Today we sit down and have a chat with Lucifer himself, Mark Pellegrino! If you’re a fan of Supernatural then you know just how great his portrayal of the prince of darkness is. Mark stops by to talk about his current Kick Starter “The Guardian Project” which is there to help with online bullying and viral defamation. John has backed the kickstarter, have you?
Support The Guardian Project:
Find Mark online:
“Drinks and Comics with Spoiler Country!”
Did you know we have a YouTube channel?
Buy John’s Comics!
Support us on Patreon:
Theme music by Good Co Music:
Mark Pellegrino – Interview
[00:00:00] Jeff: hello listeners. A spoiler country today on the show, we had the fantastic Mark Pellegrino. How are you doing mr. Pellegrino?
Mark Pellegrino: I’m surviving the pandemic.
Well, so far, how are you,
Jeff: having less WELBRO apps? I’m actually a teacher at a high school and we have three potential cases now over the last, two days. So it’s, it’s a little nerve wracking.
Mark Pellegrino: where whereabouts in the, in the country, are you a Rhode Island? Okay.
Jeff: So, yeah, so we we’re, we’re up to about a thousand cases a day.
Now consider the States only had like a million people in it. That’s pretty significant and the high schools are open. We’re not distance learning, so it’s, it makes things, stressful, but I’m sure it’s pretty rough where you are as well. where are you located? approximately
Mark Pellegrino: sunny, California, my friend, sunny, California.
We’re in like we’re, we’re in 75% lockdown last I heard, but it could be changing. Things are changing every day.
Jeff: Well, if you’re gonna be locked out, I guess California is a place to [00:01:00] be, at least it’s nice at night. The weather must be nice. So you must be nice
Mark Pellegrino: and it’s, it’s it, there are worse places to be, I guess, in that respect for sure.
Jeff: So 75%, like I was at, how, how is that affecting you? pacifically.
Mark Pellegrino: Well, I mean, you know, as an actor, I’m sort of a, a recluse anyway, so it’s no real adjustment from my, my normal life. cause my wife and I, write and create here in the home. So. And my work is usually in other countries. That’s the only significant impact on me so far is that I, I can’t travel and I can’t do my work in other States and countries like I normally do, but otherwise it’s just business as usual.
This is what I do. I write at home. I, I study at home. I, I do podcasts from home. I go out and I, am, do my shopping and that’s it.
Jeff: Yeah, it must be pretty rough when you realize the rest of the rest of the world really doesn’t want us at all at the moment.
Mark Pellegrino: Yeah, I know [00:02:00] it sucks, but my wife has been stuck in Paris since June.
Jeff: Oh, wow.
Mark Pellegrino: So she’s coming back, for the Thanksgiving holiday, I think. And then has to go back and wait for her visa.
Jeff: Oh my God. At least she’s going to be there for Thanksgiving. That’s that’s at least must be a load off your mind.
Mark Pellegrino: Yeah, that’ll be, that’ll be nice.
Jeff: So what I found interesting about you when I was doing some research on you, is that before he became an actor, you actually were studying Marine biology.
what, what, what, what, what, what was it like when you went into college for Marine biology? What was your goals at that moment?
Mark Pellegrino: I was, I was a pretty diehard environmentalist. And so I guess I, my goals were to preserve and clean the oceans, or I should say clean and preserve the ocean. and, but I.
I decided through college, if that wasn’t really my calling I in college, I got more interested in history in psychology than in the hard sciences. And so I drifted away from Marine biology in the first year, pretty much.
[00:03:00] Jeff: So what caused that shift to focusing more on, you said history and less on the hard sciences.
Mark Pellegrino: I don’t know. you know, it’s just one of those things where you just discover your tastes, you know, and, and I don’t know whether, whether, those tastes are, are inherent and you stumble on them or, or what, but I found the, the history and psychology courses in college to be, just more interesting.
for me, and I don’t think I have, I there’s, there’s certain aspects of the sciences that I’m, I’m very good at and other aspects I’m not so good at. So like, I don’t think I’m great with spatial relationships, but I’m fantastic with abstractions. So, you know, algebra and chemistry were very good, easy for me, but physics was more difficult because I have problems with visual visualization.
And, and seeing things it’s spatial relationships of things. So, I think to the degree that you have to do that, bring that to the, to the Marine, biological sciences. I think I just decided it was a week, a [00:04:00] week or point for me. And I’d rather deal in the abstractions of psychology and history,
Jeff: which does seem to fit better with you, your love of acting and running.
I would imagine psychology, abstraction creation, more than hard
Mark Pellegrino: facts. I think so. I think you’re right.
Jeff: I always find it interesting when I listen to, when I talk to people on these interviews and I always have a philosophy that the paths that we take it all possible paths help you understand better where you are now and always, and taking that as an idea.
I always think like something, for instance, your original goal of Marine biology, what you started, is there any through line between what. Talents skills abilities you learned from that as you started to what you did in history to where you are now as an actor, anything that you can look back and saying, this helped me, even though it doesn’t seem direct as a direct through line, help me be better at this other thing.
Mark Pellegrino: I can’t make any, I can’t make any serious connections. Other than [00:05:00] this, the passion that I felt, my, my love of Marine biology was less scientific and more, more poetic, I would say. and maybe that’s why I eventually bowed out because, I wasn’t a scientist. I was more a poet and an activist. And so that, that passion and love that I.
Felt for nature is translated into other subjects. So, so perhaps it’s that. Yeah. Or maybe I could take this it’s now that I’m thinking yeah. About it, you know, there is, you know, the passion that one has for a reason, and truth it, you know, which has to be, which has to be your guide. And the sciences has carried over into my passion for reality and truth in acting.
And communication and in the philosophies that I discovered and in my assessments and history, so maybe that’s another aspect that, that has carried over, but I didn’t even think about until you just asked me the question.
Jeff: Yeah. I’m going to say, I can have a similar idea on that. When I went to college originally, I graduated [00:06:00] with a focus on primatology as that was, and I did that for a couple of years.
I realized it wasn’t the. Science of the thing I loved as much as the idea of it and the feeling of the exotic nature of it. And maybe even, like I said, the natural aspect of it, I moved on to become an English teacher. And I think there’s a similar idea where there’s a question of dip between science and the idea of the thing itself.
And I think it sounds like that’s what you got caught into as
Mark Pellegrino: well. I think you’re right.
Jeff: And, and I think that’s, and I think that’s also for my students that they, if they do ever listen to my personal podcast, I don’t know if they do, but, the idea that you never know which direction you’re heading in, so you as good too.
Focus on learning as much as you can because you never really know what you’re end up using later in your life.
Mark Pellegrino: Hey, I think, I think human beings are, the one potential that’s never actualized entirely, so you’re always learning. You should never stop learning. ever. I read [00:07:00] all the time. I read more now at 55 than I did at 25.
Jeff: Oh my God.
Mark Pellegrino: So, I don’t think that you should, even if you get an advanced college degree, in some cases, if you get high enough advanced college degree, your learning can’t stop because you have to research and do academic work in order to make, tenure. But, but in the case that you just, you know, graduated with, with a bachelor’s or a master’s even don’t think, you know, it.
Just don’t stop there. You know, the human human not only is human need, insatiable human need for knowledge is insatiable and it should be insatiable in each individual.
Jeff: So w and as far as your reading goes, where’s your passions taking you now?
Mark Pellegrino: I just. Purchased, will Durant’s, comprehensive history of civilization, which is a 10 volume will an Ariel.
Durant’s a 10 volume compilation of history from the beginning of time, recorded history to a. I’m not sure when it ends. I’m not sure when duress stopped writing. So [00:08:00] maybe somewhere after world war two, that’s, that’s a, that’s about 10,000 pages of history. I’m only now in the middle kingdom of, yeah.
So I’ve got a long ways to go. I also read, I’ve got, I read Von Meeses. quite a, quite a bit. I’ve known enough to know if you’re familiar with liquid Von muses, but, I’m reading, his book on money right now. I’m reading a couple of philosophy. Books, I’m reading Peter Boghossian and James Lindsey’s book on how to have impossible conversations.
I just finished James Lindsey’s stuff on cynical theories and, I thought it was great. I’ve been, I’ve been sort of obsessed with the, With, social academic activism now and its influence in culture. not in a good way. I’m not obsessed in a good way. And I’m obsessed with undoing it and, and, and sorting out the reasons why it should be undone and why it’s toxic.
So I’m reading a lot of books about that right now, actually GAD sands book, dr. GAD stat is next with the parasitic mind.
[00:09:00] Jeff: So basically some light reading.
Mark Pellegrino: That’s my thing. Yeah. I’m also reading, Edward Redford’s book, London. Do you ever read, read Rutherford at all? He, he,
Jeff: not yet.
Mark Pellegrino: He’s a fantastic writer.
He writes about places. I’ve read Paris and New York. And, and now I’m reading London and he, he follows, lineages, you know, they’re made up lineages of course, but, these, these families of people starting at their basic origins and taking them from, in the case of London, we’re, we’re going from, Druidic times.
And, in, in Roman and the Roman invasion of the Island, Brighton probably all the way into a past world war II or the 1970s, and he’ll follow a family lineage all the way through their adventures. And it’s pretty cool. He’s a great
Jeff: writer. So you’re kind of like a Renaissance man. You’re, you’re looking at your interest in politics, history, economics, psychology, sociology.
Is it just, are [00:10:00] you fascinated with just the nature of society, individuals, or are you reading it with a goal in mind?
Mark Pellegrino: I do have a sort of vague goal. I consider look, here’s where my activism and Marine biology has sort of, permeated my, my activism in the current day. I, I, I, I feel like I am a rational warrior, against, a ever deepening.
Tide of skepticism. And, and I don’t mean good skepticism where you, where you questioned things and you question your own premises. I’m talking about philosophical skepticism, which says reality is not knowable, and you should doubt everything that there’s no such thing as certainty. and so I feel, I feel a little, agita about that concept and I feel the urge to battle it.
And I do battle it all the time online. oddly enough, I battle it as a skeptic. So I battle it as a, tell me why this is. So, [00:11:00] and I’ll tell you my perspective and some of the, some of the philosophical arguments we get in online are pretty hellacious.
Jeff: Yeah, I would S I, I was just about to mention that you’re one of the few celebrities that does feel fully comfortable to share political social views in sort through social media.
Has there ever been a concern that the impact of one impacts your profession on the other hand as a viewership? And is that even a factor for you?
Mark Pellegrino: Oh yeah, of course, of course there’s a concern. And of course it’s a factor because people have tried to get me fired for my political concepts. Not actually not my political concepts, they’re straw man version of my political concepts.
So it’s actually their narrative that they’re. Posting in front of people to try to get me fired, has nothing to do with me. And so the danger to me is in being misrepresented and in, and ended up misrepresentation being taken by my employers. not just as a PO, possibly real, but not [00:12:00] having the cashews to push back.
so I am very worried about, about the impact of that, but I also feel like we’re in times where. bully culture can’t win. They can’t, they can’t intimidate you into silence. The more they try to intimidate you into silence, the more you actually have to speak up. You’re obligated to, in my view.
Jeff: Has, do you think it has ever had an impact on jobs you receive or potential jobs that you, I don’t know if you’ve lost any positions, but any jobs that you think you’ve gone and then been issued because of political of politics, because it does seem like, Cancel culture dominates our existence at this moment.
And at the moment, it seems more important of where your reputation on social media seems almost more important than your actual ability to accomplish anything. At this point.
Mark Pellegrino: Yeah, that could be true. and, and I could lose opportunities as a result of that. that would be a shame, but that would be sort of a, that was sort of be typical for human [00:13:00] history.
I hope that’s not the case. I hope people are more interested in figuring out exactly what it is I stand for. So instead of trusting. Some, a false narrative that’s being spread about me, but I can’t guarantee that
Jeff: it was that the impetus of creating your current Kickstarter, which is the called the guardian project.
And can you explain to our listeners what that is?
Mark Pellegrino: Yes. It was definitely inspired by successive waves of, libeling and slandering me, Hurling accusations, racist, homophobe, Islamophobe, every phobe and issue you can come up with. Apparently I am and have committed some kind of sin under that moniker.
all of them are false of course, but, but that doesn’t matter. And so, for what those successive waves of cyber bullying and harassment and libeling and slander have forced me to do, go on to podcast to discuss my, my actual point of view. I’ve decided that that’s, that’s, that’s quite a bit for [00:14:00] people.
You know, people are, people are disarmed, including Checkmarx just cause check Mark doesn’t mean you have a lot of power. You’re you’re as easily, if not more easily taken down by these mobs and somebody who considers him or herself anonymous, and that’s a fairly powerless position to feel it, to feel like you’re in.
And I don’t want people to be that powerless anymore. I think anonymity makes people, brave and makes them do crappy things that they wouldn’t ordinarily do. If the victim that they were abusing was not an abstraction to them. And if they couldn’t disappear back into the crowd after they did what they did with no repercussions.
So that excited me and to try and. Developed ways to crush this concept of anonymity so that your identity is known as mine. And, and that, the, the, the, the way we’re starting in is by funding a, a potential television project, all a catfish where we, we and victimizers and victims, and, I [00:15:00] build a case and attempt to get justice for the victim, which could be as gentle as, sort of reform on the part of the, on the part of the victimizer.
Or it could be something, you know, more in the, in the legal realm of restitution and reconstitution of the, of the, of the victim’s life, whatever, whatever objective damages is, have been the result of the, of the librarian slandering. But yeah, it did come out of successive waves of, of just horrible, horrible, extra judicial trials and, and punishments of me for things I didn’t do.
And don’t believe
Jeff: so in, in watching your show, the, do you think the viewers are going to be able to reflect and see themselves in the people you’re talking about in the show? Or do you think people are incapable of looking at themselves and go shit? That’s how I behave. Maybe I should. you know, rethink how my behavior online.
You think people are capable of that level of self reflection? Yes.
Mark Pellegrino: On both accounts. I think there are [00:16:00] people that are capable of that level of self-reflection. And I think some of the worst abusers are not, I actually had a confrontation with one or two of them the other day. And, I actually think they are sophisticated sociopath’s and probably have no inkling that what they’re doing is wrong.
There, there is they’re as motivated and as justified as any Brown shirt in Nazi, Germany was doing what they did. And, but they’re not the types of people I’m trying to reach. Anyway, the overwhelming majority of people will have, enough of a conscience to see themselves in the things that are happening and perhaps change their behavior.
Jeff: I, I do wonder, if some of the issues we had do have on social media is connected to, I think a lot of the people who are doing, this canceling culture stuff, and some of these attacks view themselves as being. Kind of connected to the liberal outrage when instead it feels more like straight on bullying and I’m not sure if people quite realize the difference between sharing your point of view or [00:17:00] disagreement and the attack or the feeling of cast this individual out for having this view.
And I’m not sure if, even people realize they’re doing that
Mark Pellegrino: necessarily. I don’t think modern philosophy in academics, equips them to make the distinction. All right. I D I think, I think a long time ago, reason has been taking a back seat to another form of deciphering reality and that’s emotions. And once we’ve gone there, well, there’s no there’s going to be no common standard for it.
Jeff: And those what I find fascinating with it as well is that people. Seem to not have the patience or the ability to accept a possibility of a level of redemption, even if that’s a thing, the idea that instead of explain to a person where they believe they’re wrong, they’re more, they’re not willing to open the idea of, well, the person can [00:18:00] potentially.
Learn something they didn’t know previously. And instead of the attack, maybe you should figure out if maybe it’s these issues or misunderstandings or even a lack of information. I mean, there are a lot of issues. I think that most of us are not, I think, engage in that part of the society enough to be up to date on the changes it within there.
And I think there should be, I don’t know. I don’t know if there’s like a patient’s in the, let’s say the culture for that kind of stuff. That, that makes sense.
Mark Pellegrino: I think you’re right. But I think along with this, along with emotional reasoning comes skepticism because there is no objective standard for, for anything.
And along with the skepticism is a degree of determinism where human beings are just biological things. They exist in these. As units within this whole. And it’s the whole that influences them. There’s no such thing as free will. I mean, many neuroscientists are now coming out with this beautiful piece of [00:19:00] information.
Mark Pellegrino: so if you’re just a determined VAT of chemicals
Mark Pellegrino: who’s, Race and economic status are what really define you. And there’s nothing really you can do within the realm of it can change anything. It’s like the current batch of social justice warriors, or like the Calvinists of, of 17th and 18th century America.
They believe in predestination, you know, and yeah. And, but, but it’s called determinism and there’s no redemption. If, if, if, if God already knows who’s going to heaven and nothing you do is going to change that. There’s, you know, there’s no, there’s no real concept then of sin and redemption. And so you can, you can say something five years ago, that was perfectly legitimate.
or at least not considered evil and somebody could bring that up today as if, and judge you by the today’s standard, even though you did something five years ago, because Hey, you’re, you’re a [00:20:00] determined being and you’re already going to hell. There’s nothing you can do to make up for this.
Jeff: That actually, that’s a fascinating concept, the idea of determinism determinism.
And he does make you think once again, if you already are determined whether or not you’re. Let’s say going to heaven or hell it does seem to also excuse any behavior. Cause it’s where you’re headed anyway. Doesn’t it, it takes away your, awareness or guilt in any situation because it means you don’t have to worry.
Cause you were ahead in that direction. It’s not your fault. It’s what you are. W
Mark Pellegrino: you can look at it from that angle for sure. But I see, I see it more in the, in the, on the aggressive aggressors side, you are this, you are a no categorize you in something that’s less than human as in some category, but less than human and that excuses their aggression.
So since you are, or in this category, it excuses aggression. Since I am in this category. Of [00:21:00] intersectionality, let’s say, and I have X number of victim categories that I’m subsumed under. I am, I’m not culpable for anything that I do to you. So it’s, and maybe that’s what you were saying in the short term, but you’re right there.
It’s definitely reducing our capacity to take responsibility for our actions.
Jeff: And it does Ash think also in any level of communication, I always think that the worst thing you can do in any conversation is attack the individual because that does end the conversation right there immediately, is really, it, it, it, it boxes the person in a way that it prevents them from listening to you any longer.
Because once again, once you’re on the defensive, you’re no longer interested in the conversation. You’re now. Fully in defense mode, in my opinion,
Mark Pellegrino: this is true. And that’s why I’m going to plug Peter Boghossian and James Lindsey’s book again, how to have in possible conversations. I don’t know if I plugged that or if that was the last show I just did.
[00:22:00] Yes. I’m actually almost done with that, with that, with that book and it’s fantastic.
Jeff: Yeah. Th th the only thing I found kind of interesting, I don’t know how much time you have, if you want to dive just a little bit into it, I find it fascinating that I think you may be the only actor I know of is actually founded his own political party.
you’re a member of the American capitalist party, and I was, I was looking into it, but what are the primary tenants of the party and what do you think it would, it offers that I would say I’m always about to use a combo reference. The big two Republicans and Democrats are not offering.
Mark Pellegrino: I think if anything, this election season has highlighted, one thing to me, you can tell me if I’m wrong or not.
it has highlighted that we are faced with a tribal system wherein two tribes appear to be extreme rivals. In fact, they’re not. They’re quibbling a lot overpower [00:23:00] and who gets to hold the reins of power so that they can, you know, so that they can exercise it over the particular things that they’re their own particular preferences.
But in essence, they agree on a certain ethics. And they, they agree that the individual, does not exist as a viable entity. The group does. And the individual’s purpose is to serve that group. Now, the left has a particular group that it thinks the individual has to serve. And the right has its particular groups that it thinks the individual has to serve.
And they only disagree on which groups you are to serve and in what manner and how much. But, so to that degree, I see tribes who agree. I see Democrats and Republicans as essentially one party with S with degrees of expression. So, and that’s what [00:24:00] motivated me and my friend, Joe Sanders to come up with a third party.
Of course, third parties don’t have a very strong tradition in America. And, and so we didn’t necessarily think it was a winning proposition, at least not in the first decade or so of its development. We just thought that it was important that consistent. It consistent political ideology was put out there that was consistently individualistic and consistently, pro right.
not pro right wing, but pro right as in, the mitigation of violence in, in the world. And, we can’t find that in, in libertarianism, because that’s just the flip side and it’s consistent expression of the tribalism that we’re seeing on the left and the right. The, the flip side is an anarchistic, advertised individualism that doesn’t really measure, that measures Liberty as an end, instead of a means to an end.
[00:25:00] And it’s as sort of an insane, alternative to the insanity and the establishment. political world. And so th th the desire to have a, a complete political philosophy out there in the world, at least, so that people can prefer to, it was our original plan. And so we got a philosopher, Andrew Bernstein, who’s written some amazing books on capitalism.
To to write our platform and he wrote it and we’ve put it out there so that people can read it and look at it. And, I’ve tried to get a couple of grassroots politicians involved. It’s a little bit difficult when you don’t have an actual apparatus or money to bet. And, and, and you’re telling them that they’re going to have to do all the leg work on the ground of getting signatures and stuff.
Nobody really wants to do that. but it’ll have its day. I think, I think people are so disillusioned with. They’re disillusioned in appropriately with the two party system, because I do believe politics is binary. [00:26:00] I think there are there degrees of statism that exists on a scale, but there’s no degrees of Liberty.
You’re either free or not. So I’m sorry. So go ahead.
Jeff: So I mean, actually the way this country has built, it seems like it’s built to perpetuate a two party system. So. With your, with American capitalist party, how do you envision it progressing in the short-term and long-term. And do you feel it at the local level it’s at its strongest it’s better.
Is it better as a voice to let’s say, move the conversation? What, what’s your, path on this?
Mark Pellegrino: Well, what I was hoping was that, we could, if somebody would get elected under one of the two main parties and then switched their denomination when they were in there. To our, our party. I think that it’s probably going to have to start at the local level.
I think that the libertarianism sort of acquired some success, by starting it [00:27:00] at the local level. They fail miserably, I think on the national level for. I think obvious reasons, but, and, and then from there it’s just going to have to grow and it has to go into state. It has to start in a state where there is at least some sort of fertile ground for.
A consistent point of view about individual rights and Liberty to take root. And that’s certainly not California. I don’t, there’s a, there’s a few States around that we’ve that we’ve looked at as possibilities. but then it’s just a matter of convincing somebody to go through the, the incredible work that would, it would take to battle the two parties, because once, once you announce your candidacy and come on as a third party, the duopoly comes after you with their legal apparatus and they make your life a living.
Jeff: is there a potential then that you would be that candidate?
Mark Pellegrino: if I, I feel like if politics we’re, we’re about ideas, I would, [00:28:00] but politics are not about ideas anymore. We’ve had a spoil system for. you know, a hundred plus years and, really people are voting, politicians get constituencies based on what they can take from other constituencies and give to their pals.
or their supporters and it’s become, voting has become a low level civil war. What can I get, can my guy get in and control the levers of power so he can get shit from me? And that’s what it is. People fighting each other for a piece of the fucking, a political pie.
Jeff: So, and, and reading a bit about your background, you are, I guess will be portrayed as an objectivist.
Is that correct? Yeah, I’m probably going to say the last name is Iran. And my understanding is that the core of the American capitalist parties philosophy,
Mark Pellegrino: I would say that our ethics is based on objectivist ethics for sure. And our politics. And economics are revolving around representative constitutionally limited Republic and [00:29:00] capitalism.
Yes. Those are sort of the mainstays of those schools of philosophy. Do you want Objectivists
Jeff: so, I feel like when people discuss objectivism, there seems to be something potentially misconstrued or some of that probably could be better explained. it’s feels like objectivism is often the philosophy of individual first.
Individual goal beyond, beyond the need of the group itself, is that close to a philosophy of it or is it a misunderstanding that often is associated with objectivism?
Mark Pellegrino: Yeah, that’s a misunderstand. In other words, were they the, the, the people that like to frame these discussions, put us in a, in a, a false dichotomy in the middle of a false dichotomy.
You, to be selfish is to sacrifice people to yourself. The alternative to being that, mega Lamont, maniacal malignant narcissist is to sacrifice yourself to others. And that is a dichotomy that we deny [00:30:00] completely. we say that any group is, the group itself is an abstraction. The group is composed of individuals, and there is a individual, individual human beings, need specific conditions to thrive.
And, applying an understanding of those conditions into a soap in a social setting is what w. We arrive at with constitutionally restrained, government and free exchange of ideas and products, which we call capitalism and ownership of property. because the source of all values is the individual working for his own life.
Like every other living creature does. And with an every individual that I know, at least in LA, you may know some different ones. I don’t know, every individual that I know, Has a whole host universe or world of, of human beings that they support and, and interact with and, and [00:31:00] value, not, you know, our housekeeper had a, it just, just got, pneumonia.
And I’ve been pestering. I don’t know where she lives. I’ve been pestering her on the phone to give me her address, and, and give me a shopping list so I can go shop for her. I’m an objectivist. That’s weird. I thought you’re just supposed to be about yourself. Well, myself is a world that includes my animals, my wife, my kids, their friends, my friends, people who work for me, people who liked me, people who don’t that’s me.
That individual is composed of tons of different dimensions. So, it’s, it’s uh, it’s it’s definitely, I can’t say it’s not, not a deliberate misapplication of her ideas. I think it’s on purpose. I think it’s, it’s a, it’s a way to try to, to, to new, off of the notion that, individualism is
Jeff: good. Now. So within the construct of objectivism, the idea of it, [00:32:00] do social programs have a place,
Mark Pellegrino: not pump, not state social programs.
Mark Pellegrino: In other words, a state social program is accompanied by one thing, which I find very uncivil forests. Okay. so if, if, but, but would, would people help others? Sh of course before there was a welfare state, there were, there were mutual aid societies and foundations, charitable organizations, and there’s, and there’s still a plethora of those today, even though the market has been taken out by the public sector and as.
As always happens with the public sector, the public sector makes it impossible for the private sector to function efficiently the way it could, because it, it takes all the oxygen out of the room. But the beauty of charity is that nobody’s compelling anybody to do anything. Everything you do is from your own freewill and from your own values.
without force and to me, the, the essential definition of [00:33:00] civilization is the mitigation of force forces in a surreal and a truce, truly civil society force is sidelined it’s, it’s defined and restrained and, and it only has one moral use. Any other use of it is not moral, even if you’re, even if your end.
If you, if you claim your end is moral, use the violence to achieve it is not more.
Jeff: So it sounds like objectivism has a very idealistic view of people. In other words, given the opportunity to do whatever you want. I’m not, that’s a little bit of an extreme,
Mark Pellegrino: can’t do it. You can’t do whatever you want.
You can, but that’s not consent. That’s libertarianism, libertarianism. holds Liberty as an end. So what, what, what is freedom? The freedom to do whatever you want. We understand that Liberty. Is a condition for a rational being. So what you, [00:34:00] what what’s good is that, which is good for a rational being, not any whim, not anything you want to do.
What’s good for you as a re a rational being. So, so we have to proceed. If we’re going to talk about objectivism, we have to talk about, it’s not about doing what you want. It’s about doing what’s rational, but you also have the choice. There is the danger in a free society that people will not be rational.
Jeff: Well, I guess one question, kind of the point I was trying to go to on that is it would assume that people are going to do the right thing, given the opportunity to not do the right thing. They’ll still choose to do. The right thing towards others,
Mark Pellegrino: is that right? But, but you’re, I think you’re making presumptions about what the right thing to do towards others is.
Jeff: Okay. Fair enough.
Mark Pellegrino: And, and I think all of that is, is can’t be answered. and this is not, I’m not claiming a non-objective, answer here. I’m saying that that’s entirely contextual and it’s dependent upon the context of each individual. Okay. How much they, if [00:35:00] you, if you, if you consider your giving to others, a good, then, then that being able to do that is dependent on a lot of conditions in your own life.
Of course, I think, I think that, by virtue of being a productive and rational person in society, you are automatically just by living and producing. Excuse me creating value for other people.
Mark Pellegrino: but it’s not your, it’s not your goal. It’s like, it’s not that it’s not the butcher’s goal. For example, to, to, to, to, to serve you.
His goal is to send his kids to college. His goal is to, you know, have a house, a nice house to live in, but in, in trying to achieve those values for himself, In a, in a cooperative, system of free exchange, he has to produce value to do that. And he asked to produce a value that I want and can exchange with him on, in order to do that.
So without being quote unquote charitable, cause I [00:36:00] don’t consider charity to be virtue or if it is, it’s a very minor one. I consider pro productivity and reason to be virtues because we can’t exist without those. And virtues are things that. Humans are the foundation of human life without virtues, without particular virtues human life would be impossible.
and charity is a, is a wonderful, I think impulse and I think the benevolent impulse of anybody who’s not harassed and harangued and beaten down by his neighbor. but who is free? The charitable impulse is quite. Quite, quite a big impulse. And that’s why I think Americans in general tend to be the most generous society on earth.
There’s no mistake because we’re the, one of the freest society. What used to be one of the freest societies on earth. And that tends to make you charitable.
Jeff: have you ever watched, this sounds like I’m going way off, but I’m going to connect it back in. have you ever watched the TV show of friends in the nineties?
Yeah, there was that one [00:37:00] episode about the idea of, is there any such thing as an altruistic act, a truly altruistic act and does objectivism connect to the idea that people are inherently altruistic or that because we are looking for WWE to satisfy our needs, it does connect then to. The connection of society around us.
That makes sense.
Mark Pellegrino: I don’t think anyone’s inherently altruistic, nor do I think that there is no such thing as an altruistic act, but then again, I’m not a member, I’m not measuring things by your emotional feeling. So you may feel. That blowing up those, those, those children will, will land you in heaven and you’ll have many versions.
and, and so then some philosophers, some work and say, see how it wasn’t an altruistic act. He, he expected an end that’s there’s this, this isn’t altruism because he expected something out of it. I don’t, I don’t, I don’t buy that metric to me can sacrifice meaning you can give up a greater value for a lesser [00:38:00] value.
You can harm yourself self deliberately, and choose that as a moral code, the code of loss and pain and suffering as a center of your value system and the relief of suffering and the existence of suffering as dependent on the practices, your value system. but it’s, it’s not, there’s no sense that because you feel really good about hurting yourself or giving things up for other people that it’s a selfish act.
Now, selfish is a, is an objective metric. It’s it’s it’s it’s you’re not, you’re not giving something up by not going to the party and studying for your finals instead. that’s not a sacrifice you’re working for your values anytime you’re working for your values. objective values. I mean, not just, I feel this and therefore it’s good.
But objective value studying for a test to get an a so that you can, you can embark on the career. You want to embark on is an objective value eating [00:39:00] properly because you know, it’s healthy for your, your body is an objective value, not, not drinking so much because you know, it’s harmful for your rate.
Those are objective. Those are objective values. So, yeah, I don’t, I don’t think they’re, I don’t think that that old, that, that saying there’s no such thing as an altruistic act is true.
Jeff: So, so another aspect of objectivism, I might butcher the idea, but I’m, I’m doing my best is the idea that is the role of art in human life.
The idea that art is meant to, and I think this is an exact quote, just from humans, metaphysical idea by selective reproduction of reality, to a physical form. do you think the importance of what you do as an actor? Connects a little bit to your philosophy as well. The idea of that you’re trying to portray these ideas so they can be brought into the world discuss and give us some sort of tangible format.
Or am I misunderstanding the idea of it completely?
Mark Pellegrino: I mean, I think, I think when ran just defined art in the romantic manifestor she was right. She’s saying that art is [00:40:00] this whether you know it or not, or think it or not, or, and whether or not that’s the topic of discussion or not, doesn’t matter. Art is a concrete desertion of values.
and so when you see a play like Cyrano de Bergerac, it’s concretizing certain values and saying, this is the most important thing in the world. I of the, one of the examples that I thought she used that I thought profoundly express. This was if you paint, if you see a painting with a beautiful woman in an elegant evening gown, that says one thing about the artists sense of life, about their sense of what matters in the world.
If you see that same painting, the artist has put a herpes sore on her lip. He’s making a very different statement about what’s important in the world. In fact, he’s probably saying that all your attempts at glamour and beauty, are, are, are, our, what’s the word I wanna use? It’s frivolous there.
They, they can’t, they can’t work because you’ll be undone by a little virus and you’ll see that [00:41:00] are largely art largely. Is that, You know, the person who, who paints a beautiful painting, like, Renoir was, you know, I don’t think was ever satisfied with his painting, but loved beauty and painting.
You see it in his paintings. and, and you also see the dissembler and, and the person who’s trying to rip apart values or the nihilist, or just the emotional list. And, who they’re saying something about reality. What they’re putting on the canvases is this is my notion of what is of what’s metaphysically important and your, and the taste of your tastes in art.
What you respond to, I think tells you a lot about what you value. So I think she’s correct in her relay in her understanding of what art is and what its relationship is to people. And I think you see it as an actor, you see it in the narratives that we produce in the heroes and the types of heroes.
There are the types of villains there are, that says something about the philosophy and the ethics of the people writing the show in the end. And if it’s a popular show about, about the [00:42:00] society at large.
Jeff: So when you’re choosing your roles, is that something you’re considering?
Mark Pellegrino: No. What
Jeff: was your consideration?
Mark Pellegrino: Putting bread and onions on the table.
Jeff: At least you, you do, seem to have a theme with your roles, Jacob and lost loose. Lucifer’s supernatural. I can’t remember the character, the name of the character from being human, but you do seem to have a connection to, some sort of supernatural, maybe almost godlike characters.
Is that something that just appeals to you directly, or that just seems to be the roles you’re seeing.
Mark Pellegrino: I think that’s just an accident. but what I, what I find more when I’m more connected with, in those parts is, all of those characters are to some degree alienated. there there’s to some degree, rejected, but also very powerful and striving.
And striving to make the world in their [00:43:00] vision, intensely moral in all of those cases, believe it or not. And in that respect, I feel very much like that. I mean, as an, as an objectivist in Hollywood, I’m out of step. As an objectivist in, in the, in the tribal world today, I’m out of step because I’m an individualist.
I spent half of my time, this election season on, on Facebook making enemies of my friends on the left and the right, because I got so sick, I got so sick of their bullshit. I just started calling them all out. And, and so I was very much alone. Now, a lot of people would secretly call me and say, wow, what you’re doing is amazing, or I’m learning so much about.
I’ve never thought about this in this way before. And it’s really helping me. And that was nice. It was a nice relief, but mostly I got grief. I got people who, I got people who didn’t want to engage or, or check their own premises. And that includes me. I’m not saying I know everything. Listen to me. No, they would say something that I thought was tribal.
And then I would [00:44:00] ask a question and then we would go from there. We would delve into what they meant and where they were going with it and what I mean and where I’m going with it. And I would, I would often, you know, come out on top of these encounters, but not item feel on top. I felt like I just alienated somebody, even though I wasn’t attacking them.
I was questioning them like Socrates would question somebody, But, you know, Socrates was a gadfly, he was a pain in the ass, right. That’s why they all Rose up against him and voted him off the Island, so to speak.
Jeff: Well, I, I get the feeling of people that don’t like, their arguments brought back hasn’t at all.
and I, I would imagine that in many cases, people do not enjoy. Their views questions.
Mark Pellegrino: You’re right. They don’t, and you know what? I would never do it, but, and I would never presume to do that in ordinary times, but because we’re in extraordinary times and I saw both sides saying false things as if they were [00:45:00] real.
I had to just step in and, and, and say, It was actually in the spirit of reconciliation, believe it or not, it was actually trying to get both sides to see you’re wrong. And maybe if you guys looked at each other, instead of talking past each other,
Jeff: did you think people get too, wound up in defining themselves by their views?
Mark Pellegrino: I don’t see how you can not. I mean, when, when it comes to politics, Politics is, you know, it’s stupid, right wing guy said politics is downstream from culture. That’s a semi idiotic thing to say in my point of view, it’s downstream from ethics and what are ethics, but your values evaluate what you think is important in the world, how you think men and women and.
whatever your identity is, should treat, one another. that is your politics. It’s your social ethics. So when you, when you questioned somebody’s politics, you’re questioning their, their, [00:46:00] their evaluation of life. That’s a deep thing. How can you not, how can you not be. married to it and, and I D and identify with it because since somebody saying your politics are wrong, they’re saying you’re
It feels a little bit like almost like religion, where it’s an act of faith. And sometimes I would almost imagine your politics, an act of faith that once you get that shook, it’s very new.
Mark Pellegrino: Yeah. Only because look, I don’t think people. We’ve been taught from kindergarten through college, that the most important decisions we make have to be made with what
Jeff: I would say, a moral
Mark Pellegrino: or with, with what
Jeff: I would say our morals, and to be decided with the right or wrong.
Mark Pellegrino: Whenever I, I watch a movie, about somebody who’s in a is in a dilemma that they need to sort out. Whenever I read a story. The advice that is always given to them is follow [00:47:00] your heart, follow your heart. so w but following your heart means. Not really integrating information very well. Your heart is your heart is just the sum.
Total of integrated information and evaluations about the world. Some of what you may not even know why you feel the way you do, you have to really investigate the sources of those feelings. And so. People have taken that notion of following your heart into their politics. And so their politics is about an inch deep.
They haven’t really sussed out the consequences of their thoughts. Very deeply. They’ve just superficially said I have a good heart. I think this is right. And that’s it. but if they integrated all of their political concepts with, with their ethics and they, and they made a conscious choice about, about what ethics means, what its purpose is and relationally, what, what the [00:48:00] purpose of politics is.
I, I bet most of them would change their minds wherever they are, wherever they land on the left RightScale. I bet most of them would not be where they are
Jeff: today. I mean, I think that’s, I think that’s fantastic. And I think another thing interest about your characters that you do play is that. You do have a chance to look at, these questions on a, literally on a massive scale.
and in many ways, I think one of the fascinating things, what you did with the character of Lucifer and supernatural is that you had a character that quite often throughout the story is arguing a philosophy. not necessarily that I’m, that he’s, you know, I’m not wrong, but, I’m trying to. Are, you know, I have a definitely a philosophy that I have, and my issue is that I’m being attacked for it.
And he’s kind of, been out cast for an idea as well, but it’s also on a massive scale and obviously there’s some aspects around it. Right. But he definitely, the supernatural presented him as almost paradise lost version of Lucifer. The idea that he is in some ways, the [00:49:00] hero of his own story, it’s just depending on where you are in that story, depends on whether or not you agree with the idea.
Mark Pellegrino: Yeah. I mean, I always saw elusive for as the first rebel against arbitrary authority. And he was the one who stood up against a God and said no. And he said, no for a doggone good reason. he didn’t want to serve a lesser be. And what was the lesser being a flawed, immoral thing. Which the, which she was, it was impossible for the angels to be flawed in a more, which is a contradiction in terms.
But, that’s, that’s another, that’s another thing. It doesn’t matter. We deal with paradoxes with religion. And so, and so I think he was, I think he was, intensely moral and let’s not forget that he gave humanity its moral sense. So, I do consider him
Jeff: to be.
Mark Pellegrino: A rather noble character, even though he’s not painted that [00:50:00] way in Western Canada,
Jeff: when you look at the character of Lucifer from that perspective, do you believe that one of his concerns was that to connect with people where it was an inherently to be corruptive?
Mark Pellegrino: Yeah. Yeah. I thought, I think he felt humans were, were beneath him and, and it was probably better to just. Get them out of the way.
Jeff: And, but honestly, in doing so he became himself some level corrupted.
Mark Pellegrino: Oh yeah. Well, look, I’m not endorsing Lucifer’s way of doing things because I think, I think, I think, I think humans, in many respects turn out to be better and they do in supernatural too.
They defy, they defy God, just like Lucifer did. But they’re better because they have free will and, and the Lucifer of, of the show supernatural is sort of. like, like, like someone who’s for whom trauma [00:51:00] has, has them stuck at a certain emotional level of development. Lucifer has never gone beyond that.
I think Lucifer could be true, could be cured with, with about two years of, cognitive behavioral therapy. As it’s mostly, even though he has his foot in the door of right. Even though it’s appropriate to defy arbitrary authority and to say no, and to stand for virtue, it’s not appropriate to hold a grudge for an eternity and to, and to condemn innocent people who have done nothing to you, have, have participated zero in your downfall to hold them accountable for what happened to you.
That’s just insanity.
Jeff: Yeah, th there’s a great line of in regards to the crypto ability of freewill in, a character, the character Castillo in season six, he said that freewill is a length of rope that God lets you hang yourself with. And I kind of feel like that’s kind of what happened to Lucifer. On some level, he was given a lentil rope on to think, I feel ideas, debate [00:52:00] question.
And it was that that created the first difficulties that he had and didn’t know, and it was never. Given the ability to know how to deal with those contradictions.
Mark Pellegrino: No, you know, people people can do with their trauma, what they choose, they can, they can become creative, productive human beings are intensely destructive and nihilistic and Lucifer chose that
I think the one thing I loved about what you did with the character of, of Lucifer is that you did your performance with the character was extremely nuanced. And I think because you played it. So many different versions of the character on some level he played Nick before he’s possessed. then you played Lucifer, your version of Lucifer.
Cause I know you’ve played by Lee. We’ll go into later. How you played by different characters. Then you played Lucifer after his return. And then Nick, after having dealt with the possession of Lucifer and you had to play each version of that. Very carefully. I felt like in very, you had an, any [00:53:00] portrayed each one very uniquely.
And what was kind of how you thought about how you would make your, what decisions you made in those changes? Keeping in mind the changes to the character and how you were going to perform
Mark Pellegrino: it.
Okay. I mean, season, season five, Lucifer was a very formidable creature. and I liked season five Lucifer. He had a, he had a very, understated and subtle. Sense of humor, which was great. but he was burning with intensity and purpose and he was not going to be taken off his path. I, I like that about him.
And there was a Regal princely quality to him that really comes out. In his confrontation with cast GL when he tries to bring Castillo over to his side, by saying, look, we have, we have the same. Cause you were kicked out of heaven. I was kicked out of heaven. We can’t, we should be friends. Don’t fight me.
[00:54:00] You should be my friend and cast GL stands for the humans. There was, there was a, there was an air of the, of a Prince in that, in that, In that confrontation that, you know, because he’s looking at Casio, like, I know you you’re that little guy that used to bring the shoes over to my dad. Yeah. It was that sort of thing.
And, and there was tremendous stature in that. And then he kills all the pagan gods. It just made his, he was just so formidable. And then the, then there was a transition to a different Lucifer Lucifer in Sam’s head. And that Lucifer was a much smaller Lucifer. He might’ve still had the plans, you know, that the big, the, the big Lucifer had, but he didn’t have the stature and the strength and the F and the focus he was, he was more like the trickster.
Yeah. and, and I think it’s because, you know, the Lucifer in it was written more, it was just written [00:55:00] in a jokey way, in a fun way. And, and so that brought out those characteristics more. Then the other thing. And so by that, the Lucifer had changed from something dark and scary to something sort of, sort of funny and to, and to be sort of taken seriously because you saw that other dark side in him in season five and you would see bursts of temper and stuff, but it really wasn’t the same Lucifer from that time on the Lucifer Lucifer sort of became.
Grandiose, he could talk a big game, but when it came time to deliver, I mean, it was always a good of, a letdown and, and, and so. As much as I love that Lucifer for his, his naive Tay and his funniness, because he was funny. I think, I think he was funny. I missed, I missed the King Lucifer, as much as I liked the impish Lucifer.
Jeff: Yeah, I agree with you completely. I really do feel that they’ve [00:56:00] definitely went when they weaken the character of physically. I do feel like they weaken the character. because once again, you had, you lost that sinister aspect, that danger to the character. And I thought that was kind of unfortunate later on, but I guess at the same time, I felt maybe if you kept Lucifer at the level where he wasn’t in five, he would dominate basically any season he appears in.
Mark Pellegrino: maybe that, that could be, I mean, like I would, I remember my scenes with Crowley, I would think to myself, well, Lucifer’s not the smartest guy in the room and he has to be, I mean, he’s, he’ll, he’ll beat Crowley because he’s got the clout and he’s buddy and he’s playing a war, art of war, sun, Sue’s art of war.
But season five, Lucifer wouldn’t have these reactions. He wouldn’t be this way. it would be very frightening and you wouldn’t want to be in the same room with him. And, but look, I liked the evolution. It was, it was a separate character. It was its own thing. And I think that’s one of the reasons why [00:57:00] people thought Nick was so much more frightening.
not only because he was a real human being and real, real monsters are scarier than the made up kind. but he was really. He had that lust for power. He had something in him that was insatiable the way Lucifer did just express differently. You know.
Jeff: Did you think Nick became that way because he was possessed by Lucifer or was he that way because of the incident?
Honestly, the storyline, he had his daughter and wife killed. Was he always gonna, what do you always have been turned into that kind of Nick or was it Lucifer’s possession that made him into that Nick?
Mark Pellegrino: It’s either, if there’s an interesting sort of level, there’s two levels here that were sort of incompatible to me.
When you, when you first meet Nick and season five, you, you understand him as a character who might’ve been devout and decent. and, [00:58:00] but who got punished anyway, who was, who got this terrible thing happened to any harbored, a resentment for God? It wasn’t just a resentment. It was a hatred for God. Now that’s somebody who has loved somebody intensely and been betrayed.
So I assumed Nick was a very devout person and then went over to the deep end because of the tragedy experience. But what we find out. And the later latter seasons is that he wasn’t there. He was getting drunk. He was sort of a, he was a sketchy character himself. He had issues
Jeff: and he wasn’t as
Mark Pellegrino: he wasn’t as pure.
And as simple as I thought, he wasn’t season, season five. And I think his, his acquaintance with Lucifer, the fact that Lucifer was inside of him and that he a part of Nick, whether it’s just in his, his, His reef reflexes are his bones or his muscles remembered that unbridled power. And that, that sense that I could do anything and not experience the repercussions.
That’s a very [00:59:00] seductive thing. And so I think that those character flaws in Nick, We’re definitely accentuated by the Lucifer experience. And he sought Lucifer like a drug addict, seeks drugs. He, he, he made the choice with his ghost wife sitting, standing right there. You could have made the choice to set her free and he chose power instead.
Jeff: Do you think it would have been what, when you’re talking about the character of Nick, do you think he was more fascinating as the pure faith, a fallen individual? Or did you like the fact they added the flaws later on. You think that, I mean, from an acting standpoint or from a interest in your own character,
Mark Pellegrino: I mean, I like flaws.
I like complexity and dimensions to things and, and the clues that writers give you to fill, fill in those things. And it forced me to explore the character of Nick way that I, I hadn’t had to explore, Lucifer, you know, I had to write, I wrote like a full journal that I could, I’ll [01:00:00] be published as a book that in the day in the life of, of, of Nick.
after, after these, after this horrible thing happened. And, and so it was very, it was very, very interesting exploration for me on the other hand. on the other hand, I like mystery and, and I like mystery and not knowing. Nick so much, as I was able to supply my own intuitive sense of what he meant.
And there was a, there was a, there was just a subtleness to the, to that, to that character, you know? I think that bled over even into his later iterations, It was just, I mean, so what I guess I’m trying to say is both were interesting in their own ways, very different, but I can’t decide, I can’t decide.
which was the better one. You didn’t see enough of Nick to really know too much about him in the first, first viewing.
[01:01:00] Jeff: I can guarantee that the fans will supernatural would love to read that journal that you were at the thing that’d be fascinating for, for, for the fan base.
Mark Pellegrino: I’ve asked them if they want me to publish it.
Some, some have said yes, so maybe, I don’t know. Nice.
Jeff: That that’d be fantastic. a couple more questions. I love the line in swansong where Lucifer States, most people think I burn hot is actually quite the opposite. And then he makes that symbol in the window when he breeds on it. I think that was most interesting to take a Lucifer because it does kind of, at least how I understood it was that it meant that he was, was kind of callous cold calculating.
And I think that feels somehow more dangerous than if you’d just hot tempered. Yeah. I
Mark Pellegrino: mean, you’re right. Vengeance is a dish, better served cold, right? It’s a, that’s the scary person, the person who comply and sit there and the sniper who can wait for five days for you to come out of your house and watch you without blinking like a reptile.
That’s the scary dude. The hot tempered guy is, you know, [01:02:00] you see them coming from a mile away. So you’re right. That is scary.
Jeff: And I, and I, it’s kind of, I always, I started, I always thought about the Robert Frost poem five, that fire and ice does the world in fire or in ice. And I, and, and I think the idea of the world ending in ice the is definitely more interesting, possibility.
And I think I’m probably more realistic to, I think about the idea of. This is kind of almost cold indifference consciousness is what is actually the most dangerous aspect of us and people as well. The fact that you can determine and think only of your goal and not worry about. You know, the consequences of what you’re doing that actually makes you a far more dangerous individual
Mark Pellegrino: potentially right into the guardian project that sort of swerves into that.
Cause I think that’s, that’s, what’s so dangerous about social media, bullies, and these people who’ve passed off false narratives. They are just into their mission. They don’t care about you.
Jeff: Did, do [01:03:00] you think, that it is it. Do you think that’s a particular symptom of, of the because of social media?
Or do you think given the opportunity, this is just inherent though?
Mark Pellegrino: No, I think, I think social media is, I think, I think what’s happening on social media is symptomatic of the culture wide embrace of emotionalism. the rejection of reason, rampant subjectivism and cynicism determinism, all, all these isms that are now, Pushing culture at our culture in a certain way.
This is what makes dialogue impossible. It makes we have no shared metric for information. If you’re a metric is Mo your emotional reasoning and mine is objective reality. We’re not going to meet. Anywhere. Yeah. And if you, and if you claim there is no objective reality, if you claim all knowledges are, are equal.
then how can you have a discussion with somebody who thinks physics is knowledge or who thinks, alchemy is, is just as valid a form of [01:04:00] knowledge as chemistry? I dunno. I have a conversation with that person.
Jeff: It’s a completely geeky geek-out analogy. what kind of feelings with social media? It’s a little bit like, I don’t know if you watch any of the captain America, the movie that he had, the super serum where wherever does it basically, magnifies any character issue that you have and wherever your characteristic literally amplifies it.
So if you’re a good, like captain America became ultra patriotic, if you’re bad, like. the red skull, that part of you, it becomes visible almost. And I kind of feel social media is that same thing as that super serum, wherever you are in your regular life, the moment you log in you now become an amplified amp amplified version of that person.
On some level,
Mark Pellegrino: I’d buy that. And
Jeff: so, and I, and I think you’re a guardian product. I think it has fantastic potential, I think. Do you, what, what is, do you think the timetable on this from, cause I assume you’re going to probably hit your goal. It looks like you’re on your way between goal hitting it. And then eventually the show, moving into,
Mark Pellegrino: sometimes these things can take [01:05:00] anywhere from a year to five years.
I hope the sooner, the better. but we’re going to be, we’re going to be attacking this from a bunch of different areas. So the show is one aspect and that’s what the kickstart is for, but I’d also like legal reform. I’d like to talk to social media platforms about objective standards for communication, full verification of people, splitting platforms so that the people under 18 have their own platform that’s monitored by their parents and has strict controls.
People over 18 have verification, and, and do this while maintaining privacy, but also taking away that, finding a way to do it, finding a way to take away anonymity without removing privacy. And because I think anonymity is what’s causing all the viciousness.
Jeff: What do you think about what’s happening with, I don’t know how, where you have a parlor that the new Twitter parlor, the fact that it feels like.
It’s S it’s the next step to creating two separate realities, parlor. It seems to be the [01:06:00] next evolution of that direction where you will now have two people through social media, two groups live in their own Pacific universe or reality.
Mark Pellegrino: I mean, I, yeah, I mean, I think w we have the technology to be able to do that.
It’s unfortunate that we can’t mix, But I think, I think the major social media platforms are going to start losing a lots of people. I mean, even people on the political left who are dominating it, I know lots of liberals on the left who are leaving the platform because of its toxicity and then less the Twitter in particular.
Gets its shit together and is able to come up with objective means of, of, and an easier way, or let me see, not an easier way, but a, a, a, a more permanent way of, of kicking people off platforms and across platforms, so that bad actors can’t just, you know, come up with another handle with a bogus email and get [01:07:00] on and continue to do their damage.
they’re going to continue to see market alternatives to there. Platforms that I think will eventually overcome them.
Jeff: I mean, I would definitely hope so because I do find it unfortunate. It almost is. It looks like a surrender. The fact that we are so that things can not be handled to the point where everyone needs to run to their own different plot, social media platforms to talk to one another would definitely be a failing of our society.
Yeah, I think,
Mark Pellegrino: I think so too, but I, you know, I mean, I, I, I am, I have a presence on, on parlor. I don’t go on that much, but, and I don’t carry on conversations that much on parlor. And I know it has a reputation for being sort of a right wing. You know, they, of course everybody characterizes the, the opposition, in the worst possible least charitable light.
but I think the idea there is that everybody’s verified in a way your identity, your identity is sort of, and, and you can’t, The, the discourse is not mean. [01:08:00] And I I’ll take that. I’ll take that. I mean, I only have 12,000 followers on there because once again, I, since I don’t belong to the right wing, I often say things.
Yeah. As in like, but I’m okay with that. They don’t, they don’t harass me for not saying things that they don’t like, they don’t attack me. Like the left will try to, you know, the left will start a petition to try to fire me in every job that I go for. The right. We’ll just go, Hey, whatever, we don’t believe you.
We don’t, whatever that’s or some of them, some of them will actually turn around. it’s, I mean, it’s an odd, it’s an odd time we’re living in, because I feel like the people who, you know, liberalism brought us all the great advancements in society. but, but at some point liberalism took a turn to Jacoby aneurysm, and it became something very different.
And, and there, I think, I think. There is a clear embrace in our culture [01:09:00] from the late twenties, early thirties on. But, but it’s been tightening its grip ever since. And I know tons of liberals who are leaving the left, they can’t take it. and they actually have, shamefacedly admitted that they find more open-mindedness on the right, who does not have a reputation for being open-minded.
But when you get guys like what’s, his name is Brett Weinstein. the guy from evergreen college who was run out on a rail for, for, questioning, this racist policy that the, that the college was engaging in, he is, he is a liberal guy. He, he, you know, he is a liberal in the, in the common sense that we understand it.
I’m a liberal, but I’m not, I’m not a liberal in the common sense that we understand it today, but he is, he believes in a social welfare state and all that, all that stuff. And yet he was, he was viciously attacked by people on the left to the point where he said, the only place I could go is to the right.
And those people actually welcomed [01:10:00] me and were interested in what I had to say. And so, you know, when you get debated averse, people who aren’t, who have, who say reason is a, is it an invention of a dominant, patriarchal, dominant structures? you know, you, you can’t discuss things with a person like that.
Jeff: I think that’s fascinating. Cause once again, From my understanding of the situations. It, and it’s probably because I do tend to hang around mostly, almost entirely on the left individuals is the idea that I don’t think people would view. The right in that way from the left’s perspective. And I think that’s fascinating to hear a totally different perspective on, the, the right wing.
Mark Pellegrino: Right? I mean, I, well, look, I think everybody’s caricaturing everybody else. And that’s what I was so mad at on, on Facebook. I hated that the right was caricaturing the left and I hated the left was caricaturing. The right. Nobody was talking to each other. They [01:11:00] were talking to straw men versions of each other.
And I was like, why don’t you guys talk to each other, that person on the right isn’t that, and that person on the left, isn’t what you’re saying. He is so stop
Jeff: it. And, and I think that’s, and I think that’s something that’s fantastic for all of us to hear. And I do like the idea that guardians project as well is going to be.
Working towards the idea of a more harmonious social media, hopefully, which would hopefully make it reach the goal though. I think the original intent of social media,
Mark Pellegrino: I hope so too. we’ll see. I’m going to do everything in my power to make that possibility in actuality.
Jeff: So your Kickstarter, how much time is left on it?
Mark Pellegrino: well it’s, I think by the end of the month, so I want to say probably 10, 10 days somewhere in there.
Jeff: Very cool. and so for our listeners, look, we’re looking for the guardian project about two weeks left. how else can they help whatever, the, your, the causes that you’re supporting, including your American capitalist party and your other goals?
[01:12:00] Mark Pellegrino: Well, you know, you can go to my Twitter at Mark our Pellegrino. and, and follow me. And there’s probably a, I think there’s a link on my Twitter to the American capitalist party. Read the platform, see what you think. If you like it. Tell me if you don’t like it. Tell me, tell me what you think is wrong.
Tell me what you think is wrong with it. We can have a talk about it. I’m always open to. Criticism because criticism doesn’t make me weaker. It makes me stronger. It makes me more knowledgeable. I just don’t understand why people are so afraid of it. And you can also see the Kickstarter on my Twitter page.
It’s it’s, pinned to my Twitter profile. So you can look at it, tap on it, read all about it, read what we’re trying to do. And if you like it.
Jeff: Well, I thought it was very cool is that I think at the $30 level. You get an autograph picture from you and especially considering having been to many conventions, that’s a really, really good point.
Usually during the $89 range, I would imagine. So I think that’s a, that’s a fantastic offer. 30, $30, actually. It was a very good, limit for that. [01:13:00]
Mark Pellegrino: thank you. And also zoom calls. If you have more and zoom calls are always fun to do. And, and I, I never stopped at the 10 minutes or whatever they say you’re supposed to do.
I always, I always like, I always liked talking to the fans and getting their points of view on things and, that’s always a thrill for me. So.
Jeff: Well, one last final question. I have not actually seen the last episode of supernatural, so I don’t know the answer, but does Lucifer show up at all in the last, these last two episodes?
Mark Pellegrino: I’m not going to tell you.
Jeff: Oh, no,
Mark Pellegrino: you got to see it.
Jeff: Like I said, I’m a couple of days behind on supernatural. I, I have to watch it, you know, share the TV with my wife. So I have to wait until it’s a day where she’s working. But, I do, you know, I think it’s fantastic. How long has it been after it has lasted?
And I think Lucifer was definitely one of those characters that I think elevated the show quite a bit. I think your, your performance of Lucifer, definitely in season five, you gave, [01:14:00] you gave it the payoff that it deserved.
Mark Pellegrino: Well, thank you. I enjoyed playing Lucifer in all of its, characterizations and I enjoyed working with the boys and everybody in the cast.
And, I just hope we all continue working and doing what we
Jeff: do. w do you have a, what do you have on next? Can you share whatever projects you have coming up?
Mark Pellegrino: I’m supposed to do a project, but I, I’m not gonna say what it is on the test. I don’t want the trolls to go over there. So I’m going to keep it silent.
It was something we were supposed to start right at the top of the pandemic. In fact, I flew out to, Pennsylvania to, to do a reading and just start a fitting and we’re were just going to start working and the pandemic hit and I was there three days and had to fly back and, And so we’re supposed to start up again in March, 2021 from, from my lips to dad’s ears.
That’s let’s hope. That’s true.
Jeff: Well, thank you so much, mr. Pellegrino for talking with me, you are a [01:15:00] fantastic conversation and I really am impressed with just how knowledgeable and philosophical and, interesting you are to talk with
Mark Pellegrino: you, man. I had a good time.
Jeff: I greatly appreciate it. if you don’t mind, can you do a bumper for us?
Mark Pellegrino: Yeah, sure. Now you wanted me to, just say who I am and stuff like that, and then say, and you’re listening to spoiler country. Yes. Okay, cool.
Hey, this is Mark Pellegrino. You might know me as Lucifer from supernatural or Jacob from lost and you are listening to spoiler country.
Jeff: Thank you so much, sir.
And please come back anytime you want to promote anything. I’d love to have you back on.
Mark Pellegrino: Thanks, man. Thanks for all your good conversating.
Jeff: I appreciate that. Have a fantastic night. You too. Peace. Bye.