Acharya Prashant begins by questioning the audience's online search habits, noting the rarity of searches for profound topics like liberation (mukti), truth (satya), salvation (moksha), or Vedanta. He explains that because people do not search for such subjects, videos about them do not appear in their recommendations. Consequently, this content must be actively promoted to reach a wider audience, a necessity he attributes to a decline in societal values. He states that without promotion, which is funded by donations, this knowledge would be lost. The need for promotion and donations would cease, he says, only when people become capable of identifying and sharing the right content themselves. He reveals that the foundation receives less than a tenth of the required donations and must cut salaries and expenses to continue its work. In response to a law student's question about the Uniform Civil Code (UCC), Acharya Prashant addresses the conflict between ensuring equality and respecting India's diversity. He dismisses the argument of "diversity" as a valid reason to oppose the UCC. He points out that India's diversity is vast, with culture, language, and customs changing every few villages. If diversity were the ultimate principle, every community could justify its own arbitrary and potentially harmful practices. He asserts that simply because something has been traditionally practiced does not make it right. He also argues against exempting any community from the UCC, as it would lead to other communities demanding similar exemptions. Acharya Prashant firmly states that the UCC is a good idea and should be implemented. He refutes the accusation that it imposes the values of one community on others, clarifying that its principles, such as equal rights for women, are universal human values, not specific to any religion. He argues that no true religion can have cruelty or exploitation at its core. Any tradition that harms people, diminishes their consciousness, or promotes superstition is not religious and must be discarded. He defines religion as the act of knowing oneself in the present, not blindly adhering to old traditions. He further criticizes the political practice of appeasing minorities as a vote bank, which he says allows regressive practices to persist, ultimately harming the minorities by keeping them in ignorance. This appeasement, he warns, creates a backlash that empowers extremist and violent elements within the majority community, who are usually on the fringe. These elements then justify their own fanaticism by pointing to the fanaticism tolerated in other groups. He concludes that the UCC should be implemented without delay for the welfare of every citizen, as it is based on universal principles of justice, not the values of any single religion.