S1: A whole bunch of right wing influencers received millions of
S1: dollars from Russia in return for promoting pro-Russian talking points,
S1: which is hilarious to me since their whole narrative is like,
S1: I don't believe anything. I'm skeptical. I'm discerning except when
S1: it comes to obvious Russian propaganda. Here's another way to
S1: think about it. And I did some Intel in the Army.
S1: I'm not, like heavily Intel trained, but I did have
S1: a decent amount of exposure to it and worked in
S1: like the Intel Group or whatever. But the thing about
S1: this here are probably two unrelated phenomenon. One, we know
S1: for absolute certain that Russia is trying to use its
S1: significant propaganda capabilities to influence the right wing in the
S1: United States to be pro-Russian into Ukraine, that we know
S1: for absolute certain. Like that's not even debatable. They are
S1: really good at this, and they are spending at least
S1: tens of millions of dollars, probably hundreds of millions of dollars,
S1: probably not billions. So I'm guessing tens of millions to
S1: hundreds of millions of dollars they are spending on doing this.
S1: And they're really good at it because it's essentially like
S1: the evolution of the KGB. Second point, which is probably unrelated.
S1: The right wing in the United States is now completely,
S1: almost completely pro-Russian Anti-ukraine. And some people reached out to
S1: me and they're like, that's not true. That's not true.
S1: I should have went and found some data and linked
S1: to it. I read the data all the time. I
S1: read the data all the time in polling, where it's like,
S1: how much of the Republican Party, when polled, are actually pro-Putin?
S1: The numbers are ridiculous. I'm sorry, I don't have the
S1: link here. I should have put it in there, but
S1: it's it's pretty easy to Google and you'll find it yourself.
S1: It's actually better if you find it yourself than if
S1: I feed you the link. Just Google that. Look for
S1: your look for the stats, the polling. It's ridiculous. And
S1: a brief political aside. So this is an example of
S1: a little breakout piece. So I already know I'm going
S1: to get hate mail about the point above, because I'm
S1: a crazy liberal and I post a lot of other
S1: stuff that's like anti-left far left and their idiocracy or idiocy.
S1: And I get tons of comments about being way too
S1: right from the left because I attack the left and whatever,
S1: and I just now attack the right, and they're going
S1: to be like, oh, you're too left wing. So I
S1: ask you to consider another possibility, which is I'm actively
S1: considering each position from first principles, not perfect. I could
S1: be wrong, but I put a lot of effort into
S1: having my own opinions that are not part of a
S1: tribe of pre-approved options. So perhaps the best way to
S1: sum me up right now is that I'm liberal in
S1: my goals, and somewhat conservative in my approach for how
S1: to achieve them. So meaning, I want a planet full
S1: of lots of different colors and ethnicities of people all
S1: thriving together. A secular society that encourages any religion but
S1: doesn't allow any of them to infringe on government or
S1: the ideals listed here. Gender identity, private sexual behavior between
S1: consenting adults, all personal choices and nobody's business. Basically, the
S1: freedom for everyone to strive to be the best versions
S1: of themselves that they can be, and a society that
S1: sees that as simultaneously a matter of personal responsibility, but
S1: also helps people along that path. So free speech, the
S1: ability to offend people with difficult ideas and have those
S1: debates and be controversial and be offensive, right. The concept
S1: of meritocracy, the emphasis on personal responsibility. Okay. And those
S1: are kind of like currently those are considered like right wing. Right.
S1: But also the acknowledgement that some people in groups need
S1: help getting to this point where their personal responsibility can
S1: actually take root and help them thrive, and that it
S1: is society's responsibility to give that to them. And that's
S1: where it's liberal. So in other words, if everyone had
S1: the same opportunity, I'd be fiercely all about meritocracy. But
S1: not everyone has the same opportunity. And that's the role
S1: of society and charity and kindness to help them get
S1: to the place where their hard work can actually benefit them.
S1: So the problem right now, in my mind, is that
S1: the far right and the far left are in opposition
S1: to that model I just laid out. The far right,
S1: because they actually want the wrong things, and the far
S1: left because they are so confused about how the world
S1: works that they're causing more harm than good. So anyway,
S1: that's a short version of where I currently stand. And
S1: if you ever get confused about, like, if I'm crazy
S1: right or crazy left? Just go read that. And here's
S1: a really important point. I also consider you to make
S1: your own North Star paragraph or set of bullet points
S1: like I just did, and have that be your thing
S1: and then realize that this, this, the left narrative or
S1: the right narrative or centrist narrative with all these different narratives,
S1: they don't really matter. What matters is what is your
S1: North Star look like? Like I just laid out. And
S1: then what you'll find is, like all these different narratives
S1: and tribes and everything they might have. Venn diagram overlaps
S1: with some part of your thing, but they shouldn't be
S1: your thing. If you have a perfect Venn diagram, overlap
S1: with the extreme right or the extreme left, you don't
S1: have your own opinions. You are using someone else's opinions
S1: and that's a problem. So North Star plus First principles
S1: is far better than picking a tribe and endorsing everything
S1: they say.