Transcript of Part One: Curtis Yarvin: The Philosopher Behind J.D. Vance

Cool zone media. Oh, my gosh. Welcome back to behind the Bastards, a podcast that you are legally required to be listening to in at least four us states. Six, if you have a criminal record and are currently working through probation. Which four? I'm. Huh? Which four? Sophie, I don't have that information ahead of me right now. I was not prepared for a deeper bit than this.

Oh, well, for some reason, I know it's Idaho.

That's because I'm not. I am not a professional comedic actor. But you know who is, Sophie? Oh, our guest today, Ed Helms. Ed, I mean, I don't need to introduce you. You've been on the Daily show. You were a major cast member on the office. You were in the hangover movies. You've been in, like, a ton of things that I'm sure basically everybody watching or listening to this has watched. And today we're here to talk about your show, Snafu, which has just entered season two. Thank you for coming on the show.

I am so psyched to be here. Your show is awesome, and thank you. This is going to be fun. I hope it better be.

I wanted to say so snafu. Season two, your show, you talk about major fuck ups in american history. And season two is about the raid on the FBI building in 1971 that revealed a huge amount of information about how the FBI was conducting clandestine operations targeting anti war protesters and civil rights protesters. It's like one of the coolest chapters in american radical political history. And I thought you guys did a great job of breaking it down and bringing on some of the major players talking through it.

Yeah. Thanks. Incredibly lucky. It's a wild story. As you're getting at. These. These citizens, who were not at all professional thieves or criminals, staged this incredible heist on the night of the Ali Frasier, which is very oceans eleven. Yeah, we actually got Steven Soderbergh on the podcast to comment on that, but. But, yeah. And they pulled off this elaborate heist. They broke into that FBI office in media, Pennsylvania, stole every file, and started leaking them to a very courageous reporter at the Washington Post named Betty Medzker. They kept it secret for decades. These documents led to the revelation of COINTElPrO, which basically massive. Yeah. And demolished J. Edgar Hoover's legacy, uh, for. For good reason. And, um. And led to the church hearings, which is the only reason why we have any congressional oversight over. Over the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, and all the other Alphabet agencies. Like, it's a. It was an incredible, uh, moment.

Yeah. It's so amazing to me because like, you couldn't do it. Like, it was kind of the last moment you could have gotten away with something like that. Right. There just wasn't the kind of surveillance, there wasn't the kind of capability for it. And it was the kind of thing that a group of people was only going to get away with once before everything changed about how these buildings did their security, and they picked, like, the, this was the most important time to be able to get in there and get files like that. But it was also kind of the most important time to break into the FBI, an FBI building and get a bunch of files. Yeah. Just a, just a wonderful moment. People should know more about. I think it didn't get as much attention, it doesn't get as much attention as maybe it ought to have because of how close it was to Watergate, but I think it's just as important.

And the Pentagon files.

And the Pentagon. Right.

The kind of, which were giant Washington Post stories. This was Washington Post as well. And you're right, but what's really cool about this one is that it, it predates Watergate and the Pentagon papers by just a year or so.

Yeah.

It was all the same major players at the Washington Post. And in a, in a cool way, this was the first time they really confronted the legal issues around publishing this kind of thing, and they decided to do it. And they against, you know, they had the attorney general calling them saying, don't you dare publish these FBI files. And they did it anyway because it was newsworthy and it wasn't, it didn't compromise national security in any way. So I like to think this is what sort of gave Ben Bradley and the Washington Post brass the sort of, like, dry run that set him up to do the right thing for Watergate and really, like, I don't know.

Yeah, it started that kind of, there was this inertia and momentum behind, actually, like, we're not just speaking truth to power, but, like, prying truth out of power's grasp and forcing it in front of the country. Yeah.

Well put. Yeah.

Yeah. And I, uh. So today, you know, that I thought long and hard about what kind of episodes I wanted to talk to you about. And I. There's a. The guy that we're going to be talking about today is a fella who I kind of debated for several years whether or not we should cover, because he's a quietly important monster. He's somebody who, you know, if, if we were just talking about, like, you know, the FBI overreach of the civil rights era, the anti warriors and whatnot, which was very much like a real authoritarian moment in our country's past. And we're currently confronting another. And the guy we're talking about today, Curtis Yarvin, is sort of the prophet of taking America down a completely authoritarian path. He is an advocate for changing this country into what is effectively a dictatorship. And unfortunately, he's a guy who's had a lot of influence in speaking to that. Have you heard of Curtis Yarvin before we started these episodes?

No. I read a tiny bit about him yesterday, but that was.

Yeah, that's fine. That is the case with most people who are not interested, who are not like, actual followers of his philosophy. But unfortunately, you have heard of some of the people who are big fans of Curtis. One of them is current US vice presidential candidate and hopefully future nobody, JD Vance, who back in September 20 of 2021, went on the Moment of Truth podcast run by the conservative organization American Momentous, which is an organizational partner for the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025. In a wide ranging interview, he accused his female classmates at Yale Law of pursuing racial or gender equality as, quote, a value system that gives their life meaning, and then said that value system leads to misery. At another point in the interview, he asked if certain groups of people, particularly those from muslim majority countries, can, quote, successfully become american citizens. And then he alleged that the reason so many journalists are angry was not the rapid destruction of their industry, but because they didn't have any children, which inevitably, he says, leads to psychotic breaks. Now, a lot of this stuff has come out about Vance. This was.

When was that interview?

2021.

That's really, that's wild, because for some reason, I sort of thought that, like, he was kind of normal and then just saw a very cynical opportunity to get elevated if he endorsed Trump. And so he did that. And then everything else has been the kind of a cynical, like, trip down the Trump rabbit hole, just like so many republicans have done. But that privately, like, he's kind of smarter than that. But what you're saying now is that, is that he's, like, trumpier than Trump on his own.

He's a little bit so Trump. I don't know how much Trump believes, other than that Trump should have power. Vance has strong beliefs about the fact that, like, democracy is a mistake. Right. And that a lot of things that have, like, the most of the last century in terms of, like, social progress, women getting the right to vote, the civil rights movement, like, reforming the ability to vote for people who are not, like, white american men, that that was all horribly mistaken. Right. And it was horribly mistaken because it led to this situation whereby too many regular people have any say whatsoever in how they're governed. And. And like, to what I was saying.

Before, it's like, in.

In a lot of ways, JD Vance has more extreme views on things, which.

Is why, during the most recent debate, Donald Trump alludes to not discussing certain extreme policies that JD Vance claims to have with JD.

And.

And so he tries to distance himself.

Whereas JD is catering to a certain category of human. But Trump's like, oh, I didn't discuss it with him. And that's intentional. Yeah. And it's. It's. What's interesting is that if you're looking at, like, what his background is, Vance is a guy whose entire career has been bankrolled by Peter Thiel, who's the Facebook billion. He made a lot of money on Facebook, made a lot of money on PayPal, and he sunk about 15 million into Vance's congressional campaign, which is the most ever spent on a single congressional candidate. And Thiel in 2009 went on the record as saying he doesn't believe democracy can be compatible with freedom, by which he means, like, the freedom of people with lots of money to basically govern the rest of us. Right. And Thiel and Vance, they're not just kind of reactionaries. When they express those things, they are quoting a guy. They are referring to the work of a political philosopher named Curtis Yarvan, who they first encountered when he blogged under a pseudonym, Mincius Moldbug, which is kind of deliberately arch. But this is the guy who has been, like, the prophet of a sizable chunk of the authoritarian right.

Thiel sunk a lot of money into him. JD Vance quotes him repeatedly. So does Blake masters, who is the guy who's been running repeatedly to try to beat Mark Kelly in Arizona. And all of these guys and more are followers of Yarvin, who's probably the most influential theoretician of the radical right in the US today. Curtis has never killed anybody in any legally actionable sense or advocated for murder. And as far as I'm aware, he has never broken a law. But he advocates for the overthrow of demise and the installation of a dictatorial regime that would, by necessity, kill and imprison large numbers of people. And his influence is great enough that the whole alt right and everything that came from the alt right and to our current era right owes something to Yarvin's work. So when you're thinking about everything that's happened on the right that's gotten so deranged since 2015. All of it has bits of Curtis Yarvin in it. Right? And his thinking has had a massive impact, even on some guys, like Elon Musk, who several days ago shared a post where a reader suggested only high testosterone alpha males and a neurotypical people should be allowed to vote.

This is also a thought with some Yarvin DNA behind it.

Speaker one, say that again.

Oh, yes. This was quite a moment that only alpha males. So, you know, stereotypical, like, alpha male guys and then a neurotypical people, people who are not, like, I have.

Can I still vote?

I think. I think maybe so. Cause a lot of these guys are big about ADHD and making them superhuman, which I also have. It just makes me really bad at cleaning my house and occasionally, in short bursts, very good at cleaning my house. But yeah. So these are the kind of, like, political ideas that you get when you take too much, read too much Curtis Yarvin, or listen too much to the people who have read a lot of Curtis Yarvin. And he's a kind of guy because he's so kind of shadowed as a figure. I had always worried about, like, is covering this guy gonna bring more attention to him than is necessary? And now that, like, one of his followers is maybe going to be a heartbeat away from the presidency, I think it's probably time to talk about him. I kind of think we have to. So that's the introduction.

I'm Jess Cassavetto, executive producer of the hit Netflix documentary series dancing for the the seven M TikTok cult. And I'm Clea Gray, former member of seven M Films and Shekinah Church. And we're the host of the new podcast forgive me for I have followed. Together, we'll be diving even deeper into the unbelievable stories behind seven M films and Shekinah Church. Listen to forgive me, for I have followed on the I Heart radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Carrie Champion, and this is season four of naked sports. Up first, I explore the making of a rivalry, Caitlin Clark versus Angel Reese. Every great player needs a foil. I know I'll go down to history. People are talking about women's basketball just because of one single game. Clark and Reese have changed the way we consume women's sports. Listen to the making of a rivalry, Caitlin Clark versus Angel Reese on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you get your podcast. Presented by Capital One, founding partner of iHeart women's sports. Hey, I'm Giana Prudenti and I'm Jamae Jackson Gadsden. We're the host of let's talk offline from LinkedIn news and iHeart podcasts.

There's a lot to figure out when you're just starting your career. That's where we come in. Think of us as your work besties you can turn to for advice. And if we don't know the answer, we bring in people who do, like negotiation expert Maury Tahiri poor. If you start thinking about negotiations as just a conversation, then I think it sort of eases us a little bit. Listen to let's talk offline on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Carrie Champion, and this is season four of naked sports. Up first, I explore the making of a rivalry, Caitlin Clark versus Angel Reese. People are talking about women's basketball just because of one single game. Clark and Reese have changed the way we consume women's basketball, and on this new season, we'll cover all things sports and culture. Listen to naked sports on the Black effect podcast network, iHeartRadio apps, or wherever you get your podcasts.

The Black Effect Podcast Network is sponsored.

By Diet Coke in California, during the.

Summer of 1975, within the span of 17 days and less than 90 miles.

Two women did something no other woman had done tried to assassinate the president of the United States. One was the protege of Charles Manson, 26 year old Lynette Fromm, nicknamed Squeaky. The other a middle aged housewife working undercover for the FBI, identified by police.

As Sarah Jean Moore.

The story of one strange and violent.

Summer this season on the new podcast ripcurrent.

Hear episodes of ripcurrent early and completely.

Ad free, and receive exclusive bonus content.

By subscribing to I heart true crime plus only on Apple podcasts.

Curtis Yarvin was born probably in Brooklyn in 1973, on about June 25 of that year. Likely, his normal wiki doesn't give a birth date, but Google's AI summary bot does, and it seems to be basing this on a bio of Yarvin in another wiki, which seems to pull from earlier versions of the original. It's like this AI slop stuff, so that the gist of it is, I don't know his actual birth date, right? I'm just trying to remind everyone not to trust AI summaries that various search engines give you, because most of them don't have actual sources behind them. Like most radical intellectuals, Yarvan was born in a place of wealth, comfort, and high social standing. In his own society. His parents are highly educated. His dad had an Ivy league degree and worked for the us government as a foreign service worker. His mom was a wasp from Westchester county, the daughter of a prominent lawyer, and entered civil service herself as an adulthood. Yarvan today describes the social class of his birth as Brahman, referring to the highest caste in hindu society. And he does this because he thinks that inequality is a fundamental and immutable thing.

Right. People are unequal fundamentally. And so any sort of social stratification in society is justified by that. And he's drawn to descriptions from other cultures that harken back to other fixed hierarchies.

Sorry. It's justified by its inevitability.

Right. Exactly. Like, people are genetically, some people are better than others, they're more intelligent than others, higher iq than others.

Where therefore we are justified in leaning into that.

Yes. And in fact, yeah, yeah. We have a moral because that's a separate thing.

Like, it's inevitability is. Is a. Maybe that's a fixed condition of human existence. Leaning into it, exacerbating it. That's just a arbitrary choice.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's this idea that, like. And it's also this belief that, like, something. Like intelligence is one thing, right? Like intelligence is a number, and if it's higher, you're smarter. As opposed to, like, well, you can have an iq of 180, but if your car breaks down, the guy who knows how to fix your car is a lot smarter than you in that moment. That's how I tend to think about intelligence. As opposed to, like, this objective thing. Like, is a farmer smarter than a finance bro in New York City? Well, when it comes to making stock choices, maybe when it comes to growing food, certainly not. I don't know. I think that's a better way to look at it.

It's a weird thing. Just the existence of something makes it okay to. Then wherever it falls on the spectrum of good and evil, because it exists, it is therefore okay to. To do and heighten.

Yeah, yeah.

It's murder. Murder is bad. Murder happens. It's a fundamental part of the human condition that people get murdered and murder one another. Therefore.

Yeah, absolutely.

Like, so, therefore, like, I can murder anybody. Is that. Is that a comparable. Am I making. Is that comparable?

I think it actually is a very comparable comparison. Right. That just because there are individuals are not the same, that we should have some sort of. And you're always picking when you're trying to acknowledge that, okay, people are not. People don't all have the same abilities naturally. Right. That's a thing that's objectively true. Michael Phelps was always going to be a better swimmer than me, for example. But we don't base our society based on who's best at swimming. Right. Yarvin is basically saying, there's one thing that I actually value when it comes to the ways in which people are different from each other. And it's a very specific kind of intelligence that correlates to how I think I'm intelligent. And that's how we should stratify society. Right. Yeah, he's that kind of a dude. And I also kind of think it's interesting to me that he's so obsessed with this idea of, like, identifying as a brahmin, because in hindu culture, Brahmins are the castes that, like, traditionally were most involved in the priesthood and religious instruction. And it is like a very closed loop system. Right. The caste system, traditionally. But that's not the kind of system that his family succeeded in.

His dad was like, a member of the us foreign service and became pretty highly placed in the government. But his dad wasn't born into that role. He was the son of jewish american communists who, like, came to this country, and he had to, like, fight to make a place for himself in the higher rungs of society, which is a very clear example of, like, mobility. And the fact that we have a reasonably open society that allows for some mobility, which he doesn't want to exist. Always find it interesting when guys like that you can see a clear example of, like, oh, well, you only have what you have because our society allows for mobility.

So where is he from again?

Brooklyn. Yeah, he's from around Brooklyn.

Okay.

Yeah.

Because there is. There's also a Brahmin social class in New England.

Yeah.

And I think the Boston Brahmins. Right.

Yeah.

And that's. But that's not what he's talking about.

I mean, it's a little unclear to me because his mom is kind of like, you could probably call a Boston Brahmin, but he's referring to, like, when he talks about his family being Brahmins, he's referring to the fact that his dad was also highly placed in the state department, and his dad is definitely not a Boston Brahmin. Right. Like, his parents were jewish stalinists, which is not like a Boston Brahmin thing.

No, because that was like the Kennedys and, like. Yeah, that ill. So that's so interesting. All right.

Yeah. Yeah. It's a little weird to me, the way he kind of, like, talks about it, but definitely it's kind of key to see that a big chunk of his family's comfort at least comes from the fact that, like, his dad's side of the family entered into a fairly open society that allows for some mobility.

So can I clarify one thing so.

Absolutely.

I feel like the. And I don't know enough about this, so I'm glad to be learning as I go, but I just have. I've kind of. I guess I'm realizing that I've assumed that the Peter Thiels of the world, when they advocate for more of a dictatorial structure to our government, they're not saying that part of that is also a free market capitalism, which presumably allows for mobility. Right.

Social mobility, supposed to, yeah.

And that, if anything, it encourages the. The best and the brightest to rise, and that's how they see themselves as the best and the brightest that have risen. So I guess I'm just splitting hairs a little bit. Like, are you sure that they. That also they are anti social mobility.

Or they're very much like, close the door after you get up. Right? Like, kick the ladder out from underneath you types. Right. And I think it's because they do believe that their success was not purely based on the fact that they came up in a system where they gained certain benefits that were the result of public spending. All of these guys who made money in the tech industry went to schools that were generally publicly funded, at least at some point. Their parents drove on roads that were public. They benefited from the security infrastructure that exists in this country in a lot of different ways. And their companies all benefited to some extent from government spending and incentives. But they see that their success was, like, the result of something inherently superior within themselves and often in, like, a genetic level in some ways. And so they're Aristotle. The fact that they have achieved such success is not the result of a society that enabled them. It's a result of, like, they're members of a natural aristocracy, and the best thing they can do is legally work to codify that aristocracy. We'll get into some more of how Curtis arrives by this, because he's really a big part in kind of lending an intellectual heir to this, but that very much is how these folks see themselves.

And he grows up as a kid, his dad's working for the State department. They travel around the world a lot. He spends a decent chunk of his childhood in Cyprus, in the Dominican Republic. So that's a lot of disruption in his schooling. He's not one of these kids who stays in the same school for a long period of time, but he excels in academics. He skips a grade back before his family goes overseas, and when they move back to the US, he skips two more grades, and he winds up a sophomore at age twelve, which I think is probably never a great idea. Right. That's a little young to be a sophomore.

Sounds hard.

Yeah. Yeah. Like, it wasn't great being a sophomore at the normal age.

Yeah. That is not when humanity at that age is. Not when humanity is at its most benevolent and kind and supportive.

Yeah, yeah, definitely. Definitely a mild way to put it. In one interview I found, Yarvan basically says, like, yeah, it was whack that I was skipped ahead so far. Right.

Which was it because of academic achievement that he bounced ahead?

Yeah.

Okay, so very bright kid.

Very bright kid. Very good at specifically the kind of academics that, like, you know, the school's reward, and you can kind of read between the lines that he was the recipient of a decent amount of bullies. Bullying. Right. And that's especially. I think it actually might be a little less common for kids in school now, but, like, you know, even if you didn't get skipped ahead in school, high school has a lot of bullying in it. So I'm not. I'm not surprised that's.

We're about the same age.

Yeah.

He and I. And, yeah, that was. I mean, that was just like, good old hazing, all the. Just all the gross, horrible, traumatic stuff.

Yeah, yeah. I'm thinking through some fun memories that I have myself right now. Right. So we all. It's one of those things you could, like, read a lot into that to kind of the guy that he becomes. But also, I think we all kind of went through a version of that. So maybe it's not super useful to, like, theorize too much about what it meant to him, but what does definitely mean a lot to him is that in the late eighties and early nineties, he becomes one of the first online people. Right. This is back before most people know there's an Internet. So he is an early adopter. I think 1989 is when he first starts getting online regularly. Wow. Yeah. And this is the precursor to the Internet that we know. And he's spending all of his time in a place called Usenet, which, if you remember, like, web forums, is kind of like the first web forum. Right. It's for you Gen Z kids. It's TikTok without any videos or hot people. And everyone has very strong opinions about Star Trek, audio equipment, or race science. Right. Like, it's an interesting place to be, like.

Yeah, yes.

Like race science was a, like, they were just getting it. It was like four chan or like these. These sort of dark corners of.

Yeah, there was a actually a white supremacist terrorist group in the late eighties that robbed banks, stole a bunch of money, and then donated a bunch of it to other nazi groups that spent it buying computer systems to link up up different white power groups so that they could share information. And there's evidence from as early as, like, the mid nineties of them talking about going into places where you can find fans of stuff like different kind of like Sci-Fi media who might be socially isolated and try to push propaganda onto them. So that actually does go back pretty far. And it's hard to say. Like, I don't know exactly. We don't know entirely what Yarvan got up to when he was on Usenet. To some extent, that's a bit of a black box, but his favorite board was a place called Talk Bazaar. And I've spent some time trawling the Usenet archives for Talk Bazaar, which you can find still bizarre talk that's like the names of, like, there's different talk boards, and one of them is like the bazaar, right, okay, okay. And it's like, kind of fun. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I think it's where I would have spent time if I had been a little bit older.

It's like the first place where you would find, like, Internet humor, right? The kind of stuff you eventually you would see on boards, like something awful, and then four chan and now, like, all of Twitter culture, right? So it's inside jokes and memes and what we now call shitposting, right? And Yarvan is like one of the first generation of shitposters. And he says this of his time on Usenet. It was a decentralized system, and more importantly, it had this amazing form of admission control because everyone on it was an engineering student or worked at a tech company or something. So critically, basically, it's not an open platform. The only people here are to some extent involved in academics, involved in the tech industry, and very smart. Right. In 1985, just to get access to.

It at that time.

Yes.

You had to have to be in. Yeah.

So they're the elite in a way. Right? And that's how really how he comes to see them. And Yarvan is definitely part of that elite. In 1985, he'd entered a Johns Hopkins study for mathematically precocious youth, and then he had started taking classes at Brown University. Even at this early stage, of development. He showed a distinct interest in authoritarian leaders and just as critically, in being very wrong about them. In 1991, he wrote in a discussion on Usenet, I wonder if the soviet power ladder of vicious bureaucratic backbiting brings stronger men to the top than the american system of feel good sound bites. Now, given that the USSR collapsed the next year. Not a great prediction.

Yeah, this is. So this is like, you should have had Rainn Wilson on this episode, because you're describing Dwight Schrute.

Yeah, he's got. He's got more than a little bit of that right now.

Like a precociousness and a sort of very specific kind of brilliance and. Yeah, and a preoccupation with, with, with, like, stern leadership and a hundred.

And.

Can you just imagine Dwight just telling everybody that he entered a Johns Hopkins.

Study of mathematical precocious youth? That would be brought up constantly, by.

The way, if there is one way to guarantee you're gonna get your ass kicked on a playground with precocious methods.

You'Re not even gonna get out the first syllable of precocious before they start swinging. Yeah. So while he is at college, Yarvan shows minimal interest in the humanities. He only takes five undergraduate courses in these subjects focused on history.

And where is he in college now?

Brown is where he starts at college. Right. And he graduates in 92. He goes on to be a grad student in a comp sci PhD program at Berkeley. And his goal at that point is to enter the tech industry. Right, which is just starting to really explode from, as the Internet. This is kind of the very. The immediate precursor to the big.com boom. And as he moves from high school to college and then from college to grad school and starts flirting with big tech, he continues spending his time online exploring his first political ideology. And he is initially a libertarian. And I want to quote from a profile Joshua Tate wrote about Yarvin for a book on the radical right. Quote, engineers like Yarvan are typically sorted through competitive academic programs, which they consider analogous to the competition imagined in a libertarian in society. Their world is rational, rule bound, and solvable. Within the subculture, computer software and hardware are the dominant metaphors for society. Such thinking dovetails with the ironclad assumptions about human and market behavior of the austrian school of Economics, led by Ludwig von Mies. Tech culture systems focus also accords with libertarianism's concentration on efficiency and solving government.

And so he's one of these guys who, number one, comes to think, I am again. I've been sorted into this natural aristocracy based on my skill I've earned and the world around me, he sees, seems so chaotic. But the computer systems I'm working with are so sensible and ordered, and the companies that I am interested in all seem to be so much more efficient than the government. Couldn't we fix the government if we made it more like a computer program and more like the tech industry? Which you can't because people don't work that way. But there's always guys who think this way, right?

Yep.

You know, hopefully most of them. I think it doesn't lead anywhere but, like, some bad opinions on the Internet. Unfortunately for Yarvin, it's going to go a little bit further than that. Speaking of disastrous ideological conclusions, you know who's never had any of those are sponsors, allegedly.

I'm Jess Cassavetto, executive producer of the hit Netflix documentary series Dancing for the Devil, the seven M ticket Top cult. And I'm Kalia Gray, former member of seven M Films and Shekinah Church. And we're the host of the new podcast forgive me, for I have followed. Together, we'll be diving even deeper into the unbelievable stories behind seven M films and la based Shekinah Church, an alleged cult that has impacted members for over two decades. Jessica and I will delve into the hidden truths between high control groups and interviewed dancers, church members, and others whose lives and careers have been impacted just like mine. Through powerful, in depth interviews with former members and new, chilling firsthand accounts, the series will illuminate untold and extremely necessary perspectives. Forgive me, for I have followed will be more than an exploration. It's a vital revelation aimed at ensuring these types of abuses never happen again. Listen to forgive me, for I have followed on the I Heart radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Hey, I'm Gianna Prudenti. And I'm Jamae Jackson Gadsden. We're the hosts of let's Talk offline, a new podcast from LinkedIn news and iHeart podcasts.

When you're just starting out in your career, you have a lot of questions, like how do I speak up when I'm feeling overwhelmed? Or can I negotiate a higher salary if this is my first real job? Girl, yes. Each week we answer your unfiltered work questions. Think of us as your work besties you can turn to for advice. And if we don't know the answer, we bring in experts who do, like resume specialist Morgan Sanner. The only difference between the person who doesn't get the job and the person who gets the job is usually who applies. Yeah, I think a lot about that quote. What is it like? You miss 100% of the shots you never take. Yeah, rejection is scary, but it's better than you rejecting yourself. Together, we'll share what it really takes to thrive in the early years of your career without sacrificing your sanity or sleep. Listen to let's talk offline on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

When most people think of the Atlanta Olympic park bombing, they think of Richard Jewell, a security guard who was first painted as a hero by the media.

But later became a suspect in the FBI's investigation.

But in the summer of 1996, it was Eric Rudolph, a terrorist and dedicated soldier in the white supremacist christian identity movement, who executed the bombing and escaped into the night. And that's all most people know about him. What most people don't know about him is that before withdrawing from civilization, he also bombed two abortion clinics and a lesbian nightclub. What even fewer people know about him is that he eluded the authorities for five years in the mountains of North Carolina until his eventual capture in 2003. In what I didn't know about him was how our two lives were connected. From iHeart and Tenderfoot TV, I'm Cole Lacasio, and this is Flashpoint. All eight episodes are available to binge. Now listen for free on the iHeartRadio.

App, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get.

Your podcasts, and join Tenderfoot. Plus, for an ad free binge experience.

They stroll in like regular shoppers.

Did it ever occur to you that all these crazy shoplifting stories are actually connected? $8 million retail theft ring.

I'm going deep undercover.

It's hard to visualize you with hair.

To connect the dots and expose this secret world. It's 100% human trafficking, so you can.

Make $1,000 a day shoplifting.

Yeah, but she's just a worker bean.

I actually confront the real shoplifting queen herself.

Just wanted to see if you'd be interested in talking to me about charges and stuff. No, I have no. A mother of three orchestrating all her.

Crimes from a secluded hilltop mansion.

Walking around the perimeter of the house now, I hear the cops. Do you think we should go?

Let's roll.

Running from the cops.

Listen to Queen of the Con, season.

Six, the California girls on the iHeartRadio.

App, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Gosh, if I was one of those California girls, I'd be sweating.

When you think of mexican culture, you think of avocado. Mariachi, delicious cuisine, and, of course, lucha libre. It doesn't get more mexican than this. Lucha libre is known globally because it is much more than just a sport and much more than just entertainment. Lucha libre is a type of storytelling. It's a dance, it's tradition, it's culture. This is Lucha Libre behind the Mask, a twelve episode podcast in both English and Spanish about the history and cultural richness of lucha libre. And I'm your host, Santos Escobar, the emperor of Lucha Libre and a WWE superstar, Santos Santos. Join me as we learn more about the history behind this spectacular sport from its inception in the United States to how it became a global symbol of mexican culture. We'll learn more about some of the most iconic heroes in the ring. This is Lucha Libre behind the mask. Listen to Lucha Libre behind the mask as part of my Cultura podcast network on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you stream podcasts.

So we're back right now. The kind of thinking that Yarvan has about libertarianism, about being a part of this natural aristocracy, is not really congruent with human liberty in the broad sense. Right. Because, you know, if you are able to, as a business owner, use your liberty, like, unconstrained by government regulations to dump poison in a waterway, right. That is, you are more free as the person running that business, but you're also destroying life and one would say, harming the liberty of thousands of other people who rely on that waterway. Right. So I would say, as someone who has, like, inclined to some libertarian ideas, I don't really understand why so many libertarians are obsessed with this kind of, like, ending of government restrictions on corporations. Yeah, yeah.

And also, and another version of that, I find the anti union rhetoric. So it's so hilarious to me because the formation of a union to collectively bargain with a CEO is the most, like, the most natural expression of free spree speech. It is, yeah, absolutely. Such a natural. And, and so to be like, you know, free speech, I'm a constitutional, you know, libertarian or whatever, and then also in the same breath, be like, unions are, should be illegal. It's.

Yeah, the math doesn't add up. Yeah.

It. Unions are a. A natural growth and a natural oppositional force to exploitation.

Yeah. And I think they also, like, very, like, very objectively increase the amount of, like, freedom. Right. Like, if you're kind of looking at it that way, when people have a way to band together to oppose a much larger, more powerful, you know, more moneyed interest, then they have more agency in their lives. Right? That's, I mean, definitely how I look at it. And I will say, Yarvan, he actually is pretty good at not getting lost in this part of the discourse, right? Because he drops this idea that liberty is a value in any way, shape or form pretty early on. He's not one of these guys who preaches libertarianism because he thinks that it's, or because he's trying to convince people that it's somehow better for human freedom. He's someone who just kind of drops the idea that there's any value in human freedom pretty early on, right? So there's no point in paying service to it, which is at least more honest than a lot of these guys. Now, the major pivot point, which leads to him dropping his libertarian trappings and embracing this more authoritarian belief system, hinges on the place that he was and kind of remains his mental home, which is the early Internet.

The old days of Usenet were a simulacrum of what is today Yarvan's ideal society. As I stated before, back then you couldn't post unless you were someone with a degree of, like, skill, money, or access to a large institution. So you would only get new users in any large amount every September when you get new college classes of kids who would get onboarded and start posting, right? And so for a few years, every September, the Internet would be annoying for a while, while all these newbies came in who don't know, like the social mores, and they would have to get acclimatized, right? But there were always more old heads, people who had been there a long time to keep the new people in line. And there was this natural hierarchy based on age and technical skill. And then one year, late 1993, three, Usenet opens up to anyone with an Internet connection, and suddenly you have what people call eternal September, right? Like it's never ended since 1993. Because there were no, there's not been any kind of like guardrails to block new people from coming on after that point. This is, you know, it's an important moment in Internet history.

It's a catastrophic moment for Curtis Yarvin, right? And the mental impact this has is key to understanding him. In one interview with Tablet magazine, he complained you had this sort of de facto aristocracy that didn't know was an aristocracy, and then it fell apart. These are all big lord of the Rings guys. So I'll use a lord of the Rings analogy. They talk about this like the period of time when the elves ruled everything, before Sauron had his big war, right? Like before the breaking of the world. That's eternal September. That ruins this kind of, like, more noble golden age and brings about this dirty, grubby age of men.

I'll take your word for it. I'm not a lord of the Rings guy. I mean, I respect it, but I just don't have that level of knowledge.

Yeah, I do. I'm wearing a Lord of the Rings hat right now. Can back that claim. All these guys are big. JD Vance, his venture capital company, was named after one of the rings in the Lord of the Rings. Peter thiel's surveillance company is named Palantir from the Lord of the Rings. So this is very much the language that they all speak.

Funny. That's also one of Stephen Colbert's obsessions. And I wondered if they might find common ground and have a fun chat on that subject.

I'm certain they could have a chat about it. I think Colbert would probably be kind of horrified of some of the things that they're referencing and they're like, you named your company after this thing that is specifically a device that only the evil wizard uses. Okay.

Yeah.

But I don't know. That would be an interesting conversation. So I think this period of time, this kind of collapse of this natural. What he sees as a natural aristocracy, is key to understanding why Yarvin comes to hate democracy, right? Because it kind of ruined his Internet playground the first place where he ever felt that he fit in. Right. That's sort of what I see as, like, the, er, moment of his, like, coming to hate this kind of idea of any kind of democratic society. Now, if you're going to claim that you and your friends on the Internet back in the day were like the aristocracy of some long lost utopia of logic invites people to look at what you were posting on the Internet back then, and I've looked at some of Yarvin's old posts, and socrates, he wasn't. He does seem to have spent some of it writing comedy for a hacking and diy media collective called the Cult of the Dead cow. This is where we get to, like, the weirdest connection here, because if you've heard of the cult of the Dead cow recently, it's because Beto O'Rourke was also a member.

Yeah. Yeah. So he and Beto have a very, very strange connection to each other. Now, the cult of the dead cow was, like, a complicated thing. One Reuters article I found describes it as the oldest group of computer hackers in us history. I think that oversells how cool Yarvan's involvement in it. Is because I think he was mostly. They were also, like, a media collective, so they put out pieces of writing and whatnot. And I think that's mostly what Yarvin's involvement was. Right. And the best evidence I have of what he was writing for them is a satiric piece of badger human hybrid erotica, which I think might hold a little bit of evidence of his future interest in race science, although it's hard to say. Do you want to hear some of his badger human hybrid erotica?

Hold on, let me get some lube.

Love me for my genes, says Antonio, kneeling. If you cannot love me for myself, you must love me for my genese. I've never told anyone this before. I've always kept it to myself. I have always let them think it. But an accident of cruel nature that I have white hair on my cheekbones and a thoroughly disreputable looking nose. But the fact is that I am part badger on my father's side. So I don't know. I don't know what to say about that. I know it's a joke. It's a bit, right? I don't think it lands. Maybe it was funnier back in the early Internet, although maybe the bar was just a lot lower there.

It feels like there's some context. We're missing a. Like, just. Just. I'm digging hard for some.

So am I.

It just seems like there was some inside joke about Badger fucking or something that. That we're not. That was sort of like, came before this.

This has to be part of a dialog that we've lost pieces of over the years, right? It is like, about two pages of, like, badger erotica. That is. It's weirdly, the love me for my jeans line stands out to me, but I may be reading more into that. That is necessary. But, yeah. So, you know, that's the kind of stuff he's doing. He's like, it's pretty lighthearted comedy, right? Or it's at least attempting to be so he's not, as far as I can tell, on, like, the serious hacking side of what the cult of the dead cow is doing at this period of time. Now, Yarvan weathered the fall of Usenet, and not long after the eternal September began, he dropped out of Berkeley for a job at a tech company. He started flirting with the specific strains of more authoritarian, money centered, libertarian ideas ideology, as opposed to the old school guys who actually really were pretty focused on human liberty, I think. Kind of the last dregs of those guys you saw Pinn and Teller would be great evidence of that. That kind of libertarian was a lot more prominent back then. And Yarvin is sort of right on the edge of the folks who got a lot of money in the tech industry and started getting angry that they have to still pay taxes to keep the roads up.

That's kind of where he moves into. And Yarvan is eventually going to kind of come out of that as a monarchist, and it behooves us to look at how that happened. Now, there are some signs of his ideological turn in another short story he wrote for the cult of the dead cow the year after that badger story in 1994. This piece is titled the Bishop, and it opens with the lines, no one has come into the cathedral in some time. It's about an old bishop who exists out of time in a moldering cathedral that no one has visited in years. And at one point, Yarvin, possibly describing himself, writes, the bishop is a man of logic. Unlike many older people, he is unwilling to repaint the world he sees around him to make it a more comfortable place in which to live. He recognizes unpleasant facts. Indeed, he delights in them. In the act of recognition, he finds proof that his faculties have not decayed to that state of contented oblivion which he believes a sure precursor to death. And this is kind of noteworthy in part because the term cathedral is going to be really important for Yarva, and he's going to come to use it as a term to refer to the news media, the political establishment, and academia.

Right. Everyone who annoys him, right, is the cathedral. And this is sort of like the evil regime that he's going to set himself to the task of destroying. And this is how a lot of these guys think. It's why there's so much focus, why guys like I, Vance, spends so much time attacking schools, attacking professors in academia. It's why there's so much hatred of journalists, right? These are the people who, in his eyes, are invested in propping up a clearly dysfunctional, failing society. Right? And so you have to destroy the cathedral in order to build anything new. That's what he's going to come to believe, right? In the early two thousands, the.com bubble bursts. And at some point after that, Yarvin wound up with several hundred grand as the result of a buyout of a company worked at. So not enough to retire, but enough to sit around and really think about what he wants to do next.

What year is this?

This would be like in the early two thousands. So this is all happening sometime between, like, 2001 and 2004. You know, the.com bubble bursts sometime after 911, I think, is when he gets bought out. And by 2003 or four, he's kind of sitting around on a pile of money, reading a lot, trying to figure out what he wants to do next with his life. Life. What he kind of decides is that he wants to think about politics and economics. Now, Yarvan had made some friends during his tech years, and he'd gotten interested in austrian school economists, mostly because of this University of Tennessee law professor, Glenn Reynolds, who was like an early blogger who had gotten Yarvin interested on a guy named Ludwig von Mies. And eventually, through this, Yarvin gets interested in a fan of mies, another theoretician named Marie Rothbarde. Bard Rothbard was a foundational anarcho capitalist thinker. I don't really like that term, but that's what they called themselves. And he basically believes, like, there should not be a state, right. There should not be any power higher than individuals and corporations spending their money to make things happen. Right.

That's kind of the gist of it, being anarchist.

Yeah. Yeah. And, you know, I think, like a more, or like an anarchist would argue the fact that you have a bunch of money is, like, as much a problematic hierarchy as anything that the state does. And not necessarily, you can't really be an anarcho capitalist, a lot of people would argue. But Rothbard is one who feels like basically, that the state, the primary reason the state is unethical is that it stops people from doing what they want to do with their money. Right? Whereas an anarchist would be like, well, the reason that the state is unethical is that states can do a lot of harm to people at scale. Right? Anyway, none of that really matters to the point, which is that he gets really interested in this guy Rothbard. And Rothbard, one of the things he writes about is this kind of anger at the concept of people advocating for civil rights. Anyone advocating for civil rights, in Rothbard's mind, is an enemy, right? Because the only way to, to advocate for civil rights is to advocate for the state, to make rules about those rights, and that leads inevitably to tyranny. Rothbard wrote, behind the honeyed but patently absurd pleas for equality is a ruthless drive for placing themselves, the elites, at the top of a new hierarchy of power.

And this is something you see a lot on the right today. This idea that, like, any group of people who are advocating for their own civil, who are advocating for civil rights because they're being. Being oppressed under the present system are secretly trying to make themselves rulers, right? All they really want to do is oppress you by, I don't know, getting the right to vote or own credit cards or whatever. So that's kind of like a big part of Rothbard's belief system. And Yarvan really takes to that now. And that quote that I just read from him came out in 95. So you get the kind of feeling like this is the sort of thinking Yarvan is hoovering up in that period right before the.com boom and then the.com bust. And ultimately his reading of these austrian school guys leads him to another dude named Thomas Carlisle. Now, Carlisle has been dead for a while. He's a scottish philosopher from the 18 hundreds, and he's kind of seen as a proto to a lot of these kind of more modern thinkers that he's reading. And Carlyle is. He's an authoritarian who believes that you need a strong man to stop groups of marginalized people from making themselves the new tyrants, right?

And he's also, as we'll talk about, a massive racist. He's one of these guys who justifies slavery as being a fundamentally ethical system for reasons of, like, basically, certain groups of people are different genetically. So slavery is a natural, like, hierarchy in society. So these are the kind of people that Yarvin is digesting when he comes upon the work of a fellow named Hans Hermann Hopp. Haup is a german born political theorist and a leading austrian school economist. He's another anarcho cast capitalist. And hop is a big advocate of monarchy in a way that he defines monarchy as a privately owned government, as opposed to a democracy, which he calls a publicly owned government. And Hop believes that the transition from monarchy to democracy over the 20th century was like the big mistake that we made as humans and has caused nothing but civilizational decline ever since. And from hop, Yarvin gets the idea that the best way to run anything is to have one guy be in charge of it. Right? You can't effectively run an organization if there's any power sharing. The only way to do anything is to have a single person be invested with absolute power.

Right? I know that's kind of like a tortured logical route, but those are sort of the ingredients that eventually cook up to him becoming a monarchist. Right? Now, we might say that's not the most logical thing, right? If you look at what happened to all of the absolute monarchies, they kind of destroyed each other circa world one. And Yarvin would argue, no, no, no, those weren't real absolute monarchies. They all made too many compromises with different sort of democratical instruments within those societies. And that's the reason why Austria Hungary fell. That's the reason why the Tsar fell, right? They didn't have quite enough power. I think that's silly.

Well, sure. I mean, it places such an unreasonable amount of faith in the. In one person or in just like, the integrity of humans. The reason that you have to embrace a messy system is because people are inherently messy.

Yeah, I think that's a great way to put it.

A monarchy is a wonderful fantasy. But, like, how do you pick the guy or the woman? How do you pick that person?

And then, like, what if he gets hit on the head?

What if he's wrong and right?

What if he's drunk?

Dalai Lama thing. Where. Where? It's. It's a birthright thing. And then, like, what if. What if they're just, like, a narcissistic suicidal or depressive or whatever? Like, what if they want nothing to do with it? I don't know. It just seems nuts.

It's this wild. It's this thing that, like, everyone understands the frustration with democracy, right? Like, it's really messy and really annoying a lot of the time. And, like, people make a lot of bad decisions, especially even as collectives, groups of people, make really bad decisions a lot of the time, right? Yeah. But then saying, like, the solution to this is to have one guy be in charge. And it's like, well, number one, how do you pick that guy? Number two, like, we've all seen it. Like, people change over the course of their lives, right? Like, what happens if that guy, like, his mental decapacity gets declined or whatever, or he gets obsessed with something weird and crazy and dangerous, which is what happens to every monarchy, right? They all wind up ruled by maniacs who make terrible decisions, which is, like, why we had World War one. You have all these monarchs who were obsessed with these very silly attitudes and these very silly petty grievances between each other and had made generations of terrible decisions when it came to purchasing arms and building their military machines. And, like, it just turns out that the bad decisions of one guy are certainly not, like, any less catastrophic than the bad decisions of, like, groups of people, right?

Anytime you've got people who spend all of their time, like, theorizing about the way things ought to be, as opposed to, like, dealing with the way people are, you're going to wind up with nonsense, right? And, like, that's that. Unfortunately, every now and then, we get to see, like, what that nonsense looks like when people actually put it in place? In the case of absolute monarchies like this, we got the trenches in World War one. In the case of a very authoritarian communism, we got Stalin. And I guess part of why I think Yarvin is important to understand is that as kooky as a lot of this stuff is, he is a guy who wants to take these theories that he made himself when he was sitting alone in his apartment department reading books and not really interacting with real people. He's a guy who wants those theories to govern the lives of hundreds of millions, ideally billions. Right? And that's a real dangerous kind of person. Regular people can sit around and read their books and talk about, well, this might be neat or this might be neat, but whenever you're talking about, I know how to reorder all of society, you've become dangerous.

And that's kind of what Yarvin is doing during this period of time where he's sitting at home and he's reading his books. So the system that he pulls out of this period where he's just, like, reading everything he can get his hands on, is that monarchs are. The monarchy is the ideal kind of system of government because it's the best at maximizing long term profits within a society. Because monarchs have to think long term. Right? They can't be destructive in the short term like leaders in a democracy are, because they have a limited term limit. Maybe they only care about benefiting themselves. A monarch wouldn't act that way because they have no desire to destroy their own property. And again, I would point you back to World War one.

Yeah.

We could talk about like the saudi royal family, too, right? Entirely prominently prominent by oil bursts. Literally, most of the monarchies that have ever been, have collapsed as a result of the fact that that's also an inherently destructive thing. Some of that just comes down to human nature. But he does try to deal with this. The fact that monarchies clearly don't work the way that he thinks that they should. And he thinks that a big part of the issue is that they all make too many compromises. All of these monarchies that collapsed around the turn of the century had allowed some democratic elements into society, and they had allowed that because there were revolutions, right? People occupied Vienna for a period of time in 48. There were a bunch of socialist uprisings in the middle of the 19th century. And as a result, a lot of these absolute monarchies introduced reforms. And he sees those reforms as this was a terrible step that ensured their demise as opposed to? Well, the absolute monarch chose to make those reforms because they could not hold on to power otherwise. But again, there's never a perfect logical consistency with guys.

Can I ask this question?

Yeah.

So, like, if you're an absolute monarch, are you delegating anything? You're delegating to? Like, what are the struct, what is the. Is the, like, do you have to be just like an insane micromanager to be.

Yeah, but, but I think the key is. The key is to him, the difference would be, like a bureaucratic structure wherein there are other centers of power, right? Like, if you've got a constitutional monarch, but there's still some kind of, like, Congress or senate or whatever that has some things that are within its scope of a monarch. Right. He wants. He wants. He does actually view it as a CEO where they do delegate, but the CEO is ultimately the guy in power.

Who picks all the deleg. Delegies.

I mean, I think the CEO, in his ideal, like, situation, right. Like, his. His ideal system of government that he kind of comes around to is like the way Facebook is run, right, where you do have, like, a board of directors, technically, but Zuckerberg has enough control of stock that, like, no one can force him out. The buck stops with him. Like, he ultimately has all of the power in that organization. That's how Yarvin thinks countries should be run, right?

In his defense, Facebook is a flawless organization.

Yeah. We all know. Nothing ever goes wrong there. So the final straw for Yarvan's tolerance of democracy came in 2004 as a result of the swift boat veterans for truth scandal. You remember this, I'm sure, right?

Oh, yeah, of course.

Yeah, yeah. This is. Back in the 2004 election, John Kerry was the democratic nominee. Kerry had been wounded three times in Vietnam, and then after he had left the service, he had become an anti war activist. Right. He, like, testified in Congress. This was a really big deal. And so, number one, as a result, conservatives had never really forgiven John Kerry for, as they saw, betraying the country in Vietnam. And also, obviously, like, Bush was running on the back of two wars that he had got in the country and Kerry had been against those. So there was this pretty hideous conflict. And the way that a lot of folks on the right chose to, like, particularly those within Bush's campaign, chose to respond, was by arguing and bringing up people who claimed, people who had served in Vietnam, who claimed that Kerry had lied about his service, right. That he hadn't really done the things he'd done, that his Purple Hearts were essentially like, due to exaggerations. And none of this was true. And, in fact, when journalists actually talked to people who had served with Kerry, they're like, no, he was like a very good soldier who was wounded repeatedly doing his job.

But the propaganda campaign largely worked. Right? And yarvan, critically, he bought the propaganda campaign, and he was angry that the media, in his eyes, worked to protect Kerry, which proved that it was fundamentally evil and allied with academia and what people now call the deep state career government employees, is operating this sort of shadow government that really ran things. Right. His attitude is that because John Kerry didn't suffer enough from the swift boat scandal, that means that the whole media complex in the United States was corrupt and needed to be destroyed, which is a crazy thing to lead you to that conclusion. It's interesting to me because this guy really does. He tries to portray himself as this, like, dark philosopher, this, like, esoteric, almost political madman, but when you get right down to it, he's like your crank uncle who's angry about John Kerry on Facebook.

Well, also, the swift boating. It's a weird thing to. It's a weird thing to take from that whole chapter of american political history because it. Because swift boating works.

Yeah.

And the media, by the way, took the bait and just, like, amplified the story and. Yeah. And if they tried to protect Carrie, which I'm sure a few journalists probably wanted, certainly individuals.

Yeah.

They failed. Yeah.

It didn't work. And that's how I would say is like, I think if you're saying what happened, the swift boating thing is why I lost faith in the media. That's reasonable, but not for the reason he did. Right. Yeah. But anyway, that's where he goes. Right. Speaking of the shadow government that really runs things, that's who all of our sponsors are affiliated with, allegedly.

I'm Jess Cassavetto, executive producer of the hit Netflix documentary series dancing for the Devil, the seven M TikTok cult, Clea Gray, former member of seven M films, and Shekinah Church, and we're the host of the new podcast forgive me, for I have followed. Together, we'll be diving even deeper into the unbelievable stories behind seven M films and la based Shekinah Church, an alleged cult that has impacted members for over two decades. Jessica and I will delve into the hidden truths between high control groups and interview dancers, church members, and others whose lives and careers have been impacted just like mine. Through powerful, in depth interviews with former members and new, chilling firsthand accounts, the series will illuminate untold and extremely necessary perspectives. Forgive me, for I have followed will be more than an exploration. It's a vital revelation aimed at ensuring these types of abuses never happen again. Listen to forgive me, for I have followed on the I Heart radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. Hey, I'm Gianna Prudenti. And I'm Jamae Jackson Gadsden. We're the host of let's Talk offline, a new podcast from LinkedIn news and iHeart podcasts.

When you're just starting out in your career, you have a lot of questions, like how do I speak up when I'm feeling overwhelmed? Or can I negotiate a higher salary if this is my first real job? Girl, yes. Each week we answer your unfiltered work questions. Think of us as your work besties you can turn to for advice. And if we don't know the answer, we bring in experts who do, like resume specialist Morgan Sander. The only difference between the person who doesn't get the job and the person who gets the job is usually who applies. Yeah, I think a lot about that quote. What is it like? You miss 100% of the shots you never take. Yeah, rejection is scary, but it's better than you rejecting yourself. Together, we'll share what it really takes to thrive in the early years of your career. Career without sacrificing your sanity or sleep. Listen to let's talk offline on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

When most people think of the Atlanta Olympic park bombing, they think of Richard Jewell, a security guard who was first painted as a hero by the media but later became a suspect in the FBI's investigation. But in the summer of 1996, it was Eric Rudolph, a terrorist and dedicated soldier in the white supremacist christian identity movement who executed the bombing and escaped into the night. And that's all most people know about him. What most people don't know about him is that before withdrawing from civilization, he also bombed two abortion clinics and a lesbian nightclub. What even fewer people know about him is that he eluded the authorities for five years in the mountains of North Carolina until his eventual capture in 2003. And what I didn't know about him was how our two lives were connected. From iHeart and Tenderfoot TV, I'm Cole Lacasio, and this is Flashpoint. All eight episodes are available to binge. Now listen for free on the iHeartRadio.

App, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get.

Your podcasts, and join Tenderfoot. Plus, for an ad free binge experience.

They stroll in like regular shoppers. Did it ever occur to you that.

All these crazy shoplifting stories are actually connected?

An $8 million retail theft ring.

I'm going deep undercover.

It's hard to visualize you with hair.

To connect the dots and expose this secret world. It's 100% human trafficking, so you can.

Make $1,000 a day shoplifting.

Yeah, but she's just a worker bean.

I actually confront the real shoplifting queen herself.

Just wanted to see if you'd be interested in talking to me about charges and stuff, so I have no comment. A mother of three orchestrating all her.

Crimes from a secluded Hilltop mansion.

We're walking around the perimeter of the house now. I hear the cops. Do you think we should go?

Let's roll.

We're running from the cops.

Listen to Queen of the Con, season.

Six, the California girls, on the iHeartRadio app, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Gosh, if I was one of those California girls, I'd be sweating. Senora sex ed is not your mommy sex talk. This show is la platica like you've never heard it before. We're breaking the stigma and silence around sex and sexuality in Latinx communities. This podcast is an intergenerational conversation between latinas from Gen X to Gen Z. We're covering everything from body image to representation in film and television. We even interview iconic latinas like puerto rican actress Ana Ortiz. I felt in control of my own physical body and my own self. I was on birth control. I had sort of had my first sexual experience. If you're in your Senora era or know someone who is, then this is the show for you. We're your hosts, Diosa and Mala, and you might recognize us from our flagship podcast, Locator Radio. We're so excited for you to hear our brand new podcast, Senora sex ed. Listen to Senora sex ed on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you get your podcast.

We're back. So now the years that Yarvin is kind of doing his, having his period in the wilderness, coming up with his political ideology, largely like 2003 or four, to like, 2007 or so, are the years that the tech industry like that brings us. Web 2.0 is starting to emerge. You get Google. Apple had been around for a while, right? But we start to see what's going to become the smartphone era grind towards coming into being. Facebook also starts 2006, or seven, I think, is when it very first starts out. This is the early birth of the Web 2.0 era, which are all of these founder driven startups, for the most part, right? And Yarvin comes to see this system that gives us Google and Facebook as inherently better than the system that governs the country, right? And it's more akin to his kind of idealized absolute monarchy. So by this point in time, around 2007, Yarvin has more or less come across all the ingredients of his new ideology, this kind of reactionary monarchism with austrian economic tendencies. The problem is that none of these philosophers that he likes, these guys like Rothbard and hop, have quite gotten it right.

And so he decides I've got to start putting my ideas out there. I've finally figured it out. I've consolidated the contradictions between all these systems, and now I'm going to start putting it out for people to see, right? So in 2007, he breaks out of this kind of chrysalis of reading that he'd put himself in, and he comes up with a blog under a pin name, Mincius mold Bug. And it's under this pin name that he's going to start writing a bunch of essays of political theory. In an interview with Max Raskin, Yarvin describes the origin of this nickname, Mincius mold Bug. This way. It came from two different handles I was using in different places. I would post occasionally on Reddit or hacker news. Sometimes I would get banned and I would choose the name of a new classical figure. And I just happened to land on Mincius. And then I was doing some economics posting, and I posted something about gold, but I said mold instead of gold because I was talking about something with a hypothetical restricted support supply. So it's just kind of like a foreign name, but it sounds like a little bit sinister.

And it's interesting to me. Mencius, the first name comes from a confucian philosopher from the 300s BC who was a major figure in that kind of thought. And he had, during the Warring States period, interviewed a bunch of different kings and written a book about what he'd learned about ruling. Now, Mincias was kind of focused on getting monarchs to act more benevolently towards the poor and the downtrodden. So he's not really a figure that has a lot to do the kind of politics Yarvin is about to espouse. I think he largely picked the name because it makes him sound kind of sinister. But he starts putting out his new thoughts on politics in this blog in a series of essays called Unqualified Reservations, all geared at getting his readers on board with the idea of reorganizing society away from democracy and towards a kind of enlightened one man rule that he believes is going to work a lot better. Unlike most philosophy philosophers, Yarvin peppers his essays with casual slurs. In reading one, where he talks about World War two, he refers to the Japanese repeatedly by a common slur at the time. And in another, he makes a satiric statement about how the indigent poor should be destroyed and turned into biodiesel fuel.

This kind of stuff, it has the impact of getting, like, on the rare occasions in these early days that, like, major news outlets will look at his work, they'll kind of decide to ignore him, because this, it's this guy dropping a bunch of racial slurs and crude jokes. He's clearly not a serious thinker. But the other thing that this style of discourse does is it's very attractive to young men, particularly young, kind of intelligent autodidacts in the tech industry who spend a lot of time reading the Internet. Right. And it is kind of in the same way that a lot of, like, the way people talk on four chan is going to be attractive to these kinds of guys. Right. And what you're seeing in these early mold bug episodes with this use of slurs and these kind of, like, joking, not joking statements about killing people is the precursor to the way the alt right is going to talk about issues. Right. And use kind of humor and jokes that aren't really jokes to kind of push more extreme ideas. Right. Mold bug is really the guy who starts doing that in. I don't know if you'd say he was the first, but he's certainly the first with a platform to be doing that in a way that's really influential to a lot of these people.

Now, can I ask.

Now, the real.

I have two questions.

Yeah.

Yeah. One is, are we sure we're pronouncing Mencius correctly? Is it not Mencius?

I think it is Mencius. Sorry?

Mencius.

Yes. Yes. But it's spelled. Yeah.

And I have no idea. I just, when you said it was a Confucian, suddenly thought, well, maybe. Anyway.

Yeah, I think it is Mencius. Yeah.

And then my second question is, to what extent I find the humor aspect of this fascinating because it raises the possibility. Or I guess my question is, where on the spectrum of just kind of very mendacious and angry person who wants to reshape the world versus, like, like, all the way to the other end of just being like, a really giddy shit stirrer gadfly with who just wants to throw crazy ideas out there and. And get a reaction out of people the way, like, 90% of twitter is like, where on that spectrum is he? Because it does sound like there's like, you know, churning up poor people to create biodiesel is. Is a joke. It's a tasteless joke.

It's like a swifty Thomas Swift or it's like Jonathan Swift type joke. Right. Like.

But it could be construed as just, like, trolling.

Right, right. Well, I think that's kind of the key point. So, like, what you're talking about is, like, the term we use for it is shitposting. Right. And Yarvin is very much a shitposter. Right. But he's also using that as a tool where he understands that this is how young men particularly talk on the Internet. And it is something that inherently, if you're talking this way, if you're engaging this way, you have more credibility with them than people who are trying to be more respectable, who largely this chunk of folks doesn't think highly of these traditional intellectuals, actual elites, academics and journalists and the like. They have a lot of disdain for, but they trust someone who communicates like them. And so by using these kind of, like, by basically peppering in sort of trolling language in these very serious articles arguing for anti democratic politics, he makes himself credible to them. And he also, there's also a sense that because he's including some of this stuff that is a lot racist year, there's something almost forbidden knowledge about the stuff that he's putting out. Right. That makes them want to share it with each other.

And that's very much like a factor in his success. What he's doing here is very much intentional and very intelligent and very effective. And if you want to look at the ultimate evolution of these sort of tactics, I think a great touch point would be the crisis church shooters manifesto, which included a lot of these, like, inside jokes, a lot of, like, forum troll language wrapped around serious arguments for, like, why people should carry out white supremacist attacks. And it's a kind of tactic that is really what gave us the alt right as a political force. And it's still very much how these people communicate now. I think it started to hurt them recently, the whole, the weird stuff that Tim walls began pulling out has actually been a really effective thing, because when you actually take the way these people talk amongst each other and put it up in front of an audience, it's deeply off putting to most people. But it also kind of led to this establishment of an internal language for these folks that led to an ossification of their ideological tendencies. We're all using the same kind of terms and words that we've come to recognize as, like, dog whistles for different things.

And Yarvan is really doing that in a very organized way. He's good at developing terms for people to use that get adopted on a large scale. The best example of this would be his term, the cathedral, which he uses to mean this nexus of everything he doesn't like, the liberal media, the university system, academia, career government employees, everything he considers bad, everything his ideal monarch would destroy. Right? In his ideal world, there's not going to be an independent academic community. There's not going to be newspapers or journalists, just a king and an aristocracy. And of course, he's going to be a natural member of that aristocracy. Now he does kind of the last piece of this ideology he's putting together is he has to explain why a lot of these real world feudalist governments that fella apart, all fell apart. And part of it is obviously, they gave too much freedom to people who weren't the monarch. But the other thing he comes up with is that old monarchies denied citizens the freedom to exit. And so in this ideal world, he supposes countries will be small, like the size of a city in most cases, and they'll compete with citizens who would have the freedom to leave.

Right? So it's fine. Now, there's a lot of questions that aren't answered here, like, how do you make a society, society like, function that way and a world as interconnected as ours? How do you stop one monarch from repeatedly taking over other? Like, how do you stop? Why wouldn't they use force? Why would people just let valuable subjects leave? How do people leave if the monarch can stop them from taking their assets out? All of these things that, like, would be actual problems if anyone tried to do this sort of thing. Like, there's not actually an answer to this, but that's kind of his idealized version of a society is a bunch of small monarchies all over the world that people can theoretically leave and move between the way people leave companies and go to work for other companies. So you know how much everybody loves work. That's how the whole government should be.

That's wild. I hadn't thought of it as on such a small scale. Here's another question. In the same way that, like, a company will have a board that can, like, oust a CEO, or like, like, is there any. Is there any stopgap measure for, like, a disastrous leader?

No.

Or some, like, let's say someone has, like, a brain eating worm.

Yeah, right, right.

But they are showing no symptoms when they are appointed or ascend to the. The monarchy. But then over the next five years, they become, like, absolutely batshit crazy. Is there any stopgap there?

The only stopgap he builds in is the idea that, well, theoretically, if the ruler's bad, everyone would be able to leave and then their system would like that.

Oh, it's that thing.

Yeah, it's like. It's that thing where it's like, well, but what if he wants to shoot people who try to.

It's like Rand Paul saying, like, civil rights are. Are dumb, because if you put, like, a whites only sign in front of your store, you're going to lose business and you're going to go out of business and the. The market will keep you from being racist. Meanwhile, like.

It didn't back when people did that.

Yeah, back when people did that, it was work until the laws kicked in.

Yeah, yeah. No, and it's. It's this, it's these. It's this weird mix of, like, naivety and, like, starry eyed thinking that to a degree, I think he's just kind of being dishonest with the naivete. Like, he knows any state like this would just be a dictatorship, like, enforced through violence. Right, but that's what he wants as long as he's a part of the aristocracy. And he's just kind of built in this. Well, people would just leave if they didn't like it because he has to have some answer for it. Right. But I. I kind of think he knows how ugly a system like this would be in practice. He's just more or less with it right now. The last kind of ingredient to the ideological system Yarvin is cooking up is, of course, racism. And I want to read a passage from an article in TechCrunch about Yarvin and his followers and how they are, quote, obsessed with a concept called human biodiversity, what used to be called scientific racism. Specifically, they believe that IQ is one of, if not the most important personal traits and that it's predominantly genetic. Neo reactionaries would replace or supplement the divine right of kings and the aristocracy with the genetic right of elites.

Right. So this is another element of how he tries to justify. Well, my system's smarter than the old school of monarchies, right? It's not just these bunch of families are the people who are in charge. Our aristocracy is people who naturally are superior because of their iq, because obviously that tells you everything about a person right.

Emotional IQ, are we?

Yeah.

Is he talking emotional iq?

No, no, no. That's not worth much. Absolutely not. I'm for that.

I'm for people with, like, very strong emotional iqs being in charge of things.

Yeah, yeah. No, no, no. That's. That's not the system. We're gonna have just a bunch of guys who are really good at coding, running everything, you know, that way everything can finally work the way Uber does. Oh, so I'll feel unsafe all the time. Okay, cool. So it's probably not surprising mold bug's theories take off among specifically a lot of Silicon Valley young men, right, who are excessively online. And it also starts to take off. He begins being spread by a lot of far right folks on the Internet in kind of the mid aughts who find his work and share it amongst themselves. Themselves. It's just two years after mold Bug starts his blog that Peter Thiel gives a speech about democracy being incompatible with liberty. And Thiel starts putting money Yarvin's way. Right. He's probably the number one guy sending money towards Yarvin backing. He backs a tech company that Yarvin starts, and he's just generally sort of like his early sort of moneyed backer, right. And Yarvan kind of, as a result, he starts getting shared, almost like people are handing out drugs to each other. We want to keep this on the down low.

You don't want too many people to know publicly that you're reading mold bug. But have you read this latest article? Have you checked out this blog? And he starts getting invited to give talks, and he starts saying things in these talks, like speeches at these schools, to these conservative clubs and the like. If Americans want to change their government, they're going to have to get over their dictator phobia. There's really no other solution. And that's kind of the thinking that is going to lead directly into the alt right and its embrace of Donald Trump. Yarvin is one of the key ideological pieces. There he is. He is building a bridge that is eventually going to lead to how a lot of these people think about what Trump should be. Right. It's part of why there's a lot of this joking, not joking talk about wanting Trump to be like a guy. Right. It's a lot of these guys who are knowingly or unknowingly parroting thoughts that kind of came initially into the right from Yarvan. And, yeah, that's part one. In part two, we're going to talk about how he actually gets connected to politics and kind of where we are today with this guy.

But, yeah. How are you feeling, Ed?

I'm a little rattled.

It's dark stuff, right?

Yeah, that's the right reaction.

What happens if he is in the court, the high court of this monarch and gets a stomach flu and throws up during a ceremony of some kind and is sent to a dungeon for the rest of his life at no fault of his own? Like what? Which is a very reasonable expectation of a monarchical system. And so is he then sitting in the dungeon saying, it's still the best. This is still the best. This is still the best system.

Speaker one. I don't think he thinks that could happen, because I think he doesn't believe something that you and I believe, and I think most rational people believe, which is that, like, power corrupts. So even if you are not the kind of guy who would throw people in a dungeon when you become king, just the fact that being a king is deranging. Right. Having that kind of power, you will eventually get used to exercising it and doing things like punishing people who just annoy you. And we know that this happens because we have a lot of examples of when people are made dictators, how folks who were at least more normal at one point become more violent and dangerous to be around. Right. This is a very well documented thing that comes with power. And I think he doesn't believe that fundamentally because he thinks that power naturally accumulates in natural systems of elites. Right. So it can't be bad for them.

Or I suppose an argument might be, well, if I started to see those tendencies in the leader, I would then go to a different monarchy with a better leader. But what if it's like, what if you're the first one? What if you're the first example of that?

Of a guy going crazy?

Of a guy going crazy.

I think it's also like a failure. These guys all consider themselves historians, but they don't study history in any kind of, like, rigorous academic fashion. And, like, every time I hear this argument about, well, people would just leave. I think about, like, what happened to jewish people in Nazi Germany, where if they wanted to leave, the state would take all of their property effectively. Right. Some people did get to leave, but they didn't get to take their assets with them. Right? Like, that was a theft, was a part of the system. And it's a thing that a state operated by a single man with absolute power and a grudge can do. And there's no reason in his system that it wouldn't happen to anyone trying to leave a bad, you know, CEO King. Right. But I either, again, he's just not bringing this up because he doesn't care about the people he thinks this would happen to, or he just isn't read enough on the kind of history that's actually relevant to how a system like this would work in real life. You know, that's what I would kind of suspect. Yeah, yeah, yeah. People have tried this, Curtis, which he may very well be fully aware of, and just kind of trying to do a little sleight of hand here, right?

Cause he's more or less fine with who he thinks would be the people targeted unfairly in this system, which is like, he's one of these guys who is annoyed with the left and progressives, right. He hates social justice and advocates for social justice. So if those people get targeted, he doesn't have a problem with it. You know, I think part of it's just not believing you could ever be the victim of the system you seek to put in place, which, you know, statistically, you want to look at, like, what happened to the early Bolsheviks after the Bolshevik revolution. Most of those guys did live to retirement, right? And, you know, you want to talk about, like, the first generation of nazi street fighters. A lot of those guys didn't wind up retiring either. Anyway, Ed, let's retire for this episode until part two. People should check out your podcast snafu. Season two is out now, and yeah, we'll be back on Thursday.

All right, see you then.

Behind the Bastards is a production of Cool Zone Media. For more from Cool Zone Media, visit our website, coolzonemedia, or check us out.

On the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. I'm Jess Cassavetto, executive producer of the hit Netflix documentary series dancing for the devil, the seven M, TikTok Cult. And I'm Kalia Gray, former member of seven M Films and Shekinah Church. And we're the host of the new podcast Forgive me for I have followed. Together, we'll be diving even deeper into the unbelievable stories behind seven M films and Shekinah Church. Listen to forgive me for I have followed on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Carrie Champion, and this is season four of naked sports. Up first, I explore the making of a rivalry. Caitlin Clark versus Angel Reese. Every great player needs a foil.

I know.

I'll go down to history. People are talking. Women's basketball is just because of one single game. Clark and Reese have changed the way we consume women's sports. Listen to the making of a rivalry Caitlin Clark versus Angel Reese on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you get your podcast, presented by Capital One, founding partner of I Heart Women's sports. Hey, I'm Gianna Prudenti. And I'm Jamaic Jackson Gadsden. We're the hosts of let's Talk offline from LinkedIn news and I Heart podcasts. There's a lot to figure out when you're just starting to your career. That's where we come in. Think of us as your work besties you can turn to for advice. And if we don't know the answer, we bring in people who do, like negotiation expert maury Tahiri poor. If you start thinking about negotiations as just a conversation, then I think it sort of eases us a little bit. Listen to let's talk offline on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Carrie champion, and this is season four of naked sports. Up first, I explore the making of a rise rivalry. Caitlyn Clark versus Angel Reese.

People are talking about women's basketball just because of one single game. Clark and Reese have changed the way we consume women's basketball. And on this new season, we'll cover all things sports and culture. Listen to naked sports on the Black effect podcast network, iHeartRadio apps, or wherever you get your podcasts.

The Black Effect Podcast network is sponsored by Diet Coke.

How do you feel about biscuits? Hi, I'm Akeelah Hughes, and I'm so excited about my new podcast, Rebel Spirit, where I head back my hometown in Kentucky and try to convince my high school to change their racist mascot, the Rebels, into something. Everyone in the south loves the biscuits. I was a lady rebel.

Like, what does that even mean?

It's right here in black and white. In prince, they lying bigger than a flag or mascot.

Listen to rebel spirit on the iHeartRadio app, Apple podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.