Aside from the potential of the cut defense of slavery, these are probably the most interesting clips from the interview.

First two are pretty classic Yarvin; the first covers the topic of voting and how we mostly care about politics as an avenue to feel important and powerful when we're actually not; the second is a defense of monarchy via the idea that it's in a monarch's interest to improve human capital. The third is novel commentary on the upcoming second Trump term; the comparison between Trump and FDR is illuminating and focuses on how while their personalities are similar, FDR was a hereditary aristocrat, a member of one of America's first families of nobility, while Trump lacks such a distinction as someone outside of America's social upper class, undermining his confidence and effectiveness as a leader

Somehow, it's always the case that people who argue against philosophy's value as a discipline end up doing philosophy... I wonder why this is the case

Literally me