somewhere else. If you ever hear about that, it's cool. I did also want to say, so I put my culinary skills to the test. So last night I cooked a ham with a honey mustard glaze, which is just divine. And then I made the stuffing today for the turkey. And then I'll be cooking the turkey after the show. So silly question. Is it the same kind of standards of Thanksgiving in America? If you know the traditions, like the same sort of ornaments, turkey. We just go for the food. We don't, we don't, we dispense with the ornaments. Got it. It's just turkey, ham and Brussels sprouts and scallop burgers and that kind of stuff. Can I come? Yeah. Absolutely. There's plenty to go around. I'm surprised there's no maple syrup involved. Yeah. I'm absolutely surprised by that. Yeah. You're right. No, there's honey, but no maple syrup. Okay. Okay. Okay. Larry, we're going to play a game called what's on your shirt? What's on your shirt? What is on your shirt? It's flowery shirt. This time just flowers and palm trees and jungles. You know, it's no longer summer. Are you just going to, are you just going to? The high today is supposed to be 81. Well, that's global warming.  It doesn't mean we got, there's still fashion clocks that run by the hour. You mean like September 1st? Yeah. Yeah. There we go. And I did switch a little bit before over to flannel, long-sleeved flannels and stuff, where the cold snaps we've had. But I'm getting back more again. It is. It's too warm to be wearing that all day. It is. I love, I love Dredd's shirt. Yeah. What is on your shirt, Dredd? Yeah. Oh, Wanted Dead or Alive? Schrodinger's cat. And it's a black cat, too. Notice it's blood analyzed. It should say dead and alive. Yeah. It does. Dead and alive. Oh, dead and alive. Yeah. I've seen a brilliant meme on that theme, meme theme, which is we've got Saint Schrodinger, the forgotten saint, standing outside the tomb, and the rock is rolled back, closing it. Okay. And he's saying to a couple of visiting women, Mary and somebody, he's saying, and if we keep it shut, Jesus is always both alive and dead. That's awesome. We're going to throw it up to our own man at the hour. George Brown. We're talking about narcissism today, specifically about the tactics they use. And so, Well, that's why we're talking about this. Yeah. We could. Well, before that, I just wanted to mention what I've been up to. Sure. I have, as you may know, I am interested in the effects of destructive people on my own personal life and kind of delving into that as a personal quest to try to peel the onion and plow through the cobwebs. And so I was doing a little reading on a few people. Jim Jones of the People's Temple. And Jeffrey Epstein. And honestly, I got so disgusted when reading about Jeffrey Epstein that I almost couldn't keep reading. And anyway, the topic of the hour about him is compromise. It's a new Russian term that I think we're all going to be hearing more and more about in the future. But I will leave that to rest right here. So that's where I've been putting a lot of time. Of course. What does that term mean? Well, it's a form of blackmail. But we're used to thinking about blackmail, the goal of blackmail being money. In this way, it's the manipulation of another person. Yes. To do what you want them to do. Yes. Okay. Coercion. Yeah, it's a form of coercion. And I believe that J. Edgar Hoover was actually running the United States in a way by doing that to politicians. And there was a fellow in New York City who ran New York in the background. And his name was Robert Moses. And I believe he did the same thing. Anyway, enough of that. Can I flag up? George's wonderful mixed metaphor. I've never heard it before. Peel the onion and work through the cobweb. Well, I'm peeling my own onion. At my old age to understand myself. If I peel an onion and read some cobwebs, I'm not peeling that onion anymore. I was just like, okay. You're trying to work out your baggage George. Yes, exactly. George, what I love about your, the story that you just told me us right now is that it sounds like there are a lot of different kinds of tactics. Narcissists use to coerce people to make them do what they want to do. And it's unfortunately really effective. And I think it leads into the power that we, how about it? It leads into a direct example of how we give narcissists power. And then it asks a question of like, why do we do that? And why are these things so? Yes. And so, That's a wonderful question, I think. And it's what we're going to bring this show. And I think it's like, it was a problem that you brought up from yesterday. It's like, why is this so effective and can we break these tactics down? So we know when we see them. May I say, I would like to just one little overview here for a moment and say that there is a difference between what we're talking about and official definitions of narcissism. And so, or let's say, narcissistic personality disorder. And so these definitions, and I think this is very exciting, the work that psychologists are doing ahead of the official diagnoses in a way. So the official diagnoses are conservative. They are what people have observed and validated and codified. So it's a scientific approach and they tend to be back a little bit, whereas there's very exciting work being done ahead of the official definitions. So we will be talking about what we've observed kind of from the armchair and not the official definitions. Sure. We have an expression for this, which must be an American expression, I think, because it refers to a movie.  We call it gaslighting. It's something new that I've been hearing about. Yeah. Well, that's one. You said it came from a movie. Which movie did it come from? Gaslight. Oh, there's a movie called Gaslight. Is it just some guy gaslighting another person? Is that where that thing came from? The old black and white movie where this sort of Sven Gali figure controls a girl to do his bidding by, you know, not threats but manipulation. Wow. That sounds like the premise of V for Vendetta as well. Yeah. Yeah. Okay, George, what's that? Well, what it is, is one tactic that they can use. Right. And what it is, it is the convincing somebody else that what they know to be true is false and replacing the truth with the fantasy. And when you say that, the main thing I hear is when you convince someone that something is, you misinform someone even against their own credit. That sounds like you're taking advantage of someone who doesn't have a good standard of evidence. And the funny thing is, is we are all perceptible to that because no one has a perfect standard of evidence. It's something that you can't afford, right? Which means they're in lies, the problem with how we give narcissists powers because they exploit a weakness that we all share. And that it's a tricky thing to figure out two things from false things. And when you have a very clever person who knows how to manipulate information in just the way that you want to hear it, they can completely make you do things that are against your own interests. Larry, what's up? Well, it's particularly effective, I would think, against people who are religious and that they already follow a totalitarian world view and they're susceptible to taking something at its face value. It's terrible. Well, gospel. Are they adding another dictator to a dictator? Yes, yes. I would argue if you are already religious, you're already a victim of this. Because there's no reason why anyone's born is convinced that any higher power or anything exists. You're convinced of that when you're born, starting from the fact that you're not. And to young men, think about it on your own. Exactly, exactly. When all your authority figures, your parents, your pastor, your teachers, all believe this, you will take it. Oh heck, the law enforcement agents, the politicians all the way up to the president. People make your license plates. Yeah, everybody. And I was born anyway. I'll wrap this up into this too, because when you have an authority figure who believes in a God, it makes it very easy for that person to make enemies of other people, because it's like, they don't believe in our God. They're not, they don't have our values, like I see us in them. In group, in group, out group. And I feel like in my head, that's the OG path of religion. And while it's been so effective in terms of shaping cultures, it's essentially one guy, because it tends to be a dude, let's be honest, on a hilltop or on a church pew or some sort, being like, We're the microphone. We're the microphone. They are the bad people. Let's take their stuff. And everybody agreeing because they're not us. So of course we should take their stuff. Right.  It's real shame, but I feel like we fall prey to you today. If we look on the news, I can, I can't flip through the channel right now. If I were, I don't even have cable, but I know if I did have cable and I turned it on, I flip through the channels. If I had 30 channels, I think that's how many channels are. It's been a while. I guarantee you, I would at least see 10 narcissists. Or mouthpieces of narcissists telling me how the world works or why some group of people are terrible or why something terrible is happening. Why I don't have cable, but like I don't think the internet's any better. It's being honest with you. I know I'm getting a little bit preachy here, but John Richards, you know, in England, right? I would hope that it is not as polarized as it is in the US. Is that the case? Or do you feel like things are worse in some other ways? Well, it's not so polarized here. You are in a ludicrously polarized situation right now in the US, I'm afraid. And we're going that way, which is usually the case. You know what you do, but we follow 10 years later. But what I wanted to mention a couple of things. One is George brought up Jeffrey Epstein. And of course he's very topical at the moment because one of our princes, the Queen's second oldest son, is implicated in a case which is being brought against him for, what was the expression, seducing, wasn't raping? I'm not sure it was that. An underage woman. I'm pretty sure you said he didn't do anything. He looks very trustworthy to me in that interview, right? Well, I can't. He's letting truth be all around his face. I think that's an outstanding guy. I can't possibly say anything more about that because I'll be thrown in the tower. But yeah, it's weird. The other thing I wanted to mention was that permeates, but yeah. The other thing I wanted to say is that where do you stop? There's a line, isn't there, between sort of benevolent manipulation and narcissistic coercion for your own mean purposes. John, I wish you didn't say that. What do you mean by benevolent manipulation? And is there such a thing? Please explain to Sven Becker. Okay. Well, I'll give you a personal example so you can pull me apart. Many years ago, when I had sons, but they're now fully grown up and flown away, one of them wanted a gun. He wanted an air rifle. I mean, you can't get guns in this country, but at the time you could get air rifles. It's very hard to get even them now, but back then some boys had air rifles and they did target shooting. So I said, okay, I'll get you an air rifle, but remember that the only thing you can do with it is point it and pull the trigger, and that's it. That's the end of the fun. So I was trying to persuade him not to want it. And that's manipulation. Without telling him not to want it. Exactly. I was trying to persuade him to change his mind about wanting it, but that's benevolent manipulation. We don't want young boys with guns. So the principle behind it was, you know, fatherly. I bought it for him. He pointed it and shot it a few times, and then it's been rotting in the garage ever since. Okay, okay. He didn't put out his eye with it. No, he didn't. The most harm he did with it was ruin one of our drain pipes. Which is still broken. The rain runs down the outside because there's a hole. I remember the Red Rider air rifle from a Christmas story, and I think that's what Larry was referencing. You're going to take out your eye with it. That's right. But I was going to comment because when Ty had asked John about whether, you know, Britain or the English are divided, I mean, I thought Brexit was a perfect example of that absolute polarization where it was 49 to 51. Wow. I mean, how can something be that contentious? If it isn't clearly obvious that there's a benefit to the greater proportion of the population, why does it sit at 51, 49? I would say that that decision shouldn't happen until it's 65, 35, you know what I mean? It just seems that this one vote over the post is just an absolutely ridiculous way because you disenfranchise essentially half the population when you allow a decision to go through on that basis. It's crazy. Don't get me on this. It's almost as if a bunch of narcissists made government.  And they say it because they're the ones who've benefited because their money is already offshore. Yes, of course. And it's only got more valuable while the rest of us have seen everything get more expensive or even unavailable like petrol for the last month. Yeah. Wow, I didn't even know that. Yeah, ours just went up 20 cents a liter. Yeah. It went from $1.37 to $1.57 a liter. So it's crazy. Yeah. But we're paying that. Oh, no, you did say liter. You did say liter, didn't you? Because I was thinking it might be gallons like they asked him. No. These guys are still gallons. Yeah, we're still doing it by gallons. That's why all the satellites and spacecraft are crashing. Yes. They're sticking to the standard measurements and all that. Well, the story behind that was in the early shuttle, what wasn't it? When one company made part of the rocket to metric and the other company made it to Imperial and they didn't fit properly. Wow. Yeah. That's not cool. That's not cool. What are you going to do? You got to get your rocket chips together.  Yeah.  They have an impact on our government, but it's not just something that's like recent. Like we can't just point to Trump and be like, Hey, narcissists were done here. Like it's systematic and it's been affecting it since the conception of what government, you know, if we are taking it from Greek principles, it is and was. Because even the people that we were basing off of their ideas were probably not the best people in the world either. They we like, for example, Aristotle Plato, known slave masters, known people who write literature on how to own people does not want women in positions of power only men, but not just any man has to be land owning men. And that means rich people. So like, you know, you have a system of government that we're based off of who are people who are only interested in their own self interest for the most part and aren't privy to the consequences of bad judgments or bad calls as the people that they are in control of. And I feel like that is in my head, an aspect of narcissism. And whenever complications or complaints come up, it's like, well, at least we're not like the Chinese. It's like, whoa, whoa, why are you, why are you us versing them? Like why can't we focus on our problems? And why is pointing out another weird system or a different system from a different people in any way helpful to improving ours? Like, can't we work on making it more perfect union together? I feel like we have to struggle so hard to get through that we have to struggle through waves of narcissism to get good at anything. But we are at the bottom of half hour. George, I saw you raise your hand. We're going to get straight back to you when we come back to the show. Larry, why don't you take a step and we'll come right back to narcissism, how they're screwing up. Everything's nice. This is the digital free thought radio hour on WOZO radio 103.9 LPFM right here in Knoxville, Tennessee. And we'll be right back after the short break. 103.9 FM WOZO radio. Welcome to the second half of the digital free thought radio hour on WOZO radio 103.9 LPFM here in Knoxville, Tennessee. I'm doubted five. Let's talk about the atheist society of Knoxville for a second. ASK was founded in 2002. We're in our 19th year. We have over a thousand members now and we're back to having weekly in person meetings down in Knoxville's old city at the Barley Taproom and Pizzeria out on patio. We also have weekly Zoom meetings for those who don't live in Knoxville or are old like us and don't want to get out into a crowd and take the chance of getting COVID. So check on our website. That's KnoxvilleAtheist.org or go to YouTube or Facebook and check on our pages there. By the way, if you don't live in Knoxville, you should still go to meet up and search for an atheist group in your town. Don't find one. Start with our friends.  Hey, we're leaving mid-bought on a question from George. We're talking about narcissism and why narcissists won't let us have nice things. George, what was on your mind? Well, you know, following up on what we were talking about in the last half hour. Narcissists are master manipulators. And that's the name of the game. I think to me, I mean, there are various characteristics that they have to control. And they have many different techniques of manipulation to bring up the unspoken name so far, Donald Trump. The thing that perplexes me, the question that I just have not been able to understand in answer to, is why does anybody want to work for this man? Because they should know that he is going to throw them under the bus. You would think. I mean, as much as we read about that happening all the time, we just have to wonder about people like that. Dread? Dread has an idea on this. And this is a good topic. I was going to ask, because you said narcissists are master manipulators. Are they master manipulators by virtue of being a narcissist? Or are they narcissistic by virtue of being master manipulators? No, chicken. Yeah, there's one kind of causal to the other and which way does it go? I have a quick comment on that, Dread. I think no one took Trump seriously until people in power realized that they could use Trump. And then eventually came to the point where Trump was just his own tool that was so good that people were like, okay, even if he gets kicked out, we'll still be here. So let's just keep pushing whatever he's doing because it's working good for us now. And so I think Trump is very much in the same position as he was, six years ago when he was in president, where he's just this loudmouth guy who thinks very highly of himself, but now he's lost all political power and he's still acting the exact same thing except no one's paying attention to him nearly as much as they were. Well, that's kind of my question is because certainly there was a large portion of the population that realized he thinks he's a master manipulator. And in fact, he's just a goofball who is so self-involved that he believes these things about himself when clearly reality does not agree. And I'll just book in this and then we get to Dredd or George. I don't think he's not a narcissist. I just think he's a terrible one that was probably being used by more clever north of New York to affect a certain agenda, right? It's like, hey, we're going to go bomb this country, but we don't want people to talk about it. Can Trump say something stupid? Yeah, of course. Just put the camera on him. Great.  That's in the news. And meanwhile, no one talks about that, right? George, what do you got? Well, you know, last week I mentioned three psychologists that I recommend that everybody pay attention to. And I'll mention their names before we go today for everybody. But one of them, George Simon, who's a rather conservative fellow, was asked in an interview, why does Trump do this stuff? And his response was, because it works. And that's it. But in answer to your question, I think it was Dredd Pirate. I think the narcissism came first. Certainly in his case. Yeah. In other words, the narcissism was formed very early as a response to being abused as a child, to being traumatized. Overlooked, at the very least. And then this tendency is then an expression of narcissism, right? Yes, exactly. And the psychologist, Ramani Dervisala, who I highly recommend, her attitude about people like this is that they are responsible for the destruction that they caused. No matter what was done to them in childhood, they own the devastation that they caused in the lives of others. They own it. They are accountable for it. And as much as I love nature and nurture, I will say this. There are a lot of people who are overlooked growing up. There are a lot of people who are traumatized. They're not all narcissists. So there is something specific to people who go that route that speaks to their character, which makes them accountable for their actions. Larry, what's up? We were talking about a chicken and egg kind of thing. And George has been asking us why do we always allow them to lead us? I think to run for office, you have to have a very healthy self-respect and self-thought of yourself, self-image. And I think that a large proportion of the people that would actually get into office would be narcissistic and attributed to nothing else. Of course, there are a lot of people that run for office to be able to help their fellow man. But that's one of the things about just having a good healthy self-respect to be able to put yourself forward like that. But a lot of narcissists would definitely have that. Self-selecting. Or even the sense of duty, like we've had veterans before who have applied who I think were pretty upstanding people who are just thinking like, hey, country, I fought for this, I've led for this. I want to make sure that we can put ourselves in a direction. It's not about me. It's just I've already come from a position of soul sacrifice and I am willing to, if America chooses me, do what I can to continue to do service to my country. It's like I can appreciate that. What is it, the Constantine? Is that his name? There's a famous Roman emperor that brought Christianity. I was Constantine. Okay.  And then at the end he's like, I'm going back to farming guys, see ya. And he just went back to going back to being a farmer. It's probably not Constantine. No, I'll look it up. You guys have a fun, have a conversation with yourself. And he served as an emperor? No, not an emperor, just a general, just a general. Well, isn't it the premise of that movie with Russell Crowe? Glad he ate it. Yeah, glad he ate it. Didn't he want to go back to being a farmer after you finished fighting for the emperor and that war? I'm pretty sure he just really wanted to rub long blades of grass. Like very, very slow. I think you're thinking about Cincinnati. Cincinnati, yes, yes. Cincinnati. I knew it was a C name, but I didn't know if it was Cincinnati. So yeah, Cincinnati's general, was done serving, went back to his regular life.  And I'm like, there are people who are like that. And I feel like some of them do ask to be president. Do they get successful and get in? Who knows? Who knows? I'm not going to. There's a city named after him in Ohio. I'm sure that was his end goal at the end of the day. It's like, I want to be in Ohio City in a place called America. George, what's up? Well, I was just, you know, what flashed into my mind was differences in manipulative technique. Hitler's method was to use the southern minister approach in addressing the crowd. Whereas, and I think Martin Luther King did the same thing being a southern minister. It's an equal opportunity sort of a thing where you start out talking very quietly and rationally and logically and you build and you build and you build and you're just screaming at the end. Trump's method is different. Sorry, sorry.  But so that's his MO. It seems to work either way. So, yeah, it's a very bizarre thing. George, you made a brilliant point. It's almost as if people are willing to listen to someone, whether they speak fast, slow, loud or quiet as long as you're saying the things that they're feeling, right? And not what they're critically thinking about, but what they're feeling. And that's the case. Then it's very easy for anybody who's crazy to amass a very popular fan base if they were just saying things that the fan base wants to hear regardless of how they're saying it. And I feel like there's... Yeah. See, I think that people like us want to influence other people with logic because we are assuming that they will meet us on the logical plane, whereas these master manipulators have it really figured out. They're hitting them in the gut. Right. And we don't know how to do that. And, you know, there is something with the way how Trump does speak or the method of how he speaks. It's very similar to a fast-paced car salesman or a used car salesman who's like, hey, this is the best car in the world. It's an incredible car.  But listen, it's so good now. It's going to be the best car ever. Sure, it explodes every other Wednesday, but this is the car that's going to be reliable. It's going to drive your kids to work. It's like you're saying bad things and you're mixing in with good things and you're focusing on like huge adjectives that stick and like the person's more entranced with how you're speaking than with the actual topics of conversation that you're cherry picking from. And unlike, you know, the Southern Baptist approach where you almost completely circumvent the bad and you just up swell, up swell, up swell and keep building up. Trump will say things that are absolutely horrendous, but he'll mix them in with, but it's fantastic. It's fantastic. It's like, we're all going to get the virus, but you know what? Who cares? We're Americans. We're going to live through it. It's going to be great. It's going to be awesome. It's going to be terrific. It's going to be terrific. It's going to be terrific. But people who are listening critically, it's like there's no substance here. And you're in fact making me more scared, which makes me listen to you more because I see what you're saying as a threat, which makes you want to pay attention to what you're saying, right? And for the people who want to hear what he's saying, they're willing to happily listen to them just to, just to hear the person that they chose was a good person. And so what ends up, what you end up with is people who are critical thinking, paying attention and people who aren't critically thinking, paying attention and it just continues to build a crowd. And I feel like there's danger in there too. George, what's up? Well, you know, one thing in terms of manipulation that occurs to me again, back to Trump is that if we read a transcript, if we watch him speak to an audience or read a transcript of what he actually said, it's word salad. These are sentences that don't compute. They make no sense whatsoever. They contain the buzzwords, but they don't make logical sense as sentences. And I remember there was a, there was a reporter from a New Zealand paper who was trying to cover Trump from New York and he's in Washington and she said that the reporters have to get together and rewrite what he says because they don't make sense otherwise. Right. So they have to put words into his, into his mouth. Okay. And my point is that he knows how to speak English because every once in a while he does. I don't think he does. His vocabulary is pretty big, in fact. It's pretty big. My vocabulary is pretty big. It's the pretty big vocabulary. It's incredible. It's the best vocabulary ever. Yeah.  You know, it's the biggest one, but I'm saying he's the best words. Yeah. He's literally said that. I feel like there's a little hint of sexism in here too, because we just before Trump, the last, maybe the second, the last political roundup we did, we had a lady called Sarah Palin who in my head was, what was that dread? I'm just a laugh. I was just a laugh. Sarah Palin. We had a Sarah Palin, but here's the thing. If you, if you run Trump speeches over Sarah Palin speeches, Sarah Palin was making full sentences and was not using the same word multiple times in a sentence. They were silly. And had punctuation. Yeah, but like, I can see Russia from my house. That's a complete full sentence that had begins and end. If Trump was doing it, it'd be like, Russia, biggest, most terrific place ever. You know, great place. Love to be there. Anyway, seeing from my house, I live in a big house. Gold made of gold. Love my house. Great. It's like, what are you even saying? Like what makes sense in that word? Yeah. We, I looked at one guy as president and the other one we were laughing at for being vice president. I feel like, you know, as much as we are pointing out narcissists, I still feel like there's a little bit of sexism there too. Anyway, George, what's up? Yeah. Okay. Statistically, I believe so far. Narcissists tend more to be men than women. So why don't we just mention a few women narcissists? And I'm pulling a blank. Maybe Sarah Palin, what Madonna, maybe anybody now, anybody? Well, if you go by who takes the most selfies. That's pretty much a lot of them. You're shooting pretty low. You're shooting pretty low. You're basically saying every 14-year-old and lower. Going on the story of the original narcissist who looked at himself in a puddle. That's the measure. There's so many narcissists that they put a camera on the front side of the phone as like, you remember, like that was probably a board room. It's like, we need to put two cameras on the phone. It's like, no, why would you do that? You just turn your phone. It's like, no, trust me. We have a demographic that would love this idea. It's like a camera facing. You can see your face in the screen on the reflection. It's like, no, trust me about this. It's going to be brilliant. This is a high-tech mirror. Should we patent it? No, let's not patent it. Let's let every phone company from here on out just do that idea because it's so crazy. No one's going to ever want it. It's like, that guy's like in Hawaii right now being like, I had the zillion dollar idea and no one took me seriously. Dang it. Sorry about that, guys. So narcissists, I feel like you talked about Madonna, who was like a female narcissist. I'm willing to see that they are definitely, as John was alluding to, benevolent forms of manipulation and then obviously harmful forms of manipulation. And my point would be, I consider Madonna one of the good forms because while she was focused on herself, she was doing it in a way where there wasn't really anyone pioneering the music that she was doing, the messages that she was going for, the vogue identity. And I'm like, hey, good for you. You actually made music kind of awesome for like a period of time and I don't have a problem with that dread. Well, I was just going to say something similar to that is that on the register of actors and their behaviors on set, you can differentiate between those who are narcissistic and those who are just self-promoting. You know, there are some pretty bad examples and I'm trying to think of that one guy who was... I mean, you hear stories about how petulant and childish and stomping on the thing and stomping on the ground and I only want blue or take all the blue smarties out of my bowl because these terrible demands that some actors and other performers make on their assistants and on other people around the set to sort of place themselves at the center of all attention, whether that's positive or negative. Sure. Sure. And then what do you mean by self-promoting? What would be the alternative to that? Well, that's like Madonna. I mean, she's got an agent. She's got a promoter. She's got... Got it. You know, a stylist. She's got... I mean, it's about creating an image. Got it. And that person may go to cancer treatment centers after the fact without telling anyone. You know what I mean? By age. So using their position to do good but without drawing attention to themselves. You know what I mean? Bill Gates Foundation, for instance, is in that case. So there's a lot of well-known people out there that care about their image. But it's not in the narcissistic way there. That's the benevolent sort of aspect to it. And you know, we were talking about this last time when we were talking about narcissism, but Alfred Nobel, creator of the Nobel Peace Prize. Right. That is literally a guy being like, I need to promote myself. I may have done some bad things. Not bad things personally, but people might be using my invention for bad things. Let's see if we can't use it to inspire some good in the world. And we'll make an award that's like, hey, whoever's doing the best things for peace, we'll give you a million dollars because I got the money. Right. And let's try to make an example that people can follow, like a testament of chains of people. We'll give it to women. We'll give it to men. It'll just be whoever's the most peaceful person, right? It tends to be the case that nowadays it's giant corporations that are applying for peace prizes, which is this own thing. Why would you want a million dollars giant company? Do you really need it? Like for real, but anyway, I am happy to see people take the route of promotion in that aspect that you're referring to than petulant narcissistic tirades, right? Though I will say this, when Will Smith is on set, he brings his own trailer. Like he doesn't charge the company, the movie company that's like, I got my own van. I got my drone trailer. I'm bringing my family with me. So it's not like I'm going to like clubs or anything that's like, like I'm a family man. I have like a three tower trailer that I bring with me. It's like a multimillion dollar thing, but it's his. It's like, hey, I bought this my own. Like I already made the investment. Just tell me where the movie is and I'll drive there or my guy will drive us there and we will have fun. And when we're done, we'll drive ourselves back to our home.  And instead of having people pull your blue M&Ms out of your bowl, just buy like your own bowl of blue list M&Ms. And I feel like I, I gained the system. That's the way of it. I like the things that narcissists like, but I'll buy it for myself. And I feel like he kind of shortcut of the system there. I think there's something good to say. Larry, final thoughts and then we can go go around. You have any thoughts on narcissism? Just what I was saying about it. It just tends that they would want to go into public office because they think so much of themselves. That's a little above this, but I mean, there are a lot of people that run for office that don't think that way. Look at all the Democrats. But I'm sure every party would look at the other party and think they're just a bunch of narcissists. Sure, sure, at least some representatives. Hey, George Brown, how do you feel like we have open narcissism in today's show? I think there's a hell of a lot more to it. And you know, may I read my list of criteria again from last week? Sure, sure, sure. Okay. And then I want to mention three people to pay attention to. Okay. Characteristics. This is narcissistic personality disorder. Grandiosity. Need for admiration and recognition. Distain and lack of empathy for other people. Sense of personal superiority. Establishes abusive power and control over others. Fragile ego. Intolerance of criticism. And belittles other people. And I added the word seductive. Before you get to your list of people, I was just going to say that sounds exactly like God. Well, there's something that's not in there because a narcissist doesn't like to take responsibility. Do they? Nice. So they always try to pass the can down to somebody else who is to blame. And that reminds me of a certain son who allegedly took on board all of the sins of everybody and died. May I give my list of people, please? Go for it. Okay. I've got to do this real slow. If you're of a conservative bent, George Simon, he's a psychologist. George Simon, S-I-M-O-N. Romani Derbysala, D-U-R-V-A-S-A-L-A. And she uses the handle Dr. Romani, R-A-M-A-N-I. You'll find her on YouTube. She's an exceptionally good explainer about cluster B personality disorders and narcissists in particular. And Sam Vaknen, S-I-M-V-A-C-N-I-N.  So he will tell you the story from the inside. Self-diagnosed? I can't say. I don't know. He didn't just get a medical dictionary and read it and decide he had all the conditions. Yeah, yeah. So anyway, these people have a presence on YouTube. Simon's own material tends to be very stale because he hasn't updated his stuff, you know? But it's still good. John, where can we find you? Free Thought Productions. That's my YouTube channel. And I've just made another video today that is one minute and 10 seconds long. Oh, he's gaming that algorithm. Nice. You got a sneak peek about what that one minute vid is? Yeah, yeah. It's about atheism, our birthright. Ooh, interesting. Where do we find it, John? Free Thought Productions on YouTube. Also, Global Atheist News. I'm big in that channel. I love it. I love it. I love it. Thank you for that. That's my weekly review of how religion impacts humanity. Well, every single time I cook breakfast, I have that thing playing. It's really good. By the time I'm done, it's like, this is great. This is a great little update. I love it. Very cool. Yeah. Dred, Pirate, Eggs. Give me an update. How you been? Not too bad. I was going to give a name here, and I was thinking specifically about Val Kilmer, the actor who has been well reputed as being one of the worst actors to work with on set. And this is his quote.  So that really does say it all. But as far as my content, you can find me on YouTube at MinePirate, M-I-N-D-P-Y-R-A-T-E. I stream their show when I'm on it, live on Sunday mornings at 8 a.m. Pacific Standard Time. I'm up to 95 people, subscribers. Five more is my threshold. Please subscribe. Very, very nice. And you can find me on Let's Chat. I'm on YouTube, and we'll be here every week. Larry, you know, this atheism thing, I think it's just a fad. Unless you know what it's about, tell me what you got. I happen to have a book. Nice. It's called Atheism, What's It All About. It's available on Amazon. And I would also like to recommend people read Mary Trump's book on Trump himself. She is a trans psychologist, and it says that he is a textbook narcissist as well. Remember, this show, the Digital Freethought Radio Hour, is available on Apple iTunes, Pocket Cast, Amazon, and Podcasts everywhere. Just search for the Digital Freethought Radio Hour. My own content is on digitalfreethought.com. Be sure to click on the blog button for our radio show archives, Atheist Psalms, and many articles on the subject. You can find my YouTube channel by searching for Larry Rhodes or Daughter 5. If you have any questions for the show, you can send them to AskAnAtheist at KnoxvilleAtheist.org. If you're having trouble leaving religious beliefs behind, you can get help from RecoveringFromReligion.org. And by the way, if you're a member of a clergy, a preacher, a mom, pastor, priest, but no longer believe in the claims of your religion, there's help for you at the Clergy Project. The link is clergyproject.org. If you're watching this on YouTube, be sure to like and subscribe. This has been the Digital Freethought Radio Hour.  The time to worry about it is when they prove that heavens and hells and souls are real. Until then, don't sweat it. Enjoy your life, and we'll see you next week. Say bye, everybody. Bye, everybody. Bye, guys. Robin!


What's good y'all it's your boy Ross back again with another video So we're gonna check out mid-air counter compilation number four by none other than baron clashing v2 I haven't checked out one of his vids in a very long time So we're definitely gonna check this out It's something about those mid-air counters that be like the highlight of a lot of wrestling matches the timing on those have to be pretty much spot-on and It's always something dope to see especially when they show it in slow-mo So we're gonna check this out appreciate all the love and supports Road to 50k and let's check this a compilation out Busted open Matt Riddle legitimately busted them open like in the mouth Bicycle kick Who remembers that pay-per-view Oh, you already know the RKO You know it's coming Alberto Carrillo trying to keep the He's Now what's hambrose gonna do Time on that spinning heel kick rarely a one-on-one match up here Championship the champion Oh When MVP was wrestling man for a little bit boys the story woman was in his party Oh My hold on I did oh no hold on I was about to say something about you remember when Bobby Roo was teaming up with Randy Jordan.  It was a nice little parent. They have for a little bit This right here this boy Okay, Barrett rolls out of the way went for the ball hammer again. Oh Geez on the outside of the ring me tell my god, Grand Millie's runs into a boot To put away the shield Oh That that that last one some of these are Okay, man, then there's some that are just spot on like gloriously Like just perfect, bro. Perfect. You can't time it anymore perfectly Seven Kingston is on the top rope. Oh, no Oh, this was recently. Yeah, I think I don't understand why people From just a wrestling standpoint If you go to the top rope and Randy Orton's in the ring your best bet not even if Randy Orton's laying down Cuz we've seen him in a laying down position still catch the one in the RKO You might as well just not do it.  Oh my god.  No ray. Oh, no Ready to see the star off the second row. I can't write underneath the chin That definitely wasn't the chin that was more like the little stomach area That wasn't a chin, but hey, you know, they got to sell it like it was Because he was holding his stomach Seamus now top rope could never better team represent Oh You know it's coming He almost didn't get all of it When I say this was a fantastic match with Pat McAfee in it Pat McAfee really showed He can actually go in the ring Not even gonna lie to you for someone that's not like really a wrestler like that. He really did pretty goddamn Well, bro, I'm not gonna lie to you man And it's great that he's on commentary like he does make the commentary on smackdown that much better So hey shout out to Pat McAfee for doing this thing Corner this time the elbow connects That was just so telegraph Oh This is way back in the day Oh, no I knew the chop was coming off my chest hurts for him. Oh my god Cesaro off the second Boo, but now this is the best Roman reigns I remember watching that live and just lost my shit That Evan born from the top rope to the RKO Was one if not one of the greatest Mid-air counters of all time and then after that they started doing a lot more with Randy Orton But up to that point that and I think I'm not sure I'm sure you guys will correct me But I believe that was like the opening match of the night or something like that correct me if I'm wrong But I do remember watching this and I was just like Yo That was that was intense. That was insane, bro Oh Look at that ball that's climbing on that And now Velveteen dream going on To the high-ranked He dives right into a kick to the midsection The briefcase Went for the knee same as this right here at WrestleMania.  Oh my god. It was over Over Man, this is this Brings back some good nostalgia man. I am just looking forward to the crowds coming back I can't wait to get some live people in these arenas man. Hopefully it helps these shows Most likely it will help these shows when it comes to those those live interactions, but I appreciate all love and support that you guys have been showing on the channel comment down below Let me know what was your favorite mid-air counter from this video. I'm gonna have to give it still To the airborne that just it was just the timing on that was just had to been spot on, bro That was one of the best mid-air counters of all time So comment down below. Let me know appreciate all love and support roll to 50k appreciate y'all kicking in with me See you on the next one. Peace


This study found that age, work period, and work posture are related to complaints of musculoskeletal disorders among employees at the Ministry of Health's Republic of Indonesia's Civil Service Bureau in 2020, while gender, BMI, physical activity, and duration of work are not. The results suggest that employees should engage in physical activity three times a week, reorganize their workplace to reduce awkward posture, and pay more attention to their body position at work to prevent musculoskeletal disorders. This article was authored by Putri Taika Rahayu, Marina Ariesediawadi, Kaya Arbitra, and others.


So he comes in don't know who he is So, but I'm playing my song that I'm working on in the studio. He's like, yo, that's you. I'm like, yeah He was out. He was like, um, I got music for 50 Eminem and all these people like who do you work with? He was like, you know, I'm the A&R of G unit I'm the head A&R of G unit. So that nigga is the one that comes in Randomly to my session and still 50 doesn't even know right that I do music So he's like, you'll come to the session or come to this office tomorrow So I go to the office tomorrow and you know when you play records you in there for like 30 40 minutes, right? But I was I was an hour late. So 50 came in a little later. So when 50 came in He was like, yo, what are you doing here? What you doing here?  Let me hear what you got. I Played a song called Lotto and he made me play that song nine times back to back to back And he was like, I'm gonna do my verse tonight and I'm gonna give you a G unit deal