Episode 1390 Scott Adams： Is Critical Race Theory Marxist, How to Know Who is Projecting, Capitol Riot Commission, and More
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
146.02675
Summary
Today on Coffee with Scott Adams: China is sending Fentanyl all over the world, and we need a ceasefire to stop it. Plus, a bunch of other stuff, including some travel advice, and a new theory about the best place to go on a vacation.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Hey everybody. Come on in. Gather round. It's time. It's time for Coffee with Scott Adams.
00:00:11.040
The very best part of every single day. No exceptions. I don't care what the pollsters
00:00:17.040
tell you. And if you want to make it extra extra special, like a little extra extra extra,
00:00:23.660
all you need is a cup or mug or less, a tank or chalice or stein, a canteen jug or flask, a vessel of any kind,
00:00:30.140
fill it with your favorite liquid I like, coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure,
00:00:37.060
the dopamine hit of the day, the thing that's better than, well, I'm not even going to say it.
00:00:44.120
You know. You know the thing. It's called the simultaneous sip, and it's going to rock the
00:00:53.660
Hold on. You feel that? Yeah. That was the feeling of the simultaneous sip going all around the world
00:01:03.980
same time. Christian, you're way too nice. You don't even have a comment for me to read.
00:01:11.620
But thank you. So what about the news? There are three words we're going to talk about today. One
00:01:16.940
is ceasefire, the other is Marxist, and the other is peacock. Because persuasion depends quite a bit
00:01:26.460
on the words you use, of course. We want Dale. We want Dale. Dale might appear. You might see Dale.
00:01:36.700
Let's start at the top, and we'll get to all the persuasion tips that are embedded in this
00:01:40.980
as we go. I just saw a tweet from somebody on Twitter named Just Jess, and she reports in her
00:01:51.300
tweet. She says, so, turns out the new friend I went on vacation with doesn't believe there was an
00:01:59.860
insurrection. So, vacation over four days early, friendship way over, mind blown.
00:02:07.220
Now, this tweet suggests some advice I would like to give to all of you. I don't usually give travel
00:02:17.480
advice. Not really my domain, but sometimes. Sometimes I can give you travel advice that's
00:02:24.100
quite good. And here's my travel advice. Number one, don't plan a trip to North Korea. Just don't do it.
00:02:33.680
I feel like I'm on solid ground there. Don't go to North Korea. Not a good place for a vacation.
00:02:40.460
Number two, never go on vacation with someone who believes you can conquer a superpower
00:02:46.980
by putting on a horned hat and occupying a room at the Capitol. Because if you're going on vacation
00:02:57.400
with someone who thinks you can conquer a superpower with a horned hat and occupying a room,
00:03:06.060
well, then you're not on vacation with somebody who's smart or who has your back or even understands
00:03:14.320
anything about anything. In fact, the odds of you coming back alive, not a hundred percent.
00:03:19.680
Here's a word I would like to introduce into the argument about China and fentanyl. And as I tweeted
00:03:28.120
moments ago, I said, let's not directly negotiate with China on anything until there's a ceasefire
00:03:35.560
on sending fentanyl our way. And then I said, that has to be hello. In other words,
00:03:42.900
I don't think we should talk to them about anything else. In fact, I've suggested strongly that we
00:03:50.740
should remove all of our diplomats. Just talk to them indirectly through some other country or
00:03:57.160
something. Because I don't know if they're going to like that situation, if they're such a bad player
00:04:02.080
that they can't even get diplomatic relations with the United States, but they don't deserve it.
00:04:07.100
China doesn't deserve diplomatic relations with the United States while we're in a hot war.
00:04:15.160
And the reason I would say that we should wait for a ceasefire is that they are killing us with
00:04:20.640
fentanyl. They are doing it intentionally. They are doing it every day. And they could stop it like
00:04:27.260
that because they know exactly who it is who's sending it. We gave them the name. China knows the name
00:04:33.880
and address of the one person who's sending the fentanyl. You know, the head of the whatever
00:04:40.340
drug cartel is doing it in China. So let's call it a ceasefire. Because when you call something a
00:04:47.260
ceasefire, people understand you're in a war and people are dying right now. Like dying right now.
00:04:54.260
So if we say weak ass stuff such as, gosh, China, we'd sure like you to do more about
00:05:01.820
restricting the fentanyl trade. And then China says, Oh, yeah, absolutely. We're going to get right
00:05:08.640
on that. Soon as we're done here, I'm going to pick up the phone. Fentanyl trade will be completely
00:05:15.920
done. And then it doesn't happen. Repeat, repeat, repeat. China will just say, Yeah, we'll take care
00:05:24.820
of that and just not do it. So let's call it what it is. It's a hot war. They're sending death,
00:05:31.860
chemical warfare. And unless there's a ceasefire, I don't think we should talk to them about anything.
00:05:36.640
Just anything. All right. So a tweet that got me thinking, maybe it'll get you thinking too.
00:05:47.000
It's just a user on Twitter named Riald, or at least that's the username. And Riald said,
00:05:55.440
I'm telling you, when men get defensive, whatever you accuse them of, you are right.
00:06:01.540
And it makes me wonder, how does Riald think men act when they're falsely accused?
00:06:12.340
If there are any men here, can you answer this question? When you are falsely accused of
00:06:17.520
something, and let's say it's something important, important enough for somebody in your life to
00:06:22.700
bring it up. When you're falsely accused of something, what's the best play there?
00:06:28.460
Are you supposed to act offensive? Or are you supposed to act defensive?
00:06:35.420
Because I feel like there's a little bit of a trap you've set here, Riald,
00:06:40.040
which is, it's very convenient that when you accuse somebody of something,
00:06:45.540
you can know that they're guilty by them defending themselves.
00:06:50.800
So somebody says, I hit back hard. Well, I'm sure that's worked really well for you.
00:06:58.460
I know what you're saying, that some people hit back hard because you just feel like you want to
00:07:04.020
or you have to, but you can't tell me it worked. I'm sure it didn't work.
00:07:08.200
And so this brings up a larger question, which is when one person accuses another of projecting,
00:07:18.280
meaning, hey, you're blaming me of the thing you're doing. How do you know which one is right?
00:07:24.280
So you got two people who both think the other one is doing the only crime and is projecting it on the
00:07:31.040
other. And the other thinks exactly the same thing, but in reverse. No, I think you're doing the only
00:07:36.760
crime. I'm not doing anything, but you're projecting on me. Have you been in that situation
00:07:42.140
where you both think you're projecting and you both think you're innocent, but the other one is
00:07:46.840
definitely guilty? How do you sort it out? How can you tell which one of you, how do you know which
00:07:56.560
one of you is projecting? Would you like a way to do it? Let me give you a way to do it. Okay.
00:08:05.680
If somebody is innocent of a thing and you say, hey, I think you're projecting on me because that's
00:08:12.960
actually your crime. And let's say it's not. What would somebody say if you falsely accuse them of
00:08:21.180
projecting? Well, I think they'd say something like, well, what do you mean? Or make your case.
00:08:29.000
Or can you give me an example? How exactly? What did I do? Give me some details. That would be one
00:08:36.520
way person could react if you say, I think you're projecting, but you're guilty of that crime. Here's
00:08:42.180
another way. Go nuts. They go really nuts and they won't talk to you for the rest of the night.
00:08:47.660
Which one is projecting? One of them says, I don't know what you're talking about. I don't think
00:08:53.940
I'm projecting. Give me an example of that. Can you give me some details? That's one person. And
00:09:00.260
the other one is like, I knew you wouldn't be honest. You're doing it again. I'm not going to
00:09:05.980
talk to you for the rest of today. Which one's projecting? Yeah, it's easy. Now, you'll never
00:09:12.780
convince the other person they're projecting, but they know it because that's why they exited the
00:09:18.060
conversation. So when somebody gets too mad to talk to you and exits the conversation,
00:09:23.780
it's because they know they can't prevail based on the facts. So if you're wondering if you're crazy,
00:09:31.460
that's how you know. If you're willing to talk about it, you're not the crazy one. If the other
00:09:37.320
one says, I'm not even going to talk about it. I'm really mad at you. And by the way, you did
00:09:41.740
something terrible last year. You know who's projecting. So use that tip. The only good it
00:09:49.340
will do you is at least you'll know which one is projecting. It won't solve the problem. Because
00:09:55.100
the projector is still mad at you. And it's going to be mad at you tomorrow. But at least you'll know
00:10:00.180
which one is the crazy one. And that's worth something. All right. So Joe Biden has once again
00:10:08.520
crossed the creepy line. So hashtag creepy Joe is is is is trending again today. So this is what he
00:10:17.860
actually said. If you haven't seen the video, you have to see the video because I'm not going to be
00:10:22.660
able to to do it any any justice. Somebody said I look stoned. I think maybe I always look stoned,
00:10:31.380
but I'm rarely stoned at this time in the morning. Later. Sure. But at the moment, not.
00:10:39.020
So this is what Joe Biden said. He was he looked at a girl in the audience. And somehow this makes it
00:10:46.800
worse. It was a daughter of a veteran. And he said, quote, I love those barrettes in your hair. Man,
00:10:54.760
I'll tell you what, look at her. She looks like she's 19 years old, sitting there like a little
00:11:00.380
lady with her legs crossed. Now, I didn't see a picture of the person in question. They just showed
00:11:08.860
a, you know, close up on Biden when he was talking. So I don't know how old she is. And I think it
00:11:14.780
matters, doesn't it? It matters a little bit how old she is. It's bad no matter what, but how you
00:11:21.520
how you filtered it would depend a little bit on what she looked like. And it's all bad. So,
00:11:28.520
you know, how she looks isn't going to make it good. But it's part of the story. And it feels like
00:11:33.660
feels like we should have that information. And here's the thing.
00:11:45.360
Somebody in the comments is saying that maybe she was nine or 10. She was 11. Somebody says,
00:11:51.520
okay, I guess we don't know. But that's not terribly important to my point. My point is that,
00:11:57.520
you know, this doesn't mean that he's a pervert or something. I mean, we can't really go all the
00:12:04.680
way there. But man is creepy. It's definitely creepy. And he had to have been warned, don't talk like
00:12:12.980
that in public anymore. But, but he went there. So I'm just wondering how, I'm wondering how Democrats
00:12:24.660
who supported him are feeling about him now. You still feeling good? Did you get exactly what you
00:12:32.640
wanted there? I'm glad they don't have Trump with all of his accusations and such. But they've got
00:12:39.600
this instead. Chuck Schumer is mad at the GOP. That's new. He says, shame on the GOP. Because
00:12:49.340
they, they killed a bill, the Senate Republicans did, to create a Capitol riot commission.
00:12:57.420
Despite some of the Republicans voting with the Democrats didn't get enough votes to overcome the
00:13:03.080
filibuster. So that's not going to happen. Now, does it really matter? Well, I suppose they would
00:13:09.680
have preferred having a commission. But they also get credit for trying to have a commission and then
00:13:15.640
having the Republicans turn it down. So they get the issue either way. In terms of persuasion,
00:13:21.300
I would say that the Democrats get the win. I give the Democrats the win on persuasion. Because
00:13:28.100
whether they got that commission, which would have been really good persuasion, or it got turned down
00:13:33.020
by Republicans, that's still good persuasion. You have, you have either the change or the issue.
00:13:39.760
So it was a win-win scenario for the Democrats. They took the lesser win. They didn't get the
00:13:45.620
commission. But it's still a win. So good play by the Democrats. Whether you think that's ethical
00:13:53.960
or not, you can decide. But in terms of technique, it was pretty solid.
00:14:00.940
Brouche says, would you consider reading super chats aloud at the end of the streams or gather
00:14:06.120
them to, well, I don't know that there's an easy way to find them at the end of the streams.
00:14:10.040
One of the problems with this model is if I'm looking at my notes or trying to keep my thoughts
00:14:17.300
together, and a super chat goes by, it's kind of hard to divert. So I do the best I can. So all I
00:14:24.680
can promise you on the super chats is they are more noticeable. That's all I can tell you. Beyond that,
00:14:30.280
I don't want to commit because it wouldn't be fair to the rest of the listeners.
00:14:33.320
So there's a new study, and I don't think any of these studies should be considered
00:14:40.460
conclusive, maybe not even persuasive, because science flails around until it narrows in on
00:14:50.280
the truth. We don't know if it's flailing or narrowing at this point. But there's a new study
00:14:55.520
that says there's no credible natural ancestor to the COVID virus, meaning it just doesn't look like
00:15:01.600
it came from anything natural. But there's an allegation that the Chinese scientists tried to
00:15:08.820
cover their tracks with what's called retroengineering to make it look like it evolved or
00:15:14.840
came about naturally. I don't know how you prove any of that stuff. And if you could prove this stuff,
00:15:23.000
why didn't anybody say this earlier? You know, why was it a year ago that you couldn't even say this
00:15:29.460
in the news? Was it just because the news was blocking it? Because in person, I did talk to
00:15:35.880
people who said it all the time. A year ago, privately, the smartest people I knew were saying,
00:15:43.320
oh yeah, you could totally modify virus and make it look like admin modified. You could totally do that.
00:15:48.300
So now we're just being surprised that maybe it's possible. We still don't know if it was
00:15:56.600
modified. But certainly, if you're just calculating the odds, if you didn't know anything except what
00:16:03.900
we know at the moment, you'd have to say that the odds are exceedingly strong in favor of the
00:16:11.580
accidental release from the lab. No evidence of an intentional release. I think that's still crazy talk.
00:16:18.300
But certainly, coincidentally, having a lab exactly where it released would be too much of a stretch
00:16:26.340
for me anyway. All right. So here are some things we know about Republicans, according to some recent
00:16:35.780
polls. I was reading an opinion piece on CNN by Frida Guitas. And apparently, a majority of Republicans,
00:16:45.080
61 percent, depending on what poll you're looking at, but a majority, believe the election was stolen
00:16:51.500
from Trump. And CNN, of course, reports this as, my goodness, how dumb those Republicans are.
00:17:00.740
How dumb they are. 61 percent of them think that the election was stolen. Oh, how dumb they are.
00:17:10.540
But they didn't ask them, is there proof? If they had said, is there already proof
00:17:19.400
that the election was stolen? Well, I think you'd get a different answer. But don't you think that
00:17:25.680
people are saying, in this situation, you should just assume it was stolen? I figure it's just an
00:17:32.460
assumption. Because if you have a situation in which something can be stolen, why wouldn't it be
00:17:40.460
if it can be? If you leave your door unlocked in a bad neighborhood long enough, can't you assume
00:17:47.700
you're going to get robbed? You just don't know if it happened already, or if it's going to happen
00:17:52.720
when you go home at night and you discover it. But you don't have to wonder if your home will be robbed,
00:18:00.400
right? Let's make it more obvious. You live in a dangerous neighborhood and you leave your car
00:18:06.200
unlocked and the windows down. And you leave some valuables in your car. Do you have to see the proof
00:18:13.840
that your stuff got stolen? No. You could just go to work. You don't need any proof. Your stuff got
00:18:21.400
stolen. Because it's parked in a bad neighborhood with valuables on the seat and all the windows are
00:18:28.760
open. And nobody's around watching it. You don't really need proof. You just need to know that that
00:18:35.440
was the setup. And then you know what happened. If an election involves electronic devices, have the
00:18:43.320
electronic devices been hacked? There's no evidence of that. No evidence. Have they been hacked? Remember,
00:18:50.840
there's no evidence. What would you say about could the machines have been hacked given that
00:18:57.520
there's no evidence? Probably. Either they have been or they will be. Because it's just like the car with
00:19:06.120
the valuables on the seat and all the windows open. You don't have to wonder if it will happen. That's off the
00:19:13.540
table. If is off the table. It's only when. When is still a good question. Has it happened already? Or is it in our
00:19:23.560
future? But if is just off the table. If you're a smart person. Nobody smart thinks that if is the right
00:19:33.100
question. Nobody. I'll say it again. Nobody smart. Nobody. Zero people who are smart thinks that it's
00:19:42.940
not going to happen eventually or has already happened. Nobody. You can't find me one smart
00:19:48.060
person who thinks that it won't happen or hasn't happened. One or the other. It's a pretty big claim,
00:19:56.060
right? In person, nobody will disagree with that. Maybe on Twitter, somebody will disagree. But in
00:20:04.180
person? In person, nobody will disagree with that. Who's smart? All right. There's a, let's see,
00:20:12.080
another poll. There's something like 23% of Republicans believe in the QAnon, what CNN calls
00:20:19.820
mythology. That, quote, the government, media, and financial worlds in the U.S. are controlled by a
00:20:25.640
group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles. Well, what do you mean by controlled? Maybe that's the key
00:20:39.440
word. Because you can't, you certainly can't say that there are no pedophiles in power. That's
00:20:47.120
obviously not true. But we don't know if they have enough power. We don't really know if they're Satan
00:20:52.160
worshipping. But certainly there's at least a sprinkling of them. We don't know if they're in
00:20:56.760
control. But this is used as part of an argument by Frieda that the Republicans are forming sort of a
00:21:04.700
human bomb, meaning that if 61% believe the election is stolen and, you know, 23% believe that the Satan
00:21:14.680
worshipping pedophiles are running the country. And, you know, it's just like a time bomb waiting to go
00:21:23.260
off. And then the third piece of evidence that Frieda gives, and this is the fun part. Are you ready for
00:21:29.480
the fun part? I was holding out on you for the fun part. She's concerned that on top of this QAnon
00:21:36.760
belief and on top of the belief of the big lie, as they call it, that the election was stolen,
00:21:41.360
on top of all that, which is bad enough, it's like a powder keg. There's some suggestion that
00:21:48.780
the Democrats are similar to Nazis. And she's worried that if Democrats are unfairly being
00:21:57.500
compared to Nazis, on top of these other two beliefs from Republicans, that that's a time bomb.
00:22:04.260
Now, has anything made you more happy today than knowing that Democrats are concerned because
00:22:13.320
Republicans are unfairly comparing them to Nazis? Has anybody ever done that before? I've heard of it.
00:22:23.560
Is it a thing? I believe that people have compared people to Nazis before. I feel as if that may have
00:22:31.780
happened. Oh, yeah. Four years straight, plus every Republican president ever. And so now the Democrats
00:22:40.640
don't like this being compared to Nazis business. Hmm. Hmm. Now, I would tell you my personal assessment
00:22:48.880
of the risk. Close to zero. Close to zero. If you look at the Capitol protests, riots, whatever you want
00:22:59.200
to call them. If you look at the Capitol situation, that doesn't tell you that things are ready to
00:23:05.400
erupt. Tells you the opposite. If that group had gone there heavily armed, well, I would be just as
00:23:13.500
worried as everybody else on the Democratic side. I'd be really worried about that. But the fact that
00:23:18.840
they were aggressively unarmed, I mean, aggressively unarmed, at least in terms of, you know, serious
00:23:26.240
weapons, or didn't use them if they had them, it really tells you what the intention was. The
00:23:32.700
intention was speech. Clearly, the intention was speech to make their feelings known. And then they
00:23:41.360
did. Now, turning this into, you know, an insurrection and trying to put them all in jail, of course,
00:23:47.000
is a Democrat unethical dirty trick, but seems to be working for them. So I tweeted this morning that
00:23:55.600
critical race theory is racist, because in lots of reasons, but in one particular reason that it
00:24:02.260
marginalizes poor white kids. Because imagine being a poor white kid, and you go to school and learn that
00:24:09.940
you're part of the oppressors. Not only did you not get any money out of slavery, apparently your
00:24:17.280
family did not make and keep their family fortunes from all that slavery oppression money that they
00:24:23.580
made, because they were white. And they were born into a poor situation, but they're being called the
00:24:30.800
oppressor. Yeah, it's a double FU. It's a double FU. And
00:24:37.440
can somebody do a fact check on this for me? I need a fact check. Because I feel like this might
00:24:44.880
be like a racist data point, and not real. But I want somebody to check this out for me. Is it true
00:24:52.680
or not true that black women, specifically women, are doing better than white men at the moment? Just
00:25:02.600
recently in the last few years. Is that true? Because I think that they're doing better in
00:25:07.960
terms of average pay for starting salary, right? I believe a black woman being hired into, let's say,
00:25:16.200
a corporation, on average makes more money than a white man. I'm seeing the truths, and I'm seeing
00:25:24.160
false. It's something I've seen, but I don't have it in front of me as a fact. Somebody says,
00:25:29.380
I doubt it, look it up. Those of you who say, I doubt it, look it up. Now, I think the reason is
00:25:39.580
quite obvious. Because the corporations get a twofer, right? Because the corporations want to hire more
00:25:47.340
women. They want to hire more minorities. If you find a qualified woman who is also a minority,
00:25:53.720
her value is going to be pretty high. She's going to have three job offers. You're going to have to
00:26:00.500
offer a little bit more to get it and solve two of your problems, your misogyny problem and your racist
00:26:06.220
problem. So it makes sense, like everything I know about economics, supply and demand, right?
00:26:13.720
What is the greatest demand type? The greatest demand type for labor is a black woman.
00:26:21.420
Am I wrong? If you're a corporation, and you're trying to do the right thing, you're trying to have
00:26:28.820
more diversity in every way, both in gender and in ethnicity, isn't a black woman the highest demand?
00:26:37.400
Now, I'm not making a joke. There's no hyperbole here. Just straight economics. Straight economics.
00:26:43.560
And yeah, and if that woman had been part of the LGBTQ community in any way, well, that's a threefer.
00:26:54.400
A threefer is rare. So don't you have to pay more for a threefer? You do, right? Because that's how
00:27:00.580
economics works. You pay for rarity. So do me a fact check on this, but I wondered how critical race
00:27:09.040
theory would explain if it's true, because I'll need the fact check. But I think it's true that at
00:27:14.920
least for beginning salaries, just recently, last few years, that black women with equal education,
00:27:23.380
et cetera, are higher paid than white men. I don't know for sure, but I think that's true.
00:27:28.980
I did a little narcissism test. And man, is this fun. Once you know how it works, it takes the most
00:27:39.160
frustrating thing in the world and turns it into just sort of a hobby. And one of my hobbies is
00:27:47.540
identifying narcissists by their tweets. And here's how you do it. So I tweeted this, and I'll tell you
00:27:55.060
the trick. I started out by saying, I like the idea of accurate history lessons. All right, that's the
00:28:00.640
part I'll talk about later. I like the idea of accurate history lessons. It's the first thing I
00:28:05.540
say. I like accurate history. But can someone show me an argument for how critical race theory
00:28:13.560
is supposed to make things better in the future? I only see generalities such as, quote,
00:28:21.060
helping kids be prepared for racism. So what do you think I accurately predicted would be the response
00:28:30.620
to that tweet? The response was, why don't you like accurate history, racist? My first sentence was,
00:28:40.300
I like the idea of accurate history lessons. People who are not narcissists will read this and they'll say,
00:28:48.280
okay, yeah, I guess we all like accurate history. So we're good so far. And then they'll look at the
00:28:54.080
rest of the point. A narcissist won't be able to see the first sentence. Like actually, they won't be
00:29:01.860
able to see it. It's like it wasn't even there. So they won't see the part where I like the idea of
00:29:06.680
accurate history. And then they attack me. Oh, you're racist. Yeah, let's hide history. Let's not tell
00:29:12.600
anybody about slavery. So those are the ones that I used to think were just some kind of weird paid
00:29:19.320
troll. But now that I know that narcissism is an actual constellation of behaviors, once you see
00:29:26.540
this behavior, you go, oh, it's one of those. Now, it could be cognitive dissonance. But within the
00:29:33.760
narcissist world, that happens regularly. So the narcissist is triggered into cognitive dissonance
00:29:40.320
just all the time. It's nonstop. That their whole world is a series of cognitive dissonance.
00:29:46.480
Maybe it's not true for all of us, but a little extra for that group. So when the peacocks come out,
00:29:55.820
and this is the other word I wanted to teach you about, when I call these people peacocks,
00:30:02.080
it works way better than saying somebody is a vulnerable narcissist. Because nobody knows what
00:30:10.520
that is. Well, 2% of you know what it is. But if you call somebody a narcissist, they just argue that
00:30:18.400
they're not. And they're not even sure what it is. And maybe your definition isn't the same as theirs.
00:30:22.980
No value whatsoever. Compare that to calling somebody a peacock. See? Have I taught you that
00:30:32.260
visual persuasion is the best? Yes, I have. Besides fear. Fear is always the best persuader,
00:30:39.400
but unethical in many cases. But peacock, you see it, right? And it's a ridiculous bird,
00:30:45.940
and it's just showing off. That's what the narcissist is. The narcissist only comes into
00:30:53.060
comment to make you look worse so that they'll look better. It's a low self-esteem play. And if
00:31:00.380
somebody comes in and says some insult to you generally, without any specifics about why you're
00:31:07.860
wrong, and they say, well, you know, you racist piece of crap, of course you'd think we shouldn't
00:31:13.200
teach history, that's a narcissist. But don't call them a narcissist. Thank them and call them a
00:31:21.000
peacock. So I like to say, thank you, peacock. We all see how amazing you are. Run along.
00:31:29.620
So the peacock wants to be recognized as amazing. Somebody who has better thinking skills than you
00:31:36.360
do. Somebody who has higher ethical consideration than you do. Somebody who is more generous than you
00:31:42.380
are. So instead of fighting with them, which just gives them fuel, you just say, thank you, peacock.
00:31:49.340
You are quite awesome, and we all know it. My experience is that they go away immediately.
00:31:58.180
They just go away immediately. All right. Here is an explanation that I saw on, I think it was on
00:32:06.780
CNN in an opinion piece. No, it was not on CNN. So it was one of the founders of critical race theory
00:32:13.800
way back in the 80s, was explaining its value. And here is the explanation. Kids of color need honest
00:32:21.460
information about society as much as white kids do. So they're prepared to deal with racism,
00:32:27.540
Feigen said. We are founded on racial oppression. Where I start with this is concrete history. I don't
00:32:35.640
even bring in concepts. So the point of it is that kids of color need honest information about society
00:32:44.120
as much as white kids do. Was anybody arguing about that? Do you remember anybody being on the other
00:32:50.440
side of that? Did somebody argue that, no, no, we want to teach the good history to the white kids,
00:32:55.580
but we don't need any honest history for black kids or people of color? Whoever said that. So I don't
00:33:03.280
know who she's arguing with, because I'm pretty sure everybody likes accurate history. And then the
00:33:11.260
fact that we are founded on racial oppression, I take that as, you know, that's honest enough. Sure.
00:33:16.960
Thank you. How does it prepare you? How does it prepare somebody?
00:33:25.240
Like, what do you do? So let's say you're a black kid, and you learn your history according to
00:33:32.180
critical race theory. You know, so now you understand why everything is the way it is.
00:33:37.780
Now what? And so you do what? The obvious implication is what?
00:33:50.600
History is great, but what's the point of it? Well, this is where we get into Marxism. Are you ready?
00:33:58.900
Let me give you my persuasion tip for the day for Republicans. What do you hear Republicans say
00:34:05.640
when they're criticizing Black Lives Matter, or they're criticizing critical race theory?
00:34:11.420
What do Republicans like to say? It's Marxist. It's Marxist. It's Marxist. Is that good persuasion?
00:34:23.060
Do you think that anybody's hearing that and saying, oh, I didn't know it was Marxist. I changed my mind.
00:34:28.360
No persuasion value. Calling it Marxist, and here it doesn't matter if it's true or not true or a
00:34:37.860
little true. It doesn't matter. It has no, no persuasive value. It's completely empty. There's
00:34:45.040
nothing there. It's just a word. You've actually wasted your time and other people's time by even
00:34:51.140
using it. There's just no point to it. So if you wanted to be persuasive without using that word that
00:34:59.440
just doesn't have any persuasive power, primarily because most of the public doesn't know what to do
00:35:04.700
with it. Like, I actually looked it up this morning because I wanted to see if I was missing something.
00:35:11.880
Like, is there more in the definition than I'm aware of? It turns out there wasn't. And so I was
00:35:17.560
confused too. Like, why is it Marxist? Have I ever told you that explaining to somebody a concept
00:35:26.360
doesn't ever persuade anybody? Concepts just don't persuade. Unless somebody is sort of already to
00:35:35.600
be persuaded and then they just need a reason, and then yes. But if somebody's on completely the other
00:35:41.260
side, explaining a complicated concept doesn't convince anybody of anything. You need a fear,
00:35:50.040
you need a picture, you need something simple that you can repeat, something that sticks in the mind.
00:35:55.940
Those are all the things that persuade people and more. But a concept with a word you don't understand
00:36:01.840
necessarily? Nobody. Nobody's ever been persuaded by that. So if you wanted to make this persuasive,
00:36:09.540
then you have to connect it. Where is Marxism connected to critical race theory? The best I
00:36:16.680
know of, and this is my interpretation, maybe I'm missing something big here, is that critical race
00:36:22.640
theory would make people feel guilty. And they would operate on their guilt to try to move resources from
00:36:30.760
the people who have them to the people who have less of them. Is that what it is? Is it only about guilt
00:36:37.100
and getting rid of money from rich people? I don't know. If the point of it is that you're saying,
00:36:45.200
hey, critical race theory is just a scheme, and the real payoff is socialism, and Marxism,
00:36:53.120
socialism, using them kind of similarly. If that's what you think the scheme is, and I'm not sure I think
00:37:01.480
that, yeah, I'm not convinced that's a scheme, but you could imagine that it would help to build guilt
00:37:08.980
so you could ask for reparations, to build guilt so you could have some special laws or something.
00:37:16.000
But I would say that it's based on guilt. So CRT is specifically a guilt strategy, and I think we
00:37:24.440
should call it that. It's a guilt strategy for the purpose of moving resources. How's that? Would
00:37:34.300
everybody understand the CRT critical race theory? Its purpose is to make you feel guilty if you have
00:37:41.320
resources, so that you're more likely to put those resources in their direction. Right? But at least
00:37:49.040
that's easy to explain. There's no hard concepts there. Guilt, therefore you better do something
00:37:54.720
for me. One word, guilt. Now, how many people, if you were to talk to them privately, just one-on-one,
00:38:02.900
nobody's listening, how many of those people would say, you know, we should build a system that's based
00:38:08.500
on guilt, like feeling bad? Who would think that would be a good idea? Versus, let's say, building a
00:38:15.800
system based on competition, based on how hard you work, based on doing the right stuff, going to
00:38:23.060
school. Wow. Per Anders says, critical race theory is Marxist, a subgroup of critical thinking. All right,
00:38:32.680
so far that's just a concept, so let's get to the good stuff. Check the Frankfurt School, you're making
00:38:38.060
it worse. The whole idea is to entice and to destroy the current system, not to make it better. Okay, I agree
00:38:43.880
with all of that you said, but when you're talking about persuasion, don't tell people to check out
00:38:49.880
the Frankfurt School, because they just won't. And the few who do are not the ones who are going to
00:38:56.120
be moved by animal spirits and guilt and feelings anyway. So just in terms of, and by the way, thank
00:39:03.780
you for that. That was way too generous. I would have read your tweet for 10% of that, but I appreciate
00:39:10.200
it. Or would have read your comment. So let's call it guilt. And it's a system based on guilt. And I
00:39:18.940
don't think there's anybody in the world who thinks that's a good idea, privately. It's good for the
00:39:24.900
leaders, probably. All right. And Ruben Gao on Twitter summarized it this way, said, critical race
00:39:36.940
theory is a wealth transfer device that uses guilt and envy to benefit one group over another. So
00:39:43.360
that's what it is. It's a wealth transfer system based on guilt. Now, we probably have a lot of
00:39:50.940
systems that are based on guilt. But I think we have to, and somebody says power, everything is about
00:39:57.600
power. Everything. Everything's about power. So sometimes saying it's about power doesn't get you to
00:40:05.040
any insight. Because it's about power. Everything. All right. So I wouldn't use that word Marxist if you
00:40:12.700
can use guilt and envy or real words. And that will make things fair. All right. Same as PETA accusing
00:40:26.740
you of guilt. So does PETA use guilt as their primary thing? I don't know. I don't feel like PETA
00:40:35.840
uses guilt. I think PETA wants to make you feel bad about hurting animals. But is that guilt exactly?
00:40:47.340
Or is it just feeling bad? I don't know. I'm not sure that's exactly guilt. But it's in the neighborhood.
00:40:53.340
Good. So do you think that you should ever make decisions based on shame or guilt?
00:41:03.060
Let's say in your personal life, if somebody says you did X, you know, years ago or whatever,
00:41:10.080
do you think you should make your decisions today based on that bad thing you did years ago?
00:41:15.120
Well, you could. Maybe it'd make you feel better. But it's a bad strategy. How about a strategy that is
00:41:23.880
you do as well as you can without hurting anybody? And then once you've done as well as you can for
00:41:29.720
yourself without hurting anybody, then you get generous. How about that?
00:41:34.920
Um, who is that simple? I don't know what you're talking about. Um, yeah, feeling shame or guilt over
00:41:49.120
something you can't control is useless. What about people insisting on apologies after you've already
00:41:56.920
apologized once? What do you think of that? I feel as if, uh, apologizing has a real use. I mean,
00:42:04.440
it's a very powerful social tool. So apologizing needs to be a thing. But suppose somebody has
00:42:12.020
apologized. How much more do you need to beat them up after they've apologized? I'd say zero is the
00:42:19.040
right amount. I think you got to move on after that. Um, Laura says the worst thing the left has
00:42:30.300
done with this is destroying our ability to agree to disagree. And they've done this through social
00:42:35.520
media and their censorship. Yeah. Um, I don't know. It's just the left who's done that. I think it's
00:42:41.560
social media in general has just amped us up to the point where you can't even be in the same room
00:42:46.900
with somebody who, who disagrees with you. Let me ask you this, which, what is, if you were to make
00:42:54.200
a list of things that are, uh, sort of crazy, would Republicans or Democrats have a bigger list?
00:43:03.460
Because, you know, on the right, you'd have stuff like QAnon, but on the left, you'd have all kinds of
00:43:12.160
stuff, right? Um, apologizing just, just gives your opponents a club.
00:43:22.760
Apologizing once and doing it sort of in good form, you know, or a proper kind of apology,
00:43:29.220
a proper apology. Um, you say exactly what you did wrong in words that the person you're apologizing
00:43:38.580
to would understand to be accurate. You got to do that. It's not an apology unless you can state
00:43:44.420
it in your own words. In my opinion, it's not a proper apology. So you have to restate what you
00:43:49.000
did wrong, apologize, but then you need to be done. If, if you're being beat up forever over it,
00:43:58.240
and you've already apologized, and you've shown that there's no reason it would happen again,
00:44:02.080
uh, then it's just a power move. And at that point, you can stop being guilty.
00:44:11.560
Marusha says, mandatory CR training would give, the CRT training would give the right exactly what
00:44:16.320
they'd want, access to leftists. They'd be forced to hear arguments from the outside. Interesting.
00:44:23.560
So, but I don't know that critical race theory has any room for other opinions. My guess is that
00:44:30.200
once you get in that room, uh, you're not allowed to have a varied opinion.
00:44:42.200
Here's an interesting thought. That means I've got to go. Um, apologies are useless. If you gave a
00:44:49.020
damn, you wouldn't have done it in the first place. I don't think so. No, I think people can make
00:44:53.460
actually just mistakes. You know, your judgment is never always as good. Sometimes you're drunk
00:45:00.280
and horny and tired. People make lots of mistakes. You know, you, you, I think there is such a thing
00:45:06.360
as a genuine apology. I feel like I've given them. Uh, guilt and shame works for diet plans.
00:45:12.840
Uh, yeah, I think there's actually a role for guilt and shame. You just don't want to overdo it. All
00:45:23.420
right. I've got to go run and do something else and I will talk to you tomorrow.
00:45:27.580
Uh, yeah, I've got to go run and do something else. All right. We'll shut it down and do it.