Real Coffee with Scott Adams - March 30, 2021


Episode 1329 Scott Adams： Wokeness Kills 200K People, Vaccine Passports From Hell, CNN Stokes Riots


Episode Stats


Length

49 minutes

Words per minute

144.7428

Word count

7,135

Sentence count

517

Harmful content

Misogyny

9

sentences flagged

Hate speech

19

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

In this episode of the podcast, I talk about the dangers of cults and how to know if you're in a cult. I also talk about how to be less judgmental and more forgiving when it comes to people who criticize you.

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
00:00:00.000 Hey everybody, come on in. If you didn't know it already, Periscope is going to go away.
00:00:11.640 Doesn't mean anything to you people watching on YouTube, but if you're watching on Periscope,
00:00:18.280 I think tomorrow is the last day, and then Twitter is going to incorporate the function
00:00:23.320 somehow, but I don't know the details. So, on April 1st, not a joke, you'll only be able to watch me
00:00:32.400 on YouTube. I might look to a live stream from at least one other platform once I free up my device.
00:00:40.320 So, how would you like to enjoy today to the maximum? Yeah, yeah you would. And all you need
00:00:47.940 is a cup or mug or glass, a tank or a chalice of time, a canteen, a jug of glass, a vessel of any kind,
00:00:51.920 fill it with your favorite liquid I like, coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure,
00:00:57.980 the dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes, yeah, everything better. It's called
00:01:02.380 the Simultaneous Sip and Watch What It Does. Yeah, get ready, go.
00:01:11.900 Speaking of platforms, meanwhile, over on the subscription service called Locals, you will
00:01:19.200 find yet more of my micro lessons on how to be less judgmental, how to deal with criticism. These
00:01:28.920 are some of the new ones. Lots and lots of content there if you'd like to figure out how to improve
00:01:35.060 your life. All right, let's talk about the news. Lots of interesting stuff. There's yet another video
00:01:42.800 of Vice President Harris giggling uncontrollably at the wrong time. Now, people are interpreting it as,
00:01:51.520 you know, she's being mean, but the topic was parents having to homeschool their kids because they're
00:01:59.060 not in school. Now, I think Harris was doing the I recognize your situation laugh. You know, oh, we're all in
00:02:07.460 this together. It's hard. Ha ha ha. We all know how hard it is. But the trouble is, not everybody thinks
00:02:15.280 that's funny. Not everybody is hiring a nanny and sending kids to private schools and all that. So I
00:02:25.300 would say that a lot of the country didn't think that was very funny. And I don't see how you can be
00:02:31.860 a leader with this giggling laugh. She just has to get control of that. I don't know if there's
00:02:39.340 anybody who's a Democrat who says, yeah, that's good. I like more of that maniacal laugh. That's
00:02:46.860 really a problem. I had to look up the definition of a cult this morning because I thought I knew it.
00:02:55.980 But it turns out everybody just defines the word differently. So from now on, if anybody says,
00:03:01.860 so-and-so is a cult, here's what you should translate that into your mind. Nothing just
00:03:09.320 happened. That's it. That's how you should translate it. If somebody says, that person's in a cult,
00:03:17.380 the correct interpretation is nobody said anything. Because it doesn't mean anything.
00:03:23.720 It turns out that the cult definition is so broad that it just captures basically any organization.
00:03:30.920 So here's a practical definition, a common one. A religious or sect, so it doesn't have to be a
00:03:38.460 religion. It could be a sect, whatever that is, generally considered to be extremist or false.
00:03:45.140 That kind of depends who you are, right? Is your extremism the same as my extremism?
00:03:50.660 And what is false? Isn't that kind of an opinion? Which religion is the false one? Who gets to say that?
00:03:57.840 Under the guidance of an authoritarian charismatic leader. So in order to be a cult, you need a
00:04:04.680 charismatic authoritarian leader. Now authoritarian is kind of subjective, isn't it? Because people call
00:04:13.880 Trump authoritarian, whereas his supporters said, well, he's the opposite. He's unambiguously in favor of
00:04:22.920 personal freedom. So we can't even agree what authoritarian means. And who is one? People can
00:04:30.580 see the same person as extreme opposites on that scale. How about charismatic leader? That shouldn't
00:04:37.280 even be there. What does a charismatic leader have to do with anything? I don't know. And for
00:04:48.040 whom members exhibit fixed, even religious veneration. Veneration. Again, rather subjective,
00:04:56.240 isn't it? Would you say that you are venerating me right now? Because the people watching this are,
00:05:03.440 for the most part, people who watch me regularly and find some value in it. So where is the line
00:05:10.780 between just watching some content you like and associating with people you like and venerating
00:05:18.160 somebody? You see how subjective this is? It's completely subjective. Now I thought the cult would
00:05:25.280 include the definitions of you're kept from the outside world and they take all your possessions and
00:05:31.700 stuff like that. But I can't find a definition, at least with a quick search, I can't find a common
00:05:37.540 definition of the word cult that includes that stuff. But we all expect that to be there. Anyway,
00:05:42.580 the point is, this is all because an online conversation about whether NXIVM and the DOS
00:05:50.360 subgroup were a cult. To which I say, they're a cult in the same way that any organization is a cult.
00:06:00.560 You know, if you want to say anybody with a leader that people like, and they trust or have some respect
00:06:06.780 or they're likely to be influenced by the leader, that's sort of most groups. So it kind of doesn't
00:06:15.040 mean anything. And in the NXIVM case, there was no coercion about being in or out or who you listen
00:06:21.420 to or where you went or any of that. So it didn't really fit the extreme definition of a cult.
00:06:26.620 All right. I've come to the conclusion that your politics is mostly defined by what scares you the
00:06:35.480 most. I don't know if somebody smart has already said this. But one way to understand or just another
00:06:43.240 filter on life is that the difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is largely what
00:06:49.200 they're scared of. If you think of it in terms of what they're in favor of, it gets all complicated.
00:06:56.500 But if you think of it in terms of what they're afraid of, it gets really simple.
00:06:59.840 Let me give you an example. Democrats are afraid that Hitler is under every bed.
00:07:05.720 All right. Now, you know what I mean by that, right? The Democrats just think everything's
00:07:10.720 Hitler. Hitler's under every bed. That's what they're afraid of. The white supremacists are going
00:07:15.280 to round people up. And that's their biggest fear. So that informs everything else. But the
00:07:21.780 Republicans have their own fears, the fear of an elite conspiracy, George Soros kind of a monster
00:07:31.220 under the bed. And also that there's some kind of coordinated effort to control you in really,
00:07:39.000 really, you know, a tight way. Now, I don't know exactly who's in control, you know, like who's in
00:07:45.140 control of this vast effort. But the GOP believes there's a monster under the bed in terms of some
00:07:51.800 governmental group that we don't know their names necessarily. They're trying to control everything.
00:07:58.980 Here's my take. Probably none of that's real. None of it. And generally speaking, all of these
00:08:07.680 sort of abstract conceptual fears are almost always overblown. Almost always overblown.
00:08:17.500 So because I'm not, I don't identify strongly with either political party, although I, you know,
00:08:24.340 can often agree with topics on either side, I look at these both as irrational fears.
00:08:29.800 So the vaccine passport stuff that we talked about, I know what you're saying. I mean, I understand the
00:08:39.000 argument that, you know, it could turn into something worse than its original intention. But
00:08:44.180 that's kind of true of just about everything. Just about everything could turn into something bad if
00:08:49.500 you let it. You know, driver's license, like I said yesterday, if you have a driver's license,
00:08:54.720 you're already in a database. What else can you add to a database? Oh, all kinds of stuff. Right? So
00:09:02.280 it's a slippery slope to have a driver's license. Now, I just can't find a way to worry about this
00:09:09.860 stuff. There's an article in, where is it? Real Clear Politics talking about my argument versus
00:09:18.840 Dr. Naomi Wolf's argument on vaccination passports. But here's the punchline.
00:09:24.720 Doesn't matter. So it turns out that you and I may not have to worry about arguing about
00:09:32.960 vaccination passports. Because luckily, we have some adults, at least a few adults in charge. So
00:09:40.520 apparently, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis just said that he'll be taking executive action against
00:09:46.620 vaccine passports. So, so if you don't mind, I'm going to curse a little bit during this live stream.
00:09:52.600 All right, you're all warned, there will be cursing. Governor Ron DeSantis just said about these
00:09:59.880 vaccination passports. Well, fuck that. How about no? Just fuck that. You're just not going to do it 0.99
00:10:07.340 in our state. Now that just solves the problem, right? Problem solved. If the people of Florida like
00:10:15.080 that, they probably do, you know, I can see that they'd be popular. So as much as I'm not afraid
00:10:21.100 of vaccine passports, and I can see their utility. I love the fact that the governor just said,
00:10:28.640 well, why don't you go argue about the utility of passports? You have fun arguing about it. But also,
00:10:34.860 they're not going to be in our state. He just wiped the issue off the off the table.
00:10:40.040 Now, let me tell you, you know, we're all watching the, let's call it the baseball minor leagues to see
00:10:48.680 which politician rises before 2024. You know, we're looking for the next president. And a very strong
00:10:56.780 week for Ron DeSantis. This decision is one where you just say to yourself, oh, oh, okay, problem solved.
00:11:06.020 But we don't have to talk about it anymore. He just won't let it happen. And his principle for
00:11:12.700 preventing this, you know, he does a little bit of the fear of you don't want the fox to guard the
00:11:19.200 hen house. But I think on personal freedom level, it's going to be a popular move.
00:11:26.540 So I think, I think today he popped a little bit in the, if you're, if you're in the betting pools
00:11:33.120 for 2024 presidential candidates, I think, I think this, this decision specifically,
00:11:40.980 you know, he did give credit for opening up and keeping the economy relatively strong compared to
00:11:46.120 other states. So that's all good. But this is, this is kind of inspired, because it's just so simple.
00:11:51.640 And why didn't I even know this was coming? That's what's funny about it. He just said,
00:11:57.140 how about no? Not my state. Like, oh, okay, problem solved. And by the way, even though I argued
00:12:05.340 that the vaccine passports could have a positive utility, I'm not, I'm not even a little bit opposed
00:12:13.780 to DeSantis banning it. Not even a little bit. I figure that's a principled stand. It's based on
00:12:20.260 reasons. He showed his reasons. He showed his work. It's popular. Good move. Canada has apparently
00:12:28.740 joined some other European countries in pausing the AstraZeneca vaccines, because there's concern
00:12:36.880 that especially women under 50, 55, I guess, are having more deadly blood clots where they're 0.99
00:12:44.560 actually dying. Now, here's my question. The, they don't know that it's true yet. There's, there's
00:12:53.100 still a little data uncertainty. So it may not be true that there's any problem. So that's the first
00:12:58.860 thing you need to know. We don't know for sure that there's any problem for sure. There's enough data
00:13:05.880 to make, you know, reasonable people say, oh, hold on. All right. But we're not sure, sure. But here's my
00:13:13.240 question. How many medical things target women who are young? Unless it has something to do with 0.89
00:13:24.420 their, let's say, biological difference, maybe it had something to do with, you know, the reproduction
00:13:30.680 organs or something. But how often is it that the only people who have the worst outcomes are young
00:13:38.800 women? Are there other examples of that? Because here's why I'm asking. Well, you know, sure, the pill and 1.00
00:13:46.580 stuff, because those are specific to women. But I'm talking about a general problem. Let's say, let's say 0.63
00:13:54.460 another kind of flu or something that affects the general population. Yeah, HPV and stuff. So not counting
00:14:05.380 the stuff that's specific to the reproductive function, just the general health stuff. How
00:14:10.540 often do young women are the ones that are overwhelmingly affected? Because I don't believe
00:14:17.480 that, do you? I'm going to put myself at maximum skepticism that it's true that young women are 1.00
00:14:26.760 having blood clots when old men are not. Now, I certainly, you know, I'm not a doctor. And certainly
00:14:37.700 if a medical professional says, Scott, Scott, Scott, this is not even uncommon. Let me list you five
00:14:44.260 different things that affect younger women more than adult, old, obese men. I mean, seriously,
00:14:52.760 are you telling me that obese old men are not having problems with a shot, but young women are dying 1.00
00:15:03.520 from it? I just don't believe it. Do you? Now, I can see why they might have to pause it. If there's
00:15:11.260 enough data at some point, you know, the politics of it just require it. But if I had to guess,
00:15:17.920 if I had to bet against something being true, I would place a fairly sizable bet that this data
00:15:26.180 won't hold up, just based on the fact that young women, I just don't see them being a target for 1.00
00:15:32.980 something that's a general problem, as opposed to a reproductive problem. Now, somebody says hormones. 1.00
00:15:39.680 But do you think the hormones are the answer? Somebody says, yes, that is exactly how side
00:15:47.880 effects work, that they can target a certain group. Could be. So I'm not ruling it out. All right. So if
00:15:54.960 you're, so if, if what you're hearing is Scott says, it's not true, you're hearing it wrong. Scott is
00:16:02.420 saying, I'd bet against it, meaning the odds of it being true. I just don't think it's going to hold,
00:16:07.140 but it could. So there's, there's nothing physically impossible about that being true.
00:16:13.720 I just don't think it's true. I'll just put that out there. All right. Um, so we heard the other day
00:16:22.120 that the, at least one group of Amish are apparently at 90% herd immunity. And so I asked this question
00:16:29.480 on social media and boy, did I get some interesting cognitive dissonance, like really interesting ones,
00:16:36.640 where you read them and you're like, what? Like people, actually, their brains just broke
00:16:41.340 because I asked this question. If the Amish who apparently dropped the masks and the social 0.95
00:16:47.740 distancing pretty early, if they're at 90% herd immunity, and they're kind of the only ones,
00:16:53.640 and they're also kind of the only ones that we know of that dropped masks, have we not shown for
00:17:00.860 sure? Let's say not in a randomized controlled, you know, gold standard way, but don't you feel
00:17:08.820 pretty confident that if the ones who dropped social distancing and masks also got overwhelmingly
00:17:16.520 the most infections, does that not tell you that the masks and the social distancing have some effect?
00:17:23.660 Now, again, it's not a randomized controlled trial, you know, you'd love to have your
00:17:29.340 control group of Amish who use their masks, but really, do you need that? 90%, 90% infections, 0.97
00:17:37.860 if it's true, 90% infection, because that's not anywhere else where they use masks and social distancing.
00:17:44.520 I feel as if, if you're arguing against masks, and also, to be fair, that doesn't mean that masks work.
00:17:54.260 It could be that the social distancing is the only thing that worked, but they, you know,
00:17:58.560 the masks were in the mix, so you can't tell. So, watching people who were positive that none of the
00:18:08.860 public measures made any difference, watching them respond to this fact just spins people's brains into
00:18:16.220 just complete irrationality, and when you read the comments, you can see it yourself.
00:18:20.960 Now, so I'm going to claim some preliminary unconfirmed rightness for saying that whether you like
00:18:31.820 social distancing or masks or not, they almost certainly reduce infections, I feel that that would
00:18:39.560 be safe. Somebody says, will Dominion sue you next, Scott? Well, I doubt it. I doubt it. Can you
00:18:48.120 imagine Dominion suing me? Oh, my God, that would be fun. It would be the end of their business.
00:18:56.380 Can you imagine putting me on trial and letting me testify? I mean, just think about that.
00:19:06.220 That would be the end. I would take out not only Dominion, but I would take out all electronic
00:19:12.880 voting. I would destroy the entire industry in 45 minutes of testimony, and it would be easy.
00:19:20.500 You don't want to put people like me on trial in any kind of a public situation.
00:19:26.380 You want people a little less trained if you want a good result.
00:19:33.680 Here's a question for you. Do we yet know why Asian countries did so well? Oh, it's because 0.95
00:19:40.820 of all their crackdowns, and their social distancing is better, and they're totalitarian in some cases.
00:19:49.080 But we have this problem that they didn't all do the same thing, but they all got good results.
00:19:56.380 How do you explain that? Why did Japan get a good result when it didn't do anything
00:20:01.200 even close to what China did? If you're not doing the same stuff, you're doing all kinds of different
00:20:08.460 policies with different resources, but getting the same results. What's up with that? Well, I would say
00:20:16.840 that there are two possible explanations. Number one is weight. Weight, right? Yeah. It could be the
00:20:24.080 BMI. It could be most of the story. But here's the other thing I would wonder about, especially because
00:20:33.380 there's some concern that it's a weaponized virus. Aren't you a little bit more concerned now than even at
00:20:41.240 the beginning, that this virus was weaponized to spare Asian ethnicities? Now, that's not a statement
00:20:50.440 of fact. I'm just saying, isn't your concern about that sort of at an all-time high? And let me tell
00:20:57.640 you the data that I'd like to hear to make me feel better or worse about that speculation, for which
00:21:04.200 there's no evidence, by the way. So let me say this clearly. I'm aware of no evidence that would
00:21:10.100 suggest it was a weaponized virus against any kind of ethnic groups in particular, or would spare any
00:21:17.740 in particular. But here's the data I would like to see. I would like to see the data of Asian Americans,
00:21:24.320 people who are fully ethnically, let's say, Chinese, Japanese, Asian, etc., but are American citizens
00:21:32.020 living an American lifestyle. But here's the key. To only study the people who have, on average,
00:21:40.820 the same amount of weight as their actually living in Asia counterparts. So I wouldn't want to see 1.00
00:21:48.940 American, Asian Americans, yeah, I wouldn't want to see Asian Americans as a whole group compared to, 1.00
00:21:56.620 let's say, Chinese or Japanese citizens. I would want to see only the ones who have similar 1.00
00:22:01.920 BMI, get rid of the outliers. And once you've normalized for weight, just see if they're having
00:22:09.000 the same amount of problem. Because I don't know the answer to that. We've heard that old people 1.00
00:22:14.140 having problems, obese people. We've heard that African Americans have more problems. But have you 1.00
00:22:20.060 heard whether Asian Americans, who have good BMI, are they having good outcomes or bad outcomes?
00:22:27.420 Because I would be really, really worried, in a positive way, I guess it would be good news,
00:22:34.060 if they were having great outcomes. Because then I start to worry that the virus has a little bit of
00:22:41.420 an ethnic preference, at which point you start worrying about the weaponization at a whole different
00:22:47.940 level. So I'll just put that out there, that there are pieces of information we'd sure like to know.
00:22:55.720 All right. I asked the question this morning before finding out the answer myself on Twitter.
00:23:05.600 Did you know that in terms of the super spreaders, the people responsible for most of the spreading,
00:23:10.840 that 80% of the spread comes from fewer than 20% of the infected people. So by a five to one or four
00:23:23.720 to one ratio, the super spreaders are doing most of the spreading. Now, so that's fact number one.
00:23:32.420 It's the super spreaders who are doing most of the spreading. Now, let me ask you this. If you could
00:23:37.360 get rid of just the super spreaders, just the super spreaders, would we already be at a point where
00:23:45.400 we could kill the pandemic? Because that would reduce its spread by, you know, do the math for me,
00:23:52.200 but, you know, work it out in your head. If 80% of the spread is coming from, you know, 10 or 20% of
00:23:59.040 the people, don't you reduce the spread by, you know, like five times or four times or something like
00:24:05.840 that. I mean, I'm not doing the math right, but in terms of that degree, it's sort of in that
00:24:12.660 neighborhood, right? Now, there's more. So what causes somebody to be a super spreader?
00:24:20.780 So not everybody is a super spreader, and apparently there have been studies, and they can tell you who.
00:24:25.680 Number one, somebody with large lung capacity. Large lung capacity. So in other words, just physically,
00:24:33.860 they're just expelling more air. Makes sense that that would be more dangerous. Number two, people
00:24:40.300 whose immune response is not so good, meaning that their body doesn't fight it off so well.
00:24:46.880 Who would that be? Overweight people, for example, and people who had maybe other immune problems.
00:24:55.860 And people with comorbidities in general, I guess. So we know those two things. And then the third
00:25:01.220 thing is how much social contact those people had. So it wasn't just enough that you were a super
00:25:07.980 spreader. You had to be the kindest super spreader who was also spending time with a lot of people.
00:25:14.280 Now, let me ask you this. The CDC gave us the following guidelines early on and still,
00:25:21.420 that we would protect the vulnerable and also socially distance everybody else in pretty much the
00:25:28.580 same way, with the exception of maybe the young, the very young. But generally speaking,
00:25:33.740 the whole population has similar restrictions. And then we're going to protect extra the vulnerable
00:25:41.100 people. Now compare that. So our current system, imagine if the CDC had said instead of that,
00:25:49.140 don't go in a closed room with anybody over 50 who's overweight. What if they'd said that? And what
00:26:01.400 if that had been the only guidance? Do whatever you want. Just don't go in a closed space with
00:26:08.620 overweight people. That's it. Now, could the CDC say that? No. No, they could not. Do you know why
00:26:18.620 they can't say that? Because that would be fat shaming. It would be calling out a segment,
00:26:23.000 et cetera. Because it would be only a short leap before somebody said, hey, Scott, that sounds like
00:26:30.480 a good idea. But, you know, black people are having worse outcomes. Maybe the guidance should be that 1.00
00:26:36.400 you should stay away from black people. Now you've got a problem, right? Now you're a freaking racist.
00:26:42.760 It's the worst thing you could possibly... I can't even imagine anything worse than that,
00:26:47.040 right? It would like maybe the most... Seriously, it's hard to think of anything that would be more
00:26:53.280 destructive to civilization than calling out an ethnicity and saying, you know, stay away from 0.91
00:26:59.340 them. Don't go in the same room. But when it comes to weight, it's a little bit safer. But it still
00:27:06.880 gets you into that wokeness territory, doesn't it? I'll tell you, my guess is that the CDC knew that
00:27:13.320 the super spreaders were largely overweight people over 50, but they couldn't say to you,
00:27:19.400 whatever you do, stay out of the room with anybody who is overweight and over 50. 1.00
00:27:25.400 Because that's what they could have said. They could have said, just don't go near anybody who's
00:27:31.400 overweight and over 50 and you'll be fine. Because it would still be spread. But if it's coming four 0.98
00:27:37.240 to one or five to one from this one category of people, just stay away from them. Now, is that too
00:27:44.380 simplistic? Or would the pandemic already be over? I feel as if the CDC probably killed 200,000 people
00:27:53.380 because they couldn't say what I just said out loud. The CDC can't tell you, don't go in a room
00:27:59.880 with an overweight person over 50. And by the way, I remind you, we don't do fat shaming.
00:28:05.660 We don't do fat shaming here. All right. And I'll tell you, I'll tell you a good reason I don't do fat
00:28:10.800 shaming. And it happened this week. For the past three days, I haven't wanted to eat anything.
00:28:18.160 I haven't had any hunger. And I've had no desire just for the taste of it or whatever, to eat anything.
00:28:24.880 Now, I have eaten because, you know, I just make myself eat because I got to put some food in my
00:28:30.520 body. But I can't imagine that people who have weight problems will ever go three days and never
00:28:37.840 be hungry. I mean, seriously. Right? Somebody says, shove your mask up your ass, Scott. Well,
00:28:48.800 Rhino Lavasio, let me talk to you for a moment. What point do you think you're making there?
00:28:54.540 What point do you think you're making? I feel as if your all capitals letter exclamation to shove
00:29:03.300 my mask up my ass is maybe not as helpful as it could be. Maybe not as helpful. All right. So
00:29:11.080 anyway, my point is, people like me just don't have the same level of hunger. So how hard is it for me to
00:29:18.340 stay at a reasonable weight? It's not hard. So I don't judge people who are overweight, because they
00:29:25.920 don't have the same situation. If they also were not hungry, they would be my weight. And I think
00:29:31.540 that's the whole story, basically. So there's that. I would say the CDC probably killed 200,000 people
00:29:41.140 just by not being able to tell us the truth. That's a pretty strong statement. I'm going to stand by it.
00:29:47.240 I think the CDC probably killed 200,000 people because they couldn't tell us to stay out of the
00:29:54.320 room with overweight people over the age of 50. And that's what they knew would work. That's what I 0.99
00:30:00.360 think. Just speculation. Another example of the left eating their own. I'm just going to read this
00:30:11.340 sentence from CNN. Sometimes you don't have to add much to a story. It just, you know, the funny part
00:30:18.240 is just in the story itself. I'm just going to read this just the way it appears on CNN.
00:30:24.260 The newly hired head of diversity and inclusion at U.S. Special Operations Command. Okay, now the
00:30:32.080 first thing is, did you know there was a head of diversity and inclusion in U.S. Special Operations
00:30:39.440 Command? I should point out that the military is the one place where discrimination
00:30:47.700 discrimination is not just allowed, it's required. It's required. If you want to have a good
00:30:55.640 military. The military is the one place you can, if you have a reason, I mean you have to have a
00:31:01.540 reason, but you can discriminate. Can I join the military? No. No, they discriminate against me.
00:31:09.560 The military discriminates against me because I'm a certain age, right? They discriminate against the
00:31:14.960 people who have, you know, disabilities, right? They discriminate against people who have a certain
00:31:22.940 IQ. Below that, they won't take you. A certain height, a certain weight. The military discriminates
00:31:30.740 like crazy. And the only value that they have to us is that they discriminate like crazy.
00:31:38.700 The moment they stop discriminating, they're no good. Now, the problem is, if they discriminate for the
00:31:44.740 wrong reason. So, if they're discriminating by ethnicity, well, they're not helping readiness,
00:31:51.720 they're just being racist. Because, you know, we know now that, you know, in the old days, people
00:31:57.440 were, let's say, simpler, and they thought maybe, you know, integrating the forces would ruin them.
00:32:03.640 Obviously, that didn't happen. So, today, if they were discriminating on ethnicity, that wouldn't be cool
00:32:10.060 because it doesn't have a reason, right? They can't come up with a justification. But if they're
00:32:15.320 discriminating on, I'll just pick one category. Let's say transgender folks in the military.
00:32:23.040 If the reason they're doing it is that they suspect there would be a readiness problem or an extra
00:32:29.040 expense or any kind of inconvenience, discrimination is perfectly acceptable. They don't need a reason.
00:32:35.440 I mean, they need a reason. But if they have a reason, that's all they need, right? So,
00:32:42.640 and you know me, I'm as pro-transgender as possible. But the military doesn't play by any of those rules
00:32:49.960 and shouldn't. So, the fact that there's some kind of diversity and inclusion job, it raises a question.
00:32:59.620 If all they're doing is making sure that women and different ethnicities are represented, that's 1.00
00:33:06.280 great. But if they're making the decisions based on that, that might have some impact on readiness that
00:33:13.080 would worry me. I'd worry that they, you know, you have to worry that politics would cause them to,
00:33:20.360 let's say, favor wokeness over readiness. Wouldn't you worry about that? I would worry about that.
00:33:26.980 Anyway, so this, let me read on here. So, this newly hired head of diversity for special operations,
00:33:37.960 he has been reassigned because of his controversial social media posts. Apparently, he posted something
00:33:46.480 comparing President Donald Trump to Adolf Hitler. Now, if you're going to pick a head of diversity and inclusion
00:33:55.980 for the military, maybe you should check the Twitter feed first. Just putting that out there. Now,
00:34:03.840 they say we don't have a social, what is it called? What does China have? The social credit thing.
00:34:12.660 So, in this country, we don't have a social credit score, except we do. We just call it Twitter.
00:34:19.860 So, this poor bastard, he had his social credit score checked and he failed because on Twitter he said some
00:34:30.240 inappropriate things. So, yeah, we do have a social credit score here. It's just called Twitter and social media
00:34:37.460 in general. So, there's another example of the left trying to live by their own rules and finding that they can't.
00:34:49.220 It's just too hard. Can't live by their own rules. All right.
00:34:53.440 Okay. Do we need to have an ID to have a credit score? Yeah. Well, let's talk about Van Jones here for a second.
00:35:06.800 So, Van Jones said, quote, if Derek, is it shaven or chauvin? I always say chauvin, but I've heard it pronounced shaven.
00:35:13.520 So, I don't know. If Derek Chauvin is not convicted, it will look like, quote, open season for cops to, quote, get away with murder.
00:35:24.460 So, Van Jones is saying that if there's no conviction, it's going to look really, really bad.
00:35:31.800 Now, as you know, I'm a big fan of Van Jones. I think that as for somebody who is more associated with the left,
00:35:41.160 I would say he's more open-minded and, you know, more useful to the world than most people, right or left.
00:35:50.420 He's just an unusually useful, productive member of society. So, I'm a big fan.
00:35:57.740 But here's my problem. If you work for CNN, don't you know that riots will be good for business?
00:36:05.080 Riots will be good for business, right?
00:36:11.380 By the way, I'm not saying that I agree with all of Van Jones' opinions.
00:36:15.460 So, in the comments, I'm saying, oh, he's a Marxist, he's a socialist.
00:36:18.980 We're not talking about that. I'm talking about him as a human being with good intentions.
00:36:25.840 Anytime you find a smart, capable person with good intentions,
00:36:29.300 I'm way less concerned if I agree with them on all their policies.
00:36:33.800 I just like smart, well-intentioned people who are trying to make the world better.
00:36:39.160 So, even if they disagree with me.
00:36:42.780 Here's my problem.
00:36:43.800 We have a news business which knows it will be wildly more popular if the riots happen.
00:36:50.720 Are they making the riots happen?
00:36:52.560 Is CNN making the riots happen?
00:36:57.380 And I'll just use them as a proxy for news on the left, right?
00:37:00.960 And maybe even news on the right, because in this case, it might be the same.
00:37:06.700 But it looks to me that the news business is setting the country up for riots
00:37:11.860 just so they can cover them and it'll be profitable.
00:37:16.500 That's happening, right?
00:37:18.140 Now, ask me if, do I think they had a meeting in which they talked about it?
00:37:24.220 Do you think CNN said, hey, if we can prime the country for a riot,
00:37:29.540 profits are going to look good?
00:37:31.520 No.
00:37:32.320 I don't believe anybody had a conscious thought,
00:37:36.000 let's cause some riots so we can make some money. 0.71
00:37:40.300 Lots of people might have thought, if there are riots, we will make money.
00:37:45.580 But that's different from saying, let's cause them.
00:37:48.140 But here's the thing.
00:37:50.680 Do you know how many brains you have?
00:37:53.380 We used to think you had one brain, and that one brain was you.
00:37:58.180 And your one brain would make your decisions, and that's you.
00:38:01.380 You making a decision.
00:38:03.620 More recently, science has told us it would be more productive
00:38:07.260 and just maybe more accurate to think of you as several brains.
00:38:12.140 And they compete to see who wins on any topic.
00:38:15.380 For example, your sort of executive brain that's at least a little bit logical,
00:38:21.420 that takes charge for all the boring little logical stuff
00:38:25.420 until something exciting happens, and then that one just shuts off.
00:38:29.240 As soon as you get excited, mad, emotional, the little executive one just turns off.
00:38:35.980 And then you've got a different brain.
00:38:37.820 I mean, it's all in your head, and it's just a region or regions of your brain.
00:38:42.120 But they act like a new brain.
00:38:43.560 And in my opinion, everything I know about economics,
00:38:51.400 everything I know about psychology, everything I know about hypnosis,
00:38:56.240 and everything I know about how the brain operates and is constructed
00:39:00.100 tells me the following.
00:39:02.060 That the news business is killing people for business.
00:39:06.840 Now, in the 90s, I wrote a book called The Dilbert Future,
00:39:12.680 in which I made a bunch of long-term predictions.
00:39:15.400 One of my long-term predictions is that the news industry
00:39:19.280 would start killing people to generate ratings.
00:39:24.000 You're watching it.
00:39:25.840 The news business is creating the Floyd riots right in front of you.
00:39:32.200 They haven't happened yet, but it's the news that's creating them.
00:39:35.940 It's not the public.
00:39:37.420 The public is reacting to the coverage.
00:39:40.340 The public didn't have an opinion.
00:39:42.740 The public was assigned an opinion.
00:39:45.080 And they're still being assigned an opinion.
00:39:47.380 And Van Jones is priming the pump.
00:39:50.720 And again, I think he has only good intentions,
00:39:53.920 but that's maybe not every part of his brain, right?
00:39:58.680 There's a part of his brain, just like everybody else,
00:40:01.120 that can process good intentions and act on them.
00:40:03.780 But there's another part of the brain that says,
00:40:06.540 wouldn't it be nice to work for a network that was making more money?
00:40:13.000 Wouldn't that be good for me, directly or indirectly, right?
00:40:17.900 So you always have this, you could call it subconscious,
00:40:23.280 but I don't like that word.
00:40:24.420 It has too much baggage with it.
00:40:27.200 There's a part of everybody's brain that makes them follow economics.
00:40:33.660 Because we're evolved that way.
00:40:36.240 Biologically, biologically, we are drawn to power and money and resources,
00:40:42.600 just like a magnet.
00:40:43.880 So your conscious brain could be saying,
00:40:47.860 oh, ethically or logically, I should be doing this.
00:40:50.960 But at the same time, all of your biological urges are saying,
00:40:54.760 there's money over there.
00:40:57.900 I'm being drawn toward the money.
00:41:00.080 I know where the money is.
00:41:01.720 No, no.
00:41:03.080 We don't want any riots.
00:41:04.640 Everybody, but it would be really, really economical.
00:41:08.260 No, no.
00:41:09.600 I don't want to see anybody get hurt, but it would be really good for me.
00:41:13.120 I'd probably increase my mating options if I made more money. 0.87
00:41:16.480 I was on a network that made more money.
00:41:18.500 Ah!
00:41:20.700 All right?
00:41:21.380 So I just described every human.
00:41:24.820 Every human is absolutely drawn toward money.
00:41:30.760 They won't tell you they are.
00:41:32.440 Now, there's some people who genuinely don't care about money,
00:41:35.160 and it doesn't apply to them.
00:41:36.640 But anybody who owns a suit, let's just put it that way,
00:41:42.220 if you own a suit, meaning that you bought into society on some level,
00:41:49.100 and whatever the female equivalent of a suit is, 1.00
00:41:51.860 if you're at least bought into society that much,
00:41:54.960 you are drawn to money, whether you know it or not,
00:41:58.320 whether you like it or not.
00:41:59.840 So we have somehow built a news industry that right in front of us,
00:42:04.340 this is happening right in front of us,
00:42:06.680 as obvious, it couldn't be more obvious,
00:42:09.740 they are priming the public for major riots.
00:42:14.800 And the news industry is doing this.
00:42:17.180 This is not anybody else.
00:42:19.700 This is the news industry priming us for riots that don't need to happen.
00:42:26.300 These riots don't need to happen.
00:42:28.140 Nothing good will come from them.
00:42:32.060 Nothing will move forward.
00:42:34.560 Nothing will be better.
00:42:37.820 It's just for the news business.
00:42:41.540 Now, imagine, if you're not sold yet,
00:42:44.340 let me tell you how the news could be covering this.
00:42:48.340 Here's what Van Jones could have said,
00:42:51.400 instead of if Chauvin is not convicted,
00:42:56.200 it will look like open season for cops to get away with murder.
00:42:59.880 A very provocative sentence.
00:43:01.820 Let me suggest other kinds of sentences he could have said.
00:43:06.340 It's very likely that the burden of proof will not be met,
00:43:12.740 because even though the video looks very damning to everybody,
00:43:16.440 the medical information contradicts it.
00:43:21.800 And under that case,
00:43:23.920 we would likely expect to see him not get convicted
00:43:27.380 of whatever the worst charges are,
00:43:29.040 the murder-related ones.
00:43:31.360 And I'd like to urge everybody to stay calm,
00:43:35.240 because we're better off if the legal system works
00:43:39.200 than we would be blowing off steam.
00:43:41.900 You know, so just remember,
00:43:44.920 you black Americans are better off 1.00
00:43:47.740 whenever the legal system gets the right answer.
00:43:51.440 The last thing you want is for the legal system
00:43:53.800 to give the wrong answer.
00:43:55.480 And in this case, although you're not going to like it,
00:43:58.440 the right answer might be
00:43:59.760 that we can't tell if this was a murder.
00:44:02.600 It looked like it.
00:44:03.700 We all think it looked like it.
00:44:05.540 But the medical exam contradicts it,
00:44:07.820 and that's pretty good evidence, too.
00:44:09.240 So our system doesn't allow you
00:44:11.520 to send somebody to jail forever,
00:44:14.680 well, let's say a murder conviction of some site.
00:44:17.520 We don't support that.
00:44:19.240 And I don't think you'd want that in the black community. 1.00
00:44:21.760 I don't think you'd want it in any community.
00:44:24.180 So support the system when it gets the right answer.
00:44:27.660 That's the right thing to do.
00:44:29.840 When the system gets the wrong answer,
00:44:32.960 and let's say the, you know,
00:44:34.360 if you're still concerned about police treatment
00:44:37.300 of black citizens who are stopped,
00:44:39.440 and why wouldn't you be?
00:44:40.600 Seems worthy of being concerned, right?
00:44:44.680 You can deal with that.
00:44:46.080 I mean, that's a separate problem.
00:44:47.360 But you don't need to throw a cop in jail
00:44:49.500 for something that, you know,
00:44:51.160 the system wouldn't support.
00:44:54.320 So there are many ways that CNN
00:44:55.980 could be reducing the odds of violence,
00:44:58.740 but you won't see them do any of that.
00:45:01.260 My prediction is you will not see CNN or MSNBC
00:45:05.080 doing a full-throated call for calm.
00:45:09.720 Now, they will call for President Trump
00:45:11.940 to say, why don't you call for calm
00:45:14.700 with these protesters in the Capitol.
00:45:17.860 They'll put that standard on other people,
00:45:20.440 but you will not see the CNN, you know,
00:45:23.740 paid commentators calling for calm.
00:45:27.540 You won't see it.
00:45:28.240 In fact, I predict that you'll see them
00:45:31.300 supporting the riots.
00:45:34.580 I think you'll see,
00:45:36.360 because we saw Chris Cuomo, for example,
00:45:38.620 was supporting violence in riots,
00:45:41.940 because he said out loud on CNN,
00:45:45.460 you know, who said that protests
00:45:47.640 need to be peaceful?
00:45:49.760 He actually said that out loud.
00:45:52.000 So CNN is likely to be supporting the violence.
00:45:54.960 They'll do it by saying they support the protests.
00:45:59.560 But, of course, the protests are going to bring with them
00:46:02.180 lots of violence.
00:46:04.540 All right.
00:46:08.120 That is all I have today.
00:46:11.640 I've got to go off and spend another four hours
00:46:14.280 recording my book that I'm re-recording for audio,
00:46:19.340 How to Failed Almost Everything and Still Win Big,
00:46:21.300 and I'll let you know when that is available.
00:46:23.100 Why don't you read Super Chats?
00:46:26.640 Only because I have two sets of comments going by,
00:46:30.580 and I'm not always looking at the screen.
00:46:32.480 If I were always looking at the screen,
00:46:34.160 you wouldn't enjoy this.
00:46:36.800 But I try to read them
00:46:38.260 if I don't read them out loud.
00:46:39.980 All right.
00:46:46.240 Now, remember, Periscope people,
00:46:48.360 when Periscope turns off,
00:46:50.080 just Google real coffee with Scott Adams.
00:46:54.440 Add the real part there.
00:46:57.060 Google real coffee with Scott Adams on YouTube,
00:46:59.680 and you can watch me on YouTube
00:47:01.060 as soon as Periscope goes away.
00:47:03.720 All right?
00:47:04.940 Thanks for that, and I'll talk to you.
00:47:06.720 Well, I guess I'll talk to you one more day on Periscope.
00:47:11.500 See you there.
00:47:12.720 See you then.
00:47:14.240 All right.
00:47:14.860 YouTube.
00:47:20.140 Why don't you just stop Periscope now?
00:47:23.020 Well, people are expecting it.
00:47:27.480 That's why.
00:47:27.840 So it's easy just to turn it on for one more day.
00:47:33.200 Twitter has live video.
00:47:35.300 Yes.
00:47:35.900 So I may integrate it with the Twitter product,
00:47:40.420 but I don't know about that yet.
00:47:42.040 So as soon as I find out about that,
00:47:43.560 I'll make a decision.
00:47:45.040 But I don't think I could.
00:47:47.140 Well, we'll see.
00:47:50.920 What does effective riot prevention look like?
00:47:53.900 Well, effective riot prevention would be the news business
00:47:57.540 reassigning people's opinions.
00:48:01.320 And they would just give you the opinion
00:48:02.700 that rioting would be counterproductive.
00:48:05.980 And then people would do less of it.
00:48:15.760 Something about a Hillary server story?
00:48:17.980 I don't know about that.
00:48:19.660 Yeah.
00:48:20.100 Somebody's saying that Rumble live streams.
00:48:22.660 So right now, the locals platform does not yet have that.
00:48:26.940 I think it'll have it in the coming months.
00:48:30.160 But I'll look into live streaming on Rumble.
00:48:34.220 I'm already on Rumble, by the way.
00:48:37.740 You're leaving Periscope?
00:48:38.860 Periscope's leaving me.
00:48:40.160 So the Periscope service is discontinuing after tomorrow.
00:48:45.820 If you were the president,
00:48:47.080 would you direct the CDC to tell people
00:48:50.360 to stay away from overweight people?
00:48:53.060 Probably.
00:48:54.080 Well, I'd at least have a conversation with him
00:48:56.100 to find out if that would work.
00:48:58.520 So the first thing you need to know is,
00:49:00.380 is my intuition that it would work accurate?
00:49:05.420 All right.
00:49:06.940 That's all I've got for now.
00:49:08.360 And I'll talk to you tomorrow.
00:49:09.880 Thank you.
00:49:11.360 Thank you.
00:49:12.720 Thank you.
00:49:12.900 And we'll see you tomorrow.
00:49:15.600 Yes.
00:49:15.920 We'll see you tomorrow.