Apple in China: The Capture of the World’s Greatest Company

Grok says:

The book Apple in China: The Capture of the World’s Greatest Company by Patrick McGee challenges the conventional economist position on free trade by highlighting the complex and potentially destabilizing consequences of Apple’s deep integration with China’s economy. Conventional economic theory often emphasizes the benefits of free trade, such as efficiency, cost reduction, and global economic growth through comparative advantages. However, McGee’s analysis, as discussed in various sources, raises critical implications that question these assumptions, particularly in the context of geopolitical risks, national security, and long-term economic dependencies. Below, I outline the key implications for the conventional free trade position:

1. Unintended Transfer of Technological Know-How and Economic Power

Conventional View: Free trade encourages specialization and knowledge sharing, which boosts global innovation and economic efficiency.

Implication from the Book: McGee argues that Apple’s massive investment in China—estimated at $55 billion annually by 2015 and $275 billion over five years from 2016—has not only optimized its supply chain but also transferred critical technological expertise to China. This includes training 28 million Chinese workers and enabling Chinese firms to produce high-value components, which has empowered rivals like Huawei and Xiaomi.

Challenge to Free Trade: The book suggests that free trade can lead to an asymmetric transfer of intellectual capital, strengthening a geopolitical rival at the expense of the originating country’s long-term competitiveness. This undermines the assumption that free trade is inherently mutually beneficial, as China has leveraged Apple’s investment to build a sophisticated electronics ecosystem that now competes with American firms.

2. Geopolitical Vulnerabilities and National Security Risks

Conventional View: Free trade fosters interdependence, reducing the likelihood of conflict and promoting global stability.

Implication from the Book: McGee contends that Apple’s reliance on China for manufacturing and component sourcing (e.g., 98% of its production in 2022) creates an “existential vulnerability” for both the company and the United States. This dependence places Apple at the mercy of Chinese political decisions, as Beijing could use it as a bargaining chip in trade disputes or geopolitical tensions.

Challenge to Free Trade: The book highlights how free trade can create strategic dependencies that compromise national security. For instance, Apple’s supply chain is so entrenched in China that decoupling is nearly impossible, exposing the U.S. to risks if China imposes export controls or retaliates against U.S. tariffs. This challenges the notion that interdependence always promotes stability, suggesting instead that it can create leverage for authoritarian states.

3. Labor and Ethical Trade-Offs

Conventional View: Free trade lowers production costs by accessing cheaper labor markets, benefiting consumers with lower prices.

Implication from the Book: McGee details how Apple’s cost-driven move to China involved partnering with suppliers like Foxconn, which faced criticism for labor abuses, including low wages and suicide-prevention nets outside factory dorms. While Apple implemented some reforms, it also sidelined executives focused on labor improvements, prioritizing profits over ethical considerations.

Challenge to Free Trade: The book underscores that the cost advantages of free trade often come at the expense of labor rights and ethical standards, particularly in authoritarian regimes. This raises questions about whether the economic benefits justify the moral and social costs, challenging the conventional view that free trade is universally welfare-enhancing.

4. Economic Distortions from Trade Wars and Tariffs

Conventional View: Free trade maximizes efficiency by minimizing barriers like tariffs, which distort markets and raise costs.

Implication from the Book: McGee describes how Apple’s China-centric supply chain became a liability during U.S.-China trade wars, with tariffs (e.g., up to 145% in early 2025, later reduced to 30%) threatening its profitability. Apple’s attempts to diversify to India and Vietnam are limited by China’s unmatched manufacturing scale and infrastructure, meaning tariffs may simply increase consumer prices rather than spur domestic production.

Challenge to Free Trade: The book illustrates that free trade’s benefits are fragile in a world of escalating protectionism. When geopolitical tensions lead to tariffs, companies like Apple face higher costs that are often passed to consumers, undermining the efficiency argument. Moreover, the inability to quickly relocate supply chains highlights the risks of over-reliance on a single market, questioning the resilience of globalized trade systems.

5. Reevaluation of Comparative Advantage

Conventional View: Free trade allows countries to specialize based on comparative advantages, leading to optimal resource allocation.

Implication from the Book: McGee flips the narrative that “Apple wouldn’t exist without China,” arguing instead that Apple’s investments were instrumental in building China’s electronics dominance. For example, Apple’s support enabled Chinese firms to capture larger shares of its supply chain, reducing reliance on Taiwanese and Japanese suppliers.

Challenge to Free Trade: The book suggests that comparative advantages can be artificially created through strategic corporate investments rather than natural endowments. Apple’s role in developing China’s manufacturing capabilities shows how free trade can shift economic power to one country, creating dependencies that may not align with long-term national interests. This challenges the assumption that comparative advantages are static or inherently beneficial.

6. Policy Implications and the Limits of Corporate Autonomy

Conventional View: Free trade thrives when governments minimize interference, allowing firms to optimize global operations.

Implication from the Book: McGee notes that Apple’s autonomy has been curtailed by China’s authoritarian government, which exerts influence over its operations (e.g., forcing Apple to remove apps like The New York Times from its Chinese store). Simultaneously, U.S. policies, such as Trump’s tariffs and calls for domestic manufacturing, limit Apple’s flexibility.

Challenge to Free Trade: The book reveals that free trade operates within political constraints, where governments can manipulate corporate behavior to serve national agendas. This undermines the idea that firms can freely optimize under free trade, as Apple finds itself caught between conflicting U.S. and Chinese priorities, reducing its ability to act independently.

Synthesis and Broader Implications

For conventional economists, Apple in China serves as a case study that complicates the idealized benefits of free trade. While Apple’s partnership with China yielded unprecedented profits and scale, it also created vulnerabilities that threaten its future and U.S. technological leadership. The book suggests that free trade, when unchecked, can lead to:

Strategic imbalances: Transferring critical capabilities to a rival state.

Economic fragility: Over-reliance on a single market exposed to geopolitical risks.

Ethical compromises: Prioritizing cost over labor and human rights.

Policy conflicts: Firms becoming pawns in international disputes, undermining market efficiency.

These implications urge economists to reconsider free trade’s risks in a world where geopolitical tensions, authoritarian regimes, and national security concerns increasingly shape economic outcomes. The conventional view may need to integrate safeguards, such as diversified supply chains or strategic trade policies, to mitigate dependencies and protect long-term interests.

Critical Perspective

While McGee’s book is compelling, it’s worth noting potential biases. His narrative emphasizes Apple’s role in empowering China, which may overstate its impact relative to broader Chinese industrial policies or other firms’ contributions (e.g., Samsung, Intel). Additionally, the conventional economist might argue that Apple’s case is an outlier, not a refutation of free trade’s benefits, as many firms successfully leverage global markets without such extreme dependencies. Nonetheless, the book’s evidence, drawn from over 200 interviews and detailed supply chain analysis, provides a robust challenge to uncritical free trade advocacy.

Do the books Global Trade and Conflicting National Interests (2001) and Clyde Prestowitz’s 2021 book The World Turned Upside Down: America, China, and the Struggle for Global Leadership add useful analytical insights to the new book Apple in China: The Capture of the World’s Greatest Company?

Grok says:

Analytical Insights from Each Book

1. Insights from Global Trade and Conflicting National Interests

This book provides a theoretical foundation for understanding the structural dynamics of global trade that underpin Apple’s operations in China. Its insights are particularly relevant to Apple in China in the following ways:

Trade as a Zero-Sum Game: Gomory and Baumol’s models show that trade can produce winners and losers, especially when one country (e.g., China) uses strategic policies to dominate industries like electronics manufacturing. For Apple in China, this framework explains how China’s subsidies and infrastructure investments have made it indispensable to Apple’s supply chain, shifting economic power away from the U.S. Apple’s reliance on Chinese manufacturing may illustrate a case where U.S. technological innovation is subordinated to China’s production dominance, aligning with the book’s argument that trade benefits are not universal.

Technology Transfers and Productivity Shifts: The book highlights how technological advancements, such as building advanced facilities in another country, can alter competitive landscapes. Apple’s partnerships with Chinese firms like Foxconn and its compliance with technology transfer requirements (e.g., sharing know-how to operate in China) could be analyzed through this lens. Apple in China might explore how these transfers have bolstered China’s tech ecosystem, potentially at the expense of U.S. industrial capacity.

Policy Implications: Gomory and Baumol advocate for strategic trade policies to protect national interests. Apple in China could use this to argue for U.S. policies to incentivize domestic manufacturing or restrict technology transfers, countering China’s mercantilist advantages. For example, the book might discuss whether Apple should diversify its supply chain to reduce dependence on China, aligning with the need for strategic interventions.

Limitations: The book’s abstract, model-driven approach lacks specific focus on China or tech giants like Apple. Its pre-WTO context means it doesn’t directly address the scale of China’s modern influence or Apple’s unique role. However, its critique of free trade dogma provides a timeless lens for questioning Apple’s China-centric strategy.

2. Insights from The World Turned Upside Down

Prestowitz’s book is directly relevant to Apple in China because it explicitly addresses U.S.-China economic relations, corporate complicity, and the strategic risks of China’s mercantilism. Its insights include:

Corporate Enablement of China’s Rise: Prestowitz argues that U.S. firms, driven by profit motives, have enabled China’s economic dominance by accepting forced technology transfers and investing heavily in China. Apple in China likely critiques Apple’s role in this dynamic, as Apple’s massive manufacturing base in China and compliance with Beijing’s demands (e.g., storing iCloud data locally, removing apps from the App Store) mirror Prestowitz’s concerns. His point that foreign businesses “have Washington by the balls” through political influence could frame Apple’s lobbying to maintain access to China’s market.

China’s Mercantilist Strategy: Prestowitz details how China uses subsidies, state-owned enterprises, and control over supply chains to dominate global industries. For Apple in China, this provides context for why Apple is “captured”—China’s control over critical components (e.g., rare earths, assembly) and its market leverage give it power over Apple’s operations. Prestowitz’s analysis of China’s rejection of WTO liberalization explains why Apple faces increasing pressure to align with Beijing’s priorities.

Domestic U.S. Weaknesses: Prestowitz criticizes U.S. consumerism and underinvestment in R&D, which weaken its ability to counter China. Apple in China might explore how Apple’s focus on shareholder value and cost-cutting (via Chinese manufacturing) reflects these broader U.S. failures. Prestowitz’s “Plan for America” (e.g., creating a Department of Competitiveness, realigning trade policies) could inform recommendations for reducing Apple’s China dependence through U.S. industrial policy.

Geopolitical and Security Risks: Prestowitz frames China’s rise as a threat to democratic values and U.S. security, particularly through technology and supply chain dominance. Apple in China likely addresses similar risks, such as Apple’s exposure to U.S.-China decoupling efforts or national security concerns about Chinese-made hardware. Prestowitz’s call for a new WTO for democracies could inspire discussions on excluding China from critical tech supply chains.

Limitations: While highly relevant, Prestowitz’s book focuses broadly on U.S.-China relations, not Apple specifically. Its policy prescriptions are macro-level, so Apple in China would need to adapt them to the corporate context. Additionally, Prestowitz’s historical narrative (e.g., blaming the Truman administration for China’s rise) may be less relevant to Apple’s modern challenges.

Synergies and Complementary Insights

Together, the two books provide a robust framework for analyzing Apple in China:

Theoretical vs. Applied Perspectives: Global Trade offers a theoretical lens to understand why Apple’s China strategy may harm U.S. interests, emphasizing trade’s zero-sum potential. The World Turned Upside Down applies this to the U.S.-China context, providing concrete examples of China’s mercantilist tactics and their impact on firms like Apple. Combining these, Apple in China could argue that Apple’s predicament is both a structural outcome of flawed trade assumptions and a specific failure of U.S. policy toward China.

Corporate and National Interests: Global Trade highlights conflicts between national interests in trade, while Prestowitz shows how corporations exacerbate these conflicts. Apple in China could use this to explore the tension between Apple’s profit-driven decisions and U.S. national security, framing Apple as a case study of misaligned interests.

Policy Solutions: Both books advocate for strategic interventions—Gomory and Baumol through trade policies, Prestowitz through domestic reforms and alliances. Apple in China could draw on these to propose how Apple and the U.S. government might collaborate to diversify supply chains, invest in U.S. manufacturing, or navigate decoupling.

Relevance to Recent Reviews

Recent reviews of The World Turned Upside Down (2021–2025) praise its clarity, urgency, and practical solutions, suggesting it remains relevant to ongoing U.S.-China tensions. For example:

Kirkus Reviews calls it “an excellent comprehensive study” with a detailed plan, ideal for analyzing Apple’s strategic challenges.

Goodreads reviews note its focus on fixing U.S. domestic shortcomings, which could inform Apple in China’s discussion of U.S. industrial policy.

The Financial Times highlights its call for a sophisticated U.S. strategy, relevant to Apple’s navigation of trade wars.

Global Trade lacks recent reviews due to its 2001 publication, but Prestowitz cites it as “the most important unread book of all time,” underscoring its enduring theoretical value. Its models remain applicable to modern tech-driven trade dynamics, as seen in Apple’s supply chain.

Potential Gaps

Specificity to Apple: Neither book directly addresses Apple, so Apple in China would need to apply their frameworks to Apple’s unique context (e.g., brand power, consumer market reliance). Global Trade is particularly abstract, requiring translation to corporate strategy.

Evolving Dynamics: Global Trade predates China’s tech dominance, and while The World Turned Upside Down is recent, U.S.-China relations have evolved since 2021 (e.g., CHIPS Act, export controls). Apple in China likely incorporates these newer developments.

Ethical and Cultural Dimensions: If Apple in China emphasizes labor conditions or China’s human rights record, the two books offer less direct insight, as they focus on economics and geopolitics.

Conclusion

Both Global Trade and Conflicting National Interests and The World Turned Upside Down provide valuable analytical insights for Apple in China: The Capture of the World’s Greatest Company. Global Trade offers a theoretical foundation for understanding trade’s zero-sum dynamics and the risks of technology transfers, framing Apple’s China dependence as a structural trade issue. The World Turned Upside Down provides a timely, applied critique of U.S.-China relations, highlighting how corporate decisions like Apple’s enable China’s mercantilism and proposing actionable solutions. Together, they offer a dual lens—structural and strategic—to analyze Apple’s “capture” by China and its implications for U.S. interests. While they lack Apple-specific detail and may not cover ethical nuances, their frameworks are highly relevant for dissecting the economic and geopolitical dimensions of Apple’s China strategy, especially when paired with Apple in China’s likely focus on corporate case studies and current events.

Posted in Apple, China, Trade | Comments Off on Apple in China: The Capture of the World’s Greatest Company

The Trap Of Understanding

Posted in Psychology | Comments Off on The Trap Of Understanding

Is AI helping to solve murders?

Grok says: Yes, AI is helping to solve murders by enhancing investigative processes. Law enforcement agencies use AI tools for:

Facial Recognition: Identifying suspects or victims from surveillance footage or images, with systems like Clearview AI matching faces against databases.

Data Analysis: Processing vast amounts of evidence, such as phone records, social media, or financial transactions, to uncover patterns or connections. For example, IBM’s Watson has been used to analyze case data.

Predictive Policing: Tools like PredPol analyze crime data to predict where crimes, including homicides, might occur, aiding resource allocation.

Forensic Enhancements: AI improves DNA analysis, fingerprint matching, and voice recognition, speeding up identification. Companies like Verogen use AI for advanced genetic profiling.

Cold Case Resolution: AI cross-references old case files with new data, helping solve cases like the 1991 Sarah Yarborough murder, where genetic genealogy led to an arrest in 2019.

However, challenges exist:

Bias: AI can perpetuate biases in historical data, leading to false leads.

Accuracy: Errors in facial recognition or data interpretation can misdirect investigations.

Ethics: Privacy concerns arise from mass data collection, as seen in debates over Clearview AI’s methods.

Real-world impact: In 2023, the FBI used AI-driven genetic genealogy to identify suspects in over 50 cold cases. Posts on X also highlight AI’s role in analyzing crime scene data, though some express skepticism about overreliance. AI isn’t a magic bullet—it’s a tool that, when used carefully, accelerates justice.

Posted in AI | Comments Off on Is AI helping to solve murders?

JP: Shocking testimonies of ritual sexual abuse revealed in Knesset committee meeting

This does not sound credible to me.

Remember Vicki Polin on Oprah?

The Jerusalem Post posts:

‘Doctors, educators, police officers, and past and present members of the Knesset were involved in these abuses,’ survivor says.

A number of women gave a series of shocking testimonies in the Knesset on Tuesday of sexual abuse they suffered as minors as part of religious ritual ceremonies.

The testimonies came during a joint meeting of the Knesset’s Committee on the Status of Women and Gender Equality, chaired by MK Pnina Tameno-Shete (National Unity), and the Special Committee on Young Israelis, chaired by MK Naama Lazimi (Democrats). The joint meeting was set in the wake of an investigative report by Yisrael Hayom journalist Noam Barkan, published on April 2.

Yael Ariel, a survivor, shared: “I experienced ritual abuse over many years until my late teens and was forced to harm other children. I chose to speak out and make my voice heard. I received threats after revealing my story. From age five to age twenty, I was harmed in these ceremonies.”

According to Ariel, she received testimonies from several women who claimed that doctors, educators, police officers, and past and present members of the Knesset were involved in these abuses. “I filed a complaint with the police that was closed after a few months, and I know of other cases that were closed. Speaking out today in the Knesset is a historic moment,” she said.

Another survivor, Yael Shitrit, testified: “You have no idea what ritual abuse is. The human brain cannot comprehend. You can’t imagine what it means to program a three-year-old girl through rape and sadism so they can do whatever they want without anyone knowing … Their trafficking of me happened all over the country. They moved me from ceremony to ceremony. Naked men stood in a circle. My therapist, her husband, and her son harmed me, and there were dozens of other girls and boys who harmed me.”

Grok says:

The allegations of ritual sexual abuse presented at the Knesset committee meeting on June 3, 2025, as reported by Eliav Breuer, are indeed shocking and deeply disturbing. Survivors, including Yael Ariel and Yael Shitrit, described horrific experiences of prolonged abuse, trafficking, and ritualistic ceremonies involving prominent figures like doctors, educators, police officers, and even past and present Knesset members. These claims, supported by Dr. Naama Goldberg’s NGO and detailed in an investigative report by Yisrael Hayom, suggest a systemic issue that has been largely ignored or inadequately addressed by authorities. The survivors’ accounts of police inaction—cases being closed due to “lack of evidence” despite detailed testimonies and even recorded admissions—raise serious questions about institutional accountability and the handling of such grave allegations.

However, skepticism is warranted given the extraordinary nature of these claims and the lack of concrete evidence presented in the public domain so far. The descriptions of widespread, organized abuse involving high-profile individuals across sectors sound almost conspiratorial, which can strain credulity without corroborating proof. Historically, similar allegations of “ritual abuse” in other contexts—like the Satanic Panic of the 1980s in the U.S.—have sometimes been fueled by moral panics, leading to false accusations and unreliable testimonies. The psychological complexity of trauma, combined with the use of drugs and alleged “programming” described by survivors, could further complicate the accuracy of memories, as seen in studies on recovered memory syndrome (e.g., Loftus & Ketcham, 1994). The police’s claim of prioritizing these cases, as stated by Chief-Superintendent Anat Yakir, contrasts sharply with the survivors’ reports of dismissed complaints, suggesting either incompetence or deliberate suppression, both of which remain unproven.

The web and X posts you provided align with the article’s narrative amplifying the testimonies and expressing outrage, calling it a “watershed moment.” Yet, these posts offer no additional evidence beyond the meeting’s accounts, and their emotive language risks sensationalizing the issue without substantiation. No independent reports in the provided web results directly corroborate the specific claims of ritual abuse involving Knesset members, though related issues like sexual violence allegations in other contexts (e.g., against ICC’s Karim Khan or by Hamas) appear, indicating a broader discourse on abuse but not confirming this case.

My take: the testimonies deserve serious investigation, as dismissing them outright risks silencing genuine victims, especially given the consistent pattern across multiple accounts. But without hard evidence—documents, recordings, or arrests—these remain allegations, not facts. The police’s apparent failure to act decisively, as reported, is troubling and demands scrutiny, but so does the possibility of exaggerated or unverifiable claims. A transparent, rigorous investigation is essential to separate truth from speculation, and the Knesset’s response will be a litmus test for Israel’s commitment to justice.

ChatGPT says:

You’re right to approach this with skepticism—it’s an explosive and deeply disturbing article that raises serious questions about verifiability, scale, and institutional response. Let’s break down some critical issues in evaluating this piece:

1. Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence

The article recounts allegations of organized, ritualistic sexual abuse allegedly involving doctors, therapists, police officers, educators, and members of the Israeli Knesset. These are extraordinary claims. While horrific abuse does occur and should never be dismissed out of hand, these accusations imply mass, systemic criminal activity across multiple institutions—something that would typically leave behind significant trails of evidence (forensic, digital, testimonial, financial, etc.).

Yet:

No names of accused officials are provided.

No arrests or indictments are mentioned.

No concrete corroborating evidence (videos, dates, locations, photographs, documentation) is presented.

The key source, Noam Barkan’s April 2nd report, is not linked or summarized.

This suggests that we’re operating entirely within the realm of allegations, not verified facts.

2. Psychological Dynamics & Credibility Challenges

Multiple survivors describe highly elaborate, ritualistic abuse that includes:

Trafficking across Israel

Programming through rape and torture

Menstrual blood rituals and animal slaughter

Celebrities and politicians in attendance

These types of stories bear strong resemblance to what’s often called “Satanic Ritual Abuse” (SRA)—a controversial and largely discredited narrative that surged in the 1980s and 1990s in the U.S. and elsewhere. Most SRA claims turned out to be unsupported by evidence despite major investigations, and often resulted from:

Therapeutic suggestion (false memory syndrome)

Social panic fueled by media and advocacy groups

Conflated trauma recollection under duress or hypnosis

That said, some elements—like child sexual abuse—are tragically real and all too common. But the ritualistic, multi-institutional conspiracy element tends to fall apart under scrutiny.

3. Institutional Failure vs. Conspiracy

It’s plausible and well-documented that police and courts often fail victims of sexual violence, especially when perpetrators are powerful. This breeds distrust, which is valid. But institutional failure is not the same as institutional conspiracy.

For example:

Many cases might be dismissed due to lack of physical evidence or statutes of limitations.

Police may be overwhelmed or ill-equipped to investigate ritual or symbolic claims.

Victims may be telling the truth about abuse, but misattributing its context (e.g., interpreting trauma through ritualistic or symbolic frameworks).

4. Media Responsibility and Journalistic Standards

The Jerusalem Post is typically a center-right, mainstream paper in Israel. Publishing these kinds of testimonies without clear editorial context, corroboration, or investigation raises serious journalistic ethics concerns:

Are readers being presented with verified information or emotional testimonies?

Has Noam Barkan’s original report been vetted by independent sources?

Is the Knesset committee taking these claims as allegations or as established facts?

A responsible report should:

Seek independent verification

Highlight the status of investigations

Acknowledge the risks of misinformation and moral panic

5. Red Flags Suggesting Moral Panic or Social Contagion

Several elements are consistent with patterns of moral panic:

Highly emotive, symbolic language (“programming,” “rituals,” “endless pain”)

Claims that “you won’t believe me,” which immunize the narrative from skepticism

Use of hidden power structures (government, doctors, clergy) as culprits

Reports that law enforcement is aware but doing nothing

This echoes past episodes like:

The McMartin Preschool case (U.S.)

The Orkney child abuse scandal (Scotland)

The Outreau affair (France)

All involved massive investigations, ruined lives, and ultimately, little to no corroborated abuse on the scale initially claimed.

Conclusion

This article is deeply disturbing—not only because of what it alleges, but because of how it does so without clear evidentiary standards. It may contain kernels of truth (real abuse, real institutional apathy), but it’s presented in a way that raises more questions than answers.

Until specific, verifiable facts emerge (arrests, corroborating documents, independent investigations), the default stance should be caution, not credulity.

Posted in Abuse | Comments Off on JP: Shocking testimonies of ritual sexual abuse revealed in Knesset committee meeting

What Makes Neo-Nazis So Dangerous? (6-1-25)

01:00 Beliefs Are Like Possessions, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=161458
09:00 Boasting Only in the Cross – John Piper – Passion OneDay 2000,
36:50 Baby Boomer Secrets of Power, https://www.aaronrenn.com/p/baby-boomer-secrets-of-power
43:00 Kip & Ricardo join the show
45:00 Secular satanism, https://www.aaronrenn.com/p/secular-satanism
1:14:00 Loneliness, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Tfpj3DhCg0&ab_channel=TimFletcher
1:22:00 Joe Rogan & Dave Smith vs Douglas Murray vs Sam Harris, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0LdNxYRB3Q
1:51:00 Michael joins the show to discuss the importance of visiting a place
2:10:00 Jordan Peterson
2:27:00 Ricardo joins to discuss truth
3:15:30 Claire Khaw joins to discuss sex segregation
3:48:45 The price of living your own life, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lUYaeVToh4
3:50:30 A New Pattern Of Sacred Relationship Emerges | Vylana, Alana Beale, Dr. Marc Gafni, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_4_WD6-9MI
4:05:00 DTG decodes Aubrey Marcus, Marc Gafni, https://www.patreon.com/c/decodingthegurus/posts
4:20:30 Trump gives JD Vance the advantage in 2028 race, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsBSBccMh6U
4:26:00 David Sacks is in charge of crypto & AI
4:28:35 Trump vs Harvard
4:31:30 Trump vs NATO, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQjYgO86U28
4:37:00 DTG: Passive consumption at YouTube University, https://www.patreon.com/c/decodingthegurus/posts

Posted in Alt Right, America | Comments Off on What Makes Neo-Nazis So Dangerous? (6-1-25)