Why Lupe Fiasco doesn't support President Obama.

[BamaFanNKy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKJrMKumseY

[zacharyrow]

By listening to some of his songs he strikes me as the type that thinks, "The government is out to get me and my kind." Like everything bad that has happened to him is the government's fault. I'm not sure if he'd back Ron Paul.

That being said his "Words I never said" song is a good song, regardless if you agree with everything in it.

[VBRonPaulFan]

At least he's a reasonable voice in the ocean of madness that is the rap music industry. We need more thinking people like him. Even if you don't agree with him, i'd be willing to bet you'd be able to have a civil debate with him.

[ClayTrainor]

The uploader made this video unavailable to anyone outside of the USA.

You can watch it here, if you want. www.youtubeproxy.org :)

[BamaFanNKy]

Well, anyone who is with me on protesting to end the wars..... I support them.

[dannno]

By listening to some of his songs he strikes me as the type that thinks, "The government is out to get me and my kind." Like everything bad that has happened to him is the government's fault. I'm not sure if he'd back Ron Paul.

That being said his "Words I never said" song is a good song, regardless if you agree with everything in it.

When a culture is deeply impoverished, in this case through no fault of their own, it is simply more difficult for individuals within that group to increase their wealth and success.

Black culture in this country started out with nothing after they were freed from slavery. Slavery was enforced by the government. Then they were segregated for a long time, again by the government. Now they are all living under a gigantic police state. How can you NOT blame their problems on government??

So you have this huge segment of the population that is impoverished at the hands of the government. That doesn't mean it is impossible for them to become successful. It doesn't mean that government should some how make up for it and make them successful. But the fact is that they should blame oppressive government for their culture's condition, and that affects their individual condition. They should want freedom, and that's what you do and should want for them.

[schiffheadbaby]

he is NOT FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE, i dont know why you guys think he is on rp's side. its a joke, he wants communism not capitalism

[tasteless]

This is his LASERS Manifesto



THE L.A.S.E.R.S. MANIFESTO

To Every Man, Woman & Child...

1. We Want An End To The Glamorization Of Negativity In The Media.

2. We Want An End To Status Symbols Dictating Our Worth As Individuals.

3. We Want A Meaningful And Universal Education System.

4. We Want Substance In The Place Of Popularity.

5. We Will Not Compromise Who We Are To Be Accepted By The Crowd.

6. We Want The Invisible Walls That Separate By Wealth, Race & Class To Be Torn Down.

7. We Want To Think Our Own Thoughts.

8. We Will Be Responsible For Our Environment.

9. We Want Clarity & Truth From Our Elected Officials Or They Should Move Aside.

10. We Want Love Not Lies.

11. We Want An End To All Wars. Foreign & Domestic (Violence).

12. We Want An End To The Processed Culture Of Exploitation, Over-Consumption & Waste.

13. We Want Knowledge, Understanding & Peace.

14. WE WILL NOT LOSE BECAUSE WE ARE NOT LOSERS, WE ARE LASERS!!!

#3 and #6 lead me to believe he wouldn't like Ron Paul.

[schiffheadbaby]

This is his LASERS Manifesto



#3 and #6 lead me to believe he wouldn't like Ron Paul.

thank you, he is a communist. I guess some people on this forum care more about ending wars than ending the welfare state.

[dannno]

This is his LASERS Manifesto



#3 and #6 lead me to believe he wouldn't like Ron Paul.


#6 isn't so bad, the government does erect the invisible walls (The Federal Reserve, the police state, drug war, etc..) which separate wealth, class and race.

#3 is easy to explain. If you have a uniFIED education system, then whoever controls the system controls education. If you have one group controlling that, then it makes it easy to control everybody. If everybody got to control their own education, universally, then we would have a meaningful and universal education system, would we not?

[ammorris]

When a culture is deeply impoverished, in this case through no fault of their own, it is simply more difficult for individuals within that group to increase their wealth and success.

Black culture in this country started out with nothing after they were freed from slavery. Slavery was enforced by the government. Then they were segregated for a long time, again by the government. Now they are all living under a gigantic police state. How can you NOT blame their problems on government??

So you have this huge segment of the population that is impoverished at the hands of the government. That doesn't mean it is impossible for them to become successful. It doesn't mean that government should some how make up for it and make them successful. But the fact is that they should blame oppressive government for their culture's condition, and that affects their individual condition. They should want freedom, and that's what you do and should want for them.

Great post. I meet too many libertarians who are quick to point the blame at blacks and black culture, ignoring the fact that these folks were legally oppressed by the government for centuries, and continue to be oppressed by racist drug laws and the shitty excuses for "schools" that black children are compelled by the government to attend. If they blame the government for their condition, it's because it is largely the government's fault.

[dannno]

thank you, he is a communist. I guess some people on this forum care more about ending wars than ending the welfare state.

Ron Paul cares more about ending the wars than ending the welfare state, and this is Ron Paul forums, so you'd be correct.

By ending our foreign empire and then ending many of our alphabet agencies we would be able to afford to take care of those poor people who have become dependent on government. Once the regulations from the alphabet agencies are gone, we will be able to build prosperity and the welfare system will shrink on it's own. Then we can turn them over to the states eventually.

[schiffheadbaby]

Ron Paul cares more about ending the wars than ending the welfare state, and this is Ron Paul forums, so you'd be correct.

By ending our foreign empire and then ending many of our alphabet agencies we would be able to afford to take care of those poor people who have become dependent on government. Once the regulations from the alphabet agencies are gone, we will be able to build prosperity and the welfare system will shrink on it's own. Then we can turn them over to the state eventually.

uh not really dawg, we spend a ton more on medicaid/eduaction/ss/medicare/public schools/food stamps/unemployment than wars.

but if you want to live in a fantasy world please do

[dannno]

he is NOT FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE, i dont know why you guys think he is on rp's side. its a joke, he wants communism not capitalism

I guarantee he doesn't want what you think he wants.

What the Black Panther crowd calls "capitalism" is actually croney capitalism, aka corporatism. What they want is freedom from the system, they want to take care of their own problems locally. They want to live in a voluntary communal system within their own communities. They want to take care of their own policing and security and get rid of state law enforcement which has destroyed their culture. They are much closer to libertarians that you think, and it would take a lot less education about the system to change their mind than somebody who is wealthy and engrained in the establishment.

[dannno]

uh not really dawg, we spend a ton more on medicaid/eduaction/ss/medicare/public schools/food stamps/unemployment than wars.

but if you want to live in a fantasy world please do

Maybe you can copy and paste the statement I made where I said we spend more on wars then on medicaid/education/ss/medicare/public schools/food stamps/unemployment because I don't seem to recall making that statement :confused:

Try reading my post again, but this time keep in mind that I already know that we spend more money on medicaid/education/ss/medicare/public schools/foodstamps/unemployment than wars.

I am simply laying out Ron Paul's strategy for getting out of our current predicament that he talks about all the time.

The point is that spending money on wars is a complete waste, whereas keeping a disabled person who can't take care of themselves alive is not. We have to be more realistic about who gets government money, that is part of it.. Eventually when we become more prosperous individuals and states will be able to take care of these people. Right now we are being smothered by government coming from every direction so we can't count on individuals to take care of these people. Throwing them out on the street is not a solution that people are going to accept. When we have a dollar crisis, they'll be thrown out on the street anyway, but there are ways around doing that if we change our direction.

[BamaFanNKy]

uh not really dawg, we spend a ton more on medicaid/eduaction/ss/medicare/public schools/food stamps/unemployment than wars.

but if you want to live in a fantasy world please do

You are only thinking of monetary. How many lives and broken families have happened due to the war? Loss of liberty to the war on terror etc. Not everything is a balance sheet.

[BamaFanNKy]

I guarantee he doesn't want what you think he wants.

What the Black Panther crowd calls "capitalism" is actually croney capitalism, aka corporatism. What they want is freedom from the system, they want to take care of their own problems locally. They want to live in a voluntary communal system within their own communities. They want to take care of their own policing and security and get rid of state law enforcement which has destroyed their culture. They are much closer to libertarians that you think, and it would take a lot less education about the system to change their mind than somebody who is wealthy and engrained in the establishment.

Let's remember what Brother Malcolm used to preach:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hm8wXZmRD8

Of course, Malcolm knows that Government hand outs are just that, hand outs:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfiOOm2MK-o

[dannno]

bump

[AuH20]

uh not really dawg, we spend a ton more on medicaid/eduaction/ss/medicare/public schools/food stamps/unemployment than wars.but if you want to live in a fantasy world please do

Ding. Ding. You win the prize. You could cut DoD expenditures in half tommorrow and cease all operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, and it would do little to curb this beast they created. The enormous unfunded weight of Medicare and Social Security by themselves could singlehandedly destroy this country.

[AuH20]

Let's remember what Brother Malcolm used to preach:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hm8wXZmRD8

Of course, Malcolm knows that Government hand outs are just that, hand outs:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfiOOm2MK-o

Many blacks don't or won't listen to X. They're statists addicted to the government tit. He would probably be villified if he was alive today. Remember that he was a religious, pro 2nd amendment black man who preached self-determination and personal self-examination. That's why the power brokers at the time force-fed the population MLK's socialist vision over his. It's a state friendly message.

[tasteless]

#6 isn't so bad, the government does erect the invisible walls (The Federal Reserve, the police state, drug war, etc..) which separate wealth, class and race.

#3 is easy to explain. If you have a uniFIED education system, then whoever controls the system controls education. If you have one group controlling that, then it makes it easy to control everybody. If everybody got to control their own education, universally, then we would have a meaningful and universal education system, would we not?

Those walls exist naturally, even without government. Unless genocide, natural extinction or complete intermarriage leading to a homogenized human race occurs, there will always be difference in race. There will always be difference in wealth unless the notion of private property is completely thrown out the window. The proactive language of #6 leads me to believe he wouldn't oppose using force to see those ideals realized (affirmative action, wealth redistribution, etc.)

#3, I fail to see how people independently choosing how they are educated results in an education "system." But I'm sure you can play with semantics to get it to work somehow.

[nobody's_hero]

I like what he said about the founders establishing a precedent for justice, equality, etc. That, even though they owned slaves, Lupe is able to look past that and see what they set out to do.

That's because every time I start talking about original intent with a liberal, they always mention the founders owning slaves, as if that invalidates my argument entirely. It's quite annoying.

[BamaFanNKy]

Many blacks don't or won't listen to X. They're statists addicted to the government tit. He would probably be villified if he was alive today. Remember that he was a religious, pro 2nd amendment black man who preached self-determination and personal self-examination. That's why the power brokers at the time force-fed the population MLK's socialist vision over his. It's a state friendly message.
He was then as well.

[Roxi]

Lupe Fiasco said he wasn't going to vote in 2008, because [as an anarchist] he doesn't believe in voting, however he wanted Hillary Clinton to win. The guy couldn't possibly be that informed. Maybe he has learned something in the last 4 years though, I dunno.

[Rothbardian Girl]

Those walls exist naturally, even without government. Unless genocide, natural extinction or complete intermarriage leading to a homogenized human race occurs, there will always be difference in race. There will always be difference in wealth unless the notion of private property is completely thrown out the window. The proactive language of #6 leads me to believe he wouldn't oppose using force to see those ideals realized (affirmative action, wealth redistribution, etc.)

#3, I fail to see how people independently choosing how they are educated results in an education "system." But I'm sure you can play with semantics to get it to work somehow.

The difference is that as it stands now, there are cleavages in the population as a direct result of institutional interference. If the playing field were to be leveled by removing state privilege-created monopolies on power, I am willing to bet that eventually, equalities in the rest of the population would begin to naturally arise. It is simply dishonest not to recognize the coercive effects of capitalism as it currently exists.

I do agree that #3 is hard to twist semantically, as it clearly states "one, unified system". But I'm sure he would eventually come around to a consistent position on that as well.

[schiffheadbaby]

Lupe Fiasco said he wasn't going to vote in 2008, because [as an anarchist] he doesn't believe in voting, however he wanted Hillary Clinton to win. The guy couldn't possibly be that informed. Maybe he has learned something in the last 4 years though, I dunno.

Thank you.

It's like Rage against the machine is supposedly an anarchist but he supports communism. These rappers are clueless and Danno thinks we can "take care of" people by ending the wars.

No wonder RP fans get branded as liberals.

We must begin cutting the domestic welfare state but I know that will never happen because nobody has the courage to do it.

[BamaFanNKy]

No wonder RP fans get branded as liberals.

We must begin cutting the domestic welfare state but I know that will never happen because nobody has the courage to do it.

WHA?!?!

Guess you missed Ron saying, "I Don't Think Cutting Food Stamps For The Poor Is The Right Priority"

[schiffheadbaby]

WHA?!?!

Guess you missed Ron saying, "I Don't Think Cutting Food Stamps For The Poor Is The Right Priority"

Well Ron is wrong then, as long as we have crazy domestic entitlement programs we are screwed even if we end all the wars tonight.

I'm sure you will disagree BAMAFAN since you may not look at the numbers on a daily basis like I do but if you want the evidence it is out there.

We have 45 million on foods, over 50 million on social security, 10 million on unemployment etc etc etc

[BamaFanNKy]

Well Ron is wrong then, as long as we have crazy domestic entitlement programs we are screwed even if we end all the wars tonight.

I'm sure you will disagree BAMAFAN since you may not look at the numbers on a daily basis like I do but if you want the evidence it is out there.

We have 45 million on foods, over 50 million on social security, 10 million on unemployment etc etc etc

Back off newbie. We all look at the #s here and cutting social welfare is a thing all of us agree with. Yet, the most costly in terms of life and violation the rights of nations is the wars (also goes toward civil liberties ala Patriot Act). Not everything is about dollars when you weigh the issues.

[nobody's_hero]

It's like this:

I don't like government stealing my money.

If government steals my money and uses it to bomb other people, I really, really don't like that.

If government steals my money to keep someone stuck in a welfare class, I don't like that. I tolerate it to an extent, because, relatively speaking, it is slightly better than killing people.

I really don't like government stealing my money to kill other people.

Repeating, I don't like government stealing my money.

It doesn't mean that I'm a liberal. Just that I appreciate a chance to even slightly influence what my stolen money is spent on first, if it must be stolen.

[schiffheadbaby]

It's like this:

I don't like government stealing my money.

If government steals my money and uses it to bomb other people, I really, really don't like that.

If government steals my money to keep someone stuck in a welfare class, I don't like that. I tolerate it to an extent, because, relatively speaking, it is slightly better than killing people.

I really don't like government stealing my money to kill other people.

Repeating, I don't like government stealing my money.

It doesn't mean that I'm a liberal. Just that I appreciate a chance to even slightly influence what my stolen money is spent on first, if it must be stolen.

They are both terrible, but I have more disdain for the government stealing my money to give to the indolent who become dependent on them for life. At least we can end the wars and come home, these people that we give handouts to expect them and will be much harder to take away. That's why we must oppose them steadfastly in the first place.

[ammorris]

They are both terrible, but I have more disdain for the government stealing my money to give to the indolent who become dependent on them for life. At least we can end the wars and come home, these people that we give handouts to expect them and will be much harder to take away. That's why we must oppose them steadfastly in the first place.

I'm just clarifying here: you would rather the government tax you and use the money to slaughter random foreigners than tax you and use the money to provide food to poor people?

[AlexanderY]

They are both terrible, but I have more disdain for the government stealing my money to give to the indolent who become dependent on them for life. At least we can end the wars and come home, these people that we give handouts to expect them and will be much harder to take away. That's why we must oppose them steadfastly in the first place.

You're absolutely right about the welfare state. Your disdain is justified.

Entitlements are just used to keep us complacent, waging war is what they NEED to fulfill their sick objectives.

Putting a dagger through the heart of the military-industrial complex is one of our primary objectives, along with ending its enabler, The Federal Reserve.

The cost of war is something difficult to ascribe a numerical value to. You need to realize that there are humans involved. The broken families, millions of civilian deaths, the security state that accompanies these wars, which further chisels at what ever liberties we have left.

You can expect blow back for these military operations, and the funding of Arab dictators too, the government will use these threats as a justification to further erode our liberties.

You can't just simply end the wars and come home. Well you can, BUT you can be sure that there will be another manufactured threat.

If you do not nip it at the bud, what's to stop the government from manufacturing another threat?

They've been doing it for decades.

[nolvorite]

he is NOT FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE, i dont know why you guys think he is on rp's side. its a joke, he wants communism not capitalismlol he didn't say he was on Ron Paul's side, he just said he doesn't support President Obama.

[Johncjackson]

Yeah, because Ron Paul is such a "good government" guy. People who support limited government tend to believe government causes harm, and it certainly does. I would say a good % of Ron Paul supporters feel harmed or even persecuted by the government and/or other power elites. I have seen other rappers mention RP favorably, and they tend to be the ones who don't accept the government story about everything- like a lot of RP supporters. Even though there is certainly a large "angry white guy" ( sometimes bordering on scapegoating minorities, something that ahem, RP has spoken against) contingent among us, it is undeniable that the government has caused great harm to all of us, but especially the ancestors of those who make up the bulk of hip-hop culture. And that continues today with all the wars on everyone and police militarism.

That said, I wouldn't say he would support RP at all, but he is skeptical of the government and dislikes a lot of what has been going on, and that certainly doesn't mean embracing the political "left" either.

edit: This was supposed to quote first post. didnt for some reason.

As far as welfare goes ( sorry didn't read everything), I personally would make cutting corporate welfare more of a priority. The public social program welfare state is bad and expensive, yes. It's also pretty ingrained at this point and would say many are pretty much institutionalized by it. There are a lot of pro-liberty measures that can help that, I believe. I have certainly seen RP interviews where he said certain things were a much lower priority when it comes to cutting government.

[BamaFanNKy]

lol he didn't say he was on Ron Paul's side, he just said he doesn't support President Obama.

I've yet to see where anyone said he did.

[ronpaulitician]

WHA?!?!

Guess you missed Ron saying, "I Don't Think Cutting Food Stamps For The Poor Is The Right Priority"
Ron Paul's Plan for a Freedom President (http://www.yaliberty.org/yar/plan-for-a-freedom-president)


While the president can do a great deal on his own, to really restore the Constitution and cut back on the vast unconstitutional programs that have sunk roots in Washington over 60 years, he will have to work with Congress. The first step in enacting a pro-freedom legislative agenda is the submission of a budget that outlines the priorities of the administration. While it has no legal effect, the budget serves as a guideline for the congressional appropriations process. A constitutionalist president’s budget should do the following:

1. Reduce overall federal spending

2. Prioritize cuts in oversize expenditures, especially the military

3. Prioritize cuts in corporate welfare

4. Use 50 percent of the savings from cuts in overseas spending to shore up entitlement programs for those who are dependent on them and the other 50 percent to pay down the debt

5. Provide for reduction in federal bureaucracy and lay out a plan to return responsibility for education to the states

6. Begin transitioning entitlement programs from a system where all Americans are forced to participate into one where taxpayers can opt out of the programs and make their own provisions for retirement and medical care

This text, by the way, should be one of tthe most-used copy/paste texts into comment sections; though I would still like Ron Paul to write a column similar to Harry Browne's The president's first day in office (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=13247), where Paul very clearly lines out what actions he would undertake on DAY ONE.


After my inaugural day, I'd probably spend little more than an hour a day in the Oval Office, because a busy president is a dangerous president. But for the very first day, I'd have an extremely long agenda.

On that first day in office, by executive order I would:


Pardon everyone who had been convicted on a federal, non-violent drug charge, order their immediate release, reunite them with their families, and restore all their civil rights. (Anyone convicted of using violence against someone else in a drug case would not qualify as "non-violent.")
Pardon everyone who had been convicted on any federal gun-control charge, tax-evasion charge, or any other victimless crime, order their immediate release, and restore all their civil rights.

I would empty the prisons of those who haven't harmed anyone else and make room for the violent criminals who are currently getting out on plea bargains and early release.

Following the issuance of the pardons:


I would announce a policy to penalize, dismiss, or even prosecute any federal employee who violated the Bill of Rights by treating you as guilty until proven innocent, by searching or seizing your property without due process of law, by treating you as a servant, or in any other way violating your rights as a sovereign American citizen.
I would immediately order that no federal asset forfeiture could occur unless the property's owner had been convicted by full due process. And I would initiate steps to make restitution to anyone whose property had been impounded, frozen, or seized by the federal government without a legal conviction. (Over 80 percent of such seizures occur when no one has even been charged with a crime.)
As commander in chief of the Armed Forces, I would immediately remove all American troops from foreign soil. Europe and Asia can pay for their own defense, and they can risk their own lives in their eternal squabbles. This would save billions of dollars a year in taxes, but -- more important -- it would make sure your sons and daughters never fight or die in someone else's war.
I would order everyone in the executive branch to stop harassing smokers, tobacco companies, successful computer companies, gun owners, gun manufacturers, alternative medicine suppliers, religious groups (whether respected or labeled as "cults"), investment companies, health-care providers, businessmen, or anyone else who's conducting his affairs peaceably.
I would end federal affirmative action, federal quotas, set-asides, preferential treatments, and other discriminatory practices of the federal government. Any previous president could have done this with a stroke of the pen. Do you wonder why none of them did?


And then I would break for lunch.

[schiffheadbaby]

Ron Paul's Plan for a Freedom President (http://www.yaliberty.org/yar/plan-for-a-freedom-president)



This text, by the way, should be one of tthe most-used copy/paste texts into comment sections; though I would still like Ron Paul to write a column similar to Harry Browne's The president's first day in office (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=13247), where Paul very clearly lines out what actions he would undertake on DAY ONE.

great, I guess ron is pretty liberal if he doesn't want to immediately slash food stamps. disappointing.

[ronpaulitician]

True, it is very liberal to realize that there are certain small things a president alone cannot do, and instead focus on the bigger things that a president alone can do.

[BamaFanNKy]

Someone is Trollin:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5haHnzERjDg

[jmdrake]

By listening to some of his songs he strikes me as the type that thinks, "The government is out to get me and my kind." Like everything bad that has happened to him is the government's fault. I'm not sure if he'd back Ron Paul.

That being said his "Words I never said" song is a good song, regardless if you agree with everything in it.

How is that different from Ronald Reagan saying "Government is not a solution to our problem, government is the problem."?

[jmdrake]

uh not really dawg, we spend a ton more on medicaid/eduaction/ss/medicare/public schools/food stamps/unemployment than wars.

but if you want to live in a fantasy world please do

Your calculus is dishonest. You include stuff that most people don't consider welfare (social security / medicaid / education) but you only include "wars" on the other side of the equation and not the entire cost of "empire". (foreign bases, foreign aid, black ops, diplomatic corp, defense contracting, VA hospitals etc). Don't forget that 2.3 trillion was reported stolen from the Pentagon the day before 9/11.

[jmdrake]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKJrMKumseY

Another rap star, Mobb Deep, has come out in full force for Ron Paul.

See: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?293583-video-Prodigy-of-Mobb-Deep-talks-about-Ron-Paul

M.D. supported Ron Paul back in 2008 as well. Note what woke him up to Paul. ;) Lupe Fiasco is awake to many of the same things as well.

See: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?292972-Lupe-Fiasco-releases-music-video-for-quot-Words-I-Never-Said-quot-...WOW!

Those who want to make support of the CRA a litmus test of whether or not you can be a Ron Paul supporter are idiots that will cost us the election. There are a lot of people are RPF that disagree with Ron Paul on abortion (I know because I've argued with some of them) so why drive away potential supporters before they even have a chance to hear Ron Paul out on a particular issue? (Plus most of the libertarian types arguing about the CRA have no clue about the actual constitutional issues anyway).

Anyway, great video and thank you for posting it. Key points:

* Just because a leader is black doesn't mean he's a good leader (i.e. Robert Mugabe).
* Lupe's parents taught him to look beyond the person and see the (evil) system.
* Lupe understands the problems we face are largely economic (and in his "Words I never said" video he specifically calls out the banksters).
* Lupe is willing to accept that the founding fathers did lay down principles of freedom even though some of them didn't fully practice those principles by owning slaves.
* Lupe refused to shake Obama's hand before he had time to find out what Obama is about.
* Lupe was happy when Obama said "Let's get out of Iraq", but Obama lost him when he said "Let's send more troops to Afghanistan".

Bottom line, Lupe understands liberty and following principle even if he hasn't endorsed Ron Paul up to this point. That should be commended. And this video needs to be spread further.