Episode Transcript
[00:00:00] Speaker A: That's why I don't think we're going back to a 2015America or pre. That we're just going to go, this entropy is going to lead us into a new order. That's something different. In 2024, the Supreme Court gave the executive branch immunity from the law.
[00:00:13] Speaker B: Yeah.
[00:00:14] Speaker A: And I said, and yeah, there'll be cases going to the Supreme Court and all that. That'll work it out over the next decade or two. But in the end of the day, that's different. I said the country is now different than from the 1780s when it was founded because that we had three co. Equal branches.
[00:00:27] Speaker B: Yeah.
[00:00:27] Speaker A: Now one of the branches is elevated, which means is going to change the inc of people that are in there and that's naturally just going to change the way that our system works in certain ways. And so. And James, we've had this conversation just privately, separately. I mean, the ability for the executive branch to be above others means that they're doing things like buying government. The government buying interest into publicly traded companies.
[00:00:53] Speaker B: Yeah. Which is another.
[00:00:55] Speaker A: You don't have to departure. Yeah, that's what I mean. Like that's a small example of that's a butterfly effect step that now the U.S. government owns publicly traded companies. So that's going to morph into something else. And that's one example in one direction. And there's a hundred different directions.
[00:01:08] Speaker B: You know, the irony of that.
Well, the irony of that to me is that that same government is out here taking stakes and the means of production and the companies while also telling everybody to watch out. Socialists.
Yeah, the socialists are coming. It's like, well, hold up. I think what you're doing is exactly what you're telling everybody to watch out for. They're like, no, no, no. We're telling you to watch out for the socialists that want to give you health care. Watch out for those guys, not the socialists who want to take over, you know, private companies.
But no, like I think the way you described that was very interesting to me. And I think this is how like there are two types of creep. One the author talks about, which I think is very important to remember that it's not always necessarily the bad actor, so to speak, it's people acting in line with the incentives that they have at that moment, you know, so. And he gives examples of that.
The other art is. Is the bad actors, so to speak. And the idea that it's almost like a virus and this is. Goes into your redistricting thing. Like the actors who want to concentrate power who want to concentrate wealth, all those types of things, how they use the system's machinery in order to do it. You know, that's how a virus comes into your body, and then it uses your own cells to create copies of itself which then go and infect other cells. And so that's the process of that. And to me, the piece on without constant energy to maintain the system was very important, along with the idea of remembering what those things are for.
And so if you do get too caught up in the procedure of everything and how everything has to be, you lose the idea of why it's there in the first place. Like, we get so caught up a lot of times when people are talking about the electoral college and this and that, we get so caught up and it's like, well, what is the point of us voting?
Can we start there and then figure out, okay, what's the point of us voting? Is the point of us voting to have these little tricks and all these things here, or even the districts, the congressional districts? Is it the point to have all these little tricks and so that we can cordon off power for ourselves, or certain people can cordon off power for themselves and never be challenged and so forth? And it's like everything that our whole discussions on these things never get to the idea of what are we doing this stuff for? Is. Is the point still to have representative government? Is the point to settle scores? Is the point to stick it to somebody else who's your countryman actually, you know, because if you kind of stick it to your countrymen, you're kind of sticking it to yourself because you guys are in the same boat ultimately, you know. So I think losing touch with why you're doing these things is really in a human system standpoint. Obviously that's not your body, your body being subject to entropy. It's not like your. Your heart cell forgets what it's there for. You know, just it just eventually that's a more physical process. But with these human systems, it is like that. The actors become further and further removed from what they're supposed to be doing. And then they can't. Even if they're mustering energy to try to save it, they don't even know where that energy should be placed, where should the energy go? If people have decided, if certain people have decided they are unwilling to lose elections, and if they win, then it's cool, and if they don't win, then they're going to create a big stink about it and try to get it all returned.
The system has mechanisms in place to slow that down or to stop that to some degree. But it also takes a lot of will and energy from the people in the system to execute their roles and then make people pay from a legal standpoint. And if that doesn't happen, that's not a failure of the system, that's a failure of the people.
Yeah.
[00:04:41] Speaker A: Well, this article spoke to. This was part of the political entropy piece. And as I want to follow on what you said, it's very good. A quote from the article says no one benefits from slowing the process.
The system rewards one thing, compliance with procedure, and then the next. Quote, procedure has replaced purpose. And that's really to your point.
And I think it's a great point you make, James, because if we think about how we're talking, we're talking about a country that was founded with the idea of a representative government that basically was formed itself after leaving a king. So that was the original entropy, right? Like the thing was the colonies where the King George was the one ruling over it and taxing everybody and had governors here that was basically feudalism, right?
And the American colonists said, no, we want a different system, right? We want a system where everyone can be represented. And da, da, da.
[00:05:33] Speaker B: I mean, to be fair, that system was subject to entropy and failed around the 1850s and 60s, you know, and then there was disorder and then it reformed again. And then you had, you know, like. So you can look at this as the disorder going to. Disorder doesn't necessarily mean the end of everything. It means the. A new organizing structure is going to be. Is going to have to arise because the existing one is no longer capable of meeting the needs of whatever the system actually.
