The National Telegraph - Wyatt Claypool - March 12, 2024


Canadian Leftists are 'too smart' for Common Sense


Episode Stats

Length

10 minutes

Words per Minute

198.20108

Word Count

2,064

Sentence Count

107

Hate Speech Sentences

2


Summary

In this episode, I talk about why so many Canadians are still voting for the Liberals and the NDP, and why it's a symptom of a false sense of being "elitist" that keeps them afloat in the polls.


Transcript

00:00:00.000 I think a false sense of being elite is actually a major root cause as to why we still see such a
00:00:05.780 large chunk of Canadians still willing to cast a ballot for the Liberals and the NDP in the next
00:00:10.820 election. Like, don't get me wrong, the Conservatives are still going to smash them in 2025.
00:00:16.000 Some polls are putting the Conservatives up ahead of the Liberals by 21%. But without fail,
00:00:22.060 in the comment section of all the videos where I talk about polling, there are some people saying,
00:00:26.740 I can't believe the Liberals and the NDP still have like 23% or 21%, like depending on the poll,
00:00:32.220 like here's an example. And yes, that is kind of frustrating that there are still that many people
00:00:37.100 who don't seem to notice that the Liberals and the NDP's policies have failed over the last nine
00:00:41.720 years. But I don't think that's the point for why so many people are still voting for them.
00:00:46.420 I think a lot of people, and this is not the majority of the parties, but there's a hardcore
00:00:50.380 base to both the Liberals and the NDP who support those parties because it is the degreed person's
00:00:55.980 party. It is the intellectual choice. It is the educated person's choice. And they believe
00:01:01.160 that they are supposed to vote Liberal to signify the fact that they're not some simplistic rube
00:01:06.940 who is following the pure poly of common sense agenda. They are better than common sense. They
00:01:13.120 are too smart for common sense. And I think an article that really captures this sort of snobby arrogance
00:01:19.220 is this one from an aptly named publication from Montreal titled Cult MTL. The article reads,
00:01:26.900 the less educated you are, the more likely you are to have a positive opinion of pure poly of.
00:01:31.900 And there are so many Liberal people who will read this article and crow with the fact that they're
00:01:36.880 not so undereducated to support the Conservative Party. The Conservative Party is for foolish, dumb people.
00:01:42.680 And no, just having a degree does not actually mean you're smart. I only think I have to say that.
00:01:47.800 It's so obvious. Having a degree just means that you have the degree. You've jumped through the hoops
00:01:52.540 to get that degree. And now you have it. I have seen so many people in different programs that I've
00:01:58.100 taken at university. I have a bachelor degree and a master's degree. And I would not trust a lot of
00:02:03.000 the people in my master's degree program to run the government because they have very wacky ideas from
00:02:08.220 being in academia for so long. The person who has started a business by themselves and only has a high
00:02:14.080 school diploma is miles smarter than the PhD who studies gender. Having common sense is a fairly
00:02:21.620 intellectual thing to possess. And so many people who go to university to get degrees in nothing are
00:02:28.320 not exactly hyper-intelligent people. They are educated. They have been educated into a specific
00:02:34.700 ideology or set of factual information about a subject. But that doesn't mean that those skills
00:02:41.540 or that sort of way of thinking about things translates to good ideas in the real world.
00:02:47.680 Like STEM degrees definitely make you smart in the specific things that you study. Like I'm never
00:02:52.360 going to have some guy who's really good at computer science come and tell me how economics works
00:02:56.900 because I just don't think he really has any clue about it unless he can prove he has like common
00:03:01.960 sense knowledge about how the economy works. But in my master's program, I'm not even kidding,
00:03:06.400 day one. I had someone get mad at me for saying that we should maybe arrest homeless drug addicts
00:03:12.100 and make sure that they forcibly detox so that they can actually live more productive lives.
00:03:16.820 And I said that, you know, if you ever look at a homeless person on the street, I'm not trying to
00:03:20.020 be rude or anything, but it's just true that if you follow them around for the entire day, you'd
00:03:24.240 probably find them committing five to six crimes. And by enforcing those crimes, by actually enforcing the
00:03:30.120 law on those crimes, you could arrest them and then make sure that they actually get off drugs or push
00:03:35.000 them off of drugs. Whereas a lot of this decriminalization stuff actually takes away
00:03:39.360 tools for police to intervene with these people and try and get them help. Because if they can't
00:03:43.580 arrest them for any of these misdemeanor crimes, well, they have to wait for them to commit a major
00:03:47.340 crime to try and force them to get help or they have to let them sit there. But I had someone in
00:03:52.280 this program day one say that I was being like a horrible person and I'm stigmatizing homelessness.
00:03:58.940 And the first step to ending homelessness is to de-stigmatize the problem. Like, okay, good,
00:04:04.320 good job, lady. Yeah, we need to go over to people's encampments and lay brochures in front
00:04:10.160 of their tents and say, it's okay that you're on drugs. You're, you're like smoking crack on the
00:04:14.880 streets. Just know that I do not hold it against you. And here's a pamphlet for some sort of clinic
00:04:20.920 you can go to. You gotta be overeducated to believe in such stupid things as that a problem needs to be
00:04:26.940 de-stigmatized before that we can actually deal with it. Goodness. But I want to dive into the
00:04:34.140 actual stats that article from Cult MTL went over. It's from Angus Reid. And yes, it actually is true
00:04:40.400 that if you have more education, you're more likely to vote for the liberals of the NDP. Doesn't mean
00:04:45.900 that you're actually smart for voting for them. It just means that you have a degree and you happen
00:04:49.560 to be voting for a dumb party. But it shows people who have high school education have a 24% very
00:04:56.620 favorable of pure poly of and 19% somewhat favorable with 16% somewhat unfavorable and 29% some are very
00:05:04.700 unfavorable. And then when you get up to people with university degrees, 13% are very in favor of pure
00:05:10.620 poly of 18% somewhat 18% somewhat disfavorable and 43% very unfavorable view of pure poly of. And to that,
00:05:21.100 I say, who cares? It doesn't actually mean anything. Again, like I've said before, just because you have
00:05:27.280 a PhD doesn't mean you actually understand how the economy works. I trust someone who actually started
00:05:32.280 their own business far more than I have to trust someone with an arts PhD who's going to tell me
00:05:37.400 that we need to like put caps on rent to lower the cost of housing as if just price fixing has ever
00:05:44.000 actually solved a problem in the short term. But these people who have master's degrees are actually
00:05:48.620 very disproportionately likely to vote for the liberals and the NDP who approach a problem like
00:05:53.800 high prices and just look at and say, well, why can't we just mandate the prices be lower? They actually
00:05:59.920 think that rent control is a good policy, because these people have no historical knowledge. They do not
00:06:05.440 have the common sense view of history of knowing that when price fixing occurred in the 70s, it caused the
00:06:11.480 supply of those goods to go away. So while yes, you could buy it for an affordable price, if you were the one
00:06:17.840 of the lucky people to find an apartment for rent or different products that were like available at
00:06:24.440 the price of pricks. Oh, oh, my goodness, I am falling over myself. You're lucky if you can find
00:06:30.040 the product at the fixed price. But if you can't, you don't get the thing. And this is where so many
00:06:35.560 on the left believe that their ideas are more intellectual because they are, you know, their policy
00:06:40.480 papers are so long and nuanced. But if the idea is bad, who cares? I see people all the time on the left,
00:06:46.740 and they'll mock conservative policies for being simplistic. And they'll praise a liberal policy
00:06:52.820 because it's 110 pages. Look at all the detail here. If the fundamental policy sucks, who cares?
00:06:59.320 I do not read policies in detail. If on the first paragraph, the entire thing is stupid,
00:07:05.100 because what is it going to not be stupid once I get to page 110, where I'm just reading detail about
00:07:10.220 the stupid policy? There are so many people who trick themselves. It's the very wonkish mentality
00:07:15.380 that, you know, hard thinking about policy leads to good solutions. Not always. Oftentimes,
00:07:21.800 the common sense, simple solution is the best. This is where you get leftists in the media saying,
00:07:27.260 pure poly of has no plan. All he wants to do is cut things, get rid of the carbon tax and all this
00:07:32.200 stuff. Yeah, that's actually what will make the country better. Reducing immigration, cutting the
00:07:36.680 carbon tax, cutting income taxes, cutting regulations and reducing the size of government
00:07:40.380 is exactly what we need. Well, he's not proposing anything. He's just proposing get rid of stuff.
00:07:45.600 Yeah, because it's what needs to be done to solve the problem. It's not that we don't have enough
00:07:50.680 government programs to gird up the economy to get us onto new heights of prosperity. It's that the
00:07:56.720 government is actually holding down people's prosperity and trying to redistribute the gains
00:08:00.800 of other individuals to people who are less well off to pretend that they're actually helping people
00:08:05.860 when they're usually making people who are also less well off, even worse off just to help one
00:08:10.920 person. It is, again, the idea that you are going to rob Paul to help Bill. It is a foolish idea. But
00:08:17.880 if you have a master's degree, you think it's fantastic because it feels so intricate and it
00:08:22.580 feels so caring that we're taking money from this rich, terrible person and handing it to this virtuous
00:08:28.260 person who doesn't have as much income. It's a very intellectually satisfying solution if you've been in
00:08:34.640 university for eight to 12 years. But if you actually know how things work, if you know the
00:08:39.580 market on an intimate level, having been a business owner or having been a contractor or being a real
00:08:46.180 person who works in the economy, not just someone who intellectualized about the economy, you know
00:08:51.460 that actually getting the government out of the way is what is going to enable success. But anyways,
00:08:57.040 that's my rant on this really stupid mentality on the left of thinking that the liberals and the NDP
00:09:02.440 are intellectual. I just want to quickly plug the fact that I, Wyatt Claypool, am running for the
00:09:07.780 Calgary Signal Hill Conservative Party nomination. If you live in this riding, please buy a membership
00:09:13.000 and vote for me. This is what the riding boundaries look like. Go check out my website,
00:09:16.760 WyattClaypool.com. If you previously lived in Bowness and you think you live in my riding,
00:09:21.400 you don't anymore because in April the riding boundaries are changing so you'll be out.
00:09:26.040 And if you live in Curry Barracks, Ross, Caro, or Lincoln Park, you will then also be in my riding.
00:09:30.280 So buy a membership or contact someone you know who lives in the riding, get them to buy a
00:09:34.560 membership. And also you can contribute to the National Telegraph and myself's legal fund. We
00:09:41.320 have this billionaire developer suing us over nonsense. It's a defamation case where he has
00:09:45.260 not proven any evidence of defamation. And he's just mad that one of our guest writers referenced
00:09:50.600 a long investigative article about him from the Globe and Mail. He evidently never sued the Globe and
00:09:55.500 Mail because he knew he'd get smashed in court. But he thought if he sued a 21-year-old,
00:09:59.720 I was 21 when this whole thing started, if he sued a 21-year-old, maybe he could get a false apology
00:10:04.760 and pretend everything negative ever said about him is actually false because, look, I have a piece
00:10:09.280 of paper showing that this person apologized. We don't apologize for nonsense at the National
00:10:14.120 Telegraph. So we're $26,000 deep in defending ourselves. If you can contribute anything to the
00:10:19.520 legal fund, it really helps us out. Give, send, go link is in the description below. Have a great one,
00:10:24.460 everybody.