The Critical Compass Podcast - This Week In Podcasts, Institutional Capture, Human Rights Tribunals ｜ A Critical Compass Discussion

00:00:00.000 In these cases, it feels like somebody sees an opportunity to take revenge,

00:00:04.940 and they're using the system to basically hurt somebody else that they felt offended them.

00:00:14.080 And if you're teaching people to be victims,

00:00:17.700 and if you're teaching people to view the world through these power dynamics,

00:00:21.860 and if you're giving them opportunities to assert power over somebody else with these kind of tribunals,

00:00:28.560 it's no surprise that people would jump on that, and I don't want to say harass,

00:00:35.180 but in some cases, it feels like individuals are being harassed for political views.

00:00:40.340 And welcome to the Critical Compass.

00:01:00.180 On this week's episode, we are going to talk about some of the regulatory abuse

00:01:05.520 in these professional organizations that issues licenses,

00:01:10.580 and how that affects free speech of individuals on and off of work.

00:01:17.900 But first, I think it's, I'm curious to hear, Mike, what have you watched this week?

00:01:24.720 What kind of podcasts or what have you stumbled upon?

00:01:28.340 So, hi, James.

00:01:31.600 This week, I've been, it's been a, it's been a Joe Rogan heavy week this week, actually.

00:01:37.500 I listened to the, just the other day, just finished the latest James Lindsay interview.

00:01:43.920 I think he was on in...

00:01:45.340 He's been on a few times now.

00:01:46.980 Yeah, yeah, a few times.

00:01:48.260 I can't remember the last time he was on by himself, or if he was on by himself before.

00:01:53.320 I know he was on with Bogosian once to talk about the Grievance Studies Affairs,

00:01:57.820 but this is the first time I've seen him on his own, and that was a really good couple hours.

00:02:03.980 And then also the Riley Gaines podcast, and I don't know if one or the other came out this week.

00:02:11.620 The other one has been for a couple weeks available, but...

00:02:15.200 I think that James Lindsay was the most recent.

00:02:18.040 Yeah.

00:02:19.300 Yeah, that was a good one.

00:02:20.280 He, they talked a lot about China.

00:02:24.160 Actually, James Lindsay is writing a book on Mao right now, and how, and the similarities

00:02:30.840 in the American, like what James, or what Christopher Ruffo would call the American Cultural Revolution

00:02:40.840 that's happening right now, and its similarities to Maoism.

00:02:44.300 That was really heavy and scary.

00:02:46.060 They talked about, well, just general, like, regulatory capture.

00:02:56.700 They talked about Boeing a lot at the end, the problems happening at Boeing.

00:02:59.700 This was just, I think the recording, I think it was maybe the same day they were recording

00:03:04.520 that, or just it was the day before, that that Boeing whistleblower...

00:03:09.620 Conveniently...

00:03:13.080 Suicided.

00:03:14.500 Conveniently suicided, yeah.

00:03:16.020 The day before. 0.91

00:03:17.140 Four shots to the back of the head or whatever.

00:03:19.060 I don't know what the actual method is going to be, but...

00:03:22.080 Yeah, any time there's a death right before a, like, testimony or hearing, that should be...

00:03:28.620 In a parking lot outside of a hotel.

00:03:30.960 Like, at least try and disguise it a little bit better, guys.

00:03:34.940 So, yeah, it was pretty...

00:03:38.540 It wasn't a very joyful listen, but it was informative nonetheless.

00:03:44.000 You listened to it too, I believe, right?

00:03:45.760 Yeah, I listened to it in a couple shots.

00:03:48.200 These long ones you can't quite do in one run, but...

00:03:52.780 It takes a few car rides for me, yeah.

00:03:54.960 Yeah, it expands on...

00:03:57.460 Like, he's...

00:03:59.140 I guess he touched a little bit on his new book,

00:04:01.920 The Queering of the American Child. 0.67

00:04:03.740 Right, yes.

00:04:05.800 So, that was good for him to expand on that.

00:04:08.120 And also, James Lindsay's really good at tying everything together.

00:04:14.760 He knows the...

00:04:16.040 He knows the...

00:04:17.460 The playbook so well.

00:04:21.140 Like, he's...

00:04:22.600 And he'll just quote...

00:04:24.940 The best way to unpack this is just, like,

00:04:27.780 He's quoting the neo-Marxists, their own literature,

00:04:32.660 To say, well, this is what they believe,

00:04:35.320 And this is what they're teaching.

00:04:36.840 And I think it's a really good way to fight this,

00:04:44.800 Is, like, you shine the mirror back at them,

00:04:47.960 And you just use their own words and their own ideas

00:04:51.360 To discredit themselves.

00:04:54.000 And with some...

00:04:54.620 Yeah, and people get really mad about that.

00:04:57.140 Well, that's why...

00:04:58.820 Just look at how much hate libs of TikTok gets. 0.93

00:05:03.760 And all that account does is just post ridiculous things.

00:05:08.840 Zero original content.

00:05:10.240 It's just...

00:05:10.960 It's purely repost.

00:05:12.580 Yeah.

00:05:15.020 Yeah, he was...

00:05:15.840 He's, um...

00:05:16.920 He's got a really...

00:05:17.920 Uh...

00:05:18.260 James Lindsay has a very...

00:05:20.040 Uh...

00:05:20.700 Like, an encyclopedic mind.

00:05:22.800 I don't know if that's what it's called.

00:05:24.100 But he, like...

00:05:25.000 He can recall quotes and authors and books and sources and essays,

00:05:30.100 Like, very, very quickly.

00:05:31.240 And he knows the literature inside and out.

00:05:34.120 He treats it like a math problem.

00:05:37.300 Yeah.

00:05:38.080 That's exactly right.

00:05:38.960 Well, I think...

00:05:39.960 I remember, um...

00:05:41.280 In his interview with...

00:05:42.580 Uh...

00:05:43.020 On Jordan Peterson's podcast.

00:05:44.540 It was...

00:05:44.940 That's still, to this day, one of my favorite podcast episodes ever.

00:05:48.060 It was so good.

00:05:49.520 Um...

00:05:50.720 He credits, uh...

00:05:52.060 Being, uh...

00:05:53.480 A math PhD with his ability to...

00:05:56.840 Transition that into this world of...

00:05:58.840 Huh.

00:05:59.120 Transition it.

00:06:00.520 Into this world of, uh...

00:06:02.720 Um...

00:06:04.220 DEI and modern, you know, social equity...

00:06:08.420 Uh...

00:06:08.740 Issues because he is able to logically kind of, like...

00:06:11.860 Parse the sources and try to grasp the logic, however faulty it may be, behind some of these actions.

00:06:18.720 And like you say, he's very good at tracing the sources of things and, uh...

00:06:22.920 Being able to, like...

00:06:26.480 It's...

00:06:27.160 It's actually wild how you don't...

00:06:29.220 You don't always put these things together, but he's a very, like, zoom out, big picture kind of guy.

00:06:33.740 And he can tell you, like, okay, well, the reason...

00:06:35.520 Like, this is the reason why Boeing is falling apart and it has to do with Mao.

00:06:41.480 And it's like, whoa!

00:06:43.060 How...

00:06:43.580 How did you get there?

00:06:44.920 But also, you're right, you know?

00:06:47.100 It's very, very strange.

00:06:49.380 But very cool.

00:06:51.360 And you also mentioned...

00:06:53.780 Uh...

00:06:54.260 So you...

00:06:54.980 That was one of the Rogan podcasts.

00:06:57.220 The other one was Riley Gaines.

00:07:00.360 Riley Gaines, the swimmer from...

00:07:02.780 The champion award...

00:07:05.220 Championship winning, award winning swimmer, who...

00:07:09.140 Keith Olbermann...

00:07:11.320 Had to share a...

00:07:12.380 Share a first place medal.

00:07:14.480 First place trophy.

00:07:15.640 Do you remember Keith Olbermann back when he was on TV?

00:07:18.420 When he was a...

00:07:19.420 He used to be a sports broadcaster and then he had a fairly short-lived MSNBC show before

00:07:24.600 he got shit-canned by MSNBC for making unlisted donations to Democratic politicians. 0.61

00:07:33.500 Anyway, he tried to boom her on Twitter and claim that, you know, she was only speaking 0.98

00:07:41.160 out the way she was because she was like, she never accomplished anything and she was

00:07:44.300 bitter about her lack of swimming accolades.

00:07:47.740 Meanwhile, she's like...

00:07:49.300 I haven't seen the video.

00:07:50.240 She talks about it in the Rogan interview that she's like...

00:07:53.200 She just like has a room full of trophies and she was showing Keith Olbermann all these

00:07:57.860 trophies of stuff that she's won.

00:07:59.740 She broke one, apparently, in the process of doing it.

00:08:01.980 And she was like, whatever.

00:08:03.800 I don't even care.

00:08:04.880 I got more where that came from.

00:08:07.400 Yeah, she's worked hard.

00:08:10.900 Yes.

00:08:11.460 Yeah.

00:08:11.680 She's worked hard for what she has.

00:08:13.140 And she's very outspoken about protecting women's spaces in athletic competition because she's 0.94

00:08:20.800 unfortunately lost out on trophies and on, you know, having her name properly where it

00:08:28.200 should be because of...

00:08:29.960 Well, primarily because of Leah Thomas, but also other transgender athletes. 0.96

00:08:34.240 So, yeah, that was a really good one.

00:08:37.120 She's very well-spoken.

00:08:38.000 I think she's quite young, but she's very articulate and precise for her young years,

00:08:43.340 you know?

00:08:44.320 Yeah.

00:08:44.660 And I think it sometimes takes some of these individuals with principles with low agreeableness

00:08:52.980 to take a stand and say, this is not okay.

00:08:56.760 And I think Bradley Gaines is a good example because it does dovetail into some of the things

00:09:04.960 that are happening in Canada.

00:09:06.360 And this whole idea of, like, the reason why we have sex-segregated spaces is to protect

00:09:13.420 women, is to give them either a fair chance to compete. 1.00

00:09:19.920 So, historically, there was no women's leagues for many sports. 0.76

00:09:26.580 It was just the sport.

00:09:28.980 And the fact that men were taller, stronger, faster just meant that they were dominating

00:09:34.200 in every category.

00:09:37.500 So, that's why you would segregate and have a women's only, like, a female-only category.

00:09:44.300 To kind of dovetail this, there's been an ongoing case with a nurse in BC called Amy Ham.

00:09:56.060 And she was outspoken for a few years, even, I think, all the way to, like, 2016, fighting

00:10:07.220 for female, dedicated female spaces, and kind of, she should be one of the gender-critical 1.00

00:10:16.820 feminists. 0.94

00:10:17.660 I think that's one of her, like, self-described labels in that way.

00:10:23.500 Okay.

00:10:24.660 And very much speaking out against trans people invading female spaces. 0.97

00:10:32.360 She wanted a clear line there.

00:10:35.840 Okay.

00:10:37.220 What happened in 2020 is she helped fund a billboard that says, I heart JK Rowling.

00:10:45.400 And shortly thereafter, she had two complaints that went to the College of Nurses. 0.90

00:10:50.960 So, maybe I'll just pull this up.

00:10:56.440 JK Rowling, of course, the famed, internationally known transphobe.

00:11:02.840 Not known for anything else.

00:11:05.000 Yeah.

00:11:05.260 The, sounds like she could be a writer, but I think she's well-known as a transphobe at 1.00

00:11:13.740 this point.

00:11:14.100 We can't prove it, though.

00:11:15.400 Yeah.

00:11:16.340 With that, like, this has been ongoing for almost four years now.

00:11:21.460 Um, and this is a, this is fascinating because this, this shows how much power these licensing

00:11:33.500 bodies have.

00:11:34.420 Like, you'll, you'll have, in this case, the, this is the, uh, British Columbia College of

00:11:40.100 Nurses and Midwives. 0.54

00:11:41.240 You also have the Board of Surgeons.

00:11:43.580 You also have any, in each, each different professions.

00:11:49.420 Uh, anytime you have a license, you will have a nun, usually a non-governmental body issuing 1.00

00:11:55.920 those licenses.

00:11:56.600 And they have a certain amount of power to regulate conduct at work.

00:12:02.440 And that makes sense because you want people to follow a code of conduct and make sure they're

00:12:07.900 not doing anything that may harm the people that they work with or that they are, if you're

00:12:14.980 a nurse, you want to make sure you are, um, caring for patients.

00:12:18.780 But what that doesn't cover, and this is kind of a unique case because it's covering, uh,

00:12:26.200 the free speech element and that's outside of work.

00:12:31.080 Uh, and it's quite rare for these kind of regulatory bodies to be trying to discipline people for

00:12:39.380 what they say when they're not working.

00:12:42.320 And, um, let me just, uh, let me just, uh, let me just, uh, let me just, uh, let's

00:12:48.780 show you a little bit of this, two complaints by members of the public to the college about

00:12:55.240 Mrs. Ham's involvement with the billboard led to an investigation that resulted in a 0.99

00:13:00.140 332 page report on Mrs. Ham's activity, including a collection of her tweets, podcasts, transcripts,

00:13:07.700 and articles she had authored on the topic of gender identity and its conflicts with women's 0.60

00:13:13.460 rights and the safeguarding of children.

00:13:15.340 Problem is, this is not a topic that has a unanimous, like, there, it's still very much in flux.

00:13:26.340 So the fact that they are pursuing this and they went deep, like, to make a 300 page

00:13:32.520 report on that, that is like, this very much feels like a, um, this is a witch hunt.

00:13:43.840 Bills that they, that they, that they pushed through in like American Congress.

00:13:47.760 That's like, they're so dense and heavy because they don't expect anyone to read them.

00:13:52.020 And what they're trying to actually do is like hide like bylaws and stuff in broader bills

00:13:58.660 and just hope that no one notices.

00:14:01.440 Yeah.

00:14:01.880 It's, it's, it's almost like, uh, it's feels like it's just overwhelming with like, oh, these

00:14:11.520 are all examples and you can have the most benign tweets in there and they're just trying

00:14:17.200 to see like, look how terrible this person is.

00:14:19.840 But a, an example of one of those tweets could be like a statement, like there are only two

00:14:26.780 biological sexes and something like that can be deemed as hateful, transphobic.

00:14:34.620 Like, like it depends on who is, yeah, really, really depends on who is on the board, who is

00:14:44.420 shining the spotlight and who is, um, who, who is deeming these, these hateful, uh, the fact

00:14:54.920 that it deals with the protected class means that like the, the bar, the bar for what Dean

00:15:03.740 would, what is considered hate speech is a lot lower now.

00:15:06.920 Um, so just as a little recap, um, this has been ongoing since 2020.

00:15:16.960 That's when I think it was November of 2020 was when, uh, Amy Ham got the letter from the

00:15:24.440 from the board, uh, and the complaints were from September and October, um, of 2020.

00:15:32.820 Uh, the hearing began in September 21st of 2022.

00:15:38.020 So it took two years for them to get to a point to actually start the days of testimony,

00:15:46.300 20 days of testimony.

00:15:48.560 And so as you can see, it very much feels like this is not a speedy process.

00:15:54.140 This, this is psychological torture and, uh, I must give credit for Amy Ham for like standing 1.00

00:15:59.260 her ground and like not saying, not caving to this.

00:16:04.300 I think a lot of people would just cave and apologize and just, they would want it to be

00:16:08.660 over and they would just give up with that amount of pressure.

00:16:14.920 Um, I want to point out a couple of these, uh, this is Mrs. Ham's lawyers arguing that

00:16:21.460 there is no evidence of a breach of standards or bylaws, um, that, well, she didn't behave 0.65

00:16:29.280 unprofessionally.

00:16:30.460 There's no evidence that she was a terrible nurse or that she was transphobic as a nurse.

00:16:35.500 This is all outside of work.

00:16:37.300 Uh, her statements do not have sufficient nexus.

00:16:39.920 There's status as a nurse to warrant any, any interference from the board.

00:16:45.940 Uh, her speech is reasonable, scientifically supported.

00:16:49.760 Uh, the issue with this is they tried to get a whole bunch of witnesses.

00:16:54.280 Um, and these are, I think one of them was even Miriam Grossman.

00:16:59.800 Um, and these are professionals in these fields, but they kept on discrediting or preventing

00:17:06.560 these witnesses from, from having testimonies.

00:17:09.700 So there's a big fight, I think part of the reason this got delayed is that they, there's

00:17:14.600 a lot of this, um, the, the procedural kind of back and forth and what they would allow

00:17:22.060 for evidence and not, et cetera.

00:17:25.020 Yeah.

00:17:25.540 I think it was very difficult to get any actual witnesses.

00:17:28.920 Um, they're claiming that there's, or lawyers are arguing that there's social value in speech

00:17:35.460 and considering that W path, um, the, like it's just the organization for transcend, gender

00:17:43.600 health has had some controversies and there's different laws around the world.

00:17:48.020 We're seeing a lot of change and this requires open, open dialogue.

00:17:52.540 Uh, so there is a lot of value, et cetera.

00:17:56.840 So yeah, the, the, does this seem like a fair use of a, of a, of a regulatory body?

00:18:07.700 Well, what a waste of resources and time.

00:18:09.820 Like it's just, well, it's not even, how nice is it that we have no other issues as a society

00:18:17.040 that we, that we get to spend multiple years wasting people's time on stuff like this.

00:18:22.760 Um, yeah, and today was the last, last day of testimony and the decision will be made

00:18:29.240 in three to six months, which will put it basically to the four year mark.

00:18:34.600 Yeah. 0.58

00:18:35.160 Um, which is completely ridiculous.

00:18:37.960 You could see, uh, maybe we'll share, there's a recap of some of the closing statements.

00:18:44.340 Um, and Lisa Bildy, um, she did a great job. 0.99

00:18:53.440 You can see some of her statements of like really getting to the core of why Amy Ham should

00:19:00.480 have a right to express her views and kind of how they're scientifically accurate, uh, other

00:19:05.220 based logic, um, how it's not transphobic.

00:19:08.800 Um, but it's also worth noting who the lawyer is that's, that's prosecuting Amy Ham.

00:19:21.460 Um, and this is Barbara.

00:19:26.820 She looks exactly like what I thought she would.

00:19:28.920 Yeah.

00:19:30.840 Barbara Findlay, an activist lawyer.

00:19:33.740 Um, so I, I think this is one more example of, of like what happens when you get people

00:19:45.600 who treat their role in either a HR board or a regulatory, uh, association or a lawyer, if

00:19:54.000 they treat their role as a force for social justice.

00:20:00.000 Um, and I see that right in the text, she describes herself as an activist.

00:20:07.460 Yeah.

00:20:08.100 The, uh, she, okay.

00:20:10.160 She describes herself as an activist. 0.88

00:20:12.560 Um, she literally describes herself as fat, old, white, cisgender, queer, and disabled.

00:20:19.360 So even based on that, we can predict her views on a dozen other subjects, just based on how

00:20:28.940 she's describing herself.

00:20:30.120 And she's very much describing her position within a hierarchy of oppression.

00:20:37.360 Yeah.

00:20:38.180 And whenever you have somebody who views themselves in, in that kind of power dynamic, it's no

00:20:46.060 surprise that they would react this way to anybody calling to question, um, the legitimacy of

00:20:54.980 somebody else's status in, in these oppression hierarchies.

00:20:59.200 Yeah.

00:21:00.680 Um, so yeah, there, this is a really good article.

00:21:04.460 We will link to it in, in the show notes and the description, but, um, yeah, it's fascinating

00:21:13.140 read and kind of shows to the extent that, uh, Finley would defend some people that maybe

00:21:23.220 are only being defended because of their, their social views, et cetera.

00:21:28.080 So this reminds me of one more, uh, podcast that I listened to this week.

00:21:33.680 It was, uh, and again, I don't know how recently it was, but it was, it was Jordan Peterson's

00:21:38.660 podcast where he interviews, I think the podcast was called, they took our daughter.

00:21:43.140 Something like that.

00:21:44.080 They took our child and he interviewed, I don't know if you've listened to this one,

00:21:47.800 but a little bit of that one, um, but interviews a couple that their, their daughter, uh, 14

00:21:54.300 years old has a history of being a, a storyteller, essentially a kind of an attention seeker.

00:22:03.640 Peterson didn't want to diagnose her on the air, but he said he knew exactly what she should

00:22:07.960 have been diagnosed with.

00:22:08.720 I think it would be something like, something like borderline personality disorder.

00:22:14.360 Um, how the family describes her is sort of jives with the, you know, the, the people

00:22:19.860 I've known in my life that have that diagnosis.

00:22:22.680 Um, just, you know, essentially inventing stories for attention and being quite codependent,

00:22:30.120 quite, um, but also quite distant and quickly switching between, you know, very, um, uh, I

00:22:38.520 think maybe the word is histrionic.

00:22:40.160 There's also histrionic personality disorder that might've been it, but anyway, um, the state

00:22:46.520 of Montana essentially stole this child from her family because of all along the chain

00:22:53.860 of the people that she, that she saw, um, were activist social workers, activist doctors,

00:23:01.560 activist nurse nurses, activist lawyers, activist judges.

00:23:05.200 Um, the, the family recalls that their own council had a hearing told them specifically

00:23:13.160 that in, in this, in their, in the council's words, um, this judge is going to put you in

00:23:19.580 your place because that's what she does. 1.00

00:23:22.760 And, uh, so yeah, it's, um, it's definitely, and probably James Lindsay actually has a lot

00:23:29.500 to say about this.

00:23:30.240 They may have touched on this actually in the Rogan interview about how this sort of institutional

00:23:34.720 capture just is stratified through basically every layer of, um, every institution in our

00:23:42.760 society right now.

00:23:44.020 Well, you start from the universities because in the university creates teachers, they create,

00:23:52.120 uh, the, the individuals that form HR departments, they form the lawyers and judges.

00:24:00.240 So if you can capture that, you've basically, you've transformed everything under that.

00:24:08.340 And that includes the way that children think that's the way that people are prosecuted and

00:24:16.360 people are treated in our legal systems are, are, are all going to be treated with a particular

00:24:22.100 social, like social justice lens.

00:24:24.380 So, uh, I think James Lindsay mentioned that by the nineties, and this is kind of, uh, by

00:24:32.840 the 1990s, there's been a certain amount of capture.

00:24:35.800 And this was even something that these activists were bragging about that, well, the, the, the

00:24:43.720 amount of influence they had even in the nineties, um, within the universities and within other

00:24:49.600 kind of other domains.

00:24:52.320 Yeah.

00:24:52.800 Um, and he talks about that, um, that former KGB, uh, agent that did that interview in

00:24:58.560 the, I don't know if it was the early eighties, maybe mid eighties, where he basically described

00:25:03.600 the same, the same phenomenon that like, this is the playbook, this is how you demoralize

00:25:08.100 a nation.

00:25:08.460 And this is what the KGB specifically had been working to implement in various, uh, enemy

00:25:15.940 states throughout the world.

00:25:16.940 So yeah, describe that it doesn't happen right away.

00:25:20.400 It takes multiple generations, but if you transform, if you capture the kids, if you plant

00:25:27.980 the seeds of these ideas within a few generations, you've overhauled a society.

00:25:36.000 So it's brilliant.

00:25:38.040 And it's deviousness.

00:25:39.840 Yeah.

00:25:40.440 I guess the, like to control the present, you would capture present institutions, but

00:25:46.160 to control the future, you would, you'd get the children.

00:25:49.180 So when their heads are nice and soft and that's what they, that's what he also, Lindsay

00:25:54.720 also talked about.

00:25:56.080 Um, he's talked about it at length in other interviews and in, in his writings, but, uh,

00:26:01.720 that's essentially what they did, uh, what Mao did in China with the, with the red guard.

00:26:06.660 And do you know what happened to the red guard after he gained power the second time?

00:26:14.020 Oh, sorry.

00:26:15.220 You're too radical. 0.87

00:26:16.640 You need, you need to be disposed of.

00:26:18.260 So the very young people that he used to overthrow the current, uh, leaders and power

00:26:23.760 structure to get himself inserted into it.

00:26:26.880 Well, as soon as they were done, as soon as that, that was achieved, they were of no

00:26:30.860 use to him and actually were a threat to him.

00:26:32.400 So he just disposed of them, which is what will happen now too.

00:26:34.880 To recap, um, to bring in a revolution, you need destabilizing forces, but after the change

00:26:42.500 is made, anybody part of destabilization is a threat because you don't want to destabilize

00:26:49.540 what, like once you've installed, you've built, yeah, that's right.

00:26:53.240 What you've built, yeah.

00:26:54.180 You just want to destabilize what came before you.

00:26:57.680 Yeah.

00:26:58.200 Yeah.

00:26:59.120 Yeah.

00:26:59.640 It's the fundamental, I remember, I can't remember who was talking about this, but, um, this

00:27:04.400 was another maybe podcast interview where they talked about the, like the fundamental

00:27:09.780 difference between progressives and conservatives and how can, like I, you know, growing up

00:27:17.420 as a young liberal in the city, uh, I always thought of, you know, the, the liberals as

00:27:23.260 the, you know, the, the hopeful, the, the ones who were changing the, you know, wanted to mold

00:27:28.580 a better future and, and conservatives as like stodgy old men in business suits who, you 0.54

00:27:33.640 know, wanted to, you know, preserve their wealth and not have it, you know, which, you

00:27:38.300 know, is a stereotype of maybe like, like early two thousands, mid two thousands neocons.

00:27:45.360 But, um, what this person was saying was that actually, if you think about it, a progressive

00:27:51.460 is actually never like by their very own definition of their politics.

00:27:55.000 They're never actually truly happy with the state of the world.

00:27:58.980 They're always wanting to change it and form it into something else because it's not sufficient.

00:28:03.340 It's not good the way it is.

00:28:04.680 It needs to be something else.

00:28:06.340 Whereas a conservative actually likes the current state of, you know, whatever particular area

00:28:11.540 of the world they're in and they want to conserve it because they see value in it.

00:28:15.080 So that kind of changed my opinion of what, what it means to be on either end of the political

00:28:20.520 spectrum.

00:28:20.940 And I kind of get, you know, you know, if you want to call it conservative, that you

00:28:25.580 want to preserve certain traditions and institutions that are in fact valuable and effective.

00:28:33.140 Well, if that's conservative, then that's, there isn't necessarily anything stodgy or, you

00:28:38.600 know, dusty and miserable about that.

00:28:41.960 That's actually quite positive.

00:28:43.280 Well, I believe, uh, Jordan Peterson's written about this a little bit and he's talked about

00:28:49.380 it as well, but, um, there's two ways that you can think about it is, um, you can think

00:28:55.040 of it on the political, like the social dynamic of the, there's a constant conversation between

00:29:02.700 like conservatism of wanting to preserve the structures that have built everything that

00:29:10.940 we have now and this kind of creative reforming energy that wants to think about, well, how

00:29:16.740 can we change this and how we, how can we, um, how can we make a different or better world?

00:29:24.380 But he also talks about that every liberal should strive to build a world worth conserving

00:29:30.900 because if you're always changing and you're always reforming and you have no stability, like

00:29:37.420 that's where things kind of fall apart.

00:29:39.360 If, if there's, if you're in a constant state of, um, like change, what's the difference

00:29:46.700 between just reform and progress and destabilization because that, that line gets very tricky at some

00:29:54.240 points.

00:29:55.040 And I think even that's on the societal level, but I think within our minds, um, you could

00:30:01.180 draw a parallel to, we've got established ways of thinking.

00:30:04.800 You have established ideas, you have habits, you have things that your brain wants to conserve

00:30:10.180 or a way of thinking that you want to conserve.

00:30:13.220 And then you have these new ideas, this creative element of thinking about, well, what can be

00:30:18.660 done differently?

00:30:19.200 And I think there's a push pull in every individual as well as on the societal level.

00:30:24.440 And I don't know if we give enough credit to like fostering.

00:30:28.980 How do you foster a healthy push pull between these two, between these two dynamics?

00:30:36.240 Yeah.

00:30:36.960 Yeah.

00:30:38.740 Yeah.

00:30:39.360 That's maybe a good topic for a, for a full length episode one day.

00:30:43.400 Yeah.

00:30:44.120 I would love to dive into that further, but I guess the, the pillar of this is having free

00:30:50.840 speech is what enables us to have that push pull.

00:30:55.380 Yeah.

00:30:56.640 But with cases like Amy Hams, even, even if the, even if she's completely, um, she comes 0.97

00:31:07.620 out of this and she gets an apology, et cetera.

00:31:11.620 I, I, even the painful nature of it taking four years can have a chilling effect on individuals

00:31:20.460 staying quiet and not wanting to speak up, um, uh, on threat of kind of having, having the

00:31:27.920 regulatory body diving and chasing them and giving them a hard time.

00:31:33.100 Well, especially anyone who, who belongs to any sort of professional association, which

00:31:37.520 have all been captured by these activists again, you know, who aren't, aren't doing what

00:31:44.800 their jobs are supposed to be, but they're, they're trying to use their, you know, little,

00:31:49.160 what do they call it?

00:31:50.380 Like, you know, um, that you're, uh, the king of a molehill or so you don't, you know what

00:31:57.140 I mean?

00:31:57.360 Like your, your own little private tiny kingdom.

00:31:59.520 They're trying to be, you know, trying to be world builders from a HR cubicle and it's

00:32:05.020 just ruining people's lives.

00:32:06.320 These are people who only view the world through power, asserting power in their small domain.

00:32:11.480 Yeah.

00:32:11.820 Um, and, and the, the problem is they, these regulatory bodies seem to speak quite confidently

00:32:22.580 on like, these are the guidelines we've set, or these are the things that are true.

00:32:28.160 And often they are just proclaimed to be true from some other authority.

00:32:35.660 Yeah.

00:32:36.220 You're supposed to just take them as self-evident though.

00:32:38.260 You saw this a lot in, uh, during, during COVID with the lockdowns and, um, all the recommendations

00:32:47.960 you have something mentioned by the who, and then that is adopted as like a legitimate truth.

00:32:55.060 And that is what was followed and disseminated down from there.

00:33:00.960 And then you couldn't argue against it because they say, well, this is what these, these guidelines

00:33:05.840 are, and then they would say, well, who are you to challenge this?

00:33:10.100 And in the cases of this, you had all kinds of scientists and researchers and doctors from

00:33:18.280 different disciplines disagreeing with this and being raked over the coals in various cases.

00:33:24.420 Perfect segue to our next topic, a Mr. Well, a Mrs. Kulvinder Kaur and a Mr. J. Badacharya and

00:33:35.120 his great Barrington declaration.

00:33:36.660 Correct.

00:33:37.440 Am I, am I on the right track, James?

00:33:39.160 Yes.

00:33:40.680 The, uh, so some of you may have seen Kulvinder, um, she on Twitter, just sharing.

00:33:50.180 She's very, she's very, during the lockdown, she was pretty much every day, just sharing

00:33:56.620 the information, what she could on trying to, trying to rebalance and get some sanity back

00:34:02.460 into the situation.

00:34:03.380 And she was, uh, speaking out very, very early.

00:34:06.820 And, uh, I'm going to play a little bit of this, this short clip.

00:34:12.420 Um, cause right now she is crowdfunding. 0.94

00:34:17.260 How much, what, what, where do you stand now?

00:34:20.880 I was, um, I've now been ordered to pay nearly $300,000, um, in the costs order.

00:34:27.120 Um, and I have, uh, mere weeks to pay.

00:34:30.840 So my deadline is at the end of March and, um, it's $300,000 that I don't have after, um,

00:34:37.940 nearly four years of being entangled in multiple legal battles, trying to, um, uh, advocate for

00:34:45.560 my patients, trying to advocate for Canadians and, um, and to try to advocate for myself.

00:34:51.180 And, and so, um, it's now looking quite, quite grim.

00:34:56.120 Um, so what, uh, what, what, what happens then?

00:34:59.080 I mean, I, you, if you can't pay the order, you probably have to declare bankruptcy.

00:35:03.000 I would think, um, what will that do to your ability to practice medicine?

00:35:06.740 What will that do to your ability to take care for your patients?

00:35:09.240 Um, it's, it's, it's all very daunting right now.

00:35:14.000 Um, and, and, uh, I never thought that, that this would be the cost of speaking truth.

00:35:19.440 Of, um, being compelled to speak my conscience, um, um, um, being compelled to speak against

00:35:29.400 the harms that I knew were going to happen against, um, uh, against the people or within

00:35:35.260 the very communities that I practice within the developing world where, where I initially

00:35:40.560 was born and still have very deep roots to, um.

00:35:44.100 Um, so yeah, right now she's on the hook for $300,000, um, and this is like her legal bills 0.99

00:35:52.980 or is this a, is this a penalty that she's been ordered to pay?

00:35:56.380 This is, um, I think these are, okay.

00:36:05.140 Uh, I won't just show this here.

00:36:09.780 Uh, pre-tribunal, sorry.

00:36:12.900 Pre-trial procedural ruling against her has led to a cost order of up to 1.2 million court.

00:36:20.120 Okay.

00:36:20.600 The court procedural motion decision and the cost order were both appealed ultimately leading

00:36:24.440 to cost order of nearly 300,000.

00:36:28.500 Yeah.

00:36:29.340 So this is just another example of this would fall into the category of lawfare of like

00:36:37.980 the, if not, even without these kind of fees, uh, for somebody to defend themselves, uh,

00:36:48.860 minimum, a small trial is like 15 grand, even on like some of these small, small court cases,

00:36:56.560 like you can spend a lot of money.

00:36:58.620 And some of these, they think about how many days, and if you have somebody on retainer

00:37:04.360 and like these costs can, can just destroy somebody's, they can destroy somebody's life.

00:37:13.480 Um, shout out to Conrad Graf with this thousand dollar donation.

00:37:17.360 Holy smokes.

00:37:17.940 Yeah.

00:37:18.420 I think they're, I think they're up to a hundred thousand right now.

00:37:22.340 Um, she is not the only one, um, being put into this kind of situation.

00:37:29.600 And these are for things that have later, uh, a lot of these cases, like speaking, speaking

00:37:37.140 out about lockdowns or giving exemptions for the COVID shots or any number of these things

00:37:43.480 at the time there, they were being punished for something at the time, which later the

00:37:48.840 evidence has changed.

00:37:50.340 So, yeah, some of these cases have been thrown out, but the people have been still left with

00:37:58.460 legal bills.

00:38:00.140 So it, any, any case where you have, like some of these are regulatory bodies, some of

00:38:07.200 these are against the government.

00:38:08.540 And anytime you're up against the government, even these regulatory bodies, they tend to

00:38:13.980 have a deep pocket of money set aside for legal, like their legal battles or, uh, funding

00:38:22.720 any courts or they, if they're basically crowdfunded for all their members who have to pay a certain

00:38:29.880 annual fee to get their licenses.

00:38:32.640 Um, they have infinitely more money than the individuals that they are harassing with these

00:38:37.840 kind of legal battles.

00:38:39.460 And then anytime you're up against the government, they have nearly endless resources.

00:38:44.740 And even if you get something dismissed, if you're, you're still left on the hook for

00:38:51.840 that.

00:38:53.140 Um, so, and that, and that's on set trials and that's not even speaking anything about

00:38:58.280 these kind of, um, any of these tribunals that don't follow these same kind of, uh, structures

00:39:06.460 as, as these, um, any of these court cases.

00:39:11.080 So I, I, I know we're kind of blending a few things together because I know, um, these

00:39:17.340 regulatory bodies, they work a little bit differently than just being sued outright.

00:39:21.720 And well, there's just so many, there's just so many fun regulatory bodies that we have to

00:39:26.300 deal with.

00:39:26.760 Right, James?

00:39:27.780 Yeah.

00:39:28.340 All we need is just another, another four or five new regulatory bodies just to, just to

00:39:34.140 get more options.

00:39:35.880 Yeah.

00:39:37.380 So last, last week's episode, we were talking about, uh, B bill C 63 and with anonymous reporting

00:39:46.020 how that would supercharge, um, that, that could supercharge abuse of kind of, uh, vindictive,

00:39:54.480 uh, complaints against individuals for something that maybe really doesn't fit the category of

00:40:02.100 detestable, hateful language.

00:40:03.800 Um, so I think the reason that there's, they, they claim that there's, you have to protect

00:40:12.900 individuals because they would be singled out or there may be harm against them if they,

00:40:19.140 if they were not anonymous, which, which in some cases you could, you could, you could see

00:40:28.640 that.

00:40:28.940 But the fact that a lot of them can stay anonymous, I think, um, um, supercharges this, this abuse

00:40:37.380 and, and you have a little bit, uh, a little bit more knowledge on like, or I guess, I guess

00:40:43.820 a question for you is like, what's the major difference of these human rights tribunals versus

00:40:48.760 just like a court of law?

00:40:52.500 Well, from, from my understanding, I mean, a human rights tribunal can, first of all, it

00:40:58.120 can mean, it can mean any of a hundred things.

00:41:00.340 I mean, these are often, uh, populated by, uh, sometimes even just regular, like uncredentialed

00:41:09.220 citizens who happen to be involved in an organization and like employed by an organization in a certain

00:41:14.320 capacity, but oftentimes you'll see, um, board members, HR members, um, people who, uh, you

00:41:23.700 know, um, uh, administrative workers of certain organizations or boards, uh, who have been either

00:41:32.420 volunteered or have been told that they are to participate on a panel of, you know, adjudicating

00:41:39.720 on such and such issue on the behest of the regulations or the, or the, the code of conduct

00:41:47.740 of certain, um, professional organizations or groups.

00:41:51.840 You know, it reminds me of the situation that Jordan Peterson finds himself in now with the,

00:41:55.800 the Ontario college of psychologists.

00:41:58.560 These are psychologists, you would hope there's probably some administrative staff involved in

00:42:03.460 as well, who essentially have determined that he needs to be reeducated in his social media

00:42:10.780 usage.

00:42:12.380 Otherwise he brings the profession into disrepute.

00:42:15.580 And so they can still issue judgments that have very far reaching consequences for the

00:42:20.760 individuals that they are targeting.

00:42:24.880 And, and even finding yourself subjected to a human rights tribunal, the social cost and

00:42:33.060 employment cost.

00:42:34.560 And even if you're found, it's like not guilty by this tribunal, like you carry a certain baggage

00:42:43.740 with you.

00:42:45.440 And this can be a low cost, like a low cost complaint with a high, either procedural harm.

00:42:55.820 Like it's the, the, the damages of somebody going through months, getting put through the ringer,

00:43:04.320 um, the stress of, of this proceeding, like that and the social cost after, like it's hard to get

00:43:13.240 that off of your name, um, afterwards, I, even if they are not criminally charged with something,

00:43:22.020 I think the harms are numerous, um, Oh yeah.

00:43:26.860 Well, and it's, and it's, and it's sort of a, I think this, the, the phrase we were saying before

00:43:33.260 we hit record here that you said the, the, the process is the, is the punishment, right?

00:43:40.480 Yeah.

00:43:41.340 Whether or not that comes with a financial or a professional cost, there is, yeah, like you say,

00:43:46.400 I mean, okay, well now I have to waste, you know, if I want to keep my license or I want

00:43:50.100 to keep my certification and such and such a field and I have to subject myself to months

00:43:55.980 of this garbage, you know, being torn apart publicly by these people who, you know, have 0.78

00:44:01.860 no right to be doing so. 1.00

00:44:03.960 It's crazy.

00:44:04.660 I hate it so much.

00:44:07.960 Yeah.

00:44:08.320 It's with, with the way that some, some of the decisions have, like in prior Canadian

00:44:16.980 history, like certain cases have gone through and it's not making me feel confident about

00:44:26.380 how people, how individuals are going to be treated for hate speech under bill C 63.

00:44:32.160 Um, and it feels like comedians are often the targets of these because they're the ones trying

00:44:40.440 to find the edges of acceptable discourse.

00:44:43.300 That, that's exactly right.

00:44:44.700 That's exactly right.

00:44:45.860 Oftentimes comedians are the, the only people truly speaking truth to power in that way.

00:44:51.780 So this is a, this is actually just a, a recent decision by, um, the Supreme court.

00:44:57.460 This, um, actually this is an older article cause I believe it's a, it's a, it's a, it's

00:45:02.160 I believe that something more recently happened, uh, something more recent than 2021, but,

00:45:07.340 uh, Mike Ward, uh, so in a, in a, um, comedy set made fun of this, uh, uh, disabled Quebecois

00:45:15.540 singer, uh, Jeremy Gabrielle.

00:45:18.200 And, um, I'll scroll down a bit here because this is in 2012, I think 2012, I think is when

00:45:29.740 the joke was told this would be Mike Ward.

00:45:33.860 And then in 2016, a tribunal ruled in Gabrielle's favor, uh, awarding him $25,000 for moral damages

00:45:41.500 and another 10,000 for punitive damages.

00:45:44.340 Gabrielle's mother was awarded 5,000 for moral damages and another 2,000 for punitive.

00:45:49.240 Uh, Ward appealed.

00:45:50.500 And in 2019, uh, a Quebec court of appeal ruled in a two to one decision that Ward's comments

00:45:55.320 compromised the young performer's right to safeguard of his dignity and could not be justified

00:46:01.160 even in a society where freedom of expression is valued.

00:46:03.960 So there's perfect, uh, perfect double speech.

00:46:07.640 So, uh, just for those who aren't up to speed, does moral damages just mean hurt feelings?

00:46:16.140 I think essentially that's a fun legalese way of saying hurt feelings.

00:46:20.180 Thankfully, the appeal court did, however, roll back the payments to Gabrielle's mother.

00:46:24.820 Uh, but the Supreme court decision, uh, which apparently happened in 2021 in a five, four

00:46:32.640 split decision.

00:46:33.420 So it's not even close to being, it was very close.

00:46:37.040 The top court ruled Friday that while comedian Mike Ward's act ridiculed Jeremy Gabrielle, um,

00:46:42.160 he was chosen as a target, not because of his disability, but because of his fame.

00:46:46.060 So even then, that's a really, really weak, uh, justification for, Hey, you know what?

00:46:53.420 We're still allowed to tell jokes as a society.

00:46:56.260 So yeah, it's a, that was, that was a fun one.

00:47:01.520 Yeah.

00:47:02.060 It's you had another, you had a comedian you want to talk about too.

00:47:05.260 Yeah.

00:47:05.720 This, this is a, I think a little bit earlier.

00:47:10.460 Um, we'll just pull up national post.

00:47:12.940 There's a guy, a comedian called, uh, Guy Earl and during a set, he, there were two lesbians 0.77

00:47:26.020 making out and shouting obscenities and heckling during a set.

00:47:31.580 And they got into an argument and I think he, like a lot of comedians as you, um, you

00:47:38.920 play the crowd and you make fun of those who are heckling you, he targeted them and mentioned 0.94

00:47:45.600 them being lesbians. 1.00

00:47:47.020 And that started some, an exchange.

00:47:50.180 Um, what it, what it ended up escalating to is that after the show, I think they fall,

00:47:58.840 followed him down and they, they were continuing to argue.

00:48:01.260 And the, the woman who was suing him threw water into his face and he smacked his, her 1.00

00:48:10.160 sunglasses off onto the ground.

00:48:12.980 So this doesn't seem so one-sided.

00:48:17.420 It's not like he went out there just to find the only lesbian in the club, in the crowd and,

00:48:23.700 and target her. 0.66

00:48:24.880 So, um, ultimately the BC human rights tribunal, um, ordered Guy Earl to pay $15,000 for lasting

00:48:37.500 physical and psychological effect, um, for basically pro post-traumatic stress disorder.

00:48:46.660 Um, and, and so that's no small chunk of change.

00:48:52.680 Uh, he tried to appeal it and didn't, didn't stick.

00:48:57.920 Uh, so I think he's doing okay.

00:49:04.200 Now he recently wrote a book.

00:49:08.880 So he wrote a book called canceled the death of standup proceeds go to hecklers with PTSD.

00:49:17.020 Um, so glad to see that he's taking it and like, well, obviously he's going to be, he's going

00:49:28.180 to be silly about it, but he's, so yeah, that that's, that's Guy Earl.

00:49:34.440 Um, sounds like he's, he's trying to make light of just free speech.

00:49:41.240 Yeah.

00:49:41.800 He's a good sport about his free speech case.

00:49:44.340 And these are just examples of what happens when you have, in these cases, it feels like

00:49:51.840 somebody sees an opportunity to take revenge and they're using the system, um, to, to basically

00:50:01.040 hurt somebody else that they feel felt offended them.

00:50:05.120 And if you're teaching people to be victims and if you're teaching people to view the world

00:50:12.920 through these power dynamics, and if you're giving them opportunities to assert power over

00:50:19.160 somebody else with these kind of tribunals, it's no surprise that people would jump on

00:50:25.160 that.

00:50:25.820 And I don't want to say harass, but in some cases it feels like individuals are being harassed

00:50:32.180 for political views that, um, like a comedian's making a joke, they're at a show, you're supposed

00:50:38.620 to make a joke, um, in other cases.

00:50:42.120 And you're supposed to know, you're supposed to know that you, by being there, make yourself

00:50:48.120 a possible target for a joke, which is supposed to be taken in good fun.

00:50:53.400 You're supposed to be a certain type of personality that can go to a comedy show and take a little

00:50:59.140 back and forth from the guy on stage.

00:51:01.640 And the other thing is if you are heckling and then you're defiantly disrupting, um, don't

00:51:09.000 expect any kindness from somebody like it's difficult to be a comedian as difficult to

00:51:14.140 have your flow interrupted in something that's not supposed to be a back and forth between

00:51:19.700 the audience, unless a comedian specifically requests a back and forth.

00:51:24.700 Yeah.

00:51:25.000 Unless you're Matt Reif specifically making Tik TOK content of crowd work, it's not a participatory

00:51:32.080 exercise.

00:51:33.380 Yeah. 0.99

00:51:34.020 And, and also what is like, what a stupid target to try and like pick, pick anyone other than 0.99

00:51:40.860 a comedian who can absolutely destroy you with wit very quickly. 1.00

00:51:45.160 You're going to heck. 0.77

00:51:46.040 Yeah. 0.98

00:51:46.660 Yeah.

00:51:46.900 Generally you're not going to come out on top.

00:51:49.760 Like you're not gonna, no, you're not going to come out looking like the good guy.

00:51:54.780 You're also not going to get the last word because they literally have a mic.

00:51:59.340 So.

00:52:00.700 Yeah.

00:52:02.640 Well, um, this, I don't know, James, if you've watched this or rather listen to this podcast,

00:52:11.740 the witch trials of JK Rowling.

00:52:13.740 No, this is a new to me.

00:52:16.680 It's very, very good.

00:52:18.080 I think it came out around this time last year, I think February of last year.

00:52:21.860 And it's by the free press it's produced by the free press.

00:52:25.500 I think it was their first actual, uh, podcast, uh, production.

00:52:29.800 And it's a, uh, very, very good.

00:52:32.920 Uh, I think it's an eight part series that, uh, I'll read the, about the witch trials of

00:52:39.080 JK Rowling is an audio documentary that examines some of the most contentious conflicts of our

00:52:43.260 time through the life and career of the world's most successful author.

00:52:46.120 In conversation with host Megan Phelps Roper, JK Rowling speaks with unprecedented candor

00:52:52.060 about the depths or, uh, uh, candor and depth about the controversy surrounding her from

00:52:56.540 book bans to debates on gender and sex.

00:52:58.700 The series also examines the forces propelling this moment in history through interviews

00:53:03.060 with Rowling supporters and critics, journalists, historians, clinicians, and more.

00:53:07.220 And if I'm right, um, oh yeah, it says it down here.

00:53:10.740 Uh, Megan Phelps Roper, uh, was a, um, was actually raised in the Westboro Baptist church.

00:53:17.060 So she, uh, she has experience with being involved in, uh, in group think cults.

00:53:26.000 Yes. So it was a really, really good series. I think it's, like I said, I think it's eight

00:53:30.560 episodes. She interviews Rowling herself as well as some critics, um, uh, ContraPoints,

00:53:36.360 the very, uh, famous, uh, YouTube transgender, uh, commentator is on, is also featured in a

00:53:44.740 couple episodes and, uh, overall is a really balanced, I felt it was a very balanced, um,

00:53:50.660 series. It, uh, kind of explored both, um, you know, Rowling's like,

00:53:56.280 true kind of, it let her say in her own words, essentially why she's doing what she's doing

00:54:02.340 now and why she believes what she believes and why she's so vehement about it. And it

00:54:06.140 also, you know, has some good, uh, questions, you know, put, put on her about, you know,

00:54:12.040 her sort of activism in this space, but in this kind of latter part of her career.

00:54:17.080 Yeah, that's definitely one to check out. Uh, I'd love to listen to that further and

00:54:22.300 we'll, we'll add a link below as well. Um, I guess that raises the question of, uh,

00:54:29.920 why do you care? Why do we care about any of this? Like, um, why can't you just let people

00:54:37.720 live their lives? And for JK Rowling to pretty much, she could just be, she could just do her

00:54:48.580 thing. She has all the wealth in the world and she could just be quiet about this issue. Like 1.00

00:54:53.880 there's nothing to get, she's not going to get more famous. She's already famous. She's not going 1.00

00:55:02.300 to receive extra love. She's already wealthier than God. Yeah. Here's the thing. Like she wrote a

00:55:08.920 beloved book series. And before this was quite universally beloved by everybody. There is

00:55:18.440 nothing for her to gain, to stick her neck out and take a stance here. She's only going to receive 1.00

00:55:25.160 pushback. Um, cause when she started sharing these thoughts, this was not during a time where

00:55:32.100 there we go. She in fact just tweeted about it today. Why, why do you care? The number of people

00:55:39.360 who feel compelled to tell me that if they had my money, they wouldn't give a damn about the rights

00:55:43.380 of women and children never ceases to amaze me. I believe you of course. I'm just surprised that's

00:55:48.160 something you'd like to boast about. The, with precision, she gets right to the heart of that. 1.00

00:55:57.700 It's almost like she's a very, very good, very accomplished writer. And it's very unlikely

00:56:04.820 that you will ever outmaneuver her in a battle of wits.

00:56:09.380 She, she reminds me of Jordan Peterson in the way that like, they seem very, Jordan Peterson

00:56:16.740 mentions that like, especially being, when he's being grilled by journalists, he says like,

00:56:21.940 I choose my words very, very carefully. Yeah. And anybody who's a writer is like, especially

00:56:29.140 if they take a time to like pause in an interview or they like, they're not just running their

00:56:34.420 mouth. They are like, well, here's what I believe. Here's the principles behind it. Here's the rationale.

00:56:40.260 Here's the logic. And they're just, they're being very precise about it. So yeah.

00:56:46.420 Yeah. Which is, which is, I feel part of the, um, part of it's, it's a concept that a lot of people

00:56:52.900 who are on say the more, um, progressive self-described progressive, you know, end of the

00:57:01.380 spectrum don't really understand because, um, I can't, oh yeah, this was Michael Malice who said

00:57:07.620 that leftists, at least a modern day conception of leftists, they don't use language to communicate.

00:57:14.820 They use language to manipulate. So they don't, a lot of these people who willingly insert

00:57:21.220 themselves into these spaces and have these debates and have these shouting matches with

00:57:25.380 people who are much, much more intelligent than them online. I don't think they can truly understand

00:57:30.820 that concept that, you know, being able to actually use language and words in a, in a way to convey,

00:57:38.100 to be, to be, try and become closer to reality, trying to try to move closer to the truth of a

00:57:43.860 situation because they only view what they're saying and what they're doing as something as

00:57:50.020 being something in service of a movement or of a, of an ideology rather than language and

00:57:55.860 communication unto itself. Maybe something like that.

00:57:59.060 So what, what that means is when you are arguing with these people, you're not arguing with their

00:58:05.380 thought process. You are arguing with the ideology. And if anything, they have memorized the top

00:58:12.100 five things to counter. Um, yeah, you'll ask them this and they'll say that they, they've got it

00:58:18.260 ready. And when they've run out of their, their list of rebuttals, or if you try to pin them down on a,

00:58:26.740 on the actual logic behind something, that's where you see on a definition.

00:58:31.140 Yeah. They fumble with the actual definitions. If it's, they're not taught how to think they're taught

00:58:35.940 what to think they'll struggle in actually trying to navigate the base level to some of these concepts

00:58:42.580 and, or they, they've made these, they've made the definitions fit the ideology rather than using

00:58:51.140 definitions as a way to better describe and navigate the world.

00:58:55.780 Yeah.

00:58:56.100 So it's a conclusion first approach rather than, rather than like the scientific process of like

00:59:03.620 you make observations, you try to define the world, make observations, you put a framework and then you

00:59:10.420 see if that framework actually can predict anything or if it maps onto reality. And if it doesn't,

00:59:16.580 you revise it until you get closer and closer. And that takes constant pushing and probing into that

00:59:24.020 framework to see if it's actually true or not. But right now I don't think people are really

00:59:31.780 gunning for truth. I think they believe they know what truth is and they believe they're right. And I,

00:59:40.900 I must give them credit for like, well, they're, they're, they're reacting exactly how you'd expect

00:59:47.140 somebody to react if they were given a divine truth and told that they are morally righteous

00:59:54.420 to spread this truth and fight for this truth. But they're not given that hardware to,

01:00:01.780 to question their own truth. So that that's more of a cult cult dynamic at that point.

01:00:10.260 That seems like a great place to end it.

01:00:12.820 Yeah, I would say, say that's a good, good place to wrap up. We've solved it yet. Yet again,

01:00:20.740 it's just like that, the episode we did on Palestine, you're like, well, I think you've,

01:00:26.260 think you've taught me everything we need to know.

01:00:30.020 Yep. And that's why when that episode released, that's why all the fighting stopped.

01:00:34.660 Maybe we need another four hours on that episode to really, to really dive in.

01:00:45.860 Well, I think, uh, I think that's something that we can do. And I think, um, we touched on a lot

01:00:50.420 of things today, actually, that will, we will certainly expand on in full, full format episodes,

01:00:55.620 but this has been, uh, this has been a really good chat this week and an otherwise kind of a quiet

01:01:02.740 week. Actually, nothing particularly earth shattering happened this week, but I think we've got some good,

01:01:07.700 some good content out of, uh, out of what did.

01:01:09.940 Good chat. Yeah. I guess not that everywhere week has to be like, we don't need the shiny new object

01:01:18.340 for us to. Yeah. We're not CNN 24 hour news cycle here. There's yeah, I guess to some of this week,

01:01:26.380 there's plenty of things that are worth some attention and worth diving into. So that was a good chat. And I,

01:01:32.340 I think these things will be things we touch upon again in one form or another, because

01:01:42.660 this free speech standpoint informs everything. That's how we, that's how our whole society functions

01:01:49.060 without free speech. We don't have a democratic process. We don't have function. We don't have

01:01:55.700 people expressing. We don't have, we don't have the growth. We just have domination in some form

01:02:01.380 or another. So yeah, we're, you and me aren't allowed to do this. Yeah. It's a, well, and just

01:02:08.260 think about how much we've, how much we're able to like the process of us thinking about these things.

01:02:16.580 And we're hoping like our viewers that everybody watching that you on this path to you, you're

01:02:23.380 thinking about things that you haven't thought about because by diving into this, forcing us to

01:02:29.860 forces you to think. And I think that's, that's what we need more of. So.

01:02:35.700 Awesome. Thank you as always, sir.

01:02:37.940 Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Mike. And we'll see you again next week.

01:02:42.900 Always a pleasure. Okay. Have a good week. Chat soon.

01:02:44.980 Thank you, Mike.

01:03:01.940 Bye.

01:03:03.460 Bye.

01:03:04.020 Bye.

01:03:04.260 Bye.

01:03:04.620 Bye.

01:03:04.820 Bye.

01:03:04.980 Bye.

01:03:06.660 Bye.

01:03:06.700 Bye.

01:03:07.260 Bye.

01:03:08.220 Bye bye.

01:03:09.100 Bye bye.

01:03:10.160 Bye.

01:03:10.720 Bye bye.

01:03:10.840 Bye bye.

01:03:12.880 Bye bye.

The Critical Compass Podcast - April 01, 2024

This Week In Podcasts, Institutional Capture, Human Rights Tribunals ｜ A Critical Compass Discussion

Episode Stats

People

Summary

Transcript