You’re NOT FREE. Here’s the proof with Keith Knight

Summary

Keeping It Real: Conversations with Jillian Michaels

Episode: “You’re NOT FREE. Here’s the proof with Keith Knight”

Release Date: July 8, 2025

In this compelling episode of "Keeping It Real: Conversations with Jillian Michaels," host Jillian Michaels engages in a thought-provoking dialogue with guest Keith Knight. The conversation delves deep into political accountability, the intricacies of capitalism versus socialism, and the pervasive influence of elites in society. Through their candid exchange, Jillian and Keith uncover the underlying mechanisms that challenge personal freedom and societal structures.

---

**1. California's Policy Challenges and Public Dissatisfaction

Timestamps: 00:00 – 08:44

The episode kicks off with Jillian Michaels expressing her frustrations with the current state of California. She highlights critical issues such as:

• Economic Strain: "$70 billion in debt and homelessness on the rise"
• Environmental Mismanagement: "Electric companies were left off the hook for the fires that started. It’s madness."
• Ineffective Governance: "We didn’t do forestry management, and yet people still let him off the hook."

Jillian critiques Governor Gavin Newsom's administration, pointing out the disconnect between voter expectations and the actual outcomes. She emphasizes the lack of accountability and the continual cycle of policy failures that exacerbate the state's problems.

---

**2. Political Accountability and the Opt-Out Principle

Timestamps: 03:58 – 09:32

Keith Knight responds by dissecting the nature of political accountability:

• Personality over Policy: "Political speeches are more of a personality competition than a discourse on political philosophy or economic ideas."
• Cost of Admitting Fault: "It's hard to admit when you're wrong on a small scale, let alone retract everything after 20 years."
• Voluntary Funding Model: Keith proposes a shift from coercive funding to a voluntary model, stating, "If there was simply the voluntary principle of saying, you know what, Newsom, we're going to give you all the money you want in the world so long as people can opt out of funding you."

This segment underscores the challenges in holding politicians accountable due to the high personal cost associated with changing one's stance or admitting past mistakes. Keith advocates for a system where funding political actions is voluntary, allowing citizens to opt out if they disagree, thereby increasing accountability.

---

**3. Capitalism vs. Socialism: Wealth Acquisition and Morality

Timestamps: 12:25 – 26:05

The discussion transitions into an analysis of economic systems:

• Historical Context of Wealth:
  Keith contrasts historical methods of wealth acquisition, predominantly through coercion and theft, with modern capitalism's emphasis on voluntary exchange. "For 99% of history, the left is totally right to be skeptical of rich people. The exception is enter capitalism and the freedom for people to get wealthy through voluntary exchanges."

• Definitions and Misconceptions:
  Jillian seeks clarification on socialism, to which Keith responds, "Socialism is not about everyone having the same income. It’s about the state having a monopoly on resource distribution." He further distinguishes between equitable wealth distribution and centralized control.

• The Role of Consent in Morality:
  Keith emphasizes the importance of consent in distinguishing legitimate wealth accumulation from exploitation. "It's much more about consent. If someone gets rich through starting a company and meeting consumer demand, that's legitimate."

This section highlights the fundamental differences between capitalism and socialism, stressing that voluntary exchanges and consent are pivotal in maintaining ethical economic practices.

---

**4. Critique of Political Figures and Policies

Timestamps: 26:05 – 28:20

Jillian and Keith delve into specific criticisms of political leaders and their policies:

• Taxation and Wealth Redistribution:
  Jillian criticizes proposals to heavily tax the wealthy, arguing, "AOC sells merch... Their plan is so pathetic."
  Keith counters by discussing the impracticality of confiscating wealth, stating, "Where would we be? They've screwed up the $6.2 trillion they spend every year already."

• Corporate Influence and Efficiency:
  The conversation shifts to the impact of billionaires like Elon Musk on industries. Keith notes, "Musk cut 80% of the Twitter workforce. Now Twitter is 10,000 times better than it was previously." This example illustrates his belief in free-market efficiency over bureaucratic management.

• Elites and Oligarchy:
  Keith introduces the concept of the Iron Law of Oligarchy, explaining that some level of elitism is inevitable in any society. He asserts, "Elites are inevitable. The question is, what discipline should the elites face?"

This segment critically examines the role of taxation, corporate leadership, and the inherent presence of elites in societal structures, advocating for accountability without dismantling the foundational aspects of capitalism.

---

**5. Inevitability of Elites and Market Discipline

Timestamps: 28:20 – 32:27

Keith elaborates on the persistence of elites and the necessity of market discipline:

• Historical Perspective on Elites:
  "Every society since the beginning of time, a few people have a disproportionate amount of power."

• Distinguishing Legitimate Wealth from Exploitation:
  He differentiates between those who accumulate wealth through voluntary means versus coercion. "If someone gets rich from starting a company and acquiring money through investors, through products and services sold to people, that's legitimate."

• Market as a Regulator:
  Keith argues that the free market serves as a natural regulator for elites. "A free market gives the elites the right to earn money through voluntary exchanges, and the public can choose to disassociate from bad elites."

Jillian acknowledges the distinction, reflecting on corporate wealth and power. Keith reinforces that while elites are a natural part of society, their actions must be subject to market-based accountability rather than coercive control.

---

**6. Educational Resources and Further Engagement

Timestamps: 30:32 – End

As the conversation wraps up, Keith promotes his work and educational initiatives:

• Books and Free Resources:
  "Both of my books are going to be free for PDF download at the Libertarian Institute."
  He emphasizes the importance of accessible education on economics, history, philosophy, and foreign policy to shape public opinion.

• Podcast Promotion:
  Keith invites listeners to explore his “Don't Tread on Anyone” podcast, encouraging further engagement with his ideas.

Jillian concludes by urging listeners to like, comment, subscribe, and share the podcast, while also soliciting suggestions for future guests.

---

Key Takeaways

• Political Accountability: Current political structures often emphasize personality over policy, hindering genuine accountability. A shift towards voluntary funding could empower citizens to hold leaders more accountable.

• Economic Systems: Capitalism, when rooted in voluntary exchanges and consent, fosters legitimate wealth accumulation. Socialism, as defined by centralized control, poses challenges to personal freedom and market efficiency.

• Role of Elites: Elites are an inherent aspect of any society. The focus should be on ensuring that their wealth and power are earned through ethical and voluntary means, with market mechanisms serving as regulators.

• Educational Empowerment: Accessible education on complex economic and political topics is crucial for informed public discourse and the shaping of effective policies.

---

Notable Quotes

• Jillian Michaels:
  "We lost 24 billion trying to solve the problem and ran like he let all the electric companies off the hook for the fires that started." ([03:58])

• Keith Knight:
  "Political speeches are more of a personality competition than a discourse on political philosophy or economic ideas." ([04:03])

• Keith Knight:
  "It's much more about consent. If someone gets rich through starting a company and meeting consumer demand, that's legitimate." ([22:50])

• Keith Knight:
  "Elites are inevitable. The question is, what discipline should the elites face?" ([28:20])

---

This episode of "Keeping It Real" offers a critical examination of political and economic structures, advocating for systemic changes that enhance accountability and maintain the integrity of voluntary economic exchanges. Through insightful dialogue, Jillian Michaels and Keith Knight provide listeners with a nuanced understanding of the challenges and potential solutions to fostering a freer and more accountable society.

Transcript

[Jillian]

Did you know that there are nearly 30 biomarkers that can impact your skin more than your skincare routine? Breakouts, dullness, dryness, redness. These aren't just surface issues. They're signals from within. And Function Health helps you read them. Function is the first health membership that gives you access to over a hundred biomarkers. Hormones, metabolism, inflammation, heart, liver, and so much more. You can even add MRIs and CT scans. It's medical grade data tracked over time, explained in plain language that we can all understand. Take your skin for example. Low vitamin D can slow healing. Deficiencies in zinc, iron or vitamin A can wreck skin, repair blood sugar swings from glucose and insulin. They trigger breakouts and inflammation. So if you've been in the sun, off your routine, or just wondering why your skin feels off, and maybe it's not the serum, maybe it's your system. Function Health helps you stop guessing and start decoding the real cause. Because your skin is a mirror and Function gives you the data to read it. Function is offering 160 plus lab tests for $365 to anyone who signs up between July 7th and July 11th. To learn more and get started, visit www.functionhealth.com. jillian that's www.functionhealth.com forward slash. Jillian, I know you've got a million gazillion photos sitting on your phone right now. Don't just leave them there. Get them printed for free and delivered straight to your door. With Free Prints, they have more than a million five star reviews. Free print is the world's favorite way to get premium quality photo prints. No subscriptions, no commitments, just a thousand free prints a year. So go to freeprints.com or download the Free Prints app directly from Google Play or, or the App Store in California. Though they are living it here and they still don't see it, some do. And the ones that do are leaving. There's a hell of a lot of people that still don't. And you know, obviously like, I grew up in California. You know, we have our main residence in Wyoming now because it's closer to California, because my family, friends and there's, you know, podcast, dude, all this stuff is in California still. But it is like, I love Bill Maher. I think he's brilliant. I think he's a great human being. And he sits down with Gavin Newsom and he just still thinks the guy hung the moon. I'm like, bill, how? How? Like you're living it. It's a disaster here. It's a mess. $70 billion in debt, homelessness on the rise. You lost 24 billion trying to solve the problem and ran like, he let all the electric companies off the hook for the fires that started. I mean, it's madness. All the things that have gone on in California. You voted for it and now you're living it. And still there's no, I would say the vast majority haven't actually left the state. What do you think that is? What is that? Even the ones that are like, well, you know, I don't know if the governor could have done anything about the fires. Oh, you don't? I could give you a million that he knew that we were going to have hundred mile an hour winds five days before we had them. Like you, you could have. And talking to Michael Shellenberger, he's like, we could have borrowed firefighters and police officers. We could have had everything pre positioned. We could have set up a center of command. Like all these things we could have done to get on it fast, to be on top of it. We had no water in the frigging key reservoir. I mean, the list goes on and on and on. We didn't do forestry management. And yet people still let him off the hook. And the frigging state burns down year after year after year after year. Sometimes a couple times a year. They're living it.

[Keith]

Now.

[Jillian]

Where is the part where they're like, this may not be working for me. Where is that moment?

[Keith]

Well, just because people are living through something and just because they're miserable under certain circumstances or because they're living under it, doesn't mean they're necessarily miserable. Even if they are, doesn't mean they're able to draw a causal connection between the policies they vote for and the personalities that they're attracted to. How much of political speeches is discussing political philosophy and economic ideas and genuine reading historical documents? None of it. It's a personality competition, which politics is just too complex for politicians to really run on those specific things because you're trying to attract the average voter. The average voter does not want to hear about agricultural subsidies. So those people get weeded out. So people end up falling in love with a personality type. And the cost of being wrong is so minuscule. Whether I love Newsom or hate him, that won't determine whether he gets elected or not. But if I go from loving him to hating him, that's a big hit to my ego. And I have to say, wow, not only was I wrong to myself, all those Facebook posts that I put up, those were nonsense. This is really good. It's hard to look wrong in the moment on any one thing. Ask the waiter, did I order this? No, I think I said that it's hard to admit when you're wrong on a small scale. If it's like, oh, I've been wrong for 20 years, I retract everything. That is really hard for people to do. So there's such a big cost in admitting that you're wrong to your, to your ego and to how you see yourself in the world. And there's not much of a cost with saying, oh, yeah, I think that. So right now, if I say I think Trump's doing a good job, that's not going to affect whether Trump wouldn't be like, step down or anything. So it makes sense for me to say, oh, yeah, I think it's fine. I hope he eventually fixes things, that it doesn't cost anything to say, oh, no, I was never wrong. So because people don't have to bear a huge cost, that that's one of the main issues you come across with, why things don't change. But more importantly, if you get people's money without them having the right to opt out, if there was simply the voluntary principle of saying, you know what, Newsom, we're going to give you all the money you want in the world so long as people can opt out of funding you, because we don't believe that people really like you, but they might, and so they can give you all the money. You now are subject to the same rules as all of us, all the companies that have to get money voluntarily. You can get investors, you can start, go fund me. You can do a Kickstarter, you can do an Indiegogo. Just do that. You're so terrific, you're so brilliant. I'm sure you'll get the money voluntarily. That's totally fine. Once you give people the freedom to opt out, they'll stop finding ridiculous ways to justify all of these things. Imagine if Barack Obama had to get people to voluntarily fund the invasion of Libya and overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi. If they don't bear a cost, they don't have the incentive to provide a better product or service.

[Jillian]

God, that is so true. Hey, I was watching the debate that's now famous between Dave Smith and Douglas Murray, and I happen to like both of them. And I. I actually thought both of them did a good job. And I took things away from both sides and changed my mind in throughout the conversation about different things and had some blind spots I wasn't aware of. Nevertheless, where I fundamentally Disagreed on an issue with Douglas Murray is where he's essentially telling. Implying that if you're not an expert. Right. You don't get to talk about this. And of, you know, mind you, I would debate whether or not Dave Smith has become an expert on this subject matter at this point, however. Right. He's not a historian. Whatever you want to say. One point that was just so searingly clear to me. Well, it's my money that's over there in Gaza killing kids. And I don't like it. And Hamas, we're all like, I would imagine any normal human being is against what Hamas did on, you know, did October 7th, their chart, all of that. But we didn't pay for it. I thought that was super interesting. We would all opt out of killing a bunch of kids in Gaza. Now, nobody wants October 7th either. But my point is, I like you're paying for it.

[Keith]

Or.

[Jillian]

Or do you want to give needles to homeless people in California with your tax dollars? I don't think most people would. I don't. Now, I would pay for a rehab facility. I'd be like, I will pay for that rehab. Yes. Who's in charge? What's the therapy? Yeah, like, who's in charge? I'll pay for that. A mental health ward. I think there's. I think there's mental health problems and there's drug addiction. I think that's what comprises the majority of the homeless population in California. I wouldn't actually personally want to fund the needles, but I don't get that choice.

[Keith]

So I. Well, the case of Ukraine is just so obvious. It's like, okay, you think that this is a war as the result of NATO expansion, which it obviously is. The Secretary General of NATO, Jen Stoltenberg, said Putin said he wouldn't invade if we promised not to extend NATO. Scott is completely right about this, even if you disagree, because that's a long case for us to.

[Jillian]

Yes.

[Keith]

To get into. With. With the average person. Why don't you just let me opt out? Even. Look, even if I'm right, the example I use in a book is what if there's an organization that produces food, A supermarket food is necessary for life. Without food, we starve to death. Does that mean anyone who gets. Who produces food should get to coerce you into funding it? Or should there be voluntary competition and something as important as food, a life.

[Jillian]

Or death scenario on the small family farm? I don't want to give cargill a tax. 500 gazillion dollars in tax. We've given these bastards half a trillion dollars over 20 years to grow this poisonous food. Our tax dollars are growing these GMO crops covered in all these pesticides and herbicides and fungicides. I don't want to pay for that, but I'll go to jail if I don't pay for it.

[Keith]

It's like my, you know, what are.

[Jillian]

My choices now that I'm extremely upset? Solve this problem. Where's the solve? Or am I just meant to like open my eyes here? Are you red pilling me? Which is. I mean, God, that's all I needed was another friggin red pill. But. All right, guys, let's be real. Finding the right intimates is a struggle, right? Because most bras, they dig or they gap. I mean, they look great for five minutes and then you wash them and they look like crap. And underwear is the same story. They're too tight, they're too sac, there's weird seams, they slide up the crack of your where you're in there. I hate that. Which is why I reach for skims every time. The fit is unreal, the fabric feels like butter. Everything stays in place where it's meant to without digging or riding up. My absolute favorite is the skims. Boy short. I wear them constantly. I sleep in them. They're soft, they're stretchy, and somehow they manage to be both sexy and practical. They don't bunch, they don't roll, they just. Whether I'm running errands or I'm relaxing at home, they are the only underwear that I forget I'm wearing. And I gotta tell you, that's the highest compliment I can give. So if you've ever felt let down by your lingerie drawer, skims is the upgrade you didn't know you needed and your body will thank you for. Shop my favorite bras and [e-mail] and after you place your order, please be sure to let them know I sent you. Select podcast in the survey and choose my show in the dropdown that follows. Active skin repair utilizes a molecule called hypochlorous acid, and when you apply it to the skin, the molecule works by mimicking the natural immune response to cleanse, soothe irritation, reduce inflammation, and support healing. Active skin repair can be used to treat a wide range of skin issues, including cuts, scrapes, burns, sunburns, diaper rashes, and other types of skin damage. And it's also safe and non toxic, making it suitable for use on all skin types, all parts of the body, and you can even use it on rosacea, eczema, and acne prone skin. With over 500,000 happy customers, thousands of 5 star reviews, and ingredients so safe and clean they can be used by the youngest member of the family to the oldest. You now have one simple solution for all of your family's skin health needs. So visit activeskinrepair.com to learn more about active skin repair and to get 20% off your order, use the code. Jillian. Again, that's ActiveSkinrepair.com and the code is Jillian.

[Keith]

Well, one of the great lessons that I've learned reading presidential memoirs and Richard Nixon especially, you can tell that Nixon actually wrote this book as opposed to the other ones which are ghostwritten. One of the most amazing things is how terrified politicians are of general public opinion. Because without general public opinion, it's really, it, it's a really high cost to enforce something that people just hate, that they're just going to disregard. So when it comes to what I'm trying to do here is change general public opinion on basically one thing. The standards you have for people in general don't have double standards for politicians. If I could just take the empathy, the discipline that you have for other people, you can try to win my time over, you can try to win my money over, but you don't have the right to coerce it. If we could simply take the principles we have for every person, company and organization and extend that to politicians, that is the way that I'm hoping to change. General that look like it.

[Jillian]

Is that getting rid of Citizens United? Like what is that? Is it changing how we allocate tax dollars a tax law? What does that, how what does that look like?

[Keith]

It would look like judges enforcing laws against politicians that otherwise would go unpunished.

[Jillian]

I believe that that's like insider trading.

[Keith]

Well, yes, so something like that. But the things that I'm thinking of would be any time that something is supposed to be funded coercively, when it comes to, let's say there's another Israel or Ukraine deal, you could have a judge. We know that judges could make any ruling they want. There's so many laws that could be interpreted so many ways. They tried framing the sitting president for treason. So don't tell me. Well, that's not a real law. I'm a lawyer. What they do is they do. They find out what they want to do and then find a legal justification looking through the records. So what judges could start doing is increasing their social status and their popularity among Americans by no longer having double standards for politicians and people alike. So this would Almost have to be something like putting Lindsey Graham and Adam Schiff on trial for inciting a war, knowing that it would result in killing innocent human beings. That. It sounds ridiculous.

[Jillian]

Is that why presidents have presidential immunity?

[Keith]

Could be one of many reasons.

[Jillian]

Think about that. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

[Keith]

Well, and President Bush was.

[Jillian]

And they knew that. Right.

[Keith]

He was giving a speech to Congress where he specifically said, it's been confirmed that Iraq has purchased yellow cake uranium from Africa. This was the Valerie Plain situation where her husband, Joe Wilson said, the sitting president just lied to Americans on tv and that was not punished. Dick Cheney said that. Well, it's been pretty well confirmed that. That Muhammad Atta had connections to Iraqi intelligence in a meeting in Prague or the Czech Republic. It was somewhere in Eastern Europe. That turned out to be fabricated. Rumsfeld, to your point, said, they have the WMDs. We know where they are. They're in east, west, north, and south of Tikret and Baghdad. And this wasn't. Not only was it not punished, President Bush is like being friends with Ellen DeGeneres and. And he's like, now a painter. Cheney is welcome to Jimmy Carter's funeral and all this stuff. And Rumsfeld passed away and was never held accountable. So once the population stops having double standard in their minds, politicians and judges and media pundits, where it will start to be in their incentive to follow what the masses are already telling them. Look at. It's not like we needed media legislation for CNN to get better. CNN never got better. What happened was podcasts came onto the scene because the podcasts were filling the void that the people were demanding. I'm using the term demand as in consumer demand. So first the people need to want it, and that's what I'm trying to change with this book. And then something will quench that thirst once people are like, hey, if I did that, I'd be going to jail. Why do you get to do it? If Zelinsky is so pro democracy, why did he skip out his last elections? If the Ukrainians really want to fight, why is there military conscription? Talk about slavery.

[Jillian]

The answer. Oh, because it's in the middle of wartime and there's a precedent for this. Trying to remember who told me that. But they gave me specific incidents of when we paused on elections due to some war or some sort of disaster. That's the answer.

[Keith]

So that's the justification. Other people have done it historically. That's extremely weak. Let's see if there's anything else undemocratic about what Zelensky's done banned the Ukrainian and Russian Orthodox Church from cooperating this from operating. This was a gentleman who went on Tucker Carlson's show. He's the lawyer defending the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. They confiscated their property. Vladimir Zelensky had a no leave policy. Remember, the Soviet Union was evil because they wouldn't let people leave East Germany. That is the policy Zelinsky has for men in Ukraine. Men ages 18 to 65.

[Jillian]

He's grabbing those can't leave. I've seen them.

[Keith]

Are conscripted.

[Jillian]

Yeah.

[Keith]

So look, forced cotton picking was totally evil and immoral. Forced military service where you get your limbs blown off and are most likely to die. The Battle of Bakmut in Ukraine. The average life expectancy, according to NBC was four hours.

[Jillian]

Oh, my God.

[Keith]

These are the people fighting for democracy. So again, I'm sure Zelinsky, I could imagine talking to him when he was an actor and a comedian. You wouldn't say this is a psycho who wants to dominate people. The problem was he was given a blank check where people had a double standard for his actions.

[Jillian]

What I can't do is pretend like he's the bad guy and Putin is a great guy. The Putin is a monster. I can't get past Putin being a monster. I wanted all the off ramps in the world, but the fact that this guy, like, I, I wanted to try to think like, maybe you can negotiate with this animal. Maybe there's a way. And then he just killed all these, these kids on Palm Sunday in broad daylight. Like, I double dog dare you to do something. I was like, oh, man.

[Keith]

So, so bad. As the questions is not who's good, Zelinsky or Putin. They're both evil. Okay, the. I see it, but what's on the line, People aren't saying you have to work extra hours a week so we could take some of your money and give it to Putin. That's not on the table.

[Jillian]

Right.

[Keith]

The question is we should be giving money to this regime so he could stay in charge in Kiev. How about. Okay, how about an innocent example for this? November 15th of 2022, the Associated Press, along with Vladimir Zelinsky came out and said Russia has bombed Poland. November 15th of 2022. I'm almost positive I have that date. Right. He said NATO needs to respond cuz Poland is a NATO country. And there was like more or less media silence. You can look, this was headline news.

[Jillian]

No, I was like, am I an idiot? I was like, when did this happen?

[Keith]

Secretary of Defense Lloyd lives in Poland. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin came out after there was a shocking amount of silence. I literally thought there was going to be a declaration of war because There is Article 5. An attack on one is an attack on all, and they must all respond.

[Jillian]

Right.

[Keith]

Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin comes out and says, we've looked into this. We've talked to our, you know, Polish associates. It turns out this was a Ukrainian defense missile. So we almost got into a war with a nuclear power because Zelinsky, along with the Associated Press, got on camera to tell us a fake story about Russia bombed Poland. Imagine if that wouldn't have gotten out. So for all the progressives who say I care about the working class and everything, you have to see the greatest violation of the rights of the working class comes in wartime. And giving politicians this blank check, which they inevitably use to spend on war machines, ends up being the most evil, vicious thing to the most vulnerable people in society. So that is, that's what we're up against. And I'm never excusing anything Putin has done. Putin's a socialist. I'm against socialism regardless of what variety.

[Jillian]

But he's like the richest man in.

[Keith]

The world though, right? You know, socialists, I have no clue how they would measure that. Well, socialism is not about the amount of wealth. So here's something the left is right about.

[Jillian]

Socialism is about like everybody's supposed to have the same amount, right? Or like we're take from this guy and give to this guy so that you created equilibrium.

[Keith]

Well, if you look at what socialists actually advocate, they don't say the government should have an equal income to everyone. Bernie Sanders should have the same. They say the state should have a unique power to allocate resources. So if it's about equality, they would say everyone should be able to issue taxes so long as you're helping the poor. What the socialist actually believes in is one state that is run by someone motivated by the well being of the proletariat, the working class, to have a monopoly right on the distribution of resources. That's much more consistent with what socialists actually advocate as opposed to equality. And they would also say, well, people in Haiti have the right to steal from Americans because they're poorer and that would make things more equal. They don't advocate that. Thank heavens.

[Jillian]

Got it.

[Keith]

So it's not about equality, it's about centralizing control. I was just about to give the left credit for something. Okay. When it comes to being skeptical of the rich, there's a general claim that the rich are only rich because they stole it from the poor. First of all, it's not like the poor had yachts and then the rich took the yachts. What they're saying is there's a general exploitative relationship between the rich and the poor. The one thing the left is right about is that not like your neighbor.

[Jillian]

Who'S rich, like the global corporations are.

[Keith]

Siphoning off well, that it's not necessarily income that I think determines whether someone is an exploiter or an exploited person. It's how the money has gotten in the first place. So if someone gets rich from starting a company and they acquire money through investors through.

[Jillian]

Right.

[Keith]

Products and services that are sold to people. Yes, I think that totally legitimate.

[Jillian]

I totally agree.

[Keith]

But realize it's not just about being rich because it has much more to do with consent. Because if we just say, well, the rich are evil. Well, how about all the poor rapists, the poor murderers, the poor kidnappers, people, the rape gangs in England? Those aren't a bunch of 1 percenters. We have to have a theory which holds those people accountable for their actions. And a consistent theory is one that says consent is the root of morality. Thanks to the MeToo movement, did a very good job in bringing consent to the forefront of discussion. So I think it's much more about, okay, a person's rich, did they get there through following the principle of consent, or did they use the state to threaten people with being in jail if they don't chip into their endeavor? So the left is right that throughout the vast majority.

[Jillian]

Great way to, to clarify that.

[Keith]

And I, I still haven't gotten to where they're right.

[Jillian]

Amazing. Okay, sorry, sorry, but that's, that's really helped me a huge amount to, to, to clarify that point. It's like, well, it's not your neighbor, which was such a dumb way of saying it, but it, that's exactly what I was trying to say. Thank you for making that distinction, but please continue.

[Keith]

So throughout the vast majority of human history, the way you amassed large amounts of property, influence and wealth was through stealing and looting.

[Jillian]

Right.

[Keith]

It wasn't until capitalism and the freedom of contract made it so you could exchange value for value and create a network of contracts and relationships where people performed labor in exchange for money, where you couldn't continue to fund the endeavor unless you got customers. So it's the freedom to contract, which is so vitally important. That's what differentiates capitalism from socialism, not large amounts of wealth or property. Look at people like Hugo Chavez or Bernie Sanders or AOC or Nicholas Maduro or Kim Jong Un or Joseph Stalin. They weren't all equal to everyone else.

[Jillian]

Right.

[Keith]

What was bad about them is they used violence to achieve their ends. They didn't use a principle of voluntourism. And the good thing is you can still get wealthy. Not by just making things billionaires can afford, but people like Steve Jobs made products and services available to the average person. That's how he got wealthy. I used the example of Amazon and Walmart. But Cornelius Vanderbilt, in the steamship and railroad industry didn't just make trains only the 1% could ride on. He drastically lowered the cost and increased accessibility to millions of people. This is how Kodak became very popular. I think the guy's name was George Eastman. So when rich people want money, so does everyone else. The question is, what is the process by which they get that money? Is it through meeting consumer demand?

[Jillian]

Right.

[Keith]

Or is it by coercing people, either directly threatening them or. Or using the state to do something we would not recognize as legitimate if done by anyone else? So for 99% of history, the left is totally right to be skeptical of rich people. The exception is enter capitalism and the freedom for people to get wealthy through voluntary exchanges. And that's the problem, that the left doesn't differentiate between wealth. That's the result of meeting consumer demand and theft.

[Jillian]

And then they, you know, Bernie gets up there and I'm going to tax these rich people. Mind you, the guy doesn't have like three homes. They literally. And AOC sells merch.

[Keith]

Does the guy what? The poor government only only has $6.27 trillion a year. If you confiscated. I, I have a citation in here from Professor Anthony Davies. He goes, you know what? Let's just confiscate all the wealth from the rich people. Would cover about nine months of government expenditures, and then where would we be? They've screwed up the $6.2 trillion they spend every year already, but you just need more. And that. What are you going to do with this show? Show me the plan. It's just so pathetic to say, yeah, we've gotten all. They literally sound like the drug addict who has spent their entire family savings and says, well, what I need is some more money. It's like, you know, I think I can guess what you're going to spend.

[Jillian]

Crazy is people then fight for them to get it. It's like they go after Elon Musk and Doge and it's like, well, he's not getting richer. He's actually. The stock's gone down because of this. The dealerships are. I don't think Elon Musk is a saint. I certainly don't know him. And he's got an aw of power. And of course it scares me because any individual without much power scares me so scares me. Reid Hoffman scares me. They all freaking scare me. Bill Gates, all of them. I'm like, oh, man, that guy's got way too much money in power. That said, what he's doing doesn't actually scare me. It's like, okay, if he makes a mistake, he doesn't seem opposed to correcting it. Do we hope that they would go a bit slower? Do we hope they could be a bit more surgical? Yes, we do. But. But it's like, okay, I mean, he's cutting a trillion dollars that needs to be cut. And if things are getting cut that shouldn't be cut. For example, with HHS other there, you know, we've. We've lost too many people who inspect food. Now, obviously, we don't want that. Like, we want you to make sure people don't get listeria, salmonella. Nobody wants that. Elon Musk is not like, I think I know what I want. I want a salmonella outbreak. Like, if there's a mistake, they're going to fix it. But what we do want is to get all, you know, all this corruption and all this bureaucracy out of HHS. You want to cut it by 15. And it's all bureaucrats that they're attempting to cut according to fight for it.

[Keith]

According to the San Francisco chronicle, Musk cut 80% of the Twitter workforce. And now Twitter. Do you use Twitter?

[Jillian]

I only X. I only really am.

[Keith]

On 10,000 times better than it was previously. So, yes, he made these things more efficient. One of the issues people have is claiming that, well, the elites are the problem. There is something throughout history known as the iron law of oligarchy, that in any organization or society, there's an iron law where some people will have a disproportionate amount of power than everyone else. So it's not necessarily that elites themselves are bad. In any society, you're going to have elites. And Aristotle was an elite in his society. Genghis Khan was an elite in his Kim Jong Un. Kim Jong Il is in his today. Javier Milei is an elitist in Argentina. Every society since the beginning of time, a few people have a disproportionate amount of power. What percentage of, like, singers are as successful as Phil Collins or, you know, Sting? A very small percentage. Anytime people organize, a few people have a lot more Power and influence. So oligarchy is always going to be here. So the progressive or sometimes right wing claim that the problem is we need to get rid of. Steve Bannon said this. The problem is we're against the elites. There are going to be elites in any society. The question is, what discipline do the elites face? Do they have the market discipline of saying, I want these people's money. How do I get it? I have to create something in exchange for. For them to give me their money? Or do they have a central bank and a tax base which they could coerce people into? So elites are inevitable. So any war against the elites or the 1% is a fool's errand if there ever was one. But the question is, what discipline should the elites face when fighting for our money and attention? And the example I think that we should have is a free market where we have the right to disassociate from bad elites. I cannot believe Lindsey Graham's an elite in the society. But yes, we need the freedom to disassociate from bad elites, to incentivize more of a natural aristocracy. People who are worth admiring.

[Jillian]

Keith, there's so much brilliance here. Where do we get the book? Where do we get more from you?

[Keith]

Okay, the progressive is always telling me, education should be free. And I said, you know what? At the Libertarian Institute, both of my books are going to be free for PDF download.

[Jillian]

That it was. I was like, is this really available for free online? Like, because I was researching the book, it's like, well, you could just read the tech chat. GPT was like, you could read the text that. I was like, no, this can't be possible.

[Keith]

Yeah, so. So when. So you want to lose money here? I mean, Scott, I haven't lost money. A lot of people. I was on Dave Smith show originally, and that's where the book got some popularity originally. And so I'm still able to make money because this show is going to.

[Jillian]

Get silenced like crazy. But I. Okay, so liberty, if you could afford it.

[Keith]

It's. It's $12, so it's like the cost of three eggs. So I'm. I'm hoping that it's going to be worth it. The Voluntarist Handbook and domestic imperialism free PDFs [e-mail] along with thousands of articles and blood, blogs and videos and podcasts from all our contributors. Our goal is to create a free educational platform on economics, history and philosophy and foreign policy so people can visit our website, use the search engine, type in Winston Churchill, agricultural subsidies, minimum wage, Russia, Ukraine, and they can get an education on those issues. This book more or less took like, 15 years to write. Because this is 15 years of research. I was high. This is a transcript of a speech that I gave at the University Club in Phoenix. I just gathered all the. I went through all my books and said, here are the best points from each of them, and here's what persuaded me. So books like this are 15 years of research, and we want to make it free and easily accessible to the masses to change general public opinion.

[Jillian]

It's $12 because you got it. I mean, the people that can pay should pay.

[Keith]

And if you like the Institute at Large, if you like the project Scott and I are working on with all of our contributors, you can make a tax deductible donation.

[Jillian]

Nice. Okay, wait. And podcasts. Where are we getting your.

[Keith]

Oh, yes, the Don't Tread on Anyone podcast. I was just telling you I published my 1100th episode called Douglas Murray is Wrong about Winston Churchill. Go check that out. Yes, don't tread on any one podcast. You can find it on YouTube or any podcasters.

[Jillian]

Thank you so much for watching. If you enjoyed the podcast, please, like, comment, subscribe and share. And make sure to let me know what guests you want to see on in the future.