Cody Wilson on 3D-Printed Guns: VICE Podcast 001

CODY WILSON: I think you
have to almost be– well, pretty crazy and
unrealistic to even start a project like this. [MUSIC PLAYING] EDDY MORETTI: Hi, I’m Eddy
Moretti, and welcome to a new “VICE” podcast. I’m here with Cody Wilson, who’s
the subject of one of our new documentaries,
“Click, Print, Gun.” CODY WILSON: Gun control,
for us, is a fantasy. In a way that like, people say
you’re being unrealistic about printing a gun, I think it’s
more unrealistic now, especially going forward, to
think you could ever control this technology. [GUNSHOTS] EDDY MORETTI: We’re going
to talk about his interests and pursuits. And the documentary,
it’s taking off. Almost 2 million video views in
like, three or four days. It has 17,000 likes, 1,400
dislikes, so that’s a ratio of 10 to 1. Now that, I don’t know if people
like the doc, or they like you, but it’s a high like
to dislike ratio, and it’s got about 15,000 comments, which
is a lot of comments. And we’re going to get to some
of those comments later. We were actually just talking
about it, like, how do you feel that this is
a YouTube hit? CODY WILSON: If it is, well,
like and dislike’s an interesting measure of
engagement, if that’s the word we want to use. So I don’t know if it’s about
me, or even if they like the message or me, maybe it’s
just good entertainment. That’s one of the things
I worry about. It’s just something that’s
interesting for like a week. EDDY MORETTI: Right. So you want to make sure that
your message gets through. It’s an exotic subject, and
it’s about guns, which is controversial. So there’s entertainment factor
there, but you’re worried about a political
message getting through. CODY WILSON: No, I think
we’ve been pretty successful with that. I call it a mind virus. I think that’s happening. I’m just saying when someone
says, oh, they like the documentary. No, not really. It’s a weak measure of– EDDY MORETTI: But that’s
what a lot of social media uses to measure. They don’t have too
many dislike– CODY WILSON: Sure. We’re in a better position than
if everyone disliked it. But you used the word “exotic.”
I think it’s a participatory exoticism,
or something. Oh, great, I can consume this
interesting thing I’ll never really participate in. Not to be– EDDY MORETTI: Like is a big
umbrella to capture that whatever energy, or sentiment,
or whatever. So, OK, just really briefly,
tell us where this started. I know in the documentary,
you say that you and your colleague came up
with the idea. But like, there was an idea
that preceded the eureka moment of let’s print a gun
part, or a gun, right? Talk about the idea that
preceded the eureka moment, and then talk about
the eureka moment. CODY WILSON: It really was
almost a seamless progression to this oh, wow, we could
do it exactly this way. We imagine the way we’ve
been doing it now on video and online. So Ben Benio was talking about
arms manufacturing on a phone call with me one time. EDDY MORETTI: Why? CODY WILSON: He’s even more
waywardly eccentric than I am. And he’s just– we’re not afraid
to do unintelligent things, but we’re also
not afraid to just do experimental things. And I was doing law school, I
was just wrapping up a Super PAC that I had experimented
with for a little bit, an old 527. Long story, but we were just
looking for something to do. We believe in this
post-political, trans-political moment. Engagement in standard
politics is just a waste of time. It happened in the course of,
really, one phone call. EDDY MORETTI: So one phone call,
you basically said, wow, let’s print a gun. CODY WILSON: It became
practical for us. It was practical. Oh, what about arms
manufacturing? Well, everyone does arms
manufacturing. The market’s saturated. Why would we want to do this? And we talked about alternative ways of making arms. And then it proceeds,
well, have you heard of these 3D printers? And at that point I’d heard of
them, but in the ways other people had. EDDY MORETTI: So the idea that
preceded it was to disrupt, or what did you call it? A post-political– CODY WILSON: Well, right. The idea was for something
ideologically important and significant. And we thought, wow, what if
these 3D printers were hooked up to the internet, and what
if they could print not innocuous things, but
relevant things? And we immediately
realized it. Well, can you print a gun? Not because, oh, it would just
be interesting to print a gun, but what would it mean to
be able to print a gun? Had that in mind. Very quickly then, we set to the
research to figure out if it was possible physically. EDDY MORETTI: The excitement to
do something that disrupts is kind of everywhere in the
documentary, or you talk about democratic consensus with
a level of skepticism. CODY WILSON: Contempt. EDDY MORETTI: Yeah, contempt. CODY WILSON: Is a better word. EDDY MORETTI: You criticize this
Fukuyamist idea, you call it, in “The End of History.” You
criticize neoliberalism. You call it ridiculous. That there’s no genuine politics
left anymore, that our politicians today are just
trying to preserve the interests of a relatively
autonomous group of bankers. So what’s the ultimate object
of your scorn, then? Is it the bankers at
the end of the day? CODY WILSON: No, there’s no
ultimate object of scorn. That’s just baroque cynicism
writ large. EDDY MORETTI: Right. CODY WILSON: No, there’s
no one target. In fact, I don’t believe in– so, like Fuku’s description
of power is that power is actually diffused and all
around us and anonymous. I don’t believe that there’s a
cabal to attack, or a group of puppet masters, really. I was re-describing what I
thought American politics actually was. But no, power is a much bigger
problem than, well, there’s some bankers with a lot of
money, and they should really have it put to them. It’s a much bigger deal. So I’m interested in starting
points for alternative strategies of opposition. If that’s just discursive,
fine. It’s material, fine. I want it all. And Bitcoin, printable
guns, I want to be involved in all of this. EDDY MORETTI: And the ultimate
target, then, or the ultimate critique is a critique
of power. CODY WILSON: You could
say it that way. Man, I hate to just– EDDY MORETTI: But it’s
pretty broad, right? CODY WILSON: Like, it loses all
of its content when you just write it– EDDY MORETTI: It’s easier when
you say bankers or global neoliberalism. CODY WILSON: Yeah, but I mean,
but again, it’s just you name me a subject, and I’ll
be critical of it. That’s just how I am. I feel– I don’t want people to
take away from– EDDY MORETTI: Is that
libertarianism, by the way? CODY WILSON: I don’t think so. EDDY MORETTI: Because, are you
even called a libertarian? CODY WILSON: Yeah. I think I’m dispositionally
a libertarian. Like, my attitude toward civil
liberties is a libertarian one, but I don’t identify
as a libertarian. If that’s the question. EDDY MORETTI: Right. OK, good. We’ve got that figured out. So– CODY WILSON: But it’s not
like I would vote, you know what I mean? I don’t believe in
this concept. The system isn’t built to put
Gary Johnson into office. I don’t even accept
that possibility. Well, go ahead. EDDY MORETTI: I was going to
say, does it sound, or it could sound like what you’re
really interested in is sort of disruption itself
as a way of life. CODY WILSON: Yeah, sure. EDDY MORETTI: Broadly
speaking. CODY WILSON: So like, Nietzsche
talks about, well, what’s the revolutionary
ethic? What does it mean? And I don’t want to talk about
the revolutionary imagination specifically, but, yes, you have
to be almost fanatically devoted to just a negative
form of action to do something like this. And in fact, it would take
on some lifestyle. But I still believe in equality
of production, private property,
ideas like that. I believe in– [INTERPOSING VOICES] EDDY MORETTI: There’s that shot
when you’re shitting on global neoliberalism. You’re driving a BMW and
you’re talking on an unreasonably expensive
cell phone. CODY WILSON: Exactly. With the glasses– EDDY MORETTI: Explain
that, then. Like, how you exist in a kind
of structure and system that you’re also pulling
from in order to disrupt, or is that, like– CODY WILSON: I’m not sure
it’s that intentional. I’m happy to accept it. If it’s perceived to be some
kind of contradiction, fine, but I believe in markets and
not capitalism with a C, if that makes sense. That car’s not an expensive
car, and the phone was an expensive phone. I believe that you should be
able to buy things without interruption or coercion, or
interference from governments and markets. And in fact, capitalism, to
me, I accept the left definition of capitalism,
which is a kind of state propped institution of more or
less imperial tendencies, and tends to a monopoly and
plutocracy, and I don’t accept this social state of affairs. EDDY MORETTI: And you’re not
happy with the progressivist attempt to like, blunt some
of that imperialism, or plutocracy? CODY WILSON: That’s just it. EDDY MORETTI: Or
do you think– CODY WILSON: It’s only that
nominally, it’s only that spiritually. They think that’s what
they’re doing. And that’s what’s so
frustrating about progressivists. EDDY MORETTI: But aren’t they
doing it a little bit? CODY WILSON: No, they’re not. EDDY MORETTI: Like, isn’t Obama
incrementally better than Mitt Romney? CODY WILSON: No, not at all. No, not in the least. In fact, progressivism has cast
its lot with the fate of capitalism. EDDY MORETTI: True. CODY WILSON: What is the
progressivist idea now? That we can share in the
fruits of capitalism. It’s not even reformist
to a major degree. You get some people saying,
oh, let’s do away with personative corporations. Well, that’s desperate. They really believe that, well,
we can actually make capitalism better and
work for us all. EDDY MORETTI: Is it like, a
European liberal kind of notion of social kind of
democracy, where everyone– basically, the American
progressivist agenda wants everyone to have a really good
paying middle class job. CODY WILSON: It’s middle class
body and spirit, and that’s its problem. It doesn’t have a revolutionary
goal, it doesn’t have historical perspective, it
does nothing but apologize for monopoly capitalism
and enable it. So you get things, any political
or policy solution you get right now actually
encourages market stratification. They don’t know what
they’re doing. EDDY MORETTI: Yeah. CODY WILSON: And they want to be
judged by their intentions, and that’s lazy. It’s moralistic, and I hate
their interference in what would otherwise be an
equitable outcome. EDDY MORETTI: What’s wrong with
the fact that American liberals want everyone to have
a good middle class wage? Why does everyone need to have
a revolutionary program? CODY WILSON: It’s not that you
need one, but that we believe in fundamental inequalities
that are built into this system. In fact, the world we live in
is a totally unjust one, and that it doesn’t matter that, to
say like, well, this is the best of all possible worlds, and
aren’t you happy with your BMW, and aren’t you happy
with your phone? This is a way of apologizing
for vast evil, if we can use that word. Or vast injustices. I believe in social equality. I don’t believe that for some
reason, status or otherwise, that you should have
some hierarchy, or some power over me. EDDY MORETTI: But you
criticize ideas about a better future. You criticize the notion of
something that is whole and good, and like an endpoint
to history. But like, if you believe in
like, radical equality, social equality, isn’t that a kind of
vision of an endpoint to history that is whole
and good? CODY WILSON: No, not at all. In fact, so particularly,
you might– I’m sure you could see it,
it’s a critique of this Hegelian sense of, well,
it’s all gonna– EDDY MORETTI: Synthesis. CODY WILSON: It’s all just
gonna work out, you know? And the surface synthesis
of all things. People are deeply committed
to that. Even Marxism is in that
same frame of mind. I’m not driving for a result,
but no, what I’m trying to say with that is, everyone
thinks– so you have the difference of
socialism from above and socialism from below. Everyone thinks they can use
their institution, their state institution, their legislative
process to engineer, or one of the ways I’d put it is
counterfeit moral progress by writing it down on paper,
or something. EDDY MORETTI: But that’s the
Constitution, and you claim the Second Amendment
as like a– CODY WILSON: Not at all. EDDY MORETTI: That’s what humans
do, though, right? We engineer– CODY WILSON: They try to
centralize power, yeah. EDDY MORETTI: Or engineer
the world around them. CODY WILSON: Sure, sure. And I’m saying you shouldn’t
be able to interfere with certain kinds of rights, like
property or really, any kind of spontaneous action, free
action, free association. And this is at least a symbolic
way of demonstrating, you’re not going to be
able to control guns. I think it will apply to
commerce as well with things like Bitcoin, and then once
that dam is broken, forget about it. EDDY MORETTI: Yeah. But what you’re adding to the
idea of kind of free commerce is this very provocative
instrument called a gun, and doesn’t that kind of change
the terms of what you’re proposing a little bit,
because are you– the gun is essentially going
to end up being used for things, and not just
become a symbol. CODY WILSON: Yeah. It’s a real thing as well. That’s what upsets a lot of
people, that we’re not just willing to play a theory game,
that we’re actually willing to make this real. Of course I recognized
it’ll be used. I’m not sure what the question
that you’re asking me is. EDDY MORETTI: I mean,
it just becomes– it sounds like it’s an active
revolution, rather than just a disruption of a system
of manufacturing. CODY WILSON: I believe
that this system– EDDY MORETTI: Is this basically
the question, is this your revolutionary
gesture? CODY WILSON: No. So let’s separate
it right now. I hate to explain it
so explicitly. The system understands force. In fact, invites violence,
because it can work on that plane. But once you move the struggle
into the symbolic, from the physical to the physible, if
you will, it can’t answer. It can’t respond in kind. If we were to just go out into
the street, print some guns off and start shooting people,
it can handle that. But the idea of putting this
online and creating what we call a potentiality where you,
anyone is now a suspect criminal, this is something
the system can’t handle, because it has to know
everything and see everything. I think it’s kind
of overbidding. That’s so challenging, in fact,
to the point of maybe destruction. EDDY MORETTI: So the idea, then,
the ambition is to have people, and have the system
respond to these threats mechanically, or otherwise
through law, or through action? CODY WILSON: I’m eager to see
what the response is. EDDY MORETTI: Rather than you’d
like to see a million people, a million of your video
viewers go out, print a gun, and then threaten the
National Guard, or something. CODY WILSON: No. I don’t think it happens
that way. EDDY MORETTI: You’re more
interested in discursive like, reaction to what you’re doing. CODY WILSON: I think that’s
really how you do it, and what do I mean by it? Like, I think you expand
free spheres of action by just changing– so Gustav Landauer said the
state is a condition, just like a mode of behavior, how
we behave with each other. If you don’t use an
intermediating institution, you’ve obviated the need
for the state. So peer to peer currencies,
I can just download a gun, print it online. It’s teaching practical
anarchism. It’s not saying print this out,
although I love scaring the trendy proggies with the
idea that anyone could print one out, but that’s
just a bonus. That’s not really my– I’m not a 3% patriot saying it’s
time to print these out and get to town. I think that’s the best
way to put it. EDDY MORETTI: And what happens,
or how would you feel if the practice is adopted
en masse, and it becomes potentially a problem,
and people die? CODY WILSON: It’s a fair
question, I just don’t know how realistic it is. One, because the capital is
so first world, it’s so impractical, it doesn’t– you
can yet create a reliable gun, a working gun, don’t get me
wrong, but you can already go to Home Depot right now
and make a sten gun. Cheap. A good one. An SMG. It works. Spit out a ton of bullets. Why don’t people do
that right now? I think there’s a
precedent for– EDDY MORETTI: OK, forget about
it being adopted en masse. Let’s say one person downloads
your CAD file and it gets involved in a homicide
of some sort. CODY WILSON: Sure. EDDY MORETTI: I mean, just
hypothesize that effect on your program. CODY WILSON: I’m willing
to give you the whole hypothetical. In fact, I expect it at some
point, I guess within my lifetime, if we’re
able to do it. And I wouldn’t even suspect
that it was staged. It seems likely, or perhaps
increasingly likely. But again, I don’t think
that’s a reason not to pursue it. In fact, one thing you accept if
you adopt this position of negative liberty is that
liberty can be abused. And maybe that sounds callous,
but I accept that bad things can happen because you
have freedom, and because you have latitude. This is the nature of liberty. But we should do things about it
after it happens, but that prescription is not
a prohibition. These are not ways of handling
social problems. EDDY MORETTI: Aren’t certain
prohibitions just sensible? CODY WILSON: I don’t know of
a good historical example. And in fact, they’re always
enforced with monopoly powers, which again, is a whole other
level of problems. Give me a prohibition,
we’ll talk about it. EDDY MORETTI: Not running
a red light. I mean, that’s a prohibition. CODY WILSON: It’s
a proscription. EDDY MORETTI: Well– CODY WILSON: It’s not like an
expropriating prohibition where you can’t possess, or
own, or transfer this. EDDY MORETTI: You’re
restricted from running a red light. CODY WILSON: Well,
now you’re just talking about law generally. Well, isn’t it good
to have law? Yeah. I agree with the ideas,
especially the ideas like natural rights, or natural
law, or common law. These are things I’m
sympathetic with. So when people get into
conversations about anarchy, they go, well, you
don’t like law. No, it’s not about
not liking law. I believe in concepts like law,
and even punitive steps. Kropotkin and a bunch of people
didn’t believe in these things, but it’s a separate
question. For me it’s a question of
state, not a question of government, necessarily. Government will always be
around, but does it have to be state government? Does it have to be monopoly
of power? Monopoly of violence? EDDY MORETTI: You’re looking
towards some kind of model of diffused government power? CODY WILSON: Yeah. You see what the Seasteaders are
going to start doing soon. EDDY MORETTI: Who are they? CODY WILSON: Peter Thiel and
Patri Friedman started a research group, experiments in
government, taking to the high seas, getting on oil rigs and
cruise ships, and just new experiments. You can call it state founding,
but mostly it’s just experiments in intentional
communities. They want to just build their
own communities and see what they can do, kind of like
“BioShock.” You know what I’m talking about? EDDY MORETTI: Yeah, they’re
going to live on– CODY WILSON: It’s a gall kind
of idea, but they’re going to try it. And they’ve got enough money
to do it, and I think it’s exciting going forward. There should be federalist
experiments in free association and mutual
cooperation. And it’s like we’re coming
right back into the 19th century now, where everyone
was talking about this. I think there are macroeconomic
trends. This mega state, the United
States is getting weaker. The West is collapsing in
a glittering fashion. I love what happened
in Cyprus. More to come every
week, I’m sure. Fake crises all the time. We’re going to– these states are simply going
to have less power, and it’s going to be interesting to see
the way they fragment, and the way they begin to have to
interact with populations which now hold more cards
for themselves. EDDY MORETTI: What are the
constituencies that might adopt these positions
of power? If the United States, if the
West, if these centralized governments start to fragment,
what could take this vacuum, other than these kind of
spontaneously beautiful, anarchic conglomerates
that you talk about? CODY WILSON: I’m not saying
they’re going to be beautiful. It’s going to be really
ugly at first. EDDY MORETTI: Who else? Like, what happens to big
corporations, for instance? Where do they fit in? CODY WILSON: I hope very much
that big corporations aren’t as possible as they were now. I don’t think you get an Apple
computer, or even a Microsoft, necessarily, when you don’t
have a strong state. Strong states seem to me to be
the players that keep market entrants from competing
with– now they’re bringing back 3D printing. Groups like 3D Systems, or
groups like Stratasys can be the bullies on the corner
because they pretty much determine who they compete
with and who they don’t through these channels. And then there’s regulatory
capture, things like the FDA. People can’t bring in drugs. When you disintegrate the
strong state, these corporations have to face a ton
of external pressures, and have to get lean. Start fighting again. EDDY MORETTI: So what happens
if the printable gun isn’t disruptive to the system? What happens if it just eats it
up and shuts you down, or figures out a way of like,
putting some kind of spider bug, whatever the fuck it is,
where do you go from there? CODY WILSON: My actual conscience about it is divided. I don’t know if it even is
disruptive, as even an idea. EDDY MORETTI: Why not? CODY WILSON: Is it just
something to consume? Is it just a media event? Is it even– it seems that it’s– EDDY MORETTI: I think people
are engaging with this as a provocative idea. I don’t think this is– CODY WILSON: Yeah. You’re right. A lot of people– it’s connected with, that’s
great, and you could say that was the highest goal,
and you’re right. EDDY MORETTI: Hopefully what
we’re doing right now is a discussion aimed at the
ideas, and not just– CODY WILSON: I very rarely
get to this point with an interview, so I’m happy
that we’re here now. But one of my big fears is that
people prefer the forms of soft domination, pleasurable
domination engendered in their culture to
real acts, real events, if that makes sense. Why would you want to be
reminded that you could print a gun out and actually change
something out in the street? That’s an ugly kind
of– it’s almost a burlesque of modernity. I don’t know. I prefer “American Idol.” I
prefer watching “BioShock” communities on YouTube. I like my standard of living. Our democracy’s good, man. I like this. I think it might be ignored. It’s not necessarily that
it would be appreciated. EDDY MORETTI: But let’s say it
attracts attention of enough government officials and
authorities, and they deny you licensees, they seize things,
they shut this down, they go on a real offense on the
internet to look for these files, and like, what
happens then? CODY WILSON: That’s two
different things. I expect to be shut down at
some point, although we’re playing as smart as we can. But I mean, I expect to be
stopped, especially if it was to be disruptive. And so this might be one of the
best pieces of evidence that it’s not at all, the fact
that I’m able to just keep doing this. Because they’re not worried
about it in the least, and don’t feel the need to be. But it’s another thing entirely
to suggest that they might be able to filter things
out through the internet. I know that it’s a big game,
the internet isn’t exactly stacked in privacy’s favor, but
it’s quite an endeavor to try to purge the internet
of a file. EDDY MORETTI: China does a
pretty decent job of purging the internet there. What’s to say that that’s not
the future of the internet everywhere? CODY WILSON: That’s a
huge undertaking, what China’s doing. It’s so big, and it’s so– I think what’s more realistic
is what’s happening in the Middle East, where people just
have to cut the cables and turn it off. EDDY MORETTI: Right. CODY WILSON: In fact, and we
all know China’s internet situation is really porous
and getting better. If you know what to do, if
you can use Tor, you can do other things. You can get through. In fact, there are free zones,
and corruption works in your favor there, for liberty. So you can buy internet
access in China. So again, I just don’t think
there’s a total system that would be able to succeed along
the lines you’re suggesting. EDDY MORETTI: Nick Bilton from
“The New York Times” said that there’s an element of
self-aggrandizement here, that you’re looking for attention. Do you want to respond to him? CODY WILSON: So there’s two
things I see, that there’s the actual literal criticism, and
then for me it seems to be like a dismissal, and it’s also
bundled up with a side of, well, he’s young. He wants attention. He’ll come around to state
power eventually, don’t worry about it. We’re all there. I felt like that was a pretty
heavy dismissal of the ideas. But then two, I’ll go with
a question about self-aggrandizement. I think you have to almost be,
well, pretty crazy and unrealistic to even start
a project like this. So I recognize that. Believe me, we had this ambition
from the beginning. How crazy do you think you have
to be, or how crazy do you have to be to think
you could come this far with this project? Just think, just sitting
in your apartment. Yeah, you know what? I think we could piss
off the world. That takes a bit of ambition,
and it has to be unrealistic, I think. So yeah, it’s impossible
to extract this from my personality. But it’s not just a
vehicle for me. I don’t think it’s just a
chariot, and I’m not just, like waving. I’m trying not to cuss
in the interview. EDDY MORETTI: You can swear a
little bit here, I don’t care. CODY WILSON: But yeah,
so I’m willing to cede some ground there. Sure. How can you– yeah, there’s like a hypomanic
kind of personality in what we’re doing. And it’s driven by
my personality. Go ahead. EDDY MORETTI: Part of success in
some way has to be measured by how popular this idea, not
this media event or this video, but how popular your 3D
printing concept is, right? I mean, so for you to want to
attract attention to yourself, it’s kind of part of
the program, right? If you’re not attracting
attention to yourself, how’s this just like a tree falling
in the forest, who cares? There’s a CAD file
on the internet. CODY WILSON: We’ve seen the dull
and unimaginative ways that other 3D printing
projects have tried to attract attention. And I’m not criticizing their
software or their model, they just don’t have the vision of
it that we do, and we have a purpose we challenge them on. And it’s not strictly for
attention, but I recognize, especially during the gun debate
after Sandy Hook, if we brought it as more aggressive
and more challenging, that it would be what we
want it to be. And I think it worked, when I
said something like how’s that national conversation going? I mean, that’s critical on three
fucking levels, man. It works. And people can say, well, he’s
an asshole, but it worked. EDDY MORETTI: You seem to like,
kind of taunt the people like Joe Biden. CODY WILSON: I think we should
have nothing but limitless contempt for people like that. EDDY MORETTI: Really? CODY WILSON: Yeah. I think these are criminals. EDDY MORETTI: Joe Biden
is a criminal? CODY WILSON: Yeah. Definitely. Dangerous people. EDDY MORETTI: Why? CODY WILSON: Shouldn’t be
given power at all. EDDY MORETTI: But
what does he do? CODY WILSON: Well, he’s
clearly like, a functional idiot. Like, he shouldn’t be
given power at all. At least a standard deviation
like, below our IQ. I mean, why should it matter
to me what he does? And yet, I have to fear
his decisions. And he’s going to helm some
group telling me what my civil liberties are going to be? Or his suggestion? This is like a soft form
of autocracy now. I don’t appreciate it at all. EDDY MORETTI: What I don’t
understand is your analogy between like a 30 round clip
and you say there’s no difference, or you answer the
question, why do I need a 30 round clip with another
question, which is why do you need two houses, or why
does anyone need to make more than $400,000? I don’t totally get
the comparison. CODY WILSON: It’s not the best
way to answer that question, but I was trying to make
it more about property, specifically. And that there seems to be
always at the margin these excuses to expropriate us, or
to invade on our property rights for some reason or
another, to prevent victimization, harassment,
excess. These are the only things
that legislation even serves to do anymore. Well, don’t hurt yourself. Or well, don’t hurt
other people. This is dull and dim. But I know it’s not the best way
to answer the gun question specifically, but at the end of
the day, a 30 round clip, 30 round magazine, people hate
it when I say the word “c;ip.” EDDY MORETTI: Sorry. CODY WILSON: A 30
round magazine– I trip up with it, too. It’s just a piece of property. EDDY MORETTI: Right. I mean, a lot of people would
say that you have to be sensitive to the effects of
that piece of property? It’s not just a magazine,
it’s– CODY WILSON: I don’t think
objects have potentialities. That’s metaphysics. That’s uninteresting to me. And– EDDY MORETTI: But how
can property– CODY WILSON: It’s an excuse. EDDY MORETTI: Yeah. But how can property rights
be an absolute? I don’t understand that. CODY WILSON: Not that they’re
like, absolutely inviolable, but that there should be a
presumption you should own anything until you demonstrate
yourself to be an articulable threat, or imminent harm, or
some kind of grand danger to– this is how constitutional
jurisprudence works right now, if you want to bring it back
to, oh, well, we live in a country of laws, Cody. This is how infringing on
your freedom works. For everything except the Second
Amendment, you have a presumed right to free speech
and you can abuse it, and not until you’re really, really
abusing it can a court come in and stop you. That should be how it works with
the Second Amendment, and something like a 30
round magazine. In fact, why not? The Second Amendment’s right
after the first one. EDDY MORETTI: But even just
the idea of an amendment presupposes that yeah, we are
going to create a body of law, and then we’re going to
periodically modify that law to restrict or improve
on human behavior. I mean, isn’t that just– what I’m getting to a little
bit is that I think, I feel like a lot of your discourse
operates in absolutes. Like, you talk a lot about
us being, humans being radically free. We’re so free, we have this
capability for spontaneous freedom and stuff. And you talk about property
rights as being natural, almost akin to natural rights. And that everything that we
layer on top of that as a culture is just meant to
restrict all of that beautiful, wonderful freedom. But do we really live in that
kind of state of freedom to begin with? CODY WILSON: I don’t think we
actually exist in a state of total radical freedom. That’s not where I begin. EDDY MORETTI: Some of the
language sounds like– CODY WILSON: In the documentary
I say, so this is a critique of one of the
ideological mechanisms I see in society, that oh my god,
you could do anything. You’re so free, we should
stop you from being able to do things. That’s the impulse that’s
expressed legislatively. That oh, I worry that you
could– like this ring. You could punch someone in
the face with that ring. Why should you be able
to wear this ring? I’m not trying to
be ridiculous. EDDY MORETTI: There’s a point
at which this ring probably would be considered a weapon. CODY WILSON: Well, sure. But just to give you an example,
what happens, right? Media is the birth of
all regulation now. So something happens in the
media, and these politicians with their self interests and
their political incentive decide oh, god, it would
be terrible if X was to happen again. Let’s make a law about it. That’s just how politics
works now. Because you could do something, you should be stopped. Where does this end? It has no logical end. It’s just circling a
drain in my mind. So I don’t think we’re
completely connected with absolutes, and I’m not
completely there. EDDY MORETTI: No. How many people are there
like you out there? Like, how many– you know? What’s the community that you’re
really speaking to, because it’s obviously way
beyond the MakerBot community, and like what people in
3D printing are doing? And it’s also way outside of
the gun debate itself. So describe your community to
the rest of, in America, to the rest of us. CODY WILSON: I’m not sure
it’s a community. We want– we– I say we quite a bit, but also
me, we want to occupy a position at the outer bound of
something, to where once people, especially the makers. A lot of our criticism is
reserved for the makers. EDDY MORETTI: I’m going to
get to them in a second. CODY WILSON: Once they got lazy,
we wanted to be in a position to say, no, you’re
forgetting what this is about. Go back. And we snuck in and got that
position, for now at least. So it’s a disciplinary,
punitive function. If you mess up, we want
to be there to hold– let’s put it the
way you put it. A more absolute position. A more disciplinarian enforcing
kind of position, culturally or otherwise. EDDY MORETTI: Last night at the
screening, you called Bre Pettis from MakerBot– You called him– CODY WILSON: What
did I call him? EDDY MORETTI: Something. I don’t know. CODY WILSON: I’m worried about
you said I called him. EDDY MORETTI: I wrote down “traitor,” but do you remember? CODY WILSON: No, I didn’t
call him a traitor. EDDY MORETTI: Not a traitor,
but like– OK. Scratch that. CODY WILSON: I think I said
something, we don’t need friends like that. EDDY MORETTI: OK. CODY WILSON: Because someone
said, well, he’s sympathetic. EDDY MORETTI: So explain– CODY WILSON: And
I was, so what? EDDY MORETTI: Explain your– CODY WILSON: I’ve heard he’s
actually sympathetic to what we’re doing, and Bre’s
done great things. So sometimes I do feel a little
sorry for the criticism that we’ve trotted out against
him, because he’s given so many people access to 3D
printers and 3D printing. Obviously he’s a force for good
in this community, but by trying to have it both ways and
acting like nothing can happen when he pulled down the
gun files, and refusing to speak about it. And a lot of documentary crews
had come through before and after the “Vice” crew, always
telling me, Bre didn’t want to talk about it, Bre had
nothing to say. Bre would divert. I just thought, wow, man,
that’s terrible. He’s letting this die, and he
should be a force for openness and access. He’s willing to get
press on it. He’s willing to let “Forbes”
run pieces on how open and accessible his community is. So I thought, yeah, it was just
disingenuous, and in fact worked against the principles of
open source and this quote unquote “revolution.” So we
wanted to give it back. EDDY MORETTI: In the documentary
you talk about taking the Second Amendment
argument all the way. What is all the way, and how
does that compare to the way the NRA, or even the
Tea Party wanted to interpret the Second Amendment? CODY WILSON: The NRA isn’t
a good example. In fact, they’re a force–
you’re going to think I’m ridiculous to say this. They’re a force for
gun control. They’re a force for
registration. EDDY MORETTI: How? CODY WILSON: They introduced and
helped pass the 1968 Gun Control Act. It was a form of domestic
protection of industry. They’re for industry
and capital. They’re not for liberalization
of access and absolute property rights like we
talked about earlier. That’s not what they are. They’re a pro-capitalist
lobby. They want to protect domestic
gun manufacturing in the United States first
and foremost. EDDY MORETTI: Yes, which is what
they’re doing right now? CODY WILSON: Oh, that’s
just who they are. When it comes down to– they have no position
on me, right? It’s smart for them not to, but
when it actually comes to proliferation of guns, oh,
well, forget about it. Wipe their hands. And I don’t want
to pick a fight where one isn’t necessary. They’ve done nothing to besmirch
the project or anything, but I just want to say
they’re not an equivalent to even the Tea Party. And the Tea Party certainly
isn’t equivalent to us. When we say all the way,
we say, well, there’s a structural implication by
the Bill of Rights. You’re saying, well, it’s about
an amendment process. So it suggests something
like, well, we can restrict liberties. Well, no, when I read what the
Constitution was about, just in its structure, it seems the
Amendments were added on in this federalist, anti-federalist
debate as a way of demonstrating
a limitation on governmental powers. So we would amend to continue
to limit government powers. At least that’s the
implication there. So when I take the Second
Amendment all the way, like I say, I see it as a complete
limitation on congressional authority. Read the Constitution and show
me anywhere in there that Congress has a power to take a
battle rifle away from me. Don’t tell me, or don’t ask me
to justify why I need one. Show me where Congress has the
power to take it away from me. That’s the way I read
the Constitution. EDDY MORETTI: Sure. But again, it’s iterative,
right? It can be amended again. It was amended to prohibit the
ownership of slaves, which was a piece of property. CODY WILSON: Of course. EDDY MORETTI: It can
be amended again. CODY WILSON: I’m not
saying it can’t. I’m just saying, there are
processes of constitutional decision making. Oh, this sucks. I’ve been in law school
too long. There are ways of looking at
the document and reading it beyond just literalism and
textualism, like the Tea Party might say, that suggest how the
laws should be looked at. So in their context, the Bill of
Rights suggests limitations specifically on government
and Congress. Before limitations on individual
liberties. That’s just why they
were added. EDDY MORETTI: Right. What do you think of
the Tea Party? CODY WILSON: I’m sympathetic. But it’s like a lightning rod,
and one of the– what’s the most social or historical
function of a mob of people? To demonstrate force. But what does the
Tea Party do? It’s not threatening. It’s part of the system. The Tea Party cleans up
after itself, after it has a big rally. They are demonstrating mass
docility, if that makes sense. And I hate to sell out the Tea
Party, not that they’d be listening to a “Vice” podcast. EDDY MORETTI: You never know. CODY WILSON: I’m sure that
there’s plenty of sympathetic people all over. The thing for me is that the Tea
Party is totally complicit and docile, and loyal
to this order. And in fact, just feels
a little bit betrayed. And then it was co-opted by
people like Sarah Palin, and Glenn Beck. So it wasn’t a socially
useful movement. Occupy had the same problem,
but maybe in reverse. Occupy demonstrated that it
could be, that it had force and it could do destruction of
property, but it had no ideas. There was no content, and in the
end it just asked for more entitled nanny statism. So neither have relevant ideas,
but both are expressing frustration, and I sympathize. EDDY MORETTI: You went on
the Glenn Beck show. What was that like? What happened on “Glenn Beck?” CODY WILSON: Interesting. So I still didn’t know
how I felt about Glenn Beck at the time. I don’t think I’ve made
a call even now. I just watched him when he
did his first segment. He’s such a showman. I mean, he’s just, he’s
a good performer. Maybe you’ve seen him–
maybe you know him. EDDY MORETTI: No, I don’t. CODY WILSON: He’s just
interesting to watch. Does he believe it? Does he not? What’s the deal? Especially, so I’m from the
South, and you just hear more about the Tea Party and these
things down here. He kind of took his own wing of
the Tea Party with him, and it became this– it moved from its libertarian
roots to this, let’s bring the culture wars back, evangelical
Christian overtones. And he just took his own
Christian wing of the Tea Party with him to the internet,
and now they have their own show. So I was just trying to absorb
as much of it as possible. I watched him. And then we engaged, kind of
like you and I are engaging. But I felt, the whole time I
felt like he was not just ambivalent about what I was
doing, but in the end wanted to find a way to explain it
away to his audience. So I felt actually in real
danger when I was interviewing with him. I just pick up– EDDY MORETTI: Why? Because he wanted to put
3D gun printing in some kind of box that– CODY WILSON: I worried he was
going to explain it away as leftism, or like, something to
do with Occupy Wall Street, and then turn his audience
off of it. And I know that we need
conservatives to support this. It’s the NRA Second Amendment
conservatives that give us the most money. EDDY MORETTI: How do you know? CODY WILSON: Well– EDDY MORETTI: And how do
you accept donations? CODY WILSON: Emails. PayPal. EDDY MORETTI: PayPal. CODY WILSON: We get a lot of
ad revenue now, so it’s not we’re totally in need
of donations. But the people that mail me and
say that they’ve donated, they tell me about themselves,
oh, I’m a veteran. You know, I’m from this state. A lot of Florida, Texas,
all the South. I mean, I’ve had major donors
from overseas that totally break this stereotype, but it
just seems by and large, most of the donors are red
state conservatives. EDDY MORETTI: Last night you
talked about, like, wanting to build a software business. What’s your future look like? CODY WILSON: I don’t know. I’m playing very– I don’t plan. So I wish that this DEFCAD
search engine we do will be successful, but we’ve taken
such a hard line and are willing to play games with
copyright, that I think it will be difficult to
attract VC and play a traditional game. Not that I’m willing to do that,
it’s just that’s one way to win, if that makes sense. So maybe you get bought
by somebody. But again, that’s not
the strategy. Do I want to be a CEO and have
some nice standard of living? Man, I don’t think so. I really would like
to do something. And I don’t think physible
piracy will be as important as music piracy was. One, because this is just a
global culture of consumers, not producers. But man, it would be great if we
could become a peer of The Pirate Bay, and that it would
be essential for some people to– and the gun is a good way
to demonstrate this, but people want access to certain
objects, and don’t have them. Especially if they’re
copyrighted. It’d be great to fly the black
flag and run all over the Earth, and try to make sure
that this site stays up. That’d be fun and fulfilling. I don’t want to just sit on
Fifth Avenue or whatever, and rake in the money. EDDY MORETTI: So what happens
after– so you’re in grad school right now. CODY WILSON: Yeah, law school. EDDY MORETTI: So what happens
after law school, then? CODY WILSON: I don’t know. I may not even finish. EDDY MORETTI: Do you– where does academia fit
into this for you? CODY WILSON: I don’t know. I mean, I feel like I’m
contemptuous of academia, but at the same time, I’m
a product of it. EDDY MORETTI: Do you have like,
critics in school, where you go to school? CODY WILSON: I do, but
my professors, especially at UT, are all– they understand what’s going on,
and they think, in fact, it’s a pretty well engineered
postmodern brouhaha, so they– high fives, even if
they disagree. That’s just how academics
are, those decadents. But– EDDY MORETTI: It’s entertainment
for them. CODY WILSON: Exactly. They teach it in their
classes a little. There’s some Second Amendment
scholars. EDDY MORETTI: Maybe they’ll
show this video. CODY WILSON: You think so? EDDY MORETTI: It’ll fill up
like 40 minutes of their lecture time. CODY WILSON: Yeah, I’m
pretty sure they’re jealous of their time. They wouldn’t do this. But the Second Amendment
scholars, I’ll give them some grief, like Sanford Levinson,
I gave him some grief in the beginning. But everyone’s kind
of come around. In fact, we have some big names
in law that are willing to be consultants on some
of the projects. EDDY MORETTI: Wow. CODY WILSON: That’s cool. EDDY MORETTI: Who’s your biggest
detractor, then? CODY WILSON: You mean
like, public critic? EDDY MORETTI: Yeah, your
biggest public critic. CODY WILSON: Well, in terms of
visibility, maybe someone like Steve Israel. But that’s like, I need a better
class of enemies, man. This person is not to
be taken seriously. And in fact, I think we’re
working together. It’s like, he hopes I
succeed so it makes his career, or something. I feel like we don’t have a
significant enemy yet, and in fact that’s something to be
cultivated or desired. We don’t have that
element down yet. It would be great to have
a nemesis of some kind. I don’t know what it
would be, though. EDDY MORETTI: Do you– obviously you’re a fan of
Julian Assange, or– CODY WILSON: He’s an
important guy. EDDY MORETTI: Is he a
hero in some way? CODY WILSON: Maybe not a
hero, but I liked how his politics changed. Maybe he wouldn’t accept, how
I would say this, but one, he’s in a total different
class than me. I would never want to be
considered a peer. That would be an insult to
him, but he was more of a leftist before he started
getting in trouble after leaking these things. And then he started talking
about the totalizing state, and the need for– he came around after the state,
global states put pressure on him. I mean, he’s in a fix
now, but I really appreciate what he did. EDDY MORETTI: Just give us
a list of thinkers and philosophers that have theorized
this total state. CODY WILSON: Oh, the
total state? I’m thinking more of like,
just cultural figures who theorize the total state. So again, just with critical
theory, I think it’s more relevant to watch something
like “Blade Runner” than to read– EDDY MORETTI: Adorno. CODY WILSON: For example. Exactly, or like Adorno. Adorno’s lazy, right? And Marcuse is depressed,
or something. So yeah, instead of reading
“One-Dimensional Man,” you should watch “Total Recall.”
These are useful. In fact, why do schools
reserve such pride of place for books? Why aren’t TV shows more
prominently put in libraries? I take more stock these days in
what’s happening right now in the culture. I was just talking about
Carly Rae Jepsen’s song the other day. I think it’s important to
criticize belief in society. It’s another conversation, but
I mean, I think you should look at what’s happening now. You don’t have to go back 100
years to find relevant people. EDDY MORETTI: So give me your
one minute film review of “Zero Dark Thirty” then. CODY WILSON: I haven’t
seen it. I didn’t watch it. EDDY MORETTI: Oh, shit. Like you out of all people
should watch– CODY WILSON: Once people started
talking about the torture, I was like,
um, I’ll pass. Not because, it just became
controversial. EDDY MORETTI: We should do,
like a film show with you. CODY WILSON: That would
be amazing. EDDY MORETTI: And just do like,
you come in and give us your 10 minute deconstruction. CODY WILSON: You know, I do
consider myself a film critic, by the way. EDDY MORETTI: No, I’m serious. We should do a film show. CODY WILSON: I watched
“Alphaville” the other night. I was like, this is amazing. Let’s do it, man. EDDY MORETTI: Yeah, that’s
the state, right? In “Alphaville.” The computer. CODY WILSON: Yeah, programmed
computer. EDDY MORETTI: The talking,
Godard– CODY WILSON: The updating
dictionary of– EDDY MORETTI: Godard would
be an interesting director for you. CODY WILSON: Oh, no
question, man. “Bicycle Thieves,” right? Italian neorealism. I love it all. But again, I think you
can mine culture now. In fact, like, cinema
is more important. Or, let’s say it this way. It is the modern literature. And maybe that’s an old cliche
at this point, but I think it’s still true. So maybe I should’ve seen
“Zero Dark Thirty.” EDDY MORETTI: “Zero Dark”
I thought you’d see. Let’s get some comments, answer
some viewer comments. So TZ Premlez says, 58 minutes
ago, said why in the hell do you need 600 rounds? Just tell me why. Who are you shooting
600 bullets at? That is a mirage of bullets. That is like slaughtering. It is insane and inhumane. Go, dot dot dot dot dot. CODY WILSON: Sure, sure. So barrage is probably
what he meant. Maybe. EDDY MORETTI: Yeah. But I like mirage. CODY WILSON: Yeah,
mirage is good. EDDY MORETTI: A mirage
of bullets. CODY WILSON: Etymology? So I think the question is why,
maybe he’s asking why do we have 600 rounds in the first
place, and why should we be allowed to, and it’s insane
to even have that. But the practical answer is we
wanted to demonstrate in a very immediate way that you
could run literally 600 rounds through this lower, and don’t
just take our word for it, here it is on video. So it serves that
visceral front. You can see it happen. EDDY MORETTI: That’s a huge
leap forward, right? Because you did 26 rounds and
the gun broke up, and then it cuts to– CODY WILSON: But it’s like black
magic, because again, the lower receiver is not
a very difficult piece. We knew if we just tweaked it in
the right way– we spent a lot of our time tweaking it. So it seems maybe like it was a
harder process than it was. And believe me, this
serves the project. You see someone like Rachel
Maddow, MSNBC going, oh, look at it not failing. I know that this is black
magic to some of these progressives. But again, it’s a very
simple thing. Just wanted to thicken it
and change the curves in the right places. I’m not trying to even undersell
what we did, I just don’t think it was that huge
of an achievement. But we wanted to demonstrate
that it didn’t fail in a literal way. EDDY MORETTI: It is a
little bit like gun porn at some point. CODY WILSON: Yeah. Well, believe me, I know
that that gets views. You’ve got the guy, FPSRussia. One of the more successful
YouTube channels, because he just has access to guns that
people like, and he shoots. EDDY MORETTI: Shoots them. CODY WILSON: And he shoots them
without apology, and he blows up trucks. I mean, it’s just– it’s
gun porn, specifically. EDDY MORETTI: There is a lot
of gun porn in our culture. CODY WILSON: Yeah. All action movies. I mean even, Jim
Carrey, right? He just put up this anti-gun
video, is in like, “Kick-Ass 2,” which is nothing but
ultra-violence for the under 13’s, or something. So yeah, violence seems to be a
necessary part of consuming in this culture. What can I say? EDDY MORETTI: SKS2000 says, I
don’t understand what the big deal is with 3D printing guns. What Cody is doing, people have
already been doing for decades with mills and lathes. Why the sudden uproar now
that someone is making guns with 3D printers? CODY WILSON: I think I actually
understand the answer to the question, but I’ll
first comment on why the question was asked. So yes, this is fascinating. I think what has happened is
there’s this maker movement, which is very hyped right now. Very celebrated. And then also, there’s this
East and West coast misunderstanding, that people
were already making guns in machine shops all
over the South. EDDY MORETTI: That’s
a misunderstanding? CODY WILSON: I think so. EDDY MORETTI: Why? CODY WILSON: Well, you hear
someone like Nick in the documentary say, well, the
ATF, it changes the conversation when the ATF
realizes you can make the piece for yourself. This is totally inaccurate. The ATF knows that people all
over the country make gun parts for themselves. That’s not what my ATF
conversation was even about. There’s this East coast
misunderstanding that, I don’t think they knew that people
were making gun parts. And now, so you add this new
technological layer, and they all freak out. It’s like realization one, that
people could make guns and had been doing it, and two,
now they can do it in this new technology. But I can’t explain the specific
fever pitch that this has reached. EDDY MORETTI: It must be, it is
kind of an elite reaction, because, actually all around the
world, they’ve been making guns out of just sheet metal
by hand for years. Like, we just did– CODY WILSON: You can make
it out of a shovel. EDDY MORETTI: Yeah. CODY WILSON: Saw it happen. So it’s– yeah. EDDY MORETTI: But it has to
like, pop into the shiny, much talked about internet for it
to become kind of like– CODY WILSON: It’s some of this
internet culture, the tech blogs, and then the East coast,
West coast literati got a hold of it, and you just— EDDY MORETTI: It doesn’t hurt
that the “The New York Times” jumps in, right? CODY WILSON: Right. You get this perfect storm, and
again, we’re willing to be this villainous creation. It just all works together. It’s this nightmare scenario,
and suddenly it connects with people in a way that it
hadn’t before, which I’m thankful for. EDDY MORETTI: Antonio, oh, I’m
not gonna say his last name, says, this guy’s full of shit. CODY WILSON: Yeah, maybe. EDDY MORETTI: He feeds
on the attention. A true maniac. The two house, $400+ salary
defense doesn’t work. Guns are designed to kill
or harm, houses are not, salary is not. Respond. CODY WILSON: We talked
about the comparison. Again, it’s not the best defense
of why you should be able to own a gun, but I was
just trying to reduce it as a piece of property, and that
there are always excuses to take away your property
for some reason. Either if your property tends
toward victimization, or inequality, or harassment. These have been all ways that
legislators used to expropriate this. That will always be there. And so I just wanted– it’s not a good way of doing it,
but I just wanted to make the point that a 30
round magazine was just a piece of property. Anyone can make an excuse to
take it away, just like they make excuses for taking
anything away. But back to about being a
maniac, yeah, probably. EDDY MORETTI: You
answered that, actually, before, as well. CODY WILSON: Oh, sure. And then feeding on that. You know, fine, but it seems
to me it’s sour grapes. Obviously he’s against
my position. Just getting a few swings in. EDDY MORETTI: Last question. We’ve talked a little bit
hypothetically, but let’s have one more hypothetical. A terrorist, a foreign
terrorist, not a domestic terrorist, gets a hold of some
part manufactured via an open source file on the internet
that leads to the death of thousands of people here
in the States. CODY WILSON: How would
that even work? I’m willing to give it to you. EDDY MORETTI: Some kind of,
let’s say we go from 3D printing of guns to 3D printing
of nuclear detonators or something. I’m just saying, you talk about
the materials getting better and the processes getting
better, and say they get really fucking good,
and they get to be– CODY WILSON: I don’t think
you’re going to pop out fast breed plutonium reactors
any time soon, but I know what you mean. I know what you mean. Maybe someone can– I just don’t, one, I just don’t
think it’s realistic, just spending this time and the
technology like we have, there are just chemical
elemental limitations on making explosives, radioactive
things. But let’s give it to you. What if someone does
a lot of harm with an open source file– EDDY MORETTI: That comes
from your site. CODY WILSON: Yeah. One question, maybe this is
because of some of the legal studies, the first thing I
think of is liability. What’s our liability because
of this licensing regime? Is this enough to
take us down? Does this mean we should pursue
protection from other jurisdictions? EDDY MORETTI: Outside of the
legalities, how do you feel? Like– CODY WILSON: I’m just breaking
it down for you. So it’s not happened yet,
so I can’t know exactly how I’d feel. I’m sure that there would
be some sympathy, or– each situation like this has
its own particularities and details that drive how
you’d feel about it. So maybe– I’m sure we’d feel bad, but I
accept that something like that might happen. I really do. I just accept that it would. That’s how a gun works. I don’t think a lot of people
went up to Samuel Colt and said, well, you know,
someone might shoot somebody with one of these. It’s just assumed. EDDY MORETTI: Just because I’m
trying to understand you a lot better, would you be willing to
say that, yes, you accept that something like that might
happen, but that you would mourn the loss of life? CODY WILSON: I think that’s
fair, but does it sound– EDDY MORETTI: Just
life itself. CODY WILSON: I’m not sure if
it sounds authentic to say, well, I would mourn
the loss of life. I want to be as authentic as
possible about it in my reaction, so I’m willing to
withhold judgment almost completely. I don’t know how I would react,
but I think I would react humanely. EDDY MORETTI: But is there not
like some humanist sort of– CODY WILSON: There’s no
justification for stopping what we would do, though. The files would stay up,
if that’s what you– EDDY MORETTI: I’m just trying
to get your reaction to the loss of human life as
a concept, you know? CODY WILSON: Just
a sidebar, then. So we’ve had this
conversation. And this happens quite a bit,
and it always confuses me. It’s like I’ve violated
some pact. Some neoliberal pact. And why aren’t these
conversations happening with arms manufacturers, or in fact
the Department of Justice, or DOD, who we know just give
these guns away to rebel groups all over the world? And real guns. Real guns that do real harm and
actually work, and could be in service for 100 years. And instead it’s like, well,
what are you, Mr. Tinkerer? Why do you want to
hurt the world? It just seems to me to be a
distraction, and almost to the point of a diversion from– EDDY MORETTI: I am trying to get
you to say that you don’t want people to die, and that
ultimately, change would be better if people didn’t die. CODY WILSON: This is, of course,
true, but it’s not going to stop. I don’t want people to die. Why would I want
people to die? It’s not even a Leninist,
well, you’ve got to break some eggs. That’s not my attitude
about it. But the files will be up,
because I believe in access. And this makes me self
conscious, because is it really that important? Are people really any time
soon going to be printing these printable guns and
using them to effect? And I don’t know. EDDY MORETTI: Probably not, but
the fact that you made a distinction between you and
Leninism is, I think, worthwhile. CODY WILSON: Is it? EDDY MORETTI: For
people to know. CODY WILSON: OK, sure, sure. EDDY MORETTI: It’s worthwhile
for me to know, that’s for sure. CODY WILSON: Well, there’s
this attitude, right? And look, I respect Lenin and
his place in history, but that’s a callous attitude,
and I don’t have it. I really don’t. But if I seem cold, it’s just
because it’s principle, and why should my principles change
because some factor upstream changes? It’s not how principle works. It’s just not how I
think it works. EDDY MORETTI: I think I’m
satisfied with this interview. And yeah, no, it was good
talking to you. CODY WILSON: Yeah, it was fun. I enjoyed it very much. EDDY MORETTI: Thanks
for coming by.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *