American Political Philosopher, Author, and Musician
Check the pages for updates... interesting developments coming!


 

I'm not much of a media hound, but I have appeared as a guest on some radio and television shows to promote my ideas, and have had some interesting phone-in appearances on others. Here are some of those which were recorded:

 

mark_davis_show      Phoned in to educate Mark Davis

 

Episode II:

ep2


December 15th 2003- Guest on the Jim Chapman Live television show in Ontario Canada. Transcript below

December 15th 2003- Guest on the YoungTurks radio show nationwide

November 27th 2003- Guest for the full hour on the Barry Farber show- Nationwide to more than 65 stations.

 



TRANSCRIPT:

JIM CHAPMAN: You know when I was writing my book a couple of years ago a literary agent told me that a catchy title is half the battle; if you can grab people’s attention with what’s on the cover of your book, you’re half way there to getting them to buying it and taking it home and hopefully read and absorb what’s inside. Well imagine how intrigued I was by the title of the book written by our next guest “The Answers to All the World’s Problems”.  . .Covers a lot of ground doesn’t it . .. BRAZENHUBRIS is the author and he joins us tonight on Jim Chapman live. BRAZENHUBRIS it’s nice to have you on the program.

 

BRAZENHUBRIS:span style="mso-spacerun: yes">  Hi Jim- I appreciate you having me on the show.

 

JIM CHAPMAN: Now there are … I want to say right off the top for our viewers so they understand this that your book is . . is . . written by an American to a particularly American audience but I believe there are a lot of universal themes in the book, and I want to start with one of the themes that recurs constantly throughout the book and that is the prevalence of lies in our culture and how we have allowed them to distort our view of ourselves, of the other people in our societies, and of other societies. You keep coming back to that theme over and over and over again, on how much . . how many lies we are bombarded with in our daily lives.

 

BRAZENHUBRIS:   Well that’s exactly right, it comes in the form, in my book as I discuss it, of television advertising. One of the major points that I think is very unique to the book is the concept that I introduced that “there is no such thing as a human experience that is not drug related”. So, I don’t differentiate, for example, from any drug that you might take, such as marijuana or heroin, and a television commercial. That might seem absurd to somebody, but if you think about it all of those… everything that you experience through all of your senses occurs in chemical reactions, and changes the chemical makeup of your brain. The question that is left for me is “whose” right is it to determine what your chemical makeup is?”

 

JIM CHAPMAN         Now how  .how would a, could you explain for our viewers how does a television commercial alter the chemical makeup of your brain?

 

BRAZENHUBRIS:   Well you’re watching TV, the rods and cones are stimulated in your eyes, that introduces. . .causes neurotransmitters to fire. Those are chemical reactions, it changes your chemical makeup.

 

JIM CHAPMAN:        You mentioned in the book, you talk in the book too about the tremendous impact that television has on children …

 

BRAZENHUBRIS:  certainly

 

JIM CHAPMAN         …because they do. . . they have not yet developed the …some of the discriminatory methods that adults have to separate truth from lies, that after a certain period as you say in the book, certain period  as adults we tend to distrust a lot of what we see. We tend to recognize lies as what they are, at least some of them but the children don’t have those defenses

 

BRAZENHUBRIS:   No, you essentially . . . you receive information and you store it if you’re a child, if you’re that young . . . but as you get older, all the information that you receive, you compare it with former information, and that alters the way you view that information.

            Now I’ll come right out and say it: Everything, in my view, that’s currently blamed on drugs in terms of manipulating values and causing people to violate rights, etc. is … actually deserves to be blamed in large part on the effects of television advertising. And my view is that, at least in the United States we have contract law which says that when you enter into a contract- for example if you purchase drugs or if you watch television- you have to understand what you’re getting. And my view is that television advertisers and those who broadcast television advertisements have not lived up to their end of the bargain under basic contract law. And the other side of that coin is that I don’t believe …that At least in the United States we have, we have as our first right in our Bill of Rights that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”. It’s my view that our drug laws … Prohibition of drugs in the United States is a direct violation of that because there’s no causal relationship between a person’s choice to use drugs and that person’s inability to meet his responsibility to society.

 

JIM CHAPMAN:  Now I know from reading the book that that the connections between the television and the issues of drug use you make those connections very clearly but I’m sure there are still viewers tonight  who are a little perplexed on how you get from contract law on television to drug policy.

 

BRAZENHUBRIS:   Well I already made the point at the beginning of the show that I can’t differentiate between one drug- for example a television commercial and another drug- for example heroine.  You know, in this country we have our big talk show host Rush Limbaugh- he, by his own admission has been addicted to what the medical establishment here calls “synthetic heroine” for the last five years, and yet his ability to perform his job has earned him a contract worth hundreds of millions of dollars; And I had a similar experience, from the time I was 16 until the time I was 25, I don’t think it’s possible to use more marijuana than I did during that period of time, but when I graduated from college I made the highest grade in the university, [on the state objective examination] better than 97% of graduating seniors [nation wide] so , by our government’s own standard I proved that my drug use- my choice to use drugs-  did not keep me from achieving goals.  But if you look at the kind of drugs we’re talking about- television commercials verses  marijuana or those kinds of things- The drugs on the right hand side- the marijuana or heroin- they don’t have any ability to manipulate your values, whereas television commercials- that set of drugs- they do so as a practice.

 

JIM CHAPMAN:  Now you make the point in the book, that the government- and its the same situation here in Canada- that the government restricts certain things that  are able to see on television;  put limits on what television can show, and you say implid then that they’re telling us that what we can see is believable, because we’re not seeing that bad stuff

 

BRAZENHUBRIS: That’s right, that’s why I believe, and one of the major points that I make in the book is that cigarette adds should never have been taken off of television nor should have alcohol or any other types of ad, whether by consent decree or by whatever means they were [banned], because when you do that  you imply by the reverse that what is left is good for human consumption or that it in someway has the seal of approval of the government for human consumption. What I’m saying is that television never should have been put forth as something that that purports to have a respectable set of values. It’s an extension of human communication, and that’s all it should be.

 

JIM CHAPMAN: So, you talking the book too about the contract between individuals, between individuals and the government and individuals and advertisers for example. And you say that in a nutshell that people should be free to advertise anything they choose to ad, provided that they give a clear warning or a clear statement of the potential hazards of using the product, am I getting that right?

 

BRAZENHUBRIS:  Well that’s not precisely the way; when there’s a television station for example, it’s the responsibility of the person who broadcasts that television commercial. There should be periodic warnings- just like there is a warning on a pack of cigarettes- you understand what you’re getting into. The government should be able to say something to the effect of “We understand that television is a medium of free expression, but we offer that not all of this expression is designed in your best interest and it’s your responsibility to choose wisely”. People should hear that message, even children; It should be something  that’s pervasive in society. I have no problem living in a world that is full of warnings, what I do have a problem with is living in a world where what free people can choose to do is governed by what irresponsible people choose to do.

 

JIM CHAPMAN: You talk in the book about some of the results of irresponsibility about in terms of prisons and the role of prisons in society; some very provocative things to say- about rehabilitation for example- you don’t think that should be the role of prisons.

 

BRAZENHUBRIS: Rehabilitation is not the role of government. That’s my view. In my view if you’ve committed a crime your right to liberty should be taken away in the mode that is the most cost effective; the absolute cheapest cost to the tax payer that is humanely possible- and just as a hint that does not include televisions and free education and all of these things that are proliferating in the United states right now.

 

JIM CHAPMAN: What about these people who say well you know we have to try to rehabilitate these people and give them some life skills and give them some training so that when they leave prison they can reintegrate successfully into society.

 

BRAZENHUBRIS: Well, that’s why we have a capitalist society or at least in the United States we now have a pseudo-capitalist society- we’re trying to head in the right direction. No person should be able to say that they don’t have opportunities to learn. With the internet and computers, the free interchange of ideas is everywhere. You can’t say they don’t have opportunities to learn, and if you read further in the book you’ll understand that I don’t believe in the concept of public education.

 

JIM CHAPMAN: Well you say in the book in fact that public ed is almost a con in terms, because we, you refer to education as “it” and you ask the question “even if we decided who was going to teach “it”, what is “it” going to be?

 

BRAZENHUBRIS: We’ll that’s exactly right. The problem is that people are individuals, and as individuals we don’t react with linearity to our environment regarding what compels us to succeed in our endeavors. Some people are going to be driven by their adversity to achieve great success and other people are going to be lulled by the comforts provided by their parents or their government into behaviors that reduce the probability of their financial independence. It’s a socialist idea that somebody knows what’s best for all of us and can determine the best set of circumstances for each person.

 

JIM CHAPMAN: What about the argument that again the socialists sometimes make that there are some among us who simply are not capable of making the best decisions for themselves and they need our help, what do you say to those people?

 

BRAZENHUBRIS: Well I would say that one of our founders, Thomas Jefferson, said in his first inaugural address that “Sometimes it’s said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others?” Now that’s a hell of a question.

 

JIM CHAPMAN:  Is there an answer for it?

 

BRAZENHUBRIS  The answer is “NO”, if he cannot be trusted with the responsibility of himself then he cannot be trusted with the government of others; And of course what that means in the converse is that he can and must be trusted with the responsibility to govern himself [if we are to accept government]

 

JIM CHAPMAN: Your book was originally published in the 1990s, and has received a wide circulation since then. Now what kind of feedback do you get from people, are you on the enemies list of any of the socialist organizations, I mean do they come after you on any kind of regular basis:

 

BRAZENHUBRIS Well not yet. One of the curious things; I think one of the very interesting things about the book is that I wrote it in 1994,  and just kind of sat there and watched TV analysts and everyone try to solve these problems, and finally just last year; the year before last now actually the book was published and so it hasn’t really been out there long enough and I’ve just started promoting now so I haven’t received a whole lot of feedback; some positive some negative though.

 

JIM CHAPMAN: How can people get a copy of it up in Canada here can we get it at Amazon.com here for example or a website?

 

BRAZENHUBRIS: You can go to your favorite bookstore and ask for it, I do ask that anyone interested go to my website whybilloreillyiswrong.com and you can read the forum there, you can log on, read some of my arguments and get more input as to what the book is about, and maybe even make some arguments of your own on the forum.

 

JIM CHAPMAN:   Well I must tell you I was very-  not only was the title provocative, the book was very provocative and I spent some very interesting hours reading and mulling over the things you have to say it’s been a pleasure talking to tonight and I hope we have a chance to do it again.

 

BRAZENHUBRIS:  Well I certainly appreciate you having me on, thanks.

 

JIM CHAPMAN:  Take care, thank you sir.

 

            That’s BRAZENHUBRIS. His book is called. The Answers to All the World’s Problems. Now I’m going to tell you I said earlier that he describes himself as the most intelligent man in the world, and I’m not kidding he does say that but I suspect with his tongue in his cheek a little bit, [ks note- I actually refer to myself as the “wisest person on the planet” and detail the difference between knowledge, intellect, and wisdom in the book]  and the book can be a little tough going at times. I think actually, no offense to Kenny, it could be half the length that it is without suffering at all, but it is one of those books that I just couldn’t stay away from. I’d read a chapter and I’d think about what he had to say and I’d think “gee I’m not sure about that” and I’d put it down and come back a couple of days later and I’d read another chapter and go “well yeah, I kind of like this one” come back and I found my self re-reading chapters and-

Whether you agree with him or not he has some very provocative things to say- and not needlessly provocative- not just for the sake to say “hey people buy the book”. He has some very provocative things to say about the fundamental things we believe, not just in the United States but in Canada too, so if you’re looking for a bit of a mental challenge and you want to take or get a fresh look at lot of the major problems of our age it’s a most interesting book.  It’s called The Answers to All the World’s Problems by BRAZENHUBRIS, and you can certainly as he said get it at your local bookstore, if they don’t have it in stock ask them to order it for you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Copyright ©  2008    The American Tarot     all rights reserved